Oh, you can always tell. Whenever he's scum, he uses the letter "e" a lot.Glork wrote:Let's hope he's not scum this time. <.<
![Shifty-Eyed :shifty:](./images/smilies/icon_shifty.gif)
Heh...careful there, Glork. If you gloat too much about your king-ish skills you'll end up killing the hero. Murphy's Law and all that.Glork wrote:Heh... at this point, I'm just trying to decide which n00b didn't make *ME* the king.
Bastard. If I could kill you, I would.
Actually, I think it's best that the scum not know who the kingmaker is, becuase then they could AVOID killing him. The scum tend to kill off whomever looks pro-town; it might actually be in our favor if they happen kill off a kingmaker who already looked pro-town, and then if a person who looks less clearly pro-town will become kingmaker, which would hopefully let the town avoid a mislynch and get information in the process about who tried to lynch the kingmaker. If the kingmaker gets outed too early, then the scum can just avoid killing him, and the "confirmed innocence" factor would be less useful.MrBuddyLee wrote: Why are you "worried" about protecting the Kingmaker at this point? They're a vanilla townie who passes the role of Kingmaker on to another vanilla townie upon their death. What makes the vanilla townie who selected PJ as king any more worth saving from nightkill than the next vanilla townie down the line? PARTICULARLY this early in the game... Your tears for the lurking Kingmaker taste crocodile-flavored to me and thus your accusations reek of an attempt to cast wrongful aspersions upon a player with a better-than-average record of hunting scum.
Well, I won't "deal with" you not voting. The only thing voting does in this game is give pro-town people information. It gives both the king and the kingmaker direct, easy to find and interpret information about who most of the town finds scummy and who most of the town trusts at any given point in time, both of which are absolutly vital to the town's chances of winning the game. It gives us a clear, easy to follow record of what you think, have thought, and have done during the course of the game. It lets us see who voted for who, when, and why.Mastermind of Sin wrote:@PJ, #2C) Deal with it.
cardb0ardb0x wrote:fine. lynch me. if, after you lynch me, i'm a townie, just please, like, examine mrbuddylee. he's kind of obnoxious. if town wins, i'll count it as a win for me even if i'm lynched in the first round.
honestly, i trust pj to make the right descision. and actually read what i write. i admit i made factual errors in my earlier posts. i know i'm easy to bandwagon. no self-respecting mafia player would NOT vote for me. Sorry for distracting everybody during the first round and wasting a lynch.
Things never, ever to do in a mafia game, if you want to win, from bad to worst:cardb0ardb0x wrote: fine. lynch me. if, after you lynch me, i'm a townie, just please, like, examine mrbuddylee. he's kind of obnoxious. if town wins, i'll count it as a win for me even if i'm lynched in the first round.
honestly, i trust pj to make the right descision. and actually read what i write. i admit i made factual errors in my earlier posts. i know i'm easy to bandwagon. no self-respecting mafia player would NOT vote for me. Sorry for distracting everybody during the first round and wasting a lynch.
Mastermind of Sin wrote:
You'd better hope I become King soon, then. I'm not afraid of the big bad vote. If the King decides to execute me, so be it. I don't need votes to tell you who's scum, and I'm certainly not going to conform to anyone's wishes but my own. If you have a problem with it, I guess it sucks to be you.
Eh? Why would we "assume" anything like that?ShadowLurker wrote:
Although that was a joke, I would just like to say we should ALWAYS give the King the benefit of the doubt or else, this day won't be productive at all.
So for now, assume PJ is town and his intentions are good so we won't get sidetracked.
Happy with all of my votes atm.
