Because I hate the "I'm going to do something scummy so I can jump on the first person who calls me on it to "encourage conversatin"" gambit. I've seen town people do it too often lately to really consider it a scumtell anymore, so I'm notgoing to vote you for it, but it never accomplishes anything and just makes day 1 muddy.
Mafia 88- Return to New Catania- Game Over!
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
IGMEOY:Hoopla
Because I hate the "I'm going to do something scummy so I can jump on the first person who calls me on it to "encourage conversatin"" gambit. I've seen town people do it too often lately to really consider it a scumtell anymore, so I'm notgoing to vote you for it, but it never accomplishes anything and just makes day 1 muddy.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Looked like he was voting Hoopla because of Hoopla's vote on George Carlin; specifically, because he thought Hoopla was trying to stop George Carlin from talking about the no-lynch thing. Is that why Hoopla was voting? Eh, probably not, although he didn't give any details. But that's irrelevent; Seraphim made a non-random vote for an actual reason, then backed down after a tiny amount of pressure, basically just one FOS from you.Battle Mage wrote:
The reason was not legitimate. If you think it was, i suggest you read the first 2 pages again. You're better than this.Yosarian2 wrote:Also,FOS:Seraphimfor falling into BM's trap.
Seriously, he voted for a legitimate reason, and then backtracked just to stop from getting FOS'd by BM?
FoS: Yos
BMI want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Umm...yeah, he did...Battle Mage wrote:Large post but a few issues Ecto:
1. You claim that content has been ignored. Yet, you do not deign to state what this content is. If you choose to do so, it might give your comments some credibility, and heaven forbid, give me the chance to respond!
Ectomancer wrote: What his point is as I read it, is that Hoopla made a move that revealed no alignment information.
That point is correct.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
I still need you to explan how George Carlin's play there was scummy, btw.Battle Mage wrote:
But as you just admitted yourself, the reason was not legitimate, because Hoopla did not make any discernible attempt to kill conversation about his move. He merely responded in the way any townie would when confronted with scummy play.
BM
But to the point, I probably shouldn't have used the word "legitimate" there, since that's irrelevent; just take out the word legitimate and replace it with "non-random", the effect is the same.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
FYI: No lynching on day 1 is generally considered a Very Bad Idea (tm), so voting no lynch is usually a good way to get a few people to vote for you.Sobeahero wrote: Voting No lynch doesn't seem all that controversial to me
I don't really think that's valid. For one I don't really thing people were following him as much as reacting the same way on their own. Besides which, I don't think "voting X while some other people are following X" can really be considered an inherent scumtell.And thats a good summary, if GC isn't scum, one of the ones voting for him probably is. Though most likely it would be the one who lead teh assault against him, since anyone the town is willing to listen to could prove to be bad for the Mafia if he rallys them behind that person. Basically Scum already have a reason to want him dead. :pI want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
No; if you are pro-town, then your ploy fails if it just leads to pro-town people fighting with each other all day. Which, in my experence, is usually what happens.Hoopla wrote: If the 'ploy' fails, then it's just one wasted post.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Eh, I don't think any ofit is indicitive of alignment. I've seen the pattern many times, and I don't think scum are any more or less likely to vote no-lynch, or to vote someone for voting no lynch, or to vote someone for voting someone for voting no-lynch. Any step of that, some town people will do it and think they're doing the right thing.Hoopla wrote:
So, at this stage you believe it's very possible everyone involved in this debate is pro-town, under the premise mafia wouldn't bother getting involved?Yosarian2 wrote:
No; if you are pro-town, then your ploy fails if it just leads to pro-town people fighting with each other all day. Which, in my experence, is usually what happens.Hoopla wrote: If the 'ploy' fails, then it's just one wasted post.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Ok...but, by the same token, town are also likely to want to "promote good practices". So I tend to consider it a null-tell, all around.Battle Mage wrote: As such, scum are less likely to do something that is often seen as scummy, and will put them under scrutiny early on (such as vote No Lynch) and are more likely to do something seen as protown, that might stand in their favour later on (such as promoting good practices, like NOT No-lynching day 1).
You are probably right that. if Hooper knew it would attract him negitive attention, it would probably be a small town tell (unless he also knew we would see it as one..lol). I still hate the reflexive vote he made on GC, though, especally since GC's reasons were logical, at least in a first-iteneration kind of way. It's not especally strong, but I don't expect strong arguments that early.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
:eyebrow:Battle Mage wrote: My comment to CKD was referring to the way in which you and Yosarian are pretty indistinguishable atm. It's very disconcerting when 2 of the most respected players in the game aren't meeting those expectations, and instead, seem to want to buddy up as much as possible.
