The only thing I don't like so far is Generic apparently drawing conclusions based on wildly incomplete information, and mostly just implying things rather than stating them outright. Generic: No, it's not exactly the Kennedy conspiracy, but you should still state your conclusions specifically. Also, how was Prophylaxis' vote on MDenham "good"?
Red flag. Non-committal disdain for Generic's play without any real follow-up.
Someone got angry fast and ultra defensive. Theres only two votes on you, and one is just RVS by MDenham. You started off confused being singled out, then instead of actualy defending yourself you lashed out like a cornered animal.
that did not read like anyone was talking down to you or your character as a person so the sudden anger makes me suspicious.
I'm bemused more than anything. I engaged wessel when I thought he was going to have something of note, then he accused me of avoiding commenting on a weak exchange between him and Proph, like I was the only person not contributing to it.
Then teia attacks me for treating the exchange with contempt. Then caex says I'm hyper defensive.
And as I have always maintained in games I respond to everything aimed towards me. If you wa t to vote me over it that's your perogative.
Your response to Teia still came off as over the top defensive. But the other two interactions so far haven't been terrible. As I said, it comes off as suspicious for now, thats it.
More non-committal disdain for Generic. Duly noted.
I'm happy to talk to you wessel, what would you like to discuss?
How about explaining to me why you haven't commented on what's been going on?
I missed the part where it was Generic's responsibility to comment on everything that happens.
And apparently RVS is over? Unvote
O hi swishh! I see you've taken up the role of being Generic's defender. Good. Can you explain to me why him ignoring things should not be questioned?
I've been in one game with Generic before, and from what I've seen his play is...erratic. Your post just seemed like you were bullying him into providing his thoughts on what frankly isn't legitimate content.
Generic is leaning town for me. #50 seems to be coming from a town mindset, and I've been in many of Generic's games before and I'm used to him. He just plays like this.
The best way I can describe Generic is like a hurricane. He comes in during Day 1, makes a mess, then starts making sense.
I find Wessel's poking at Generic during RVS noteworthy. Generic's response was over-the-top, but there is no real reason for Wessel to call him out during RVS for RVS-type behavior.
Barn this. No comment on Proph's alignment, but I agree with his opinion of Generic.
New Zealand standard time, and got tattoo today, sorry for being late to the party! Read back and Wessel and Generic strike me as overly defensive. FOS both of them, but nothing solid as yet. Not going to bother omgusing the vote on me during RVS, since I missed the whole stage; although I called the autovote Jace when my clan was picking our planeswalker
Prophyl buddying Generic seems a little suspicious to me, but it's early days yet.
New Zealand standard time, and got tattoo today, sorry for being late to the party! Read back and Wessel and Generic strike me as overly defensive. FOS both of them, but nothing solid as yet. Not going to bother omgusing the vote on me during RVS, since I missed the whole stage; although I called the autovote Jace when my clan was picking our planeswalker
Prophyl buddying Generic seems a little suspicious to me, but it's early days yet.
Unvote, vote Necropsy
Consider my vote on MDenham as well.
Any reason in particular to vote Necropsy over MDenham?
Read back and Wessel and Generic strike me as overly defensive.
All right, so what aspects of their posting seem defensive? Does one seem any more defensive than the other? What conclusions would you draw based upon your observations?
Basically, your post seems pretty noncommittal and overly vague. Let's get some more concrete details from you.
Also Prophylaxis: That vote of yours seems a bit OMGUS-y. "Prophy's buddying up to Generic." "Vote Prophylaxis." Do you have anything to back that vote up?
I totally disagree. I don't want to misconstrue Proph's post, but Necropsy seems to be the one OMGUSing, not Proph.
Lack of immediate voting I will put down to not knowing salve meta (I understand noob tells read scummy, but I play elsewhere and I like to out reads before making rash votes)
My initial suspicions were justified for reasons similar to page 3, but with not much to go on, I was hoping to hold out for something a little more solid since the random voting was over.
Apologies for not quoting, as I mentioned earlier, I am playing from a tablet (check Dimir thread if you care to verify my computerless status) which makes posting a little trickier (hence Prophyl ninja'ing me before I cemented a vote earlier).
Regarding the suspiciousness turning into a vote - no edits are allowed and I updated my thinking in realtime. My schedule dictates I have certain times I can be online, and I write my thoughts out loud during these times. On further reflection, I continue to find Prophyl's willingness to immediately omgus me scummy as hell, and am happy in my voting. I seem a convenient scapegoat to draw away from the discussions earlier regarding the strongly defensive play of who I suspect is his scumbuddy.
You don't provide any real content or thought here, just self-conscious explanation for your behavior. Regarding what I underlined, sounds like you found what you think is a legitimate reason fed to you by other players for your vote on Proph.
Cause I considered your vote on MDenham as the end of the RVS.
Don't think this is a good enough explanation.
You voted the mod, which should be counted as a null vote, and yet you unvoted. Why?
RVS is over, I unvote RVS vote. Even if it's for a non-player.
What do you think of my MDenham vote, Wessel?
Prophy, your question about your vote to Wessel doesn't line up with what you and Wessel were discussing. Why ask about your vote to Wessel when Wessel left the door open to for investigation about his prior game?
Has Wessel unvoted a null vote prior in RVS?
What is your experience with Wessel on this or others?
These questions are for Prophy to answer. More to come later when I have more time.
If he were scum and knew you were town, he would want to get on your good side and/or get your support for his actions. You're certainly one of the more experienced players in this game. You supporting his actions would give them (and him) some legitimacy.
Everything scares me... kitties scare me... squirrels scare me... corpses....corpses bring forth a pletora of confusing feeling which i prefer not to dwell on...:p
One question before I continue on this: How is 'town wants to help other town' an issue in this? You say Generic reacted with disdain, could you explain to me how this indicates to you that he might be scum for not wanting to help town?
I'm not exactly sure what is is your trying to ask.
What he said Just didn't seem helpful.
But to note at least. Generic was the one that said he treated it with disdain and sarcasim. I didn't claim that, he did.
Quote from Wessel »
Not liking the bolded sentence. 'Genuinely' is a buzzword overdoing the attempt to sound sincere. And 'valuable intel'? I doubt it. Sounds like an attempt to buddy up to me.
Genuinely is a buzzword? Ethier way, anything can be valuble no matter the source. I've seen alot of people claim to of solved the game by something said in day one. In a game were one slip up can get you lynched, everything becomes valuble information.
Intel is my shorthand for information. Hence the 'Valuble intel' not connected to you as a 'Buddy' in the slightest.
tl;dr
Everything ANY person says CAN be valuble, doesn't mean its a buddy attempt at all or what was said IS valuble.
RL notes: Fleetwood Mac concert was cool; getting back at 3:30am was not (but was kind of expected).
Getting up this morning and seeing that nobody had posted in 21 hours, though, was ridiculous. I know a few of you are V/LA; that's fine, but the rest of you could stand to post something even if it isn't content.
Commentary on what little has been posted since I last did:
Rancid Raptor seems like flailing something; not sure if town or scum at this point, however. The comment about people claiming to have solved the game on Day 1 bothers me (I mean, I'll say that on occasion but solely as a joke; this doesn't read like a joke to me).
BV's "first read" seems a bit light on, well, anything. Wessel vs. Generic doesn't make up that much of the thread.
Generic's last post seems to have been attacked by a wild autocorrect; I assume the second half of the post is supposed to begin "You never actually answered my question..." as that's the only way that post even sort of makes sense.
Sorry, I should of Mentioned I'd Be V/LA During the weekened. I just didn't think The weekened would of been that bad.
