What?! Look at the initial post; he is dead. Deceased. Kaputt. Indefinitely horizontal. In mafia games, you see, people are occasionally "killed off," and when that sad event occurs, he or she is no longer allowed to post, on account of rigor mortis and what-have-you.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Vive, vale. Siquid novisti rectius istis,
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
Man, I need to pay more attention. I thought you were making a joke in that he'd died in real life. Heh.
Anyway, for some content, Nymphe is right on MoT. Not newbish so much as weird as heck. Also, as far as I can remember still voting me (though I'm not sure why).
I'm inclined to agree with Cyan when he said that long days tend to lead to unhelpfully large amounts of bull to weed through during rereads and, as far as I can tell, don't have a higher accuracy of scum lynches. If we can't find scum in a few hundred posts I'd rather just kill off a noob who'll probably be a hinderence to us later in the game anyway with the knowledge that it's not going to be worth our time and energy to grab that scum (that probably won't be scum anyway).
If that makes any sense at all I'm giving myself a cookie.
Sorry for not checking this myself but I'm going to sleep shortly, and I think that presenting this question could maybe prove more useful anyway.
Has nymphe done any other scummy actions than the on-off vote-jumping on diggy? And as that's just another thing I could as well see being a mere newb-mistake, I'm more confident with leaving my vote on HR-G.
Maybe I'm a little confused here, but you think that both nymphe and Coiled have done scummy things, but for them it can be called Newb mistakes and ignored... but I've done nothing (according to the post where you voted me) that is actually scummy, I'm just the best target? OK, cool, as long as I know...
@nymphe-stuff: I think nymphe has actually explained the whole diggy-vote thing quite well. I think it's more probably a genuine newb-mistake than anything bigger.
The following are admittedly out of context but I put them there so anyone can refresh their memory.
Quote:
Originally Posted by #31 Poop, the day would have to start while I was out, figures... Oh well, nothing to do now but:
Vote - Cyan, you have got to be scum, crap, already beaten to that one, so
unvote, Vote - Kokusho, Always a good opening play, I don't care which one it is... Dangit! how about Unvote, Vote - creampuffeater, no one wanders in and out on my watch... I will be ever vigilant, I will never rest, I... will just sit down for a second...
But seriously Beaker, WTF mate? you are reeeeeally streching it there trying to assign scum tells from post one from nymphe there... Bad form...
Quote:
Originally Posted by #71 Wow, why are sooooo many people in this game wanting to try a forcibly find things wrong with other peeps... It just don't make no sense...
Oh, and Salubrious, I don't think that he is using the newb defense, I think he is accusing someone of being either a newb or a scum (or a newbscum).
Quote:
Originally Posted by #78 Quote:
Originally Posted by Coiled Flame I learned never to replace someone. Other than that, I didn' treally learn anything. it was my forst mafia ever, and Ij ust didn't know how the heck to defend myself... luckily, I don't have to defend myself in thsi game.
Wow, I totally missed this post by CF, yeah, I retract my he isn't playing the newb angle statement... my bad.
Quote:
Originally Posted by #144 Um, could someone please let me know why no one is really thinking that Flame is scum? If his posts are scummy, and his repeated ignoring of the warnings you guys give him are scummy, and his play in genneral is scummy...
I mean, come on, now... If it walk like a duck, and sounds like a duck... odds are...
I am just not seeing what makes him look not scummy to so many people... would one of you guys elaborate for me?
Quote:
Originally Posted by #154 Quote:
Originally Posted by Coiled Flame Didn't WoD vote for himself??????
@Wuffles: I explained my choices, and for the fiftieth time, they make sense to me. I'm not forcing anyone to agroo with them.
And for the fiftieth time, making sense to you is really not all that important at this point. I think we all understand that your actions will (or at least should) make sense to you. You did them, you should know why. No one else cares that they make sense to you, though. What we care about is understanding why you would do what you have done. Obviously your reasons are not enough for us. And no, you haven't forced anyone to agree with you. You can't force anyone to agree with you, not with the 'logic' you've been using.
Quote:
Originally Posted by #166 Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyan Seriously. One person voting for someone 'just until they show up and post' is not a big deal. Multiple people piling on that kind of wagon is really lame. Especially when one of those people is Coiled Flame, who would most likely love for anyone else to be the center of attention.
I thought Coiled was voting WoD right now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by #189 I would agree that he is acting 100% newbish, but that doesn't mean that it isn't scummy also. Sometimes people are scum early on, too. He keeps saying that he has explained himself, but if that explanation isn't good enough (as I don't think it is), then what do you do? Do you just ignore him because he is acting newbish; or do you pressure further, even though you are sure he won't give any better of an answer afterwards? I don't really want a claim from him, yet, but I for one don't think that he is acting like a member of the town currently. I would push for a claim if more people agreed that he is more than just newbish, but I don't think I need to. Right now I am content with letting him act the way he has been until others agree that he needs to claim. Unless he changes his ways, I am sure that won't take too long.
For now, though, I will unvote, Vote Coiled Flame.
Also, could we get a vote count?
Quote:
Originally Posted by #233 I was going to say something along the lines of 'It's a pity that when asked to say who they think are the scummiest players, so many are just choosing lurkers. While yes, lurking is a rather scummy thing to do, are you guys seriously thinking that there is no better option among the more frequent posters?' But then the most recent posts by some of the more lurky people have been rather off to me, so they actually do make it onto the list...
Anywho, my LoS has at it's top:
Coiled Flame - still currently the most suspicious person in the game to me.
