Print

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

[Nerjin]

Nerjin did you miss my earlier question:

Yes.

Nerjin— I can understand you not wanting to inflate your post count with chaff, but is there any reason why you've only seriously engaged with less than a third of the other players? Last I heard, scum don't just hunt themselves.

It's hard for me to keep track of so many players. I've got a decent feeling [so to speak] about Max. Everyone else is giving off a rather neutral vibe. You'll have to be more specific on your "Seriously engaged" comment though. What do you consider seriously engaged?

Also, I'm pretty sure you never followed up on my detailed response here:

Spoiler: Several Pages Back! (click to show/hide)

Where was I condescending? Tone can be easily mistaken in forum-text, and I didn't intend it. I've got a bit of mafia-experience under my belt. I think I have the smarts, the muscle and the heart to win this time! As for impossible wincons. The last five games:

• In Witches I had to kill all third parties before all the witches were killed, including killing ZU four times
• In Princess I had to survive a whole game where death was meted out by scum randomly
• In BM XLII I died N1 as the cop in a game fraught with participation issues
• In Toon I had to spend a night alone in a room with a boy in a game where not all the other players could be relied on to rationally play to their wincons
• In the Great Temple (though I also admit to lousy play here) I was pretty much the only player that didn't have a power in a game with dubious mechanics

No, this time I have a normal role (town, since you asked). Most of the other players in this game seem somewhat competent, I trust that the game set-up isn't completely broken, and it's at least not out of the realms of possibility that if I die tonight, I'll still win the game. You seem to be saying that scum and town wincons are impossible: what do you know that I don't?

(p.s. I love the image of scooping self-confidence into my raisin bran. You've got a good way with words.)

I guess you really didn't give a damn.

I didn't see that either. You gotta understand that I'm human and can miss things man. There's no need for this kind of anger. Though reading it now there's not really much I can comment on that's actually relevant to this game. I could comment on how witches and Great Temple were unwinnable. But that's not relevant to THIS game. Though I'll admit I liked the revolution reference.

[notquitethere]

Nerjin

It's hard for me to keep track of so many players. I've got a decent feeling [so to speak] about Max. Everyone else is giving off a rather neutral vibe. You'll have to be more specific on your "Seriously engaged" comment though. What do you consider seriously engaged?

I mean, you haven't actually directed any questions at most of the players in the game. Of course people are going to come off as neutral if you don't actually converse with them...

I didn't see that either. You gotta understand that I'm human and can miss things man. There's no need for this kind of anger.

Uh— I wasn't angry and I'm sorry I came across like that (I don't ever get genuinely incensed about Mafia). Only, not engaging with most players and not following up on questions are both pretty big scum tells. I can understand that you can miss things, but the very fact that you're not chasing up questions is a pretty clear indicator that you don't have a genuine desire to find scum (or, at best, you're being quite lazy about it). I'm waiting to hear back from Persus, who appears to have disappeared off the planet, but as things stand I'd be quite happy to see you lynched today.

[Imp]

Posting from work, this must be kept brief.  NQT, your request is heard and I know my answer, but I can't type it in the time available, I'll answer you (and opine in general on what you're asking about) when time allows, within 12 hours for sure.

However I meant to include this in my previous post, and seeing Nerjin so active reminded me!
Nerjin!  I'm still hoping for an answer to this.

Nerjin:

@Imp
How sure are you about your theory? I like it. I really do. It'd be friekin' AMAZING but... This is beginner friendly. Why waste your vote like that? Hows-about you actually put it towards something useful until Mod confirmation?

I agree that a vote was not the only way I could have tested my theory, and indeed I tested it with words and questions as well.  Given that at the time you made this post four of us had not yet used their vote in any fashion - how was my action 'wasting' my vote?

It's hard for me to keep track of so many players.

Is it also hard for you to follow the thread as a whole?

[Toaster]

Yeah, I'll jump in.  Going to catch up.

[Nerjin]

Nerjin!  I'm still hoping for an answer to this.

Nerjin:

@Imp
How sure are you about your theory? I like it. I really do. It'd be friekin' AMAZING but... This is beginner friendly. Why waste your vote like that? Hows-about you actually put it towards something useful until Mod confirmation?

I agree that a vote was not the only way I could have tested my theory, and indeed I tested it with words and questions as well.  Given that at the time you made this post four of us had not yet used their vote in any fashion - how was my action 'wasting' my vote?

Because you were putting it on a player who wasn't even in the game. I guess in retrospect it's not that big of a deal but voting on someone who literally CAN'T be lynched is basically abstaining.

It's hard for me to keep track of so many players.

Is it also hard for you to follow the thread as a whole?

No. I'm following rather well but forgive me if I don't pick up on everything.

[Caz]

Tiruin

> ...Did you read my question right or are you just skimming over what I did? I posed my own questions there, and continued along that line--now, at this time, there were quite many other people posting posting posting questions questions questions. It isn't in the sheer quantity that makes it 'scumhunting', but in its essence. I sighed to myself and re-checked checked back to see if what I asked was asked before-so I did ask seeing as they were not asked before. Said queries which you seem to be apparently discarding without answering in lieu of the thought train despite missing the query which attempts to make sense of said train.

Okay. I just don't see where you're going with this.

> ...So if something is just a question, it is then suspicious? Yes. In the matter of how you word it and how the other person analyzes it. Is there a problem in finding suspicion on that question?