How am I "not meeting expectations"? Just because I don't agree with you on everything?
And how are we "buddying up"? Just because we do agree on some things?I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
(shrug) I don't generally consider someone agreeing with me to be a scumtell...Battle Mage wrote:
From where i'm sat, you've kind of rolled into 1 player. It's got to the stage where i cant tell you apart without checking the username every 5 minutes...Yosarian2 wrote:
:eyebrow:Battle Mage wrote: My comment to CKD was referring to the way in which you and Yosarian are pretty indistinguishable atm. It's very disconcerting when 2 of the most respected players in the game aren't meeting those expectations, and instead, seem to want to buddy up as much as possible.
How am I "not meeting expectations"? Just because I don't agree with you on everything?
And how are we "buddying up"? Just because we do agree on some things?
I cant even say who's to blame overall, although on this page, it seems to be him blindly tagging onto you.
BMI want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
...why? I mean, I understand the point you were trying to make about how you think a random vote is no more useful information wise then a no-lynch vote, you may or may not be correct, but I don't understand how that leads you to deciding to vote for Sensfan here. Now, if you wanted to vote Sensfan because he still hasn't read the whole thread, that I would understand...Battle Mage wrote:Ya know what. To hell with it!Unvote, Vote: Sensfan
BM
On another note, I like OGML's vote for Sir T, and am interested to see how Sir T responds.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Put my "money where my mouth is"? You talking about Sir T? Because if I wanted my vote on him right now, then that's where it would be.OhGodMyLife wrote:Yos, hurry up and put your money where your mouth is before you start looking scummy.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Just because I'm not voting anyone right now, it hardly means I'm "sitting back".OhGodMyLife wrote: It doesn't have to be Sir T if he doesn't think Sir T warrants a vote, but I get a bad feeling when someone sits back and doesn't vote at all.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Anyway, as I said before, I don't really think that any side of this debate is especally scummy, so I'm going to start pressuring lurkers.
Lurker List:
Killa seven: Only two posts, no content at all.
andkilla seven wrote:hey guys.
Natirasha: Has only posted once, and that was a self vote. Apparently had some kind of real life problem, but his sig now claims that he is "slowly getting access back". We need to hear from him soon.killa seven wrote:i need a read
Millitant: Three posts, no content. His last post said that:
I certanly understand real life stuff getting in the way, but you made this post back on the 10th, promising you'd re-read "tommorow". Have you had a chance to do that yet?Millitant wrote: Sorry about the recent inactivity on my part, a relative of mine fell ill, I have otherwise been preoccupied with visiting her. I will re read tomorrow and offer my opinions and thoughts then.
Puta Puta: Has been more active the last few days. I'm curious to hear if he has any reasoning for why he said "let's all vote for Sensfan", but then didn't vote for sensfan himself.
ZTR: Lurker. Hasn't posted since November 8th.
xyzzy: Lurker. Posted once to apologize for not confirming, way back on november 8th. Has not posted since.
Panda Stomper 85: Has not posted at all this game.
George Carlin: Even though he started all this debate, he hasn't posted since November 7th.
Tubby216: Has not posted at all this game.
Mod, could you please prod ZTR, xyzzy, Panda Stomper 85, George Carlin, and Tubby216?
Out of the lurkers, some might have just forgotten about the game; the ones that look scummiest are Killa Seven (who clearly hasn't forgotten about the game, but hasn't said anything yet) and xyzzy (who I expect more then this from from).
vote:Killa SevenI want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
I'm disturbed more people aren't paying attention to who is lurking and who isn't. I'm tried of always having to be the only guy who even bothers to figure out who's been lurking, and then inevitably being attacked for it, even though it's clearly in the best interests of the town.OhGodMyLife wrote:i am supremely disturbed by yos' lurkerhunt
In fact, now that I think of it, didn't YOU say:
So why are you trying to protect the lurkers now?OhGodMyLife wrote: Also, lurking will not be tolerated for much longer.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
You know who wants to "stay out of the way"? Scum do.tubby216 wrote:@ yos
i have posted i have been reading i have nothing of substance to post, untill something pops up that i need to adress i prefer to stay out of the way
If you're town, then comment on stuff. The game has been 10 pages. You must agree or disagree with SOMETHING someone said, or you must have SOME kind of idea about certain people's alignment.