Magician of Thought - none of your points make any sence, even if you bother to go back and check the actual posts that you are trying to link to. At the end you ask for impressions... I think that your fist point against Cyan sums it up rather nicely...
Diggy - Your last post bothered me a bit. Quote:
Originally Posted by diggy Sorry guys, life is really busy at the moment I've been reading but haven't found the time to post.
But hey. my top 3 right now:
1) Coiled Flame, in the long run it will hurt the town to have him around, lets get rid of him now, and see what happens from there.
2) Wuffles, why pick on me? Surely you have better things to follow up than a lurker hunt? Or maybe not of course
3) Mosschop, he's even more of a lurker than me (And thats saying something) i'd like a prod for him
My vote still stays on Colied Flame and i would like a name/role claim from him
At first I was going to bold the parts that bothered me, but realized it would be easier to bold what I was OK with about your post.
You being busy doesn't bother me, we all are. You saying that you have the time to read this, but not the time to post a "hey, I'm still here" or an "I'm reading, will post later" is a bit bothersome...
What you use as reasons for voting CF seem rather lame to me. If you think he is scum, then cool, suspect him all you want, but the way you say this makes it sound more like you think he is town, but we should lynch him anyway. I am of the opinion that it is never good to kill someone who you actually do think is town. It is always better to kill people that you assume are scum (now, I happen to not think he is town, so I'm not that upset about this one, but the logic still merits talking about).
I'm not sure what about your second point bothers me, but it just rubs me the wrong way. I really can't explain it better right now, I'll have to think more about why that irks me, so ignore that one for now...
Point three bothers me as you are calling out someone for lurking, while admitting that you are just about as lurky as him. "Hello, Kettle? This is Pot. I was just calling today to let you know that, hey, you are black"
Since the case on Salubrious isn't going anywhere and I can't see any other cases I'd agree with, I'll Vote HRoth-Gar.
His initial post saying he was suspicious of Coiled Flame (#144) doesn't state any other reasoning than just agreeing to what other people had said. Not awfully scummy, but if looked through scum-lenses it could definetely be a jump onto an 'easy' wagon. Also, the way the post is constructed, conciously or subconciously, somewhat encourages other people to hop on as well.
The second post to have caught my eye is #189. I'm not entirely sure what he's trying to say there. I think he means that we need a claim from Coiled Flame since he doesn't make any sense even if we put pressure on him. Which, even if I don't agree, I don't condemn inherently scummy but since he still doesn't give any particular reasons for his suspicions it seems a little off. If you're going as far as outrightly demanding a claim you usually state some reasons for it. Also, these two sentences are a tad questionable:"I would push for a claim if more people agreed that he is more than just newbish, but I don't think I need to. Right now I am content with letting him act the way he has been until others agree that he needs to claim." In other words, he's demanding for a claim if other people do so as well, but if not then he won't either.
His latest post, #233, rubs me the wrong way as well. He still doesn't give anything particular for having Coiled Flame as his highest suspect, and also points at MoT because MoT doesn't make sense. I think it has been concluded that 'not making sense' is not a valid tell in itself, and in this case it seems like pointing out another possible easy target.
Shortly, I don't like the way he's chasing the inexperienced or otherwise newbish players with vague reasons. I could definetely see him as scum pushing for easy lynches, and since I haven't caught any contrary townie signs on him I'm happy with my vote.
To your first point I have to agree with what you have said, it was taken out of context. If you read it by itself, then sure, there isn't much of a reason for what I said. However, I didn't feel any strong urge to repeat what was being said in just about every post that was on that page ranging from as early as post 122 from enigma (who doesn't think Flame is scum, but does point out how his actions are suspicious) all the way up to post 141, and starting right after my post, 145 up to post 155 are almost only about this subject. I don't see what I needed to elaborate on. And yeah, my post was meant to have people look more negatively at CF, I thought that was rather clear. I thought he looked suspicious, and wanted to know what on earth made him not suspicious to everyone who was pointing out his scum tells and such yet would say that they thought he was just a foolish newb town. The only reason that I didn't move my vote to him right then was that I thought that with so many players stating with such certainty that he wasn't scum, that I must have just missed something and wanted to find out what it was.
For your second point, in post 189 I flat out say that I don't want a claim. There would have been no need for me to push for a claim on him, IMHO, as I felt that he wouldn't change his ways and eventually would piss off the town enough to just get rid of him. I'm patient enough that I felt I could wait this one out.
And your last point, I disagree with your point about MoT. If you (being anyone playing this game) are going to post something that absolutely makes no sense whatsoever, then I am going to question why. MoT's post was so confusing as to be ridiculous. And as far as the picking on the newbs go, other than those that have outed themselves as such (Coiled and nymphe) I have no idea who is a newb here or not. This is only my second game on this site, the only people I know here are the ones that play on WIFOM and AFAIK they are all more experienced than I am... So unless someone tells me that they haven't played much, I am going to assume that they have played more than me.
Hmm, here is my summary of what I've seen in the last few pages.
A lot of people saying that we should basically lynch someone before Day One becomes spam that will be annoying to re-read through later, such as random stupid FOS's that are based on one's like or dislike of Rome: Total War.
No new voting, aside from Ged's vote on Nymphe, despite the sentiment of wanting to move to day two - This means that most people are basically just waiting for bandwagons to form.
Hmm, here is my summary of what I've seen in the last few pages.
A lot of people saying that we should basically lynch someone before Day One becomes spam that will be annoying to re-read through later, such as random stupid FOS's that are based on one's like or dislike of Rome: Total War.
