Print

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

[Jim Groovester]

Day 1 Continues...

[3] LARD: Graknorke, Tiruin, TheDarkStar
[1] darkpaladin109: Persus13
[1] Persus13: 4maskwolf
[1] Graknorke: mastahcheese
[1] Solymr: LARD


Day 1 will end Tuesday 12:00 PM MST in approximately 45 hours. Three votes have been cast for an extension. One more is required to extend the day to Wednesday 12:00 PM MST.

[Graknorke]

Why do you care about what I do or don't like?

saying something is well and truly useless if nobody listens.

why did you not answer my question?

Really?

You seem very easy to change your opinions of something, and very.. non-caring about it. Why do you not feel more of an investment toward your suspicions?

You're using that as an example? Because it wasn't founded on much to begin with. It was just musing about a possibility that got easily explained away by my lack of understanding of the standard course a game takes. Do you have a problem with people being wrong?

Because you're taking the attitude of someone who simply doesn't care about the things they perceive. Think about what you did from this perspective.
Scum: "That looks like something I could use to get someone accused with! I'll go after that."
Other player: "Actually that's something very common."
Scum: "Oh, well I better back off of this and act never it never happened to save face."
What you're trying to do is brush it off and sweep it under the rug, not explain that what you're trying to do is find scum, and was simply unaware of what constitutes scummy behavior. Yes, there is a difference. If you can't see that then you aren't looking as hard at it as you should be.
And no, I don't have a problem with people being wrong. If people were never wrong, they would never learn. And that's what this is for.
And why didn't you answer my question this time, either?

No, I'm not seeing how that's scummy. You're saying I could keep trying to pressure somebody when there is literally nothing to go on?
And I didn't act like it never happened. That would be ridiculous, because it obviously did happen (it's recorded there in text, it's not like you couldn't go back and check). It's just not important. I made a mistake because of my lack of experience.
And your question was not only a leading question, but I answered it fine. I explained to you why I changed my opinion in the answer you gave. If you aren't satisfied with that, ask me about another one. To be honest, I don't think there is another.

And now you're starting to get passive-aggressive. And going off of a "vague accusation" is a very common reason to start pressuring someone, for your information. And if you want more focus, Graknorke, then tell me why I shouldn't believe you to be scum? Or for that matter, why you are once again questioning my methods of scum-hunting like you did here? I'm starting to doubt that excuse you gave to that.

That... is not scumhunting. That's just you telling us your feelings.
And your request is both ridiculous and nearly impossible. Everything I've posted is evidence that I'm not scum, considering that I've been asking and answering questions in the hopes of uncovering something scummy from someone. You can argue about the quality of them certainly, but you can't say I haven't been trying. Also, there's a reason why we have scumhunting rather than townproving. The burden of proof is on you to find something scummy on me, rather than on me to show you all of the non-scummy things I've done.

I'm sorry, how is what I said in any way just "telling you my feelings?" I never included my feeling into that in any way. What you're doing is called "deflection" which is trying to change the topic to something else entirely, probably in an attempt to incriminate me, in this case.
"And your request is both ridiculous and nearly impossible." Um, no, it's not. People have done this many times before, and very well, in many cases. Telling someone else that it "isn't your job" to prove their innocence, and blaming the other person, telling them to find the proof, is something that I've never heard from anyone that isn't town. Accusing the accuser is called OMGUS, whether a vote is attached or not.

Since when was saying that someone mentioned their feelings at attempt to incriminate someone? I can't find a way to read my post as even implying that you are scum. I'm just saying that asking me to prove my innocence doesn't really make sense, not only seeing as I'm biased, but apparently even a crime as heinous as making a mistake is a scumtell. So naturally I would miss things that you wouldn't.

Would you care to show us these "slip-ups" that you are so aware of? Or perhaps why you are loathe to have pressure applied to you?

Oh come now, I'd hope you would remember. After all, you're the one who pointed it out.

[2] Well at least now there is an attempt. I'm sorry, what is this "gaoler"? Asking questions regarding (what I assume to be a role) that aren't even in the game seem to be far less effective at finding scum, than my methods, which you are doubting. And when you are protected, you don't know that you are protected. You are completely unaware of such an event.

So your "slip up" in this case is simply a clerical error, or misunderstanding of the rules? That's not a "slip up" by Mafia terms, and you should know that.
And why did you, for the third time now in this post alone, not answer my question? In case you missed it, it was right after the one you did answer. "Or perhaps why you are loathe to have pressure applied to you?" <- Right here.

