"Why?" Which again, would be a pointless question. In fact, you don't really care why. If you did, you'd ask why when you asked for who i think is a scumbuddy
You just want me to give names so you can try and negate my reads (you already tried with my response to d_v's nonvote)
So..
There's a thing.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Thank you for choosing
Rodemy Pizza
It’s not the best choice, but it’s a choice nonetheless
"Why?" Which again, would be a pointless question. In fact, you don't really care why. If you did, you'd ask why when you asked for who i think is a scumbuddy
You just want me to give names so you can try and negate my reads (you already tried with my response to d_v's nonvote)
So..
There's a thing.
I just want your reads and thoughts on the game, because that's how games progress? :S
Aside from votes, our reads and thoughts are all we have. Unless you feel that we should just end D1 this quickly and do nothing else.
Post #142 by Rhand, Rhand responds to my post #127, which is about Ophidia and Rodemy. He then talks about how I’m choosing sides with Ophidia and Rodemy. Just proof that me and him, at a similar time, talked about the Ophidia/Rodemy dichotomy — as well as two other players. But somehow, despite it making no sense, I’m lying and it means I’m scum. Even though every other instance of me talking about a pair, and all the instances around the same time, refer to Ophidia/Rodemy. I've already gone in depth about how it doesn't make sense and it's not even scummy as well, so I won't beat a dead horse.
We were trying to lynch Omega right? Lynching ghost is something that I can get behind, but the sudden shift kinda caught me off-guard.
It makes me more suspicious of r_O, as if his buddies are drawing the attention away; the rapid shift and incredibly poor/no reasoning would be explained by that.
I was not suggesting otherwise, just wanted to know what you are basing that read on.
The more I read it, the more I feel that Omega's questions sound weird.
Omega, how does this question help contribute to the overall analysis?
In what way does it sound weird?
I asked because I wanted to know what you were basing this read on; this is literally what I said in the post you quoted.
@Cantripmancer: this is a large post to respond to, so excuse me not quoting it directly:
Rhand, am I correct that you are saying Ghosting is opportunistic scum for attacking Rodemy? If so, why are you agreeing with him and going after Omega? Do you think Ghosting is bussing?
How effective did you expect this line of questioning to be when you provided him a safe answer?
His opening posts of 39-40 are a bit odd, as he's barning opposing views, but phone-posting, so whatever, but:
@Omega: Why is it a good thing that you checked "today"? Why would it have made a difference if you had checked later?
I quoted the wrong post by mistake the first time, because I was posting on my phone (which hates this site); this seems obvious.
It is a good thing I checked that day because the game started, and I had not checked on the status in at least a week. It would have made a difference by being that much more time before noticing and posting in the game. This is not as obvious, but still seems fairly clear.
Why are you trying to paint this as scummy with weak language like "odd"? What do you find "odd" about it anyway?
In #40 he naked barns Rod's attack on Ophidia without a vote or additional input/explanation, which is never helpful.
Not helpful? Fair enough I suppose, though you would go on to do the same multiple times:
I feel like by #80, Ophidia's town status is pretty likely and obvious, so Omega's questioning of Vaimes' town!clearing Ophidia feels like beating a dead horse.
Asking him to explain his reads is relevant regardless of what anyone else thinks of the other person's alignment
#83 is a very weak jab at Ophidia for agreeing with someone Ophidia thinks is scum (Rod). Ophidia's not agreeing with Rod's reads or opinions; she's agreeing with (rather basic) good gameplay.
I agree that it is basic good gameplay, that is precisely my point.
It is such basic gameplay that it seemed like a strange place to not just say that, instead of claiming to take the word of the person you are most suspicious of. It make no sense and comes across as artificial
This is one of the reasons that I find the way people answer questions at least as informative as their actual answer, and one of the reasons that people who are not liking my questions should try to look deeper at why I might be asking.
#105 feels like a smear on Hunt, like Omega's reaching for a reason to cast suspicion.
Again, just because I ask for clarification on something does not mean I necessarily find it scummy. How is asking for clarification "smearing", when at no point did I even imply that it was scummy?
It does not seem like a great idea, and I wanted to know why he was so eager to stick his neck out for something he seemed so unsure of.
@Omega: In #110, who (Ophidia or Rodemy) were you hoping to gain insight into with this question, and what did you learn?
Both actually; Ophidia has been so strongly against Rodemy (who I was still trying to get a handle on) up to that point, and I wanted to know what specifically this 180 is based on. By the way, #79 & #103 are barely 2 hours apart, during which he also claims to have been playing Dark Souls.
As for what I learned, his answer was not very satisfactory, but I did not feel the need to press him for more as I have been drawing my own conclusions about Rodemy's towniness.
• #133 rings huge bells for me. Omega quotes Ghosting and makes a very generic "this is good, bro" statement, then highlights one of the safer parts (Rodemy's alignment). The other parts he thinks are "good" are:
- Ophidia's town-status (which Omega seems to disagree with previously) and Ghosting's reasoning, which is similar to Vaimes' reasoning, which Omega hasn't seemed to buy thus far.
- A generic "Zomg's post was interesting; leaning town".
- Hunt being town.
This just seems so subtle. Slight buddying followed by picking out one element so that it sounds like there's substance behind the post. And if he wants to reverse his stance on any of the other parts, he just handwaves the situation with "well, I didn't mean I agreed with everything Ghosting said, just that it was 'good'".
I agree with you somewhat here; I noticed that he had posted while I was working on my previous post, and I wanted to comment on it quickly before I had to go, but I definitely should taken a little longer to elaborate on what I meant. It certainly was not a blanket /barn on his entire post as you suggest, or else I would have just said that.
