Print

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

[Gentlefish]

@Imp:

Your first vote for RPG. You sorta just toss your vote here.

Rolepgeek, I've got this vote and no better use for it right now.  If you're dead there's no need to replace your spot; and from close to start of play you've not really done much that seems pro-Town to me.  Your behavior isn't that bad of a Scum cover either.  I'm far from sure you're Scum but I'm far from sure you're Town either, so for the moment this works for me.  As long as you're seeking replacement I'm not going to ask you anything.

Then DeathSword posts. Saying you're dropping a vote on someone asking for a replacement. Which is weird, for me at least, as someone new to the game.

Imp: If you got nothing better to do with your vote, as you claim here:

Rolepgeek, I've got this vote and no better use for it right now.  If you're dead there's no need to replace your spot; and from close to start of play you've not really done much that seems pro-Town to me.  Your behavior isn't that bad of a Scum cover either.  I'm far from sure you're Scum but I'm far from sure you're Town either, so for the moment this works for me.  As long as you're seeking replacement I'm not going to ask you anything.

Then why not use it to pressure someone who can actually answer you? It seems as if you want to vote someone but don't really care who, and Rolepgeek provides a nice, safe target.

RPG then replies, agreeing with DeathSword that, yes, it's a vote on someone asking for a replacement.

Rolepgeek, I've got this vote and no better use for it right now.  If you're dead there's no need to replace your spot; and from close to start of play you've not really done much that seems pro-Town to me.  Your behavior isn't that bad of a Scum cover either.  I'm far from sure you're Scum but I'm far from sure you're Town either, so for the moment this works for me.  As long as you're seeking replacement I'm not going to ask you anything.

That's an extremely poor idea. Until I'm replaced, I am going to continue to play to the best of my ability. You shouldn't vote someone based on 'meh, nothing better to do'. Vote someone for pressure, for RVS, or to get them lynched. It's not RVS anymore, it's not pressure since you aren't going to ask me anything, which means all that's left is lynch votes. But you aren't sure I'm scum. So why vote me? There's no point to it.

I don't see Deathsword defending RPG, I see him questioning why you're voting to lynch someone who's asking for a replacement. RPG does put up good points on why you're voting him. You state that you aren't going to ask him questions, meaning you aren't looking to actually check if he's scum. For someone who's so set on scumhunting, that's a pretty odd move.

Moving on.

In this topic:

words.

You call Deathsword out on coddling players in one game and not giving this game much attention. This is true.

...Though you did try to call him out on being sick. Which is possible and highly likely this time of year. My partner was sick with various different bugs for three months straight last fall/winter. You try to call him out in his IC brackets when I believe the person behind the computer was legitimately ill.

You also call him "an IC jerk" for calling you out on a vote that you placed on someone calling for a replacement. Sounds a little OMGUS-y to me.

And then:

Quote from: Deathsword on October 15, 2013, 09:34:23 am

    Imp: If you got nothing better to do with your vote, as you claim here:
    Quote from: Imp on October 14, 2013, 10:49:17 pm

        Rolepgeek, I've got this vote and no better use for it right now.  If you're dead there's no need to replace your spot; and from close to start of play you've not really done much that seems pro-Town to me.  Your behavior isn't that bad of a Scum cover either.  I'm far from sure you're Scum but I'm far from sure you're Town either, so for the moment this works for me.  As long as you're seeking replacement I'm not going to ask you anything.

    Then why not use it to pressure someone who can actually answer you? It seems as if you want to vote someone but don't really care who, and Rolepgeek provides a nice, safe target.


The only way you can make that claim about how I use my vote, and how I use pressure, is to disregard how I have played this game so far.  Considering how -you- have played this game so far, I'm not surprised at you at all.

You did not plan on pressuring RPG. You stated earlier you were going to vote for him and not ask him any questions.

Speaking of, you then start into RPG, claiming his activity elsewhere in the forums over this one game, which he said he asked for a replacement for, shows scumminess and unwillingness to post. Could it possibly be he maybe had priorities over this single game?

Deathsword posts.

