Newbie 1707 - Game Over

[Raskolnikov]

Well, this is embarrassing, I think I jumped to conclusions a bit.

[Simoyd]

@Raskolnikov: What do you mean when you say Murph is "definitely thinking"? I feel like all he has done is hate on yogurt's accusations and defend himself against my accusations. Not saying I've done much more, but I'm not quite understanding what you mean here?

[Raskolnikov]

So I didn't like you including p47 before voting him because it feels like you used that as part of your vote, when I don't think p47 is in any way scummy.
And I didn't like you voting him for p60 because you cropped the quote and the part you had quoted isn't even bad, so it felt like you were hypocritical as well telling him not to "make something out of nothing".
But actually looking again at 60 I do think it's sort-of scummy?

Yet you've suggested that each participant weigh in with an opinion sans guert and, more importantly, me.

Makes me wonder what your intent is and why these two post ?

because the way he says it it feels like he's trying to assign scum intent to the rather innocent question by sim and the way in which he asks feels a bit malicious ( as opposed to asking it more normally normally ).
But I still don't even think it's that bad for him to be curious about sim asking around about his posts. If defensiveness is what you're interested in I think kali is a bit defensive as well, but I don't think you said anything there.
I personally don't think defensiveness is that much of a scumtell, maybe a hint of one but I've seen a fair bit of townpeople in my other games who are just stylistically defensive.

[Raskolnikov]

Okay, the murph vote is fine.

I still don't like what feels like the doubt put to wguerts; I don't think 14 is forced but actually a reasonable observation, and I think scumreading the "does" emphasis/bolding is pretty ridiculous.
But eeeeeeh still not as bad a post as I thought it was.

[Hoppic]

Ohh there's a lot to read. Hi everyone.

[Raskolnikov]

@Raskolnikov: What do you mean when you say Murph is "definitely thinking"? I feel like all he has done is hate on yogurt's accusations and defend himself against my accusations. Not saying I've done much more, but I'm not quite understanding what you mean here?

Okay, here's how I see it.
You FOS'd murph because you thought his post could potentially have been a distraction to help kali if they were partners. I like you being so eager to try to figure the game out at this point, and I like it as a post from you for that intent, but as far as actual analysis it was a bit far-fetched and wguerts said this.
I think Murph as town can definitely be confused at this happening (because it would feel a bit ridiculous to be suspected on that) so early so his reaction to you is fair. His response is to confidently tell you to bring it on as opposed to trying to dismiss or appease your suspicions, which I actually think is a minor town-tell.
Although I think you are town I don't think your early reasoning in your exchange with him makes that much sense, since it's based on that initial post which I think is okay, and snowballed a bit because you don't like him defending himself; which I don't see the logic in as someone being suspected should defend themselves, and the alternative of ignoring you there I don't think would necessarily be good either.
Again, if he's town him questioning you asking around about his 19 is actually okay, although the way in which he did it reads a bit weird. If he's scum he is just acting in self-preservation, but as town he could genuinely want to figure out what you're thinking there.

I have gone back and reviewed things a bit since; through some hubris I kind of skim read earlier and assumed what was happening wasn't as interesting as it actually was.

I see him asking questions and engaged in the game. I do think you/RC have a point in that he has been mostly reactive with his thoughts, and aside from saying one of kali's posts looked really scummy (and not going into detail on it) he hasn't really gone on the offensive; I think you personally have shown a lot more evidence in trying to figure the game out. I still think this defensiveness of his could be stylistic, but he's a more null now than I felt on my first impression.

[Raskolnikov]

@RC
You disliked some of ygeuerts posts (which I disagree with), but do you actually fos/sus him on these?
What do you think about Kali?

@Murph
You think the suspicions against you are ridiculous.
Among these do you think any are malicious, or just mistaken?

@Kali
Are you scumreading anybody?

[Raskolnikov]

Sidenote, this is pretty much my only game so I'm going to focusing most of my effort here.
If anyone has any questions please feel free.

[Simoyd]

I'm having trouble understanding why you deflected from my question and repeated the far fetched nature of my previous accusations. I'm not sure I would quantify anything you described about murph in your post (80) as "definitely thinking". Perhaps you can speak more to that? Do you think others are definitely not thinking?

[Raskolnikov]

Asking relevant questions and engaging people is evidence of thinking about the game, and just that effort/investment into that game of that is something imo.
Questioning the suspicion onto seth and then giving reasonable questions to you and wguerts isn't something necessary; it would have been easier and attracted less attention to ignore the rvs, and to have been less standoffish to you. Compare murph to kali here and I think you can see a minor difference in thought displayed; though they both talk mostly about people suspecting them, murph seems interested in the intentions of the people accusing him or at least pretending to. That doesn't mean kali isn't or won't be, but you can see potential evidence for one of these things and none yet for the other, understand?

