Mini 829 - Internal Struggle Mafia (Over)

[ryan2754]

OT: Alex, the flavor of this game so far is tremendous.

*I'm glad you liked it.

Vote: ryan2754

for being scum in the last game I played!

Well,

Vote: DRK

for being scum with me. With my random vote out of the way:

Unvote

.

Vote Dank

For being the first person to make a second vote for someone.

WTH?!

unvote, vote:Idiot King

for having a "real" vote.

Interesting. I kind of felt the same way when reading it.

You don't like Jeff Gordon, so you put the

third

random vote on Jason?

Indirectly trying to protect jason from quick bandwagon?


Then HipHop gets called out about his vote (DTM said he made idiotking L4) and then hiphop unvotes. Seems scummy.
Then Paradoxombie says this:

FOS:

Hiphop and Idiot King. I don't like the way they each unvoted immediately when their votes were called into question, and how they didn't put any other votes down in place of them.

Hiphop then later in Post 33 tries to reenter the RVS with his vote on RC, not to mention it came AFTER paradoxombie's post saying it's scummy that they didn't place another vote down. Although I don't particularly agree with the idea that each unvote needs to be followed by a vote, the fact that hiphop revoted a seemingly random vote after Paradoxombie's call-out after RVS had finished is extremely scummy.


I do find both unvotes to be slightly scummy, like paradoxombie says.

I'm confused. Normally you would unvote when you see a bandwagon forming if you were part of that bandwagon. You voted for danks first though not jason.

Wow, didn't realize this initially. Definitely makes IdiotKing look scummier.
1.) IK votes Dank for being FIRST PERSON to make a SECOND VOTE
2.) Jason wagon follows
3.) IK UNVOTES

Dank

, not Jason. If you aren't voting the bandwagon, why unvote and comment on the bandwagon?


Does anyone else have a weird vibe about the exchange between Hiphop's 22 and IK's 23? Who does everyone think is wrong, in that exchange? Hiphop for the logic of his IK vote, or IK for his explanation?

I believe they are just lurkers, and I despise lurkers. They make the game less fun for everybody else, and they hurt the side that they are with. Their posts no matter how small can give us more activity and more discussion. I am waiting for them to post, but that does not mean I won't be active in trying to locate the rest of the scum.

1.) Don't call me a lurker. We are on page 3. Oh, and I despise lurkers as well.
2.) I had a wedding this weekend. I also learned this past week that my Uncle and my GF's Uncle died. It's been a hectic few days, to say the least.

You [Hiphop] were also quick to unvote. And you didn't give any explanation either. You say you want to give him a chance to answer, but I don't think that makes sense when you were already voting him for something else altogether.

Good point. Hiphop is being fairly hypocritical.

As for why I am not voting for him, it is because he already has two votes on him, and I don't want scum to pounce on him without giving himself a chance to defend for himself. As I already explained I didn't know he had three votes on him.

Really? Worrying about L-4/L-3? It would be dumb for scum to jump on at that point, and get a quick lynch. We are sinking to a brand new low, people. Extremely scummy statement by hiphop trying to appear cautious.

And my wording in my original unvote post was exactly what I intended it to be. I saw a problem with a bandwagon forming, and so unvoted my random vote. My post makes sense in this context.

Who thought I was voting for jason instead of danks?

1.) You gave off the impression you were voting for jasont by mentioning the bandwagon. You make no transition/segway between your vote on danks and the bandwagon on jason, thus implying you are unvoting jason. Thus, we are confused why you would say the things about the bandwagon on unvote a random vote at the same post, with no transition between the two thoughts. Thus, what you intended the post to be is not clear, and thus it's weird you say it's exactly what you meant it to be.

What case could I possibly have? "A bandwagon was formed, and those 3 were part of it." That's all the information available; everything else that I can see could be explained away as being merely part of the RVS, as you say.

Umm, let's go back a few posts. You say:

...and was considering investigating the bandwagon [voters on Jason]...

So you say you were thinking about investigating the bandwagon, then later say the only information available is the bandwagon itself? So you admit that there is nothing to investigate, despite wanting to previously do it? Or is it that everything you could investigate is "part of the RVS?" and thus not readily able to be investigated? You seem to be contradicting yourself.


Shrine, in your post 46, where did you take DTM's quote from?

Hiphop continually trying to deflect.

Unvote
vote: ryan

@zach. It has only been a couple of days, not even half our required time. And that lurker is as suspicious as anyone else. I would of kept my vote on idiotking, but I dislike lurkers more.

So you would rather vote lurkers than "scum number 1?" Usually, when you admit that your vote on lurkers is a pressure vote to get them to post, it doesn't work. Pressure votes lose their luster when people know they are for pressure to post.

I'm considering on putting a vote on hiphop, but his lack of experience sort of is making me feel sympathetic and going against it. But you know what, after rereading his posts, I'm definitely not getting a real townly feeling from him, so...

Vote: hiphop

Anyone else getting a weird vibe by this post. Sort of like, "If he is revealed as town, I told you it could of been lack of experience." Seems like a sort of fencesitting.

I must be scums greatest dream. I would think that if I was scum, my buddies would of defended of me, before this got out of hand.

No. Good experienced scumbuddies would have harped you and pounced on you for your play in this game, not defended it, especially this early in the game. It would have been an extremely bad move for scumbuddies to do so.

