Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[NativeForeigner]

That would be an interesting sort of bastardry to add, but since this is not a bastard mod, I'm guessing "no."

But I'll show you some love, Native. Aside from a single RVS question and an early prod at the other urist, your every post in this thread has been about penngo and Andrew, and only indirectly, if at all, about anybody else. That you hunt them is fine, I have no gripes with that. But that you hunt nobody else is... not cool.

Is nobody else interesting to you at all? Are there no other interesting interactions in this thread? Are there no scumtells from other people you wish to note, even just for the record so you can take them up if your top pick proves to be town?

My point was that I find it incredibly annoying to be ignored multiple times. I wasn't actually suggesting that that was a wincon.

I find Andrew to be scum, so he gets my attention. I find Penngo to probably be bad town, so he gets my attention until I make sure of that. I don't have any strong opinions on anyone else and I don't have any interesting questions to ask. It's D1, sue me.

You're correct, no one interesting to me right now. My attention is occupied by other things. If Andrew turns out to be town, then I'll have to look back and see if there's anything interesting to go back on. Posts aren't going to go away, so I focus on the eye-catching things. If that doesn't work or isn't enough, then I look for the more subtle things. At least on D1.

[Jim Groovester]

Phantom
That you managed to take the screenshot makes it harder for me to believe you. It makes me think that you've been watching the game while logged off.

Why is it harder to believe? It's not like he's been dicking around elsewhere on the forum this whole time.

Orangebottle:
Everyone is probably scum. => There is a chance that everyone is scum. I don't think its possible for everyone to be scum.
Everyone is probable scum. => Everyone is people that have a chance to be scum.

This is a pointless clarification to a pointless subject. Why is this important?

Blah blah statistics blah blah Bayes blah blah systematic bias blah blah

Man, for how much you hate the standard way to play, you've sure got some novel, groundbreaking approaches to scumhunting that are definitely showcasing some clearly superior results.

But I'll show you some love, Native. Aside from a single RVS question and an early prod at the other urist, your every post in this thread has been about penngo and Andrew, and only indirectly, if at all, about anybody else. That you hunt them is fine, I have no gripes with that. But that you hunt nobody else is... not cool.

Is nobody else interesting to you at all? Are there no other interesting interactions in this thread? Are there no scumtells from other people you wish to note, even just for the record so you can take them up if your top pick proves to be town?

Wait, why do you have a problem with this, when you give this answer to zombie urist:

Fair enough point, as far as it goes. But people need to not-hunt everybody else for some time before it is in any way productive to call them out on it. If you don't give them enough time, they can just brush it off and leave us no better informed for that.

. . .

Hop-skip-jumping between all the players, or a substantial majority of them, dilutes both the attention I can give each of them and any pressure they might feel to respond, so I kept my focus on you and Bottle longer than was perhaps wholly necessary or prudent.

At the same time you're giving NativeForeigner crap for focusing his attacks on a few players, you're also justifying focusing your attacks on a few players in the very same post.

Why, I'm afraid I don't follow. Explain this one, McUselessNoble.

Jim: You're lurking. This is unusual for you. Want to share the reason why?

And you've been around for so long that you can make any judgment about what I usually do, huh? What if lurking is something I usually do? Then you'd be mistaken, and you'd be trying to pick at me over baseless things.

You're right, though. I don't lurk, and here's your reason for why I've been quiet lately: Video games. If you say that that's no excuse, I will respond with the following: See how much I care.

I have a question though: Why are you speaking as if you're an authority on my meta when there's no reasonable way you could be one?

[Urist McUselessNoble]

Native:

You're correct, no one interesting to me right now. My attention is occupied by other things. If Andrew turns out to be town, then I'll have to look back and see if there's anything interesting to go back on. Posts aren't going to go away, so I focus on the eye-catching things. If that doesn't work or isn't enough, then I look for the more subtle things. At least on D1.

There are two scum out there. You stated that penngo is reading bad town to you. Are you only going to start hunting for Andrew's scumbuddy, or are you content to wait until you get a roleflip from Andrew?

Jim Groovester:

Man, for how much you hate the standard way to play, you've sure got some novel, groundbreaking approaches to scumhunting that are definitely showcasing some clearly superior results.

