Santo Rugger
Mome Rath
The Obviously Innocent Townie
The Rugger formerly known as Pygmy[on:BYAHH!][of:BYAHH?]
Posts: 3
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Santo Rugger on Oct 4, 2007 16:10:55 GMT -5
Another thing I'd like some more explanation on is why PygmyRugger was the hammer vote two days running. He, in fact, said he'd explain something at the end of yesterDay, when apologizing to Story for doing it: Second things second: I don't feel that I need to explain myself for happening to be the hammer vote for the first two days. First, if we chastise somebody for hammering, it will prevent the hammer from dropping. I was in a position on both Days where my first scum candidate was not going to get lynched, and somebody very high on my radar was one away from the noose. Had we lead Cookies to the gallows, I would not have been the hammer. I apologized to story not for dropping the hammer, but for ending the Day when he wanted to continue the discussion. That was not my intention, and for that I apologized. At the time, I felt that the discussion concerning ui was over, as he didn't really say anything new in his defense in the previous page of posts. BlaM, IIRC, was going to drop the hammer if I hadn't, and was only waiting for Hal (again, IIRC) to explain his "weird" vote. Never mind that 10 or so others had, at that time, been voting for ui. But Hal's was weird for some reason? When Hal posted and didn't reply to BlaM, I figured he wasn't planning on it, so I placed my vote.
|
|
|
Post by storyteller0910 on Oct 4, 2007 16:45:12 GMT -5
I apologized to story not for dropping the hammer, but for ending the Day when he wanted to continue the discussion. That was not my intention, and for that I apologized. At the time, I felt that the discussion concerning ui was over, as he didn't really say anything new in his defense in the previous page of posts. BlaM, IIRC, was going to drop the hammer if I hadn't, and was only waiting for Hal (again, IIRC) to explain his "weird" vote. Never mind that 10 or so others had, at that time, been voting for ui. But Hal's was weird for some reason? When Hal posted and didn't reply to BlaM, I figured he wasn't planning on it, so I placed my vote. For what it's worth, the only reason I wanted to delay the hammer yesterDay was that it seemed like there were players who still had something to say - mhaye, in particular, had promised a forthcoming outline of his suspicions and thoughts on the game. While it seemed like discussion on the particular subject of ui was over, I saw no reason to rush the lynch if players still had things on their minds - had mhaye died last Night, for example, whatever he was planning to say would have been lost to us. Not an especially big deal, I guess, but there's the reasoning. And, mhaye, if you're reading, I'm interested in hearing the thoughts you were going to share just before the hammer yesterDay.
|
|
Santo Rugger
Mome Rath
The Obviously Innocent Townie
The Rugger formerly known as Pygmy[on:BYAHH!][of:BYAHH?]
Posts: 3
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Santo Rugger on Oct 4, 2007 16:51:31 GMT -5
Third things third: panama and Roosh have both commented on my "Four Possibilities" post. panama is right in expressing concern in linking posters, how I may have appeared to be doing, is bad. That was not my intent. Here is the post again, underlining mine (well, of course... but I mean, I'm just adding them now): I started thinking about this before I went to bed last night, and it's really been nagging at me this morning. I think somebody may have alluded to, or actually said what I'm about to below, I'm not claiming this is a purely original thought. Let's assume for a minute that Roosh's claim is legit. His greatest asset to the town is in taking scum down with him if he's night killed. By announcing that he has a power that protects* him, he's basically neutralized that threat. In other words, it's much more likely that a scum would announce that tidbit of "information**", as a way to explain why they never seem to die at night. If you were scum, and a townie claimed some type of protection at night power, you'd have no reason to think they were lying. So, how are you going to take them out since you can't night kill them? Try and get them lynched during the day, of course. Which is why I submit either: a) Roosh is town, Ui is scum, thereby explaining Ui's actions. b) Roosh is scum, Ui is town, and Ui came to the game with a fresh perspective and picked up on it. This one is a bit harder to swallow because of the missing chunk from yesterDay. However, just because Ui didn't see Roosh's backpedal and adjustments to his hypothesis, wouldn't necessarily mean that he would have seen through said backpedals. c) Roosh is scum, Ui is scum, which would explain Roosh's "claim", and Ui is trying to gain some town creed by his dogged pursuit of Roosh. I think C is most likely, but I think A and B are equally likely. I didn't submit D (both town) because I think that's even less likely than C. *Even if he still dies, the point remains the same. ** In quotes because if a scum announces it, it's not true info. I was trying to figure out why the interaction between two players was taking place. Obviously, it must have been one of the four possibilities, and now it can only be one of two possibilities. I wasn't trying to link them together in any way, which is why I listed all possibilities. My biggest reasoning for thinking Roosh is scum is, as I've mentioned before, why would he let the scum know they have a chance of dying if they target him at night? It just doesn't make any sense.
|
|
Santo Rugger
Mome Rath
The Obviously Innocent Townie
The Rugger formerly known as Pygmy[on:BYAHH!][of:BYAHH?]
