Print

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

[notquitethere]

LS

Downvoting.

Well at least you're on track to keeping your earlier promise.

Incidentally, it's not really about convincing - NQT already knows exactly who the spies are.  I'm just exposing the fact that he is scum.

I really wish I did know who the spies were but I'm beginning to have a good idea. I like how your 'exposing' tactic is just to repeatedly insinuate that I am scum on the flimsiest of pretexts. It must be nice to go through life with such certainty. Why are you going to downvote the next team?

Tiruin

I'd cheer that someone actually pierced the veil of scrunity and actually caught my role, but...I'm really confused why you didn't shift for Toaster/Ford, still.

I didn't go for Toaster because although he's acted very reasonable and offered up rational responses and whatnot this doesn't necessarily prevent him from being scum. Furthermore, once I was convinced that you were town on the basis of absolute vote-coherence, it would be ridiculous to put Toaster forward: we have zero vote-coherence, and if you're town then that makes Toaster 50-100% scum and that's way to high a risk to put forward. Ford would have been okay. Of the three (ZU, LS and Ford) who have upvoted every failed team, Ford is the least suspicious.

Basically, Toaster and Ford seem the most town to me because they're reasonable and analytical. I know from experience in the mason game that appearing to be reasonable and analytical is exactly how scum want to appear. Town-tells are scum-tells! The scummiest players are thus the most trustworthy.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Nerjin

Yes and his vote flip doesn't seal the deal does it scum-boy?

Sure, that was suspicious as well. I- I think you might be misunderstanding my position on ZU. Incidentally, 'scum-boy' sounds like a minor villainous sidekick. As in:

TUNE IN NEXT WEEK FOR MORE INSALUBRIOUS ADVENTURES OF SPYMAN AND SCUM-BOY!

[Tiruin]

I didn't go for Toaster because although he's acted very reasonable and offered up rational responses and whatnot this doesn't necessarily prevent him from being scum. Furthermore, once I was convinced that you were town on the basis of absolute vote-coherence, it would be ridiculous to put Toaster forward: we have zero vote-coherence, and if you're town then that makes Toaster 50-100% scum and that's way to high a risk to put forward. Ford would have been okay.

Wait, how does this out Toaster as scum? By vote coherence? And you stated afterwards that Toaster/ZU seem most towny to you.

Why didn't you shift me with him...As you do know, most of the people here are actively biased against me, right?

Or..was that backup for emphasizing

Town-tells are scum-tells! The scummiest players are thus the most trustworthy.

because I'd like to ask.

How do you view Leafsnail?

I know from experience in the mason game that appearing to be reasonable and analytical is exactly how scum want to appear

...You explain my whole message to Toony better than I could. Yes, this is exactly my point. In this game -  scum are at a total advantage over town. Their power comes in how they play - subtle and calculative, giving off the reasonable neutral stance whenever they see town go along with their musings. Glad to see you've got that right idea NQT.

[notquitethere]

Wait, how does this out Toaster as scum? By vote coherence? And you stated afterwards that Toaster/ZU seem most towny to you.

Why didn't you shift me with him...As you do know, most of the people here are actively biased against me, right?

Where did I state that ZU seemed most towny? Maybe I have to spell out the Toaster issue: the first mission failed with you, LS and Toaster. If you are town then that means either Toaster or LS or both are scum. There are other players that have only a 0-33% chance to be scum rather than a 50-100% chance. If I believe you to be town then it would be insane to put forward a Toaster team no matter how innocent he otherwise looks (and given that he's voted the opposite way to me for the entire game, he doesn't look that innocent, but to be honest, I'm not sure how much weight should be put on vote-coherence).

I thought it would be better to put forward a team that I thought was town rather than a team that would actually had a good chance of being upvoted by these muppets. Worst case, the more failed votes we have, the more information.

How do you view Leafsnail?

He's either an unhelpful rebel or a cunning spy. Either way, as he's been on and upvoted both failed missions I'm not going to advocate any more missions with him on. I don't even think he should have been on that second mission.

[zombie urist]

> It would be hard enough to see that if Toaster/LS was scum - they'd both sabotage. I know I didn't sabotage.

This is where you're wrong. There's no reason for both of them to sabotage because only 1 sabotage is needed for a mission failure.

[notquitethere]

Yeah, ZU's right on this point. It'd be a piece of cake for scum to organise a method for not double-sabotaging: like, if more than one spy are on a mission then the spy who's username comes first in the alphabet is the the one to sabotage. (When we run this game mode again, I don't think the scum should be allowed to confer before the game starts, they have enough advantages as it is).

[Dariush]

When we run this game mode again, I don't think the scum should be allowed to confer before the game starts, they have enough advantages as it is.

I support this idea completely. Well, either this or increase the number of missions rebels can fail and still win (for example, 3 out of 6 instead of 2 out of 5).

[Tiruin]

> It would be hard enough to see that if Toaster/LS was scum - they'd both sabotage. I know I didn't sabotage.

This is where you're wrong. There's no reason for both of them to sabotage because only 1 sabotage is needed for a mission failure.