Hey, if you really think there's "nothing of substance" in the game, then clearly the right thing to do is to refuse to post or vote or do anything until something with "substance" appears. Hey, how about we all do that?Tubby216 wrote: nope still don't,,, there is nothing of substance to be had anywhere,,
Ok.so yah lynch me if you want its ok by meVote:Tubby
[/quote]
although i would sugest looking elsewhere[/quote]
Sure. Where? If you think we should lynch someone who's not you, then who would you suggest? Who do you find suspicious?
Well, it wasn't obveous to me. Ok, if you don't think Sensfan is a good lynch, then why is it he's not a good lynch?Puta Puta wrote: Yos, are you sarcasm-intolerant ro something? my last post "let's all vote SensFan" was OBVIOUSLY a joke, sheesh...OH HAI THAR ECTO, u in my other game,
The thing is, when I thought your SensFan comment was serious, at least that was one real piece of content from you. If that didn't mean anything, then you've basically done nothing so far this game. Who do you think is scummy?I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
But there are times when the best way to use a vote is to not cast it right away, when the implied threat of a possible vote is more likely to get useful reactions then an actual vote would.Shanba wrote:
A vote is a tool, and, as town, there is no reason not to use it to the greatest extent possible - even if you are not certain someone is scum, you can use it for pressure, you can vote to see how people respond. A vote is too importantnotto be used.
Speaking of which, I still do want to hear from Sir T, and see what he thinks about the wagon on him (even if that wagon's gone away now).
When day 1 can last as long as a month, letting someone get away with lurking the whole time without even noting it seems like a bad idea. It's more effective to stay on top of it and keep people active the whole time, instead of waiting until day 2 and then expecting them to catch all the way up or be replaced.@Yos: Lurkerhunt? I know it's your style, but egh. I can't get enthusiastic about lurker hunts till at least day 2.
Letting people lurk for all of day 1,leting them get by without commenting on any day one wagons at all, just seems bad for the town.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
I've caught scum in the part of the game some people call the "random voting stage". Scum tend to think they can say whever they want then, and that no one is really paying attention, and sometimes they give themslelves away through carelessness there.Shanba wrote:(As a sidenote - Sensfan, I simply don't understand how that is even possible. I could see the transition period from random voting to real game being fruitful... but I don't see how you could catch scum in the random voting stage. It's too... well, random.)
That did bug me too, yeah; I just decided I didn't want to bring attention to it, heh.Then, there's the way BM seems to invoke a boogeyman when arguing with sobeahero. I really *hate* the way he says "But what if I'm a power role?" It's incredibly heavy handed, and frankly, just scummy.
Eh...in my experence, a large fraction of lurkers are people who are following the game, but aren't saying anything for whatever reason. (Nervous, confused, can't think of anything to say, or want to fly under the radar). If you call them by name, though, if you take note of their lurking, they'll often come back and respond. (Look how many of the people on my lurker list responded within a few days). If you can get them to do that, before they drift away from the game entirely, it seems like it helps, you can at least get some reactions and stuff. Plus, I've found scum before based on how people respond when they're called out for lurking.On lurker hunts, in general: I feel they're kinda a waste of time. A lot of lurkers will drop off the face of the earth entirely. Others will start contributing. Some will be legitimately trying to slip under the radar - those are the ones to watch for (FoS Der Hammer) but any wide scale lurker hunt is a distraction from focusing on the meat of the game - that is, the content, timing, tone etc. of players' posts.
Yeah, I don't get a good vibe from him either. I was hoping to get a response from him on OGML's vote for him before I did anything else, but the longer he waits on that, the more likely I am to just vote him.But it's Sir T I want to lynch. Well, want to wagon, anyway. The more I read his posts, the scummier he seems.
BM: Keep posting, please. The problem isn't that you're posting too much, it's that a lot of other people aren't posting enough.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Also, Shanba, while I'm not going to let BM get away with lurking, I also am wondering why you were pushing him in that direction. I don't buy the whole "BM posting means we get less info about everyone else" bit; if anything, I think BM's activity and agressivness has pushed everyone else to be more active and to post more then they would in a "normal" mafiascum game.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
That's true, but that's not what's happened here. What has happened was BM attacking and commenting on lots of things by lots of different people, and lots of people responding to his comments,and people responding to the comments made by those people.Shanba wrote:
In my experience, it's much more difficult to contribute to a game which is dominated by one player or one argument. You know those situations where two players are going at it hammer and tongs, posting ever longer lists of refutations and accusations at each other? Those make it very difficult for other players, as there's a tendency to sit back and watch the show.