By the way Ryan still hasn't posted yet, and there is a little more than 12 hours left, I believe.

Good God. You can count. Read above.

I could see both IK's and HipHops play as VI/newb/inexperience. IK, what is your level of experience?

DTM, you have read my meta? What games?

I will take my vote off of Ryan, because he is either going to be replaced, and I want to give the person who replaces him a chance, or he eventually will post anyways, and I will probably unvote then anyways.

You continually outdo yourself, hiphop. Someone applauds you for lurker hunting, and you vote me, but before I even post, you unvote me. Seems fairly weird to unvote a "lurker" before he posts, especially when you are trying to lurker hunt.

unvote

vote:Toro

just a hunch right now may come back with reasons later.

So let me get this straight. You have ahunch on toro. Yet, you say you will come back with reasons later.

1.) This early in a game, I have no problem with hunch votes, but hunches have reasons now? I thought hunches were gut feelings, without any reason?
2.) Voting someone and giving reasons later is scummy.


I would like my question to IK answered before I make my vote.

[ryan2754]

EBWOP: Fixed Quote/Formatting Tags for readability. I would like people to answer the questions posed in my post.
OT: Alex, the flavor of this game so far is tremendous.

*I'm glad you liked it.

Vote: ryan2754

for being scum in the last game I played!

Well,

Vote: DRK

for being scum with me. With my random vote out of the way:

Unvote

.

Vote Dank

For being the first person to make a second vote for someone.

WTH?!

unvote, vote:Idiot King

for having a "real" vote.

Interesting. I kind of felt the same way when reading it.

You don't like Jeff Gordon, so you put the

third

random vote on Jason?

Indirectly trying to protect jason from quick bandwagon?


Then HipHop gets called out about his vote (DTM said he made idiotking L4) and then hiphop unvotes. Seems scummy.
Then Paradoxombie says this:

FOS:

Hiphop and Idiot King. I don't like the way they each unvoted immediately when their votes were called into question, and how they didn't put any other votes down in place of them.

Hiphop then later in Post 33 tries to reenter the RVS with his vote on RC, not to mention it came AFTER paradoxombie's post saying it's scummy that they didn't place another vote down. Although I don't particularly agree with the idea that each unvote needs to be followed by a vote, the fact that hiphop revoted a seemingly random vote after Paradoxombie's call-out after RVS had finished is extremely scummy.


I do find both unvotes to be slightly scummy, like paradoxombie says.

I'm confused. Normally you would unvote when you see a bandwagon forming if you were part of that bandwagon. You voted for danks first though not jason.

Wow, didn't realize this initially. Definitely makes IdiotKing look scummier.
1.) IK votes Dank for being FIRST PERSON to make a SECOND VOTE
2.) Jason wagon follows
3.) IK UNVOTES

Dank

, not Jason. If you aren't voting the bandwagon, why unvote and comment on the bandwagon?

Does anyone else have a weird vibe about the exchange between Hiphop's 22 and IK's 23? Who does everyone think is wrong, in that exchange? Hiphop for the logic of his IK vote, or IK for his explanation? Or do people think this exchange is normal?

I believe they are just lurkers, and I despise lurkers. They make the game less fun for everybody else, and they hurt the side that they are with. Their posts no matter how small can give us more activity and more discussion. I am waiting for them to post, but that does not mean I won't be active in trying to locate the rest of the scum.

1.) Don't call me a lurker. We are on page 3. Oh, and I despise lurkers as well.
2.) I had a wedding this weekend. I also learned this past week that my Uncle and my GF's Uncle died. It's been a hectic few days, to say the least.

You [Hiphop] were also quick to unvote. And you didn't give any explanation either. You say you want to give him a chance to answer, but I don't think that makes sense when you were already voting him for something else altogether.

Good point. Hiphop is being fairly hypocritical.

As for why I am not voting for him, it is because he already has two votes on him, and I don't want scum to pounce on him without giving himself a chance to defend for himself. As I already explained I didn't know he had three votes on him.

Really? Worrying about L-4/L-3? It would be dumb for scum to jump on at that point, and get a quick lynch. We are sinking to a brand new low, people. Extremely scummy statement by hiphop trying to appear cautious.

And my wording in my original unvote post was exactly what I intended it to be. I saw a problem with a bandwagon forming, and so unvoted my random vote. My post makes sense in this context.

Who thought I was voting for jason instead of danks?

1.) You gave off the impression you were voting for jasont by mentioning the bandwagon. You make no transition/segway between your vote on danks and the bandwagon on jason, thus implying you are unvoting jason. Thus, we are confused why you would say the things about the bandwagon on unvote a random vote at the same post, with no transition between the two thoughts. Thus, what you intended the post to be is not clear, and thus it's weird you say it's exactly what you meant it to be.

What case could I possibly have? "A bandwagon was formed, and those 3 were part of it." That's all the information available; everything else that I can see could be explained away as being merely part of the RVS, as you say.

Umm, let's go back a few posts. You say:

...and was considering investigating the bandwagon [voters on Jason]...

So you say you were thinking about investigating the bandwagon, then later say the only information available is the bandwagon itself? So you admit that there is nothing to investigate, despite wanting to previously do it? Or is it that everything you could investigate is "part of the RVS?" and thus not readily able to be investigated? You seem to be contradicting yourself.