Posts: 3
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Santo Rugger on Oct 4, 2007 16:54:53 GMT -5
For what it's worth, the only reason I wanted to delay the hammer yesterDay was that it seemed like there were players who still had something to say - mhaye, in particular, had promised a forthcoming outline of his suspicions and thoughts on the game. While it seemed like discussion on the particular subject of ui was over, I saw no reason to rush the lynch if players still had things on their minds - had mhaye died last Night, for example, whatever he was planning to say would have been lost to us. Not an especially big deal, I guess, but there's the reasoning.<snip> I understand. Hence my apology. I didn't notice any other conversations going on at the time, or I would have delayed.
|
|
Santo Rugger
Mome Rath
The Obviously Innocent Townie
The Rugger formerly known as Pygmy[on:BYAHH!][of:BYAHH?]
Posts: 3
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Santo Rugger on Oct 4, 2007 16:55:37 GMT -5
Does it seem to anybody else that Hockey has something she's itching to share, but needs to get some votes on her before she feels justified doing so?
|
|
|
Post by NAF1138 on Oct 4, 2007 17:00:03 GMT -5
As requested
5- ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies (Captain Klutz, drainbead, FCoD, CiaS, Pygmy )
3- drainbead (Captain Spaceman Blam, Dotchan, Idle Thoughts)
1- BlasterMaster (storyteller)
9 of 23 votes cast with 23 alive it takes 12 to lynch
|
|
Hockey Monkey!
Borogrove
This is supposed to be a happy occasion. Let's not bicker over who killed who.
Posts: 371
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Hockey Monkey! on Oct 4, 2007 17:08:01 GMT -5
Does it seem to anybody else that Hockey has something she's itching to share, but needs to get some votes on her before she feels justified doing so? The answer to that is "No, I don't. I don't have anything I can share, want to share, should share, because I don't know anything." Neither would I like any votes.
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Oct 4, 2007 17:22:45 GMT -5
I'd like to hear from mtgman and the newly-subbed nesta.
|
|
Merestil Haye
FGM
Grudge Keeper
[on:Slumming it in the Middle-Earth][of:In the halls of Manw
Posts: 1,077
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Merestil Haye on Oct 4, 2007 17:31:05 GMT -5
And, mhaye, if you're reading, I'm interested in hearing the thoughts you were going to share just before the hammer yesterDay. What I had on my mind were two impressions that chunks of Day 2 had left me with. Unfortunately, what with one thing and another (including but not limited to the dramatic close of Day 1 of Conspiracy Mafia and my prioritising filling out a job application today) I haven't done the research I need to substantiate either. I'm just starting my reread of the relevant bits now. I may need a day or so for each as I work in a bit of a dot and carry fashion, and it's nearing midnight here. Onward ever upward he says, diving back into Yesterday's debates.
|
|
|
Post by Hal Briston on Oct 4, 2007 17:32:17 GMT -5
Ok, before I step off the ship and head out on my annual camping trip (ooo, that's right -- gotta post in the away thread), time to get my vote in:
Yes, it's strictly based on the "slip", but I've yet to see anything more damning come up yet.
Vote Cookies
By the by...if people wouldn't mind keeping their posting/voting to a minimum until I get back Sunday night, that'd be highly appreciated, 'k? Thanks!
|
|
|
Post by nesta on Oct 4, 2007 21:21:20 GMT -5
Just checking in to say I'm here and trying to finish my Day 2 read. I followed along on Day 1 in near real-time, but hadn't read much of Day 2 before subbing in. I hope to be done tonight, but it might be until tomorrow night before I finish.
Please bear with me if I get some facts about Day 1 wrong for the first little bit until I get a chance to review it, since I was reading as a spectator not expecting to sub in, so I wasn't really trying to keep it straight. Feel free to correct me on anything I get wrong. Over the weekend I plan to skim back through what's left of Day 1 to jog my memory.