In the context I was using it, it's clear that by "slip-up" I meant mistake, since I applied it to townies. But of course, how could I forget that not understanding terminology properly is a scumtell right?
And that is a leading question, another from you. I'm not loathe to have pressure applied to me. It would just not be conducive to my ability to play and learn Mafia.

As with all of these "not answering my question"s you've been getting so excited over, with the first two (the third was actually a question I didn't answer) it seems like you just want a specific answer. When you get tired of this ridiculous song-and-dance, would you like to tell me what it is? Really, you've dug up a few things you don't like, demanded an explanation, then when you get the explanation you just ask for it again.


LARD
Hm, alright. I think I understand what you're getting at. My questions have been answered and I don't have a problem with the answers.
unvote LARD

As to the dogpile, I was kind of the first voter so I suppose it would be me who started it.

[Tiruin]

Whoelse didn't extend? I say that this is imperative for two things: Discussion, and continued talk.

Quickpost because gathering broken RL stuffs together.

Mastahcheese/Everybody

I'm loathe to post reads on IC's, due both to their experience, and the fact that they're here to help, so null for now.

I'd like everyone here to question your terminology and what you identify with it, first.
In any game-there will be people who are more experienced than you. There will be people less experienced than you.
And thus I ask this: Do you fear the more experienced person? Why or why not?
Next: Are you more likely to target the experienced person with an: inspect, block or protect? Why or why not? You may pick any or all of the choices.

This question is to see if there is any discrepancy between personal value attached to certain terms that people deem important.

Mr Cheese

Tiruin: You're scum. Your scumbuddy happened to draw some suspicion due to some of their behavior, but not enough to get lynched. Would they be any particular type of person you'd try to kill in the night at this point? Why? How would you proceed for the next day? Why?

When 'at this point' means 'Day', I presume?
Well I'd target the investigative voices-those which treat the situation with a generalist attitude. Those of probing hints or curious motive--all due because I am to either Rolecop/kill them. For the next day, I will deliberate with said buddy-point out his flaws, probably give hints on what s/he's to do in that matter, and in the next day I shall prod them on the matter--moreso because its an aid to the person regardless of their role and it helps them learn instead of going all aggressive on them.
Why? My playstyle. I side with benevolence no matter what alignment I am on.

Did you ask that question to learn more about me?

Question to everyone: What would be your preferred role? Why?

No preference. Why? Because my playstyle doesn't depend on my role--whatever ability exists in said role is but a tool I can work with-sure, my playstyle could conform to how I use said tool, but it has no direct relation to why I have this role nor on why I'd like it.
For me, the role or the wincon doesn't define the player but their [the player's] principles.

Why do you ask?

The answer to the two bolded bits are the same. I'm asking to get conversation started, basically. See if people give any sort of answer that flat out makes no sense, that sort of thing. Also in part because I like to know more about people, just as a general curiosity. You also failed to answer the first question, whether you prefer to play as town or scum.

So who would you say, so far, has a "generalist attitude"?

You also failed to answer the first question, whether you prefer to play as town or scum.

...I didn't see any question like this.
For me and my principles? Town. Because of their...lone-ish attitude, and I've no bias on my team (unless Mason, wherein I will carefully analyze those who target my stoneworker-buddy) given that you didn't say 'what exactly as town/scum'. When I'm scum, I tend to go overly critical of stuff--I intentionally misplace words from my statements (yet any incident of me forgetting are applicable to both) yet I prefer me playing as town because....yeah. I guess its more of a sentimental thing to me.

So who would you say, so far, has a "generalist attitude"?

...It would be hard to decide, given the general playerbase I'm staring at now. Persus is focused yet spreading his cheese to cover everyone. 4mask seems pointy and being a non-absolutist in his posts, yet I can easily trace his intent (or in the least poke on where its going). Solymr, Graknorke, LARD, and darkpaladin109 are all in my 'introduce me to you and I'll meet you here' zone. Which means I can't develop a qualitative read on them to base quite anything regarding them at all. TDS is being specifically grumpy :I but not generalistic, seemingly absolutist in his perception.

You may get the note that I'm playing along terms used in Ethics here. [Absolutist/Non-absolutist/Generalist/Consequentialist...]
If there's any error with those terms, this is another case of 'Tiruin uses what she sees those terms as instead of what those terms may exactly mean'.