Also you totally dodged my questions there bro. I'm not happy with that. Not a good thing. Please answer them, directly.

I was continuing the conversation with Jim on the theme of 3rd party resurrection, that's the reason for the questions. I want to see if Jim's claimed reactions match up with what he's actually doing - that is the nature of the game, right?

"But others asked questions!" isn't an excuse for avoiding making any effort of your own.

Nerjin

Max White I don't see how this is scummy and your recent attacks on NQT seem rather like McCarthyism to me.

I fail to see how this line of reasoning holds up. Are you trying to be an aggressive IC by chance because, otherwise, you're seeming awfully keen on knocking of NQT. Specifically though the ending seems more like "You're not doing it right! You are scum!" Every town player wants to survive. It's a simple fact that, as humans and players both, we want to be alive at the end of the day and start of the next. Town players know we shouldn't behave like that but we do anyway. I'm sorry, but you're just making things up it seems so my vote goes to you.

Who is looking for the easier lynch here? Is looking for mistakes in someone else's post considered "making things up"?

I post when I have something to say. Sorry that's just how it is. If I have nothing to say I won't put up a bunch of nothing to make myself look better. I believe so. At this point anyway. I view what NQT did as stupid, no offense to him, but I don't really view it as scum actions. I just think Max is being a little too zealous about it is all so it strikes a bit like McCarthyism to me.

So NQT was being 'stupid', but Max is being scummy? How do you distinguish between the two? Would you say that McCarthyism exclusively a scum trait?

To your second point I was stating: The Ideal Town Player will NEVER focus on their own survival and will instead focus ONLY on scum-hunting; none of us are Ideal Town Player. As a general rule EVERY player will fight to stay alive because they view themselves as more useful to town than any other player [especially at the beginning where you only have yourself as confirmed town.]. I hope that makes a bit more sense.

Scum are still more likely to defend themselves when threatened or panic under pressure. It's precisely why focusing on defending your arguments is a scumtell. Arguing that there's no "ideal" player is just irrelevant.

Let me propose a counter-argument though. 1 = Cop. 2 = Claimed Not-Cop. 3-9 = Regular townie

1 has a 1/10 chance of being NK'ed [we assume 11 is also town and is Lynched] if no one claims right? Easy enough.

2 complicates this by claiming. Or do they? You assume that scum would trust someone who says they're not cop right? If I were scum I wouldn't trust a damn thing that came out of a townies mouth. Town power roles will lie just as much as mafia in early game to my experience. As scum the SECOND someone claimed non-cop this early I'd have them marked for death. Why you ask? Simple, wouldn't the cop try to distance himself from the role?

So as Scum I'd kill 2. Simply for the fact that he's my best lead to the cop. If he's not Cop [as 2 did] then I didn't waste a NK and everything is awesome for me anyway. If he IS a Cop then I lucked out!

That assumes scum thinks like me though. I'd say that on average claiming not-cop doesn't change the odds at all that 1 will die. If there even is a 1. Maybe 1 is an A instead. I just doubt that NQT's claim thing there really means anything towards a power-roles death assuming NQT is a townie.

Except that no smart player would claim either cop or non-cop for the reasons you described. If they did, it's safe to assume they have no idea what they're doing and hence it would be to your advantage to keep them in the game.

Max White

Tunneling implies not watching others too. I'm keeping my eyes open, also still waiting to hear from Persus.
If I see something I think is questionable, I will question it, but right now I'm happy with NQT hanging.

Is Persus your only second pick? He seems more newb than scum to me. Going to go for the easier lynch once your argument against nqt collapses?

Is your main argument against nqt really "town don't claim as non-cop"? Are you open to the possibility that it could have been a mistake? If so, what is your remaining argument against him?

kleril

I'm out. I'm in no state to play, and I apologize.

Bah.

notquitethere

What's a bigger scum-slip: being defensive, or not actually scum-hunting?

Are you really defending yourself against defending yourself here? I find this hilarious.

Cmega3

Max white, could you please calm down a bit?
You are acting rather weird.

This is useless. Please explain your argument beyond "acting rather weird".

Imp

I am in favor of helping, period. Newbies, experienced players, non players, the moderator.  Note that what I mean by helping probably encompasses far more than what for you that word means.

Fine.

Going back on your answers, versus correcting a mistake (if you made one).  Is that the same thing to you?  You may think it's convincing to explain away my challenge against your words and the attitude they spring from as 'imaginary'.  I'm not concerned with whether you're a jerk or not.  I'm concerned with whether you're a Town or an anti-Town jerk.  You're looking pretty anti-Town to me, but it does look like you're also trying to Scum hunt.  I won't vote you for being an idiot or making mistakes; if it happens it'll be because of the probability I see in your being Scum.

You offered no real argument against my words except to claim that they were "bullshit". I saw no fault in them either. When you come up with something with more substance I'll take it more seriously.

To confirm your view: I'm an anti-Town jerk who scumhunts, right? How does the former align with the latter in your view? Do you even read what you write?

Where'd you get that misperception from?

Which? You're not still peddling the "Webadict is a zombie!" theory, right? How is this a misperception?

If you'd prefer for me to ignore a question, do not bother to ask it.  Any attempt you make to over exaggerate my answer or to attack me for having answered a question appears, as does you asking any questions that you do not want answered, to be you "just spinning bullshit to distract from the real discussion".

Why are you making assumptions of whether I want answers to the questions I ask or not? Of course I want answers. It looks more like you're trying to paint me as exaggerating your own answers so that you can ignore my questions.