While I'm catching up I have a question for Blaster that I've been curious about while keeping up with Today. I know the issue is on the back burner right now, and I almost hate to bring it back up, but I'm trying to sort this game out a little.
Blaster, why are you so suspicious of storyteller for his advocating a no-lynch on Day 1. I get what you're trying to say with your math that a no-lynch was a bad idea, and I agree, but if storyteller is scum, what do you think his motivations were for the no-lynch on Day 1? One of my primary arguments against a no-lynch on Day 1 is that no one feels pressure to stand behind their vote, but at the point storyteller proposed a no-lynch the Day was almost over and there was already a huge vote record built up. Also, I think at that point dotchan was the only real candidate, and you would think scum would want her lynched since she had a null-name and was town. A no-lynch was a very real possibility and I don't see scum arguing for it under those circumstances.
|
|
|
Post by dnooman on Oct 4, 2007 21:36:42 GMT -5
Vote DrainBead
I just have a really bad feeling about her.
Cookies are you still suspicious of me?
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Oct 4, 2007 21:59:06 GMT -5
I'm suspicious of everyone, but no, dnooman, you are very far from the top of my list. I realize that you were as close to "mod-confirmed" as it is possible to be without your name being on the wrong end of a death scene, but I was also trying to (eventually) get around to the point that the other folks who currently join you in the "claimed" spreadsheet are in a very different situation. I brain-farted at the time that I apparently made "Clanger #2". I knew that you weren't on as shaky ground as the others, but had mis-remembered why at the moment that I was trying to get more possible scum on the block with me. Then ui's bandwagon came along and I never got back to where I was trying to go with the whole "clanger #2" post until Cat was so nice to remind me to post what I included in Post #50.
Did you read that statement from yesterday as a smear on you?
|
|
Parzival
Mome Rath
Let's all strive to do our best today![on:forgot to log out][of:forgot to log in]
Posts: 201
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Parzival on Oct 4, 2007 22:38:44 GMT -5
My biggest reasoning for thinking Roosh is scum is, as I've mentioned before, why would he let the scum know they have a chance of dying if they target him at night? It just doesn't make any sense. Now this is a pretty good point. I've said that such a power role is very useful to the town IF Roosh becomes confirmed, but I may not have emphasized that if no confirmation occurs, he'll of necessity be pretty high up on the suspicion list toward the end, since it's a convenient role for scum to claim. For me, Roosh still has at least a few Days before I'd really consider a lynch. Votes seem to be coming early and often Today, but I don't like to vote until I've looked more deeply at people. Some of Storyteller's defensive statements struck me a little off since hardly anyone besides BlaM-Luc Picard was going after him. The discussion twixt the two of them Yesterday was seeming a bit like scum-generated chaos. Though from what I've seen it might not be entirely out of character for him, it was a bit distracting. On the other hand, he's sort of promised to stay out of it for Today. drainbead is my biggest suspect right now. Dropping in with the votes, and then a ridiculous grammar attack today puts her at the top of my "check this person out" list.
|
|
|
Post by Pollux Oil on Oct 4, 2007 22:49:16 GMT -5
I do not miss the irony in the fact that I'm contemplating "me too" voting for a person that been accused of "me too" voting too much, and that would be my primary reason for voting for her. (Yes, I'm talking about drainbead here.)
I brought up the fact that I thought her jumping around so quickly was suspicious in Day 2, and her explanations were a little less than satisfactory. Her defenses today have a little more substance that I'm willing to agree with. In fact, the "they" argument with Roosh seems like a half-attempt at starting something on her own, but just for really bad reasons. So I'm willing to give her the benefit of the doubt at this moment, but I'm keeping an eye on how she responds to the votes and accusations.
I don't like hockeymonkey's generalizations about bandwagoning. I was one of the people that did the original analysis of who was on a lot of bandwagons the first day, and I only counted the votes that were on the person at the time they role-claimed. Well, at least for dnooman, Roosh, and Mad. Zumachan's bandwagon was hard to quantify considering there were only 2 people on in when s/he roleclaimed, and it kind of went up and down after the fact. And I didn't analyze Cat's bandwagon 'cause...er....it was a product of my previous analyses *cough*.
Regardless, of the four "bandwagons" I analyzed on Day 1, the only people that were on all four were drainbead and Cat. (Hockey was only on 3, it was my mistake that included her in the first place). But hockey's generalization of the "bandwagoning" looks like an attempt to smudge other people without an actual reason and make her stand out less. *shrug* Another person to watch.