No new voting, aside from Ged's vote on Nymphe, despite the sentiment of wanting to move to day two - This means that most people are basically just waiting for bandwagons to form.
Sounds accurate, save that as Beaker has never mentioned R:TW, I'm not sure why Bubbles is FOSing him.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Vive, vale. Siquid novisti rectius istis,
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
MoT is not a mafia newb at all. More like he's the worst person to have to play in a mafia game. Seriously, his approach to playing is 'post as little as possible, and when you have to post, don't say anything that makes sense. This way, the mafia will never NK you and hopefully you don't get lynched as long as there are better targets around'. I realize that sounds like exaggerating etc, but, it honestly isn't. I would say 'just go read some other games he's been in', except that it seems like he just gets replaced in every single one.
@Mosschop: I'm pretty sure that I'm voting for Nymphe also, and have been for quite awhile.
Nymphe trying to 'prod' Hawkeye crosses me as someone trying to come off as just really noobish than a real mistake. I mean honestly, how can you be aware enough to notice whenver someone is reading the thread but not posting and to attack them for it, but, not aware enough to realize who got NKed N1.
However, I don't think I mentioned that I don't see your actions as actually scummy, the only thing was in the first point where I admitted your post wasn't awfully scummy.I think I need to elaborate on the 'encouraging other people to vote', since of course I do that as well when I've found someone I think scum. You did it in a sort of subliminal and suggestive way (i.e. the duck-comparison), not to mention that you didn't present any reasons of your own.
Ah, but you did, though:
Quote from Crippled_Fist »
His initial post saying he was suspicious of Coiled Flame (#144) doesn't state any other reasoning than just agreeing to what other people had said. Not awfully scummy, but if looked through scum-lenses it could definetely be a jump onto an 'easy' wagon. Also, the way the post is constructed, conciously or subconciously, somewhat encourages other people to hop on as well.
The second post to have caught my eye is #189. I'm not entirely sure what he's trying to say there. I think he means that we need a claim from Coiled Flame since he doesn't make any sense even if we put pressure on him. Which, even if I don't agree, I don't condemn inherently scummy but since he still doesn't give any particular reasons for his suspicions it seems a little off. If you're going as far as outrightly demanding a claim you usually state some reasons for it. Also, these two sentences are a tad questionable:"I would push for a claim if more people agreed that he is more than just newbish, but I don't think I need to. Right now I am content with letting him act the way he has been until others agree that he needs to claim." In other words, he's demanding for a claim if other people do so as well, but if not then he won't either.
His latest post, #233, rubs me the wrong way as well. He still doesn't give anything particular for having Coiled Flame as his highest suspect, and also points at MoT because MoT doesn't make sense. I think it has been concluded that 'not making sense' is not a valid tell in itself, and in this case it seems like pointing out another possible easy target.
Shortly, I don't like the way he's chasing the inexperienced or otherwise newbish players with vague reasons. I could definetely see him as scum pushing for easy lynches, and since I haven't caught any contrary townie signs on him I'm happy with my vote.
Your last point was the only one that you didn't point out as 'not scummy but still bothers me.'
Quote from Crippled_Fist »
But I'll concede this point, since it is a weak tell at best. I mainly mentioned the post in question because with the other points I raised it points out a consistent behaviour of pressing people without mentioning definitive reasons of your own.What you actually said was: "I would push for a claim if more people agreed that he is more than just newbish, but I don't think I need to." Which to me seems pretty much as "I would demand a claim if other people would do that as well, but as they don't I won't either." Which, firstly, isn't at all the same as saying you don't want a claim from him, and secondly, is rather scummy since you evade taking clear stances.
Actually, I think I did say I didn't want a claim...
Quote from HRoth-Gar »
I would agree that he is acting 100% newbish, but that doesn't mean that it isn't scummy also. Sometimes people are scum early on, too. He keeps saying that he has explained himself, but if that explanation isn't good enough (as I don't think it is), then what do you do? Do you just ignore him because he is acting newbish; or do you pressure further, even though you are sure he won't give any better of an answer afterwards? I don't really want a claim from him, yet, but I for one don't think that he is acting like a member of the town currently. I would push for a claim if more people agreed that he is more than just newbish, but I don't think I need to. Right now I am content with letting him act the way he has been until others agree that he needs to claim. Unless he changes his ways, I am sure that won't take too long.
I go on to say that if I wasn't alone in this I would push for a claim. As it was, there was no reason at all for me to push, I would have been all alone in that pursuit, and I feel that would do more harm than good to the case against CF. There is no reason at all for a solitary person to push for a claim. If I had, then by the time a solid anti-CF thing got going, he could very easily just ignore me, as I'm the guy who has been militantly pushing for a claim since page five to no avail.
Quote from Crippled_Fist »
Also, I find it interesting that you think it's worth waiting for the town to get emotional and lynch someone because they 'piss off the town'.
He was already getting the town emotional; that was my reasoning behind saying that. I really didn't expect it to be too much longer before the people on the fence about him and the people who were just fed up with him would start voting for him. More than one person had commented on how it was getting harder and harder to not justify just dropping their vote onto CF to get him out of the game. Now, if I think someone is scum, and others don't but are willing to vote for them anyway, then I'm not going to care why they are voting, just be happy that they are.
Quote from Crippled_Fist »
The point is that you had MoT as your second highest suspect because 'he didn't make sense'. Putting MoT being a player from which that is almost expectable aside, that struck me as preparing for a possible future attack against another prospective easy target.