You might find a link helpful.

This is at least useful. Thanks.


Nerjin

It's hard for me to keep track of so many players.

This seems like a weak excuse for just not bothering.

Toaster

Yeah, I'll jump in.  Going to catch up.

Looking forward to your posts.



Since we're getting close to the day's end I'll add my own overview as well.

Nerjin – seems to like defending NQT. Gives a scummy excuse about it being difficult to scumhunt multiple people (difficult to keep track of so many)
Jim Groovester – seems to be observing more than participating. Haven't found fault with his posts so far, though.
Tiruin – has done some fair scumhunting, but hands out votes like candy before moving onto another target, as if he doesn't really care who is lynched.
Persus13 – newb, but acted quite strangely telling Cmega3 to unvote his choice.
Cmega3 – noob. Votes without reason, erratic. Doesn't seem to believe his own arguments and seems to be looking for an easy lynch.
Imp – talks a lot with little substance. annoying, but seems more town than scum to me due to high activity.
ToonyMan – hasn't contributed much at this point. Leaning towards scummy.
notquitethere – notquitesure at this point. Made some stupid mistakes, but not completely convinced he is scum yet.
Caz – this is me.
Max White – has been very active in scumhunting, but could be exaggerating his arguments against NQT for an easy lynch.
kleril/Toaster – newb, hasn't been that active, didn't seem that interested in scumhunting, but don't really have a read yet.

[Nerjin]

Nerjin

Max White I don't see how this is scummy and your recent attacks on NQT seem rather like McCarthyism to me.

I fail to see how this line of reasoning holds up. Are you trying to be an aggressive IC by chance because, otherwise, you're seeming awfully keen on knocking of NQT. Specifically though the ending seems more like "You're not doing it right! You are scum!" Every town player wants to survive. It's a simple fact that, as humans and players both, we want to be alive at the end of the day and start of the next. Town players know we shouldn't behave like that but we do anyway. I'm sorry, but you're just making things up it seems so my vote goes to you.

Who is looking for the easier lynch here? Is looking for mistakes in someone else's post considered "making things up"?

I don't understand what your first question is asking BUT the mistakes, for they are there, that Max is claiming are irrefutable proof of NQT's scummyness don't prove anything at all and honestly just seem like bad play to me.

I post when I have something to say. Sorry that's just how it is. If I have nothing to say I won't put up a bunch of nothing to make myself look better. I believe so. At this point anyway. I view what NQT did as stupid, no offense to him, but I don't really view it as scum actions. I just think Max is being a little too zealous about it is all so it strikes a bit like McCarthyism to me.

So NQT was being 'stupid', but Max is being scummy? How do you distinguish between the two? Would you say that McCarthyism exclusively a scum trait?

Because people make mistakes. It's human nature and what NQT has done, while dumb as hell, doesn't seem particularly scummy. Max on the other hand is absolutely DRILLING NQT over very little. McCarthyism can be a scum trait OR a poor town trait. His follow ups have done little to convince me that it was poor town play though.

To your second point I was stating: The Ideal Town Player will NEVER focus on their own survival and will instead focus ONLY on scum-hunting; none of us are Ideal Town Player. As a general rule EVERY player will fight to stay alive because they view themselves as more useful to town than any other player [especially at the beginning where you only have yourself as confirmed town.]. I hope that makes a bit more sense.

Scum are still more likely to defend themselves when threatened or panic under pressure. It's precisely why focusing on defending your arguments is a scumtell. Arguing that there's no "ideal" player is just irrelevant.

I'd thank you to read the post. EVERY player will defend themselves if they are under attack. As town OR scum. It doesn't matter which. My argument that the perfect player isn't irrelevant at all as it's arguing the point that a town player will defend themselves. I welcome you to present an example of any game where a town player didn't try to defend themselves.

Let me propose a counter-argument though. 1 = Cop. 2 = Claimed Not-Cop. 3-9 = Regular townie

1 has a 1/10 chance of being NK'ed [we assume 11 is also town and is Lynched] if no one claims right? Easy enough.

2 complicates this by claiming. Or do they? You assume that scum would trust someone who says they're not cop right? If I were scum I wouldn't trust a damn thing that came out of a townies mouth. Town power roles will lie just as much as mafia in early game to my experience. As scum the SECOND someone claimed non-cop this early I'd have them marked for death. Why you ask? Simple, wouldn't the cop try to distance himself from the role?

So as Scum I'd kill 2. Simply for the fact that he's my best lead to the cop. If he's not Cop [as 2 did] then I didn't waste a NK and everything is awesome for me anyway. If he IS a Cop then I lucked out!

That assumes scum thinks like me though. I'd say that on average claiming not-cop doesn't change the odds at all that 1 will die. If there even is a 1. Maybe 1 is an A instead. I just doubt that NQT's claim thing there really means anything towards a power-roles death assuming NQT is a townie.

Except that no smart player would claim either cop or non-cop for the reasons you described. If they did, it's safe to assume they have no idea what they're doing and hence it would be to your advantage to keep them in the game.

Max White

Tunneling implies not watching others too. I'm keeping my eyes open, also still waiting to hear from Persus.
If I see something I think is questionable, I will question it, but right now I'm happy with NQT hanging.

Is Persus your only second pick? He seems more newb than scum to me. Going to go for the easier lynch once your argument against nqt collapses?