As you do go on to say, I did not agree with everything he said, I meant that it was good in that he came in with his first substantial post and made some insights of his own instead of just going with what others are saying, and that he backed them up with specific posts, which also helped sway me on Huntzilla being town.
As an aside, you seem to have a problem with begging the question and putting words in people's mouths as you question them, you have done it several times already. This allows to you to sit back, wait for an answer, say "I knew you would say that", and act like you have caught someone.
I commented on his thoughts on Rodemy specifically, because that was more or less the reason that I was already coming to to the same conclusion.
Let's see what some pressure in this direction gets us.
Not much, because there is not much there.
I am not getting mafia vibes from you, you seem to be actively trying to figure things out and be helpful. I obviously think you are being misguided on this.
I've really liked Vaimes' posts since then, especially the stance on Oph (cause I could totally see scum capitalizing on a perceived easy lynch).
Explain how it could have been "a perceived easy lynch" when he is overwhelmingly seen as town
@Omega: I initially had stuff written out here, but realized you haven't actually responded to the votes on you yet, so I'm going to wait.
You had already written "stuff" (I assume question or points against me?) but deleted it in favor of waiting until I address the existing "stuff" about me?
I do not believe you; care to guess why?
You have something similar multiple times (#79, #103, #227, #231), completely unnecessarily; no one has even been near claim range. We are all aware that some people are still out for the holidays, that a few people have barely posted at all yet, and that it would be a bad idea to rush into anything;
Why do you feel the need to seem so concerned about it?
I alluded to a few of my reads during this post, but a full town/scum list will have another day or two. The last thing I have time to comment on tonight is Ghosting:
I went on at length about his first real post, and I obviously disagree with his points against me, as they are basically the same as Cantripmancer's; the first thing that interests me is his reaction after he starts getting a little pressure applied. Starting after posts #221/225, he starts becoming super defensive, flailing against his accusers, triple and quadruple posting frantically, and basically forgetting to do anything other than fight back against the couple of votes on him. It really comes across as desperate, and that Rodemy's accusation of "spiraling" is correct. I do not even think the original point that has them so worked up against him is that great, but his response has turned me off so much I consider myself voting for him, pending a votecount (I was going to provide post numbers in support of this part, but it is getting late, and I have already been working on this post for a couple of hours)
Red, your last point about me simply isn't true. For the entire duration of my wagon, I've been asking players about their reads, asking other questions about specific posts, etc. So using this as your logic is pretty flawed. My reaction isn't flailing, I'm logically explaining steps while being bewildered that the wagon exists with such poor reasoning; defending yourself isn't scummy, and posting frequently isn't scummy either (I also play mostly offsite on a forum where the games last 1-2 days to am more used to faster paced games). The following posts are all commentary or questions that look to progress the game, or put more simply, me doing more than "just defending myself":
215
240
256
262
265
268
273
275
In comparison, Rodemy has done almost nothing aside from push my wagon. I asked for reads, and apparently that's a stupid question. I ask for depth in answers, apparently there's no point. So it's very interesting for you to claim that I've done nothing but defend myself, and use that as a reason to jump on my wagon once you've seen a vote count, but you make no note of Rodemy doing nothing. It makes me think you either didn't read the posts, or are purposely ignoring that I did do more than just defend myself.
@D_V: Why are you proposing a name claim? Do you plan to contribute more, or to scum hunt at all? Your recent activity has been almost entirely pointless posts that don't explain your views or do anything to contribute to the game. Why should we think that comes from a town player?
@Red, with that in mind, I do agree with a lot of your points against Ophidia in 277; he definitely comes across as very conscious and concerned, but not in a genuine way. It's almost as if he feels like he should be saying it to earn town points, but there's not even yet a reason to be saying it. I remember at the time of him saying it I had 2, maybe 3 votes against me (and like you said, most people were gone from Christmas)?
Tomorrow I'm going to spend some time on reading Ghosting again. I really wonder if he sincerely means that he thought the conversation had switched.
@Ghosting: you keep repeating how bad rodemy's posts are. What is your current read on him?
I really dislike Hunt. All he does is throw potshots at the active posters, and he still didn't move his RVS vote.
@Hunt: Do something useful?
Same for D_V. Proposing a nameclaim is not useful.
@D_V: Do something useful?
And then there's Zomgcarwind. I think I've never seen a T/S with as few strong reads as his. He literally says with almost all his townreads that they can be scum and with his scumreads that they can be town. And then he says that he's going to vote one of his scumreads depending on their answers to his question, but doesn't even ask me (the bottom read) anything.
Ok I reread Ghosting. It seems that he somehow never really read my post 142 and thought I accused him of picking sides in the Rodemy/Ophidia argument, while I was all the time accusing him of picking sides in the Rodemy/Rhand argument.
He never looked back to his own posts, because he assumed he had asked Vaimes his opinion on Rodemy/Ophidia while he in reality had asked him his opinion on Rodemy/Rhand.
So the only things he did wrong is forgetting what question he asked Vaimes and not really reading my wall.
Which does bother me, because I was supposed to be the most suspicious player for him and then he doesn't read my posts.
And forgetting what you asked someone shows that you don't care for your own questions.
I think the flailing to Rodemy we saw happening is an example of QFTWR.
I don't know why you feel I'm fake. I am trying to solve the game.
Have you read my posts? I think Rodemy is town, so that would be an easy shot.
If I could dayvig, I think I would take out a lurker though.