Well, we may have gotten a little less information on Hoopla himself, but BM's attacks on people over the issue directly caused many people to either agree or disagree with him about those specific people, and that's exactally the kind of reactions that will be useful in the future.Similarly, BM's posting dominating the thread makes it hard for other players to rise to the forefront. I believe his discussions about Hoopla, for example, have reduced the amount of information we would have received should Hoople have had to present the information his/herself.
Well, you're right, more information in the thread makes it harder for people to catch up, but it also makes it easier to catch scum. As for the problem with catchign up and re-reading, I think the key to that is to keep everyone active as much as possible so they don't have a chance to forget what's going on.Furthermore, it hurts the game going forwards, too - the larger the weight of information, the harder it is for players to catch up, to replace in or to reread the thread.
(shrug) I guess I just don't see this as being an issue.And besides, when there's all this extraneous information about one player, other stuff about other players may get lost in the mass of BM's posts.
Again, I don't think all the BM posts just give us information about BM; they, and especally people's reacitons to them, give us information about everyone else.
Eh...I think that's about a normal amount of lurkers for a large game, at least in the fairly tight way I define lurkers.You say that people are contributing more than normal. Look at your list of lurkers above. That seems larger than normal. Other players are not contributing much - I fall into that category, as sobeahero pointed out below, as does Der Hammer.
I wasn't saying that BM posting a lot makes people who would have been lurkers active, but I think it does make people who would already have been active more active and give them more things to respond to. There's like half a dozen different useful threads of discussion going on here between everyone in the game, and many of them were started by BM.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Basically, any time anyone says "I am going to lurk now" and then actually does it and stops posting, I think it's vote-worthy. And if you say "I'm going to lurk now" and then do, it's pretty clearly not "forgetting about the game". it's lurking stratigically for whatever reason, and that's just not something the town can allow.Battle Mage wrote:
Ironic really. Maybe i forgot about the game?Yosarian2 wrote:
BM: If you do that, then whatever Shanba thinks, I'll vote you for lurking, just so you know.Battle Mage wrote:Consider me V/LA from this game until i get prodded.
:eyebrow: What "non-game related stuff"?Sorry, just the incessant bickering about non-game related stuff is grating on me. You guys sort it out amongst yourselves.
BM[/quote]I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Hey, Volkan. Welcome to the game.
Yes.vollkan wrote: I do have a question for everybody who is on the Tubby wagon, however: Are you prepared to take it to lynch if he doesn't post --
I wouldn't be happy about lynching him based just on what he's posted so far, but yes, I would be willing to do it. Pressure wagons don't work unless there is a real threat, an actual risk that if they player dosn't give in to the pressure and start acting in a more pro-town way, that he might be lynched.
Besides, based on his posting right now, I consider Tubby to be somewhat less likely then random to be town, and if he is town much less likely then random to be helpful town. Which adds up to "not a bad day 1 lynch", at least unless he starts posting some content that might change my mind about that, or unless a better wagon comes along.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
I guess I would just say that he hasn't given me any reason to think he's pro-town, he hasn't really done any useful or helpful pro-town actions yet (of course, he's not alone there...). I also consider refusing to comment on anything scummy (in the narrow sense, at least; something scum would like to do if they thought they could get away with it while not being something town should do.)vollkan wrote: Is there any reason in particular why you think Tubby scummier-than-average, rather than just arsehole town?
Obveously, my read on him right now is based on very little information, and is certanly subject to change if he starts actually playing the game. But, if someone has only said a few things all game, and one of them is somewat scummy, I consider that enough reason for a vote.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
You know, this kind of cryptic stuff really just makes me want to lynch you more. Seriously, I was like half an inch away from switching to Puta Puta before you started this.