Shrine, in your post 46, where did you take DTM's quote from?

Hiphop continually trying to deflect.

Unvote
vote: ryan

@zach. It has only been a couple of days, not even half our required time. And that lurker is as suspicious as anyone else. I would of kept my vote on idiotking, but I dislike lurkers more.

So you would rather vote lurkers than "scum number 1?" Usually, when you admit that your vote on lurkers is a pressure vote to get them to post, it doesn't work. Pressure votes lose their luster when people know they are for pressure to post.

I'm considering on putting a vote on hiphop, but his lack of experience sort of is making me feel sympathetic and going against it. But you know what, after rereading his posts, I'm definitely not getting a real townly feeling from him, so...

Vote: hiphop

Anyone else getting a weird vibe by this post. Sort of like, "If he is revealed as town, I told you it could of been lack of experience." Seems like a sort of fencesitting.

I must be scums greatest dream. I would think that if I was scum, my buddies would of defended of me, before this got out of hand.

No. Good experienced scumbuddies would have harped you and pounced on you for your play in this game, not defended it, especially this early in the game. It would have been an extremely bad move for scumbuddies to do so.

By the way Ryan still hasn't posted yet, and there is a little more than 12 hours left, I believe.

Good God. You can count. Read above.

I could see both IK's and HipHops play as VI/newb/inexperience.

IK, what is your level of experience?

DTM, you have read my meta? What games?

I will take my vote off of Ryan, because he is either going to be replaced, and I want to give the person who replaces him a chance, or he eventually will post anyways, and I will probably unvote then anyways.

You continually outdo yourself, hiphop. Someone applauds you for lurker hunting, and you vote me, but before I even post, you unvote me. Seems fairly weird to unvote a "lurker" before he posts, especially when you are trying to lurker hunt.

unvote

vote:Toro

just a hunch right now may come back with reasons later.

So let me get this straight. You have ahunch on toro. Yet, you say you will come back with reasons later.

1.) This early in a game, I have no problem with hunch votes, but hunches have reasons now? I thought hunches were gut feelings, without any reason?
2.) Voting someone and giving reasons later is scummy.

[DTMaster]

^ Ouch double post of walls with a EBWOP on the second one. :<

@ Hiphop

@Dtm Toro said he was agreeing to #24, as in Jason, not his points. His avatar has a 24 on the helmet.

Ah ok that makes much more sense now. Though I would have preferred if Toro answered me.

Could it possibly be because there are no other suspicious actions that have not been pointed out? As Dtm pointed out, the rvs ended in record time, perhaps that needs to be started again.

I disagree here. Discussion is key in scum hunting, not RVS. Besides it is too late to return to those times because many people are tunneling on you. They are going to keep you at the back of their minds (with the rest of the discussion so far) so it would just be counter productive.

@Ryan

Does anyone else have a weird vibe about the exchange between Hiphop's 22 and IK's 23? Who does everyone think is wrong, in that exchange? Hiphop for the logic of his IK vote, or IK for his explanation?

This is a null-tell to me actually. What hiphop stated was slightly inaccurate on his vote with IK. IK corrected it since there is a difference from "second vote" to "second vote on another person".

Can you explain your weird vibe here in more detail?

So you would rather vote lurkers than "scum number 1?" Usually, when you admit that your vote on lurkers is a pressure vote to get them to post, it doesn't work. Pressure votes lose their luster when people know they are for pressure to post.

Very good point. This makes hiphop look like he is keeping a backdoor to jump on the IK bandwagon when conditions are ideal. But lurker hunting is still beneficial to the town regardless of alignment.

Anyone else getting a weird vibe by this post. Sort of like, "If he is revealed as town, I told you it could of been lack of experience." Seems like a sort of fencesitting.

The newb card defense is weak in general, especially after hiphop mentions he has played 3 games.

3 games, all theme based, so not much. I am learning as I go. So please critique me anyway you can.

I have yet to do a meta read but even in theme games the basic mechanics are still there for mafia. It is a very defensive action for the RVS, I normally would expect something like this during a claim period around L-1.

DTM, you have read my meta? What games?

Nope because I don't have too much time to do a meta read at the moment, which is why I asked DRK for her thoughts. While meta reads are useful at times, I rather base an arguement against/for you with what you posted in game.

1.) This early in a game, I have no problem with hunch votes, but hunches have reasons now? I thought hunches were gut feelings, without any reason?

Hunch/gut votes have some reason behind it. Abet, this is really early for a good analysis I'm still interested with his thoughts on what Toro posted so far. But I agree with your second point because it makes little sense to do that without an explanation on why hiphop cannot explain his hunch at the moment.

[Idiotking]

Wow, didn't realize this initially. Definitely makes IdiotKing look scummier.
1.) IK votes Dank for being FIRST PERSON to make a SECOND VOTE
2.) Jason wagon follows
3.) IK UNVOTES

Dank

, not Jason. If you aren't voting the bandwagon, why unvote and comment on the bandwagon?

1. That was actually just a random vote, not a real reason. I use that reason in every RVS I get into simply because it's a good, reliable, repeatable reason (because someone inevitably makes a second vote).
2. Correct.
3. I don't understand what you mean 'voting the bandwagon'. Do you mean voting ON the bandwagon? As in being part of the bandwagon? In that case, I'd actually thought the RVS was over, and so unvoted Dank (unvoted my random vote) in preparation of an examination of the bandwagon. That didn't occur, however, because shortly thereafter I was pursued because of the unvote.