Is your main argument against nqt really "town don't claim as non-cop"? Are you open to the possibility that it could have been a mistake? If so, what is your remaining argument against him?

kleril

I'm out. I'm in no state to play, and I apologize.

Bah.

notquitethere

What's a bigger scum-slip: being defensive, or not actually scum-hunting?

Are you really defending yourself against defending yourself here? I find this hilarious.

Cmega3

Max white, could you please calm down a bit?
You are acting rather weird.

This is useless. Please explain your argument beyond "acting rather weird".

Imp

I am in favor of helping, period. Newbies, experienced players, non players, the moderator.  Note that what I mean by helping probably encompasses far more than what for you that word means.

Fine.

Going back on your answers, versus correcting a mistake (if you made one).  Is that the same thing to you?  You may think it's convincing to explain away my challenge against your words and the attitude they spring from as 'imaginary'.  I'm not concerned with whether you're a jerk or not.  I'm concerned with whether you're a Town or an anti-Town jerk.  You're looking pretty anti-Town to me, but it does look like you're also trying to Scum hunt.  I won't vote you for being an idiot or making mistakes; if it happens it'll be because of the probability I see in your being Scum.

You offered no real argument against my words except to claim that they were "bullshit". I saw no fault in them either. When you come up with something with more substance I'll take it more seriously.

To confirm your view: I'm an anti-Town jerk who scumhunts, right? How does the former align with the latter in your view? Do you even read what you write?

Where'd you get that misperception from?

Which? You're not still peddling the "Webadict is a zombie!" theory, right? How is this a misperception?

If you'd prefer for me to ignore a question, do not bother to ask it.  Any attempt you make to over exaggerate my answer or to attack me for having answered a question appears, as does you asking any questions that you do not want answered, to be you "just spinning bullshit to distract from the real discussion".

Why are you making assumptions of whether I want answers to the questions I ask or not? Of course I want answers. It looks more like you're trying to paint me as exaggerating your own answers so that you can ignore my questions.

You might find a link helpful.

This is at least useful. Thanks.


Nerjin

It's hard for me to keep track of so many players.

This seems like a weak excuse for just not bothering.

Toaster

Yeah, I'll jump in.  Going to catch up.

Looking forward to your posts.



Since we're getting close to the day's end I'll add my own overview as well.

Nerjin – seems to like defending NQT. Gives a scummy excuse about it being difficult to scumhunt multiple people (difficult to keep track of so many)
Jim Groovester – seems to be observing more than participating. Haven't found fault with his posts so far, though.
Tiruin – has done some fair scumhunting, but hands out votes like candy before moving onto another target, as if he doesn't really care who is lynched.
Persus13 – newb, but acted quite strangely telling Cmega3 to unvote his choice.
Cmega3 – noob. Votes without reason, erratic. Doesn't seem to believe his own arguments and seems to be looking for an easy lynch.
Imp – talks a lot with little substance. annoying, but seems more town than scum to me due to high activity.
ToonyMan – hasn't contributed much at this point. Leaning towards scummy.
notquitethere – notquitesure at this point. Made some stupid mistakes, but not completely convinced he is scum yet.
Caz – this is me.
Max White – has been very active in scumhunting, but could be exaggerating his arguments against NQT for an easy lynch.
kleril/Toaster – newb, hasn't been that active, didn't seem that interested in scumhunting, but don't really have a read yet.
[/quote]

[Nerjin]

I'm sorry about that guys. I hit the wrong button.

[ToonyMan]

Had my post mostly done but had to leave for classes.

@Tiruin:

ToonyMan

@Tiruin:

ToonyMan

Also I'm voting Imp for voting a player who doesn't exist, you should know better.

...And this signifies her being or having the characteristic of scum because...?

It's misleading, any form of distraction from the truth can be read as a scumtell and I think Imp is too good a player to make that error.

You mean voting Webadict, seemingly missing the context in which she voted Webadict for, but in general who isn't actually playing?
I think you missed her reason there.

You don't vote players who aren't playing, frankly it doesn't really matter what the context of their reasoning was.

ToonyMan: Where are you~? What have you been doing? Why do you only have a few posts~?

Hi.


@Cmega3:

Max white, could you please calm down a bit?
You are acting rather weird.

This is a bandwagon vote.


@Imp:

I think Imp is too good a player to make that error

What are you basing this belief upon?

If you lack the self-esteem to see yourself as a skilled player I should say by my impressions you seem pretty competent or at least proactive.

@Max White:

Toony
Putting your education before internet games, for shame!
Will you have a chance to really be active any time soon? I have no read on you what so ever, and that annoys me.

Unfortunately, probably not until Friday or this weekend.  Ideally, I won't die by then so it should work out.

BS.  I think you're too good a player to try to pull that one.  What do you mean by 'working out' if you don't die within a week's time - Exactly 'what' is going to 'work out' 'how'?  That's an entire two weeks of play you'd have mostly not been here for, with at least one player saying "I have no read on you what so ever".
You haven't offered much to go on, but I think I have a read on you.

It should be less than a week, Friday is in only four days after all.  I have two school exams I really don't want to do poorly in on Wednesday and Thursday so I've only really had time to make one mafia post a day usually.

A lack of a read is not a scumtell or a towntell.  You can say they're lurking I guess.


NQT and Max White are being kind of dicks at each other, and judging by NQT and Dariush acting against each other in WC3 one of them is most likely town at least.  I doubt both are scum of some sort.