Actually to me now, the point is that you had first accused me of finding newbs to pick on as they would be easy lynches. It seems to me, however, that if someone can point out that MoT isn't a newb but his play style is just to act stupid enough that the mafia doesn’t find him a threat, then my reaction to him won't be changing any time soon. I think it is a very valid course of action to let someone know that intentionally playing poorly shouldn't be tolerated. If the town wants him to not act this way anymore, then I think the only way to do it is to tell him to make sense or get lynched. If he gets lynched for this kind of behavior in a game or two, eventually he'll start to realize that he can't do it any more. And as far as 'preparing for a possible future attack against another prospective easy target' goes, except for the prospective easy target bit, isn't that the whole point of the LoS? Aren't we just saying whose lynch we could get behind? I still hold out that I did not pick the "easy targets." I picked, what was at the time to me, the correct targets, people who I thought were scum and or questionable.
Oh, I didn't realize that hawkeyez is dead...why was he reading this thread? Anyway, moving on...I'd like to point out that MoT never did respond to the communal "WTF?" in response to his ged vote and absence of logic. I think that after we asked for an explanation, Coiled flame did something dumb and we all asked him to explain that, forgetting about MoT. Personally, I'm still curious as to what he was thinking when he made that vote
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Domanatrices are like dentists...you pay them to hurt you!"
Sorry I haven't said anything the past few days. I'm about to go to bed so tomorrow after school I will post more regarding my suspicions. However for now I will suffice it to say that I don't find nymphe suspicious. Going back to my logic from when beaker first went after nymphe. He's new and won't understand certain rules immeadiately (such as not knowing that once a lynch is reached votes can't be removed).
@Beaker: Couple questions regarding your PBPA, or to anyone in general:
1. How were nymphes posts overlydefensive (I just see him explaining why he posted the vote and conditional recall)
2. You point out nymphe attacks mosschops alot, however you attacked mosschops just as often (for reference, you go after mosschops in posts 110, 160, 169, and 214) So why attack nymphe for this when you did it more?
I have a few more points but I need the time to quote everything which will take a while.
unvote
Sorry for not posting. I am guessing c_f is just a newb but I could be swayed because I don't like his vote frenzy. I need to reread to make sure though.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"No, I specifically heard denim. Looks like so crafty ghost is trying to break our code" -Bravo 3 "I know nothing of the law, only vengence" -Dom, U/G madness
If we are truly at seven votes (the 6 mosschop counted plus Cyan's) we'll have to tread carefully from now on. We don't want to inadvertantly put nymphe at "hammer range" (to borrow ZDS's term) before he has been given the chance to fully defend himself.
Quote from nymphe »
I'd like to point out that MoT never did respond to the communal "WTF?" in response to his ged vote and absence of logic. I think that after we asked for an explanation, Coiled flame did something dumb and we all asked him to explain that, forgetting about MoT. Personally, I'm still curious as to what he was thinking when he made that vote
This is somewhat diversionary.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
By kingcobweb and Goblinboy.
Official Elitist of [thread=40859][RBS][/thread]
Quote from kingcobweb »
I don't understand the purpose of gimmick accounts.
@Beaker: Couple questions regarding your PBPA, or to anyone in general:
1. How were nymphes posts overlydefensive (I just see him explaining why he posted the vote and conditional recall)
the overdefensiveness wasnt really a big part of my PBPA, but i mainly saw it in post 244. looking back on it now, its not as overdefensive as i thought it was. i think that it just comes from the lack of inflection in posting
2. You point out nymphe attacks mosschops alot, however you attacked mosschops just as often (for reference, you go after mosschops in posts 110, 160, 169, and 214) So why attack nymphe for this when you did it more?
my main point in this argument wasnt that he was attacking mosschop, but he was trying to distract from him. at the time of his first lurker hunt (it wasnt just mosschop) it was early, but the only small lead then was his first post.
remember that the main point of my PBPA was the diggy vote interaction, not overdefensiveness/lurker hunting...
as i look back on the PBPA, i see that a lot of the posts depend on what connotation you give them to whether or not they're scummy. for now, ill leave my vote on nymphe as our best lead, but if he would respond to our concerns, i would be willing to unvote if his response isnt scummy
I'll support the wagon. Unvote Salubrious, Vote nymphe. I'm still not convinced that nymphe is the best suspect, but I think there's at least some basis for a wagon, enough that I think getting a claim will be productive.
In any case, be aware that I'll be out of town starting tomorrow, so I won't be able to participate much for a while.
I just don't think that there really ARE any other cases. I mean, there are some points against Salubrious but not, IMO, anything compared to the case against Nymphe. Throughout Coiled's posting/voting spree, I never got any kind of malicious intent from his posts. But from Nymphe's, I get alot of it. Hence why I was willing to give Coiled the benefit of the doubt, but, I'm not willing to in Nymphe's case.
Once again I am going to say it: show me. Show me where you see the malice in nymphe's posts that you don't see in Coiled's. Highlight every malicious evil scummy word.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Vive, vale. Siquid novisti rectius istis,
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
well, it seems like there are a few people who want me to role claim right now, and two who are reluctant. If we get to the point where the majority wants me to role-claim, then I will, but for now, I only count Cyan, fadeblue, and, judging by his post, wuffles as expressly wanting me to claim.
Also, beaker, what concerns exactly do you want me to respond to?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Domanatrices are like dentists...you pay them to hurt you!"
@blinking spirit: It's obviously impossible to 'highlight' malicious intent. It's more of a feeling than anything else. I could try to explain why they came across as malicious to me, compared to just newbieness on CFs part, but, that's a pretty tough thing to explain.