I'm always mislynch fodder when I'm town. I guess any scum would rip me apart if I kill a townie. Right now my candidates for scum are Ghosting, Hunt, DV, you, red and scarbo.
Because lurkers hide in the shadows and are hard to lynch. Active scum have a good chance to slip somewhere in the future.
My main issue with this is that it's the holiday season, Christmas was literally just 2 days ago, and people generally are less active during this time of year. I agree that we often find at least find scum in the shadows, but to label anyone as a lurker at this point in time is a little uncalled for.
Ok I reread Ghosting. It seems that he somehow never really read my post 142 and thought I accused him of picking sides in the Rodemy/Ophidia argument, while I was all the time accusing him of picking sides in the Rodemy/Rhand argument.
He never looked back to his own posts, because he assumed he had asked Vaimes his opinion on Rodemy/Ophidia while he in reality had asked him his opinion on Rodemy/Rhand.
So the only things he did wrong is forgetting what question he asked Vaimes and not really reading my wall.
Which does bother me, because I was supposed to be the most suspicious player for him and then he doesn't read my posts.
And forgetting what you asked someone shows that you don't care for your own questions.
I think the flailing to Rodemy we saw happening is an example of QFTWR.
Because lurkers hide in the shadows and are hard to lynch. Active scum have a good chance to slip somewhere in the future.
My main issue with this is that it's the holiday season, Christmas was literally just 2 days ago, and people generally are less active during this time of year. I agree that we often find at least find scum in the shadows, but to label anyone as a lurker at this point in time is a little uncalled for.
How do you feel about zomg voting scarbo, then? With that reasoning you should have some suspocion on him.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Thank you for choosing
Rodemy Pizza
It’s not the best choice, but it’s a choice nonetheless
How do you feel about zomg voting scarbo, then? With that reasoning you should have some suspocion on him.
Out of curiosity, do you agree with my reasoning?
I'm suspicious of Zomg for a few reasons. I actually agree with D_V that Zomg's townread on him is certainly questionable, especially if D_V is telling the truth about his neutral claim. Additionally, his town/null/scum list in post #257 has reads which don't seem consistent, if that makes sense. Like he has Ophidia as town, even though he says that something he does might be scummy. And at the same time, he has me as scum, but says that I might be town, and Rhand as scum, but again another qualifier, "it might be the wine" and "TSBTBS?". So not only do I feel like the reads aren't consistent, but also that he's trying to allow himself a lot of flexibility in his reads. There's lots of what are essentially fencesits, which certainly doesn't point in his favour.
Aside from that, not much has caught my eye, but those alone have me curious. He's certainly not a townread.
Ok, holidays were a bit stressful, and work is starting to get a little crazy already, so I want some progress here. Some of this is chronological, but I may jump around a bit because I'm also working from my notes, so:
(As an aside, does anyone know why my {url}{/url} tags (with square brackets) aren't working? I'd really like to be able to provide links, as I personally find that really useful...)
(Also, sorry for the textwall.)
@DV:
1) In #201, you said to check back with you on Monday for your reads. It's Tuesday. In #237, you said you'd provide more thoughts later. It's later. Something more than one-liners would be appreciated.
2) I don't know that there's a reason not to, but what benefit do you really think we'll get from a name claim, especially given (emphasis mine):
Quote from Brinatoo »
1. I would not recommend flavor-gaming. The roles/characters were randomized many times because I figured a Normal shouldn’t have flavor mechanics. The flavor is, however, in place for your(and my) enjoyment.
@Zomg: I agree with Rhand that your T/S list is 90% on the fence, and your response in #292 ("Imma gonna give you ALL my perspectives") doesn't really parse for me. It still sounds fence-sitty. So a few questions:
1) What is wolfing, and what is TSTBS?
2) Where do you see Ghosting "trying to get wagons started"?
3) Why do you say Ghosting "pre-emptively" posted games? Rhand asked for some of his games just a few posts previous.
@Hunt: You don't seem inclined to follow either of the current wagons (Omega or Ghosting), but have expressed suspicion in Rod and Rhand. Who do you think we should lynch? Why? Is your vote on Rhand now serious, or is it still an RVS-carryover?
I've reread the exchanges with Rod, Rhand, and Ghosting, and I'm still leaning town on Ghosting. There are some elements to Ghosting's posts that are questionable (twice highlighting that he posts stoned, twice committing the "honesty" tell, triple posting), and the first lines in #230 ("I literally am either townreading these players, or in one instance, asked another player if they think the player could be town, scum, etc. -- to see where that player's views lie in order to better analyze the game") felt like a lie the first time I read them, but then #264 feels REALLY sincere. He points out Rhand's #142 (which seems to be where the issue lies) and continues to argue that he was talking about Rod/Ophidia. I don't really see that kind of persistence coming from a scum mentality. Plus, his bewilderment at being attacked also sounds sincere.
Rhand, am I correct that you are saying Ghosting is opportunistic scum for attacking Rodemy? If so, why are you agreeing with him and going after Omega? Do you think Ghosting is bussing?
How effective did you expect this line of questioning to be when you provided him a safe answer?
Eh, good point, I guess, but I already felt he was mostly town, and he didn't take that easy out, so more town+ to him.
Quote from Omega »
His opening posts of 39-40 are a bit odd, as he's barning opposing views, but phone-posting, so whatever, but:
@Omega: Why is it a good thing that you checked "today"? Why would it have made a difference if you had checked later?
I quoted the wrong post by mistake the first time, because I was posting on my phone (which hates this site); this seems obvious.
It is a good thing I checked that day because the game started, and I had not checked on the status in at least a week. It would have made a difference by being that much more time before noticing and posting in the game. This is not as obvious, but still seems fairly clear.