Yes, we can keep track of what you have said without you voting, but it will be harder, and it'll be harder to tell when something was a big deal to you and when you were just making observations. In any case, it'd be damn hard for a king to figure out what the town is thinking without people voting. Let's say you say "Yos is looking scummy", then 5 pages later say "Glork is looking scummy", then later you say "Ameliaslay, you just misrepresented Yosarian". Now think of everyone in the town saying things like that but not voting. Do you really think any king would be able to get an idea of what the town in general thought? Would anyone really feel the need to defend themself?Mastermind of Sin wrote: Nope. It's not antitown, either. It's just how I feel. And I don't feel like voting. Also, I'm not assuming that your opinion is meaningless, I justdon't. For those of you skimmers who use votes to keep track of shit, then you can assume that I find no one scummy, if it makes you happy. If you want to know who I think is scum, you'll actually have to read my posts. If you want a quick reference of what I thought, take notes on what I say. It'll be better for you in the end.care
It was not all that clear from those posts that you suspected those people, MOS. Just because I disagree with a point someone makes does not automatically mean I suspect them. And it's still not clear which one you suspect more, and your posts are certanly not going to put any pressure on any of them or get them to respond or defed themselves in any way, and it didn't even get me to take a closer look at them or anything like that, so I must say that as a scum-hunting technique, your one-liner responses without votes seems pretty worthless.Mastermind of Sin wrote: Clearly I'm suspicious of Twomz, Vaughn, and Ameliaslay. In the future, don't expect me to be this nice about it, either. I will not go around saying "I suspect so-and-so". That's where the whole reading of my posts thing comes into play. Next time do your homework, kthnxbai.
Dosn't work. It would have worked in the last game, and I and several others suggested variations of the plan in kingmaker I; however, the game has been changed.cardb0ardb0x wrote:First, the kingmaker would have to declare who they are putting in line to become the next kingmaker should they be mafia'd. Second, those in line to become the next kingmaker would have to declare *who* they would choose to be king the next day should they become kingmaker, and each person's selection *must* be different.
If the kingmaker dies, a new pro-town citizan will be chosenBrianMcQueso wrote:The Rules
...
Kingmaker wrote:You are the Kingmaker. Each night, you must send two player names to me via PM, and you must indicate which player you wish to become King and which is the backup. You may not choose yourself for either position. If the player you chose to be King is still alive in the morning, they will become the King, otherwise, your backup choice will become King. You may not choose the same player two days consecutively unless, at the end of a Day, there are 7 or fewer players remaining. If you are killed (either by the assassins or executed publicly), a new pro-town citizen will be chosen randomly to take your place as the new Kingmaker. You win when all the assassins are executed.
Heh...Mert wrote:Heh, you went to the effort of copying and pasting the Kingmaker description from the front page but didn't read the Hero role while you were at it?Yosarian2 wrote:And actually, that "citizan" wording makes me wonder. Not that it really matters yet, but could a hero become a king this game, or not?
The Hero can become King unless someone tries to execute them and their role is revealed, after which point they can no longer reign.
Actually, that is a good point. It seems fairly likely that Glork will end up as King eventually, if he dosn't get himself killed first, and it does look like pablito might be trying to make friends with him now so he'll have a better shot at manipulating him later.Thok wrote:Um, yeah.vote pablito, way too certain that Glork is town, and way too much sucking up to Glork.
(shrug) The big difference for me is that if someone does one thing that looks odd, or somewhat scummy, I FOS them to point out that one thing they did is scummy. I usually only vote someone if I look back at all of their posts and come to the conclusion that based on all of their posts they're more likely then average to be scum at that point in time.Twomz wrote:Weeks, maybe longer.
I rarely ever FOS. The only reason I would is if I don't want to unvote who i'm voting for, but I want to draw attentio to the fact that i'd like to be voting for the other person as well. I see no reason to use FOSs in this game. When people FOS others just to show that they think the other person is acting scummy but isn't quite scummy enough to warrent a vote... I usually take that as a scum tell.
Agreed. PJ, if you don't want to make a formal LOE just yet, I'd like it if you at least listed a few people you are especally suspicious of at the moment, so we can get some pressure going on someone and get the game moving. The town can't really pressure people very effectivly here; the responsibility to pressure people into getting rections kind of falls on the King.Twomz wrote:PJ... if there's no conversation at all and BMQ is forced to impose a deadline, then what are you going to do? I the last post I made (or maybe second to last) I asked for a LoE, because no one had posted at all... and since then, no real content has been posted. It's not a good idea for the town to drag through the day and then be forced to choose basically a random person to excecute at the last minute because of a deadline. If we can narrow our search and pick out the best candidates out of the people w/ the most votes, then maybe we'll be able to reach a discision before the game dies again. It feels as if the game is draggin unneccessarily at this point... and that actual contribution from the players is nonexistant (or, no content is being posted, take your pick)
Besides, no one is really voting for anyone, and no one is anywhere close to majority... If you don't put at least a couple of people on by your own discression... there won't be a LoE until it's too late to discuss our options.
