Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 ... 21 22 [23] 24 25 ... 84

Author Topic: Witches' Coven: In the Heart of Darkness [GAME OVER: 4/13]  (Read 203402 times)

notquitethere

  • Bay Watcher
  • PIRATE
    • View Profile
Re: Witches' Coven: In the Heart of Darkness [D1: 13/13]
« Reply #330 on: August 09, 2013, 06:41:00 pm »

I recently played a game over on mafiascum and one thing it showed me is that when there's a hammer, the players are forced to do something useful with their vote. You've all got to keep in mind that if you're not voting for one of the lynch leads or making a new lynch lead, then you're vote is doing nothing at day's end and if you don't think the person who's about to be lynched is scum, then you are wilfully letting scum win.

---
Tiruin
I disagree on the point that we need to be told what we need to do.
Well, the town obviously do need a reminder of their duties because they're currently collectively doing nothing to prevent a mislynch.

Why did you ask me if I disagree? Why state those three people and denote them as lurkers and my opinion of them?
I want to know what you think of things, obviously. You were the most inactive player, I wanted to know your view on the other most inactive players. That's not an unusual request. Are you going to do something useful with your vote before the day ends (in about 20 hours time)?

Ottofar
I was ready to unvote you at this point. Then these happened.

[Why is X Scummier than Y]
Everyone

Particularly the latter post of the two, the first one I at first marked off as lazy town play, but the second one seems to me to be desperate to stay alive. So are you a survivor?
Uh, so I'm supposed to be both lazy (i.e. not putting enough effort in) or desperate (i.e. putting too much effort in)? What's scummy about wanting to stay alive? That's a null-tell for everyone but jesters.

EVERYONE -- Ottofar thinks wanting to stay alive is a scum-tell.

Ottofar, make a case on someone that makes some sense. If you are actually town, look at the other people on my lynch and ask yourself whether their cases are well founded and (when you see that they're not), maybe ask yourself why players would be making bullshit cases on the lynch lead.

Deathsword
You then list off some of the accusations and counter them. I don't feel that is particularly scummy. This, however, is:
Town, it's your job to critically examine the votes against the Day 1 lynch lead. Do it.
You talk to the town as if you are not part of it. Strange, is it not? You slipped good there.
NQT, thou art caught.
I want you to take a look at what you just wrote and ask yourself: does this make any sense? I think you'll find that in a post where I was addressing everyone, specifically addressing fellow town players by calling them 'town' makes perfect sense. If that's the best you can come up with, I think you need to actually take some time to reread the thread. What do you think of Ottofar's argument?

ZU
I actually think you're third party so you don't have a scumteam.
I'm not third party but you are absolutely correct in that that would also account for the overall voting pattern at the time. Thankfully, I wasn't relying in anyway on that argument. More just food for thought in case I am mislynched.

Dariush, Toaster, I hope you both read my earlier replies and give a decent response by the end of the day. Clock's ticking and I'm not letting you all mislynch me without pulling you  up on every bullshit argument you try to make. Whether you're scum, third-party or town, every hour you prevaricate is only giving town more ammunition against you tomorrow if you don't make a solid case today.
Logged

Tiruin

  • Bay Watcher
  • Life is too short for worries
    • View Profile
Re: Witches' Coven: In the Heart of Darkness [D1: 13/13]
« Reply #331 on: August 09, 2013, 07:50:47 pm »

Tiruin
I disagree on the point that we need to be told what we need to do.
Well, the town obviously do need a reminder of their duties because they're currently collectively doing nothing to prevent a mislynch.
In which your arguments against it lean more on showcasing the point and telling everyone that it is a mislynch--This is something we disagree on. Do we know yer role, sir? No. Only you do, and the point in case of depending on that notion is far less persuasive than facing up those who are voting you and going on that point. Sure, it may come off as defensiveness, but people are smarter than the superficial reader: they can see or sense what the writer is doing, in a way.

Now on those.."Duties"? You spoke about it in turn before all this, and it's quite detailed, I've to say. What's irking me is why you're shifting the notion to ulterior self-defense. You're (well, more of seemingly) defending yourself instead of proving those who are voting you wrong (however the effort seems more sincere than not, and I'm attributing what you're doing now to your..playstyle.)

Why do you keep on shifting the point and shoving 'this is what town must do' in it's case?