And my wording in my original unvote post was exactly what I intended it to be. I saw a problem with a bandwagon forming, and so unvoted my random vote. My post makes sense in this context.

Who thought I was voting for jason instead of danks?

1.) You gave off the impression you were voting for jasont by mentioning the bandwagon. You make no transition/segway between your vote on danks and the bandwagon on jason, thus implying you are unvoting jason. Thus, we are confused why you would say the things about the bandwagon on unvote a random vote at the same post, with no transition between the two thoughts. Thus, what you intended the post to be is not clear, and thus it's weird you say it's exactly what you meant it to be.

This is what I get from the town's reactions:

-Town expects A to happen
-I make B happen instead
-Town is surprised that B happened instead of A

By this logic, B doesn't have to be scummy, just unexpected, or in this case, misunderstood (I'm a confusing person). A is also not necessarily pro-town, just what is expected. My question is, how is it actually scummy for me to have acted in this manner?

So you say you were thinking about investigating the bandwagon, then later say the only information available is the bandwagon itself? So you admit that there is nothing to investigate, despite wanting to previously do it? Or is it that everything you could investigate is "part of the RVS?" and thus not readily able to be investigated? You seem to be contradicting yourself.

I can see how it'd be seen as contradictory. It would have been impossible for me to investigate at that exact point. Instead, I was hoping for something else to happen, some new development that I could see concerning the bandwagon. However, thing's didn't turn out as I'd expected.

I could see both IK's and HipHops play as VI/newb/inexperience. IK, what is your level of experience?

... well that's cold....

On this site, 3 games, all losses, the first due to stupidity/inexperience, the second due to obsession over one individual (who turned out to be town), the third due to a biased and insane setup/being overly trusting of one individual (who turned out to be scum).

On another site that I frequent... I think I'm on 7 or 8 now, all wins. I seem to polarize.

[DTMaster]

@Idiot King

I have problems with these following quotes:

That didn't occur, however, because shortly thereafter I was pursued because of the unvote.

I can see how it'd be seen as contradictory. It would have been impossible for me to investigate at that exact point. Instead, I was hoping for something else to happen, some new development that I could see concerning the bandwagon. However, thing's didn't turn out as I'd expected.

I don't understand your reasoning on what is stopping

you from pursuing the bandwagon case

. Why does the town have to follow you on this rather then analyze you? This is a really poor excuse to use to defend yourself since there are more effective ways to generate discussion then "waiting for a new development". (I.e. Try a line of questioning with your defense)

FoS: Idiot King

While this is premature, TO THE TOWN: Doesn't Redcoyote's post seem odd to you guys? He used a post-RVS argument to support his RVS vote. His post still bothers me.

[Toro]

For DTMaster : Yeah the #24 was an obvious Jeff Gordon reference.

And it's nice to know that I'm not the only one who thinks that 3 games is too many for the inexperience card.

And how long did it take ryan2754 to write that!?

[Idiotking]

I don't understand your reasoning on what is stopping

you from pursuing the bandwagon case

. Why does the town have to follow you on this rather then analyze you? This is a really poor excuse to use to defend yourself since there are more effective ways to generate discussion then "waiting for a new development". (I.e. Try a line of questioning with your defense)

FoS: Idiot King

What is stopping be NOW? Nothing, we've moved on to other things. Now I'm more interested in hiphop and answering the questions posed to me.

The town would NOT have to follow me on this. I never said that nor implied that (not intentionally, anyway). It's not an excuse, either, and I'm sort of annoyed that you think it is. It's an explanation; I don't do excuses. Excuses are attempts to get out of trouble, explanations are attempts to make someone else understand why you did what you did. But that's off subject.

I'm also quite fine with the town analyzing me. I don't see anything I've done as wrong, and as such, I can respond with a clear conscience and without excuses. I guess I'm not understanding what you're getting at.

[RedCoyote]

But you are right we have 2 people that haven't contributed anything to the game and RVS is over. One more day and we might need a prod ("sigh" already)

The game started on Saturday at Midnight, and you are talking about prods on Sunday at Midnight? This was effectively 24 hours into the game when you made this comment.

We left the RVS already so I suggest you read up.

Why did you assume my vote was random?

I'm not going to say it's obvious, but I would consider it fairly apparent that when hiphop says he believes Ik is "scum number 1" that he is saying, rather, he's suspicious of Ik. Take a look at what hiphop said prior to that,

@ idiotking it is almost like you don't want to be voting for someone else, if the bandwagon ends in lynch. This looks scummy to me.

hiphop is trying to explain his suspicions of Ik, I sincerely doubt he was trying to convey any absolution.

dank jumped on what I thought was simply misspeak. The words "scum number 1" are interchangable with "sounding scummy" (e.g. Ik is

scum number 1

/Ik is

sounding scummy

).

---

@deathrowkitty what do you think would of happened to me if I hadn't even posted yet? I wouldn't have any suspicious drawn on to me. Which is why I don't like lurkers. They think they can float under the radar.

...

And that lurker is as suspicious as anyone else. I would of kept my vote on idiotking, but I dislike lurkers more.

You complained about "lurkers" even before DTM did, some 21 hours into the game. How often should a player be posting, in your estimation?