I still don't buy into the Cookies voting, even with the New and Improved DnoomanSlip(tm) that is now being used as corroborating evidence. The everyone voting for Cookies again was the issue I had with the zumachan voters on Day 1 (i.e. if we didn't lynch zumachan, would people keep bringing up the same issue and trying to lynch her over and over). I'm still suspicious of Captain Klutz because to me, it seems like he immediately revoted Cookies at the beginning of the Day to make sure we kept discussing the same thing, to stop new discussion and continue old discussion we've been over before...kind of like what he did yesterDay with Cat. Coincidence? Hmmm....
So I suppose that's my "suspicious list" at the moment. Drainbead, hockeymonkey, Klutz. No votes yet, but I'm considering.
|
|
|
Post by dnooman on Oct 4, 2007 23:20:46 GMT -5
A question to the Cookies voters: Do you have anything else going against her besides the "slip"? I, for one, among others, it seems, find that slip less than spectacularly convincing. Yup: something interesting in this post Day 2 #555 followed by Cookies in post #556 Now, Idle Thoughts was making the point that we could not keep backing off from people who were claiming names from Firefly. Cookies has applied this to dnooman who was the first to claim with a vanilla role. The problem is that I consider dnooman well cleared for reasons other than claiming a name within the FireFly universe. And if Cookies had had the same PM's as myself, Idle Thoughts and other vanilla crew members, she would know why he was cleared instead saying that some suspicion should be placed back on him. Sorry Cookies, that's slip no.2 In response to Cookies, the above quote had me wondering about your motives, but as always, suspicion is not always based on fact. I don't know if one could say that it's paradoxical or not, but I'm more suspicious of those that seem to seem too convinced that I'm town. That very idea caused me to correctly vote for DrainBead in the last game. She seemed too sure that I was town, and I hadn't claimed. Turned out I was right to suspect her because she was scum in that game. That being said, Idle Thoughts has really been piquing my interest because of his sureness of my town status. I was pretty sure of Dotchan's towniness, and I don't have the type of knowledge that the scum have, so I guess it's a double edged sword. I'm growing more wary of FOSing people that seem to be too sure of my town status now though. Being in a closed setup, I don't know if they're scum looking for townie cred, or a possible power role that investigated me and saw that I'm town. I'll also add that if there's a recruitment element here, they certainly haven't tapped me as a candidate. Perhaps Mad would make a better choice, but that might be obvious. I'm guessing that I would be a decent second choice, mostly because of the pseudo-mod-confirm verbiage. I have a certain sense of security now, and I'm trying to not cloud anything with my own half-baked ideas unless they're somewhat profound IMO. I'm ATM basing my suspicions on general feelings, but I'll definitely quote chapter and verse when and if I find a scummy slip though. I guess that's just candy-coating my current "no big deal" line of thinking. I got dealt a fairly worthless role (I'm not complaining about that at all), and I've been all but confirmed, so I don't feel like I'm on the hot seat anymore, even if I get close to a lynch. I've already laid my cards out on the table, I have no secrets anymore. So, if my somewhat lax attitude (maybe it's the opposite of being stressed) makes any townie feel that I'm not giving the game my all, I'll gladly sub out. I am having much more fun this time around though, my death doesn't help the scum in any way, nor does it remove any power from the town side. I'll probably have another post with some substance this weekend as well.
|
|
|
Post by dnooman on Oct 4, 2007 23:33:47 GMT -5
Dammit, I knew I'd forget something.
I think that there's a very real possibility that scum are either FOSing each other at this time, and possibly more likely, voting for each other.
Just thought I'd throw that out there to if any of you felt the same way. "Same group masking®" seems to have become de rigueur, people know that in order to hide one's group allegiance, they need to vote for one of their own in order to make it not totally obvious that they are a member of the same party, this is especially true with spreadsheets. Who was the first mafia Doper to use one of those?
|
|
Blaster Master
Mome Rath
The player formerly know as BLAM!
Now 34.788% less repellant to Sharks! :( [on:I WANT TO DIE!][of:I WANT TO LIVE!]