@Nymphe: You have 8 votes. 8 people willing to lynch you today means 8 people that want you to claim, even if they don't specifically say so. Please claim in your next post.
nymphe, what i am looking for is why you jumped in your next post, pretty much saying "OMG! I'll vote for him, but if i would get responsibility for the hammah, I'll take it back!!"
I just don't think that there really ARE any other cases. I mean, there are some points against Salubrious but not, IMO, anything compared to the case against Nymphe. Throughout Coiled's posting/voting spree, I never got any kind of malicious intent from his posts. But from Nymphe's, I get alot of it. Hence why I was willing to give Coiled the benefit of the doubt, but, I'm not willing to in Nymphe's case.
This is my rationel. I don't see a great case against anyone so far, and left to my own thoughts I think CF and Nymphe for their various highlighted plays or MoT or CPE mostly because I don't like their play styles are the people to go after. I don't really see anything on H'Roth-Gar or Salubrious, myself.
well, it seems like there are a few people who want me to role claim right now, and two who are reluctant. If we get to the point where the majority wants me to role-claim, then I will, but for now, I only count Cyan, fadeblue, and, judging by his post, wuffles as expressly wanting me to claim.
Also, beaker, what concerns exactly do you want me to respond to?
@blinking spirit: It's obviously impossible to 'highlight' malicious intent. It's more of a feeling than anything else. I could try to explain why they came across as malicious to me, compared to just newbieness on CFs part, but, that's a pretty tough thing to explain.
nymphe, what i am looking for is why you jumped in your next post, pretty much saying "OMG! I'll vote for him, but if i would get responsibility for the hammah, I'll take it back!!"
Consider the context. There were posts in between nymphe's two posts. Go reread, then see if you can't think of a reasonable explanation for yourself.
This is my rationel. I don't see a great case against anyone so far, and left to my own thoughts I think CF and Nymphe for their various highlighted plays or MoT or CPE mostly because I don't like their play styles are the people to go after. I don't really see anything on H'Roth-Gar or Salubrious, myself.
Agreed (though I kind of see fadeblue's point regarding Salubrious). I'd definitely much rather lynch magicianofthought than nymphe, who has been sensible and participatory throughout the game, at least.
Hell, why not? Maybe it'll start a bandwagon; those have been happening often enough. Vote magicianofthought.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Vive, vale. Siquid novisti rectius istis,
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
@Blinking Spirit: The point isn't to see whether or not YOU can come up with a reasonable explanation for a person's actions, but whether or not that person can reasonably explain them. That's half of the reason why you shouldn't defend other people in mafia...because often, in attempting to defend themselves, it becomes even more obvious that they're scum. If everyone just came up with justifications for everyone else's actions, mafia games would never go anywhere.
@Blinking Spirit: The point isn't to see whether or not YOU can come up with a reasonable explanation for a person's actions, but whether or not that person can reasonably explain them. That's half of the reason why you shouldn't defend other people in mafia...because often, in attempting to defend themselves, it becomes even more obvious that they're scum. If everyone just came up with justifications for everyone else's actions, mafia games would never go anywhere.
You make a good point, but I'm afraid I just can't help myself: I like defending people.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Vive, vale. Siquid novisti rectius istis,
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
*makes note about Cripple_Fist not spelling my name right the last like 6 times you've written it down...*
I don't know what you are expecting me to 'answer' from that post, you don't ask me any questions, you don't change anything about your stance, you just restate your original grievances without expounding on anything at all, only this time to say that they are more severe than they were before.
I've already talked about why I didn't put forth any new accusations. I've already talked about how you are completely taking my posts out of context. I'll go ahead and placate you, if that is what you need though, and go over all of you last post to me.
Quote from Cripple_Fist »
The first post is mainly there because of the other posts. It isn't awfully scummy, since I've seen townies hop on wagons without stating good reasons, but when that kind of a behaviour becomes consistent there is something to be suspicious of. I pointed out the post because I wanted to indicate the consistency in your actions.
In the second point, however, I said "...he means that we need a claim from Coiled Flame since he doesn't make any sense even if we put pressure on him. Which, even if I don't agree, I don't condemn inherently scummy but since he still doesn't give any particular reasons for his suspicions it seems a little off."
I should've maybe used heavier words than 'a little off', but the point remains. I wouldn't hold the opinion that scummy if you'd posted some reasons to justify the whole case. Which you hadn't, and that's why I do in fact see this point scummy.
Convenient that after I point out that there wasn't really anything damning in your original post, that it now should have been ‘heavier’ worded. My guess is that you didn't word it any 'heavier' the first time through was because you realized that if this was all you could muster against me, then you really didn't have a case.
Quote from Cripple_Fist »
I don't see any reason why it would be unwise for a person to push for a claim if he thought he had good enough reasons to do so. If you have, you certainly haven't posted them. As for the risk of getting ignored, he won't ignore you if you have a good part of the town and a good case backing you up. The former usually comes with the latter, but as far as I can tell you haven't presented any case against Coiled, so I can believe you feeling a little lonely.
That, however, doesn't diminish the scumminess of "I'll act like the majority does".
If the entire town says "I want no claim from 'X'," but you decide to press the attack on 'X', then one of 2 things happen: you get ignored by everyone until suspicion falls back onto either 'X' or yourself, or you lose credibility with the rest of the town as they have already stopped caring about 'X'.
