Night Watch Open 95 - Game Over before 703

[orangepenguin]

There's a term for that in the wiki some place. Forgot what it's called. But it has something to do with spreading a lie enough that people start to believe that it is true.

Argumentum ad nauseam

?

That would be it.


TCS is at L-3. I don't like his comment that he's sure me or Panda are scum, especially after only 6 pages. He must have a thing against exotic animals. I bet the cougar is next on his list.

[orangepenguin]

EBWOP: Well, make that 7 pages, besides the fact that it was 6 when he made the comment.

[bionicchop2]

Let's see where this goes...

unvote, vote;TCS

I have a full day of being lazy tomorrow, so I should get a good read in then.

[Xtoxm]

I am not liking this TCS wagon at all.

[afatchic]

I am not liking this TCS wagon at all.

care to shed some light?

[Jex]

Vote Count

4 - The Central Scrutinizer (icemanE, StrangerCoug, afatchic, bionicchop2 )
1 - Crazy (Xtoxm)
1 - bionicchop2 (orangepenguin)
1 - Panda Stomper 85 (The Central Scrutinizer)

Not Voting

Crazy, ortolan, Panda Stomper 85, camn,

It takes 6 votes to lynch

[icemanE]

Yes, please expand on why this is a bad wagon.

[Xtoxm]

His comment does not sound scum motivated and he has garnered votes far to quickly.

[icemanE]

Xtoxm, while your defense was subpar, your comment made me look back through the votes. Beyond mine, and maybe the second vote on TCS (placed by StrangerCoug), which was justified with Stranger calling TCS out for craplogic, the third and fourth votes on TCS are totally unjustified. The third and fourth votes were placed by afatchic and biochop. Something interesting to note:

# Third person on a wagon is likely to be mafia (+15)
# Fourth person on a wagon is likely to be mafia (+10)

Coincidentally fat and bio placed the third and fourth votes, and had little to no reasoning behind them.

# Voting without any good reason, or indeed any reason whatsoever.

Another wiki-reinforced scumtell which often holds true in real application as well.

So, with that in mind, I'm going to

unvote - vote: afatchic

and

FoS: bio

while I do a readthrough (and perhaps a PBPA, if I find it necessary) on the two of them.

[bionicchop2]

unvote;vote icemanE

[icemanE]

Add OMGUS to the list of scumtells.

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Since nothing is happening, so i think we need some sort of a wagon to get things rolling, and because i really think he is scum...

UNVOTE, VOTE The Central Scrutinizer

So, what is your ranking for those three reasons? Just out of curiosity.

[The Central Scrutinizer]

unvote

, now that ppl iz talkin

Also, I got a bad vibe from my initial votes on the penguin and the panda. I can't really decide between the two of them, but I'm fairly certain that one of them is scum.

Neither do I enjoy the last couple of votes on my wagon, but whatever. I want to read some more discussion before I recast my vote. I'm fairly certain at this point that my deadline vote is going to come out of the group of the panda, the penguin, the fatty, and the bionic one.

[The Central Scrutinizer]

EBWOP: I should say, the penguin and the panda's reactions to my initial vote.

[StrangerCoug]

FoS: afatchic

for mindlessly bandwagoning and

HoS: bionicchop2

for OMGUS and not giving reasons for his last two votes.

[bionicchop2]

Common Tells
From MafiaWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
This information is probably out of date, and needs to be edited by someone who knows what has happened since early 2005.

Reason for vote on TCS - to see who the first player to overreact would be. icemanE stepped into that one nicely. I gave an intentionally easy target for scum to pounce on and point fingers.

Reason for vote on icemanE - see reason for vote on TCS. icemanE comes in and uses outdated wiki material on tells that are no longer valid. Add to this I was the first person to vote TCS, changed my opinion and then voted iceman when he voted for TCS.

Occasionally

a Scum player will use it to cover a strategic vote, feigning outrage to get someone else closer to a lynch.

1. I haven't seen any solid evidence that OMGUS is a current and legit scum tell.

2. My vote has been on icemanE for the past week, taken off temporarily to see who would react to my bandwagon vote. I have stated my suspicions of him prior to any FOS on his part.

[afatchic]

FoS: afatchic

for mindlessly bandwagoning and

HoS: bionicchop2

for OMGUS and not giving reasons for his last two votes.

sorry for my "mindless bandwagoning" that actually got you to talk[/sarcasm]

but really.... i thought you was scum. and i thought a bandwagon was a good idea... in that order. when i placed the vote though, i didn't go look as i new it wasn't close to a lynch and thought it was only the second vote.

when i get home i will make a decent post of why i think TCS is likely scum.

also TCS in post 164 why are you already talking about your deadline vote. how bout we pick up the activity and not worry about the deadline right now. that post seems scummy to me.

[StrangerCoug]

Reason for vote on icemanE - see reason for vote on TCS. icemanE comes in and uses outdated wiki material on tells that are no longer valid. Add to this I was the first person to vote TCS, changed my opinion and then voted iceman when he voted for TCS.

I'm not going to argue the outdated Wiki bit for the most part, but I agree that being the nth person on the bandwagon isn't reliable anymore. One thing, however, is keeping me from believing you:

1. I haven't seen any solid evidence that OMGUS is a current and legit scum tell.

Voting someone solely for voting you, which is the basic form of OMGUS, is indeed a scumtell, and you proposing otherwise does nothing to help your town image. In fact, it hurts it. HoS stands, but I'm debating whether this warrants a vote.

