ToasterFiguring out whether my intuitions about how a town player would play a Vigilante Cop helped me see whether my suspicions were justifiable. Not wilfully mislynching people is an important component to playing this game effectively.
See, no, I don't buy that. It looks a heck of a lot more like you're trying to make sure your argument is popular before committing to it- especially since you backed off it when it started looking unpopular.
Hardly: if you look at the stats
most people agreed with me about how to play the hunter, and that doesn't even figure into my current case.
This doesn't really help your argument. However, that's quite the interesting catch. I'd like to hear Jim clarify that one.
What doesn't help what argument? Let's be clear here: I no longer give a monkey's about Jim's stance on vigilante cops. I'd stopped voting him and moved on to what I thought a more likely target. Then Jim proceeded to lie about our interaction, which I take it we agree is a reasonable cause for concern.
TiruinI wonder if I should just replace out for someone better in this modus of language here.
Don't be absurd, you're fine Tiruin: you're usually one of the better players on the forum. You're very focused on Caz right now but if you had to rank all the players in order of scumminess, what would that look like?
Jimnotquitethere, it just occurred to me that you were doing some heinous rolefishing.
If you were town, why on earth would you think it was a good idea to out the person you thought was the Monster Hunter? Because you didn't know for sure and wanted confirmation so you'd know who to kill/convert.
I was only stating what should be obvious to everyone. Also, figuring out who is most likely town is very useful in scumhunting. Like I'd expect a hunter to come out and claim? I wouldn't want that to happen at this stage of the game and I wasn't looking for that to happen. I was openly speculating on the possibilities inherent in Persus' claim. Trying to make sense of it, working out whether it was plausible.
It's not a lie, it's a stupid mistake. Clearly you would back off before being voted since that's what happened and I was in error, but voting me because of my opinion on how to play vigilante is still junk and something you should not have done.
Okay, I admit I should have merely FOS'd you: I thought it was suspicious, I asked others about it and reflected some and unvoted. Jim this whole game is about forming suspicions that might be incorrect and it takes a good town player to admit their mistakes and change their votes. Voting me for what I've since recanted is absurd. So I'm not allowed to make a mistake and take it back but
you're allowed to make a 'stupid mistake' and it's all rosy? You're not just a liar, you're a hypocrite too. Tell me, why did you say that to Toaster? Why did you invent details to reinforce your faith in my lynch?
This seems perfectly reasonable. I, too, consult popular opinion whenever I make an accusation that could be considered controversial. I, too, also expect everyone to let it blow over, since scumhunting by democracy is a perfectly reasonable approach.
Well I'm glad we're on the same page here: so why the paranoid OMGUS on me?
Clearly clearly obviously clearly clearly. You say clearly when it's not really the case.
The information about who agreed/disagreed is already available since people can read the thread. This doesn't answer my question why you would tabulate the responses.
Most other players are lazier about looking at information. Also, I was signalling that I gave a damn about the responses and wasn't just asking questions for kicks. I
clearly didn't use the information to build a case against you and I'm not sure why you're continuing to suggest otherwise.
Apparently you missed the part where I'm voting you for lack of a better target.
Whether or not the scumteam is Vampires, lynching scum is still a necessary task, so the vote is not wasted just because you're not the Vampire Lord.
Uh huh, and do you expect to find a better target? Look, I think we both agree in the value of scumhunting by diplomacy, so why not tell me your current scum-ranking of the other players?
I suggest
everyone does this as its a good tool for drawing out collective suspicions and seeing whether your fellow players have been paying any kind of attention to the game.
SCUM
Jim - was previously very townish but now pursuing a case that he has twice undermined with his own lies and hypocrisy
Max - Tunnelling the same player two days in a row, the second time sheeping someone else's weak case
Caz - Parking his RVS vote on Nerjin leading to the latter's lynch
Nerjin - Doing nothing all day 2 after being resurrected as a possible bad dude
Tiruin - Has tunneled Caz almost the entire game. Has she no other suspicions?
Imp - Has yet to press a lynch case as we're nearing the end of the day despite being generally active
Cmega - Mostly comes across as inexperienced but has done nothing all day
Persus - Wishy-washy with his use of the vote (why vote Caz certain he's scum and then immediately vote someone else?)
Toony - Low early-game engagement (probably excusable due to time commitments), but fair engagement since
Toaster - Pretty reasonable play so far, though Kleril said some dubious things
NQT - The Raddest Priest In Town
TOWN