This week until next monday is is also V/LA. Monday was my Great Grandma's 95th, so was a mini family renuinion. This fourth is a reunion for the other side. Camping and such and more then 7 hours of driving a day. So pretty absent from the computer this comming week.
Secondly I pressured him to try to see if I could get reactions.
Here's something I'm curious about: You pressure someone to try and get reactions, yet were convinced that my post about your RVS vote was simply a "cheap jab." I wanted to see how you reacted, and you got defensive. Would you say there's any difference between the two? Why perceive an offhand comment as an attack?
Two of my reads have been updated after I looked back:
Wessel looks like he's shotgunning questions every which way but he's not followed up on some of them. It makes me some. Mind you, this isn't always a scum tell, but I've seen scum do it before to try to gain lots of town points early on. EtR in Ataghan and Wheat_Grinder in Giant Robot Battle Royale are the two examples that spring to mind immediately. It bumps Wessel down to a neutral read.
Generic's post responding to my vote of him seems like he's genuinely confused, so I'll go ahead and Unvote.
Everything scares me... kitties scare me... squirrels scare me... corpses....corpses bring forth a pletora of confusing feeling which i prefer not to dwell on...:p
New Zealand standard time, and got tattoo today, sorry for being late to the party! Read back and Wessel and Generic strike me as overly defensive. FOS both of them, but nothing solid as yet. Not going to bother omgusing the vote on me during RVS, since I missed the whole stage; although I called the autovote Jace when my clan was picking our planeswalker
Prophyl buddying Generic seems a little suspicious to me, but it's early days yet.
Flailing fingers and generally non-committal (voteless) fault-finding with several players. It could be an apathetic town mindset, but it seems more like "Look at all this suspicious stuff going on, you guys."
Lack of immediate voting I will put down to not knowing salve meta (I understand noob tells read scummy, but I play elsewhere and I like to out reads before making rash votes)
My initial suspicions were justified for reasons similar to page 3, but with not much to go on, I was hoping to hold out for something a little more solid since the random voting was over.
Apologies for not quoting, as I mentioned earlier, I am playing from a tablet (check Dimir thread if you care to verify my computerless status) which makes posting a little trickier (hence Prophyl ninja'ing me before I cemented a vote earlier).
Regarding the suspiciousness turning into a vote - no edits are allowed and I updated my thinking in realtime. My schedule dictates I have certain times I can be online, and I write my thoughts out loud during these times. On further reflection, I continue to find Prophyl's willingness to immediately omgus me scummy as hell, and am happy in my voting. I seem a convenient scapegoat to draw away from the discussions earlier regarding the strongly defensive play of who I suspect is his scumbuddy.
I already stated my thoughts about this: "On further reflection" and "I continue to find" sound like Necropsy dropped a premature vote on Proph and later found justification for it.
Please note that votes will not be counted if you do not: Unvote your previous vote first, Vote for a player not in the game, or Vote for a player using a nickname that I don't recognize. Thank you.
We have an RVS vote from MDenham followed by what I assume is an Auto-correct mishap from Prophy when he voted for MDenham, but came out “Martha”. Because the word “Martha” came out I see MDenham going along with what he presumes to still be RVS because of the vote from Prophy. We later get confirmation that Prophy’s vote on MDenham is legit with the reasoning provided and Wessel informs Prophy that he (Wessel) likes Prophy’s vote on MDenham.
Wessel, would please explain why a emoticon is worthy of vote? Especially thee three that were used in that post. I’ve only seen you attack one emoticon in the past and that was this one here:
And what is your read on Necropsy?
Why are you so buddy buddy to Prophy this game?
Your /barn of Proph to vote Necorpsy was fine, but afterwards you don't comment on anything else that Necorpsy has posted, but then ask for others to give you their read on Necorpsy. Would you mind explaining why you took this route?
I'm thinking that one of Prophy or Wessel is scum. I'm not saying this is a dichomoty just yet. I have not rules the possibily that the two may be scum together.
swishh
Polski
Teia Rabishu
BlackVise
MDenham
Caex Kothar
Rancid Raptor
Could the above people please tell me in a few lines their view on Necropsy? And don't just say 'I have no read', even if you're not sure, explain why that is.
Scummy. So far, all he's really done is to come in, cast suspicion at people indiscriminately, throw around baseless FOSing, and blatantly ignoring my question. He looks very much like scum trying to active lurk through the game. His most recent post reeks of making excuses rather than explanations: he doesn't know the meta, he's playing from a tablet, he has a certain schedule... all very nice, but he didn't really do much beyond that. Painting himself as a scapegoat and trying to deflect discussion away from himself doesn't improve my opinion of him, either.
Sure, if someone had wanted to pressure me for that post at that time, ok. I see no huge problems with that. But you made your post as a response to me saying I thought MDenham's post indicated nervousness. I didn't understand the merit of your linking the two posts, and only saw it as an attempt to undermine my (really not that all important) point regarding MDenham's first post.
The point, just to make it clear, was to introduce the idea that you might be pressuring someone despite engaging in comparable behaviour, and to see how you'd respond. The important part, to me, was to see whether or not you acknowledged that one could read it that way, how (or whether) you differentiated the two, and gauge how you respond to off-the-cuff questioning—in your case, you were confused as to why I was asking, but instead of simply asking me where I was going with that, you took it as an attack, which indicates a defensive mindset towards this game in general.
EBWODP: When I say "baseless FOSing" I mean he's basically just barning other people in a few short words (e.g. calling Wessel and Generic defensive without elaboration), and not actually putting forth his own reasoning.
To clarify Proph's usage of Martha with respect to me: it's a running clan joke. The Facebook username of "mdenham" points to a page named Martha Denham (no relation to me that I know of), and so it's turned into a joke among Flamingos to refer to me as Martha.
Re: Necropsy: I don't like anything he's done to date. He's misreading things, he's making bad arguments for his vote, and in general it's low-quality posting that I'm ashamed to admit has all the hallmarks of newb town. (As well as newb scum.)
In short, he looks awful, but it appears to be an act for this reason alone:
Lack of immediate voting I will put down to not knowing salve meta (I understand noob tells read scummy, but I play elsewhere and I like to out reads before making rash votes)
That is, I find this highly likely to be "scum trying to hide behind the newb card". However, my initial impression of his "argument" with Proph reads as an initial round of light bussing for town cred on both sides. It doesn't feel like "town vs. caught/possibly caught scum" in either direction to me.
swishh
Lots of quotes, little content. Mostly one line questions about other players, and baseless statements; 'greetings, you are scum' 'just gunna Omgus etc from #78. It's hard trying to get an unbiased read from someone trying to string you up, but I think he is just strong-willed town with a misread.
Polski
Was late to the table and I haven't any strong reads, however in #77 he seems to try and diffuse conflict between Prophylaxis and I. I'm not sure if this is just Polski having confident town reads on both of us, or an attempt to keep Prophyl's name on he down low a little more. I'm confused by him.
Teia Rabishu
Seems to be pointing fingers a lot but not contributing too much in my eyes. As in #64, lots of questions but no opinions nor answers. Again in #75
BlackVise
Tunnelling Wessel. Would like some more justification before reading further. Could be BWey or just vote-happy. My lack of any meta knowledge means I can't make the call between the two as yet.
MDenham
Not reading the controversial smileys as scummy or nervous, just part of mindless rvs banter. Later posts seem constrictive and insightful, even if somewhat damning on me. Once again, hard to not have bias for someone who mistrusts you, but I townread MDenham.
