This is pretty much a point made with a sample size of one in a game with different circumstances. In this game the vidge/SK gets to make a new kill every action phase in a smallish game. Additionally not knowing whether they are town or self-aligned makes their actions unpredictable to other scum-players. Scum players would also potentially be scared of town reaching consensus on who the vidge/SK should kill and targetting them or their scumbuddies. Finally I see him as, if he was scum, wanting to not have to waste his kill on him that action phase (surely he'd prefer to get him lynched and choose a different target). As I said it's not an overwhelming town tell but I still view it as a town tell nonetheless.PTA (182) wrote:In this game:
http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=8926
I PF was scum. And everybody (Town and Scum) tried to use DGB (Who was a very powerful Vig) to kill other players since you were allowed 2 day kills a day and or only 1 lynch. Not even for a second did my scum group think of killing DGB. etc. etc.
This summarises the main two points we are being attacked for this game: the first is supposedly "fluff posting" while attacking others for fluff posting. Now I acknowledge that some of what Hoops posted was sloppy, especially when she then wanted to attack other people for wasting posts. However, in the scheme of things, none of our posts have been as wasteful as for example PTA's or Zmd's or Death The Hogfather's or Korts' or J-Scope's or Zaphod Beeblebrox's; all of whom have made at least one postPTA (82) wrote:They said our wagon was oportunistic and that scum wouldn't post fluff; they helped lynch A&B with that attitude. They said my wagon was originally oportunistic and scum would avoid fluff; now they are on our wagon and say scum would do fluff. They said we fluff posted; Hoops did some too.
Basically they are going back on some key points of their logic as well as commiting things they once deemed wrong. I see that as hypocracy.
The other point is that "our" read on PTA differed between different points in the game. As should have been obvious from for example, the difference in purple and black text, that was two different people reading. Hoops made the first post without consulting me, and while I was doing Alpha I kind of expected her to post here but she had to move countries so when we got prodded I took it upon myself to make the post and could not ignore PTA's blatant scumminess- I could not consult her at the time and still haven't had a proper opportunity to talk to her about this game. Nevertheless, I very much disagree with PTA's wagon being "opportunistic". So, PTA, with my rebuttal to these two points in mind, I would urge you to very strongly reconsider your view you are not OMGUSing us, as neither of your points have merit imo (your case against us in light of these points is even weaker which leads me to wonder how much scumhunting rather than OMGUSing scum-style you're actually trying to do).
Weeeeeak vote.Korts (183) wrote:i agree with pokethealpaca on zaphod trying hard to look pro-town with her post-lynch a+b analysis. her defense hinges on people actually caring whether she found the already lynched sk scummy. all in all it looks like padding for her post.
vote zaphod
Except they're not scum with A&B?Korts (183) wrote:the vig claim would obviously be stupid as mafia, it was from zaphod's initial ignorance of the a+b wagon that we suspected her, and the sudden switch and hard push on it implied hard bussing--which we would expect dgbscum to do in such a case.
Um, you've made at least two entirely useless posts in this game (see your subsequent post, 184, as well as 174). This puts you on far, far worse footing than us, however hypocritical you want to be; sorry about that. Consider a self-vote though.Korts (183) wrote:the pta vs. ortohoops argument is pretty hypocritical of both re the fluffposting. both are reasonable wagons. we'll have to review them more seriously to have a solid opinion.
WIFOM? This being valid hinges on you actually being town.Yosariwen (185) wrote:Seriously? I spent 2 hours last night doing a hyper-detailed analysis of everything in the entiere game and every single person in the game, probably the longest and most meticulasly reserached scumhunting post I've done in any game all year, and that's your response? I find that kind of strange, honestly.
The point I am making is that calling for faster lynches then avoiding a healthy wagon on your "second" largest suspect in favour of your supposed first is disingenuous. And how can you prove your earlier vote on PTA wasn't simple distancing??? Your point about the "easy and unopposed wagon" I also do not like- that is an extremely subjective notion and you could potentially make that argument of pretty much any bandwagon in the game. Plus you've seen people's subsequent reticence in joining the PTA wagon anyhow. I also note you rely on the implied hypocrisy of our apparent "shift in opinions" here.Yoswen (185) wrote:Yes, I would like to. Of course, lynching scum is more important then lynching quickly. Also, 4 pages is 100 posts; that should be pleanty of time to lynch someone (unless people keep wasting posts like Korts just did there).Ortohoops wrote:Basically, you want to lynch twice within the next four pages, and "want to get a bandwagon going quickly here."