Do you have some kind of magiacal role restriction that forbids you from being at all useful? Whatever it is you think you want to "reveal prior to your lynch", there's absolutly nothing stopping you from, like, playing the game, trying to find scum, contributing to the discussion and stuff, before that point.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
As I later mentioned, I had actually started to make the list of lurkers on Friday, before OGML's post. The lurker list was the correct move, the move that needed to be done for the good of the town at the time and the move that was most likely to find scum at the time; it had nothing to do with OGML's post.farside22 wrote: Yos: Post 225 The problem I have with this post is that Yos mentions his like for OGML vote on Sir T and see where it goes. When pressured more about his lack of vote he lurker hunts.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Generally, because they think it'll get people to unvote them out of sympathy or somthing.Sir Tornado wrote:
Ok... just curious, why would scum want to self vote again?Xyl wrote:My view is that anyone who is self-voting must fall into one of three categories:
(1) Scum
Bah. I'm torn on Puta Puta. Game theory suggests we shouldn't lynch him today, but I really, really hate to unvote him while he's still not saying anything. Puta, if you had to guess who the scum was right now, if you absolutly had to pick someone to vote for as if your life depended on it (hint: it might), who would you vote for?I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
No, not at all.tubby216 wrote: Yos,, nevermind i read through and you have been on me the entire game..i found in your previous posts i assume your revoting me stems from the case you made earlier right??
I really hate you OGML OMGUS vote here. This post is especally scummy:
Flip flops? OGML has suspected you and Sir T for a very long time now. How is he "flip flop"ing? And how is "flip flopping" supposed to be scummy anyway?Tubby wrote: because you are doing more flip flops than a fish out of water
flip flops+opertunistic wagon jumping+ irrational thought= scum
you sir are scum,, enjoy the gallows
I don't see anything oppurtunistic about his votes. Also, the whole concept of an "oppurtunistic vote" on day 1 is pretty much bogus anyway; good guys are supposed to join large, strong bandwagons in order to put pressure on people and move to a concensuss.
And there was nothing irrational about his thought, either; your "I have something magical to say right before I get lynched" thing was pretty scummy, and there's nothing irrational about him calling you out on it.
Also, I think this is incredibly scummy:
Hinting you have a power role in order to try to scare OGML into unvoting you...ugh.Tubby wrote:what if i have a power role what then?? does that make you a scum hunter or a role fisher??
Especally since you are now saying:
even though earlier, you were sayingTubby wrote:
and I will not claim, i will go to the gallows nice and quiet and with out a claim
and combined with your "I-might-be-a-power-role" hint, is just so scummy. There are times when refusign to claim is a good idea, but hinting you have a power role but aren't going to claim it to spite the town is just such a scum tactic.Tubby wrote: no but i assure you yos all will be revealed soon
And, finally, this:
is what I was talking about when I said you sound like frustrated scum.Tubby wrote: so if i shut up and say nothing i get wagoned, then i speak up try to help ,, present a case and i still get voted ,, i love this ,,,this game is awesomeI want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Interesting point, BM, but I think you're reading too much into it; especally since the mod made clear it would have been modkilled no matter if it was real or fake. I'd make the same kind of post as mod as Fonz's origional post, either way, so no one else would do the same thing and then be surprised if they got modkilled.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Well, I have a hard time explaining in any more detail then that; sort of a partly gut thing of my own, I guess. I guess it seems scummy to me because the vibe I get is that he seems almost entierly focused on not getting lynched; it makes me think that when he was making cases, he was perhaps only doing so to try to get the pressure off of him and is frustrated it didn't work.Shanba wrote:
Firstly is the fact that I strongly disagree (in parts) with his analysis of tubby's play. Particularly, I disagree that this reaction:
sounds like frustrated scum: it just sounds frustrated to me. I don't really get what's scummy about it.so if i shut up and say nothing i get wagoned, then i speak up try to help ,, present a case and i still get voted ,, i love this ,,,this game is awesome
This is like the 4th time in as many games I've been called opportunistic, and I have yet to have anyone explain to me even exactally what that means or how it is supposed to be a scumtell. It's like people think there's something inherently wrong with joining wagons, or something.Then there's the fact that his vote feels off to me, timing wise. Can't really place it. I think it just looks a touch opportunistic: Yos' vote was on the crest (or just before) of the wagon, if you will.
Eh...nothing BM's done seems to be too far outside his normal pro-town meta for me to get too worried about it yet.And then there's the fact that his play towards BM and his play towards tubby seem somewhat inconsistent: BM's power role hint-threat, despite coming from a vastly more experienced player who knows the ins and outs, who should be better than that, whereas tubby's comes from a newbie who seems almost incoherent at times...
Well, I actually did unvote Tubby after his first real scumhunting-appearing-post. That being said, his attacks on Oh God My Life just seem really scummy to me, as I explained. Do you really think that make him "look fairly town" to you?And then there's just the fact that I think tubby's attempts to scumhunt have, at least, looked fairly town which Yos just seems to ignore.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Clarify what you mean here. Do you think he's scum?Seraphim wrote:Sounds good enough for me.