Being "not helpful" is a minor scumtell in and of itself; I would inherently expect a good guy to be trying harder to help the town and find scum then I would expect a scum to. And besides, it's in the town's best interest to encourage pro-town behavior, and one way to do that is to lynch people who are not doing pro-town behavior.Phoebus wrote:hrm. lack of participation, lack of posting = not helpful.
lack of vociferousness, lack of scumtells = not scum?
would you be prepared to say that only because I'm not helpful today would mean that I shall be that way all days? would you go as far as making that assumption? or is it just a case of, rather Phoebus than anyone else? or is it a case of, whoever it is, don't matter to me...might as well go for someone on the "LoE"?
Could you be a little more clear on that? What has he done, exactally, that makes you think he's pro-town?Mastermind of Sin wrote:
That's exactly my point. the fact that he's playing differently does not in and of itself point towards a particular alignment, but if you look at the particular playstyle he's using, while it may not be optimal protown play, there are earmarks here and there that point to him being protown, as I've already pointed out.
I didn't like the bird wagon. And then I saidGlork wrote:Eh... I *do* want people to restate their stances regarding Bird1111. I'm pretty sure that I remember a handful of peoples' thoughts, but I still want them on record.
I don't think MBL's origional "kicked-in-the-nuts" theory was suspicious; it's an interestesting speculation that makes some logical sense. I don't think it's a very strong theory, though. It's fairly common for people to suddenly decide they're not going to lurk anymore and to take an interest in a game, and when they do that the first thing most people do is do a re-read and try to figure out what's going on, often making some kind of general game summery post in the process. I've done that pleanty of times when I wanted to catch up with a game I felt behind on, and in fact, MBL himself recently did that in an ongoing game.petroleumjelly wrote:In any case, my opinion is that MBL's theory is more than plausible, and in reality, likely. Apparently the people agreeing with this theory are somehow "scummy", but I was wondering about thatbeforeMBL proposed it, so it's not as if I was simply hopping on his idea.
Well, it might be WIFOM, but a scum-PJ would have to know that it would be hard to accuse him if he simply did what he said he was going to do an execute someone on his list of execution, and then if anyone questioned him on it later, he'd just have to say "well, sorry, but I just went with the town. If you don't like my decision that's fine, but then why aren't you also attacking X, Y, and Z who voted for person A?".CrashTextDummie wrote:Most of us are townies, so having Rosso dead is about as beneficial to scum as anyone else. The fact that your reasoning for why scum PJ wouldn't execute Rosso is mostly based on WIFOM is not sitting well with me though.
Eh? If you suspect me, then why are you following my lead when it comes to Pooky, Bird, and Tomez? I'm not getting set up here, am I?Glork wrote:Vote: Yosarian2
I think I picked up on something when skimming over his posts. I'll return to it later (probably late tomorrow afternoon), but I'm painfully short on time tonight.?
What change in opinion?Glork wrote: Yosarian: What inspired your change in opinion regarding Phoebus between Post 376 and Post 423?
I mention that I didn't feel like I had a good read on him, but also say that I find his constant lack of contribution and contentless posts suspicious. I also think it's fairly clear from that post that none of those four people was jumping out at me as uber-scummy.Yosarian wrote: Ok, some quick thoughts on the people on the king's list of exectuion.
Pablito: His constant defense/buddying up to Glork is a minor scum tell, and he hasn't done much else.
Bird111: all he's done is vote Gork and Pablito for no good reason. Clearly :not helpfull: at best.
Phobus: I really can't get a good read on him at the moment. His shameless bandwagoning dosn't look good, but I'm not sure if it's a scumtell at this point. More suspicious is his refusal to contribute in any real way, with helpful comments like "still nothing to add at this point".
CDB: Don't really see anything too suspicious about him at this point.