[Xtoxm]

Omgus is

not

a scumtell.

[The Central Scrutinizer]

Common Tells
From MafiaWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
This information is probably out of date, and needs to be edited by someone who knows what has happened since early 2005.

Reason for vote on TCS - to see who the first player to overreact would be. icemanE stepped into that one nicely. I gave an intentionally easy target for scum to pounce on and point fingers.

Reason for vote on icemanE - see reason for vote on TCS. icemanE comes in and uses outdated wiki material on tells that are no longer valid. Add to this I was the first person to vote TCS, changed my opinion and then voted iceman when he voted for TCS.

Occasionally

a Scum player will use it to cover a strategic vote, feigning outrage to get someone else closer to a lynch.

1. I haven't seen any solid evidence that OMGUS is a current and legit scum tell.

2. My vote has been on icemanE for the past week, taken off temporarily to see who would react to my bandwagon vote. I have stated my suspicions of him prior to any FOS on his part.

I don't think I'd characterize playing off of the wiki as an "overreaction." While I think I understand the content of your bone with Iceman, I don't like how you played this.

[bionicchop2]

1. I haven't seen any solid evidence that OMGUS is a current and legit scum tell.

Voting someone solely for voting you, which is the basic form of OMGUS, is indeed a scumtell, and you proposing otherwise does nothing to help your town image. In fact, it hurts it. HoS stands, but I'm debating whether this warrants a vote.

Provide one example of scum voting for a town person, not giving any reason for voting and it is clear that the vote was a direct result of the other person voting for them. OMGUS can only be used if you can prove that no reason was given for the vote (otherwise the term doesn't exist). If you can prove a vote had no valid reason behind it, that is scummy on its own and the fact the other person voted for them is inconsequential. All the term does (and the scumminess associated with it) is make players hesitant to vote anybody who votes for them or is suspicious of them.

Now, iceman and yourself have both applied the term to me. You made an assumption I only voted him because he FOS'd me. Now, if OMGUS is such a clear scum tell, explain how my vote on iceman (which made me look suspicious by being intentionally vague) would advance a scum agenda of not getting myself lynched and getting an innocent town player lynched.

[The Central Scrutinizer]

FoS: afatchic

for mindlessly bandwagoning and

HoS: bionicchop2

for OMGUS and not giving reasons for his last two votes.

sorry for my "mindless bandwagoning" that actually got you to talk[/sarcasm]

but really.... i thought you was scum. and i thought a bandwagon was a good idea... in that order. when i placed the vote though, i didn't go look as i new it wasn't close to a lynch and thought it was only the second vote.

when i get home i will make a decent post of why i think TCS is likely scum.

also TCS in post 164 why are you already talking about your deadline vote. how bout we pick up the activity and not worry about the deadline right now. that post seems scummy to me.

The deadline has been set. I don't see any reason not to talk about it. To say that I will pick from that group of four for my deadline vote is simply to say that I don't feel comfortable voting for anyone else at this juncture. I'm sorry if you feel threatened that you are included in this group.

I think one of op/panda is scum... and I think a bandwagon is good... and I think that activity wasn't enough at the time I made the vote. If my reasons are suspect then so should yours be; you've done little different from me aside from hopping on a wagon rather than attempting to start one.

A question Which do you generally find more likely for scum to do--start a wagon or hop onto one?

[bionicchop2]

I don't think I'd characterize playing off of the wiki as an "overreaction." While I think I understand the content of your bone with Iceman, I don't like how you played this.

The overreaction was pretending like the 2 votes in question weren't blatantly obvious in their bandwagon for the sake of bandwagon nature.

[bionicchop2]

A question Which do you generally find more likely for scum to do--start a wagon or hop onto one?

Neither are universal. It isn't the action which makes a person scummy, but the intent. The challenge in scum hunting comes from determining the root reasoning behind every action and not the reasoning which the player gives readily (in the case of a town player, the reason they give typically matches the reason for the action).

[StrangerCoug]

Provide one example of scum voting for a town person, not giving any reason for voting and it is clear that the vote was a direct result of the other person voting for them.

Post #159 before you even bothered with #165.

OMGUS can only be used if you can prove that no reason was given for the vote (otherwise the term doesn't exist). If you can prove a vote had no valid reason behind it, that is scummy on its own and the fact the other person voted for them is inconsequential. All the term does (and the scumminess associated with it) is make players hesitant to vote anybody who votes for them or is suspicious of them.

If you have a valid reason to vote back, then OMGUS does not happen. If I see someone make a crap case on me and vote me for it, I will attack the case and vote back.

Now, iceman and yourself have both applied the term to me. You made an assumption I only voted him because he FOS'd me. Now, if OMGUS is such a clear scum tell, explain how my vote on iceman (which made me look suspicious by being intentionally vague) would advance a scum agenda of not getting myself lynched and getting an innocent town player lynched.

I see a vote and expect to find a reasoning for it in that post, or failing that, for the vote post to tell me to go look at a specific post for it. You did not vote icemanE and tell us that you were voting him for the same reasons as your vote on The Central Scrutinizer in the same post—you waited until a later post. It gives the same vibes as "vote: bionicchop2. I'll tell you why later." Were your vote and your reason (or a reference to it) in the same place, I would not have HoS'd you.