((Imp Quoted, right to lurk))
I am not, and at no point have I ever stated this. To the point I actually apologized for my low activity. How in any way is that acting as if I had a right to lurk?

((Imp Quoted, talking about how his advice is across the board don't talk about NK.))
{I stand by my advice that speculating about the night is useless to either town or scum. You have the right to disagree. I fully believe in what I said about it, both as scum and as town. There are others who disagree, and like doing that. It is their call. Being a scum IC is actually pretty easy, as you do not have to think as a player, you do not have to scumhunt}

((Imp Quoted, talk about health))
I do not like to give much details about my personal life, but I'll say this: my health is complete and utter shit. I get sick quite frequently, whenever the air gets somewhat dry it feels as if my nose if trying to rip itself from the rest of my face and I've had to do two complete lung collapses (for absolutely no reason either) in the same year. When I say I am unable to post, it's because I really am, especially where my health is concerned.


((Imp Quoted, IC voice distrust)
Being a scum IC is actually pretty easy, as you do not have to think as a player, you do not have to scumhunt.

((Imp Quoted, about vote pressure. "you IC jerk"))
Rolepgeek asked to replace. When someone asks for that, it usually means they stop posting. You yourself said you voted him because you had nothing else to do with said vote. Now you talk about your previous play, but it is this very same previous play that makes your disregard as to where your vote goes more glaring. Is the vote yours to use as you see fit? Yes. It still does not exempt you from being called out on it.

You then honestly wish him well and drop the subject of health.

Your post:

Deathsword - Hope you feel better soon.

You're acting like you have this 'right to lurk', and you absolutely don't.

I am not, and at no point have I ever stated this. To the point I actually apologized for my low activity. How in any way is that acting as if I had a right to lurk?

I'm not saying 'you say you have that right' -  I am saying 'you act as if you have that right' and I say it because you have been doing it.  This:

I am sorry for disappearing for the last two D1 days

We don't need apologies from you.  If you're Town we need help.  If you're a rolemodel, Town or not, we need an example of good play, which you are NOT giving us.

All of last week you made 1 post - only one post.  That post contained no scumhunting and outside of a small amount of IC advice.  Are you hiding -from yourself- with an apology for 'The last two days'?  No two days are an issue.  The whole kit and caboodle across the course of the game is the issue.  Get off your behind and work for this Town.  This Town can't afford to carry you and your behavior is directly or indirectly helping the Scum - and you lack the inexperience to not know this.  Fix it.

You try to call him out for not hunting in one post. Which is, to your true point, the only one made in a week. But most of that is an IC post, and the other bit is talking to you about time constraints.

A couple of your posts deal with other people for a little bit. Good playing happens.

Deathsword gets to responding. It takes a little bit, but he does get to it.

Almost no focus on teaching as IC

Regarding this: as a whole, the remaining players here are doing pretty well, mechanics-wise. There is little at the moment that requires an IC explanation.

He sure doesn't seem to care about catching Scum or not though.

Well, I think you are scum, and am voting you over it.

Let me restate why: You just threw a vote on Rolepgeek because you could, because you had nothing better to do with it. In the quoted post you further list inactivity (which, I suppose, is a valid, if somewhat weak, reason) and a personal attack (IC stuff on this below). While the added reasons are nice, I am still concerned over the disregard over where your vote went, and, to be quite frank, I consider you to be, among the new players here, one of the most possibly dangerous if scum.

{On personal attacks: don't. Seriously, just don't. It adds nothing to the game, is of no benefit to anyone (town, scum, third-party) and can ruin the friendly (if agressive) nature of the game. What happens in the game stays in it, and you shouldn't hold a grudge or insult someone over it.}

If so, can you help me understand that things are going well, not terribly quiet, and why you think we're not going to a lurky town loss as is?

{BMs often tend to have periods of very low activity, especially as the game goes on. People often don't realise how long a mafia game can take.}

Extend

He votes extend. He tells you why he's voting for you, quoting you saying that he's not hunting when he's hunting you, as he says. Then goes IC to talk about personal attacks. Which is a good point. And also on the activity level of the game.

You then tell him, in a large WoT here:

words.

Why you had reasons, and you link to:

words.

which when I read it, I honestly read it as a large ad hominem attack.

You then list that you could have voted for "Rolepgeek, Deathsword, Darvi, Squill" and felt comfortable with it. Why not with someone who was around?

Then RPG replies here:

words.

And the next post is your reply. I don't wanna parse these out but it's more back-and-forth, basically.

Then DS hops in.

Imp, what you are basically doing is trying to dominate the game with massive walls of text. Every time someone says something you disagree with, out comes the WoTs.

((The spoiler of all RPG's words of busy/absence))

Above, for example, you attempt to discredit rolepgeek by point out posts where he said he was busy/not paying attention. While that was certainly true, what makes you think he didn't do a full read of the thread before posting his own wall of text?


You talk a lot about personal attacks and how long it took me to react. You know why I took so long to "react"? Because I did not see it as a personal attack. He criticised your playstile, which apparently offended you, thus resulting in you calling it an attack on your person. Well, following that logic, all your allegations that I am a shitty player/IC are personal attacks as well.

You are trying to do a lot to discredit me, despite the fact that I've been trying to provide advice since the very start of the game. Darvi was gone for a full week, but you barely said anything about that, and when you did it was in a friendly tone. When it comes to me, out come the allegations of me being shit. SBC is gone too, not a single word was said by you about that. So is MrZero. So is Squill.

Your walls of text are smokescreens, for walls of text are indeed intimidating, and it discourages others to go through them and attempt to counter the arguments.

I am, of course, unfazed by such attempts of discredit. But it reeks of scum play, and for that my vote stays on you.

I believe he was Scumhunting you. Not defending RPG. Using your comments against RPG as evidence against you.

Another WoT from you:

words.

You say you don't care about your WoT's even though they're frowned upon as a whole. (I says this as I write my own.) You say that DS was ascribing you a motive of trying to discredit RPG. You say "nope, he's doing that all by himself" in so many words.

He says he's read most of it, and you quote where he says he was too busy. Doesn't mean he didn't read the thread. He was too busy to post.

You then call his current style of looking for a replacement and trying to stay active garbage. And then you call DS garbage for his {IC} comment about personal attacks. Calling him scum while he scumhunts you. Again, sounds OMGUS-y to me.

You then say he's doing a fine job of discrediting himself through his actions. All of which I've seen as scumchecking you.

more "more activity plz". We do like activity in this game.

Then you say that DS's reasons to vote you are "you're active, verbose, and attacking me." then call him Scumsword. Honestly I can see why he didn't once waver.

I'll stop parsing here, where Tiruin posted the update and apologises for not prodding folk. I can go on if you really really want me to but it's honestly more of the same to me.

What I'm getting out of all of this is that RPG and you were at odds with each other and DeathSword was able to pick up enough evidence against you to have a solid argument for a vote.

And I'm picking it up too, I think.

So, Imp. About those questions I had? I don't see your honest evidence against RPG. At least, evidence to convince me that you had a solid case against him to vote him on D2 where you said you were going to drop your vote and leave it, and not even bother to ask him questions.

I am still holding off my vote for another few days because I need to hear from BSnott.

My list goes:
Imp - Now, because I can see the case built by Deathsword.
BSnott - Mr. Zero was reeaallll quiet during all of that.
Squill - You kept a steady, if slow post pace.
Tiruin - You picked up DS's place. DS had a hell of a solid case.

Imp:
Thanks for having me analyze DeathSword, too.

Now, question: What does your list look like right now?

Tiruin:
How do you feel about DeathSword's play as your previous roleholder? How much do you agree with how he handled the scumhunt against Imp?

Everyone else:
Now having a large part of D2 scumhunting lain out in front of you, how does it make you feel about the roles of Imp, RPG (me), and Deathsword (Tiruin)?

Woo, first WoT. I tried to be as concise as possible. There was just so. Much. Words.

[Tiruin]

Ooohhh man these posts D: Coming up!

Note ahead! {If you've a post which contains a lot of text and wish to only point out a minor part of it, or in the least, point out the post in turn, edit out all the words and append a "snip" on it to show the quote. Or use the spoiler button upon replying. It's...somewhat like a radioactive warning symbol for some reason.}

[Imp]

Puff:

Thanks for making it clear you've closely read the D2 material, all of it or at least a great deal of it.  I believe it's vital for as many of us 5 to be working with the same dataset as is possible, and I believe that the data should be interpreted through as many player minds as is reasonable, so we can come to sensible conclusions.

I still elect to delay answering your questions and the post as a whole until I've received my answer from Tiruin, and I will explain why I delay after I receive it (it may require some back and forth between myself and Tiruin.  I will make it as fast as possible if so).  I did see her IC-voice recommendation not to do this, I still consider my reasons for as valid enough to continue to do so.

In this case I'm going to offer to delay my response to you for one other thing too - some observations and questions from me about yours - in case you'd like to react to mine or answer mine before I answer yours.  Feel free to say 'no' if you want me to answer you without your answers - I'm willing to - in that case my sole delay is waiting for my answers from Tiruin.

You have joined us quite recently; in a sense the only thing that may differentiate you from being a 'mostly impartial observer' about the events that occurred before you joined play is the role that you have (that role might bias your opinions, it also might motivate you towards certain goals).  Otherwise - you are highly impartial, right?  Or even tilted against Rolepgeek - I remember you saying this -

I think I've got a fairly good grip on the matter, at least especially on how RPG was being a dill hole. I'd seriously almost call it a flame war. There wasn't any scumhunting there. On both sides, I really have to say. The votes there didn't have much weight for me when it came down to it. Going back through it I believe I've read the majority of this thread and I've got a general idea of where things stand.

So you should have a pretty fair and unbiased viewpoint, or even be tilted towards negative towards Rolepgeek.  That's important to take into account when considering your perspective and what you say.  Do you agree with my reasoning and my assessment of your viewpoint as a 'mostly impartial observer' as you read over the game's history?

Your new post about your observations of D2 play describe me as being challenged quite appropriately by both Deathsword and RPG who both put significant time and effort into Scumhunting me.  I note that you now reference RPG as "put[ting] up good points".   My response throughout D2 is described as being pretty unreasonable and pretty Scummy (you do not use those words, but they sum your description of my response up - do you agree?).

You even appear quite comfortable with interpreting my words to the point that you describe where I am honest and what I have not planned.  (It would be inappropriate for someone to ask you what Rolepgeek planned or if he was being honest about something he said because you are not him; you can guess but you cannot know, and the value of your guess is no better than any other player's - save that you know the role and alignment you have replaced into.)  I note that the interpretation you give to my 'plan', the intention you ascribe to me, is quite specific and not exactly unbiased.

So, having carefully read the sum total of the interactions between Deathsword, Rolepgeek, and myself, limited to D2, you describe my posts as being mostly inappropriate and very Scummy - and you do this as a mostly impartial observer who started the reading thinking that "RPG was being a dill hole" and "There wasn't any scumhunting there. On both sides, [you] really have to say" -- is this correct?

You really are comfortable with the interpretation you have placed for all four players to see - and with it what this interpretation may show about you and your motives and intentions?  You don't want to double check or correct anything you said, right - I should just respond and answer as you have already asked?


One last question I'd like to see if you'd like to answer before I properly respond to your post - and of course, feel free to decline if you see fit - Squill says that I've not been seriously scumhunted against yet.

... that no one has seriously scumhunted against you yet.

That seems to be a very different viewpoint than yours, in how you describe D2 interactions.  Do you agree with what Squill says about my having not been 'seriously Scumhunted against' yet?

[Squill]

Just posting to say that I have a good bit of homework. I might not be able to do a fully-fledged post.

[zombie urist]

Day ends Monday November 11th 9PM PST.

Imp -
squill -
bsnott - squill
Pufferfish - Tiruin
Tiruin -

Not voting - bsnott, Pufferfish, Imp

0 to extend, 2 needed
0 to shorten, 3 needed

Play more mafia.

[Imp]

bsnott:

I'll get to reading that right now.

How goes this plan?  How far are you along?  How well do you feel you understand what has happened?  How much more are you willing to read?  Do you know how much time you expect to need to finish?

Please plan on posting a minimum of once a day, even if you have no idea what to say.  For now, reporting progress on the read through is adequate to me - as you read questions may occur to you too, or there may be things you wish to comment about.

... and please don't forget that we need you.  I believe Scum can win without you, but not Town.

Tiruin:

Ooohhh man these posts D: Coming up!

My breath is bated, my eyes wide, and my hopes gutter, barely more than embers.

You have time, and yes you do, and yes you need.  And other things you do with what free time you have are also urgent.  If you have a mostly finished response, do you think your purposes would be served by posting said unfinished thing, for its consideration as is - or are your purposes best served by fully finishing it, however long that requires?

Puff:

   

From you this time, silence is an answer, not a non-answer, correct?

[Tiruin]

your purposes best served by fully finishing it, however long that requires?

I was checking back on the other parts of this post, but..right. I do discover that our part is quite done.



Imp: Note that, before all else, I address your note of 'why I'm doing x'. This is because I don't actually care about being scummy or not-slip ups are made, and I'd argue that I would 'do' or the act would happen regardless of my alignment, but the case in point there

Your reasons almost perfectly mirror mine (said more briefly, of course) - and this is quite sensible - except your perspective is given from -then-.

Now seems like you're attacking me from a different point. Yeah, scummy. Alright. But I see inquisitiveness there. Are you weighing in the target's fate after a tangible offense in sight has been committed there?

I will address them in spoilers, each with their own category to your post. Case begins here, searchphrase: "I greet you"

Spoiler: Point 1: Time and posting//Extension (click to show/hide)

Lack of extension has NO pro-Town value under those circumstances, right?

Is the endline here.

Tiruin, When you finally do post, you appear to ignore ALL of this, despite that you even quote some of the things I've said.

Yes. I did appear to ignore that, as I did read it, and put the notion aside as what I saw as your opinion and plan on the matter to come. In truth, the problem with me skimming is that I usually tend to focus on parts which seem most apparent to me that could be questioned and rather less on the time remaining--I miss the time when I begin posting under pressure, given my timezone and all the conversion factors.

However I do note. I finally did post and..here, it seems you just poke on it. Nothing else on that matter?


Regarding the day/extension issue. The quote you got from me is true. I did not ask for an extension as I saw nobody else in favor of extending or forwarding it in bold (Especially the bolding part). I did see you speaking about the probability of an extension, however I saw nothing being bolded-showing that you would really want to extend before the time I had mentioned it (the quote referenced). The note on extensions are void in that matter as nobody - including myself and stated by you then - bolded the matter at hand. This is where the formal extension offer began.

Do NOT disregard it again, as you did repeatedly at the time you answered it.

I see aggression. Frustration. Something which is..genuine. However I must note that I did not ignore the question intentionally. If this was not a satisfactory response to that query, then I did not see anything of the note. I missed it, is all I can say in my defense otherwise, though I have to note that you say that I did such, multiple times. Though I have to prod this. Where did you ask this that I disregarded, repeatedly at that time? All my defense was at that time, related to me not thinking to put down an extend and get ready at the new day. Scummy? Yes, now that I see it. It is scummy, but I wonder on such a note as that, that you lack putting down how this relates being 'scummy' to "being scum". My only defense to the extension fiasco is that I had not thought about bolding an extend despite my mental state at the time due to seeing..nobody else doing so. Yes, people have been discussing an extend, however it was never bolded. I also doubted that 3 people would extend at the time given-and something I only noticed when you called the time left remaining. As an IC, this was a crucial error for me to not address directly--however I chose to play it as a player and take it all as blame on myself.

But backing up:

Not seeking an extension at that time is PURELY pro-Scum, right?  Lack of extension has NO pro-Town value under those circumstances, right?

You're poking at extremes here. The generality agrees that not favoring an extension is scummy due to giving the target the lack of time, or cutting short the mode of communication in order to achieve a rational judgement, however the point in which I diverge from that statement in this quote is on one single reason.

The essence of where the vote lies at day end.

See the link we have there. At the time, you and I vote for Darvi. Seeing the total lack of note from him, I marked him as down and out and pondered on why he would do such things as scum--display of bad rolemodel, surely not. I thought of him as town and figured..well, it is reasonable, but the ground is shoddy all the same, favoring town more than scum. Despite such, I looked forward into the future and cast my dice, standing on the notion of 'a lynch is better than a no lynch'.

Why? Because whether townie or scum, it eliminates a person from the list of suspects. What I saw during that time was a muddled confusion on who was scummy to lynch and who was truly scum to be lynched. I couldn't make up my mind given that..shamefully, I did not fully re-read and chose to go where the votes would lie. Moments before that, you did vote Darvi. If I would vote anyone else, it would lead to a lynch. I could've left it to lie and the lynch would still be the same--however I chose to cast my vote.

On PURELY or NOT, I'd say it isn't an EXACT tell. A guide, pointer or marker, but not an exact.

Now we head to spoiler 2.

Spoiler: Point 2: Lynching Darvi or the black kitty (click to show/hide)

Alright, to be honest, the comparing and proceeding details on how you think I voted is...questionable. Where are you seeing all that? I may have missed it. This was the votecount I based it on, and your vote here denounces everything else you said there. My posts proceeding mention nothing on your basis there. The 3 tables of votecounts? That.

It shifts soon after.

Or perhaps you base those tables on what I'm saying now on Rolepgeek? As stated before, I had not read that much on everyone, and would decide to go with the one the majority follows-hence why I asked why you unvoted Darvi after you voted him. I did note why I chose to lynch instead of no lynch.

...Imp. I've to cut the spoilers short, but that is as far as I go until I see a flaw in your note here. It appears to me that you discarded your own vote on Darvi when putting up those tables, and...somehow backed up the suspicion on me from that point. What did you see Darvi as, at that time?

[Squill]

-snip-

@Imp: I am not quite sure I follow. What was so imperative(heh) about this question/answer that you needed to put several other things on hold until Tiruin replied? It doesn't make a lot of sense to me, could you clarify?
@Tiruin: Do you understand why Imp wanted this answered so badly?
@Bsnott: Still waiting for an answer to my question,  but if you're still catching up then there's no need to rush. But if I could get a confirmation that you're still here, that'd be great.
@Pufferfish: What do you think about the current relationships between players?

[zombie urist]

Day ends Monday November 11th 9PM PST.

Imp -
squill -
bsnott - squill
Pufferfish - Tiruin
Tiruin -

Not voting - bsnott, Pufferfish, Imp

0 to extend, 2 needed
0 to shorten, 3 needed

Play more mafia.

bsnott and Pufferfish have been prodded.

[Gentlefish]

Whee sorry folks I shoulda said something but, ah, post coming either later tonight or tomorrow.

[Tiruin]

@Tiruin: Do you understand why Imp wanted this answered so badly?

I could say I understand, but how the depth of my understanding is caught in the mix of trying to figure her standpoint. I could say that, yes, I understand it, and that if I follow my intuition over my reasoning I could see her approaching the existing cases with Rationalism (Defensive Mechanism), but in doing that, it would only fall short in trying to mention how far my suspicion goes. Yes, she gives space for the person to explain him/herself, but where I get the suspicion from is where she made her point.

The quote I have and answered from her covers the recent acts of D2, on which I am ready to expound given her reply soon enough, as well as my take on DS' case.

Currently checking back on you people-Squill, bsnott and puffypuff! (..Sorry for that Puff..It's just the semantics playing with me again.)

Unvote

{Note ahead: In real games, it pays to check and counter check posts and words. Not only does it help your verbal acuity but IRL it aids your detection of minor matters and in catching hints that you wouldn't see before! Keep on checking back, even on someone you see as all clear, until you're reasonably sure to yourself that said person is all clear.}

[zombie urist]

Day ends Monday November 11th 9PM PST.

Imp -
squill -
bsnott - squill
Pufferfish -
Tiruin -

Not voting - bsnott, Pufferfish, Imp, Tiruin

0 to extend, 2 needed
0 to shorten, 3 needed

Play more mafia.

bsnott has been double prodded.

[Gentlefish]

@Imp:

Puff:
-snip-
... Otherwise - you are highly impartial, right?  Or even tilted against Rolepgeek...

Oh yeah coming in I saw at him as being rude. I'm not changing my mind on that. It's deathsword deathsword. His argument is the one I'm starting to stand by.

Do you agree with my reasoning and my assessment of your viewpoint as a 'mostly impartial observer' as you read over the game's history?

My response throughout D2 is described as being pretty unreasonable and pretty Scummy (you do not use those words, but they sum your description of my response up - do you agree?).

I do not understand why I would not be impartial to a viewpoint in a game where logic and reasoning are key in victory.

I agree. The clincher was that you threw a vote at someone and stated while doing so that you were not going to question them. You ended up pressuring, but that's due to other causes. You intent was not pressure with the vote.

As to if I should doublecheck, if I have made an error in words, whether through structure or typos, I apologize, otherwise I do not know what you are asking about. I see Deathsword's case against you, and I agree with it.

So, having carefully read the sum total of the interactions between Deathsword, Rolepgeek, and myself, limited to D2, you describe my posts as being mostly inappropriate and very Scummy - and you do this as a mostly impartial observer who started the reading thinking that "RPG was being a dill hole" and "There wasn't any scumhunting there. On both sides, [you] really have to say" -- is this correct?

You really are comfortable with the interpretation you have placed for all four players to see - and with it what this interpretation may show about you and your motives and intentions?  You don't want to double check or correct anything you said, right - I should just respond and answer as you have already asked?

Between you and RPG? No scumhunting. Between DS and you? He was investigating you. Absolutely. I stand by this conviction.

One last question I'd like to see if you'd like to answer before I properly respond to your post - and of course, feel free to decline if you see fit - Squill says that I've not been seriously scumhunted against yet.

... that no one has seriously scumhunted against you yet.

That seems to be a very different viewpoint than yours, in how you describe D2 interactions.  Do you agree with what Squill says about my having not been 'seriously Scumhunted against' yet?

Yes. You have been scumhunted, but it took the sideline between you and RPG. I honestly almost missed it had I not been going post by post. Seriously scumhunted? He was serious about the hunt.

So yes, please answer my questions.

Tiruin:

Puffypuff is acceptable Like I said, anything goes.

@All:

Still need your answers folk

[Gentlefish]

-snip-
@Pufferfish: What do you think about the current relationships between players?

I think that, as imp said, we are at an interesting position in the game. The ties between players is... tenuous at best. All of the votes have been cleared off the table. Well... Most of the votes. And we're starting to re-establish who is what, what is the gap in play and now the turmoil of arguments when it comes to who's scum and town.

Seeing as the day ends monday, unless we come to a decision over the weekend, ((unlikely)), I will be posting and extend vote on monday if it comes down to the bare wires.

[Imp]

Tiruin:

Maybe we're confusing each other.  Lets try again.

You are confused by my tables of votecount?

I created them trying to understand what you thought the votecount was when you voted (and when you explained your vote later).

Or perhaps you base those tables on what I'm saying now on Rolepgeek?

Absolutely not.  I am asking about what you thought then - because only that can explain what you said then.

I made those tables to compare reality, as of when you joined the thread, as of when you voted, and to match what you said in your explanation of why you voted.  If one of them looks like I'm disregarding my own vote - I am - because your explanation of who you considered 'up for lynch' disregards my vote.  If those tables look crazy to you - it's because I made them trying to illustrated and get you to clear up what looks crazy to me.

I think what you said when you explained your vote doesn't make any sense - unless you were really confused about what the votecount was (or maybe I'm confused about the votecount - but I really don't think so).

So I'm going to just ask you, "explain what you thought the votecount was, and then we continue from there, alright?"  Because that's a large part of my major suspicion of you, personally, this game.  I think what you said about your choices for your vote doesn't make sense.

Maybe you were confused, maybe we were both confused, or maybe you were being maliciously manipulative.  That third one's what I'm worried about, so lets get it straightened out.