There was no real change in my reasons for suspecting him. He still had not posted any real content other then the one "bandwagon everyone for no reason" post. Again, as I made clear, I still didn't really have a very strong suspicious about him, but out of the four people on the king's LOE at that point I liked his lynch the best.Yosarian2 wrote:Eh...with the deadline coming up, I figured I should vote for the person on the execution list I felt most suspicious of. I honestly don't have a very strong suspicion on anyone at this point, but out of the 4 people the king said he's thinking about executing, you're at the top of my list.
Basically, like I said in an earlier post, my general impression so far is that you've been mostly :nothelpfull:, and the one time you did contribute content it was to shamlessly bandwagon without good reasons.
(shrug) I think I was the first one who attacked Twomz and Pooky for the way they joined of the Bird bandwagon, and especally Twomz for some other scummy looking posts where he was pushing it with craplogic, and so I was under the impression you were basically following me there.Glork wrote:Followyourlead? I've been calling Pooky scum since the middle of Day One. Heck, when you suggested offing a lurker such as Vaughn, I mentioned Pooky again and explained why he was a better choice than Vaughn. Also, though it can't be verified, I could have sworn that I was the first to vocally reject the Bird-is-scum theory as presented by MBL. As for Twomz... *shrug* so we sortof agree on that point. Twomz is actually lowest on my list of people-who-might-be-executed.
Glork wrote:You seemed awfully wishy-washy in this post. Saying that you thought he didn't look good, but couldn't commit to such an inkling (even rejecting your own feelings by saying "I'm not sure if it's a scumtell") feels very uncharacteristic of you.
So why comment on four people if none of them strike you as particularly scummy? If you're going to make a post and judge some players, wouldn't it be more helpful to make some "I think this guy is scum" posts rather than "I kinda almost suspect this person, but not really because I can't read him" posts?Yos2 wrote:I mention that I didn't feel like I had a good read on him, but also say that I find his constant lack of contribution and contentless posts suspicious. I also think it's fairly clear from that post that none of those four people was jumping out at me as uber-scummy.
(shrug) If the king says he's going to execute person A, B, C, or D, and a deadline is coming up, I'd expect everyone to weigh in and say which one of the four of them they would execute. Just like if a deadline's coming up in a normal game and it's clear that either person A, B, or C will be lynched, I will usually vote for one of the three of them.Glork wrote:So basically you fence-sat until near-deadline, then picked someone who you "couldn't get a good read on" because he was on the king's List of Execution? Again, this seems very unlike the Yosarian I'm used to seeing. I'm finding it very hard to believe that someone with your talent and experience "[doesn't] have a very strong suspicion on anyone" after nearly 20 pages' worth of discussion.
...what arguments would those be, exactally?pablito wrote:vote: Yosarian2. I'm not liking the defense right now, but it's possible that he's just misguided because of his lack of comprehension of the game timeline. Also I may be biased because I'm totally buying all of Glork's arguments on Yos.
When I said it "does not look good", I meant exactally what I said; it looked bad. That it, I wasn't sure if it really was a scum tell, but I could understand in any case why people were voting for him for it, becuase it looks bad.Glork wrote:Here's why he was wishy-washy.
He says he cannot get a good read on Phoebus.
He says that bandwagoning "does not look good," indicating that he finds it suspicious.
He says that he is not sure if it's a scumtell, indicating that he doesn't really find it suspicious yet -- a contradiction to his prior statement that he finds Phoebus' it suspicious
He says that Phoebus' refusal to contribute is suspicious -- which would appear to contradict his initial statement that he cannot get a read on Phoebus.
I'm not saying that not having a firm stance is scummy. I'm saying that making conflicting comments within the same post while analyzing your thoughts on a player is scummy. Had Yosarian said something like "I think A is scummy, but I think B is pretty pro-town, so I don't have a good read on him yet," I wouldn't have a problem. Instead Yosarian points out two things he finds suspicious, and mentions that he can't read Phoebus and that he's "not sure" if Phoebus' suspicious behavior is scummy. Seems to me that suspicious behavior is, well... inherently scummy.