Weak. It's Day 1. There are not clear results from anything yet. If you want to discuss results, let's discuss results when we get some roleflips so there are actual results to discuss.

Wait, why do you have a problem with this, when you give this answer to zombie urist:

Fair enough point, as far as it goes. But people need to not-hunt everybody else for some time before it is in any way productive to call them out on it. If you don't give them enough time, they can just brush it off and leave us no better informed for that.

. . .

Hop-skip-jumping between all the players, or a substantial majority of them, dilutes both the attention I can give each of them and any pressure they might feel to respond, so I kept my focus on you and Bottle longer than was perhaps wholly necessary or prudent.

At the same time you're giving NativeForeigner crap for focusing his attacks on a few players, you're also justifying focusing your attacks on a few players in the very same post.

Because there's a difference between keeping your attention on the same two players for 24-36 hours vs. keeping your attention on the same two people for all of D1 so far.

One is "being thorough." The other is "tunneling the easy lynches." I'll leave it to the reader to puzzle out which is which.

And you've been around for so long that you can make any judgment about what I usually do, huh?

I've read enough of the archive to know that you're not a low-visibility player.

You're right, though. I don't lurk, and here's your reason for why I've been quiet lately: Video games.

OK, I buy that.

Now, do you have an interesting explanation for why you came back here two posts after I mentioned that you were unusually quiet? Or do you want us to put that down to coincidence?

I have a question though: Why are you speaking as if you're an authority on my meta when there's no reasonable way you could be one?

Uh, you are aware that people can click on these old thread thingies that hang around the board, right? I read up on a number of archived games before I signed up for the account here, to get a feel for the idiosyncrasies of the board and its culture. You're, eh, a visible member of the community.

[NativeForeigner]

There are two scum out there. You stated that penngo is reading bad town to you. Are you only going to start hunting for Andrew's scumbuddy, or are you content to wait until you get a roleflip from Andrew?

I'm well aware of that. If I had another strong lead, I'd be following it. I don't. I'll pick up on the next strongest lead I can find D2. Earlier if something interesting happens.

[Dariush]

Dariush:
Are those latest questions rhetorical or do you actually want me to dignify them with answers that do not consist of concatenating increasingly interesting invective?

The questions were rhetorical, but it will still do everyone a lot of good if you stop passively activelurking and do something.

[Urist McUselessNoble]

I'm well aware of that. If I had another strong lead, I'd be following it. I don't. I'll pick up on the next strongest lead I can find D2. Earlier if something interesting happens.

Hypothetically, what would qualify as adequately interesting to motivate you to pick at it?

And doesn't this tactic run the risk of you being NK'd and the rest of us thereby not getting to benefit from your cases on the second-tier scumpicks? I mean, unless you're nightkill-immune for some reason?

[NativeForeigner]

Hypothetically, what would qualify as adequately interesting to motivate you to pick at it?

Why would I want to point something like that out?

And doesn't this tactic run the risk of you being NK'd and the rest of us thereby not getting to benefit from your cases on the second-tier scumpicks? I mean, unless you're nightkill-immune for some reason?

I suppose, but nobody would be missing out on much. My second-tier scumpicks aren't exactly developed. This is coming off more as trying to find out whether or not I'm onto you than you being concerned about my hunting efforts. Your rolefishing is also noted.

[Urist McUselessNoble]

This is coming off more as trying to find out whether or not I'm onto you than you being concerned about my hunting efforts.

Deflection noted.

Your rolefishing is also noted.

Dude, I was suggesting that you might be NK-immune because you might be one of the chaps making the NKs. This gig was billed as "role-light," so I seriously doubt that we have bulletproof townies running around in the woodworks.

[penngo009]

Native, I'm not one for more of the random questions, I bring them up when I feel they're needed.

Jim, C'mon man, screw da video games for a single post every once in a while. xD

[NativeForeigner]

Native, I'm not one for more of the random questions, I bring them up when I feel they're needed.

It wasn't a random question and it wasn't about random questions. It was about the attacks to your most recent post that held some measure of content.

McNoble:

Deflection of what? A question that will only serve to help scum.