Vote: Der Hammer
(oh yeah, I'm back, lol. I'm catching up now but as I read the post above me, claiming miller and voting for oneself is bad play)I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Ok. Could you explain why you think a scum would be especally likely to claim miller, self vote, and then ask the town to lynch him?Seraphim wrote:
from those one/two posts? Hell yes.Yosarian2 wrote:
Clarify what you mean here. Do you think he's scum?Seraphim wrote:Sounds good enough for me.
Vote: Der Hammer
(oh yeah, I'm back, lol. I'm catching up now but as I read the post above me, claiming miller and voting for oneself is bad play)I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
I will say that I don't necessarally disagree with this logic. I'm usually in favor of lynching claimed millers, and Der Hammer is both a claimed miller, a self-voter, and he lurked for much of the game. He's basically the ultimate day 1 safe lynch.Xylthixlm wrote:Something like this.
If there was a guilty cop result on someone, you would lynch them even if they claim miller.
If someone claims miller early, then you know that any cop inspect on themwillbe guilty. That means that there is no difference in information about the miller's alignment whether or not the cop uses an inspection. (The cop knows, too, and will never actually inspect the miller). So a claimed miller is logically equivalent to an inspected miller.
Since you would lynch an inspected miller, and a claimed miller is logically equivalent to an inspected miller, you should lynch a claimed miller.
Only problem is, I don't really think he's scum. Saying "I'm a miller, I should therefore die, vote:self" clear out of the blue like that would be a pretty crazy gambit for a scum to pull out of the air, especally since all he had on him at the time were a few lurker votes. I mean, I can't think of many mafia player who would ever even think of trying a bizzare gambit like that, let alone actually do it.
I still need Seraphim to explain why he thinks der hammer is scum, because I'm not buying his explination at the moment.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Um...that's...insane, Ecto.Ectomancer wrote: There is no giving 'townie credit' here. Here and now we make our decision as town. What we won't have is leaving this up in the air, and here is why:
1: If we don't believe him, he is scum, we lynch him here today after we are content with the discussion.
2: If we believe him, we make a pact as town here and now not to lynch him...at all. That pact forces scum to deal with him. They cant afford to go into endgame with what we are essentially deciding is a confirmed townie. It also presents the possibility of blocking a NK somewhere along the way, or, our boy gets into endgame. Also, making the pact means we wont have to worry about our power roles going crosspurposes, Doc/Vig being a simple example (no, not saying we have them). We cant waver on this. Once the decision is made, we stand solid on it.
Mafia is not a binary game; it's not a matter of "either we 100% totally and completly believe him, or we 100% totally and completly disbelieve him". There's always a chance someone is lying. At the moment, I don't really think der hammer is all that likely to be lying; I'd probably put the odds of him lying low enough so I think he's a worse then a random lynch at this point. That being said, I intend to continue to watch him, and if other evidence makes me more suspicious of him later, I reserve the right to change my mind. That's, you know, how pro-town people should always approach everything, IMHO. Declaring someone totally cleared when there's no actual reason to think they are is a good way for towns to lose.
Also, but what if we need to pressure him again later to start posting? Pressuring him to be more active worked today, but it wouldn't have if everyone had "made a pact to never ever lynch him no matter what" or whatever.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Um...there's a lot of things wrong with Der Hammer's play, but, how is what he saing have "little substance"? He's posted about once a day since last Friday or so, and in that time, he has claimed, voted himself and pressed for his own lynch, unvoted himself, attacked someoen else, analyzed part of the game, speculated on cults.skitzer wrote: Der Hammer is active lurking. He appears to be saying just enough to avoid proddage, yet it has little substance. Conclusion: Probably the best lynch at the moment, with tubby's claim and Puta being replaced.
If you want to say his play is bad, or anti-town, or whatever, I'd be fine with that. But active lurker? Huh? He's posted more content in the past 4-5 days then you have all month.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Yeah...that still dosn't make any sense to me. Unless someone is actually cleared one way or another, everyone is under some level of suspicion, right?Ectomancer wrote:You chopped my post Yosarian. The "DH is town" statement is an If Then Else statement, not binary at all. If we cant reach a consensus to never lynch him, thus forcing scum to deal with him, then we vote him here and now, today and get him out of here because what that says to me is that people still suspect he is scum, and if you suspect someone is scum, then you lynch them, period.