Were you even reading the game before the crash?bird1111 wrote:Unvote Mert, his logic has improved a lot; and poor logic was the main reason for my vote
Vote Yosarian2as like Glork, I don't like his wishwashiness in his section about Phoebus in post 416. Also in 547; after Glork requested that everyone state their stances of me, Yosarian said that he had been against my bandwagon, which contridicted his last post that involved me, also 416, made it seem like he was neutral or slightly for my bandwagon.
Glork, why the unvotes?
Um, no, I don't think so. You were attacking me partly because you said I was "contradicting" myself by saying I had been defending you, which is pretty clearly both untrue and rather absurd as I had, in fact, been defending you today. I did say yesterday that I didn't like your lurking, but that dosn't apply today as you've been more active. So how was I "contradicting" myself?bird1111 wrote: Relook over my post, I think you are misunderstanding my point completly.
Both your vote for me and your vote for bird. Just two more examples of you voting for people without giving reasons, and in those cases, both look like bad wagons to me.Phobes wrote: Yosarian,
bad bandwagons = the "wagon" on you?
Or bird's thang?
I've clarified my thoughts on bird. Most of which are lost now.
If you see no reason in my argument, please qualify that by saying "pushing wagons for no reason that I see" and don't just omit the last part. That's just insulting. Don't make me go all Glork on you
Except I HAD been against your bandwagon. I argued against it a great deal in posts that were deleated when the game crashed.bird1111 wrote:Yosarian, what I meant is that you contridicted yourself by saying that you had been against my bandwagon, when your're previous post that mentioned me showed you as being neutrual/slightly for my bandwagon, therefore you contridicted yourself
bird1111 wrote:Yosairain, at the time of your post saying that you were against my bandwagon, you had never posted anything that showed that you were against my bandwagon
Yosarian wrote:I'm not sure how many different ways I can say this. Do you know that several days worth of posts were lost in the crash, right? Did you read any of them?
:eyebrow:Glork wrote: Also, Yosarian... I'd like you to do 2-3 people, instead of just one more. I don't want to let you off easy, as I feel like I might know someone else you'll pick as a pro-town player.
Glork wrote:I'm not asking you to make your inklings set in stone. But surely you must think that some player are more pro-town than others. In my initial assignment, I said who do you think ismost likelyto be pro-town. This is nothing permanent. There's no "I absolutely believe that this person is pro-town and I will not be swayed in my opinon." But I would imagine that you can at least name a few other people who are on your good side.
Well, in all fairness, I think I've seen you get killed night 1 or night 2 more then anyone else lately, Glork.Glork wrote:Eh... in all fairness, I consider Thok at least as good a player as myself or PJ. I would also guess that scum likely considered killing me overnight. But there are several ripe N1 targets, I feel. To say that skilled players are more likely to be scum just because they outlived other skilled players is, IMO, a little absurd.MBL wrote:And yes, I consider many players good players, MoS, CTD, Yos amongst them. Scum can't kill all the good ones N1, so obviously your presence amongst the living right now is not a scumtell. But YOU got kinged, Glork got kinged, and Pooky is an award-winner. I chose to name you three because you're high profile and die often and early as far as I know. I'd think scum would have feared a Glorking D2 and significantly considered offing him.
I'm quite scummy? Care to expand on that one?Zindaras wrote:I'm at Page 19 right now, jumping out from my notes so far are Yosarian2 and Vaughn (now Der Hammer). I think they're quite scummy so far.
Have fun discussing this while I'm off. My reread will continue in the evening.
Care to elaborate a bit there?Zindaras wrote:Yosarian2: Another interesting case. I had three scum vibes from him, from Posts 189, 376 and 426. He defended Mert and attacked MoS. He FoSed pablito. He pressured PJ to pressure others (instead of doing it himself). He voted Phoebus. Though Glork stated he thought Yos was pro-town Day 1, he attacked Yos Day 2, an attack against Yos defended himself very awkwardly. He voted Twomz and pablito.
Post 189 was me pointing out, again, why MOS's plan of action was and is directly harmfull to the town. If someone does something that's bad for the town, it makes it more likely they're scum, and it also means that pro-town people should try to pressure them to act differently. I don't see why people don't seem to get that, with Glork dismissing my attack against MOS as a "metagame vote" and no one else willing to back me up to put more pressure on him. So what, exactally, is scummy about that post?Yosarian2 wrote:I don't really see how trying to tie people together is a scum tell anyway; it's a perfectly reasonable way of trying to find scum.