FYI there are more than one scum in the game, so keep looking. At least I am staying active.

Appeal to emotion.

---

RedCoyote

: Did you realize that, when your had placed your random vote, that we were pretty much finished with the RVS?

Why do you assume my vote is random?

---

I would think that if I was scum, my buddies would of defended of me, before this got out of hand.

WIFOM

---

Your choice of vocabulary is very interesting here. It would have been a better response to say he was the "most suspicious person" rather then "he is the number one scum". Saying someone is scum number 1 has some finality when you state it.

Yeah, this is what I caught on to as well.

If you look at Red's only post, he only voted to:

...

draw attention away from himself from lurking.

I will likely only make one or two posts every 24-48 hours, not including weekends. I encourage you to look through my meta, you'll find my activity in games tend to maintain this rate.

No content, no reason, not even admitting he is RVSing.

Are you not content with waiting for me to answer your accusations before you vote me because of them?

As I said above, dank appears to be attempting to corner a newer player by twisting their rhetoric beyond its meaning.

He read the game so far to know he got voted on, but he didn't address what is going on.

Was there something specific you wanted me to address?

I think hiphop is being painted into a corner, I think this talk about "lurking" is grossly exaggerated, and I think everyone is just a little too anxious at this point. I appreciate the activity levels. If you want to try and use it against me, that's your perogative, but I simply do not have the ability to check MS every few hours.

---

At least they are trying to start an activity, because this discussion has stalled, is it because you guys are waiting for everybody to vote me? It may happen or it may not. Keep your votes on me if that makes you satisfied, at least point your finger of suspicion at some other scum activities as well. Could it possibly be because there are no other suspicious actions that have not been pointed out? As Dtm pointed out, the rvs ended in record time, perhaps that needs to be started again.

Like I was saying to DTM, some of us need to seriously take a deep breath and just ease up. Scum usually aren't caught within 48 hours. I don't know where y'all are used to playing, but if we all calm down a little and remember,

I will mention the deadline at least a week ahead of time.

hiphop, you especially need to get out of melodramatic mode. If we could stop tossing around words like lurker after one day (or less than) of play. If y'all want to see real "stalled" discussion, look at 90% of games on page 50 or 60.

---

I'm not liking your vote on Toro. Until you explain it, I see it as an OMGUS vote. I want more than a hunch on this.

FoS hiphop.

Explain why this is not true, hiphop.

---

OT: Alex, the flavor of this game so far is tremendous.

I also like it very much :3

*I'm glad you liked it too .

Anyone else getting a weird vibe by this post. Sort of like, "If he is revealed as town, I told you it could of been lack of experience." Seems like a sort of fencesitting.

I feel the same way. Frankly, I was going to call it out myself had he not voted for him. It's like, he gives himself an out for voting him (in case hiphop flips town during the lynch).

Since he voted him, I'm more inclined to think he's just piggybacking on the wagon. I don't think I've seen any unique Toro questions of hiphop, he's just going off of what others have asked.

---

While this is premature, TO THE TOWN: Doesn't Redcoyote's post seem odd to you guys? He used a post-RVS argument to support his RVS vote. His post still bothers me.

The first time you brought it up was understandable, albeit presumptive. The second time you brought it up was disconcerting. Now you bring it up a third time, without waiting for my response, in order to do what exactly?

[alexhans]

Those in danger of suppression #3:

dank (1)

-

RedCoyote

hiphop (3)

-

dank, Zachrulez, Toro

Idiotking (2)

-

jasonT1981, Paradoxombie

jasonT1981 (1)

-

Shrinehme

RedCoyote (1)

-

DTMaster

toro (1)

-

hihop

Not Voting (3)

-

Idiotking, ryan2754, DeathRowKitty

Happiness with Posting Level:

SATISFIED

With 12 alive it takes 7 to lynch.

[DTMaster]

@RedCoyote

The game started on Saturday at Midnight, and you are talking about prods on Sunday at Midnight? This was effectively 24 hours into the game when you made this comment.

Um no. The first RVS so post #1 was Sat Aug 01, 2009 11:48 pm. My almost prod request was Mon Aug 03, 2009 12:16 am.

If you do your math correctly this is about 36 hours, not 24. If you look at the days, this is almost 2 days. Prods are sent out at the 72 hour mark according to Alex.

* I don't like lurkers. Please be ready to post at the very least once every 2 days. Treat this game like a commitment. I will prod anyone as soon as I become aware that they haven't posted for 72 hs or more. If you are going to go away and not have access for more than 3 days, you must write so in this game thread.

Your first post from the first RVS vote took place on Mon Aug 03, 2009 12:52 am which is about 36-37 hours hours. Like I said if you hadn't posted for another day (ie add 24 hours so around 60 hours later then we might have to prod you.)

About your vote though, look at your post.

DRK, you can call me RC or Red if you'd like.

hiphop,

I hope my vote: dank satisfies your concern with my absence.

You offered your explanation AFTER I noticed there was nothing supporting your vote, and 2 people pointed out the bold part. If you look at it in isolation, it looks like you are voting to just get rid of the lurker suspicion. You did not explain at that time why you couldn't offer an explanation. You even state:

I'm not going to say it's obvious

, <insert case against dank>

This is very scummy due to the timing of your posts. I won't accept the whole real life argument just because:

1. You could have said something if your real life is taking time away from the game in your first post.

2. You clearly read the game up to that point for that post and could have backed up your case with your first post.

dank jumped on what I thought was simply misspeak. The words "scum number 1" are interchangable with "sounding scummy" (e.g. Ik is scum number 1/Ik is sounding scummy).