Obviously showing some thought in the game doesn't immediately make someone town, as a)it can be faked,b)scum can genuinely do that from a defensive/reactive position, but in newbie games the trend I see is for scum to be apathetic so it's a minor credit to him in this case. I'm hesitant to go too far in judgement atm while several people haven't posted much yet; in my second newbie game I had my reads messed up because scum were inactive and I forced myself to scumread/lynch among the rest (who were all town).

[Raskolnikov]

Although funnily enough, actually having explained how I see this lowers the value of it for future use here, as scum will see/adjust.
But there are way better hints and tells than this

[SethYazura]

My first post wasn't forced, it's not an attempt on humor either, I made it sound strange on purpose.
If we don't lynch Murph now, we are just going to lynch him later because of how dangerous he sounds.
How about we lynch him now and start from there.
VOTE: Murph
UNVOTE: wgeurts

Mod Edit: Fixed vote tags

[wgeurts]

@RedCoyote 70
I'm afraid that was a typo made on my phone's autocorrect, I meant all "off" you not all "over". That should clarify that a bit at least.

[wgeurts]

My first post wasn't forced, it's not an attempt on humor either, I made it sound strange on purpose.
If we don't lynch Murph now, we are just going to lynch him later because of how dangerous he sounds.
How about we lynch him now and start from there.
VOTE: MurphVOTE:
UNVOTE: wgeurts

What do you mean by "I made is sound strange on purpose".
I'm also not sure how I like your positioning, the way you've jumped into murf seems terribly suspect. Why are you scum-reading him?
Also know that if you are town, flash-lynching is never a good idea especially for the reasons you gave.

[wgeurts]

I can't avoid these typos at least once per post can I?

Anyway, I'll refresh my reads once I'm free. I'm liking rash's thought splurges as town, and on the other hand seths most recent post is something that is worthy of suspicion. I'll await his reaction though to see whether I'll follow up on that right now.

[SethYazura]

What do you mean by "I made is sound strange on purpose".

It was to attract attention and immediately get the game going, but it's more than that, sadly I can't tell you my secrets.

I'm also not sure how I like your positioning, the way you've jumped into murf seems terribly suspect

How does that make me terribly suspect? A suspect is one that acts like scum, a scum pretends to be town, what I'm doing is the total opposite of that.

Also know that if you are town, flash-lynching is never a good idea especially for the reasons you gave.

Sure

[Murph]

Yet you've suggested that each participant weigh in with an opinion sans guert and, more importantly, me.

This comes across as unnecessarily defensive. If you want to give your opinion, give it. To me it was clear the Simoyd was just making a blanket, "we need more people to chime in" statement. There's no reason to make something out of nothing, in other words.

In any event, I'm certainly not afraid to be confrontational. VOTE: Murph [/quote]

Not even defensive. I was questioning his motive. Sim stated that my statements could be interpreted in different ways.

So, that FoS you were swinging about, how about IT ? Your reasoning is unjust and quite actually confirms my statements.

I think that the words you used, and the effects of those words are two separate things. A liar can use the words you did to try and direct attention to Seth. Yes it's associative, and yes it's weak.

I felt them to be concise.

@ Kal and geurts

Why do either of you have suspicions about a single D1 poster ?

Seems more like Seth was acknowledging/poking an acquaintance with a throw-away D1 vote.

If you think it's more nefarious, please share why.

@Murph: You downplayed both posts in your first sentence,

( ? )

then you encouraged other people to talk more about Seth with your second and third sentance.

I have like 15 bottles of this weak sauce, and I need to get rid of it somehow!

That is correct.

Sentence one - Seth had one post. Still has one post. I asked each of them how they could find Seth suspicious after one post. That's how you start a conversation. I read about that somewhere...

Sentence two - My interpretation of Seth's post. Pointing out why I felt it lacked suspicion. My contradistinctive contribution to the forth coming conversation.

Sentence three - If they were going to defend their original position then they need to bring more ammo and explain how and why it was suspicious.


So, that FoS you were swinging about, how about IT ? Your reasoning is unjust and quite actually confirms my statements.

I've noted that Sim likes to answer questions by turning the question back into a question.

why do I need to have a problem with them?

If you have something to weigh in about, then let me know. I assumed you didn't, am I wrong?

why not these two posts? What do you think those posts expose?

After reading and then comprehending,

My intent is to judge other people's opinions on said posts.