Uhuh, I'm sure.

[Toaster]

Vote Count:

Jim Groovester:
NativeForeigner:
Phantom of The Library:
Urist McUselessNoble: zombie urist
Orangebottle:
Andrew425: Orangebottle, NativeForeigner, penngo009, Jim Groovester
Dariush:
penngo009: Andrew425, Dariush
zombie urist:

No Lynch:

Not voting: Phantom of The Library, Urist McUselessNoble

With 9 alive, 5 votes to hammer.

[Phantom of The Library]

Phantom
That you managed to take the screenshot makes it harder for me to believe you. It makes me think that you've been watching the game while logged off.

How does that make it harder to believe? It took me all of thirty seconds.  I took it because I didn't expect people to completely trust me on my word alone so I went to the thread, opened up the snipping tool, clicked on my profile and snipped that, opened up paint, saved, and while img.ie was uploading it; I logged in.
I will tell you now that in any game of mafia I play the one thing that I am guaranteed not to lie about is how busy I am IRL, everything else in-game is fair game, but that is one thing that I can assure you that I will not lie about.

Phantom: Who're you suspicious of? Why are you lurking so much? Why aren't you voting?

I wasn't lurking, I had a paper to write, two major tests to study for, and two different events that I had to be at, both taking up more than half a day.  In short: I almost literally did not have the time to think until last night when I only had one major test to study for and work to catch up on.

As for who I'm suspicious of.
Andrew425, Penngo009, and Urist McUselessNoble

Andrew and Penngo because they both have been dodging question and generally acting suspicious.
Andrew especially with that first post both claiming that he was town and accusing penngo in a way that was definitely not going to help the scumhunt.
Urist is more a gut feeling, there's something I really don't like about him.

I haven't voted because:
A) This is a hammer mafia and I'm being cautious, I would vote Andrew right now, but that would kill him and I want to see his response first, then if he can't give me a satisfactory answer, I will present a full summation of my reasons for suspecting him and vote for him.
B) At the time I last had the time to log on I only suspected Andrew lightly, I knew that I wouldn't be able to make a critical analysis for a while, and I didn't want to have my vote just sitting there and able to be exploited.

Phantom After winning last game as the scum how will you help the town win this game?

If you are asking me how playing as scum last game will allow me to help the town, it won't really.  I know the position that the scum are in, but I can't say that it will help me in any way shape or form. 
If you're just asking how I'm going to assist the town: by doing what I said I was doing there.  Scumhunting and watching for tells.
Either way, how do you know that I'm town?  I do believe Jim already asked this, but I can't find your response.

Andrew425: Why have you avoided questions or incompletely answered questions? 

I want to hear a full response from you within 36 hours explaining all of your scummy behavior throughout this entire game.

The only reason I'm not voting for you already is because I think that there's a chance that you're just very idiotic town and not scum; and I want to give you a chance just in case, but unless it's ridiculously convincing I'm probably going to vote for you anyway.

You have thirty-six hours.


If I missed any questions directed at me, just let me know, I'm not sure I caught everything.

[penngo009]

Thank god that post by that person earlier was removed, anyways.....Last time I checked I answered all the reasonable questions that came my way(Basically "unreasonable" was Andrews post.) if I missed any, please tell me.

Though I can also see your point on Urist, as I got the same feeling myself, but maybe I'm just being weird.

[zombie urist]

If you want them to justify their votes why don't you ask them? I'm not restating my case on Penngo because it hasn't changed from what I've said on page 2 and 3.

On p. 2 and 3 your case was that penngo was first protecting then distancing himself from Andrew. This hypothesis sort of worked when you assumed that Andrew was his scumbuddy. That, judging by where your vote is sitting, is no longer your assumption. How does this alter your case? ("It doesn't" is the wrong answer.)

I've stated some of my reasoning here. In addition his recent posts have been fluffy and he's not scumhunting.

It makes you scummy because you haven't been making an effort to find out more about the people who are tunneling Andrew/Penngo.