Also, are you aware that some of the facts you explain don't match the records?  Stuff like that really bugs me, because it feels like lies.

I bold and number things that are incorrect.

The essence of where the vote lies at day end.

See the link we have there. 1  At the time, you and I vote for Darvi. Seeing the total lack of note from him, I marked him as down and out and pondered on why he would do such things as scum--display of bad rolemodel, surely not. I thought of him as town and figured..well, it is reasonable, but the ground is shoddy all the same, favoring town more than scum. Despite such, I looked forward into the future and cast my dice, standing on the notion of 'a lynch is better than a no lynch'.

Why? Because whether townie or scum, it eliminates a person from the list of suspects. What I saw during that time was a muddled confusion on who was scummy to lynch and who was truly scum to be lynched. I couldn't make up my mind given that..shamefully, I did not fully re-read and chose to go where the votes would lie. 2  Moments before that, you did vote Darvi. 3  If I would vote anyone else, it would lead to a lynch. I could've left it to lie and the lynch would still be the same--however I chose to cast my vote.

1)  You and I did not vote for Darvi at the same time, or even close.
2)  I did not vote for Darvi moments before you did.  I voted for Darvi more than 5 hours before you did.
3)  When you discuss who you might vote for, you discuss only Darvi and Superblackcat.  If you had actually voted for Superblackcat, you would have created a tie.  Anyone else you had voted for would have had just one vote on them - Darvi would have two votes.  But I had switched to Darvi as a compromise, from my vote on Rolepgeek - Do you claim to have missed this?  Do you claim to be unaware that if you had voted for Superblackcat you would have created a tie?

You explain your vote, with minutes left on the clock:

At first glance-yea, it may seem like a bandwagon, and yea, it may also seem like its an easy-lynch move. I compared between the people going up for a lynch--SBC, IMO, isn't playing like naughty scummy scum is doing. He's being the newbie card role-distinct in my eye due to his wording. Comparing his early posts (in which I have lacking time to link and can only thank my typing speed for all this), he doesn't have that scummy vibe coming off him.

As for Darvi...I'm pretty unsure. While him and his predecessor, sans being an IC, have come off generally squeaky-I can not tell if the squeaky squeaks scum or town- the tells beyond him are generally vague, and despite his inconsistency (...I'm unsure but Darvi has a record, IMO, of net troubles[?]), I've found his posts mostly reasonable.

Compared to SBC--I'd like to give the little kitty a chance at this, despite recent behavior, and I would really much like Rolepgeek who is voting while in replacement to expound on his reason on SBC, as well as links to it.

To say bluntly, I'd rather have a lynch go off instead of a non-lynch. Reason being, a no-lynch at this kind of scenario (vague future) does not benefit the town at all. It gives a free night--sure, if we have an inspector (which should not be relied on-both in the BM setup or in any game setup), this would probably benefit--but in general cases, a lynch aids in focusing the angle of view. Lesser suspects.

You sound like you think SBC was up for lynch (he is not, your vote for him would have created a tie unless someone else changes their vote), and IF you thought Rolepgeek was lynchable, you dismiss that with a single question towards him.

Were you unaware that I'd switched to Darvi as a compromise vote as day end neared and there'd been no activity from anyone but myself and the mod in about 17 hours?

Alright, to be honest, the comparing and proceeding details on how you think I voted is...questionable. Where are you seeing all that? I may have missed it. This was the votecount I based it on

That link goes to your post, where you say

Yeah. I di-
...Well, I did think of it, but then seeing that there was no extension at that time (which I missed now that I see it) I would extend.

...I had thought that nobody was into extending it -I looked at ZU's votecount at the time.

So you say you looked at the vote count for extensions, and I assume you also looked at the votecount for votes.  Thus you HAD to know that I'd voted for Rolepgeek, and that I'd recently switched to Darvi - or you HAD to have thought that Rolepgeek had one vote still.

But you never discuss Rolepgeek as being up for the lynch.  You discuss creating a tie (as if you have no idea it would create a tie - that supports that you didn't see my vote for Darvi at the time), but your post totally fails to consider lynching Rolepgeek - not even to say why you wouldn't consider it.