Why are you trying to paint this as scummy with weak language like "odd"? What do you find "odd" about it anyway?
I try to be pretty careful in my posting; doing so leads to less misunderstanding as town and less scrutiny as scum. So it struck me as odd that you would misbarn an opinion that was the opposite of what you were trying to communicate. That said, I've never mobile-posted, so maybe it's a lot harder to use than I'd anticipate. I misunderstood that you were saying it was good that you checked the thread/game; I thought you were saying it was good timing specifically given what you were commenting on (which wasn't much).
Quote from Omega »
In #40 he naked barns Rod's attack on Ophidia without a vote or additional input/explanation, which is never helpful.
Not helpful? Fair enough I suppose, though you would go on to do the same multiple times:
Seriously? There is a HUGE difference between barning a vote-post with an "answer or get lynched" ultimatum and barning a player asking for another player's reads or barning an opinion on how good/bad a previous game was. Your barn communicated (to me) "Hi, my name is Omega and I agree with what Rodemy just indicated, but I'm not going to contribute anything to the discussion except push Ophidia's wagon...but I'm not even going to go on "official" record with a vote." My barns were "yeah, I agree that Zomg's actions seem scummy; he should answer Rod's question" and "yeah, I agree that Sesame Street was a horrible game". Yes, your barn was scummy. No, mine were not.
Quote from Omega »
I feel like by #80, Ophidia's town status is pretty likely and obvious, so Omega's questioning of Vaimes' town!clearing Ophidia feels like beating a dead horse.
Asking him to explain his reads is relevant regardless of what anyone else thinks of the other person's alignment
Ok, I can accept that answer.
Quote from Omega »
#83 is a very weak jab at Ophidia for agreeing with someone Ophidia thinks is scum (Rod). Ophidia's not agreeing with Rod's reads or opinions; she's agreeing with (rather basic) good gameplay.
I agree that it is basic good gameplay, that is precisely my point.
It is such basic gameplay that it seemed like a strange place to not just say that, instead of claiming to take the word of the person you are most suspicious of. It make no sense and comes across as artificial
This is one of the reasons that I find the way people answer questions at least as informative as their actual answer, and one of the reasons that people who are not liking my questions should try to look deeper at why I might be asking.
I would agree with you, if Ophidia hadn't already demonstrated excessive noobness. From a newer player, though, it doesn't feel unusual to me.
Quote from Omega »
#105 feels like a smear on Hunt, like Omega's reaching for a reason to cast suspicion.
Again, just because I ask for clarification on something does not mean I necessarily find it scummy. How is asking for clarification "smearing", when at no point did I even imply that it was scummy?
It does not seem like a great idea, and I wanted to know why he was so eager to stick his neck out for something he seemed so unsure of.
I went back and reread it, and I still feel like you're attacking Hunt. Hunt's response feels like something I would post, that this is something I remember observing in the past, but I can't remember the specifics. As to "eager", it just felt to me like Hunt was looking to dismiss a suspicion that was unfounded. That's what a call to meta is: "I find this scummy; does anyone know if this is common for this player, regardless of alignment?"
Quote from Omega »
@Omega: In #110, who (Ophidia or Rodemy) were you hoping to gain insight into with this question, and what did you learn?
Both actually; Ophidia has been so strongly against Rodemy (who I was still trying to get a handle on) up to that point, and I wanted to know what specifically this 180 is based on. By the way, #79 & #103 are barely 2 hours apart, during which he also claims to have been playing Dark Souls.
As for what I learned, his answer was not very satisfactory, but I did not feel the need to press him for more as I have been drawing my own conclusions about Rodemy's towniness.
Um, ok, so you're *still* suspicious about Ophidia? And the last sentence is regarding what you learned about Rod? How was his answer not very satisfactory to you? Where do you stand on Rodemy?
Quote from Omega »
• #133 rings huge bells for me. Omega quotes Ghosting and makes a very generic "this is good, bro" statement, then highlights one of the safer parts (Rodemy's alignment). The other parts he thinks are "good" are:
- Ophidia's town-status (which Omega seems to disagree with previously) and Ghosting's reasoning, which is similar to Vaimes' reasoning, which Omega hasn't seemed to buy thus far.
- A generic "Zomg's post was interesting; leaning town".
- Hunt being town.
This just seems so subtle. Slight buddying followed by picking out one element so that it sounds like there's substance behind the post. And if he wants to reverse his stance on any of the other parts, he just handwaves the situation with "well, I didn't mean I agreed with everything Ghosting said, just that it was 'good'".
I agree with you somewhat here; I noticed that he had posted while I was working on my previous post, and I wanted to comment on it quickly before I had to go, but I definitely should taken a little longer to elaborate on what I meant. It certainly was not a blanket /barn on his entire post as you suggest, or else I would have just said that.
As you do go on to say, I did not agree with everything he said, I meant that it was good in that he came in with his first substantial post and made some insights of his own instead of just going with what others are saying, and that he backed them up with specific posts, which also helped sway me on Huntzilla being town.
But that's the problem with what you did. You propped up another player's post without really committing to anything or specifying what you found "good". This continues the pattern I saw emerging in your earlier posts of you participating without participating.
Quote from Omega »
As an aside, you seem to have a problem with begging the question and putting words in people's mouths as you question them, you have done it several times already. This allows to you to sit back, wait for an answer, say "I knew you would say that", and act like you have caught someone.