[Max White]

notquitethere

Max

Were you questioned on a theme?
Please, quote the exact question you were expanding on.

So you say your early game isn't always the best... Why do you feel like pointing that out? What difference does it make?

I answered your question and then expanded on the theme of day one mistakes.

I didn't question you, I pointed out you were doing the wrong thing, and from there you felt the need to expand on the point in an attempt to try and lessen the scum mistake you had made.

You clearly did question me: there were question marks and everything. It's all quoted there. How is lessening a mistake a scum tell?!

This is outright misleading the town in the hopes they won't check the posts.

My early game isn't always the best, I prefer to have concrete things to work with. As such, I'll be bearing a close eye on how people will be voting today. What to you constitutes a valid reason to lynch someone on Day One?

This was reply number 64. Nobody asked you anything before this relevant to this reply, yet you still try and insist you were answering a question.

So you say your early game isn't always the best... Why do you feel like pointing that out? What difference does it make?

This is reply number 66, and came after that comment.
Unless you can tell the future in real life, there is no way that you were answering the question quoted. All I did was point out you made a mistake and then you got defensive from there, no questions asked about it until you got defensive. Once you had shown that tell I questioned you about it, but that came after.

Where are you even getting this from? You asked me questions, I gave you answers. It's okay not to like my answers but don't pretend I never gave them. You've convinced yourself I'm scum and are now working up further evidence for the case. It's just confirmation bias. Your case doesn't amount to a hill of beans.

I asked you, very specifically, word for word

What difference am I meant to see from you in regards to whether your answers are carefully deliberated or from instinct?
Should I just dismiss scum tells because you didn't spend fifteen minutes carefully picking over your post to make sure there were none, or should I be even more inquisitive about mistakes people make when they are most likely to give themselves away?

And your reply was

Perhaps I wasn't clear enough. I should say, my play specifically on Day One sometimes suffers mis-steps because I prefer concrete information and also I occasionally don't think about my precise wording when I post. Everyone in general's play on Day One is also hampered by the fact that there's nothing concrete to work off. I made a mistake in asking you a question about an unanswered question and this was quickly remedied— what more is there to say? I'm glad you answered the question eventually: I have a greater understanding of your rationale now than I did at the beginning of the game. If you think I have displayed a scum-tell then by all means say so and place a vote.

That is totally evading the actual question. You never even tried to give me an answer, you thought you would just 'clarify' and everything would be forgotten.

Look, why don't you tell me about what you think of Max's case. As far as I can see it's the only seriously lynch vote so far. So does he have a good argument or not?

Now, there's two serious votes in the game: Max is convinced I'm scum, his argument is there for all to read. Nerjin claims Max is seriously over-reacting. Well, who is right?

Max has an argument against me, Nerjin disputes that argument. They both can't be right and both of them have backed up their positions with lynch-votes. The game has left the RVS and there is now substance to discuss. Can you understand why I'd want players to discuss matters of substance in the game? Is Max or Nerjin correct?

Oh look, now you are trying desperately to polarize the town. Seriously, we could technically both be wrong, yet you want people to vote based off the fact that somebody is making an argument they may or may not agree with? Technically we could both be right (Were not, but from an outside point of view) and I would be trying to bus you right now. This attitude that 'Either you agree with his argument or you lynch him!' is total scummy bullshit.

Max has the only serious case in the game and yet he has yet to meaningfully question Cmega, Toony, Imp or Nerjin. What's a bigger scum-slip: being defensive, or not actually scum-hunting?

I would say it works in degrees.

Max white, could you please calm down a bit?
You are acting rather weird.

Please, elaborate on this case.

Imp

You identify a seriously scummy player fairly early D1.  There's a few real life days before the scheduled nightfall.  How important is it for you to further verify that your intended target is Scum during this time?  How important is it for you to seek the other Scum during this time?

It is important to seek other scum at all times. It is also important to verify suspicions, but to at least state them early enough that you aren't jumping in with fifteen minutes until the day ends with a great big case.

Nerjin

Let me put it this way: Max's attacks on NQT could have happened to anyone and I would feel that he was simply trying to whip town, or perhaps just himself, into a fever pitch against the player with very little evidence.

What makes you say NQT has little experience? Isn't he IC in the current beginners game?

[Toaster]

If there are any outstanding questions to kleril that anyone still wants me to answer, please repeat them.  The only one I saw was really irrelevant because it was about him asking a question to everyone, which I wouldn't do in RVS.

I noted a question about me claiming survivor after a res in Super5.  I'd like to point out that I had a very visible role (vig) and knew my lack of kill would be noted.  It went poorly for me.

Also, I'm going through the thread and responding to things that catch my attention, so I may be a bit redundant and possibly oddly ordered.


Persus13:

All vets: Any tips for a Supernatural Newb?

Read the previous games.


Nerjin:

EVERYONE: What role would you most like to have and why?

Vig.  I tend to die quickly when I have it, though.

What did you hope to get out of this question?

We don't really know what a Monster Hunter does but if I had a town aligned NK I would go after whomever I thought was the most scummy. If I were more than 75% sure I would use it. Hope this helps.

Man, I've been all the interesting roles!  Yes, a Monster Hunter is a generic vig.  There are other flavors too- Super1 Toony was a Vampire Hunter who could vig or inspect someone to determine if they were a vampire... in a game where the scum team was werewolves.

@Imp
How sure are you about your theory? I like it. I really do. It'd be friekin' AMAZING but... This is beginner friendly. Why waste your vote like that? Hows-about you actually put it towards something useful until Mod confirmation?