Caex Kothar
Not really contributing much, more posting passing observations as in #55. #94 is not much more insightful. Null reading, maybe bored town
Rancid Raptor
Noob behavior statement in post #35 seems matter-of-fact to me, and not an AtE or excuse. Begins asking towny questions around #51, so town reading.
Generic
Thought the null vote wasn't really an attempt to distance him from a vote, more, just icebreaking during rvs. Got defensive (angry/AtE posts
#31 #32 #38 a la 'single Me out' AtE, 'kennedy conspiracy' bitter sarcasm and 'high horse' rage) which seemed scummy to me at the time.
Wessel
Hyper-aggressive against Generic in early game (#23), looking bandwagoney; but as he began his justifications, looked strongly inquisitive rather than scummy. Recently, his confident reads and his rich content has me strongly townreading him.
Prophylaxis
In #54, starts backing Generic strongly for no immediately apparent reason. I suspected buddying between the two, but am now feeling Generic is reading more town. After #66 he disappears so I have nothing new to say here.
Apologies for lack of formatting or quotes, on a tablet and no access to a computer for the forseeable future.
In regards to brief statements, read post #95.
I posted what Wessel asked of me.
In regards to fencesitting: I was asked for reads and I gave them. I would not have cared to mention half these players of my own accord, and as such, aren't enthusiastically persecuting anyone. I fail to see how not forcing a read that isn't there is scummier than pointing fingers for the sake of getting off the fence. I still find Prophyl scum, and I still have an active vote.
Consider that off the fence and down the road.
Hey Necropsy, you ignored my questions again (despite making a direct reference to both posts I asked them in). Are you incapable of coming up with good answers, or are you just hoping I'll forget about them? Either way, I still want answers. Also, you're not really going into very much detail with the cases you do present (for instance, you say "Generic is reading more town" but don't really say why), and you're falling back on excuses again (you're on a tablet, you don't know the meta). Since you're acting consistently scummy:
Necropsy, it is time for you to claim, unless anyone is willing to unvote.
Please explain your logic for making this statement. More specifcally the bolded.
Really?
(1) Premise: When someone is at L-2, that person should claim.
(2) Fact: With 12 alive, it takes 7 to lynch. (See ZDS's post)
(3) Fact: 5 votes are on Necropsy. (See ZDS's post)
(4) Lemma: Necropsy is at L-2. (from 2 and 3)
(5) Proposition: Necropsy should claim. (from 1 and 4)
(6) Lemma: If someone unvotes, Necropsy will no longer be at L-2. (from 2 and 3)
(7) Corollary: If someone unvotes, Necropsy should not claim. (from 1 and 6)
(8) Theorem: Necropsy should claim unless someone unvotes. (from 5 and 7)
"@Polski: Your argument is invalid because "honestly" and FoSes are completely different. Some people put "honestly" into all of their posts/when they speak, but no one uses FoSes in natural conversation.
On my asking Wessel: I wanted reactions from my early vote on MDenham, so I asked Wessel, who was the only other person online at the time.
@Necropsy: I was not OMGUS voting you. I voted you because your opener was absolutely terrible - a knickknack of mild suspicions and FoS votes that is remarkably noncommittal.
However, it is indeed possible that people commonly use FoSes on your site; can you give me a link to a recent town game and a recent scum game you've played in?
I dislike Teia's #64. It's also noncommittal and she's not doing much except asking questions.
@swishh: Necropsy pings my scumdar higher, but I'm completely fine with voting each at this point. Both are scum.
@Void: Pointless questions?
I asked about my vote of Wessel because I wanted reactions to it.
I checked Wessel's past games a day back and I didn't find him voting a non-player, so I didn't comment further. In the games that I looked at he voted for players, then unvoted.
@MDenham: In #57, why are you making points about Wessel and then go OMGUS vote me? It feels like you're trying to soften the blow of your vote.
Also, your #90 is fencesitty. You point out a bunch of suspicious behavior about Raptor and BV but you don't actually form solid opinions or scumhunt. Speaking of scumhunting, when are you going to start doing it?
Also, on #80, why specifically call out BlackVise? What are you trying to accomplish?
@Generic: Can you please re-phrase #89 again? I don't understand it at all.
Necropsy, it is time for you to claim, unless anyone is willing to unvote.
Please explain your logic for making this statement. More specifcally the bolded.
Really?
(1) Premise: When someone is at L-2, that person should claim.
(2) Fact: With 12 alive, it takes 7 to lynch. (See ZDS's post)
(3) Fact: 5 votes are on Necropsy. (See ZDS's post)
(4) Lemma: Necropsy is at L-2. (from 2 and 3)
(5) Proposition: Necropsy should claim. (from 1 and 4)
(6) Lemma: If someone unvotes, Necropsy will no longer be at L-2. (from 2 and 3)
(7) Corollary: If someone unvotes, Necropsy should not claim. (from 1 and 6)
(8) Theorem: Necropsy should claim unless someone unvotes. (from 5 and 7)
That is not what I meant and I take this as an insult to my intelligence. You know that I know this information.
Why would someone unvote Necropsy when they believe him to be scum? I thought this was very clear from the previous post, swishh.
Necropsy, it is time for you to claim, unless anyone is willing to unvote.
Please explain your logic for making this statement. More specifcally the bolded.
Really?
(1) Premise: When someone is at L-2, that person should claim.
(2) Fact: With 12 alive, it takes 7 to lynch. (See ZDS's post)
(3) Fact: 5 votes are on Necropsy. (See ZDS's post)
(4) Lemma: Necropsy is at L-2. (from 2 and 3)
(5) Proposition: Necropsy should claim. (from 1 and 4)
(6) Lemma: If someone unvotes, Necropsy will no longer be at L-2. (from 2 and 3)
(7) Corollary: If someone unvotes, Necropsy should not claim. (from 1 and 6)
(8) Theorem: Necropsy should claim unless someone unvotes. (from 5 and 7)
That is not what I meant and I take this as an insult to my intelligence. You know that I know this information.
Why would someone unvote Necropsy when they believe him to be scum? I thought this was very clear from the previous post, swishh.
Maybe...
Because someone may not want Necropsy to claim yet?
Because someone might think the bandwagon was too fast?
Because someone's stronger scum read is also voting Necropsy?
Because someone may have used their vote more as an FoS than "Necropsy should be lynched immediately."
Because someone may not be willing to end the day yet?
Because Necropsy doesn't seem scummy in hindsight?
Any one of those would seem like a legitimate reason for someone to unvote. Do you disagree?
Necropsy, it is time for you to claim, unless anyone is willing to unvote.
Please explain your logic for making this statement. More specifcally the bolded.
Really?
(1) Premise: When someone is at L-2, that person should claim.
(2) Fact: With 12 alive, it takes 7 to lynch. (See ZDS's post)
(3) Fact: 5 votes are on Necropsy. (See ZDS's post)
(4) Lemma: Necropsy is at L-2. (from 2 and 3)
(5) Proposition: Necropsy should claim. (from 1 and 4)
(6) Lemma: If someone unvotes, Necropsy will no longer be at L-2. (from 2 and 3)
(7) Corollary: If someone unvotes, Necropsy should not claim. (from 1 and 6)
(8) Theorem: Necropsy should claim unless someone unvotes. (from 5 and 7)
That is not what I meant and I take this as an insult to my intelligence. You know that I know this information.
Why would someone unvote Necropsy when they believe him to be scum? I thought this was very clear from the previous post, swishh.
Maybe...
1) Because someone may not want Necropsy to claim yet?
2) Because someone might think the bandwagon was too fast?