I can understand the "putting words in people's mouths" part, as I often employ that to help express what I'm hearing when I read a particular post, but can you show me where I'm begging the question? I wasn't 100% sure I understood what that meant, and even after looking it up, I would like you to be specific with where you see this.
Quote from Omega »
I commented on his thoughts on Rodemy specifically, because that was more or less the reason that I was already coming to to the same conclusion.
Ok.
Quote from Omega »
Let's see what some pressure in this direction gets us.
Not much, because there is not much there.
There's not much pressure because a wagon has formed on Ghosting. But I'm not ready to drop your pursuit so quickly. You indicated that you weren't quoting my post directly, but in not doing so, you left out (inadvertently or not) some of my points. They weren't specifically things I asked you to respond to, but they were pertinent, so I'm going to ask some questions:
1) A lot of your early posts seem to me to be lacking substance. You responded to questions asked directly of you and commented on game lingo. Do you agree that your early posts were not very content-heavy, and would you say this is standard play for you?
2) You seem to be a little obsessed with Ophidia. I *thought* you had said you felt better about Ophidia, but now I'm not seeing where, and you continue to make comments that make me think you suspect him. Where in your t/s spectrum is Ophidia?
3) In #140, you highlight the three Vaimes' reads that you remember disagreeing with. The first one is "Huntzilla - looking better to me." It sounds like you're saying that Hunt is looking better to you (Omega), and that you already mentioned this...where did you mention it?
You have something similar multiple times (#79, #103, #227, #231), completely unnecessarily; no one has even been near claim range. We are all aware that some people are still out for the holidays, that a few people have barely posted at all yet, and that it would be a bad idea to rush into anything;
Why do you feel the need to seem so concerned about it?
Feel free to wait until Ophidia responds, but after he does, please tell me why you're asking. As in, what does Ophidia's repeated cautioning tell you about Ophidia's alignment?
And then in #278, you again shade Ophidia? I could have sworn you said you thought he was town. Why do you keep tossing these little attacks in?
Feeling good about Rhand, Ophidia, Rodemy, Vaimes. Leaning town on Ghosting. Hunt and Silver are still question marks. Zomg and DV are leaning scum. Still feel like Omega is our best pursuit at this time.
Eagerly looking forward to Scarbo and Kitty posting. And Atog.
BTW, @Scarbo: What was your standard avatar when you were swishh? I remember being confused that you switched names, but I'm having a hard time remembering you. Avatars, I'm finding a little surprisingly, help immensely, as Rhand and Rodemy stand out, while I can't quite remember you as well...
"You have something similar multiple times (#79, #103, #227, #231), completely unnecessarily; no one has even been near claim range. We are all aware that some people are still out for the holidays, that a few people have barely posted at all yet, and that it would be a bad idea to rush into anything;
Why do you feel the need to seem so concerned about it?"
Just as you said, because I don't want the day to end before scarbo and kitty get to post anything. Maybe it is Rodemy's aggressive attitude that leads mr to believe that Ghost is about to be lynched. Maybe it is just my laziness and a lack of things to say.
To me Ghost is slightly town, but we will have to see his role. IF he is town, however, I can totally see how Rodemy is scum, which I will explain sometime around the 30th.
On a side note, can the mod post the vote count please?
To me Ghost is slightly town, but we will have to see his role. IF he is town, however, I can totally see how Rodemy is scum, which I will explain sometime around the 30th.
Can you reconcile the above bolded statement with:
This is the most pointless question. If i think you are scum, what information would i think YOU would gain from answering that?
What information in general is to be gained if i name a few names d1 that i *THINK* are your buddies.
Its d1. We find out who buddies are after we lynch a scum or we get a few flips.
I'm essentially just asking what your other scumreads are, and if you feel they have any relation to me.
Mafia Stats 2016-2017:
Town: 1-0 | Scum: 2-0 | Neutral: 1-1
If i say rhand, you say...
If i say ophidia... you say???
"Why?" Which again, would be a pointless question. In fact, you don't really care why. If you did, you'd ask why when you asked for who i think is a scumbuddy
You just want me to give names so you can try and negate my reads (you already tried with my response to d_v's nonvote)
So..
There's a thing.
I just want your reads and thoughts on the game, because that's how games progress? :S
Aside from votes, our reads and thoughts are all we have. Unless you feel that we should just end D1 this quickly and do nothing else.
Mafia Stats 2016-2017:
Town: 1-0 | Scum: 2-0 | Neutral: 1-1
Ghosting is not allowed to give reasons.
Post #142 by Rhand, Rhand responds to my post #127, which is about Ophidia and Rodemy. He then talks about how I’m choosing sides with Ophidia and Rodemy. Just proof that me and him, at a similar time, talked about the Ophidia/Rodemy dichotomy — as well as two other players. But somehow, despite it making no sense, I’m lying and it means I’m scum. Even though every other instance of me talking about a pair, and all the instances around the same time, refer to Ophidia/Rodemy. I've already gone in depth about how it doesn't make sense and it's not even scummy as well, so I won't beat a dead horse.
Mafia Stats 2016-2017:
Town: 1-0 | Scum: 2-0 | Neutral: 1-1
Mafia Stats 2016-2017:
Town: 1-0 | Scum: 2-0 | Neutral: 1-1
Ghosting is town because he uses emotes.
Duh.
But no he's not town. But neither is Shadow #called out.
Do we get reasons or is my entire wagon just going to be like this?
Mafia Stats 2016-2017:
Town: 1-0 | Scum: 2-0 | Neutral: 1-1
Mafia Stats 2016-2017:
Town: 1-0 | Scum: 2-0 | Neutral: 1-1
Who is this directed towards and why?