This also a vote for derping, and a second one, at that.  Bandwagony, a bit.

I was saying he was trying to whip town into a frenzy. He was trying to drum up a lynch-mob so to speak. I also mentioned that he might just be trying to psych himself up to believe his accusations.

Isn't trying, as a townie, to convince the town that your target is the correct choice also a townie move?


NQT:

I'd most like to be an Illusionist as that's my favourite kind of magic. However, having looked at the last Supernatural, I'm pretty sure that that's a scum role in this, so maybe I'd pick Exorcist as I like dealing with the theme of ghosts. Does this tell you anything useful?

It can be town too.

Of the various main and third party roles which have appeared in Supernatural games, which do you think you'd have the easiest or hardest time winning with?

Does Supernatural have a survivor role? Those are usually the hardest to win by because other roles you can win if your team mates survive after your death.

Org or Ottofar (one of those lurky O names) was a survivor Wererat in Super 3.

Now, there's two serious votes in the game: Max is convinced I'm scum, his argument is there for all to read. Nerjin claims Max is seriously over-reacting. Well, who is right?

Who is to say they aren't both right or both wrong?  You should know better that to set up something like that, NQT.

Back to the point: It seems you only signify that one out of the 10+ people here have something tangible as of that post. Why? Do you not think anyone else has things to seriously say?

Max has the only serious case in the game and yet he has yet to meaningfully question Cmega, Toony, Imp or Nerjin. What's a bigger scum-slip: being defensive, or not actually scum-hunting?

"Only." "Serious."

My claim is that Max's vote is the most serious in the game, and by association, Nerjin's vote on Max is also serious. I may be mistaken, but it appears to me that everyone else's votes are just pressure votes, prodding people to be more active or explain some small matter.

Why isn't your vote serious?


Caz:

notquitethere - Do you think that policy-lynching lurkers is ever a good strategy? Do you see this strategy as scummy or town-orientated?

I'm interested in hearing your opinion on the matter.


Cmega3:

notquitethere, you look pretty suspicious, responding and and asking questions to everyone personally. I'll watch you for now, but I'm very prone to changing my thoughts.

"NQT, I suspect you for partaking in very townlike behavior."  Yeah, you're going to need to back up this vote with better reasoning.

Max white, could you please calm down a bit?
You are acting rather weird.

This is a bandwagon vote.  You need original reasoning behind your vote.


Imp:

In game 3, Mysteriousbluepuppet was raised as a zombie.  He never appeared on the list of people who could be voted for, but he was slaying people through Toaster's commands.  Was the only way to kill him to kill Toaster, who had raised him?  Would that even have killed Mysteriousbluepuppet-the-zombie?   It's HARD to figure out the one player who purposefully raised a zombie for SK purposes, but less difficult to figure out that kills suddenly started - and maybe the dead person has been raised a killer.  What would have happened if a player had said VOTE Mysteriousbluepuppet?  Would his name have then appeared on the vote lists?  Could the town executioners have discovered his corpse and destroyed it if he'd been the lynch choice?

I can field a couple of those.  The zombie was not voteable, but was actionable... if anyone knew the right person to action, when the only possible hint would come from a sexton (who can't do any action against the zombie.)  IIRC the zombie goes if the necromancer goes.

Toonyman:  Welcome in late to the party!  If your role gave you a one shot daykill which had to be used on D1 or not at all, who's your pick and why?

This is a very specific question.  Have you, perhaps, read Paranormal 11?


Tiruin:

EVERYONE: What role would you most like to have and why?

I would like to be an Exorcist -No this isn't my role.

Why did you feel the need to specify your non-exorcistness?

Tiruin

Tiruin dons her Inquisitorial hat and robe.

Yet you're only reacting to questions when asked. Are you going to do some scumhunting of your own?

Interesting vision there Caz, do you not see scumhunting in the questions I return to the person? Do you see those questions proposed to me as scumhunting?

This is an awfully defensive vote.

NQT:
I note that you seem to be voting or FoS'ing people who miss your questions? Something wrong with it?

He's doing it to inflate his own vote count and fall under his own town tell, obviously.

Max White I don't see how this is scummy and your recent attacks on NQT seem rather like McCarthyism to me.

(Please explain either in the [/abbr] tag or something what those terms are...) What is McCarthyism?

We just love referencing American politics when non-Americans are playing.


Toony:

Also I'm voting Imp for voting a player who doesn't exist, you should know better.

Since when is derping out a valid reason to vote someone?


Max:

I'm not a cop

Now this is also scummy. You don't talk about your role day 1!

Why wasn't Tiruin scummy when she did it?  Quote's earlier in my post.

Chances are we only have so many people with inspects, most likely not many. The most people who claim to not be a cop, the more likely it is that a cop gets NKed. That is pretty basic statistics. Do you not understand how that works?

Why are you so ready to believe that he's not a cop?  In fact, your argument here is bass-ackwards.  You're saying claiming non-cop is bad, because scum prefers to NK cops and therefore won't NK him.  Ergo, he's scum.  However, if he's scum, then he's not a town cop at all, completely negating the danger from him claiming that.

Toaster
When you've caught up and read the thread could you tell us your initial reflections?

You are scummy, Max is scummy, Cmega hasn't got a grasp on hunting scum yet.   Toony and Nerjin are worth another look.  Jim is quiet.

kleril/Toaster – newb, hasn't been that active, didn't seem that interested in scumhunting, but don't really have a read yet.