Because I want to lynch scum, and for reasons i explained, Raging Wishbone looks scummer to both me and to Nuwen then PTA does.I cannot understand how you can simultaneously want as many lynches as quickly as possible, and blatantly be trying to start a new wagon.
Remember, I *STARTED* the poke the alpaca wagon. I understand why he looks suspicious, and I continued to point out scumtells in the post I just made. However, if he was scum, I would kind of expect the wagon to not feel quite so easy and unopposed. In fact, the only person who was opposed to the PTA wagon so far was...you, who said at the time:
Ortohoops wrote:At the moment, the PokeTheAlpaca wagon looks very opportunistic.
Where did I say I didn't want people commenting on his wagon? All I have said is that your position of both wanting more lynches while starting fresh new bandwagons and neglecting those of people you admit to find scummy is inconsistent.Yoswen (185) wrote:People are posting and not commenting on the wagon at all, which I don't like. Are you really suggesting that it's scummy for me to want people to comment on a wagon before we lynch someone? How the hell do you expect to find scum if you want to just lynch people without any discussion about them? In fact, if you really are a pro-town person who really do think PTA is scum; if you really did think he was scum, you should be DEMANDING that EVERYONE post comments about him before the lynch, because that would help us find scum partners later. I can't understand why any pro-town person would be opposed to people commenting on the PTA lynch before it happens; you need to explain this to me.
If PTA's buddiesYoswen (185) wrote:The fact that no one is trying to do that either means the other scum are willing to just bus PTA, or else that the wagon is a bad one; the feel *OF THE BANDWAGON* on PTA is making me kind of nervous.
Wait didn't you say you wantedYoswen (185) wrote:If we get close to the (admittadly arbitraty) page 12 "deadline" I set, I might be willing to jump to the PTA wagon to secure a lynch before then. But there's absoltuy no reason to rush things; we've still got 4 pages left, and he's already at lynch -2, we have lots of time to explore other options, especally since he just looks scummier then PTA.
How does observing apparently the same things as you constitute "riding your coattails"? Why is it not plausible that you attempted to distance from PTA and are now trying to undermine his wagon having seen it go too far?Yoswen (185) wrote:That was the argument I used to start the PTA wagon in the first place. So don't act like you "don't understand why I find them scummy" when YOU are trying to ride MY coattails to attack them, ok?
I don't even understand your point about Zaphod not voting- I just looked back and they were voting the whole time and were actively commenting on the A&B wagon while it was going on. It's also funny that you comment on this while seemingly completely ignoring PokerFace's almost total and blatant ignoring of the situation in post 99. Apart from this, again, I ask, explain to you what was illogical about our attacks on PTA- I've asked you to clarify twice now and you totally ignore the question.Yoswen (185) wrote:I am curious about the other arguments you were trying to use in 154, because the REST of the arguments you were using to attack him seemed pretty illogical to me, and I would like you to explain them. Especally wher you attack him because he attacked Zaphod for not voting; "not voting" is generally a decent scumtell, and especally in a game like this where you should really be using your vote at all times.
Although apparently, rather then explain your attacks on PTA, or respond to my reasons for thinking Raging Wishbone looks scummier, you'd rather just attack anyone who dosn't blindly follow you. Nice.
It seemed to me you wanted to have it both ways and were introducing Nuwen's supposed read as a way of segueing from supporting a PTA lynch to an RW lynch. I thought you yourself were disowning responsibility for the attack on RW- if you yourself are happy to support your hydra's attack on RW I would drop this point.Yoswen (185) wrote:Ok, your first sentance is complete garbage. Me and Nuwen were talking as I was writing that post, she made the observations, and I agreed with them. Why should it matter to you if the thought origionally came from me or from Nuwen? Why are you making such a big deal out of irrelevent side issues here?
The problem is these two don't work in conjunction. You are attempting to have your cake and eat it too. You want to call him scummy for being "careless" by leaving an SK on L-1, but you also want to attack him for not wanting the SK killed.Yoswen (185) wrote:First, the one head put him at lynch -1 without giving him a chance to claim, right after that had been pointed out to be anti-town, since scum can insta-lynch anyone who is at lynch -1 in this game by just daykilling someone not on the wagon. At the very least, this demonstrates a carelessness that looks scummy.