LARD

As for my reads,
Lard: poor, misunderstood, sad, pathetic lump at the bottom of dogpile. (just kidding)
Tiruin: Quite scummy. Voted me on first post with very little explanation. Perhaps that means she is dropping hints in order not to destroy us too bad, maybe she is busy and under strain, or maybe just a pressure vote. Pressure vote seems unlikely do to lack of reasons.
Graknorke: I don't have a very good read on him because he's more experienced, seems to be legitimately fishing very hard for information though. I'm sorry about you needing to pressure me. town lean, and I'm not just saying that to get you on my side.
TDS:
Solymr You are not fishing very hard for information, seem unacceptably ambiguous,

LARD: pretty much everything he says points to scum.

, and above reasons.
TheDarkStar: voted with not that much reasoning other than what other people had said. Med scum lean.

On those you find scummy--can you back them up with a little context? As in, I see accusations, but I want to see the exacts.
Point being: There are more variants of who you find scummy--yet those are more on who voted you out of the general audience.
And the reads on others?


Solymyr: I'd like context for these reads you mention here--primarily on LARD, due to the much-too-general statement.

TDS: What did you mean by "chance" when talking about your reads?

4mask

Now, what is the most effective town strategy for day one, in your personal opinion.

LYNCH DAY ONE. LYNCH AT DAY ONE. LYNCH AT DAY ONE.
Now when you speak strategy, it is quite a general category. The strategy for the general townsperson is what I'll answer (given the plurality you speak of here).

What Town is advised to do is to approach the first day with the concept of deconstructionalism and holism. Deconstructionalism in the way that if they've lacking idea on what to do (and are not biased by their abilities), then they should go all out and question question question. This is where several aspects of the player shines: Personality, awareness and readability. How astute their wording is accompanied by how their questioning process is = information. Any set of that kind of communication = information.

You do not bloody just vote people and leave it at that. That is the way of ignorance. Ignorance wherein you trap yourself in your own box and just fling your vote like a lazy person.

I vote personX

^Good example of what NOT TO BLOODY DO AS YOUR DAY POST. ONLY.

Next: Communicate. Forum Mafia is no different from anyotherkindofmafia because it holds its core concept in communication. You talk: question someone else to usually start a conversation, banter a bit, prod, poke and talk. The receiver does the same, speaking in what s/he believes, and the cycle goes on.

The most effective town strategy IMO, is to post with pertinent information to the game you're playing in. To question with an open-mind, and to attempt approaches to the scenario in other perceptions or viewpoints than yours. Because in looking at a situation in a holistic manner-one can see how both the receiver responds, and those they talk to react.

The biggest failure I mostly see are people acting on impulse. While this is thoroughly subjective--emotions are a ready concoction to explode at any moment. Said person acting or posting 'sillylike' may be under many things (other than being scum), wherein I put forth personal discernment in order to get your ideas clear.
Which means: Communicate.

Everyone: Is there a time to use the FoS, if so, when?  What do you believe is the difference between an FoS and a vote, beyond the obvious?  Do you believe that the questions asked on day one can help find scum, and why?  Would you rather have a power role or a vanilla role, and why?

Tiruin does not use the FoS unless she deems the situation necessary.
Now here's a core part of my playstyle that ain't amorphous: I do not use the FoS commonly-but as a point to my statements.
The time depends on how you wish to use it--either as a marker for the public to see, as leverage against the player, or for general tracing. There is no suggested or efficient time to employ it-it is in how you use it that matters.
My idea on the vote and FoS are that they are both weapons: Imagine...err, the demoman from Team Fortress 2: He has a gun that shoots...sticky bombs that can be redacted. When you have a bomb on yourself, you either panic, or you panic subtly that it isn't shown. Meaning: Both are used to forward a point (and in the essence of scumhunting: finding out who the other people are without directly revealing that cheap tactic of 'O HEY I IS TOWNY' thing, in general).
Yeah D1 questions can help find scum--yet I repeat it is how you ask, then how you follow it up! Minor details within, I state this as a generality due to its obtuse nature.
I'd rather have a chocolate role, really. It tastes better. :I
Meaning: I have no preference for such kinds of roles being ability or without-those abilities which gives spice to the role are just tools to what your alignment is. And even then--well for me--there are personal principles which guide your actions.


So do you know more about me yet or was that not the intent of those questions?

PS: My style of teaching is much like the Finnish. I teach what to expect in (Forum Mafia) life. Hands-on.

[Tiruin]

TDS

Everyone: What is your favorite subject in Mafia? Favorite notion to talk about?
What do you not understand about Forum Mafia? What about your least favorite notion?