I don't think he's likely to be scum, at the moment, just because I don't think it's likely he would have done his recent actions as scum, but that's not the same as "he should have a free pass for the rest of the game and no one should be allowed to ever suspect him of anything ever from now on"; I've been wrong before, and I've changed my mind before, and I reserve the right to do so again if new evidence comes up.
I mean; what would you do if you took your "I'm never ever going to lynch Der Hammer no matter what!" vow but then tommorow a tracker claims says "Hey, I just watched Der Hammer target the guy that got nightkilled". Do you still vow to never lynch him?
I mean, there's no one in the game right now who I would vow to "never lynch no matter what"; you saying "we should lynch him right now unless we are all absolutly 100% positive we would never ever lynch him no matter what" seems like a pretty absurdly high bar.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Ok.Ectomancer wrote:
Which is why I said I see why there is a policy lynch to claimed millers. And of course if he is proven scum by a tracker then you would lynch him.Yosarian2 wrote:you saying "we should lynch him right now unless we are all absolutly 100% positive we would never ever lynch him no matter what" seems like a pretty absurdly high bar.
I don't think we have that many gamblers in this crowd anyhow.
But...why?
If he claims miller, that's a strike against him, sure, since at the very best that means he's one step less useful to the town then a vanillia townie. But...why not just have the cop not investigate him, and do our best to figure out, from his posts, if he's scum or town? I mean, it's not like we can investigate everyone anyway.
If you really think there's a high chance that his posts today came from a scum, then you should lynch him based on that, and I'd be interested to hear your logic for that. But lynching him because he claimed miller, even if you think he's probably town, just seems like a bad idea.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
How does claiming miller help scum?Xylthixlm wrote:Claiming miller helps scum, so the balance of WIFOM demands that claiming miller be inherently scummy.
Logically, if you actually are a miller, the not claiming might help scum, since if you claim you at least don't waste a cop investigation.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Right.
If he's lying scum, there are advantages to claiming miller day 1 out of the blue(although they're probably smaller then the cost, which is "claimed millers usually get lynched").
Also, if he's telling the truth and is town, there are advantages to the town of him claiming miller now before a cop investigates him (although, again, they may or may not be bigger then the cost).
If any action makes sense coming from either scum or from town, then I can't agree that it's "inherently scummy". In this case, in the circumstances he made the claim and the way he made the claim, I think it actually makes a little more sense coming from a pro-town miller then it would coming from a lying scum.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Well, that's kind of a non-specific mafia-theory discussion point of your own, isn't it Except you're just discussing, using mafia theory, about if it's more useful to discuss theory in a mafia game or not.Claus wrote:Ecto:
1- I find that abstract theory discussion to be harmful to the town, if not to the mafia game in general. Why argue if lynching millers in general is a good or bad idea, when we have our own personal miller, with his personal characteristics (not posting, then volunteering to die, then posting content when asked).
In short - Non specific theory discussion - cop out for scum. Specific discussion about players - good.
I certanly think it's worthwhile discussing mafia theory in a game, especally when it's directly related to a question of a choice the town has to make right now. Like, "should the town always lynch claimed millers, or should they only do so sometimes"; that's pretty clearly key to the game right now.
"No relevence"? 75 was me shooting down Sobeahero's garbage argument that "either Gc is scum or one of the people voting him is". How is that "not relevent"? Everyone else was trying to lynch someone based on the stupid "X voted no lynch" "Y voted X for voting no lynch" "Z voted Y for voting X for no lynch" chain, and I think that's foolish and pointless. How the heck is that "not relevent" to the game?Page 4:
Yos keeps up with no-relevance, on the wall posts (75,76). He backs down (78) when Hoopla asks him on 77 if his posts means he thinks people on the initial wagons are townies. WIFOM-fest on post 85. I don't like this "play with your cards close to your chest" style on day 1.
And I did not "back down" in 78, I clarified, explaining that I didn't think that whole thing meant anything at all.
And why are you attacking me for a "WIFOM-fest", exactally, while not attacking BM for the post I responded to? I was just shooting down BM's WIFOM logic, which was:
My post was just explaining that that was bad logic, since town are also obviously going to be interested in "promoting good practices". So why would you attack my post as "WIFOM" while ignoring BM's? (Whole thing is foolish anyway; there's nothing scummy with properly used logic even if it has a WIFOM component to it)Battle Mage wrote:
As such, scum are less likely to do something that is often seen as scummy, and will put them under scrutiny early on (such as vote No Lynch) and are more likely to do something seen as protown, that might stand in their favour later on (such as promoting good practices, like NOT No-lynching day 1).