Quote
Why did you ask me if I disagree? Why state those three people and denote them as lurkers and my opinion of them?
I want to know what you think of things, obviously. You were the most inactive player, I wanted to know your view on the other most inactive players. That's not an unusual request. Are you going to do something useful with your vote before the day ends (in about 20 hours time)?
Toaster
I believe you missed this.

Why did you miss it? What uselessness do you see with this vote that you don't attack it directly?


I recently played a game over on mafiascum and one thing it showed me is that when there's a hammer, the players are forced to do something useful with their vote. You've all got to keep in mind that if you're not voting for one of the lynch leads or making a new lynch lead, then you're vote is doing nothing at day's end and if you don't think the person who's about to be lynched is scum, then you are wilfully letting scum win.
...So experience from a mafiascum game is your sole defense against the arguments against you?


Could you tell me why you're reacting in such a way that people would miss pertinent points in others' posts? ...Like a tattletale?




Deathsword
Everyone
[Think about this carefully. If I'm scum, where's my scum team to make an alternative case? Look at the votes-- they're evenly spread except for on me. I'm willing to bet that this pattern has never been seen on a day 1 scum lynch before. All it takes for evil to prevail is you all doing nothing.
This is some massive bullshit. Just because it never happened before it does not mean it'll never happen. In BM XL I fakeclaimed and borno counterclaimed. Had it ever happened before in a BM? Probably not. Did it still happen? Yes, it did. And don't think I haven't noticed your appeal to emotion at the end.

You then list off some of the accusations and counter them. I don't feel that is particularly scummy. This, however, is:
Town, it's your job to critically examine the votes against the Day 1 lynch lead. Do it.
You talk to the town as if you are not part of it. Strange, is it not? You slipped good there.
NQT, thou art caught.
Could you remind us all how, in context, does this seem like a good slip? If semantics is your reason, define and expound on it, please.

That doesn't come off as necessarily scummy to me, judging by how NQT's playstyle is, and judging by how his intent is brought about in his posts, and while the notion in itself does lead to suspect, I'm pretty curious how you shifted that suspicion from-..

Well, you didn't vote anyone else in your first five posts.

And the jump goes here to thou art caught?

Pretty interesting.



I'm trying to figure out what Lenglon's deal is; my posts weren't exactly something I was trying to bottle up for mass consumption, or to convince anyone.  I didn't flip-flop on NQT, either.  That was the only part of his post I objected to, and though I still think he shouldn't have posted that bit, I understand how using unpopular scumhunting criteria can look like WIFOM.  Once he explained "I'm referring to my voting records thing" I knew that it wasn't WIFOM, but rather a technique I disagreed with; and he was quite chill about it, too.

Yes, I've focused on Lenglon.  So what?  If she's scum, then it's time well-spent.
"If."

So what if you've focused on Lenglon? What's so wrong with that, that you go all uppity on the point?

From your focus, what're you leaning on given her mannerisms? The 'if' there seems to be a supporting idea backing up your case.

Meaning: You seem defensive on that point. What's up with that?

Quote
*Ahem*
Let me clarify. My vote was a pressure vote--something I usually do at the start of the game or within my first posts so I can start building up along the way.

Oh, it's a pressure vote!  So it's fine to contradict yourself.

That's like "I was claiming, the way that people do in the endgame to weed out imposters, which is why it's fine that I claimed SK and you shouldn't vote me."
...That's a horrible misrepresentation of my words.

However I'm wondering if this is a misunderstanding on semantics and wording rather than not, because contradiction is somehow the first thing to jump to mind. Did you skim my words, take their superficial meaning and come up with the worst possible idea? Or were you just snarking.

Quote
To facilitate zis, I suggest we all share our names and professions
> My point of targeting.

The arguments raised against me go along the line of 'why do you vote the guy asking for claims, yet claim yourself?' including parts on it being scummy or not.

My defense.
Quote
I said suspicion, which generally pokes at the intention and doesn't outright announce it as scummy. It could either be a backroom motive, or some quirk in his intention. My reply would've been 'I'm waiting on NQT's answer, then I'll explain'.

What I was thinking at the time was what NQT himself stated--matching up roles and probable events later on, but his reply was the crucial part of it.

The addition of the bolded portion
Quote
Oh, it's a pressure vote!  So it's fine to contradict yourself.
tells me you're waiting for something while giving me some sort of conclusion on your side which you don't expound.