It was not all that clear from those posts that you suspected those people, MOS. Just because I disagree with a point someone makes does not automatically mean I suspect them. And it's still not clear which one you suspect more, and your posts are certanly not going to put any pressure on any of them or get them to respond or defed themselves in any way, and it didn't even get me to take a closer look at them or anything like that, so I must say that as a scum-hunting technique, your one-liner responses without votes seems pretty worthless.Mastermind of Sin wrote: Clearly I'm suspicious of Twomz, Vaughn, and Ameliaslay. In the future, don't expect me to be this nice about it, either. I will not go around saying "I suspect so-and-so". That's where the whole reading of my posts thing comes into play. Next time do your homework, kthnxbai.
If you're not going to vote, you should at least "fos" or something, and I can't imagine why you wouldn't want to even just clearly state "I am currently suspicious Twomz". Do you really think everyone is going to sit down and pore through every one of your posts to try to get some kind of hint as to what MOS might or might not be thinking?
I don't see how the way you're playing here could possibly help the town in any way, or how it could possibly find scum. Especally in a game where the town has no information roles, if you're not going to help the town find scum during the day, you're going to have to die.
King PJ had asked for comments about the people on his list of execution, and so I re-read all the posts of those people and posted my thoughts. More people should have done that, but they weren't. If you want to find scum, why not look at the people who weren't trying to help the king make a decision, as opposed to the few people who were?Yosarian2 wrote:Ok, some quick thoughts on the people on the king's list of exectuion.
Pablito: His constant defense/buddying up to Glork is a minor scum tell, and he hasn't done much else.
Bird111: all he's done is vote Gork and Pablito for no good reason. Clearly :not helpfull: at best.
Phobus: I really can't get a good read on him at the moment. His shameless bandwagoning dosn't look good, but I'm not sure if it's a scumtell at this point. More suspicious is his refusal to contribute in any real way, with helpful comments like "still nothing to add at this point".
CDB: Don't really see anything too suspicious about him at this point.
And again, what's wrong with this post? When the king says "I'm going to execute one of these three people", every pro-town person in the game SHOULD comment on that, and say "Well, if you're going to execute A, B, or C, I'd suggest B, because....".Yosarian wrote:Eh...with the deadline coming up, I figured I should vote for the person on the execution list I felt most suspicious of. I honestly don't have a very strong suspicion on anyone at this point, but out of the 4 people the king said he's thinking about executing, you're at the top of my list.
Basically, like I said in an earlier post, my general impression so far is that you've been mostly :nothelpfull:, and the one time you did contribute content it was to shamlessly bandwagon without good reasons.
I'd been trying to pressure MOS for most of the day, and it did exactally nothing. He basically ignored me, everyone else basically ignored me, and nothing changed at all, he felt absolutly no pressure to change his anti-town behavior. So yeah, I came to the conclusion that we needed to have the king start pressuring people if we were going to get anywhere. Do you disagree?He pressured PJ to pressure others (instead of doing it himself).
Yup, and I still think he's scum. What's your point?He voted Phoebus.
I "defended myself against very awkwardly"? How so? What in my defense did you disagree with?he attacked Yos Day 2, an attack against Yos defended himself very awkwardly
Just wondering...when did I defend mert? I don't remember doing that.Zindaras wrote:
I've already stated quite a good case against you, but apparently, you see it as having no good reasons.
You defended Mert, who I view as scummy.
(shrug) I'm sure I was giving off a different vibe in reverse, it was a very different game. For one thing, in Reverse I spent the whole day 1 trying to get myself "elected".I'm not getting the scumhunting vibe from you I got in Reverse.