DV, your reasons, please.
You said if I thought he was town to give reasons.
You didn't say if I thought he was scum.
Two of us have asked now though, so why not give them? Just kind of comes across as low effort. :/
Mafia Stats 2016-2017:
Town: 1-0 | Scum: 2-0 | Neutral: 1-1
We were trying to lynch Omega right? Lynching ghost is something that I can get behind, but the sudden shift kinda caught me off-guard.
It makes me more suspicious of r_O, as if his buddies are drawing the attention away; the rapid shift and incredibly poor/no reasoning would be explained by that.
Mafia Stats 2016-2017:
Town: 1-0 | Scum: 2-0 | Neutral: 1-1
In what way does it sound weird?
I asked because I wanted to know what you were basing this read on; this is literally what I said in the post you quoted.
@Cantripmancer: this is a large post to respond to, so excuse me not quoting it directly:
How effective did you expect this line of questioning to be when you provided him a safe answer?
I quoted the wrong post by mistake the first time, because I was posting on my phone (which hates this site); this seems obvious.
It is a good thing I checked that day because the game started, and I had not checked on the status in at least a week. It would have made a difference by being that much more time before noticing and posting in the game. This is not as obvious, but still seems fairly clear.
Why are you trying to paint this as scummy with weak language like "odd"? What do you find "odd" about it anyway?
Not helpful? Fair enough I suppose, though you would go on to do the same multiple times:
Still want to paint it as scummy?
Asking him to explain his reads is relevant regardless of what anyone else thinks of the other person's alignment
I agree that it is basic good gameplay, that is precisely my point.
It is such basic gameplay that it seemed like a strange place to not just say that, instead of claiming to take the word of the person you are most suspicious of. It make no sense and comes across as artificial
This is one of the reasons that I find the way people answer questions at least as informative as their actual answer, and one of the reasons that people who are not liking my questions should try to look deeper at why I might be asking.
Again, just because I ask for clarification on something does not mean I necessarily find it scummy. How is asking for clarification "smearing", when at no point did I even imply that it was scummy?
It does not seem like a great idea, and I wanted to know why he was so eager to stick his neck out for something he seemed so unsure of.
Both actually; Ophidia has been so strongly against Rodemy (who I was still trying to get a handle on) up to that point, and I wanted to know what specifically this 180 is based on. By the way, #79 & #103 are barely 2 hours apart, during which he also claims to have been playing Dark Souls.
As for what I learned, his answer was not very satisfactory, but I did not feel the need to press him for more as I have been drawing my own conclusions about Rodemy's towniness.
I agree with you somewhat here; I noticed that he had posted while I was working on my previous post, and I wanted to comment on it quickly before I had to go, but I definitely should taken a little longer to elaborate on what I meant. It certainly was not a blanket /barn on his entire post as you suggest, or else I would have just said that.
As you do go on to say, I did not agree with everything he said, I meant that it was good in that he came in with his first substantial post and made some insights of his own instead of just going with what others are saying, and that he backed them up with specific posts, which also helped sway me on Huntzilla being town.
As an aside, you seem to have a problem with begging the question and putting words in people's mouths as you question them, you have done it several times already. This allows to you to sit back, wait for an answer, say "I knew you would say that", and act like you have caught someone.
I commented on his thoughts on Rodemy specifically, because that was more or less the reason that I was already coming to to the same conclusion.
Not much, because there is not much there.
I am not getting mafia vibes from you, you seem to be actively trying to figure things out and be helpful. I obviously think you are being misguided on this.
Explain how it could have been "a perceived easy lynch" when he is overwhelmingly seen as town
You had already written "stuff" (I assume question or points against me?) but deleted it in favor of waiting until I address the existing "stuff" about me?
I do not believe you; care to guess why?
You have something similar multiple times (#79, #103, #227, #231), completely unnecessarily; no one has even been near claim range. We are all aware that some people are still out for the holidays, that a few people have barely posted at all yet, and that it would be a bad idea to rush into anything;
Why do you feel the need to seem so concerned about it?
I alluded to a few of my reads during this post, but a full town/scum list will have another day or two. The last thing I have time to comment on tonight is Ghosting:
I went on at length about his first real post, and I obviously disagree with his points against me, as they are basically the same as Cantripmancer's; the first thing that interests me is his reaction after he starts getting a little pressure applied. Starting after posts #221/225, he starts becoming super defensive, flailing against his accusers, triple and quadruple posting frantically, and basically forgetting to do anything other than fight back against the couple of votes on him. It really comes across as desperate, and that Rodemy's accusation of "spiraling" is correct. I do not even think the original point that has them so worked up against him is that great, but his response has turned me off so much I consider myself voting for him, pending a votecount (I was going to provide post numbers in support of this part, but it is getting late, and I have already been working on this post for a couple of hours)
smoke_Killah
"We"? When have you said anything about lynching me? When have you said anything stronger than "sounds weird" about me?
Or Ghosting for that matter?
smoke_Killah
For da luls obv.
There is no need for a name claim at this point.
I do not like where Rodemy has gone with this Ghosting push. Also am less comfortable with Rhand.
I'm not seeing what you all are with Ghosting. He seems like frustrated town getting pushed for small reasons.
Sorry. To keep him straight in my head I call him by what I remember him as.
215
240
256
262
265
268
273
275
In comparison, Rodemy has done almost nothing aside from push my wagon. I asked for reads, and apparently that's a stupid question. I ask for depth in answers, apparently there's no point. So it's very interesting for you to claim that I've done nothing but defend myself, and use that as a reason to jump on my wagon once you've seen a vote count, but you make no note of Rodemy doing nothing. It makes me think you either didn't read the posts, or are purposely ignoring that I did do more than just defend myself.