Then, the other head saying "let's keep the SK alive so we can direct him" is even worse, in my opinion.
I said it was anti-town, and it was. Anti-town means "bad for the town". There is absolutly no reason a pro-town person should want to keep a SK alive, just in order to "direct the kill." Especally in a game when town can lynch multiple times a day anyway.
Lynching a SK day 1 is one of the best things that can possibly happen for the town; it extends the game, means less nightkills, more lynches. In general, nightkills give the town much less information then lynches do, so they hurt the town more then they hurt the mafia.
Um...are you seriously claiming not to have understood the point we've just been contesting in the last serious of posts? And you think that's a justification for FoSing me at that????Yoswen (185) wrote:Wait...really?
You were trying to argue that RW wanting to keep the SK alive was a *TOWN* tell?
Hahaha.
Man, you make this easy. I think we just found RW's scumbuddy here.Fos:Ortohoops
No hard feelings, friend.Raging Wishbone (186) wrote:@Othohoops - great gane in Alpha, I am sorry I was pressured on time and did not know if RR would have a chance to check the thread before I returned today... He called JScope scum in daytalk and I screwed it up by not voting with ya! *gah* I almost quit tooo!, lol
Posting these notes here because Adel locked the Alpha thread and I owe Hoops, Raging Rabbit an apology for botching that game, I also owe Jscope sincere props and Kudos...also thanks to Adel for setting these games up...
*pinches Santa Claus ass*
I am kind of curious about this- we seem to agree that Yosarian is suspicious but in my mind that's largely because of the way he's detracting from the PTA wagon, while you're assuring us he's obv-town.Raging Wishbone (186) wrote:This ain't the Alpha game, I know Tajo will flip town and it ain't cause I am scum! But than again he aint getting lynched today I hope!
I would like to see you attack the large number of people who are even more guilty of it than us even harder then please.Ojando (187) wrote:See the bolded part from the quote. I wouldn't have thought that needed clarification in this game. Post wasting is inherently bad, since it was on first page I labeled it questionable instead of a stronger word.
Believe me if I was scum I would try far harder to ensure our opinions supposedly appeared "united".Ojando (187) wrote:That did come out more in a self-note mode.
We were referring to the "the other half did it" defence. Your heads seem to have very different take on things and that could be a convenient way to contradict yourself without having to take responsability. That being said, at the moment we are much more interested in pursuing PtA whose heads contradict timewise simultaneously in their attack and defence.
I second this question.Ojando (187) wrote:This is the second time you say strongly that you find PTA town, I wish you would just get on and give your reasons for thinking so already.
You call Ortohoops' case on Yos brilliant, but at the same time that case relied mostly on the suspicion that PTA is scum. Contradiction?
Um how exactly?Yos (188) wrote:Ok, now trying to bring emotion from the Alpha game, when I was scum, into the game here in order to manipluate the town. Scum tactic.
He is at four votes which is actually L-3.Yos (188) wrote:Interesting; he's at lynch -2 now, and Ortohoops entire post was him attacking me because I didn't put him at lynch -1 now. So why are you attacking me here?
???Yos (188) wrote:Although I think you're still just talking about the alpha game here, which again, is scummy.
Fair point.Yos (188) wrote: Again, in this game, his ENTIRE CASE on me was based on me not wanting to put PTA at lynch -1 just yet. How can you think his case on me is "brilliant" if you don't think PTA is scum?
You soundYos (188) wrote:RW is obvscum here, and we need to lynch him now.
I concur, your excellency.Zaphod Beeblebrox (189) wrote:@ Yosariwen
I don't understand why you're voting RW when Poke is another main suspect of yours, has a far larger wagon, and you think Poke may be RW's buddy. To wit: "*10. PoketheAlpaca (PokerFace+populartajo) : Along with the other things that have been pointed out, possible link to Raging Wishbone, in this post where he defends Raging wishbone. "
Your expressed reasons are, again, weak.Yos (190) wrote:Because RW is far scummier.
Tajo is kind of scummy; he's more likely to be scum then a random lynch. On the other hand, RW is incredibly obvscum, especally after that last post of theirs where they came up with a series of really illogical and contradictory excuses to OMGUS vote me (while specifically denying they were OMGUS voting, of course ) and tried to manipulate the town using the alpha game.
If we lynch tajo, I won't be unhappy, but I really want to lynch RW right now.