You are correct, however, in that I never did present a case again him (again, I did state why {there was no need as the case had been presented by the posts that preceded mine}), so I'll do so now. He has jumped wildly from one vote to the next with little, poor, or no reasoning for said votes. Any 'case' he has made against someone has either been wrong or ridiculous. He ignores the cries of the town to stop acting like a kid with ADD. And now we can add lurking to the list, as well, as his last post was on the 18th.
Quote from Cripple_Fist »
I admit it takes courage to say you're so sure of someone being scum on Day 1 that you don't bother with reactions and debate about the said person. In the case they are lynched and turn out townie, despite your iron-clad beliefs, what are you going to analyse? "Yeah, I knew they were probably town but I was pissed at them" as a defence from a townie who'd voted them could likely lead to another unfortunate mislynch.
Especially since if you're so sure of someone's scumminess you usually could muster a case which with its logic alone would probably work better than hoping for the town to get pissed enough.
It's not a matter of 'courage' to argue and debate, as that would mean that he would have to also participate, it's a matter of me getting the feeling that he is scum, and acting on said feeling. As for the rest, once again, out of context (which you yourself admitted to at the start of your first accusation against me). I will totally agree that in a vacuum, my post can look scummy, because in a vacuum, any post can look scummy.
Quote from Cripple_Fist »
1. I don't think MoT has ever proved he pays enough attention/is able not to post like he does. As such the point that he'd do it intentionally is moot, he's always done it.
2. We are not playing 'teach person X to play by lynching him', we are playing mafia, 'lynch person X because they have committed scummy actions and not because they annoy us in some way'.
1. I'm going off of what someone else (I think it was Cyan) said about MoT. That he does this intentionally. If that is true, then no, the point is not moot.
2. Yes, we are playing mafia, and as such, if someone does something that I deem suspicious, I will then be suspicious of that person. I feel that posting complete and utter nonsense is suspicious. At the time I made my LoS, it was suspicious enough to be put onto my list. I'm not going to apologize for that, I'm not going to take it back, but I will stand behind that decision until MoT decides to post something intelligible.
Quote from Cripple_Fist »
With 'easy target' I mean someone who is known that, or seems like, they are unable to defend themselves well and are likely mess things up if they meet pressure.
The point is that as your top 2 suspicious players you chose Coiled and MoT, who to my eye are both those 'easy targets', with presenting reasons vague at best. If you had had some definitive justification for your suspicions, I would've evaluated the post differently. However, since you didn't, I consider it scummy.
Bolded by me for emphasis
No, with "easy target" you had specifically said 'newbs and inexperienced players':
Quote from Cripple_Fist »
Shortly, I don't like the way he's chasing the inexperienced or otherwise newbish players with vague reasons. I could definetely see him as scum pushing for easy lynches, and since I haven't caught any contrary townie signs on him I'm happy with my vote.
So that is crap. At this point I would normally say something along the lines of "and once again, you are taking me out of context," but seeing as that really is all you have done, that it is what all of your accusations revolve around, I'm just going to ignore the part that is bolded. And as such that means that I will for the most part just ignore everything you've said to/about me.
None of this has diminished that I feel that Coiled Flame is still the scummiest player, by the by. Vote stands.
Coiled Flame has just been replaced in Newb 10. On our thread, his last post was on the 18th, 11 days ago. magicianofthought is in the same boat, as he also has not posted in 11 days (and has only made 4 posts as well). I'd like to request a modprod for the two.
Can someone reiterate the arguments against nymphe, please? Aside from the withdrawing of diggy vote, what else are we accusing him of?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
By kingcobweb and Goblinboy.
Official Elitist of [thread=40859][RBS][/thread]
Quote from kingcobweb »
I don't understand the purpose of gimmick accounts.
We should just save some time and replace MoT now. Otherwise, we're just going to prod him multiple times and replace him later, just like basically every single mafia game he has ever played in.
EBWOP - Correct me if I'm wrong, but Coiled hasnt posted on this thread since the 19th, page 15 of this thread. Unless I'm mistaken that is grounds for a PROD and/or replacement.
Yeah all right, I guess I have to claim then. My song is "Walking With A Ghost" and my role is that of retaliator. The logic is that if I get killed my ghost avenges me.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Domanatrices are like dentists...you pay them to hurt you!"
Flavorful claim. I like it. Unvote for now. Are you a super saint (kills the person who puts the final vote on you) or do you just off someone if they night kill you?
A vote on someone is pretty much the same as willing for someone to claim.
Not in general. In this case, of course, but you can't say that of every vote in every game. Just a point of clarification for the newbies in the crowd.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Vive, vale. Siquid novisti rectius istis,
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
EBWODP: The reason for this is that frankly I think him making his "list" of which people want him to claim was a simple delaying tactic while he tried frantically to come up with a believable false-claim.
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
Anyway, for some content, Nymphe is right on MoT. Not newbish so much as weird as heck. Also, as far as I can remember still voting me (though I'm not sure why).
I'm inclined to agree with Cyan when he said that long days tend to lead to unhelpfully large amounts of bull to weed through during rereads and, as far as I can tell, don't have a higher accuracy of scum lynches. If we can't find scum in a few hundred posts I'd rather just kill off a noob who'll probably be a hinderence to us later in the game anyway with the knowledge that it's not going to be worth our time and energy to grab that scum (that probably won't be scum anyway).
If that makes any sense at all I'm giving myself a cookie.
Maybe I'm a little confused here, but you think that both nymphe and Coiled have done scummy things, but for them it can be called Newb mistakes and ignored... but I've done nothing (according to the post where you voted me) that is actually scummy, I'm just the best target? OK, cool, as long as I know...