Posts: 0
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Blaster Master on Oct 5, 2007 0:56:15 GMT -5
While I'm catching up I have a question for Blaster that I've been curious about while keeping up with Today. I know the issue is on the back burner right now, and I almost hate to bring it back up, but I'm trying to sort this game out a little. Blaster, why are you so suspicious of storyteller for his advocating a no-lynch on Day 1. I get what you're trying to say with your math that a no-lynch was a bad idea, and I agree, but if storyteller is scum, what do you think his motivations were for the no-lynch on Day 1? One of my primary arguments against a no-lynch on Day 1 is that no one feels pressure to stand behind their vote, but at the point storyteller proposed a no-lynch the Day was almost over and there was already a huge vote record built up. Also, I think at that point dotchan was the only real candidate, and you would think scum would want her lynched since she had a null-name and was town. A no-lynch was a very real possibility and I don't see scum arguing for it under those circumstances. Without a whole lot of reiteration, I did all the math because the concept of a no-lynch that Storyteller proposed was SO counter-intuitive and so anti-town in my mind that I didn't have a choice but to double check. Now, this is sort of the curse of being one of the more experienced players in our little clique here, and it's a little meta-gamey, but I fully expect that if it's blatantly intuitive to me, as it is to others, that it should ALSO be intuitive to him. The fact that he argued in favor of a no-lynch means to me, he either didn't know any better, or he had ulterior motives. I postulate that it WAS intuitive to him, and he deliberately falsified his premise just enough to get the result he wanted, namely a no-lynch. Of course, the no-lynch serves several purposes, including making him look good when dotchan is eventually revealed to be pro-town (which, as scum, he would have already known); second, it helps preserve the scum's informational advantage because everything they could learn from dotchan was known to scum when she role-claimed; finally, it would help instill further chaos by NOT bringing a conclusion to the the frantic Day One and allow the scum to specifically choose their target at Night so that information gain would be minimized... lather rinse repeat. Now, this is the corner-stone of my suspicion of him, but it is not the only thing i put forth in support of his lynch. They're a lot less convloluted, so I don't think you'll have trouble picking them out.
|
|
|
Post by Captain Klutz on Oct 5, 2007 2:12:49 GMT -5
I still don't buy into the Cookies voting, even with the New and Improved DnoomanSlip(tm) that is now being used as corroborating evidence. The everyone voting for Cookies again was the issue I had with the zumachan voters on Day 1 (i.e. if we didn't lynch zumachan, would people keep bringing up the same issue and trying to lynch her over and over). I'm still suspicious of Captain Klutz because to me, it seems like he immediately revoted Cookies at the beginning of the Day to make sure we kept discussing the same thing, to stop new discussion and continue old discussion we've been over before...kind of like what he did yesterDay with Cat. Coincidence? Hmmm.... Yes, I revoted Cookies at the beginning of the Day. There were several revotes at the beginning of the Day - why is mine singled out as "trying to stop new discussion"? And I have previously explained my reasons for discussing CatInASuit (see post 2.32). If you're not happy with that, well, I don't know what else I can say.
|
|
|
Post by CatInASuit on Oct 5, 2007 3:58:10 GMT -5
<snip> I brain-farted at the time that I apparently made "Clanger #2". <snip. What again, you're just passing it off as "another slip". How many slips are there going to be or do we just let you off on each one because they are just slips? The first slip Pygmy Rugger found was not exact but was the best thing we had to go on in Day 2, until ui launched himself againast Roosh. So given Blaster Master's request for any other reason for suspecting you I looked back through Day 2 to see if there was anything else. I found something unrelated to the first slip but something I consider to be a mistake a townie would not make. That makes two slips, unrelated, which as far as I can tell only a scum would make. Its more than we have on anyone else, which is why you are my #1 scum suspect.
|
|
|
Post by CatInASuit on Oct 5, 2007 4:11:43 GMT -5
Dammit, I knew I'd forget something. I think that there's a very real possibility that scum are either FOSing each other at this time, and possibly more likely, voting for each other. How strange, I was thinking that earlier. A question for the town at large: Does it seem like Storyteller and Blaster Master are having their own private argument that everyone else can hear but is not paying too much attention to. I am beginning to wonder if it is a scum/scum ploy to ensure that one of them looks real shiny after the other is lynched. Neither of them spent much time (if at all) in analysis of other players yesterday and spent it arguing. How could two of the most experienced players so say much without saying so little. They certainly haven't been spending their time looking for scum amongst everyone else.
|
|
RoOsh
FGM
Former BatMod
[on:Wanna see a magic trick?][of:See You, Space Cowboy....]