Suspicion can go along many terms. You trying to perceive what he's seeing, trying to glean on how or what that person was thinking when he asked such. For me, a vote is more than the notion of finding one scummy, but also as a tool to find out information. It's in the reaction of what the person does which adds to it.

But I guess me using the term of pressure vote was wrong in its colloquial meaning. When I say pressure in this context, it goes along a press for information. What I was thinking when first reading this was "He's claiming just as he's asking. I wonder if-I'll ask."
The - there was me coming up with a thousand ideas on why he's doing it, the notion of cross-matching being only one of them, but the best way was for me to ask on it.

And then follow it up after giving my claim.
Quote
What would you hope to gain other than knowing our name and probable profession?

Why do you skew my words into a..strange representation of it? You add a nonessential clause to the manner (hence me wondering if you were just snarking at me) and yet it goes like this.
Quote
I was claiming, which is why it's fine that I claimed SK and you shouldn't vote me.
...How the hell does this make sense.
Logged

Tiruin

  • Bay Watcher
  • Life is too short for worries
    • View Profile
Re: Witches' Coven: In the Heart of Darkness [D1: 13/13]
« Reply #332 on: August 09, 2013, 08:25:57 pm »

EBWOP
Lenglon/NQT would be inspected
Did I miss something here? This came off as more than a prediction for me.
Logged

Vector

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Witches' Coven: In the Heart of Darkness [D1: 13/13]
« Reply #333 on: August 09, 2013, 08:35:25 pm »

Tiruin:

You're right, I'm feeling a bit defensive.  I feel that I've been picked on a lot recently for my playstyle, especially letting me know that I'm a worse player than Lenglon in particular, and I'm starting to feel sort of demoralized.  People have kept asking: "Why are you focusing on Lenglon?"

Well, because I don't know her very well, she wiped the floor with me last game so I know that she's pretty clever, and I feel that it's my responsibility to not let that happen again based on my going "aww, I am picking on her!  I need to be nicer."  I'm treating her like she's dangerous, which I feel to be reasonable, but it seems that folks who are town are happy to chainsaw against what isn't even my normal level of aggression when it comes to her.

So yes, I'm kind of frustrated.  I'm trying to get over it, but I'm frustrated.


As for the other thing, I wanted a bit more explanation than what you'd given.  It sounded like you were trying to justify bad behavior because it fell under one of the basic Mafia pieces--like pressure voting, massclaiming, RVS, etc.

I appreciate the explanation.




Leafsnail, why are you announcing the inspections?  How will that help the town?
Logged
"The question of the usefulness of poetry arises only in periods of its decline, while in periods of its flowering, no one doubts its total uselessness." - Boris Pasternak

nonbinary/genderfluid/genderqueer renegade mathematician and mafia subforum limpet. please avoid quoting me.

pronouns: prefer neutral ones, others are fine. height: 5'3".

Tiruin

  • Bay Watcher
  • Life is too short for worries
    • View Profile
Re: Witches' Coven: In the Heart of Darkness [D1: 13/13]
« Reply #334 on: August 09, 2013, 08:44:29 pm »

PFP  - Posting for Posterity.

You're a great player Vector, it's not going to change, ever.

If it makes you feel better, you're one of the primary factors on why I joined Mafia. Browsing through the previous games and all.. T'was pretty fun and really intellectually stimulating. :)


...

This is also a PFP as nothing's coming to my mind at the moment other than work. I'll be back in a whole 8 or so hours.
Logged

zombie urist

  • Bay Watcher
  • [NOT_LIVING]
    • View Profile
Re: Witches' Coven: In the Heart of Darkness [D1: 13/13]
« Reply #335 on: August 09, 2013, 08:49:07 pm »

Quick post.
Everyone
[Think about this carefully. If I'm scum, where's my scum team to make an alternative case? Look at the votes-- they're evenly spread except for on me. I'm willing to bet that this pattern has never been seen on a day 1 scum lynch before. All it takes for evil to prevail is you all doing nothing.
I actually think you're third party so you don't have a scumteam.

Lenglon: Using Lynch All Lurkers as an excuse to lynch Ottofar is lazy and it feels like you don
I'd ask you on both accounts. Why do you think he's a third party. Why do you feel like Lenglon doesn't really have a case based on the LAL policy?
He's been acting scummy, but no one's been defending him (even Dariush kinda defended him in Rev II) and his interactions with others don't feel like scum-scum. Admittedly this is mostly gut feel. Because at that point her biggest reason to get Ottofar lynched was "we should enact LaL". 
Logged
The worst part of all of this is that Shakerag won.