Fair enough point, as far as it goes. But people need to not-hunt everybody else for some time before it is in any way productive to call them out on it. If you don't give them enough time, they can just brush it off and leave us no better informed for that. For instance, Phantom's up-front statement - whether it is true or not - that he would be busy until today bought him until today, simply because there were no reasonable grounds for disputing it (but his content had better be really awesome to justify missing the first week of the game rather than replacing out).

Once we passed that point, I called you out, and then I was busy with you and Bottle for a while. Hop-skip-jumping between all the players, or a substantial majority of them, dilutes both the attention I can give each of them and any pressure they might feel to respond, so I kept my focus on you and Bottle longer than was perhaps wholly necessary or prudent.

The thing is up until very recently, you haven't been hunting at all. In the past you've stated many times that you didn't like the tunneling on Andrew/Penngo but didn't do anything about it. Traditional scumhunting tactics still work on the more experienced players, which is everyone else. I did not see any attempt before.

Using math shifts the blame from yourself.

Not under any version of logic or ethics with which I am familiar.
What using math and other forms of formal logic does do is make my argument independent of what you think about me - you only need to consider the premises and the chain of lemmas. But it does not magically absolve me of responsibility for making shit arguments if the argument itself turns out to be shit.

Using math makes you less accountable for your arguments.

Do I have a checklist? No. But you can look at the overall style and feel of their contribution and consider the plausibility of the gambit you think you spotted them trying to pull. Someone who has trouble stringing together a syntactically valid English sentence is unlikely to make particularly convoluted gambits that require careful message control. If someone has a history of cracking under pressure both as town and scum, then one needs to look at the content of their response more and the change in tone less.
In other words, a lot more guesswork and gut feeling.
For the sake of completeness, I will note that there is a case that can be made that one should treat them the same way that one treats experienced players, because that way they may improve their play faster (or drop out in frustration at all the D1&2 lynches they catch). But that is an argument over the community's way to support newbies, not an argument over whether they are scum or not.

Well good luck on trying to find evidence based on your gut feeling, since that alone will not convince anyone of anything. Just because they're English isn't very good does not mean they are not good players. Also what happens if your gut feeling is wrong? Then how will you proceed?

This is a pointless clarification to a pointless subject. Why is this important?

Game-wise it's not very important. But OB wanted clarification, so I gave it to him.

Andrew and Penngo because they both have been dodging question and generally acting suspicious.
Andrew especially with that first post both claiming that he was town and accusing penngo in a way that was definitely not going to help the scumhunt.
Urist is more a gut feeling, there's something I really don't like about him.

What constitutes 'generally acting suspicious'?

I'm well aware of that. If I had another strong lead, I'd be following it. I don't. I'll pick up on the next strongest lead I can find D2. Earlier if something interesting happens.

So what are you going to do rest of D1?

Mod Andrew's last post was on March 4th, but he has been online recently. I think he needs a prod.

[Orangebottle]

Phantom
That you managed to take the screenshot makes it harder for me to believe you. It makes me think that you've been watching the game while logged off.

How does that make it harder to believe? It took me all of thirty seconds.  I took it because I didn't expect people to completely trust me on my word alone so I went to the thread, opened up the snipping tool, clicked on my profile and snipped that, opened up paint, saved, and while img.ie was uploading it; I logged in.

Because you had the forethought to take a screenshot.

Urist is more a gut feeling, there's something I really don't like about him.

Then why are you focusing on Andrew instead of asking Urist questions?

I haven't voted because:
A) This is a hammer mafia and I'm being cautious, I would vote Andrew right now, but that would kill him and I want to see his response first, then if he can't give me a satisfactory answer, I will present a full summation of my reasons for suspecting him and vote for him.
B) At the time I last had the time to log on I only suspected Andrew lightly, I knew that I wouldn't be able to make a critical analysis for a while, and I didn't want to have my vote just sitting there and able to be exploited.

That's fine.

Orangebottle:
Everyone is probably scum. => There is a chance that everyone is scum. I don't think its possible for everyone to be scum.
Everyone is probable scum. => Everyone is people that have a chance to be scum.

Except I was reffering to Penngo's original sentence,"I think Andrew is probable scum."

What do you mean by "fluffy"?

Hmm ORANGEBOTTLE, may I repeat I voted for him AFTER HIS SECOND POST. It wasn't his first.

How is that relevant?