Posts: 284
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by RoOsh on Oct 5, 2007 8:37:24 GMT -5
Alots been said already, and since I don't like not having my vote out there, I'll toss it in. Vote Drainbead.
In my mind i was hesistant to consider her scummy, only because she was scum in the past game. Then I realized that was really illogical. And Dumb. And so I should go with my gut.
The cookies arguement, I could be swayed to, but it still looks rather... weak. Cat's points are certainly valid, and I consider a stronger issue than the "Slip" but still. I'm hesistant to just drive her up the flagpole based on that. However, I do find her HIGHLY defensive, and ridiculously so at every post directed her way. But now she's got more votes on her, so I could understand it, but earlier in the day yesterday it was certainly wierd. I mean, I don't want to get lynched either or anything, but I don't freak out about every vote, I assume the truth will work out in the end sorta deal. But... i'm not sure, I've not played with Cookies before, so it could be her style to be overly defensive. No clue, and that's why it's odd to me, and i'd consider her certainly suspicous but not the main target.
Hockeymonkey: dislike her usage of "bandwagon", think its dumb, but meh. Thats about it. Frankly I dislike the whole scum are all just on bandwagon ideas. I mean its certainly a good lead, but you gotta think of scum layers, so don't forget, a dude who hasn't voted for ANY scum also is suspicious as well because... well he's under teh radar. But so far that only applies to 2 people (WTF and Capt. Klutz, heh, that rhymes!). But still, don't just put all your eggs in one basket.
Atarus- Still is suspicious to me. :smudges over and over: I have no idea how to explain it other than, you're TOO helpful. And I want it on the record for in case I go. i think you're like Storyteller from last game, which IS WHY it's so suprsinging because you haven't played before, and I'm not expecting it this time around. You... could be VERY covert scum. And I'm afraid of this because I'd never be suspicious of you enough for a vote if your behavior continues. Only hope would be you getting caught redhanded or something. But still. :shrug: I gots my Eye on you. (O_<)
StoriedBlam: Your arguements both seem... blah. I mean okay, he was pro-no lynch. But it's now past that. If he's STILL advocating no lynch, then i'd be suspicious as hell. But he's moved on, so I'm willing to forgive as well, and give the guy a moment of clarity. Harping on something from Day 1... I'm not a fan of that. By all means be suspicious of him, but right now it feels again like the Cookie's arguement. Though you did say you had "other" points against him. I'll have to go back and read those, as currently I just feel its because of his Day 1 actions on being so anti-lynch. But you HAVE also been quite flippant in your responses towards Story's questions, Blam. And that's not helping your arguement (rolly eyes and such. It looks evasive and weakens your side). Just my 2 cents.
Drainbead: You're an odd one. I know you wished that "i had posted first" and I kinda do too (because I'm really freaked out by Blam's defending of me (making me paranoid and not trusting him), but my first reply to you was made without reading anything else. Which is why it was so offkilter, and just had the quick message, followed up by a 2nd post stating "whoops, I see the issue has been addressed." Now I suppose you can WIFOM that, but that's your bag. I also disliked that whole arguement. I mean yes scum slips are possible and all. But that was a GRAMMAR issue. (I still believe that you all are wrong, and that "They" is the correct usage there, what should I have said? Just He, or (s)he? i disliked that one). I mean I'd understand you calling it out if it even LOOKED like a slip like "we scum" or "you townies should' something like that.
But saying "They" is just ... blah. I mean what else would be used there (not grammatically but in teh game). I'm certainly not going to say "The Vig killed him, let's not focus on Zeriel" and I'm not going to say "He killed him" because that doesn't sound right either. We haven't killed any scum, therefore there are more than one scum out there. There could be more than one scum groups out there, there could still be an SK out there, there could be a Vig out there (as you kept trying to bring up), and with all those possibilities, it's easier just to say "THEY" rather than list them all out and create even more WIFOM.
That's why the arguement seemed REALLY weak, and just stretching it. Because then you started fishing with the Vig issue. I disliked that one because you started WIFOMing on if the Vig killed Zeriel or if Scum killed Zeriel (what about the idea of a 2nd serial killer? That was never brought up, but one i haven't ruled out either. Or a 2nd killing group, esp. remembering the Day 1 Flavor). It's as if you didn't even consider the idea that there could be 2 killing groups out there, but are rather neatly just going "there's probably Scum, and probably a vig. and we got the sk. So lets keep at it."