No content??? Excuse me??I think Yos and Farside would be good alternative lynches, though, because they had posted so much by then, without actually giving out any content. I'd be willing to lynch them.FoS: Yos and FarsideI want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Well, not to this extent. This game is getting a little silly, with how long day 1 is taking.Natirasha wrote:So is this how games were like in the old day? Long tl;dr posts over stuff that isn't even important(I think, as I said, I tl;dred).
I want to hear the rest of Claus's thoughts, but once he's caught up, I'd be willing to end the day. At this point, I'd be fine with lynching either Sir T or tubby.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Well, no.tubby216 wrote:@xyl
ok what is the case on TI?? i must have missed it,
as far as der hammer,, i would support that lynch i know he is a claimed miller but i do not understand why its in the best interest of the town to keep him around, cause we will show up as scum if investigated, so that would be a wasted investigation, but if we lkynch him that would also be a wasted lynch,and the scum get a kill , so by lynching der hammer it would be like if we voted not lynch at this point right?,, so thats the quandry as i understand it is that correct??
If he is lying scum, then we need to lynch him at some point or we lose. If he is a pro-town miller, then we obv don't want to lynch him at all.
The fact that he can't be cop investigated (no matter if he's telling the truth or lying, he should come up guilty) makes him slightly less useful to the town, but not by that much; it's not like we can investigate everyone.
So basically we should be lynching him if we think he's scum, and not if we think he's town; you know, just like anyone else.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
First of all,. I hope everything gets better for you with school, Sir T.
Well...you've consistantly been a secondary suspect of mine for most of the day. A lot of it in the early day comes down to some vaugly scummy vibes.Sir Tornado wrote:Also, if I am going to be lynched, I want Shanba and YoS to put their reasons for suspecting me on the record right now.
You later said something about how you were "trying to look delibratly ambiguas" about if you were town or scum to avoid being nightkilled, and that comment really struck me the wrong way. I responded to it, and you never responded back; it just seemed like a really easy excuse to say "well, if I look scummy, it's because I was trying to".
There was a third reason, which was that it seemed to me like whenever a bandwagon on your started to form you kind of lurked until it went away, but now that you've asked to be replaced I tend to think your lurking probably was honestly due to lack of time, so I'm disreguarding that as a scum tell.
You've never really been my main suspect today, sir T, but I've always been somewhat suspicious of you. I don't have that many concrete reasons to suspect you, honestly, but then again I don't have much data to work from since you haven't posted all that much, and I naturally tend to be more suspicious of someone who posts 10 times and 1 of their posts seems off then of someone who posts 40 times and 4 of their posts seems off. I still think Tubby is more likely to be scum then you, but you would be my second choice for a lynch.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
(shrug) If we get to deadline and it's needed in order to prevent a no-lynch, I'd vote Seraphim. I thought he was a little scummy early in the game, I wasn't especally impressed by his reasons for voting Der Hammer either, and he's only posted 4 times in the entire month of december.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Sir T: If you can keep playing, there's no reason for you to replace out just because you said you were going to. Especally if you're going to continue to be this active.Sir Tornado wrote:
Had I not asked to be replaced out already, I wouldn't want to right now; but I understand many of you may have unvoted me/changed your opinion on me due to me asking to replace out, and it would be in bad taste to stay, so I am still being replaced out when The Fonz manages to find replacements, and he has to find replacements for 3 players, so it is very unlikely I would have got replaced out on D1 even if I hadn't been posting so much. Obviously, BM and Xyzzy who aren't posting should get replaced out first.Hoopla wrote: On a side-note are you still seeking replacement or sticking it out now?I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Der Hammer wrote:Obviously everyone is going to be busy between today and tomorrow because of new years, but I will make a final reflection post on the day in case I am lynched. This should come in the next few days.
Still waiting for this, der hammer.
At this point, I still don't really think much of the case against him, but the way he's just stopped talking lately does not made me especally inclined to defend him.I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey
Hmmm...4 days left, Elmo? Ok, we've got to get moving.
I said earlier that I prefered the Seraphim case to the Der Hammer case, if that was our only two options, but I hate to let Der Hammer get away with lurking like this
Der Hammer, are we going to hear from you before deadline?I want us to win just for Yos' inevitable rant alone. -CrashTextDummie-
-
Yosarian2 (shrug)
- (shrug)
- (shrug)
- Posts: 16394
- Joined: March 28, 2005
- Location: New Jersey