@D_V: Why are you proposing a name claim? Do you plan to contribute more, or to scum hunt at all? Your recent activity has been almost entirely pointless posts that don't explain your views or do anything to contribute to the game. Why should we think that comes from a town player?
Mafia Stats 2016-2017:
Town: 1-0 | Scum: 2-0 | Neutral: 1-1
Mafia Stats 2016-2017:
Town: 1-0 | Scum: 2-0 | Neutral: 1-1
Look at the last page. What are your thoughts?
@Ghosting: you keep repeating how bad rodemy's posts are. What is your current read on him?
I really dislike Hunt. All he does is throw potshots at the active posters, and he still didn't move his RVS vote.
@Hunt: Do something useful?
Same for D_V. Proposing a nameclaim is not useful.
@D_V: Do something useful?
And then there's Zomgcarwind. I think I've never seen a T/S with as few strong reads as his. He literally says with almost all his townreads that they can be scum and with his scumreads that they can be town. And then he says that he's going to vote one of his scumreads depending on their answers to his question, but doesn't even ask me (the bottom read) anything.
He never looked back to his own posts, because he assumed he had asked Vaimes his opinion on Rodemy/Ophidia while he in reality had asked him his opinion on Rodemy/Rhand.
So the only things he did wrong is forgetting what question he asked Vaimes and not really reading my wall.
Which does bother me, because I was supposed to be the most suspicious player for him and then he doesn't read my posts.
And forgetting what you asked someone shows that you don't care for your own questions.
I think the flailing to Rodemy we saw happening is an example of QFTWR.
CFTWR. Caught is obviously not with a "Q"
Have you read my posts? I think Rodemy is town, so that would be an easy shot.
If I could dayvig, I think I would take out a lurker though.
I'm always mislynch fodder when I'm town. I guess any scum would rip me apart if I kill a townie. Right now my candidates for scum are Ghosting, Hunt, DV, you, red and scarbo.
#Zomg is totally scum for town reading me since I know nothing I've done has seen very towny.
My main issue with this is that it's the holiday season, Christmas was literally just 2 days ago, and people generally are less active during this time of year. I agree that we often find at least find scum in the shadows, but to label anyone as a lurker at this point in time is a little uncalled for.
Mafia Stats 2016-2017:
Town: 1-0 | Scum: 2-0 | Neutral: 1-1
I am overbob, the best Overwatch character, imo.
You read ghosting that quick, eh?
WhaT is QFTWR?
How do you feel about zomg voting scarbo, then? With that reasoning you should have some suspocion on him.
Out of curiosity, do you agree with my reasoning?
I'm suspicious of Zomg for a few reasons. I actually agree with D_V that Zomg's townread on him is certainly questionable, especially if D_V is telling the truth about his neutral claim. Additionally, his town/null/scum list in post #257 has reads which don't seem consistent, if that makes sense. Like he has Ophidia as town, even though he says that something he does might be scummy. And at the same time, he has me as scum, but says that I might be town, and Rhand as scum, but again another qualifier, "it might be the wine" and "TSBTBS?". So not only do I feel like the reads aren't consistent, but also that he's trying to allow himself a lot of flexibility in his reads. There's lots of what are essentially fencesits, which certainly doesn't point in his favour.
Aside from that, not much has caught my eye, but those alone have me curious. He's certainly not a townread.
Mafia Stats 2016-2017:
Town: 1-0 | Scum: 2-0 | Neutral: 1-1
Hmmmm.. i forgot how your play was.
Is this normal for D_V to not vote when he accuses people of being scum?
Mafia Stats 2016-2017:
Town: 1-0 | Scum: 2-0 | Neutral: 1-1
(As an aside, does anyone know why my {url}{/url} tags (with square brackets) aren't working? I'd really like to be able to provide links, as I personally find that really useful...)
(Also, sorry for the textwall.)
@DV:
1) In #201, you said to check back with you on Monday for your reads. It's Tuesday. In #237, you said you'd provide more thoughts later. It's later. Something more than one-liners would be appreciated.
2) I don't know that there's a reason not to, but what benefit do you really think we'll get from a name claim, especially given (emphasis mine):
@Zomg: I agree with Rhand that your T/S list is 90% on the fence, and your response in #292 ("Imma gonna give you ALL my perspectives") doesn't really parse for me. It still sounds fence-sitty. So a few questions:
1) What is wolfing, and what is TSTBS?
2) Where do you see Ghosting "trying to get wagons started"?
3) Why do you say Ghosting "pre-emptively" posted games? Rhand asked for some of his games just a few posts previous.
@Hunt: You don't seem inclined to follow either of the current wagons (Omega or Ghosting), but have expressed suspicion in Rod and Rhand. Who do you think we should lynch? Why? Is your vote on Rhand now serious, or is it still an RVS-carryover?
I've reread the exchanges with Rod, Rhand, and Ghosting, and I'm still leaning town on Ghosting. There are some elements to Ghosting's posts that are questionable (twice highlighting that he posts stoned, twice committing the "honesty" tell, triple posting), and the first lines in #230 ("I literally am either townreading these players, or in one instance, asked another player if they think the player could be town, scum, etc. -- to see where that player's views lie in order to better analyze the game") felt like a lie the first time I read them, but then #264 feels REALLY sincere. He points out Rhand's #142 (which seems to be where the issue lies) and continues to argue that he was talking about Rod/Ophidia. I don't really see that kind of persistence coming from a scum mentality. Plus, his bewilderment at being attacked also sounds sincere.