3) Because someone's stronger scum read is also voting Necropsy?
4) Because someone may have used their vote more as an FoS than "Necropsy should be lynched immediately."
5)Because someone may not be willing to end the day yet?
6)Because Necropsy doesn't seem scummy in hindsight?
Any one of those would seem like a legitimate reason for someone to unvote. Do you disagree?
1) If they don't want Necropsy to claim, then why vote him in the first place? Although this ties in into point number 6 as well and gives this statement a litte bit of validation.
2) If they believe the bandwagon went to fast, then that player might as well except any suspicion that may come his way. That's a bad Cop Out to use when waiting for someone to claim.
3) In what scenario would someone want to force a claim out of someone who might be Town? Having two scum reads is fine, but stating one is stronger than the other, then voting for the weaker (less sure scum read) to claim is not a Town mindset.
4) Have you seen someone use their vote as an FoS tool in the past? If yes, then please support your claim with the game and post where that player admitted this information.
5) What? Were not even on the subject of ending the Day so why bring it up? We're talking about claiming and why someone would unvote prior to claim. This makes no sense for the discussion at hand.
6) This about your only valid reason for why someone would unvote prior to that person claiming, but even then I don't see this happening to often if ever.
Necropsy, it is time for you to claim, unless anyone is willing to unvote.
Please explain your logic for making this statement. More specifcally the bolded.
Really?
(1) Premise: When someone is at L-2, that person should claim.
(2) Fact: With 12 alive, it takes 7 to lynch. (See ZDS's post)
(3) Fact: 5 votes are on Necropsy. (See ZDS's post)
(4) Lemma: Necropsy is at L-2. (from 2 and 3)
(5) Proposition: Necropsy should claim. (from 1 and 4)
(6) Lemma: If someone unvotes, Necropsy will no longer be at L-2. (from 2 and 3)
(7) Corollary: If someone unvotes, Necropsy should not claim. (from 1 and 6)
(8) Theorem: Necropsy should claim unless someone unvotes. (from 5 and 7)
That is not what I meant and I take this as an insult to my intelligence. You know that I know this information.
Why would someone unvote Necropsy when they believe him to be scum? I thought this was very clear from the previous post, swishh.
Maybe...
1) Because someone may not want Necropsy to claim yet?
2) Because someone might think the bandwagon was too fast?
3) Because someone's stronger scum read is also voting Necropsy?
4) Because someone may have used their vote more as an FoS than "Necropsy should be lynched immediately."
5)Because someone may not be willing to end the day yet?
6)Because Necropsy doesn't seem scummy in hindsight?
Any one of those would seem like a legitimate reason for someone to unvote. Do you disagree?
1) If they don't want Necropsy to claim, then why vote him in the first place? Although this ties in into point number 6 as well and gives this statement a litte bit of validation.
2) If they believe the bandwagon went to fast, then that player might as well except any suspicion that may come his way. That's a bad Cop Out to use when waiting for someone to claim.
3) In what scenario would someone want to force a claim out of someone who might be Town? Having two scum reads is fine, but stating one is stronger than the other, then voting for the weaker (less sure scum read) to claim is not a Town mindset.
4) Have you seen someone use their vote as an FoS tool in the past? If yes, then please support your claim with the game and post where that player admitted this information.
5) What? Were not even on the subject of ending the Day so why bring it up? We're talking about claiming and why someone would unvote prior to claim. This makes no sense for the discussion at hand.
6) This about your only valid reason for why someone would unvote prior to that person claiming, but even then I don't see this happening to often if ever.
1) I don't want people to claim when I vote them. Do you ask people to claim when you vote them?
2) this doesn't make any sense to me
3) None
4) Are you kidding me?
5) What? We're talking about Necropsy getting lynched. Guess what happens when someone gets lynched.
6) OK
Are you saying no one should unvote anyone ever? I don't understand what you're getting at with this.
Necropsy, it is time for you to claim, unless anyone is willing to unvote.
Please explain your logic for making this statement. More specifcally the bolded.
Really?
(1) Premise: When someone is at L-2, that person should claim.
(2) Fact: With 12 alive, it takes 7 to lynch. (See ZDS's post)
(3) Fact: 5 votes are on Necropsy. (See ZDS's post)
(4) Lemma: Necropsy is at L-2. (from 2 and 3)
(5) Proposition: Necropsy should claim. (from 1 and 4)
(6) Lemma: If someone unvotes, Necropsy will no longer be at L-2. (from 2 and 3)
(7) Corollary: If someone unvotes, Necropsy should not claim. (from 1 and 6)
(8) Theorem: Necropsy should claim unless someone unvotes. (from 5 and 7)
That is not what I meant and I take this as an insult to my intelligence. You know that I know this information.
Why would someone unvote Necropsy when they believe him to be scum? I thought this was very clear from the previous post, swishh.
Maybe...
1) Because someone may not want Necropsy to claim yet?
2) Because someone might think the bandwagon was too fast?
3) Because someone's stronger scum read is also voting Necropsy?
4) Because someone may have used their vote more as an FoS than "Necropsy should be lynched immediately."
5)Because someone may not be willing to end the day yet?
6)Because Necropsy doesn't seem scummy in hindsight?
Any one of those would seem like a legitimate reason for someone to unvote. Do you disagree?
1) If they don't want Necropsy to claim, then why vote him in the first place? Although this ties in into point number 6 as well and gives this statement a litte bit of validation.
2) If they believe the bandwagon went to fast, then that player might as well except any suspicion that may come his way. That's a bad Cop Out to use when waiting for someone to claim.
3) In what scenario would someone want to force a claim out of someone who might be Town? Having two scum reads is fine, but stating one is stronger than the other, then voting for the weaker (less sure scum read) to claim is not a Town mindset.
4) Have you seen someone use their vote as an FoS tool in the past? If yes, then please support your claim with the game and post where that player admitted this information.
5) What? Were not even on the subject of ending the Day so why bring it up? We're talking about claiming and why someone would unvote prior to claim. This makes no sense for the discussion at hand.
6) This about your only valid reason for why someone would unvote prior to that person claiming, but even then I don't see this happening to often if ever.
1) I don't want people to claim when I vote them. Do you ask people to claim when you vote them?
2) this doesn't make any sense to me
3) None
4) Are you kidding me?
5) What? We're talking about Necropsy getting lynched. Guess what happens when someone gets lynched.
6) OK
Are you saying no one should unvote anyone ever? I don't understand what you're getting at with this.
1) That is not what that sentence says. Are you done twisting my words around?
2) Unvoting someone due to the speed of a wagon is a bogus excuse to get off a wagon. Better?
4) I asked for an example of what you mean. I would think it is obvious I am expecting more than an "are you serious" type comment.
5) No, were talking about Necropsy claiming and why you added the unvote clause to the end of your sentence. This has nothing do with Necropsy being lynched at the moment. Please stay on track.
I'm trying to figure out why you would include that unvote clause in your statement about claiming.
I'm liking necropsy less and less with each post. Not to say that I liked him before, but my willingness to give him the benefit of the doubt has pretty much expired. My attempt to pressure Proph didn't really pan out, either. Whether that's a lack of ability on my part or indicative of Proph's alignment remains to be seen.
Unvote
I'm liking Void right now, and I feel like swishh is being willfully obtuse in their recent interactions.
You said if they didn't want Necropsy to claim, why would they vote Necropsy? I say that's swill because I vote lots of people without wanting them to claim just yet.
Unvoting due to the speed of a wagon is definitely a legitimate reason. I can't now, but I will show prove this to you soon.