Actually if you look at Dank's full post:

First of all, my case for idiotking being scum number 1, well he unvoted for someone, and his reason was that people were bw another person. What little evidence that is nobody else has more, so that makes him scum number 1. I didn't see this at first until dtm pointed it out.

As for why I am not voting for him, it is because he already has two votes on him, and I don't want scum to pounce on him without giving himself a chance to defend for himself. As I already explained I didn't know he had three votes on him.

Why I am voting for someone else, because he should at least have as long as someone else

who hasn't posted yet

. As far as I am concerned they haven't done anything yet to prove they are scum or town, and they are not giving me the fair chance of deciding whether they are scum or town.

The reason I voted for him in the first place was because of an abstract reason, the same as what everybody else was doing at that time.

Any questions I didn't answer yet?

So, you are fairly certain that Idiotking is "scum number 1" because he unvoted when a bandwagon was forming, yet don't want to vote him, the guy you confidently say is scum, because that'll build a bandwagon?

That makes sense. So does my vote.

You'll notice that dank's main and strongest point is the bandwagon logic issue. The rest of the town focused on the "vocabulary of that post". So this argument is a tad bit weak.

I will likely only make one or two posts every 24-48 hours, not including weekends. I encourage you to look through my meta, you'll find my activity in games tend to maintain this rate.

Another meta call? Ugh because I think this might assume too much of the player's gaming style. When I have time I'll look it over.

Are you not content with waiting for me to answer your accusations before you vote me because of them?

There is a concept called pressure voting. The difference between me and hiphop on how we used it was he publicly announced it when I didn't. We debated that pressure voting only works when you don't announce it. Now I am since you are questioning my vote.

You seem to be concerned by

1 vote

or

me putting you at L-6

. Unless you display something extremely scummy I doubt 6 people will jump the bandwagon within 48 hours that you are away. This has a defensive tone over something so minor, especially when there are 2 main bandwagons that are taking center stage.

Was there something specific you wanted me to address?

Only the questions in this post for now since you addressed your case in more detail with your second post. I don't care about your activity levels, only with the content of your posts. The whole problem I had with your first post was the lack of content you posted (which I answer more in detail above).

The first time you brought it up was understandable, albeit presumptive. The second time you brought it up was disconcerting. Now you bring it up a third time, without waiting for my response, in order to do what exactly?

Um.

1. Can you point out the 3 times I forced my case against you? In Isolation I can only see I addressed you specifically (and that point) were in ISO 7 and ISO 9, where ISO 9 is the question I asked the town and ISO 7 is where I presented the original case.

Unless you find that 3rd time before ISO 9 you are twisting my words, aka, pulling an argument out of thin air against me.

2. Since you aren't as active as the rest of the town I wanted some other input to my case. Which is why I asked: if that post was odd to anyone else. I don't see why you have a problem that I asked my question to the town in general.

If you looked at my vote post I didn't ask a specific question to anyone.

Unvote
Vote: RedCoyote

No answer yet plus he RVS after RVS died as I stated and Shine did too. If you look at Red's only post, he only voted to:

DRK, you can call me RC or Red if you'd like.

hiphop, I hope my vote: dank satisfies your concern with my absence.

draw attention away from himself from lurking. No content, no reason, not even admitting he is RVSing. He read the game so far to know he got voted on, but he didn't address what is going on. This seems really scummy to me since he is putting minimal effort to divert the 1 man vote against him.

So I wanted to be clear and ask a specific question to the town.

Can you explain why you are sensitive about this when I specifically asked for an open discussion with my ISO 9?

*fixed tags

[DeathRowKitty]

DTM, you have read my meta? What games?

Nope because I don't have too much time to do a meta read at the moment, which is why I asked DRK for her thoughts.

Before saying anything of value to the game, I would like to point out my gender. His, not her (a bunch of people made the same mistake in my first game).

I guess you've probably noticed this by now, but you won't have a problem with the amount of content in ryan's posts (unless you despise long posts).

As I said above, dank appears to be attempting to corner a newer player by twisting their rhetoric beyond its meaning.

...and you didn't think to give that reason with your vote?

I do see some sense in this, although as DTM just pointed out, you used that argument on the wrong person. If you combine this argument with the fact that hiphop was an easy target, I think this will be useful (later in the game if not now).

[DTMaster]

@DRK
Whooops. Lol sorry about your gender mixup.

@Mod
Thanks for the fix on the quote.

*You're welcome.

[Zachrulez]

By the way Zach, why did you put the third random vote on Jason?

Why not? What's the point of RVS if it doesn't lead to a bandwagon? You could argue that it looks a bit more suspect if people are intentionally

avoiding

bandwagons in RVS.

It's also pretty foolhardy to think that a bandwagon that's built out of RVS will lead to scum ridden lynch without easily revealing who the scum are.

[Toro]

Why did you assume my vote was random?

I'm not going to say it's obvious, but I would consider it fairly apparent that when hiphop says he believes Ik is "scum number 1" that he is saying, rather, he's suspicious of Ik. Take a look at what hiphop said prior to that,

Umm...you do realize we're talking about your vote on dank right?