Toaster

  • Bay Watcher
  • Appliance
    • View Profile
Re: Witches' Coven: In the Heart of Darkness [D1: 13/13]
« Reply #336 on: August 09, 2013, 08:56:59 pm »

NQT:
Everyone
[Think about this carefully. If I'm scum, where's my scum team to make an alternative case? Look at the votes-- they're evenly spread except for on me. I'm willing to bet that this pattern has never been seen on a day 1 scum lynch before. All it takes for evil to prevail is you all doing nothing.
Everyone
[Also, are you going to trust the lynch to the two most lurkiest players in the game?
How do you feel about sharing a case with arch-lurkers Tiruin and Ottofar? Do you feel their powers of perception are so sharp that they can make accurate cases without actually needing to play the game?]
What's your view on lurkers Ottofar, Deathsword and griffinpup?]
I recently played a game over on mafiascum and one thing it showed me is that when there's a hammer, the players are forced to do something useful with their vote. You've all got to keep in mind that if you're not voting for one of the lynch leads or making a new lynch lead, then you're vote is doing nothing at day's end and if you don't think the person who's about to be lynched is scum, then you are wilfully letting scum win.

Remember what I said about deflecting earlier?  You are standing on your soapbox screaming the evils of lurkers, doing your best to ensure people pay attention to them over you.  You're fleshing that out with calling the town as a whole lazy and complacent.  Essentially, you're doing your best to shift the blame of the votes on you away from yourself.  This is the kind of behavior that I am voting you for.

Speaking of lurking, let's go over your post where you put up post counts.  What point, exactly, are you going for?  Quantity over quality?  Quantity is a quality of its own?  All that matters is the number of posts you make?

Everyone
[Also, are you going to trust the lynch to the two most lurkiest players in the game?

This is a false argument.  You have four votes at this point- not just the two "lurkiest players."

Lenglon
I'd like to point out that post counts don't reflect activity perfectly. for example, at least in my eyes, Tiruin only has one post (since her first one had zero content) and yet her one post has more in it than Ottofar's three, so I consider Ottofar the worse offender for lurking.
"Exactement, Monsieur Coullart."

If you truly believe this, it sure doesn't show in your vote count post, since your top three lurkers are the ones with the lowest vote counts.

Tiruin
[Thanks for finally posting some more content. Good to have you back.]

Hilarious buddying, considering she just unvoted you and voted one of your voters.

Ottofar thinks wanting to stay alive is a scum-tell.

So do I, at least if its your first priority.

All of this just reinforces what I said last time- you blew up when I mentioned any implication that you could be third party, you follow up with deflection, and you wiggle like a snake to try and not get lynched.

Also, what's your take on Lenglon and her Lynch All Lurkers statement?  Given how much you've been railing against them, it seems like a banner you should take up.


Dariush:  Fair enough regarding ZU versus NQT.


Lenglon:
I would like to request a Lynch All Lurkers policy-lynch on Ottofar. the last time he did any scumhunting was his first post of the game. I do not want to have a BM XL situation where the scum sit back, lurk, and watch the town tear itself apart.

This is way too early to do such a thing.  Either lead it yourself or just vote him and be done- don't try to get others to go along without leading a solid charge.


Tiruin:
Toaster
So I've seen what parts you're voting NQT for-is it worth it, though? Perceived deflection, which 'sorta' came off as the same note as a feeling more than a fact is the best case you could put against him?

For..the case on being or not being a third-party?

Your vote sticks on him without further clarification and a conclusion with a weak foundation.

Your next posts follow it up, but not in a way a townie usually does it. What I see you're doing is negative communication.

Backhanding his post, and inflating...what. Something not even within the idea of malevolent intent. Your conclusion is pretty much laughable, given how you wasted a post just giving him a retort when his concern is placed in the right part.

What's up there?

Did you miss this post and this post?  To say I'm not further clarifying my vote is patently false.  Between those two posts and this one, I have posted many reasons that he should be lynched.  Hell, have some bullet points.

  • Implying he was third party got a disproportionate reaction.
  • He's been continually deflecting attention away from himself.
  • To that end, he's making crude and unfocused references to lurking and lurkers.
  • He's blaming the town for his potential lynch.