Any kill at night should be treated as a scummy kill even if it kills a Scum. Sure, we could assume it's a Vig out there, but that rules out then the thoughts of a second killing group and the idea of another SK. The Focus on the Viglante sorta "calms" the town, and I see it as being used then to put the extra kills onto a positive force and allow another group to get away with kills. So I will not just easily attribute kills to a Vig unless i have a HUGE suspicion that such was the case. and EVEN THEN, I wouldn't SAY something like that. I'd rather still just attribute it to the scum. Because If i was able to pick up on a Vig role, there's no need to help scum along by bringing up teh idea of one. The reason in Mafia:Asylum that I trusted the Masons for so long is that it was REALLY easy once dnoo was a dead mason to go back and just look through his posts to get a 4-5 person idea of possible masons. Which is why I never brought up that information in the last game until they were reavealed. Because if I can do it alone, I'm sure scum can do it in a group.
But i disliked your harping on the Vigilante for it. Assuming that I ignored the Vig choice, and the fact that it made me your 2nd scummiest person just... really was suprising.
To me it feels like you're too trusting of the Vig possibility, and trying to ignore the idea that a 2nd SCUM group could exist. And I dislike that quite a bit. Hence my vote.
|
|
|
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Oct 5, 2007 9:02:00 GMT -5
<snip> I brain-farted at the time that I apparently made "Clanger #2". <snip. What again, you're just passing it off as "another slip". How many slips are there going to be or do we just let you off on each one because they are just slips? The first slip Pygmy Rugger found was not exact but was the best thing we had to go on in Day 2, until ui launched himself againast Roosh. So given Blaster Master's request for any other reason for suspecting you I looked back through Day 2 to see if there was anything else. I found something unrelated to the first slip but something I consider to be a mistake a townie would not make. That makes two slips, unrelated, which as far as I can tell only a scum would make. Its more than we have on anyone else, which is why you are my #1 scum suspect. A) Neither of them were slips. B) There will undoubtedly be more mis-rememberings and lapses of memory and use of phrasing that will not sit will with some folks. C) You're in good company of those who have tried to build cases against me based on the way I've said things. Are you sure that "we" was the proper choice of word to use in that last sentence? For a "townie" advocating a case that several players have dismissed, that is an awfully interesting choice of words. My "by the seat of my pants" style can indeed provide scum some loose ends to grab unto. I am not a perfect player. Am I providing you and your scummies more loose ends to spin than other players? Could it be that you're expanding your "suspicions" to those who aren't pursuing me as doggedly as you? <--- (Rolling eyes of sarcasm) [oog]I actually yelled "You're a rutting idiot!" at a clueless driver on the freeway this morning.[/oog]
|
|
Blaster Master
Mome Rath
The player formerly know as BLAM!
Now 34.788% less repellant to Sharks! :( [on:I WANT TO DIE!][of:I WANT TO LIVE!]
Posts: 0
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Blaster Master on Oct 5, 2007 9:02:36 GMT -5
Just a few comments here... Hockeymonkey: dislike her usage of "bandwagon", think its dumb, but meh. Thats about it. Frankly I dislike the whole scum are all just on bandwagon ideas. I mean its certainly a good lead, but you gotta think of scum layers, so don't forget, a dude who hasn't voted for ANY scum also is suspicious as well because... well he's under teh radar. But so far that only applies to 2 people ( WTF and Capt. Klutz, heh, that rhymes!). But still, don't just put all your eggs in one basket. Atarus- Still is suspicious to me. :smudges over and over: I have no idea how to explain it other than, you're TOO helpful. And I want it on the record for in case I go. i think you're like Storyteller from last game, which IS WHY it's so suprsinging because you haven't played before, and I'm not expecting it this time around. You... could be VERY covert scum. And I'm afraid of this because I'd never be suspicious of you enough for a vote if your behavior continues. Only hope would be you getting caught redhanded or something. But still. :shrug: I gots my Eye on you. (O_<) I'm suspicious of both of these individuals for there actions at the end of Day One with regard to the no-lynch on top of what you say. That is, to steal Storyteller's terminology from the last game, atarus seems like a survivalist scum and Hockey Monkey like a more pro-active sort. We'll have to see when I get around to investigating them. Yes, his behavior on Day One is what piqued my interest, but it's very telling that everyone seems to ONLY remember the arguments I've put forth with regard to his No-lynch argument and not the rest of it. Namely, I've attempted to demonstrate other aspects of his scumminess, but he (and I imagine a few others dabbling) have done a good job of continually redirecting the conversation back toward that point. As for the emoticons.... FTR I hate them and I hate using them, but at some point after the big mess from Day Two in M2, I decided it was a good idea to try to use them to keep from stepping on too many people's toes because my intended tone is not getting across. Either way, classifying my arguments as flippant and evasive because I'm using emoticons is... weak.
|
|
Blaster Master
Mome Rath
The player formerly know as BLAM!