In general, I'm very reluctent to make a long list of people I think are pro-town this early in the game. If I have a hunch someone might be scum, I'll say so, but if I have a hunch someone might be pro-town I usually don't. Saying "I think person X might be pro-town", if X isn't being attacked, is generally not very useful (it's not likely to start an argument, for one thing), if everyone did that it'd make it much easier for scum to manipulate conversation (by keeping people who trust them alive), and of course if you turn out to be wrong you've just linked yourself to a scum.Glork wrote: Now, with regards to why I gave you that assignment: The initial question (pick three people) was because I wanted to see where you placed your "trust" (note that I use this term very lightly). I asked you an unusual question specifically to get you thinking in an unusual manner. Sometimes figuring out who you think is pro-town can lead you to find scum. I was sorta hoping you would do that; obviously it didn't happen. The reason I expanded it to 5 is because I realized that 3 wouldn't give me any info on you. When you answered 'Bird and Glork' initially, my internal reaction was "well, that's not too surprising." And then I realized that asking for 3 people isn't very controversial or revealing. If I want to get good info on you, I need to make you pick out something solid amongst the grey matter that is the "middle of the bunch." Yeah, it's easy to name one or two people you think are pro-town. But I wanted to make you look at other players, to think about who you like and who you don't like, and to pick amongst the uncertainty something -- some opinion, some significant conclusion -- that you are able and willing to share. I must say, I've been sorely disappointed that your response was effectively "well, I guess PJ too but after that it gets tough." That's not the kind of response I either expected or wanted to see. I guess that's partly why I continue to suspect you. You're still showing this unwillingness to dive down into the muck and get your hands dirty. I get this distinct nagging feeling that you're trying to be cautious, that you're still avoiding major confrontations (for the most part... this could turn into one), that you're still trying to slide by without voicing any firm suspicions one way or another. You can't seem to get good reads on people who might be scumbags. You're not willing to do some scrounging to find any significant number of people who might be townies. That kind of unwillingness, IMO, is rather scummy. It's the main reason that you're on my list.
No one said you should execute a random lurker, Glork, although it wouldn't be a bad thing to kill someone who is both scummy looking AND a lurker. However, we do need to have the king put pressure on lurkers, and there's no reason there shouldn't be some lurkers on your LOE.Glork wrote: Explain to me how you think that is, in any way, a good idea. (And I don't want to see you say, "lynching a lurker will force the other lurkers to participate." Lurkers will be lurkers. And as people get more behind on the game, they will be less inclined to want to catch up. Experience has taught me that sad fact time and time again, so while the idealist in you might want to "set an example" by executing a lurker, I can just about guarantee that it won't be the case.)
Hardly; if someone stood up and said "I'm going to basically just lurk all game and never contribute anything useful, and only post just often enough so as to not get replaced", I would certanly vote for them, because that's anti-town behavior, and the town should never put up with anti-town behavior.Zindaras wrote:For the rest, I find MoS's way of playing not in any way to hurt the town. I have quite a few entries in which MoS stated opinions, so your attack on him is based only on "he won't vote", while votes aren't even that relevant. You seem to find deliberately not casting votes as scummier than deliberately not posting.
(shrug) The game was dragging, people were not posting, and there was a deadline coming up. I didn't feel like I had much to say either, but we needed to get conversation going, so I just re-read all of the posts of the people on the execution list and wrote down my thoughts as they came to me. I was trying to stir discussion on those three people, becuase it seemed clear that the king was going to execute on of them, and it apparently failed as most people still didn't comment on them. This game has been pretty frustrating for me pretty much all the way through, and all game I've felt like I've been talking into an echo chamber where everyone ignores me and nothing I say or do seems to matter.I don't like how you post conflictingly here. You state Phoebus, pablito and bird as both scummy and townish. I don't like the general tone of your post.
Again, based on PJ's earlier thoughts, it seemed clear that he WAS going to execute someone on that list, and there was nothing I could do about that. Anyway, if someone picks three people they think are suspicious, the odds are very good that at least one of them is scum, so there's certanly something to be gained by wieghing in on which one looked most suspicious to me.You ignore everyone but those on the scum list, as if you're happy with whatever happens. You think inside the box. That's not something I'm used to from you.
I think that in this kind of game we need to have at least some support from the king in order to put pressure on people. No one really feels pressured unless they really think they're at risk.I think you should always try to do your own job, instead of asking others to do it for you.
Ok. What has Phoebus done that makes you think he's pro-town? Use specifics, please.I don't.