I'm going to put down for an extend.  Griffin is sidelining, but he did say he'd be gone until the start of next week.  I'd like to see some more content from him.
Logged
HMR stands for Hazardous Materials Requisition, not Horrible Massive Ruination, though I can understand how one could get confused.
God help us if we have to agree on pizza toppings at some point. There will be no survivors.

Tiruin

  • Bay Watcher
  • Life is too short for worries
    • View Profile
Re: Witches' Coven: In the Heart of Darkness [D1: 13/13]
« Reply #337 on: August 09, 2013, 09:26:57 pm »

I did read those two posts, Toaster. THose posts led me to conclude such, though labeling it as 'without' should've been 'lacking'.

It's not that convincing seeing how you stuck the vote, and attempted to clarify it.

I'll expound.

1. The question started here.

However, there are points I can't argue against (especially the deflecting as it goes off more as deflecting..however something's just wrong when I read his posts. He's coming off as a non-scum [third-party is my best bet followed by extremely philosophical townie, which would be pretty strange. 95% third-party attitude, 3% townie, 2% scum. That's how I'm viewing it at the moment.] given how he answers things) given how he's representing himself.

Quote
    Implying he was third party got a disproportionate reaction.
    He's been continually deflecting attention away from himself.
    To that end, he's making crude and unfocused references to lurking and lurkers.
    He's blaming the town for his potential lynch.
> Disproportionate..seems much like that. I saw it as a neutral answer where he stated..IC. While it is suspicious, it could also be said that (1), he chose to answer it IC (yet it is strange seeing how he doesn't address it explicitly, he does [prior to bad semantics] say  I am not, as you say, a "third party". I am a journeyman carpenter." The second sentence throws it off.)

Continued at (2).

>...crude and unfocused? That goes along the lines of diversion. Where specifically marks this out?
> Blaming when he's stating towards everyone? How is that blaming? That would be remarkably a very astute form of blaming. So astute that I can't see that. How is he specifically blaming and not anything else?

2. This is pretty much a taunt to me.

You respond in turn, here. You aren't sure what his point is despite him clearly outlining it?
Quote
You have the gall to accuse me of deflecting and then this is your response to my follow up?
I mean, there's nothing to glean but a disgusting insult to logic by that banter on your part.

Quote
Not sure what your point is, since you were deflecting and I was blowing off your ridiculous statement, which are two separate things.
> Ridiculous statement in turn was:
Quote
[I don't think it's deflection: I clearly answered your question, didn't I? I'm not third party. And furthermore, if your reasoning for believing that I am third-party were that I'm an out-of-towner, that would make you a third-party too (outlying is still outside). Your vote is incredibly weak and will mark you as scum if I am lynched or night killed.]
He answered it as clean as day here. Something which you didn't poke. This something being my point.

Did you poke that matter? No. You didn't.

You give a crappy generalist conclusion to it.
Damn skippy it is.  Not sure what your point is, since you were deflecting and I was blowing off your ridiculous statement, which are two separate things.

In any case, I'm voting you because after I threw a question pertaining to "not from town = anti town" at you, you then deflected attention away from yourselfBefore I could even respond you throw it right back at me.  Basically, you flipped out over my simple question.  You then threaten me with said ridiculous statement, which is just laughable.
Why would you blow off a case such as this when you do say it's a flip? That's pretty much something to build upon, eh?

3.
NQT:
Toaster
[No, I answered your question and followed up by indicating that if your logic was not from town = anti town" then you yourself would be out-of-town and so your continued vote made absolutely no sense. I fail to see how this is a lynchable offence. You've voted for me in the RVS and have kept your vote parked there since-- a typical scum manoeuvre.  You're fabricating the flimsiest of pretexts to get away from doing something productive with your vote. If you're town then you need to step up your game; if your not, then laugh all you like: you're rumbled.

What's your view on Zombie Urist?]

The answering of the question wasn't the point- it was the fact you pointed fingers elsewhere on the out-of-town issue, and how it got you so riled up.  Also, the vote wasn't and has never been a random vote- it was specifically directed at you on the grounds of something you said.  It got a scummy reaction, so it stuck.  Finally, just because you call the vote flimsy doesn't actually make it so.
You say 'your reaction is what I'm talking about' in a weird way. How did he point fingers when he distinctly said the above? His only other question was asking if you were out of town yourself.

The reaction was scummy--how? I don't see you expounding on it. Nor on why it stuck.