[hiphop]

One must realize that I am scum or town. I can’t be both. If I am scum then there might be suspicion on shrine, deathrow, dtm, for unvoting me, if I am lynched.

I am not scum, and because I am not scum, the scum would realize I would be an easy lynch. Nobody, and I mean nobody would of questioned anybody if they put votes enough to get a lynch of me. I was at L-2, and if there were two scum members left they would have voted for me and I would of been a townie that was lynched. Therefore there could be a max of only one

active

scum member left that didn’t vote for me. So I thought that most of the scum must be already voting for me. The reason I have a suspicion of Toro is he was the fifth vote on me. He is following the bandwagon, and reiterating points already made against me. He seems to be over anxious to have me lynched. One can say the same thing of Jason, but at least his points are points that he thought of.

As for Ryan’s post if he makes posts that long, that is enough for ten posts, and he can wait that long to make another post if he wants to. At least now we have a post from everybody.

@redcoyote I will try to calm down to the best of my ability.

[jasonT1981]

One must realize that I am scum or town. I can’t be both. If I am scum then there might be suspicion on shrine, deathrow, dtm, for unvoting me, if I am lynched.

I am not scum, and because I am not scum, the scum would realize I would be an easy lynch. Nobody, and I mean nobody would of questioned anybody if they put votes enough to get a lynch of me. I was at L-2, and if there were two scum members left they would have voted for me and I would of been a townie that was lynched. Therefore there could be a max of only one

active

scum member left that didn’t vote for me. So I thought that most of the scum must be already voting for me. The reason I have a suspicion of Toro is he was the fifth vote on me. He is following the bandwagon, and reiterating points already made against me. He seems to be over anxious to have me lynched. One can say the same thing of Jason, but at least his points are points that he thought of.

As for Ryan’s post if he makes posts that long, that is enough for ten posts, and he can wait that long to make another post if he wants to. At least now we have a post from everybody.

@redcoyote I will try to calm down to the best of my ability.

Alot of WIFOM....If you actually are town I would not expect scum to hop on at the end for the lynch that may give them away far to much do you not think? Infact I would expect scum to be in the middle/start of a wagon instead.

On the end would make it far to obivious I feel

[jasonT1981]

Also, how am I over anxious to see you lynched? I have not even got a vote on you, do I?

[jasonT1981]

Infact, I had not posted in a day (post 56) due to family matters and really only pointed out what I felt was wrong with your post in my post 53... my last post in post 56 actually agreed with you slightly.....

I would most likely say 3 or 4 scum members.

As for activity proving that one is not scum, I don't believe it either. Scum would no doubt act like town. All I meant by activity, is that it makes the game more fun for everybody else.

While I do agree, more posts make for a fun game... but looking at people who have not posted yet would have been inpossible as we only have to go on what is posted in game if you understand what I mean.

Yes, it is annoying.. but I cant equate not posting to being scummy. However I can see how it is Anti-town. Just not scummy.

So umm how does that show as anxious for your lynch when I only pointed out what I felt was wrong in my post 53 as youwill see here

unvote
vote ryan

No, I unvoted, because than I too thought it was just a random vote that needed more thinking.

@deathrowkitty what do you think would of happened to me if I hadn't even posted yet? I wouldn't have any suspicious drawn on to me. Which is why I don't like lurkers. They think they can float under the radar.

@ dank I never said he was scum. When I said he was scum number 1, I meant that he was the guy that I was most suspicious of.

@everyone. FYI there are more than one scum in the game, so keep looking. At least I am staying active.

@zach. It has only been a couple of days, not even half our required time. And that lurker is as suspicious as anyone else. I would of kept my vote on idiotking, but I dislike lurkers more.

Ok point 1 - If you had not have posted yet, I think people may have been willing to give you time given it was over the weekend this game started and not everyone is able to post at weekends. Lurkers are a problem in games, however over the weekend I would give people leeway until monday/tuesday

Point 2 - So if he is your No1 choice of scum... you basically are saying he is scum right? why say he is your no1 suspect if you dont think him of scum.. that point you made makes no sense to me really.

Point 3 - Just because you are active does not mean we can not suspect you of being scum.. being inactive we can consider them scummy yes, but i prefer to go on what we have in text in this game.

Point 4 - We are all aware there would be more than one scum... maybe a diversion tatic from you to get others to look elsewhere away yourself?

then agreed with you in 56?

that is a very serious misrep by saying I am anxious for your lynch I think as NO WHERE did I even mention anything about being anxious for, or even made mention of your lynch. Hell I don't even have a vote on you.

[hiphop]

He is the 5th vote not the seventh, that is close to the middle is it not?

Another mistake on my part, I guess, about you voting.

[DeathRowKitty]

Another mistake on my part, I guess, about you voting.

Making mistakes-not a scum tell. Being paranoid about who finds you suspicious-is a scum tell (IMO at least). Unfortunately it can also be a VI tell. One more mistake like this one and I'm more than willing to revote you.

[Paradoxombie]

Another mistake on my part, I guess, about you voting.

Making mistakes-not a scum tell. Being paranoid about who finds you suspicious-is a scum tell (IMO at least). Unfortunately it can also be a VI tell. One more mistake like this one and I'm more than willing to revote you.

