Open 144 - Near-Vanilla - GAME OVER!

[Alduskkel]

No you and d3x are trading insults and you insulting hohum pretty recently.

And I think I've made it clear what I think about Khamisa.

[Zer0ph34r]

Well, I think everyone always has some kind of target. Someone who they just think is scum or have reasons for it, either way, I think we've all picked someone at some point. I don't find it odd that you were picked for suspicions because I felt the same way near the beginning, but the fact that he picked you as a suspect and then was all questiony confused me, but not necessarily suspicious. Just weird.

[d3x]

Zer0-
Now that you've come back, please respond to the following...

What crap do you speak of?

The initial quote is Ald's, you may want to follow up with him for the original thoughts.

For my part, I read over Day 1 and couldn't find a single instance of you helping the Town. You were being confusing. You were claiming VT {which as I've said, hurts the Town IMO} without anyone asking. You weren't ScumHunting.

Instead of continuing, let me ask this. How do you feel you've helped the Town in securing a victory? What steps have you taken to fulfill your Win Condition?

Another follow up. You don't have to play the game the way others want you to play, that's fair. You admittedly 'seem anti-town'. How does this help catch Scum, in your opinion? Has this tactic worked in other games? Is it working in this game?

[Kdub]

MCD targetted me D2 and had to backtrack in order to FIT an idea around me.

Just keep repeating that, AT. Someone's likely to believe at some point, right?

MC, I think you're starting to reach for anything you can to convince people that he is scum. You admitted in 1024 that he answered your questions and it was just a matter of deciding whether you believed them or not. Since then, you have not mentioned your original case, but instead are trying to discredit the manner of his defense rather than the defense itself. For example:

If they're such weak points, why are you continually pushing back so hard? You've been going bananas from the get-go for such weak points that can't be used. Why not let the weak points speak for themselves? Clearly everyone else would see that they're not usable, right?

Regardless of whether your points were actually weak or not, what matters is that you were able to get a decent wagon going against AT, indicating that there were others who did not think they were weak. If he doesn't defend himself, he looks bad since it appears he doesn't have good answers for your questioning. If he defends himself, he faces accusations like this one. It's not a good way to catch scum (attack a player, then accuse them of being too defensive when they respond) because if you think they are suspicious, you will subconsciously change your threshold of what is "too defensive" such that you will conclude they are scum far more often than is warranted. I think you should take a step back and look objectively at your case before you continue to push forward after he has addressed your points.

You cannot just look totally at what zer0 said, but what others said as well. Others noted that zer0's immediate vote indicated frustration. I can't remember, but I probably noticed this on a reread and saw the reasoning, and it made sense.

This explanation is a bit unsatisfying since it's also the likely excuse you would have come up with if you didn't have a good reason for your change of opinion, but I'll give you a chance to expand on it. Can you mention specific posts that convinced you and why? Also, what is your opinion on the MC-AT debate and Alduskkel's D2 behavior so far?

[Alduskkel]

Regardless of whether your points were actually weak or not, what matters is that you were able to get a decent wagon going against AT, indicating that there were others who did not think they were weak. If he doesn't defend himself, he looks bad since it appears he doesn't have good answers for your questioning. If he defends himself, he faces accusations like this one. It's not a good way to catch scum (attack a player, then accuse them of being too defensive when they respond) because if you think they are suspicious, you will subconsciously change your threshold of what is "too defensive" such that you will conclude they are scum far more often than is warranted. I think you should take a step back and look objectively at your case before you continue to push forward after he has addressed your points.

This is just a longer version of what I've been saying in 1083 and 1097.[/quote]

[Khamisa]

d3x: I found very little suspicious about Cephrir. Even If I didn't know where the note to self was or what it was about, I had a good idea what it was, and based my opinions off of that. Plus, yes, there is the part where it looks like I'm scum because I stayed off the Cephrir lynch, but it's equally if not more scummy that there was actually a Cephrir lynch which consisted of very little in my opinion.

On analyzing the Cephrir relationships, I can understand the view of looking for those who pushed his lynch, but I do not like the buddying thing. Buddying with a townie would be fruitless for scum; I just can't see any reasoning behind it.

I know you replaced in, d3x, but I personally find it very hard to read mounds upon mounds of posts. I'd personally much rather jump in at the current state and go from there.

AndyTony: The two weeks I was gone was because I was only able to have access on Saturdays. That's all over now, so I should be back to normal.

I disagree with what you are saying about me "playing it safe". Is there a difference between that and acting town? I fail to see what you are saying here.

Kdub: I honestly can't remember why else I would have changed my opinion. I'll confront the other stuff later; it personally didn't left any imprint on me when I read.

[AndyTony]

Playing it safe is different from being town, indeed.

There's no way to truly act town (ironically, that's scummy) - people only ever come across/make sense as town. You however, were proactively "on the fence" with a lot of issues; you lacked passion/intensity/genreal

drive

to scumhunt, or investigate, or persue a lead, or argue - - - and that comes across as scummy to me.


Your statements to d3x about how you felt about the Ceph wagon differ to D1 mentalities slightly, for instance. It also begs the question: If you didn't think any of the suspects were scum, who

did

you find scum? Why did you not defend those on trial for being innocent in your eyes (by letting us know what made them less suspicious/town like to you) - -

You see, you seemed to have avoided wagons and the responsibility there of because you weren't convinced they were scum (so you stood by, and avoided confrontation - you could have voiced up about thinking they were innocent) - or you could have had better prospects for us.

The reason you didn't have better prospects, other suspects, any other lead - - is because you weren't looking for any (seemingly). You weren't investigating, inquiring, looking for clarification, making solid concrete opinions of your own - - - it feels far too "safe" to be town to me.

**The above is just to explain where I'm coming from with this, Kham - I'll hear you out still and am glad you aren't so limited on the internet now (however, that means I expect to hear from you more on this board)

Thoughts?
===============================================

@hohum & Lurkers
- Still with us/remaining in the shadows?

[d3x]

Buddying with a townie would be fruitless for scum; I just can't see any reasoning behind it.

Really? If a wagon were building on a Townie and the Scum knew it, I don't see how it wouldn't be advantagous to buddy. After the lynch occured, it'd be the easiest thing in the world to say "There must have been Scum on that wagon". If the wagon fails, then the Townie feels more comfortable with the Scum because they 'believed' in the Townie's innocence. These aren't things you can see as good reasoning?

I personally find it very hard to read mounds upon mounds of posts

Playstyle difference. I'm sorry. I like to be able to paraphrase 40+ pages of the game so others can see where I'm coming from. I think it's very important in order to establish one's new presence in a game that's been going on for over 3 months.

What do you feel about the wagon building on you now? Do you feel it's justified due to the players' cases against you? What are your impressions of those players? Do you think it's being championed by Scum or misguided Town, especially considering the 2 players you have "minor suspicions" of arent' on it?

[Kise]

In your first post you don't think that either of us are scum, but in the second post you say this..."shows how MCD let everything slide D1, and also shows that his change of opinion (after Cephir was lynched) comes out of nowhere," which IMO seems to possibly paint me as a little bit scummy. My point was that if you still thought AT was town, and that I was possibly scummy, I was wondering why you were calling AT off.

I used that example to show why I view AT as more in the right. But just because I view 1 as right and 1 as wrong doesn't mean wrong = scum.

[lobstermania]

So what would you summarize the case as being? She is no longer V/LA, are you still so comfortable with her wagon moving along so briskly with her being inactive?

Khamisa was pretty absent most of Day One, but when she did appear, she tended to side with Cephrir to the point where it seemed like buddying. Cephrir made some pretty adamant points assuring the town that they were not scum partners and Khamisa was mafia. Since he's flipped town I'm inclined to believe him. That in addition with her almost constant V/LA is why I'm voting Khamisa right now.

Explain why you're voting AndyTony.

[Zer0ph34r]

I don't intend on acting anti-town. I just seem that way. I'm not though. It has not worked in other games because it wasn't a strategy nor is it working in this one. I'm developing info to myself. [Yes, that IS lurking. DUH!] And it's working to my advantage... as of now.

[AndyTony]

Not a fan of lurking (hohum, Zero) - but the more I look at it, the more it looks like Khamisa was trying to stay on the fence and play things safe. She hasn't stood for anything, defended anything, challenged anything - - the avoiding of confrontation, absentism, and unusual behavior toward seeing someone lynched that she claims she believed to be innocence makes me suspicious.

Vote:Khamisa

She's avoided confrontation and responsibility while playing it safe. That reads scum to me.

[MadCrawdad]

@MCD
- Thoughts? Sounds like you're unhappy people aren't dancing to your tune.

You're tunnelling is making it very hard to appreciate the idea that you're aggressively confused town. Stop tunnelling me, it hurts towns more than you'd think.

- What are your thoughts on the ODDin ideas from Pablito?
- What are your feelings to Khamisa sitting on the fence, avoiding confrontation, not bringing anything new to investigations/conducting any of her own? What are your feelings to her little activity with no active V/LA?
- What are your feelings toward hohum's narrow mindedness toward a case that came after his prejudice to me? What are your feelings to his lurking?
===============================================

Well, you've gleaned quite a bit of information from one word there, eh? What did you think of the post, though...in terms of Al's behavior (ie, regardless of the fact that you're the one he might be drawing in)? Note that I mentioned two possible options for Player B's affiliation in my post.

With regard to other players, as I told ODDin, I'd prefer to keep some things close to the vest for now. Based on what you asked, though:

- I agree with Pablito that studying the genuineness of language can be helpful in finding scum...I'd prefer to let ODDin answer the case first, though, before wading in further.
- Khamisa is suspicious to me. I don't like her style of play (or non-play, actually). However, I'm generally not a big fan of lynching lurkers. Lurking is not a strong enough of a scumtell. It's been shown that she's actively lurking, but so is Zero. I wouldn't feel good about taking either one into an endgame situation, but I'm also not willing to just lynch them one after the other.
- Hohum? As I told ODDin, I'd like to see him play better with others as it would help to get a better feel.

And yet you haven't actually addressed my point. You just OMGUS'd me here (and screw you Andy, I have a looser definition of OMGUS ); you didn't respond to my point, just twisted it into something scummy and attacked me. You're essentially saying that if the points against AT were so weak then he shouldn't have bothered with them at all. If AT had done that I guarantee he would have taken flak.

Regardless of whether your points were actually weak or not, what matters is that you were able to get a decent wagon going against AT, indicating that there were others who did not think they were weak. If he doesn't defend himself, he looks bad since it appears he doesn't have good answers for your questioning. If he defends himself, he faces accusations like this one. It's not a good way to catch scum (attack a player, then accuse them of being too defensive when they respond) because if you think they are suspicious, you will subconsciously change your threshold of what is "too defensive" such that you will conclude they are scum far more often than is warranted. I think you should take a step back and look objectively at your case before you continue to push forward after he has addressed your points.

It was more of a rhetorical question question, guys. Obviously he answered the case, so it couldn't be undone. And yes, he would have been spanked had he not answered it, but the point was that he came out pushing back pretty hard on what he claims was such a weak case (versus just laughing it off)...

But agreed that the questions asked have been answered.

This is just a longer version of what I've been saying in 1083 and 1097.

Unfortunately for you, Al, you're kind of a weird one to be saying it. After jumping in head-first with a simple blanket agreement with the points against AT, you argue with AT, then say you might just get off him later (but acknowledge that would look scummy), then get off him, then defend him, then start to question him about copying Kdub's case right after d3x casts his vote for AT. You appear to be a little too opportunistic.

vote: Alduskkel

In your first post you don't think that either of us are scum, but in the second post you say this..."shows how MCD let everything slide D1, and also shows that his change of opinion (after Cephir was lynched) comes out of nowhere," which IMO seems to possibly paint me as a little bit scummy. My point was that if you still thought AT was town, and that I was possibly scummy, I was wondering why you were calling AT off.

I used that example to show why I view AT as more in the right. But just because I view 1 as right and 1 as wrong doesn't mean wrong = scum.

If you really believed that someone let everything slide and just pulled an opinion out of nowhere you'd feel comfortable in thinking that they were just wrong, and not likely scum?

[MadCrawdad]

So what would you summarize the case as being? She is no longer V/LA, are you still so comfortable with her wagon moving along so briskly with her being inactive?

Khamisa was pretty absent most of Day One, but when she did appear, she tended to side with Cephrir to the point where it seemed like buddying. Cephrir made some pretty adamant points assuring the town that they were not scum partners and Khamisa was mafia. Since he's flipped town I'm inclined to believe him. That in addition with her almost constant V/LA is why I'm voting Khamisa right now.

Explain why you're voting AndyTony.

Because Ceph flipped town, 'you're inclined to believe him'? You can trust that his intent wasn't to deceive the town, but just because he flipped town doesn't necessarily make his judgement any clearer.

[d3x]

Quid pro quo is fair, though I've posted this {albeit not in this form} like 3 times already.

1. I agree with the case brought against him by MCd {specifically the contradictions addressed in p984}
2. I feel that he was trying to bully me off of his case {further contradiction to his position of diplomacy}
3. Twisting/misrepresenting my points {the whole "special interest conversation}
4. Setting up strawmen {ala reducing MCd's case to 'another man's discomfort'}
5. Ignoring my points {specifically where he snipped my response to his quote in 1091}
6. Trying to link my suspicions of others to discredit my suspicion of him ie Khamisa and Zer0}
7. To add more pressure to a wagon that was just, IMO {the wagon has since fallen apart}

[MadCrawdad]

I don't intend on acting anti-town. I just seem that way. I'm not though. It has not worked in other games because it wasn't a strategy nor is it working in this one. I'm developing info to myself. [Yes, that IS lurking. DUH!] And it's working to my advantage... as of now.

How is lurking working to your advantage, Zero? By keeping you from being lynched? That's not your main job, if you're town. Your job is to hunt for scum (and try not to get lynched in the process). Your main goal currently seems a little self-centered, though, as you don't appear to be looking very hard.

Who do you suspect?

[AndyTony]

Mod
Can we get prods on hohum and ODDin?
As well as a vote count!

Thanks!

[Crazy]

Vote Count:

Alduskkel (2)

- ODDin, MadCrawdad

AndyTony (2)

- hohum, d3x

d3x (0)

hohum (0)

Kdub (0)

Khamisa (5)

- Kdub, lobstermania, Alduskkel, Kise, AndyTony

Kise (1)

- pablito

lobstermania (0)

MadCrawdad (0)

ODDin (0)

pablito (0)

Zer0ph34r (0)

Not voting (2)

- Khamisa, Zer0ph34r

With 12 alive, 7 votes will achieve a lynch.

Deadline for Day 2 is

August 27th.

Prodding hohum and ODDin.

[ODDin]

Response to prod: I'm still here, though I did say I'm sick and won't be around, so I don't think a prod was really in order. I'm feeling somewhat better and I'll try to catch up during the weekend.

Sorry, forgot about the V/LA.

[AndyTony]

kk - hope you get well

[pablito]

andytony, so I make one post about oddin, and you like don't even bother with me anymore. And now you're asking people oh, what do you think about pablito's post?

before you were harping on me. really? one post was all it took?

[hohum]

there's no need to prod me. I've got nothing to say.

Lynch me or lynch andytony.

[AndyTony]

I harped on you? I took issue to your "meh" and unmotivated attitude - - and you posted in 1077 a response to me. That was good enough for me, you suggest it's your gameplay.

And yeah - one post that looked like you put work into. It was a sound observation you made.

[AndyTony]

there's no need to prod me. I've got nothing to say.

Lynch me or lynch andytony.

Why would we lynch you?

[hohum]

because I refuse to participate.

We're going on a lurker hunt, right? That's why you want to lynch Khas so bad.

Lynch me too, because I'm basically done at this point.

What's two more mislynches in the sands of time? Doesn't matter much to me anymore because it's clear that this town is too dysfunctional to win.

cheerio.