To clarify the last statement: You only gave something; posting something and left it out for conclusions to be derived rather than state how and in which parts, why, it is scummy.
NQT:
Toaster
NQT:  In the first game, IIRC all the out-of-towners were third party.  Are you non-town?
"A most interesting suggestion, Monsieur Petit. I am not, as you say, a "third party". I am a journeyman carpenter. But, alors! We must not rule out ze possibility of townsfolk sharing connections through similar circumstances. On zat note..."
Toaster
"Monsiuer Petit, are you not also from out of town, as a farmer yourself?"

These- especially put together- are some pretty serious deflection.  You really don't like me implying that you're third party because you're out of town- as such, I do believe I will keep voting you.

To answer your question, no, I live nearby in an outlying farm.  I just have to haul up to the market to make my sales.

To which his answer, you pay no heed to but divert to this case as if it's his death warrant.
Logged

Tiruin

  • Bay Watcher
  • Life is too short for worries
    • View Profile
Re: Witches' Coven: In the Heart of Darkness [D1: 13/13]
« Reply #338 on: August 09, 2013, 09:27:24 pm »

Mod: Votecount please?
Logged

Tiruin

  • Bay Watcher
  • Life is too short for worries
    • View Profile
Re: Witches' Coven: In the Heart of Darkness [D1: 13/13]
« Reply #339 on: August 09, 2013, 09:34:17 pm »

EBWOP//PFP
Zombie Urist:  Other than Okami, who is scummy and why?
NQT, excessive focus on flavor and not much scumhunting. I'm also somewhat sceptical about being a female carpenter.
Let's not be ignorant here. Women played a much larger role than you think, sir. Don't let the media get to you unless you do some research.

Also I've a history book stating such things as these but can't link it :P
Logged

Jim Groovester

  • Bay Watcher
  • 1P
    • View Profile
Re: Witches' Coven: In the Heart of Darkness [D1: 13/13]
« Reply #340 on: August 09, 2013, 09:49:29 pm »

Votecount:
Dariush  - 0 - 
Deathsword  - 1 -  griffinpup
griffinpup  - 1 -  Leafsnail
Leafsnail  - 1 -  Vector
Lenglon  - 0 - 
notquitethere  - 4 -  Toaster, Ottofar, Dariush, Deathsword
Okami No Rei  - 1 -  zombie urist
Ottofar  - 2 -  Lenglon, notquitethere
Tiruin  - 0 - 
Toaster  - 1 -  Tiruin
ToonyMan  - 0 - 
Vector  - 1 -  ToonyMan
zombie urist  - 1 -  Okami No Rei
-
Not Voting  - 0 - 
No Lynch  - 0 - 
-
Extend  - 2 -  notquitethere, Toaster
Shorten  - 0 - 



The Day will end on Saturday, the 10th of August, 8PM GMT, in approximately 17 hours.

2 more votes required to Extend. 7 votes required to Shorten. 3 Extends left for the Day.
Logged
I understood nothing, contributed nothing, but still got to win, so good game everybody else.

Tiruin

  • Bay Watcher
  • Life is too short for worries
    • View Profile
Re: Witches' Coven: In the Heart of Darkness [D1: 13/13]
« Reply #341 on: August 09, 2013, 10:05:38 pm »

Extend.
Logged

lordnincompoop

  • Bay Watcher
  • Allusionist
    • View Profile
Re: Witches' Coven: In the Heart of Darkness [D1: 13/13]
« Reply #342 on: August 09, 2013, 11:40:39 pm »

Griffinpup has been prodded.
Logged

Lenglon

  • Bay Watcher
  • Everyone cries, the question is what follows it.
    • View Profile
Re: Witches' Coven: In the Heart of Darkness [D1: 13/13]
« Reply #343 on: August 10, 2013, 01:46:25 am »