It's a common scum tell to FoS someone when a vote is available and there's no risk of putting someone in claim-range. I will show you this soon as well.
Someone may unvote because he or she wants the day to go on longer, i.e. that person is not yet ready for Necropsy to be lynched.
I included the unvote clause because it is time for Necropsy to claim, but at least 2 people voted Necropsy long enough ago that they may not realize how close to a lynch we are, namely Proph and Wessel.
I'm liking necropsy less and less with each post. Not to say that I liked him before, but my willingness to give him the benefit of the doubt has pretty much expired. My attempt to pressure Proph didn't really pan out, either. Whether that's a lack of ability on my part or indicative of Proph's alignment remains to be seen.
Unvote
I'm liking Void right now, and I feel like swishh is being willfully obtuse in their recent interactions.
Be that as it may. Void has a way of rubbing me the wrong way.
You said if they didn't want Necropsy to claim, why would they vote Necropsy? I say that's swill because I vote lots of people without wanting them to claim just yet.
You do realize how that kind of play is hurtful to the Town, right? "Let me place this vote on someone even they it means nothing." If you don't want the player to claim, then you take away any pressure that may have been there to begin with.
It's a common scum tell to FoS someone when a vote is available and there's no risk of putting someone in claim-range. I will show you this soon as well.
But that is not what you described prior. You said "Because someone may have used their vote more as an FoS than". That means the vote is being used as an FoS. Not that an FoS was used when the vote wasn't on someone.
Someone may unvote because he or she wants the day to go on longer, i.e. that person is not yet ready for Necropsy to be lynched.
For some reason you are having a difficult time grasping what is being said here. We're talking about CLAIMING only here and your little unvote clause. Not LYNCHING someone. Stop jumping ahead of yourself.
What you just described would be what would happen after the claim. We're not going to consider lynching anyone without a claim first.
I included the unvote clause because it is time for Necropsy to claim, but at least 2 people voted Necropsy long enough ago that they may not realize how close to a lynch we are, namely Proph and Wessel.
You do realize that both Prophy and Wessel are very experience players on this site and know what they are doing. I find it strange that you would direct a unvote clause to two players who probably know the game better than you do.
I know you didn't say it was legitimate reason. I said it was a legitimate reason.
I will be purple. You will be green.
4) Because someone may have used their vote more as an FoS than "Necropsy should be lynched immediately."
If this is the case, perhaps someone would want to unvote. You countered:
4) Have you seen someone use their vote as an FoS tool in the past? If yes, then please support your claim with the game and post where that player admitted this information.
The answer to this is yes:
It's a common scum tell to FoS someone when a vote is available and there's no risk of putting someone in claim-range. I will show you this soon as well.
Take it a step further: If someone has a legitimate reason to FoS Necropsy, a vote would be appropriate.
The comment wasn't directed specifically towards Wessel or Proph.
You're making the same mistake you did in Legend of Lucian.
As for Proph's question to me about his MDenham vote; I can see a good reason for Proph to ask that, but I'm going to wait for Proph to check in again before I expand more on it.
Be that as it may. Void has a way of rubbing me the wrong way.
Do you mean to say you ARE being willfully obtuse? And your reason is because he rubs you the wrong way? If so, that's incredibly unhelpful and does not earn you any town credit at all.
no I'm saying I think Void is latching onto some insignificant shred of whatever he considers a scum tell and tunneling me into oblivion for it. I think he's town because this is pretty standard for his meta, but our going back and forth isn't going to do anything.
@MDenham: In #57, why are you making points about Wessel and then go OMGUS vote me? It feels like you're trying to soften the blow of your vote.
Also, your #90 is fencesitty. You point out a bunch of suspicious behavior about Raptor and BV but you don't actually form solid opinions or scumhunt. Speaking of scumhunting, when are you going to start doing it?
Also, on #80, why specifically call out BlackVise? What are you trying to accomplish?
Working in reverse order of the posts in question:
The options for when I made #90 were either (1) don't post and get called on lurking, (2) point out behavior and get called on fence-sitting, or (3) jump down people's throats and get called on jumping to conclusions. I don't like what was posted between #90 and #83 - the only person who really posted content in that range is Wessel - and coming to any sort of conclusion other than "these were bad posts, quit doing that" would be doing so on insufficient evidence. Especially in BV's case.
Speaking of BV, my reaction in #80 was "wait, what the hell, are you even reading the same game as us?" By focusing on Wessel vs. Generic, he's basically ignored half the game there. I want him to go back, look at the half of the game he ignored, and then post constructively.
#57, meanwhile, was intentional. I wanted a reaction. I like the reaction I got. Unvote. Your vote on me for using multiple smilies was bad and you should still feel bad, however.
As far as "when am I going to start scumhunting": this is how I do it. I couldn't consciously notice a tell if I tried at this point (in fact, I get way too many false positives if I do because the general meta here seems to be "act mildly scummy as town and then complain when new players point at you"), and trying to get reactions in anything resembling a timely fashion is kind of hard when operating in forum time.
I will say that swishh is coming across more as than actually defending his own argument. However, since the last time I tried an argument by vote timing I got yelled at by half the players, and because it doesn't actually make swishh the only suspect (Wessel and Generic get hit as well, and I strongly doubt that the scum are solely in the grouping of Necropsy, swishh, Wessel, and Generic), I'll hold my vote in lieu of more behavior to analyze.
2011: Best Mafia Performance (Individual) - Best Newcomer
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
While I play Mafia by trying to draw reactions, I don't play it by trying to make people unable to sleep at night. This is part of why I dislike the site meta. (99% is a part, right? :shrug:)
I don't have any sort of natural instinct to harass people into slipping. I prefer to play "softer" and rely on my subconscious to pick up on things instead; if that doesn't work after I get a few games under my belt, I probably just won't bother playing Mafia in the future because I have no interest in picking up the instinct that seems to compel people to be jerks in this game.
I know, no great loss there if I don't play in the future.
With that out of the way, however, would you mind explaining why I should keep a vote that was solely intended to get a reaction from someone on that person after I get the reaction and analyze it?
Also, I would appreciate an explanation of how voting someone for using smilies can be considered something other than OMGUS in the first place, because the "nervousness" argument still makes no sense to me. The first "nervous" post I've made this game was the previous post, and... well, that's my normal reaction to being nervous. I just start considering other, less stressful, forms of recreation, such as throwing chainsaws at a dartboard.
I brought up the proposition of unvoting to avoid Necropsy's claim to see if anyone would bite. Why is that more suspicious than simply unvoting myself?
And another question, by arguing that scum (me, in this case, I presume) can genuinely agree with someone (Proph, in this case) with his case on someone else (Necropsy, in this case), for it to be genuine, I should be scum with Necropsy. Is this what you're arguing?
You're over complicating the situation. I'm not tying anything else into your post. I'm simply stating what I stated above.
I'm not buying your answer either, Wessel. First of all, how does he stand to gauge your honesty with that question? He has no way to tell if you're being truthful or not, so it seems a very unlikely thing for him to do.
Second, why exactly did you need to wait for him to check back in to reveal that? There definitely wasn't anything prolific to your answer, and I fail to see what a town Wessel would stand to gain from waiting.
Both Polski and Necropsy are rubbing me the wrong way. Wessel I'm back and forth on. Teia and Void are fine.
I'm gonna go ahead and Vote Polski
He's /barned me twice regarding proph (once implicitly and once explicitly), and this post is too cautious and has a disconnect in his actions regarding Proph and his actions regarding Necropsy.
