Extend if you say so.
Deathsword:I'll start with the why: I wasn't completely sure and I certainly wasn't confident enough about what I though to share with others, especially since it carried the risk of making me look stupid and even making my situation worse. So yes, it was partially out of fear and I admit that.
No good. If you don't try, you're not going to get better, and if you don't want to say it out loud, you probably need to get better.
Now, what I did get from that: He seemed to misunderstand (intentionally or not) most of my statements. If it was because they were confusing for any reason, I apologize.
And did you bring up that he's misunderstanding your statements and try to establish why?
Why is everything. It's obviously not possible to completely read his mind, but usually when someone's doing something for "some reason," it's a good prompt to figure out more about them, not lynch them because it maybe possibly means they're scum. The case of misunderstanding statements is especially dangerous (and noteworthy) because it might mean they're scum trying for any angle or to wriggle out of something, or it might mean you're being unclear- and obviously, that's a pretty vital distinction you need to be making.
It's also possibly interesting because it can clue you in to how they're thinking, though obviously that's not something you can gather useful info from every time.
However, he decided to FoS and later vote me because I "felt wierd". Now, this is (or was) RVS, thus voting to pressure is normal. However, when questioned himself he was clearly defensive, even angry, and kept re-stating the same things, mostly how I "felt wierd". This has led me to belive there is something off here and thus I hereby clearly and fully accuse him of being scum due to behaviour I belive to be that of scum.
My question to fiskav still stands, I'd like to know why.
Problem: That's where your questioning stopped. You're not, as far as I can tell, gathering any new data on him, which seems to mean you're
absolutely certain of his alignment. Does the information you have so far make you 100% certain, or is there still room for error? (Hint: If he made that serious a mistake, there's always room for error; if scum can dead out themselves, townies can damn well incriminate themselves fairly well).
You're also not questioning anyone else, which means you're not moving forward at all. Yes, you're waiting for an answer from Fiskav, and yes, that answer might help you get a read on him. But sitting on a single question, even when you think you're voting scum, is not good hunting.
Fiskav:I have no clue who the scum is. As a townie, I'm trying my best to find out who is scum, which is proving to be very difficult.
This is probably related to the fact that you're not asking very many questions. Surely there's someone and/or something you're curious about, and would like to hear explanations from and/or about?
Remember, you're trying to get a read on other players by watching what they do, and especially by asking them questions. It's not the sort of thing that will magically provide answers if you wait long enough; more like a strategy game where you're trying to figure out what the other players have or are doing by prodding them and trying to see through their feints. Sitting there and hoping one of them drops his cards is not the way to go about that.
Unvote Chaos Armor due to lack of evidence. I really have no clue who is the scummiest person now. Really, none. But I'm just going to say right now that since the scum already know who is and who isn't a townie, for the uninformed townies to know, I'm a townie.
Publicly declaring yourself town is scummy and useless. It's not going to convince anyone, and it may very well convince some people that you're panicking scum. It's like if you're looking around for a thief, and someone suddenly blurts out that they're not a thief or anything. Pretty much your first thought is that they're a nervous thief.
Whether I am being hypocritical or not is not the answer I am trying to find out. What I am trying to determine is who the scum are. Chaos, I am becoming more confident that it is not you, simply due to your offensive nature that makes it seem like you are aiming for a town victory.
I doubt he cares whether
you want to know if you're being hypocritical, and I don't think deflecting the question is going to fix that.
I'm also curious why Chaos Armor has gone from your number one scumpick for sidelining to being offensively pro-town in your eyes.
blackmagechill:Why wouldn't he be aiming for a town victory? This is probably the biggest slip I've ever seen. Fiskav, that was pretty deadly mistake.
Because he's scum? Why don't you explain more thoroughly why this could only be something scum would say.
My bad if I read it wrong, but slips could be pretty common at this level. I haven't read many BM games. Fiskav has looked pretty scummy the whole way through, as outline by Irony and Theoldus.
Then why didn't you mention those reasons and that you were lifting them off me and Theodolus, instead of not mentioning them and going for something completely different? Was there some reason you didn't think bringing them up was necessary or a good idea? You do want him lynched and think he's scum, right, so why wouldn't you explain
why to everyone else?
For those who will ask (if anyone) my suspicion list reads like this
1.Deathsword- reread the whole first page of play
2.ChaosArmor-reread the second and thirdish pages of play
3.Fiskav-Irony's and Theoldus' points, and what looks like a pretty huge slip
If the answer's sitting right there, we hardly need you to point it out to us, now do we?
This also means that if people don't already agree with you, reading a few pages is not going to magically change their mind. If you want to convince people, you have to specifically convince people, not just gesture in a direction and claim the evidence is obvious.
4.Flying Dice- trying to cover for Fiskav after that, although his vote for me and the way I look suspicious is pretty well founded
Better, but a more thorough explanation would be nice.
In all cases, this brings up the issue of why, if these are so suspicious, you haven't gone into them yourself. You have/are going after Fiskav for
one of the reasons you've mentioned, but otherwise you either haven't bothered to actually hunt any of these people (this is the first time you've mentioned any suspicion at Flying Dice at all) or have given up on them already (been a while since you've questioned Deathsword).
If you can't be bothered to hunt them for this, why would we?
I forgot to mention to appear less defensive. I looked like it in questioning which raised some eyebrows, and it seems to me that the best defense is to either not have one because you don't need it unless you're scum, or to redirect to someone else, which also sort of looks like a scum tell.
The best defense is to explain what you're doing and move on. Ignoring accusations makes it look like you don't have any defense and are just hoping it'll go away. Trying to deflect suspicions onto someone else makes it look like you don't have any defense and are hoping you can train attention onto someone else for you. Spending an inordinate amount of time defending yourself while doing nothing else makes it look like you're very concerned about your own survival but apathetic about actually finding scum.
Your defensiveness came from a combination of the second (trying to deflect attention) and looking like you were nervous in your responses. But then, you knew about that because of Deathsword's fallacy crap, right? Same basic idea.
Also, I hope not summarily lynching you for not answering my questions is what's giving you the idea that ignoring them works. In a real game you'd probably be in a noose already for that; I've been letting them slide because you're new and you seem to be at least understanding the "this is a bad idea" part of them, but in an actual game I'd want to hear your reasoning at the time even if you admitted that they were poor suspicions and had moved on.