[/quote]I "defended myself against very awkwardly"? How so? What in my defense did you disagree with?he attacked Yos Day 2, an attack against Yos defended himself very awkwardly
That's another reason that I don't like to declare that I think certain people are pro-town; because then it makes it harder for me to later attack that person if I change my mind.MrBuddyLee wrote:Yos has been primarily defensive, and suspects Twomz and Phoebus, two people who haven't said much. For bad votes with no stated reasons on bad wagons. He finds PJ pablito bird cbox townish. He's gone from finding Glork explicitly pro-town to finding him suspect over the past three weeks.
No, he didn't say he wouldn't contribute, and I was never trying to imply that he did. You're trying to take my words out of context here by deleating the part of your post that I was responding to, and as you took the effort of quoting the post and then deleating your words.Zindaras wrote:Two interesting things to note: MoS never said he wouldn't contribute. He simply said he wouldn't vote. There is no huge disadvantage to not voting in this setup, if you contribute.Yosarian2 wrote:Hardly; if someone stood up and said "I'm going to basically just lurk all game and never contribute anything useful, and only post just often enough so as to not get replaced", I would certanly vote for them, because that's anti-town behavior, and the town should never put up with anti-town behavior.
Now, later in the day he did start participating in a useful way dispite the bizzare self-imposed limitation he put on himself, at which point I backed off on attacking him, but I certanly don't think I was wrong to attack him for that early on.
You said "You're attacking MOS for not deliberately not voting, but you're not attacking people who are deliberately not posting". And I pointed out the incorrect logic of your statement by saying "I will never contribue anything this game", I would vote for them. In other words, if anyone actually announced a stratagy of delibratly not posting the way MOS announced a stratagy of delibartly not voting, I would have voted for them.Zindaras wrote:For the rest, I find MoS's way of playing not in any way to hurt the town. I have quite a few entries in which MoS stated opinions, so your attack on him is based only on "he won't vote", while votes aren't even that relevant. You seem to find deliberately not casting votes as scummier than deliberately not posting.
I didn't attack MoS for being a "non-contributor", and that's not true anyway; one of the main reasons I supported a Phobus lynch over the other options PJ offered yesterday was because of lack of useful contrabution on his part.As for the second thing, MoS is the only "non-contributor" who you have attacked in this way. We have far more non-contributors, who have contributed far less than MoS. I don't see you calling those out, specifically.
What's your point? I was trying to answer the King's question by giving quick opinions on all the people he had on his LOE, so I did a quick re-read of their posts and posted some thoughts; yes, I didn't go into a lot of detail, but it was more of a response then anyone else was giving at the time. Later, I did some more reading on the suspects, and decided that I was in favor of a Phoebus execution.You didn't raise amazing points regarding the three. Your opinions were mainly one-liners.
At that point, it was; it was sort of a stream of consiousness post, typed out as I was re-reading their posts. I made a commitment a little later.Your stances on all 4 were noncommittal. I find that very suspicious.
Someone else said the king should pressure lurkers, and I agreed. Is there something wrong with that?You didn't even try, you just told the King to do it. However small, pressure is pressure.
#1 is a circular argument; you think I'm scum partly because I'm attacking Phoebus, who you think is pro-town, and you think I'm scum partly because I'm attacking him. It's an especally bad argument as I know you're wrong about me, a possibility you have apparently not even considered.I like his voting behaviour, or most of it (votes on Mert and you). I think
MoS is town, and MoS is very sure about Phoebus' townieness.
And now you're hiding behind Glork.Basically, I agree with Glork's points in Post 601.
Yosarian2 wrote: You said "You're attacking MOS for not deliberately not voting, but you're not attacking people who are deliberately not posting". And I pointed out the incorrect logic of your statement by saying that if anyone made the statement "I will never contribue anything this game", I would vote for them. In other words, if anyone actually announced a stratagy of delibratly not posting the way MOS announced a stratagy of delibartly not voting, I certanly would have voted for them.
No, not at all. Notice, though, that I first attacked MOS for that comment back on september 15, only one day after the game started, which is a little too early to go lurker-hunting.Zindaras wrote: There's a huge difference between not posting and not voting. You can not vote and still contribute. You can't not post and still contribute. If someone announces they will not vote, does that make them scummier than someone who simply doesn't post?
This is the relevant quote, from Post 189: