Newbie 991 - Newbieville! (Game Over)

[EarthIntruder]

I already explained why I didn't find him so scummy. Everyone on the wagon (besides Arraneas who at least noted misrepping as well) was basically voting him for no really stated reasons - hence they were voting based off of previous reasons, which were mine and were RVS. That's a pretty classic scum push on townie wagon right there.

Well, when you voted for reluctant you said this:

You then actually pointed out things that Aranneas said that you called scummy, but only chose to FoS him. Why wouldn't you vote someone who has done something scummy?

Which, sure, is something small and during the very beginning of the game, but also seems like a decent tell to me.

Like you said, Aran's vote on him was because of his misrepping:

The fact that you jumped on this... and boggled it completely... well, you either deliberately intended to vilify my actions, or you simply didn't read half of what I wrote.

And Coach Travis then got onto the wagon too, saying this:

But also, he seems very noncommittal now, which is not good, because if a bandwagon starts against someone else, then as scum he could use this an excuse to switch to that bandwagon, because he was never really committed to voting for Aranneas.

Anton FoS-ed him in his one post and said this:

However, his FoS argument was rather weak, and the interpretation jumps that he had on the Aranneas statement on RVS equaling quick-lynches seemed like a fishy redirection of attention into his target.

And then scapegoat put him at L-1, saying that the game had come to a standstill and he wanted to get things moving. You could argue that he simply followed along with the wagon without thinking much, but it looks to me like everyone else on the reluctant wagon had pretty solid reasoning that had to do with all of reluctant's post content, not just your own reasoning. You actually don't seem to have been pushing the wagon very much after your initial vote, you instead do a lot of questioning of other players - which is totally fine, I don't have a problem with that - but my point is it means it's probably more likely that players came to the conclusion that reluctant is scum on their own.

Responding to the rest of your post soon, I just don't have the energy to do another monster post like my first one x_x

[EarthIntruder]

Claiming when not at L-1 and Appeal to Emotion are indeed tells for newbie, but they are hardly townie actions (in fact most believe AtE is scummy). There is a difference. Other then replacing into his slot and reading his role PM - why should we believe it is Newb town as opposed to Newb scum?

Because newbies use AtE all the time without realizing it's just not a good argument, whether they're town or scum. AtE is scummy, you're right, but much less so when a newbie's doing it. I'm sure you've read at least one newbie game where a town newbie freaked out when a wagon built on them and resorted to AtE?

If you don't see the strategic value in pushing attention and suspicion onto a lurker I'm not sure what to say. If you don't push suspicion on lurkers they keep lurking, suspicion requires defense and defense requires posts and posts let you read the slot.

Are you legitimately claiming that finding lurkers suspicious and saying so is scummy?

I think that active lurking is much more suspicious than lurking-lurking, and that putting suspicion and trying to stir discussion on people that have clearly left the game completely and aren't going to post again is suspicious. Let's say, hypothetically, that Anton were to be lynched right now. Anton had posted, what, once the entire game? If he is scum, then great, but town has barely gained any information about who his partner might be, and if he's town, then town not only has no new information because everyone that voted for him can just say "he was lurking", but they're down two townies for no good reason.

Active lurking is another thing entirely, because it means someone is clearly posting and around, but none of their posts really have any kind of new content to them. That is absolutely something that should be called out, and it's a much better scumtell, IMO. It's something that I feel willow has been doing a lot so far, which is why he's my second candidate.

I don't think finding lurkers that have disappeared suspicious is necessarily scummy in and of itself, but within the context of the other things you've done, yeah, I do. It looks to me like you're trying to push for easy lynches.

Um, so then you're saying that the scum team is Thor/reluctant - because that's the only way this is a scumtell.

That's a possibility, but not necessarily. It could be you just found a much easier target to lynch.

Him being more experienced makes the 'follow the IC' *more* suspicious, not less suspicious. I would think that would be obvious.

This is the second time you've said more people then Travis have been following me - name them please, I'd love to know your thoughts here. The only one you peg is willows_weep, and I disagree that he's doing it as much as Travis, and you're clearing Travis for being an SE but so is willows, so what's your issue with him following me when you don't have an issue with Travis doing it? None of this makes sense to me.

Okay, well. My argument about the experience of people following you was bad and silly, haha. I didn't actually realize willow was an SE - my apologies to you, willow. But my bigger point is that Travis hasn't been the only one following you and I don't understand why he's the only one you're calling out for it. Post 108, reluctant says Anton is his second choice for a lynch right after you bring him up for discussion. You say yourself that it doesn't seem like he actually has a good idea of his second choice. Post 121, willow calls out Travis as scummy for no real reason right after you say he's scummy for following you. It seems like this is scummier than Travis to me because neither of these instances seem to have a lot of thought behind them.

You said yourself that you thought that 'everyone' on the original reluctant wagon was following you, didn't you? I know I said that I disagreed with that, but if you interpreted it that way, then why are you arguing here that Travis was the only one worth calling out about it?

...it almost seems like he's going out of his way to defend me. Even I find that confusing, since he pretty much contradicted himself, saying an SE is less suspicious for following an IC, than attacking another SE for doing the same thing.

I'm defending you because I think that everyone in Thor's top three (assuming it hasn't changed at this point, me, Anton then you) is a bad lynch at the moment, and that leads me to believe he's scum.

[seth]

vote: CoachTravis

[Cirno]

Vote: Seth

@Seth:
Why are you voting Travis? If you had to vote for someone else who would it be and why?
What do you think of the votes on the Reluctant and Scapegoat/EarthIntruder bandwagons?

Thanks for giving me something to post, bro.

[seth]

Hi. 'Cause I think he's scum. I don't really want to vote anyone else. I don't really care about those votes.

No prob.

[EarthIntruder]

Hi. 'Cause I think he's scum. I don't really want to vote anyone else. I don't really care about those votes.

No prob.

Well I don't know what to make of this.

So does that mean you think reluctant and I are both town, or what? You've gotta give us a little more info than that.

[Cirno]

'Cause I think he's scum.

Why do you think he is scum? Glancing through another game of yours, I know you can make a proper post.

I don't really care about those votes.

Would you be okay with a Reluctant lynch? Would you be okay with a EarthIntruder lynch?

[EarthIntruder]

Oh, and I have another question for Thor.

Um, so then you're saying that the scum team is Thor/reluctant - because that's the only way this is a scumtell.

It would make a reasonable amount of sense if you wanted to claim reluctant was my partner - but scapegoat?

So, in your response to me you seem to be implying that a Thor/reluctant scumteam doesn't make sense, but in the other post I've quoted you say it does. So do you think that it's reasonable to suspect or not?

[seth]

@EI

Nah. I don't think you guys are both town. What kind of info do you want?

@Cirno

Mostly a gut kinda thing :/ He was being super careful of quicklynches via BW's rather early on, which I think is scummy.

I would not be ok with a reluctant lynch nor an EI lynch.

[Thor665]

This is a quick bullet point style response to this post and this post by EarthIntruder/scapegoat

tl:dr - I disagree with him Also I can't figure out why he's so annoyed that I dismantled the reluctant wagon and why that makes me scummy

@EarthIntruder - you disagree with my top three and find them bad lynches. Who are your top three?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
======
POST 1
======
Again - you are commenting about how *you* find the scumtell I raised on reluctant to be worthwhile and how *you* think everyone else came in with solid reasons and cases of their own. I disagree, I said so at the time. Also, if we accept all of them as not following me I'll be curious to see who all the people following the IC are (edit: and later you list no one else but willows, so I guess "all" the people I didn't call out was just him then?)

======
POST 2
======
1. First off, you "answer" my question of whether we should read AtE as Newb scum or Newb town by telling me again that it's a newbie tell. I agree with you, that it's a newb tell. Now, why is it Newb town as opposed to a Newb scum tell?

2. You go into a speech on how active lurking is scummier then regular lurking. I am aware of this distinction. You then pretty much act like I wanted Anton lynched right now You've missed my point, I already explained it. Address it or don't, but don't expect me to defend a standpoint I never took.

3.

Um, so then you're saying that the scum team is Thor/reluctant - because that's the only way this is a scumtell.

That's a possibility, but not necessarily. It could be you just found a much easier target to lynch.

Much easier then the guy I took to L-1 without having to push him and had everyone else agreeing how scummy he was for their own individual reasons? And I decided to dismantle that vote why? <---this REALLY requires an answer if you plan to stick to this current theory of yours.

4. I called out Travis for the 'follow the IC' stuff because I found the way he was doing it more suspicious then anyone else. I've said this before. I never said he was the only one, only that I found his actions in that regard suspicious. willows followed my suspicions pretty tightly, but he at least occasionally came in and offered scum tells that were his own, I never felt Travis did and that's why I called him out on it. Also, even as you're chiding me for not calling willows to task on this stuff, you're admitting that I did;

Post 108, reluctant says Anton is his second choice for a lynch right after you bring him up for discussion. You say yourself that it doesn't seem like he actually has a good idea of his second choice.

Oh, and I have another question for Thor.

Um, so then you're saying that the scum team is Thor/reluctant - because that's the only way this is a scumtell.

It would make a reasonable amount of sense if you wanted to claim reluctant was my partner - but scapegoat?

So, in your response to me you seem to be implying that a Thor/reluctant scumteam doesn't make sense, but in the other post I've quoted you say it does. So do you think that it's reasonable to suspect or not?

Both posts are saying that the only way my actions make sense, if you believe what you're saying, is for me to be scum partners with reluctant if I'm scum. There is no contradiction between the two sentences - they say the same thing.

[seth]

So, who else is down for a travis bw

[Cirno]

@EarthIntruder: Can you summarize all your problems with Thor for me?

@Seth: What is your read on Thor and Aranneas? Also, you said you don't care about the EarthIntruder wagon. Does this mean you didn't bother to look into it or that you believe you the wagon is worthless?

[seth]

I don't have one. I haven't looked into the EI wagon.

[Cirno]

I don't have one. I haven't looked into the EI wagon.

...
......
............

Well, I think seth is town.

Unvote: seth

I'll probably vote EarthIntruder soon unless I can find an excuse to vote Coach Travis.

[EarthIntruder]

Well, he's not very wordy, but not especially scummy, I suppose. I'd ask you to please look into the wagon on me, though, seth, since I'm a pretty big candidate for a lynch at the moment.

Aaand, more responding to Thor. tl;dr version and also responding to Cirno's question, I think that Thor is scum because of his sudden switch from reluctant to scapegoat, and his scum list being two easy newbie lynches and one person that I just don't understand the suspicion on at all. In fact, Cirno, could you please explain your willingness to vote Travis to me?

~

Again - you are commenting about how *you* find the scumtell I raised on reluctant to be worthwhile and how *you* think everyone else came in with solid reasons and cases of their own. I disagree, I said so at the time. Also, if we accept all of them as not following me I'll be curious to see who all the people following the IC are (edit: and later you list no one else but willows, so I guess "all" the people I didn't call out was just him then?)

I suppose I can't argue it any further if it just comes down to us disagreeing, but I still maintain that it was a weak reason to unvote and strikes me as off.

And hey, I also listed reluctant. I also think scapegoat was, somewhat, as well, but I'll get to that in a second. In a game this small, two or three people is enough to start a bandwagon pretty quickly on someone.

First off, you "answer" my question of whether we should read AtE as Newb scum or Newb town by telling me again that it's a newbie tell. I agree with you, that it's a newb tell. Now, why is it Newb town as opposed to a Newb scum tell?

The biggest thing that scapegoat did that everyone was suspicious of was put reluctant at L-1, saying he knew that it was scummy but that he wanted things to move along, right? It looks to me like he saw you guys saying things like

Also, bandwagon for the win!

I agree with using bandwagons just at the start to set up discussion, get a reaction from the player being voted for, and in general so we can get out of RVS as quick as possible.

The idea is to move to productive discussion as quickly as possible.

And figured, well, bandwagoning and moving things along is helping the town, so even if it's risky putting reluctant at L-1, I'll do it. Then when everyone turned around on him and told him it was scummy for the exact reasons he thought were pro-town, he threw a fit and left. If he was scum, he probably wouldn't have taken that risk at all, or just defended it relentlessly with bad logic, as I've seen newbie scum do before.

I get the reason that you voted for him initially, but I really think his reactions to the wagon would've been completely different as scum, if he'd voted reluctant at all.

If you agree that scapegoat's actions were newbtells, what makes

you

so convinced they were newb scum and not newb town?

You go into a speech on how active lurking is scummier then regular lurking. I am aware of this distinction. You then pretty much act like I wanted Anton lynched right now You've missed my point, I already explained it. Address it or don't, but don't expect me to defend a standpoint I never took.

I don't think you want Anton lynched now, and I'm sorry if that's the impression I gave, but you did say that he was your second candidate, as did reluctant, and unless I'm mistaken, others have referred to him as suspicious as well, and I'm trying to point out that he isn't a good lynch, either.

Much easier then the guy I took to L-1 without having to push him and had everyone else agreeing how scummy he was for their own individual reasons? And I decided to dismantle that vote why?

Maybe you're scumpartners and you hadn't intended to bus him to the point of lynch (if you are, then reluctant's vote on me despite most of my suspicion being on you makes sense). Or, more likely, maybe you were afraid of a quicklynch occurring from a wagon you led, you wanted to gain town points by ending it, and scapegoat putting reluctant at L-1 was an easy reason to.

I called out Travis for the 'follow the IC' stuff because I found the way he was doing it more suspicious then anyone else. I've said this before. I never said he was the only one, only that I found his actions in that regard suspicious. willows followed my suspicions pretty tightly, but he at least occasionally came in and offered scum tells that were his own, I never felt Travis did and that's why I called him out on it. Also, even as you're chiding me for not calling willows to task on this stuff, you're admitting that I did;

For the record, the quote you used was talking about reluctant, not willow. Again, if this just comes down to a disagreement, I guess I can't argue my point any further, but I honestly find willow and reluctant much scummier. The only thing you've mentioned about Travis being scummier so far is the fact that he's following you, and I don't think that makes him scummy enough to be one of your top three lynch candidates just for that. Maybe he just agrees with you. Reluctant and willow on the other hand, have other things against them, at least in my eyes, and neither of them even made that list.

Both posts are saying that the only way my actions make sense, if you believe what you're saying, is for me to be scum partners with reluctant if I'm scum. There is no contradiction between the two sentences - they say the same thing.

I just didn't understand whether you thought that an accusation of you and reluctant as a scumteam was reasonable or not, since in the context you said it to me, it sounded like you were trying to pre-emptively discredit that idea.

you disagree with my top three and find them bad lynches. Who are your top three?

My top three would be you, willow and reluctant.

[Thor665]

Much easier then the guy I took to L-1 without having to push him and had everyone else agreeing how scummy he was for their own individual reasons? And I decided to dismantle that vote why?

Maybe you're scumpartners and you hadn't intended to bus him to the point of lynch (if you are, then reluctant's vote on me despite most of my suspicion being on you makes sense). Or, more likely, maybe you were afraid of a quicklynch occurring from a wagon you led, you wanted to gain town points by ending it, and scapegoat putting reluctant at L-1 was an easy reason to.

Seriously? You actually believe that I'm not reluctant's partner and that I was scared that he would be lynched on a wagon I led...so I stopped the wagon and started one on scapegoat so I could...what?...not be found suspicious by having a wagon I led flip town?

Does this actually make sense to you? Since I'm scum and you're town what was my scum plan when I got you lynched and you flipped town? How would I have been leading your wagon any more or less then the reluctant one? What was the difference and why was it advantageous to me to lynch you like that?

Also, if reluctant is one of your top suspects, why is it more likely that he and I are *not* buddies?

[Cirno]

In fact, Cirno, could you please explain your willingness to vote Travis to me?

Well, the reason I'm not voting him is because it would be difficult to explain why I made such a vote. My suspicions of him are pretty much gut and my willingness to vote him comes from the fact that there really isn't anyone that stands out to me as the best lynch.

[EarthIntruder]

Does this actually make sense to you? Since I'm scum and you're town what was my scum plan when I got you lynched and you flipped town? How would I have been leading your wagon any more or less then the reluctant one? What was the difference and why was it advantageous to me to lynch you like that?

Because it meant the day would have taken longer. Scapegoat put reluctant at L-1 on page three, if he'd gotten quicklynched and flipped town that early in, that wagon would've been WAY more suspicious, and you would've gotten a lot more heat for it.

Well, the reason I'm not voting him is because it would be difficult to explain why I made such a vote. My suspicions of him are pretty much gut and my willingness to vote him comes from the fact that there really isn't anyone that stands out to me as the best lynch.

Does that mean you feel the same way about my lynch?

[Thor665]

@EarthIntruder

Also, if reluctant is one of your top suspects, why is it more likely that he and I are *not* buddies?

[EarthIntruder]

Guhhh sorry I missed that. 3am and all. Honestly, I'm just not as sure about him. I missed taking out that 'more likely' part while I was editing my post.

[Cirno]

Does that mean you feel the same way about my lynch?

Sort of. It is not really a matter of gut with you, rather your slot is the one with the most points against it and there isn't any reason

not

to lynch you.

[Coach Travis]

Oh geez, this is now 3 people suspicious of me with no actual reason, that's pretty silly. At least when I give my reads on someone, I specifically state why I feel a particular way about them, instead of just going with a gut feeling, that's taking the lazy way out. If you find me suspicious, explain why, like Thor did. You aren't going to hurt my feelings by explaining why you feel I'm scum. If you can't think of anything, look up other people until you find someone you have reason to suspect, and either vote them or at least give thoughts. Seriously, Seth and Cirno are both frustrating so far, as it seems all they can do is say someone's suspicious, with no reason other than a gut feeling. I find that lazy and slightly suspicious.

But EarthIntruder's posts on Thor are also so bad, I still can't help but find him scum. It's like he's just desperate and trying to get rid of the most experienced player here, but failing to make convincing arguments.

[seth]

I'd rather tunnel on you until you towntell or scumtell more. I also have one reason which I mentioned before, I don't think it's an especially strong reason, but reason enough to put some pressure on you.

[EarthIntruder]

Sort of. It is not really a matter of gut with you, rather your slot is the one with the most points against it and there isn't any reason not to lynch you.

Bah. I guess that's fair enough.

But EarthIntruder's posts on Thor are also so bad, I still can't help but find him scum. It's like he's just desperate and trying to get rid of the most experienced player here, but failing to make convincing arguments.

Does this actually make sense to you?

Gah, fine. If my arguments are failing that hard, then I guess there's no way I'm going to convince anybody else. I still don't like Thor, but I'll switch my vote once I've heard a little more from willow and/or reluctant.

-Reluctant, is your second choice for a lynch still Anton, or have you changed your mind?
-What about your vote on Aran, since he was your last vote before the scapegoat/me wagon, how do you feel about him now?
-What's your opinion on the replacements (besides me, of course, I think you've already established that one)

-Willow, I know you've been V/LA, I think you still are at the moment? I'm not sure. But I want to hear more from you. Give us a list of your top three scum candidates with reasonably detailed reasons why as soon as you see this post.

[Cirno]

I'd rather tunnel on you until you towntell or scumtell more. I also have one reason which I mentioned before, I don't think it's an especially strong reason, but reason enough to put some pressure on you.

He isn't going to be pressured by a vote that can't be argued against and makes no points. If you want to pressure him, at least ask him some questions or something.

Gah, fine. If my arguments are failing that hard, then I guess there's no way I'm going to convince anybody else. I still don't like Thor, but I'll switch my vote once I've heard a little more from willow and/or reluctant.

I think your arguments against Thor are pretty much the only kind of arguments you can get on day 1 without somebody slipping up. By that, I mean that I don't think the case against you and scapegoat is all that much better. Especially when compared to Coach Travis' "Scapegoat is scummy because his posts are scummy!".

So anyway, I changed my mind. I'm not going to jump on the EI wagon.