I don't think he's being paranoid. I would expect any player to be somewhat overwhelmed. Jason may not have voted, but he has been solely interrogating hiphop, to a greater degree even than some players who have voted(Toro).

[Paradoxombie]

Alot has happened since my last post.

A few suspects:(in no order)

Red Coyote- I'm not a fan of lurking or massive posts, but I don't suspect him for that yet. His vote on dank was pointlessly cryptic when first made, and if he had read enough to make the vote, why couldn't he provide any content to back it up? Confusing, but the ideas he presents afterward are more sound.

Zach-His random vote was too non-random for my taste, and he calls one vote on him for it an overreaction. Willing to apply preassure but not take it. But I like his vote on hiphop. Makes a better argument than those before him, I think.

Ryan-Didn't put down a real vote in his only post, despite being 3 pages into the game and despite lots of content. Especially troubleing if we're gonna have to wait 3 more pages for his next post

Hiphop- The case on him seemed a bit overblown but it's died down a little I hope. He made some simple mistakes, but the best case I see on him are his last few impotent votes. Too careful.

Jason- Seems very critical of Hiphop without placing a vote. Now considers it a misrepresentation that hiphop called him anxious for a lynch. Maybe hiphop is wrong, but to still be riding a random vote is practically worse. Whether he is setting himself up to hammer or sitting on the sidelines, I don't like it.

IdiotKing- Makes a non-random random vote and since has offered nothing else besides explanations for explanations for why he unvoted. His unvote doesn't bother me as much as the pretense of analyzing the jason wagon which never happened.

Now deciding who to vote, im stuck between IdiotKing and Jason, because both have only random votes and seem to be eyeing the hiphop wagon. Idiot King ended up on the defensive, but that almost gives him more of an excuse. Ultimately it's hard to tell much without knowing Hiphops alignment, so I'll vote for someone I consider scummy either way, Toro.

Toro- Pretty slow onto Hiphop wagon and too wishy washy in voting in 61. Then jumps to seeming almost too confident in 63 and 65. I don't like how he refers to the difference between "good" and "bad" moves. That seems alot more like a scum perspective.

FOS

In his last post 88 he fails to understand Red Coyote was talking about danks vote because that was the reason for his own vote on dank. Reading Comprehension may not be a classic scumtell, but I can easily see how scum would skim large posts like Red Coyote's. I think someone reading the whole post can see where Red Coyote was going

unvote, vote:Toro

[Shrinehme]

These walls are painful. Guys, if we could tone down the length of these posts, it'd be great. I'm discouraged from reading all of them. No one wants to sit and read through that. There's not need to quote each line of someone's post. Keep them short, sweet, and to-the-point, if you could.

Shrine, in your post 46, where did you take DTM's quote from?

It came from his post 26.

RedCoyote

: Did you realize that, when your had placed your random vote, that we were pretty much finished with the RVS?

Why do you assume my vote is random?

Because you hadn't posted a reason for the vote when you had cast it. I thought it was a pretty fair assumption...

So, then, if it wasn't random after all, why did you cast the vote?

One must realize that I am scum or town. I can’t be both. If I am scum then there might be suspicion on shrine, deathrow, dtm, for unvoting me, if I am lynched.

I never unvoted you... I just don't support the wagon.

Actually that's not necessarily true. I don't like how you tried to use inexperience as an excuse for your first unvote in post 64.
... In fact, reading over your posts again, you explained you unvote differently before I had mentioned inexperience could be a factor; you said:

"No, I unvoted, because than I too thought it was just a random vote that needed more thinking."

But after I had asked how many games you had played, you changed your excuse to "inexperience". I merely mentioned a possibility, and you took it and piggybacked off of it. I don't like that at all.
Major

FOS

to HipHop.

[DTMaster]

@Zach

Why not? What's the point of RVS if it doesn't lead to a bandwagon? You could argue that it looks a bit more suspect if people are intentionally

avoiding

bandwagons in RVS.

By the way you can argue the reverse of that statement: Bandwagoning can be a scum sign because it is the best time to start one/be part of one. No one would question you and its the best time to pressure a townie to make slips. Like I said I rather judge people on their reactions, not on the bandwagon itself since it is a weak argument.

@Hiphop

One must realize that I am scum or town. I can’t be both. If I am scum then there might be suspicion on shrine, deathrow, dtm, for unvoting me, if I am lynched.

This is stretching the buddying argument quite a bit, and does not take into account that scum might distance/bus each other to try and get rid of suspicion.

Also your vote counting is stretching the bandwagon argument but it does have some merit to it. It might be too early to assume most scum are/were on your bandwagon though because that would be "too convenient". I would keep this in mind as the days go by to see if this holds true.

[dank]

In iso, Toro's post have been completely useless thus far. He jumped on the hiphop bandwagon, and made 5 or 6 irrelevant comments like "there could be 2 or 3 scum" and "scum could bus". I won't quote them all here, but I invite everyone to make a quick iso read to see for themselves.

Toro- you're skating through the day by posting, yet contributing nothing. You have not shown much intent to actively scumhunt, and your posts have little if any relevant content. You have been active lurking.

Thus, i'd like to ask you: Who do you suspect? Who are your prime suspects. WHY are they your prime suspects. What questions do you have for these prime suspects, that will give them a chance to clear them or incriminate them further? Make a case for someone, and pursue it.

Until then,

unvote, Vote: Toro