Nah, I'm no newb.  Now Jim, yeah, he's a newbie.

[Caz]

Toaster

Caz:

notquitethere - Do you think that policy-lynching lurkers is ever a good strategy? Do you see this strategy as scummy or town-orientated?

I'm interested in hearing your opinion on the matter.

I'll quote my earlier post for this.

In actual play I've only seen policy lynching lurkers put forward by scum players. However, players not being engaged with the game is pro-scum, so town have an incentive to pressure lurkers into participating more or replacing out. As such, sometimes the right thing to do is to vote lurkers. This should never be presented as a policy though, as often there'll be better lynch candidates.

Do you disagree and if so, why?

I'd mostly agree with you there.

Pressuring lurkers into being active = Very yes.
Actually lynching lurkers = Usually there's a better candidate, and if you can't find one, town has bigger troubles than a few sleepy villagers.

Though the strategy doesn't detract from how much I loathe lurkers. Especially the ones that come in just before a prod and say "Hey guys! I'll make a post later!" just to disappear for another two days. If it spreads it can be game-breaking.

kleril/Toaster – newb, hasn't been that active, didn't seem that interested in scumhunting, but don't really have a read yet.

Nah, I'm no newb.  Now Jim, yeah, he's a newbie.

Ah, this was from my earlier thoughts on kleril. Sorry about that.

[Persus13]

Hey, so the primary means of me knowing a thread is active is getting email notifications that someone made a post since the last time I checked the thread, and I wasn't getting emails from this thread for some reason (I probably deleted the notification email without checking thread) since my last post on Saturday. So I'll read through the thread since then and answer any questions and scum-hunt now.

[Tiruin]

PFP

Ugh. Nightmares. Can't sleep. And then this. >_> Will post correctly in the next 12 hours..depending on mood and RL.

Caz

Tiruin

> ...Did you read my question right or are you just skimming over what I did? I posed my own questions there, and continued along that line--now, at this time, there were quite many other people posting posting posting questions questions questions. It isn't in the sheer quantity that makes it 'scumhunting', but in its essence. I sighed to myself and re-checked checked back to see if what I asked was asked before-so I did ask seeing as they were not asked before. Said queries which you seem to be apparently discarding without answering in lieu of the thought train despite missing the query which attempts to make sense of said train.

Okay. I just don't see where you're going with this.

> ...So if something is just a question, it is then suspicious? Yes. In the matter of how you word it and how the other person analyzes it. Is there a problem in finding suspicion on that question?

Also you totally dodged my questions there bro. I'm not happy with that. Not a good thing. Please answer them, directly.

I was continuing the conversation with Jim on the theme of 3rd party resurrection, that's the reason for the questions. I want to see if Jim's claimed reactions match up with what he's actually doing - that is the nature of the game, right?

"But others asked questions!" isn't an excuse for avoiding making any effort of your own.

...How can you not see where you were going with this if you were the one who caused it in the first place!? What kind of handwave gesture is that?

I can't even get where you gleaned the last statement. The questions I asked which you apparently intentionally skip over now become discarded for..something unconnected, and this quotation out of nowhere seems like something nice to append.

What. Caz.

On that mark, your list has a few curious bits in it for an 'overview'.

Nerjin – seems to like defending NQT. Gives a scummy excuse about it being difficult to scumhunt multiple people (difficult to keep track of so many)
Jim Groovester – seems to be observing more than participating. Haven't found fault with his posts so far, though.
Tiruin – has done some fair scumhunting, but hands out votes like candy before moving onto another target, as if he doesn't really care who is lynched.
Persus13 – newb, but acted quite strangely telling Cmega3 to unvote his choice.
Cmega3 – noob. Votes without reason, erratic. Doesn't seem to believe his own arguments and seems to be looking for an easy lynch.
Imp – talks a lot with little substance. annoying, but seems more town than scum to me due to high activity.
ToonyMan – hasn't contributed much at this point. Leaning towards scummy.
notquitethere – notquitesure at this point. Made some stupid mistakes, but not completely convinced he is scum yet.
Caz – this is me.
Max White – has been very active in scumhunting, but could be exaggerating his arguments against NQT for an easy lynch.
kleril/Toaster – newb, hasn't been that active, didn't seem that interested in scumhunting, but don't really have a read yet.

Want me to explain myself? If I had two votes, one would be you on the pretense of suspicion--check back and see for yourself and the other would be on Cmega because of the flippancy with how he acts, and the total ignorance he moves on with. Foremost being an intentional breach of logic given everything he said, with lacking address of those questioning him (and the implied rudeness.)

An overview would contain your reads on people--I see just how you see them, but how you mark specific people as scum/town while the rest are with opinions and sidecommentary. What is your view on them?

Please note the bolded portions:
@Me: Where is the shiftiness? Outline. Defend that accusation. ALSO I'M FEMALE IF YOU DIDN'T GET THE HINT.
@Persus: Expound on the strange action. Correlate.
@Cmega: Opinion of him. Relate that opinion to scumminess and your chosen vote-target.
@Imp: ...You just seem to be wanting to give a snide remark of her there. If High Activity is the only mark, why don't others surpassing your own post count get the same note? Is that the only thing which gives a town point?
@Max: Seemingly contradictory. How is exaggerating akin to actively scumhunting in that context? Reword if misunderstood.