Eh, good point, I guess, but I already felt he was mostly town, and he didn't take that easy out, so more town+ to him.
I try to be pretty careful in my posting; doing so leads to less misunderstanding as town and less scrutiny as scum. So it struck me as odd that you would misbarn an opinion that was the opposite of what you were trying to communicate. That said, I've never mobile-posted, so maybe it's a lot harder to use than I'd anticipate. I misunderstood that you were saying it was good that you checked the thread/game; I thought you were saying it was good timing specifically given what you were commenting on (which wasn't much).
Seriously? There is a HUGE difference between barning a vote-post with an "answer or get lynched" ultimatum and barning a player asking for another player's reads or barning an opinion on how good/bad a previous game was. Your barn communicated (to me) "Hi, my name is Omega and I agree with what Rodemy just indicated, but I'm not going to contribute anything to the discussion except push Ophidia's wagon...but I'm not even going to go on "official" record with a vote." My barns were "yeah, I agree that Zomg's actions seem scummy; he should answer Rod's question" and "yeah, I agree that Sesame Street was a horrible game". Yes, your barn was scummy. No, mine were not.
Ok, I can accept that answer.
I would agree with you, if Ophidia hadn't already demonstrated excessive noobness. From a newer player, though, it doesn't feel unusual to me.
I went back and reread it, and I still feel like you're attacking Hunt. Hunt's response feels like something I would post, that this is something I remember observing in the past, but I can't remember the specifics. As to "eager", it just felt to me like Hunt was looking to dismiss a suspicion that was unfounded. That's what a call to meta is: "I find this scummy; does anyone know if this is common for this player, regardless of alignment?"
Um, ok, so you're *still* suspicious about Ophidia? And the last sentence is regarding what you learned about Rod? How was his answer not very satisfactory to you? Where do you stand on Rodemy?
But that's the problem with what you did. You propped up another player's post without really committing to anything or specifying what you found "good". This continues the pattern I saw emerging in your earlier posts of you participating without participating.
I can understand the "putting words in people's mouths" part, as I often employ that to help express what I'm hearing when I read a particular post, but can you show me where I'm begging the question? I wasn't 100% sure I understood what that meant, and even after looking it up, I would like you to be specific with where you see this. Ok.
There's not much pressure because a wagon has formed on Ghosting. But I'm not ready to drop your pursuit so quickly. You indicated that you weren't quoting my post directly, but in not doing so, you left out (inadvertently or not) some of my points. They weren't specifically things I asked you to respond to, but they were pertinent, so I'm going to ask some questions:
1) A lot of your early posts seem to me to be lacking substance. You responded to questions asked directly of you and commented on game lingo. Do you agree that your early posts were not very content-heavy, and would you say this is standard play for you?
2) You seem to be a little obsessed with Ophidia. I *thought* you had said you felt better about Ophidia, but now I'm not seeing where, and you continue to make comments that make me think you suspect him. Where in your t/s spectrum is Ophidia?
3) In #140, you highlight the three Vaimes' reads that you remember disagreeing with. The first one is "Huntzilla - looking better to me." It sounds like you're saying that Hunt is looking better to you (Omega), and that you already mentioned this...where did you mention it?
Feel free to wait until Ophidia responds, but after he does, please tell me why you're asking. As in, what does Ophidia's repeated cautioning tell you about Ophidia's alignment?
And then in #278, you again shade Ophidia? I could have sworn you said you thought he was town. Why do you keep tossing these little attacks in?
Feeling good about Rhand, Ophidia, Rodemy, Vaimes. Leaning town on Ghosting. Hunt and Silver are still question marks. Zomg and DV are leaning scum. Still feel like Omega is our best pursuit at this time.
Eagerly looking forward to Scarbo and Kitty posting. And Atog.
BTW, @Scarbo: What was your standard avatar when you were swishh? I remember being confused that you switched names, but I'm having a hard time remembering you. Avatars, I'm finding a little surprisingly, help immensely, as Rhand and Rodemy stand out, while I can't quite remember you as well...
Why do you feel the need to seem so concerned about it?"
Just as you said, because I don't want the day to end before scarbo and kitty get to post anything. Maybe it is Rodemy's aggressive attitude that leads mr to believe that Ghost is about to be lynched. Maybe it is just my laziness and a lack of things to say.
To me Ghost is slightly town, but we will have to see his role. IF he is town, however, I can totally see how Rodemy is scum, which I will explain sometime around the 30th.
On a side note, can the mod post the vote count please?
Can you reconcile the above bolded statement with:
Mafia Stats 2016-2017:
Town: 1-0 | Scum: 2-0 | Neutral: 1-1
Also, you can see scum!blanketyblank pushing a town!blanketyblank mislynch? Many props to you.
Why not a scum!rodemy pushing a scum!ghosting?
Your statement makes it seem that you know ghostings alignment and will call me scum when he flips town...
At that unvote i need to amswer ghostings questions soon. I promise i will. Today got ahead of me.
...
I can't. I just.. can't. Yes, in general this is true, but you are basically saying: if ghosting flips town, rodemy is scum.
You aren't even concidering anyone else on the wagon.
Nor did you address my questions.
It's like you are trying to set up a mislynch.
Ghosting actually made a good point.
Why would you be behind a ghosting lynch if he might be town?
You think lynching someone you're reading as lean town is a good idea D1, and that it's something you want to voice you're behind?
Mafia Stats 2016-2017:
Town: 1-0 | Scum: 2-0 | Neutral: 1-1