Everything scares me... kitties scare me... squirrels scare me... corpses....corpses bring forth a pletora of confusing feeling which i prefer not to dwell on...:p
You talk about how badly you're feeling about Necropsy and you're not giving him the benefit of the doubt, but you don't vote him and you back off Proph by saying "was only voting for pressure, time to back off". That looks like a convenient excuse to jump off him without looking like you're abandoning ship without reason.
The disconnect comes because you claim to have voted Proph to apply pressure but you don't vote Necropsy at all, either to apply pressure or because you think he's scum.
Everything scares me... kitties scare me... squirrels scare me... corpses....corpses bring forth a pletora of confusing feeling which i prefer not to dwell on...:p
Everything scares me... kitties scare me... squirrels scare me... corpses....corpses bring forth a pletora of confusing feeling which i prefer not to dwell on...:p
Thoughts on the gamestate right now. I wrote up my previous post two days ago on the bus so it's a bit outdated.
MDenham's response in #135 reads fairly genuine and.... honest, for the lack of a better word. Still don't like him but I'll bump him up.
There's one thing that I don't like, though. You only just finished judging my reaction, from that post waaaay back to now?
I'm thinking of a Teia/Necropsy/Void scumteam.
Teia has been exceedingly noncommital and asking a whole bunch of questions but not following up on them. She's behaving the exact same way in her scum mod game... MM4, I believe? Or MM5? As town she usually flails wildly at everyone for poor reasoning. I remember looking at a couple of her posts while I was quote-hunting and I was surprised at the similarities.
Necropsy has made bad posts and has been covered already.
Void is scum for #131, which is a massive reach. He's also failed to follow up on his questions for me or Wessel.
Wessel, would please explain why a emoticon is worthy of vote? Especially thee three that were used in that post. I’ve only seen you attack one emoticon in the past and that was this one here:
Red flag. Non-committal disdain for Generic's play without any real follow-up.
Half-hearted and seemingly opportunistic vote on a player that's I think likely town.
More non-committal disdain for Generic. Duly noted.
I've been in one game with Generic before, and from what I've seen his play is...erratic. Your post just seemed like you were bullying him into providing his thoughts on what frankly isn't legitimate content.
Barn this. No comment on Proph's alignment, but I agree with his opinion of Generic.
Greetings, Necropsy. You are scum.
Just gonna OMGUS like that?
I totally disagree. I don't want to misconstrue Proph's post, but Necropsy seems to be the one OMGUSing, not Proph.
You don't provide any real content or thought here, just self-conscious explanation for your behavior. Regarding what I underlined, sounds like you found what you think is a legitimate reason fed to you by other players for your vote on Proph.
Vote: Necropsy
(Probably NSFW) So you may have heard I'm trying to write a TV series...
Prophy, your question about your vote to Wessel doesn't line up with what you and Wessel were discussing. Why ask about your vote to Wessel when Wessel left the door open to for investigation about his prior game?
Has Wessel unvoted a null vote prior in RVS?
What is your experience with Wessel on this or others?
These questions are for Prophy to answer. More to come later when I have more time.
(Probably NSFW) So you may have heard I'm trying to write a TV series...
{Magic: The RPG}
I'm not exactly sure what is is your trying to ask.
What he said Just didn't seem helpful.
But to note at least. Generic was the one that said he treated it with disdain and sarcasim. I didn't claim that, he did.
Genuinely is a buzzword? Ethier way, anything can be valuble no matter the source. I've seen alot of people claim to of solved the game by something said in day one. In a game were one slip up can get you lynched, everything becomes valuble information.
Intel is my shorthand for information. Hence the 'Valuble intel' not connected to you as a 'Buddy' in the slightest.
tl;dr
Everything ANY person says CAN be valuble, doesn't mean its a buddy attempt at all or what was said IS valuble.
It's Hip to be a Square
RL notes: Fleetwood Mac concert was cool; getting back at 3:30am was not (but was kind of expected).
Getting up this morning and seeing that nobody had posted in 21 hours, though, was ridiculous. I know a few of you are V/LA; that's fine, but the rest of you could stand to post something even if it isn't content.
Commentary on what little has been posted since I last did:
(Probably NSFW) So you may have heard I'm trying to write a TV series...
This week until next monday is is also V/LA. Monday was my Great Grandma's 95th, so was a mini family renuinion. This fourth is a reunion for the other side. Camping and such and more then 7 hours of driving a day. So pretty absent from the computer this comming week.
It's Hip to be a Square
Here's something I'm curious about: You pressure someone to try and get reactions, yet were convinced that my post about your RVS vote was simply a "cheap jab." I wanted to see how you reacted, and you got defensive. Would you say there's any difference between the two? Why perceive an offhand comment as an attack?
Two of my reads have been updated after I looked back:
Wessel looks like he's shotgunning questions every which way but he's not followed up on some of them. It makes me
Generic's post responding to my vote of him seems like he's genuinely confused, so I'll go ahead and Unvote.
Other than that, I don't have much to go on.
{Magic: The RPG}
Flailing fingers and generally non-committal (voteless) fault-finding with several players. It could be an apathetic town mindset, but it seems more like "Look at all this suspicious stuff going on, you guys."
As if Proph's vote on Necropsy in any way justifies Necropsy's vote on him? Sort of an OMGUS-after-the-fact.
I already stated my thoughts about this: "On further reflection" and "I continue to find" sound like Necropsy dropped a premature vote on Proph and later found justification for it.
Perhaps I missing why this is a good vote from Prophy... Also to note is that this comment of “Good.” Came after Iso’s votecount.
Let's review what happened here:
We have an RVS vote from MDenham followed by what I assume is an Auto-correct mishap from Prophy when he voted for MDenham, but came out “Martha”. Because the word “Martha” came out I see MDenham going along with what he presumes to still be RVS because of the vote from Prophy. We later get confirmation that Prophy’s vote on MDenham is legit with the reasoning provided and Wessel informs Prophy that he (Wessel) likes Prophy’s vote on MDenham.
Wessel, would please explain why a emoticon is worthy of vote? Especially thee three that were used in that post. I’ve only seen you attack one emoticon in the past and that was this one here:
And what is your read on Necropsy?
Why are you so buddy buddy to Prophy this game?
Your /barn of Proph to vote Necorpsy was fine, but afterwards you don't comment on anything else that Necorpsy has posted, but then ask for others to give you their read on Necorpsy. Would you mind explaining why you took this route?
I'm thinking that one of Prophy or Wessel is scum. I'm not saying this is a dichomoty just yet. I have not rules the possibily that the two may be scum together.
Vote: Wessel
Scummy. So far, all he's really done is to come in, cast suspicion at people indiscriminately, throw around baseless FOSing, and blatantly ignoring my question. He looks very much like scum trying to active lurk through the game. His most recent post reeks of making excuses rather than explanations: he doesn't know the meta, he's playing from a tablet, he has a certain schedule... all very nice, but he didn't really do much beyond that. Painting himself as a scapegoat and trying to deflect discussion away from himself doesn't improve my opinion of him, either.
The point, just to make it clear, was to introduce the idea that you might be pressuring someone despite engaging in comparable behaviour, and to see how you'd respond. The important part, to me, was to see whether or not you acknowledged that one could read it that way, how (or whether) you differentiated the two, and gauge how you respond to off-the-cuff questioning—in your case, you were confused as to why I was asking, but instead of simply asking me where I was going with that, you took it as an attack, which indicates a defensive mindset towards this game in general.
Re: Necropsy: I don't like anything he's done to date. He's misreading things, he's making bad arguments for his vote, and in general it's low-quality posting that I'm ashamed to admit has all the hallmarks of newb town. (As well as newb scum.)