Any particular reads you want to expound on? Because it mostly seems commentary there.

Toaster

EVERYONE: What role would you most like to have and why?

I would like to be an Exorcist -No this isn't my role.

Why did you feel the need to specify your non-exorcistness?

Would you believe me either way? I'm saying that in humor..or something non-serious, and in the way that I answer the question. The appended part is for you to believe or not. Why I added that tag is because lots of people usually get the note on 'If I want role x, then I am role x'..which would deal with a lot of explaining in itself.

Tiruin

Tiruin dons her Inquisitorial hat and robe.

Yet you're only reacting to questions when asked. Are you going to do some scumhunting of your own?

Interesting vision there Caz, do you not see scumhunting in the questions I return to the person? Do you see those questions proposed to me as scumhunting?

This is an awfully defensive vote.

And this is an awfully casual poke on a vote for a seemingly passive-aggressive statement.

Why is that an awfully defensive vote?

Had my post mostly done but had to leave for classes.

@Tiruin:

ToonyMan

@Tiruin:

ToonyMan

Also I'm voting Imp for voting a player who doesn't exist, you should know better.

...And this signifies her being or having the characteristic of scum because...?

It's misleading, any form of distraction from the truth can be read as a scumtell and I think Imp is too good a player to make that error.

You mean voting Webadict, seemingly missing the context in which she voted Webadict for, but in general who isn't actually playing?
I think you missed her reason there.

You don't vote players who aren't playing, frankly it doesn't really matter what the context of their reasoning was.

But she..what she said back then..
...
Fine. >_>
Good luck in your exams though! Hope you enjoy!

NQT and Max White are being kind of dicks at each other, and judging by NQT and Dariush acting against each other in WC3 one of them is most likely town at least.  I doubt both are scum of some sort.

...Wouldn't this be classified too much as a metatell? They could be good dicks bussing too early to separate each other. Though I'm not sure how one could be a dick when the other is busy calling everyone to look at who is tattling on who.

@Imp:

I think Imp is too good a player to make that error

What are you basing this belief upon?

If you lack the self-esteem to see yourself as a skilled player I should say by my impressions you seem pretty competent or at least proactive.

...Really? I think its a bit too early to make the reference on 'too good to do [this] error' here. Imp is technically fairly new to Bay12 forum mafia..
I could say the same for myself as I don't see myself as skilled at all given...my whole history on this board.

Nerjin: Sleep. Now. Fix your comprehension. :I Rest. Take some tea. Whatever will make you happy. Then get back to posting coherently thanks.

kleril/Toaster – newb, hasn't been that active, didn't seem that interested in scumhunting, but don't really have a read yet.

Nah, I'm no newb.  Now Jim, yeah, he's a newbie.

Stop confusing the newbies with pointing hands. :I


PPE:

Hey, so the primary means of me knowing a thread is active is getting email notifications that someone made a post since the last time I checked the thread, and I wasn't getting emails from this thread for some reason (I probably deleted the notification email without checking thread) since my last post on Saturday. So I'll read through the thread since then and answer any questions and scum-hunt now.

Erm..you don't put the note of saying 'ok I've missed [x, y, z or any other factors]' and then add an 'I'll scumhunt now' to make up for it...

What have you learned as of late, and do you have any reads on the general masses?

Also:
> Notify in the tab bar.
It sends you emails. Forever.

Unless you check your newbox everyday to see this thread with every update.

[Toaster]

Persus:

Hey, so the primary means of me knowing a thread is active is getting email notifications that someone made a post since the last time I checked the thread, and I wasn't getting emails from this thread for some reason (I probably deleted the notification email without checking thread) since my last post on Saturday. So I'll read through the thread since then and answer any questions and scum-hunt now.

That link is your friend.


Caz:  Fair enough in regards to your response.  Figured I'd miss something.

kleril/Toaster – newb, hasn't been that active, didn't seem that interested in scumhunting, but don't really have a read yet.

Nah, I'm no newb.  Now Jim, yeah, he's a newbie.

Ah, this was from my earlier thoughts on kleril. Sorry about that.

This is a reference to an earlier game where someone called Jim a newbie.  I enjoy giving Jim crap about it (because he's awesome.)  Sadly, I am having trouble finding the reference.


Tiruin:  First off, see right above.

EVERYONE: What role would you most like to have and why?

I would like to be an Exorcist -No this isn't my role.

Why did you feel the need to specify your non-exorcistness?

Would you believe me either way? I'm saying that in humor..or something non-serious, and in the way that I answer the question. The appended part is for you to believe or not. Why I added that tag is because lots of people usually get the note on 'If I want role x, then I am role x'..which would deal with a lot of explaining in itself.

That's one of those jokes you probably shouldn't make.  I'm not NO FUN ALLOWED in Mafia, but that one is going to be taken at face value.

Tiruin

Tiruin dons her Inquisitorial hat and robe.

Yet you're only reacting to questions when asked. Are you going to do some scumhunting of your own?

Interesting vision there Caz, do you not see scumhunting in the questions I return to the person? Do you see those questions proposed to me as scumhunting?

This is an awfully defensive vote.

And this is an awfully casual poke on a vote for a seemingly passive-aggressive statement.

Why is that an awfully defensive vote?

It's causal because I wanted to see your reaction to the poke; said reaction allows me to check the nature of the vote in the first place and give me a starting point for building a read on you.  Currently a fairly null read, for the record.

It's because it came (almost) entirely off his attack of you.