Let me go ahead and post that here:
To your first point I have to agree with what you have said, it was taken out of context. If you read it by itself, then sure, there isn't much of a reason for what I said. However, I didn't feel any strong urge to repeat what was being said in just about every post that was on that page ranging from as early as post 122 from enigma (who doesn't think Flame is scum, but does point out how his actions are suspicious) all the way up to post 141, and starting right after my post, 145 up to post 155 are almost only about this subject. I don't see what I needed to elaborate on. And yeah, my post was meant to have people look more negatively at CF, I thought that was rather clear. I thought he looked suspicious, and wanted to know what on earth made him not suspicious to everyone who was pointing out his scum tells and such yet would say that they thought he was just a foolish newb town. The only reason that I didn't move my vote to him right then was that I thought that with so many players stating with such certainty that he wasn't scum, that I must have just missed something and wanted to find out what it was.
For your second point, in post 189 I flat out say that I don't want a claim. There would have been no need for me to push for a claim on him, IMHO, as I felt that he wouldn't change his ways and eventually would piss off the town enough to just get rid of him. I'm patient enough that I felt I could wait this one out.
And your last point, I disagree with your point about MoT. If you (being anyone playing this game) are going to post something that absolutely makes no sense whatsoever, then I am going to question why. MoT's post was so confusing as to be ridiculous. And as far as the picking on the newbs go, other than those that have outed themselves as such (Coiled and nymphe) I have no idea who is a newb here or not. This is only my second game on this site, the only people I know here are the ones that play on WIFOM and AFAIK they are all more experienced than I am... So unless someone tells me that they haven't played much, I am going to assume that they have played more than me.
Type II:
BGUWet Rock
GWTapping Token Beats
Extended:
GWREternal Slide
GRUBeasts (homebrew)
RGoblins!
Legacy:
GUBWROath of Barbarians (homebrew)
A lot of people saying that we should basically lynch someone before Day One becomes spam that will be annoying to re-read through later, such as random stupid FOS's that are based on one's like or dislike of Rome: Total War.
No new voting, aside from Ged's vote on Nymphe, despite the sentiment of wanting to move to day two - This means that most people are basically just waiting for bandwagons to form.
Sounds accurate, save that as Beaker has never mentioned R:TW, I'm not sure why Bubbles is FOSing him.
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
@Mosschop: I'm pretty sure that I'm voting for Nymphe also, and have been for quite awhile.
Nymphe trying to 'prod' Hawkeye crosses me as someone trying to come off as just really noobish than a real mistake. I mean honestly, how can you be aware enough to notice whenver someone is reading the thread but not posting and to attack them for it, but, not aware enough to realize who got NKed N1.
Ah, but you did, though:
Your last point was the only one that you didn't point out as 'not scummy but still bothers me.'
Actually, I think I did say I didn't want a claim...
I go on to say that if I wasn't alone in this I would push for a claim. As it was, there was no reason at all for me to push, I would have been all alone in that pursuit, and I feel that would do more harm than good to the case against CF. There is no reason at all for a solitary person to push for a claim. If I had, then by the time a solid anti-CF thing got going, he could very easily just ignore me, as I'm the guy who has been militantly pushing for a claim since page five to no avail.
He was already getting the town emotional; that was my reasoning behind saying that. I really didn't expect it to be too much longer before the people on the fence about him and the people who were just fed up with him would start voting for him. More than one person had commented on how it was getting harder and harder to not justify just dropping their vote onto CF to get him out of the game. Now, if I think someone is scum, and others don't but are willing to vote for them anyway, then I'm not going to care why they are voting, just be happy that they are.
Actually to me now, the point is that you had first accused me of finding newbs to pick on as they would be easy lynches. It seems to me, however, that if someone can point out that MoT isn't a newb but his play style is just to act stupid enough that the mafia doesn’t find him a threat, then my reaction to him won't be changing any time soon. I think it is a very valid course of action to let someone know that intentionally playing poorly shouldn't be tolerated. If the town wants him to not act this way anymore, then I think the only way to do it is to tell him to make sense or get lynched. If he gets lynched for this kind of behavior in a game or two, eventually he'll start to realize that he can't do it any more. And as far as 'preparing for a possible future attack against another prospective easy target' goes, except for the prospective easy target bit, isn't that the whole point of the LoS? Aren't we just saying whose lynch we could get behind? I still hold out that I did not pick the "easy targets." I picked, what was at the time to me, the correct targets, people who I thought were scum and or questionable.
Type II:
BGUWet Rock
GWTapping Token Beats
Extended:
GWREternal Slide
GRUBeasts (homebrew)
RGoblins!
Legacy:
GUBWROath of Barbarians (homebrew)
@Beaker: Couple questions regarding your PBPA, or to anyone in general:
1. How were nymphes posts overlydefensive (I just see him explaining why he posted the vote and conditional recall)
2. You point out nymphe attacks mosschops alot, however you attacked mosschops just as often (for reference, you go after mosschops in posts 110, 160, 169, and 214) So why attack nymphe for this when you did it more?
I have a few more points but I need the time to quote everything which will take a while.
Sorry for not posting. I am guessing c_f is just a newb but I could be swayed because I don't like his vote frenzy. I need to reread to make sure though.
"I know nothing of the law, only vengence" -Dom, U/G madness
This is somewhat diversionary.
By kingcobweb and Goblinboy.