In short, he looks awful, but it appears to be an act for this reason alone:
That is, I find this highly likely to be "scum trying to hide behind the newb card". However, my initial impression of his "argument" with Proph reads as an initial round of light bussing for town cred on both sides. It doesn't feel like "town vs. caught/possibly caught scum" in either direction to me.
I'll look into this later toDay, though.
(Probably NSFW) So you may have heard I'm trying to write a TV series...
Lots of quotes, little content. Mostly one line questions about other players, and baseless statements; 'greetings, you are scum' 'just gunna Omgus etc from #78. It's hard trying to get an unbiased read from someone trying to string you up, but I think he is just strong-willed town with a misread.
Polski
Was late to the table and I haven't any strong reads, however in #77 he seems to try and diffuse conflict between Prophylaxis and I. I'm not sure if this is just Polski having confident town reads on both of us, or an attempt to keep Prophyl's name on he down low a little more. I'm confused by him.
Teia Rabishu
Seems to be pointing fingers a lot but not contributing too much in my eyes. As in #64, lots of questions but no opinions nor answers. Again in #75
BlackVise
Tunnelling Wessel. Would like some more justification before reading further. Could be BWey or just vote-happy. My lack of any meta knowledge means I can't make the call between the two as yet.
MDenham
Not reading the controversial smileys as scummy or nervous, just part of mindless rvs banter. Later posts seem constrictive and insightful, even if somewhat damning on me. Once again, hard to not have bias for someone who mistrusts you, but I townread MDenham.
Caex Kothar
Not really contributing much, more posting passing observations as in #55. #94 is not much more insightful. Null reading, maybe bored town
Rancid Raptor
Noob behavior statement in post #35 seems matter-of-fact to me, and not an AtE or excuse. Begins asking towny questions around #51, so town reading.
Generic
Thought the null vote wasn't really an attempt to distance him from a vote, more, just icebreaking during rvs. Got defensive (angry/AtE posts
#31 #32 #38 a la 'single Me out' AtE, 'kennedy conspiracy' bitter sarcasm and 'high horse' rage) which seemed scummy to me at the time.
Wessel
Hyper-aggressive against Generic in early game (#23), looking bandwagoney; but as he began his justifications, looked strongly inquisitive rather than scummy. Recently, his confident reads and his rich content has me strongly townreading him.
Prophylaxis
In #54, starts backing Generic strongly for no immediately apparent reason. I suspected buddying between the two, but am now feeling Generic is reading more town. After #66 he disappears so I have nothing new to say here.
Apologies for lack of formatting or quotes, on a tablet and no access to a computer for the forseeable future.
I posted what Wessel asked of me.
In regards to fencesitting: I was asked for reads and I gave them. I would not have cared to mention half these players of my own accord, and as such, aren't enthusiastically persecuting anyone. I fail to see how not forcing a read that isn't there is scummier than pointing fingers for the sake of getting off the fence. I still find Prophyl scum, and I still have an active vote.
Consider that off the fence and down the road.
Vote Necropsy
Please explain your logic for making this statement. More specifcally the bolded.
Really?
(1) Premise: When someone is at L-2, that person should claim.
(2) Fact: With 12 alive, it takes 7 to lynch. (See ZDS's post)
(3) Fact: 5 votes are on Necropsy. (See ZDS's post)
(4) Lemma: Necropsy is at L-2. (from 2 and 3)
(5) Proposition: Necropsy should claim. (from 1 and 4)
(6) Lemma: If someone unvotes, Necropsy will no longer be at L-2. (from 2 and 3)
(7) Corollary: If someone unvotes, Necropsy should not claim. (from 1 and 6)
(8) Theorem: Necropsy should claim unless someone unvotes. (from 5 and 7)
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
Curse Premium"@Polski: Your argument is invalid because "honestly" and FoSes are completely different. Some people put "honestly" into all of their posts/when they speak, but no one uses FoSes in natural conversation.
On my asking Wessel: I wanted reactions from my early vote on MDenham, so I asked Wessel, who was the only other person online at the time.
@Necropsy: I was not OMGUS voting you. I voted you because your opener was absolutely terrible - a knickknack of mild suspicions and FoS votes that is remarkably noncommittal.
However, it is indeed possible that people commonly use FoSes on your site; can you give me a link to a recent town game and a recent scum game you've played in?
I dislike Teia's #64. It's also noncommittal and she's not doing much except asking questions.
@swishh: Necropsy pings my scumdar higher, but I'm completely fine with voting each at this point. Both are scum.
@Void: Pointless questions?
I asked about my vote of Wessel because I wanted reactions to it.
I checked Wessel's past games a day back and I didn't find him voting a non-player, so I didn't comment further. In the games that I looked at he voted for players, then unvoted.
@MDenham: In #57, why are you making points about Wessel and then go OMGUS vote me? It feels like you're trying to soften the blow of your vote.
Also, your #90 is fencesitty. You point out a bunch of suspicious behavior about Raptor and BV but you don't actually form solid opinions or scumhunt. Speaking of scumhunting, when are you going to start doing it?
Also, on #80, why specifically call out BlackVise? What are you trying to accomplish?
@Generic: Can you please re-phrase #89 again? I don't understand it at all.
That is not what I meant and I take this as an insult to my intelligence. You know that I know this information.
Why would someone unvote Necropsy when they believe him to be scum? I thought this was very clear from the previous post, swishh.
Maybe...
Because someone may not want Necropsy to claim yet?
Because someone might think the bandwagon was too fast?
Because someone's stronger scum read is also voting Necropsy?
Because someone may have used their vote more as an FoS than "Necropsy should be lynched immediately."
Because someone may not be willing to end the day yet?
Because Necropsy doesn't seem scummy in hindsight?
Any one of those would seem like a legitimate reason for someone to unvote. Do you disagree?
1) If they don't want Necropsy to claim, then why vote him in the first place? Although this ties in into point number 6 as well and gives this statement a litte bit of validation.
2) If they believe the bandwagon went to fast, then that player might as well except any suspicion that may come his way. That's a bad Cop Out to use when waiting for someone to claim.
3) In what scenario would someone want to force a claim out of someone who might be Town? Having two scum reads is fine, but stating one is stronger than the other, then voting for the weaker (less sure scum read) to claim is not a Town mindset.
4) Have you seen someone use their vote as an FoS tool in the past? If yes, then please support your claim with the game and post where that player admitted this information.
5) What? Were not even on the subject of ending the Day so why bring it up? We're talking about claiming and why someone would unvote prior to claim. This makes no sense for the discussion at hand.
6) This about your only valid reason for why someone would unvote prior to that person claiming, but even then I don't see this happening to often if ever.
1) I don't want people to claim when I vote them. Do you ask people to claim when you vote them?
2) this doesn't make any sense to me
3) None
4) Are you kidding me?
5) What? We're talking about Necropsy getting lynched. Guess what happens when someone gets lynched.
6) OK
Are you saying no one should unvote anyone ever? I don't understand what you're getting at with this.
1) That is not what that sentence says. Are you done twisting my words around?
2) Unvoting someone due to the speed of a wagon is a bogus excuse to get off a wagon. Better?
4) I asked for an example of what you mean. I would think it is obvious I am expecting more than an "are you serious" type comment.
5) No, were talking about Necropsy claiming and why you added the unvote clause to the end of your sentence. This has nothing do with Necropsy being lynched at the moment. Please stay on track.
I'm trying to figure out why you would include that unvote clause in your statement about claiming.