I acquiesced, since that is sound reasoning and what I want as well. As stated, there needed to be a lot more participation.

As far as confrontational and defensive ?

I don't agree. I will defend my statements and thoughts. I will change my opinions if warranted.

[AlpacaAlpaca]

Ok so I just caught up and I think that Murph has been a little defensive but only because he was called out on some things which wouldn't be good just to leave alone. He was possibly overly defensive but I am going to keep that tucked away in my memory for later analysis.

I am tempted to start pointing fingers at people however I think that D1 is mostly about talking semantics about posts and so on this point I have to say that I am a little confused at Seth making a post sound strange on purpose and than covering it up as it being his 'secret', although that may also be entirely valid. I think that Simoyd's questions were good ones and on that note I have to say that on post 33 I am not convinced as KS having the same opinion as someone is a scumtell, although it is mildly suspicious you can't change up your opinions every time if you don't state them first to appear as not just simply agreeing instead of holding the same beliefs.

As for post 34 I think that the third sentence was a bit iffy "possibly" but in the end might just be a way to get conversation started D1.

I am extremely non committal right now since I I personally think that everything said so far could be taken either way, now the nest step is to cross check what people say in the future with suspicions I already hold for them.

[Murph]

[quote="In post 81, Raskolnikov
@Murph
You think the suspicions against you are ridiculous.
Among these do you think any are malicious, or just mistaken?

quote]


This game is about suspicions. We are trying to identify discrepancies, contradictions and anomalies for further evaluation.
I expect scrutiny as I will scrutinize each of you.

Hopefully there won't be malice intended or otherwise. It's unnecessary, imo.

As to mistaken ? That's for me to determine as it could just as well be an agenda.

[Murph]

Oh and Good morning fellas

[Murph]

My first post wasn't forced, it's not an attempt on humor either, I made it sound strange on purpose. --

Why would you do this ?

If we don't lynch Murph now, we are just going to lynch him later because of how dangerous he sounds. -

How do I sound dangerous ?

How about we lynch him now and start from there. -

This won't be in the towns best interest. At all.

VOTE: MurphVOTE:
UNVOTE: wgeurts

I'll hang up and listen

[Raskolnikov]

@Murph
You think the suspicions against you are ridiculous.
Among these do you think any are malicious, or just mistaken?

This game is about suspicions. We are trying to identify discrepancies, contradictions and anomalies for further evaluation.
I expect scrutiny as I will scrutinize each of you.

Hopefully there won't be malice intended or otherwise. It's unnecessary, imo.

As to mistaken ? That's for me to determine as it could just as well be an agenda.

Haha. When I say malice I'm talking about scum motivation, scum saying they "suspect" someone is acting out of malice/harm to town because they obviously can't be mistaken.
If someone is being pushed and is town, the people pushing are either mistaken-town or malicious scum, and said person will be trying to sort between the two. Obviously if you're scum this isn't true but you would have to lie and pretend it is; regardless of your alignment it's useful to get this information and stances out of you. You should personally be motivated to answer this as either alignment as well, as town should want to be open and allow themselves to be read, whereas scum has to do it because it's what town should want to do.
You haven't been very transparent in your views on others and I'm interested in hearing who you "think" is scum and your views on things not related to yourself.
This goes for Seth too, who's plainly being secretive/guarded in his recent posts. Technically kali and hoppic haven't given their views yet either, but because they haven't posted today yet there's no reason right now to believe they won't do so of their own accord.

[Raskolnikov]

P.S. Quote formatting is annoying, but as an easy alternative feel free to respond to posts via number instead, using post tag.

Code: Select all

[post]96[/post]
And here have your response to said post.

[Murph]

@ Rasko

Thank you for the constructive criticism. Also, I'll try the :code: for quotes in the future.

As to suspects ? I'm formulating opinions as each players joins the game.

Kal - Early sheepish behavior and smarmy explanations. Not feeling town here.
guerts - While we disagreed on Seth's early post, we've had common thoughts about Kal's posts. Null
Sim - I like that Sim asks good questions however I dislike the answering questions with questions responses. Null
Ras - Good observations thus far. Too early still.
Red - As the IC, I find it difficult to understand Red ignoring an entire conversation and then cherry picking a single statement to squat on. OMGUS null
Seth - When called out for a forced first post, Seth implied secret reasons and then promptly tried to divert attention away by creating a shiny object. - Scum

Need more participation from Hop and Alpaca

Rip away

[Raskolnikov]

Thank you for the constructive criticism. Also, I'll try the :code: for quotes in the future.

Uh that's not what I meant!