Now 34.788% less repellant to Sharks! :( [on:I WANT TO DIE!][of:I WANT TO LIVE!]
Posts: 0
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Blaster Master on Oct 5, 2007 9:04:39 GMT -5
[oog]I actually yelled "You're a rutting idiot!" at a clueless driver on the freeway this morning.[/oog] My goodness, I hope you don't kiss your mother with that mouth.
|
|
|
Post by CatInASuit on Oct 5, 2007 9:31:38 GMT -5
A) Neither of them were slips. B) There will undoubtedly be more mis-rememberings and lapses of memory and use of phrasing that will not sit will with some folks. C) You're in good company of those who have tried to build cases against me based on the way I've said things. Are you sure that "we" was the proper choice of word to use in that last sentence? For a "townie" advocating a case that several players have dismissed, that is an awfully interesting choice of words. My "by the seat of my pants" style can indeed provide scum some loose ends to grab unto. I am not a perfect player. Am I providing you and your scummies more loose ends to spin than other players? Could it be that you're expanding your "suspicions" to those who aren't pursuing me as doggedly as you? <--- (Rolling eyes of sarcasm) [oog]I actually yelled "You're a rutting idiot!" at a clueless driver on the freeway this morning.[/oog] I guess the "we" could be the royal "we" (being British has its compensations ) Actually, it refers to the fact that more people are voting for you than anyone else. I can see several people have said that they do not understand the claim against you but no-one has dismissed it as unworkable apart from yourself. I welcome others than ourselves to prove me wrong. I'm not a perfect player either, which is why I will admit there is a chance that you are town. But you certainly seem more scummy than everyone else. As for expanding my suspicion list, oh dear, oh dear, please try harder. Try going back and reading my posts about who I consider scum - you are actually the last person to join it.
|
|
|
Post by Drain Bead on Oct 5, 2007 10:40:29 GMT -5
To me it feels like you're too trusting of the Vig possibility, and trying to ignore the idea that a 2nd SCUM group could exist. And I dislike that quite a bit. Hence my vote. I suppose there could be a 2nd scum group. I'm guessing that there's not due to the size of the game, but I suppose given the fact that there seem to be a lot of crew with minor-to-major power roles, it might be balanced to have two small scum groups. I had not considered that possibility. I'm glad you brought it up, and not someone else, because it has decreased my suspicion of you a bit.
|
|
Santo Rugger
Mome Rath
The Obviously Innocent Townie
The Rugger formerly known as Pygmy[on:BYAHH!][of:BYAHH?]
Posts: 3
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Post by Santo Rugger on Oct 5, 2007 11:50:30 GMT -5
<snip>Frankly I dislike the whole scum are all just on bandwagon ideas. I mean its certainly a good lead, but you gotta think of scum layers, so don't forget, a dude who hasn't voted for ANY scum also is suspicious as well because... well he's under teh radar. But so far that only applies to 2 people ( WTF and Capt. Klutz, heh, that rhymes!). But still, don't just put all your eggs in one basket. <snip> Roosh, how do you know WTF and Capt. Klutz haven't voted for any scum?
|
|
|
Post by Mad The Swine on Oct 5, 2007 12:09:05 GMT -5
<snip>Frankly I dislike the whole scum are all just on bandwagon ideas. I mean its certainly a good lead, but you gotta think of scum layers, so don't forget, a dude who hasn't voted for ANY scum also is suspicious as well because... well he's under teh radar. But so far that only applies to 2 people ( WTF and Capt. Klutz, heh, that rhymes!). But still, don't just put all your eggs in one basket. <snip> Roosh, how do you know WTF and Capt. Klutz haven't voted for any scum? I'm curious about that also.
|
|
|
Post by Drain Bead on Oct 5, 2007 12:26:57 GMT -5
I have an idea about that Roosh thing, but I'd like to hear from him to see if they match. I don't want to say what it is and give him an out.
|
|