I'm liking necropsy less and less with each post. Not to say that I liked him before, but my willingness to give him the benefit of the doubt has pretty much expired. My attempt to pressure Proph didn't really pan out, either. Whether that's a lack of ability on my part or indicative of Proph's alignment remains to be seen.
Unvote
I'm liking Void right now, and I feel like swishh is being willfully obtuse in their recent interactions.
Legacy
WW Death and Taxes WW
Modern
WBMartyr-Proc BW
Unvoting due to the speed of a wagon is definitely a legitimate reason. I can't now, but I will show prove this to you soon.
It's a common scum tell to FoS someone when a vote is available and there's no risk of putting someone in claim-range. I will show you this soon as well.
Someone may unvote because he or she wants the day to go on longer, i.e. that person is not yet ready for Necropsy to be lynched.
I included the unvote clause because it is time for Necropsy to claim, but at least 2 people voted Necropsy long enough ago that they may not realize how close to a lynch we are, namely Proph and Wessel.
Be that as it may. Void has a way of rubbing me the wrong way.
You do realize how that kind of play is hurtful to the Town, right? "Let me place this vote on someone even they it means nothing." If you don't want the player to claim, then you take away any pressure that may have been there to begin with.
I didn't say it wasn't a legitmate reason. I said it was a bogus excuse. A bad excuse if that wording works better for you.
But that is not what you described prior. You said "Because someone may have used their vote more as an FoS than". That means the vote is being used as an FoS. Not that an FoS was used when the vote wasn't on someone.
For some reason you are having a difficult time grasping what is being said here. We're talking about CLAIMING only here and your little unvote clause. Not LYNCHING someone. Stop jumping ahead of yourself.
What you just described would be what would happen after the claim. We're not going to consider lynching anyone without a claim first.
You do realize that both Prophy and Wessel are very experience players on this site and know what they are doing. I find it strange that you would direct a unvote clause to two players who probably know the game better than you do.
Unvote: Wessel
Vote: swishh
I will be purple. You will be green.
4) Because someone may have used their vote more as an FoS than "Necropsy should be lynched immediately."
If this is the case, perhaps someone would want to unvote. You countered:
4) Have you seen someone use their vote as an FoS tool in the past? If yes, then please support your claim with the game and post where that player admitted this information.
The answer to this is yes:
It's a common scum tell to FoS someone when a vote is available and there's no risk of putting someone in claim-range. I will show you this soon as well.
Take it a step further: If someone has a legitimate reason to FoS Necropsy, a vote would be appropriate.
The comment wasn't directed specifically towards Wessel or Proph.
You're making the same mistake you did in Legend of Lucian.
Proph has checked in. Expand.
Do you mean to say you ARE being willfully obtuse? And your reason is because he rubs you the wrong way? If so, that's incredibly unhelpful and does not earn you any town credit at all.
Legacy
WW Death and Taxes WW
Modern
WBMartyr-Proc BW
Necropsy, please claim.
The options for when I made #90 were either (1) don't post and get called on lurking, (2) point out behavior and get called on fence-sitting, or (3) jump down people's throats and get called on jumping to conclusions. I don't like what was posted between #90 and #83 - the only person who really posted content in that range is Wessel - and coming to any sort of conclusion other than "these were bad posts, quit doing that" would be doing so on insufficient evidence. Especially in BV's case.
Speaking of BV, my reaction in #80 was "wait, what the hell, are you even reading the same game as us?" By focusing on Wessel vs. Generic, he's basically ignored half the game there. I want him to go back, look at the half of the game he ignored, and then post constructively.
#57, meanwhile, was intentional. I wanted a reaction. I like the reaction I got. Unvote. Your vote on me for using multiple smilies was bad and you should still feel bad, however.
As far as "when am I going to start scumhunting": this is how I do it. I couldn't consciously notice a tell if I tried at this point (in fact, I get way too many false positives if I do because the general meta here seems to be "act mildly scummy as town and then complain when new players point at you"), and trying to get reactions in anything resembling a timely fashion is kind of hard when operating in forum time.
I will say that swishh is coming across more as
(Probably NSFW) So you may have heard I'm trying to write a TV series...
{мы, тьма}
2012: Best (False?) Role Claim - Worst Town Performance (Group) - Best Mafia Performance (Group) - Best SK Performance - Best Overall Player
2013: Best Non-SK Neutral Performance
2014: Best Town Performance (Individual) - Best Town Performance (Group) - Most Interesting Role - Best Game - Best Overall Player
2015: Worst Mafia Performance (Group) - Best Read
2016: Best Town Performance (Group) - Best Town Player - Best Overall Player
I don't have any sort of natural instinct to harass people into slipping. I prefer to play "softer" and rely on my subconscious to pick up on things instead; if that doesn't work after I get a few games under my belt, I probably just won't bother playing Mafia in the future because I have no interest in picking up the instinct that seems to compel people to be jerks in this game.
I know, no great loss there if I don't play in the future.
With that out of the way, however, would you mind explaining why I should keep a vote that was solely intended to get a reaction from someone on that person after I get the reaction and analyze it?
(Probably NSFW) So you may have heard I'm trying to write a TV series...
(Probably NSFW) So you may have heard I'm trying to write a TV series...
I don't buy this statement from you, Wessel. Scum can genuinely agree with someone.
Also, I haven't forgotten about your post back to me. A response will be coming forward soon.
You left out that possibilty. I'm not sure if you left it out for a reason or if it was a mistake, but either way it struck me as odd.
You're over complicating the situation. I'm not tying anything else into your post. I'm simply stating what I stated above.
Second, why exactly did you need to wait for him to check back in to reveal that? There definitely wasn't anything prolific to your answer, and I fail to see what a town Wessel would stand to gain from waiting.
Legacy
WW Death and Taxes WW
Modern
WBMartyr-Proc BW
Both Polski and Necropsy are rubbing me the wrong way. Wessel I'm back and forth on. Teia and Void are fine.
I'm gonna go ahead and Vote Polski
He's /barned me twice regarding proph (once implicitly and once explicitly), and this post is too cautious and has a disconnect in his actions regarding Proph and his actions regarding Necropsy.
{Magic: The RPG}
Please point out what you consider too cautious.
Legacy
WW Death and Taxes WW
Modern
WBMartyr-Proc BW
The disconnect comes because you claim to have voted Proph to apply pressure but you don't vote Necropsy at all, either to apply pressure or because you think he's scum.
{Magic: The RPG}
Legacy
WW Death and Taxes WW
Modern
WBMartyr-Proc BW
...Don't I feel stupid. Alright well that makes more sense. I should probably pay a little more attention to this game.
Unvote
{Magic: The RPG}
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
Curse PremiumMDenham's response in #135 reads fairly genuine and.... honest, for the lack of a better word. Still don't like him but I'll bump him up.
There's one thing that I don't like, though. You only just finished judging my reaction, from that post waaaay back to now?
I'm thinking of a Teia/Necropsy/Void scumteam.
Teia has been exceedingly noncommital and asking a whole bunch of questions but not following up on them. She's behaving the exact same way in her scum mod game... MM4, I believe? Or MM5? As town she usually flails wildly at everyone for poor reasoning. I remember looking at a couple of her posts while I was quote-hunting and I was surprised at the similarities.
Necropsy has made bad posts and has been covered already.
Void is scum for #131, which is a massive reach. He's also failed to follow up on his questions for me or Wessel.
Also, this is terrible:
This question is bad because:
Void should obviously know that emoticons are worthy of votes, yet in this post he pretends like he doesn't know.
I'm 99% sure that one of those three is scum and fairly set on two being scum.