Lenglon: It seems that, so far, you think it's a better idea to lynch a lurker/absent player other than someone acting in a scummy way. Why?
because someone who is totally absent isn't contributing to our information in any way at all. active scum are constantly at risk of fingering themselves and their scumbuddies, and so having scum around can be useful to finding scum. someone who is completely idle is totally useless, be they town or scum. as long as it is neither MYLO nor LYLO I would prefer to lynch someone who completely fails to communicate over someone mildly or even moderately scummy (very scummy... yeah, lynch that despite the lurker). That threshold is easy to get above, and once nobody is totally idle then I would prefer to lynch someone who is acting scummy, but someone who fails to do anything at all is more of a liability to us than probable scum is in my opinion.
-snip-
"NQT, please, calm down. You're lost track of what is important, what we're doing here. You've become so focused on defending yourself, upon saving your own life, that you forgot that we're here to find the witches among us. You can't just defend, you have to look around, question, and make cases of your own. Please, stop telling us why you think we shouldn't be lynching you, but rather tell us who you think we should be lynching instead. You need to be asking questions, and looking for the witches among us, not standing around screaming your innocence to the heavens. Look at it this way, if you're going to die today, try your hardest to die well. Make as sure as you can that when you go down, you take at least one of the witches with you when you go."
Extend
"You've got one more chance, one last chance, make good use of it."
Lenglon:
I would like to request a Lynch All Lurkers policy-lynch on Ottofar. the last time he did any scumhunting was his first post of the game. I do not want to have a BM XL situation where the scum sit back, lurk, and watch the town tear itself apart.
This is way too early to do such a thing.  Either lead it yourself or just vote him and be done- don't try to get others to go along without leading a solid charge.
Toaster:my vote has been on Ottofar for three days now, have you not been keeping track of who is voting whom?

Leafsnail:
Leafsnail: why are you making lots of small posts back to back instead of individual larger ones?
Leafsnail: how does the town benefit from having one person who does not claim when everyone else does?
ONR:
ONR:
notquitethere - Rolefishing already?  I'll bite.  I am Colin Fleury, Apprentice Cooper.  So, why exactly do you want this information, Witch?  You need it for your spells and rituals?
There are three separate threads here that you are muddling together.
First:  The idea that everyone should soft-claim name and profession.
I agree with this.  I believe it is a pro-town move, since, as Toaster said, we're likely to have a town flavor cop, and it forces scum to either stand out as dissenters, lie, or give up some of their information.
Second:  NQT claiming, and calling out everyone to claim in his first post.
I find this to be potentially scummy, and he still hasn't given me a satisfactory explanation for why he thinks what he did was pro-town.  I would have preferred holding off on the soft-claim until the majority of the town was behind it, in order to maximize the pressure on scum to go along with it.
Third:  My choice to soft-claim at the same time as I called out NQT.
This was damage control.  The only way a soft-claim has power as a potential weapon against scum is through pressure from a united town.  NQT hurt that potential power by claiming so early.  I threw my own weight behind it in order to restore some of its strength, hopefully start a snowball effect, and to try to curtail the inevitable arguments against soft-claiming, which scum could easily hide behind if they needed to.
What he did in the first post does not match with his explanations. Firstly he said "rolefishing" in the post 1 but something else in post 2. Also his claim that he tried to do damage control by throwing his own weight behind, yet he described it as "rolefishing" as well as hinting that it might be needed for witches which doesn't seem to support his cause.
this particular accusation by ZU seems to hold signifigant merit to me Okami, please address it well.
Dariush:
Dariush: you said NQT dropped many minor scumtells over time, could you list and link them for me?
Logged
((I don't think heating something that is right above us to a ridiculous degree is very smart. Worst case scenario we become +metal statues+. This is a finely crafted metal statue. It is encrusted with sharkmist and HMRC. On the item is an image of HMRC and Pancaek. Pancaek is laughing. The HMRC is melting. The artwork relates to the encasing of the HMRC in metal by Pancaek during the Mission of Many People.))

Lenglon

  • Bay Watcher
  • Everyone cries, the question is what follows it.
    • View Profile
Re: Witches' Coven: In the Heart of Darkness [D1: 13/13]
« Reply #344 on: August 10, 2013, 02:43:26 am »

Griffinpup has been prodded.
And sorry guys.  I'm going to be gone from tomorrow to about Monday or Tuesday.  Admittedly, repelling is far more fun then this, but it is unfortunate that I have to be gone for so long, so extend.
He said ahead of time what was happening with him. prod is pointless.
Logged
((I don't think heating something that is right above us to a ridiculous degree is very smart. Worst case scenario we become +metal statues+. This is a finely crafted metal statue. It is encrusted with sharkmist and HMRC. On the item is an image of HMRC and Pancaek. Pancaek is laughing. The HMRC is melting. The artwork relates to the encasing of the HMRC in metal by Pancaek during the Mission of Many People.))
Pages: 1 ... 21 22 [23] 24 25 ... 84