I did put that into the idea. Thing is, how would they have coordinated if so? There is little to no evidence of their interactions going along this line beforehand - what if both committed to lay low, or what if both sabotaged? Occam's Razor here, I'm going along the most possible and practical assumption.

Wait, how does this out Toaster as scum? By vote coherence? And you stated afterwards that Toaster/ZU seem most towny to you.

Why didn't you shift me with him...As you do know, most of the people here are actively biased against me, right?

Where did I state that ZU seemed most towny?

Typo, was thinking of ZU at the time because of his 'have to rethink everything' thing. Mental note to self to not type at the early hours of morning following review period. Honest mistake.

I thought it would be better to put forward a team that I thought was town rather than a team that would actually had a good chance of being upvoted by these muppets. Worst case, the more failed votes we have, the more information.

So Toaster and Leafsnail are Leafsnail, in your opinion, would get more votes? Also, you're rating LS over Toaster? Forgive me if I'm wrong there in understanding you.

I don't even think he should have been on that second mission.

Why not?

PPE: You 2 replying.

[Tiruin]

EBWOP: Editing pre-post went wrong.

> It would be hard enough to see that if Toaster/LS was scum - they'd both sabotage. I know I didn't sabotage.

This is where you're wrong. There's no reason for both of them to sabotage because only 1 sabotage is needed for a mission failure.

I did put that into the idea. Thing is, how would they have coordinated if so? There is little to no evidence of their interactions going along this line beforehand - what if both committed to lay low, or what if both sabotaged? Occam's Razor here, I'm going along the most possible and practical assumption. I did not think about that course of pre-planning in that situation...

Wait, how does this out Toaster as scum? By vote coherence? And you stated afterwards that Toaster/ZU seem most towny to you.

Why didn't you shift me with him...As you do know, most of the people here are actively biased against me, right?

Where did I state that ZU seemed most towny?

Typo, was thinking of ZU at the time because of his 'have to rethink everything' thing. Mental note to self to not type at the early hours of morning following review period. Honest mistake.

I thought it would be better to put forward a team that I thought was town rather than a team that would actually had a good chance of being upvoted by these muppets. Worst case, the more failed votes we have, the more information.

So Toaster and Leafsnail are more town than me, judging by the chance of upvoting? Or on that idea, sending anyone of the two instead: Toaster or Leafsnail, in your opinion, would get more votes? Also, you're rating LS over Toaster? Forgive me if I'm wrong there in understanding you.

I don't even think he should have been on that second mission.

Why not?

PPE: You 2 replying.

[notquitethere]

Tiruin

So Toaster and Leafsnail are Leafsnail, in your opinion, would get more votes? Also, you're rating LS over Toaster? Forgive me if I'm wrong there in understanding you.

I think you need to get some sleep Tiruin. Leafsnail is slightly more suspect than Toaster on account of being on two failed missions. He shouldn't have been put on the second mission because there was a higher chance of him being scum than any player that hadn't been on that first failed mission. Hence why I downvoted the second failed mission. Why did you downvote that mission (the one proposed by Dariush)?

[Tiruin]

I EBWOP'd - edited by way of post :/

Downvoted - it had Leafsnail on it. That's the sole reason I downvoted it. Why I believe LS is scum? Mainly because of his first reaction to M1, and no continuation or explanation in the proceeding posts.

[zombie urist]

Umm... no it didn't?

[Tiruin]

Ah well, I don't see any point in delaying the vote anymore.
Leafsnail
Dariush
zombie urist
Captain Ford

I think that says Leafsnail.

[notquitethere]

ZU, she's talking about Dariush's mission that failed, not the mission I just put forward.

[Tiruin]

Oh. That was me pointing to the downvoting...must state it properly more.

Upvoting > This team. Really.

[Tiruin]

Posting this ahead of time because of the lack of time.

Spoiler: Appeal to Toony's blood pressure (click to show/hide)

Please don't get worked up about what I said. Why I'm using those statements is because I've noticed we're going fully on possibilities here. Outing people and considering others just like a Mafia game. Logical fallacies and illogical statements are scumtells - yes, I agree and have been prodding you to see your viewpoint, that seemed to be the wrong course of action - but that is in a Mafia game.

This is not a Mafia game, but almost one, mostly due to how Mafia-esque games include the mode of thought into them.

Logical fallacies and such, there is no apparent basis on catching scum but by their words - no roleflips, no categorized scumtells, no setting people's alignments in stone. Scum have an advantage of a whole day's talk before their field work. Most missions take only one person to destroy it and cause chaos among who committed to the mission.

This deals with dealing with players. How to communicate.

M1,2,3 & 5 all need one spy to be victorious.

Mission number:
3
4
4
5 - This mission requires TWO attempts to sabotage in order to cause it to fail.
5

Our clincher lies with M4. Needing only this and the third to pass, then its an all out on the fifth to get things right. Another, ulterior reason on why I'm considering every and all passages of logic is because I'm wondering how others view scumhunting in this way - yours follows the conventional method, (and also pokes at the 'not understanding my posts' again :/) but anyway, that's all there is in my explanation.

Yeah, I'm nuts that way, but its better than relying on percentages.