Official Elitist of [thread=40859][RBS][/thread]
the overdefensiveness wasnt really a big part of my PBPA, but i mainly saw it in post 244. looking back on it now, its not as overdefensive as i thought it was. i think that it just comes from the lack of inflection in posting
my main point in this argument wasnt that he was attacking mosschop, but he was trying to distract from him. at the time of his first lurker hunt (it wasnt just mosschop) it was early, but the only small lead then was his first post.
remember that the main point of my PBPA was the diggy vote interaction, not overdefensiveness/lurker hunting...
as i look back on the PBPA, i see that a lot of the posts depend on what connotation you give them to whether or not they're scummy. for now, ill leave my vote on nymphe as our best lead, but if he would respond to our concerns, i would be willing to unvote if his response isnt scummy
In any case, be aware that I'll be out of town starting tomorrow, so I won't be able to participate much for a while.
diggy has disappeared, after alleviating my lurker suspicions back on page 15.
MoT as well, but everyone already knew that.
Request Prodz0r, please, Fayul
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
Also, beaker, what concerns exactly do you want me to respond to?
@Nymphe: You have 8 votes. 8 people willing to lynch you today means 8 people that want you to claim, even if they don't specifically say so. Please claim in your next post.
This is my rationel. I don't see a great case against anyone so far, and left to my own thoughts I think CF and Nymphe for their various highlighted plays or MoT or CPE mostly because I don't like their play styles are the people to go after. I don't really see anything on H'Roth-Gar or Salubrious, myself.
Yes, it is.
Consider the context. There were posts in between nymphe's two posts. Go reread, then see if you can't think of a reasonable explanation for yourself.
Agreed (though I kind of see fadeblue's point regarding Salubrious). I'd definitely much rather lynch magicianofthought than nymphe, who has been sensible and participatory throughout the game, at least.
Hell, why not? Maybe it'll start a bandwagon; those have been happening often enough. Vote magicianofthought.
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
You make a good point, but I'm afraid I just can't help myself: I like defending people.
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
I don't know what you are expecting me to 'answer' from that post, you don't ask me any questions, you don't change anything about your stance, you just restate your original grievances without expounding on anything at all, only this time to say that they are more severe than they were before.
I've already talked about why I didn't put forth any new accusations. I've already talked about how you are completely taking my posts out of context. I'll go ahead and placate you, if that is what you need though, and go over all of you last post to me.
Convenient that after I point out that there wasn't really anything damning in your original post, that it now should have been ‘heavier’ worded. My guess is that you didn't word it any 'heavier' the first time through was because you realized that if this was all you could muster against me, then you really didn't have a case.
If the entire town says "I want no claim from 'X'," but you decide to press the attack on 'X', then one of 2 things happen: you get ignored by everyone until suspicion falls back onto either 'X' or yourself, or you lose credibility with the rest of the town as they have already stopped caring about 'X'.
You are correct, however, in that I never did present a case again him (again, I did state why {there was no need as the case had been presented by the posts that preceded mine}), so I'll do so now. He has jumped wildly from one vote to the next with little, poor, or no reasoning for said votes. Any 'case' he has made against someone has either been wrong or ridiculous. He ignores the cries of the town to stop acting like a kid with ADD. And now we can add lurking to the list, as well, as his last post was on the 18th.
It's not a matter of 'courage' to argue and debate, as that would mean that he would have to also participate, it's a matter of me getting the feeling that he is scum, and acting on said feeling. As for the rest, once again, out of context (which you yourself admitted to at the start of your first accusation against me). I will totally agree that in a vacuum, my post can look scummy, because in a vacuum, any post can look scummy.
1. I'm going off of what someone else (I think it was Cyan) said about MoT. That he does this intentionally. If that is true, then no, the point is not moot.
2. Yes, we are playing mafia, and as such, if someone does something that I deem suspicious, I will then be suspicious of that person. I feel that posting complete and utter nonsense is suspicious. At the time I made my LoS, it was suspicious enough to be put onto my list. I'm not going to apologize for that, I'm not going to take it back, but I will stand behind that decision until MoT decides to post something intelligible.
Bolded by me for emphasis
No, with "easy target" you had specifically said 'newbs and inexperienced players':
So that is crap. At this point I would normally say something along the lines of "and once again, you are taking me out of context," but seeing as that really is all you have done, that it is what all of your accusations revolve around, I'm just going to ignore the part that is bolded. And as such that means that I will for the most part just ignore everything you've said to/about me.
None of this has diminished that I feel that Coiled Flame is still the scummiest player, by the by. Vote stands.
Type II:
BGUWet Rock
GWTapping Token Beats
Extended:
GWREternal Slide
GRUBeasts (homebrew)
RGoblins!
Legacy:
GUBWROath of Barbarians (homebrew)
Can someone reiterate the arguments against nymphe, please? Aside from the withdrawing of diggy vote, what else are we accusing him of?
By kingcobweb and Goblinboy.
Official Elitist of [thread=40859][RBS][/thread]
Since 8 people are voting you, that is 8 people that want you to claim.
you say that you're ghost avenges you, are you avenged right away, or is it after a period of time?
I'm happy with that claim.
But yeah, do you simply off anyone who NK's you, or are you like a true super saint, in that the person who offs you (i.e. judas) kills you?
rawr.
Serves me right for not using the preview button
The role itself has the potential issue of difficult confirmability, but hey, some roles are like that.
Not in general. In this case, of course, but you can't say that of every vote in every game. Just a point of clarification for the newbies in the crowd.
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
We do not need to know this as the town. Suspicions of Beaker rising further.
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
if we know this, it allows us to find out if we want to test it