Favorite subject: Rules for a non-standard mafia game. It's fun figuring them out!
Favorite notion: People playing well. It's fun if people try to do their best and talk a lot (as opposed to lurking, which slows down the game and makes it not very fun because nothing is happening).
Something I don't understand: Why I have so much trouble making it to Day 3. Seriously, I get lynched as scum and nightkilled during Night 1/mislynched as town.
Least favorite notion: Powerless civilians. I find it annoying to have no abilities and so I like power role-heavy games like Paranormal. It's almost as bad as lurking, but other people have said quiet a bit about that.

A runner up to my least favorite notion is Vigilante-type roles who target random people every night. Random killing is likely to just kill more Town than the one that the scum already kill.

So what does the role give to the player?

Next: Why more town? You seem to be basing this 'random' stuff and the result onto statistics, hm?
How will you judge a claimed Vigilante like that?

Solymr

Questions first:
4maskwolf:
I haven't used FoS, but I guess it's useful for stating that you're suspicious of one or more people without voting and risking an unwanted lynch.
Questions on Day1 are useful if they make someone nervous or paranoid. Usually means that they're scum
And I like power roles because I want to feel special :3

Graknorke:
Lynches on Day1 aren't usually successful, but they give valuable information. I'm not completely sure, but lynching LARD wouldn't feel like a bad move because every time he posts he seems more suspicious.
As for the NK, I have no idea. TDS looks like the Kenny around here who never gets to Day2.

And reads:
4maskwolf: much activity and hunting. Most likely to be town.
Graknorke: also very active. Another good contender for town.
Mastahcheese: isn't asking too many questions but doesn't seem too suspicious.
TDS: quite active. Probable town.
DP: seems like he's trying to avoid answering certain questions and doesn't make himself clear. Slight scum.
LARD: pretty much everything he says points to scum.
The ICs I'll wait until Day2 to get a good read.

And about the NK and such, why not ask the pros?
For the ICs: if you were scum and people told you who they think that's going to get killed, what would you do?
I personally think that scum could use that info to get the town into a massive WIFOM and drive everyone nuts.

Query on them reads again: Why do you give a presumably 'good' read on the rest-and not on the ICs?
Is there a barrier between them and us?

Now for the IC-question: I would judge them as their opinion and go with what me (and/or my buddy) planned to kill.
Because in that situation, I'd be contending with either the Jailkeeper or the Cop, in this setting--in any kind of scenario, that method is the least likely for me to go by, yet it is possible for anyone to do so, depending on the situation. (Just that doing such, and then probably remarking on said situation would be suspicious as people would sooner or later begin matching links as a form of backtracking)

And about the NK and such, why not ask the pros?

...? Pros?

[Tiruin]

LARD
On this note:

Ok. I'm pretty sure we already established that that first point only lead to a dead end (wifom) so it is irrelevant.

No, we haven't. We haven't established that the point is in exacts that the mafia even know you exist yet you word it as if they already know who you are. This is the context. Now to the point you address to 4mask-it seems more of a benign 'situational assessment' type question to get to know how others act as.
On how it could only be used by mafia is something that intrigues my curiosity-you state that out but not how. I'd like to know more about why it is so specific, thanks.
On how the mafia would not assume--could you dictate how this works to me?

And on the last: I was being snarky.

Everyone  Ambiguous answers, are they scummy?

Like the one I give you now?

> I wanted to see your response to that.
On the reason behind it? It depends on what the question was. If you asked me what color my underwear is and I'd reply a '...', how would that be scummy?
Things like these kinds of questions-to-all, while exaggerated in my example above, need to have their wording put out in such a way that you'd be gaining something from the other person.
Because they could be scummy but not-actually-scummy for a number of reasons: Language barrier, misconception of the question, misreading of the question, differing viewpoint...
The list is too vast to pinpoint them.
So for me? No they aren't scummy. It depends on the question.

[LARD]

TheDarkStar

Lard: I want a response to this still:

To clarify why I think you are scummy:

1. You claim that your vote was not intended as a lynch despite earlier evidence. This seems to be there more as a cover-up of a mistake.

2. Town doesn't find targets based on randomly choosing. If someone behaves scummily, hunt them down for it. Town doesn't want random people dead, they want specific people (the people they think are scum) dead. Your choice seems random, especially since you did not back it up at all. You had an excuse, but I expect a good reason once you can post again.

I'm tempted to change my vote off you because of things that have been happening, but I want to see your response to my comments first.

1. I still claim that my vote was not intended as a lynch. I thought I was on to something for a bit there because 4mask hadn't responded well to my accusations, but my accusations were a ludicrous pressure tactic so there was nothing to respond to.  I don't know why that makes it seem like a cover up.

2. I thought that was the point of RVS, randomly choose and follow up on anything and see what shows up. My little threat on Graknorke was a mistake once I looked back over what he had said.



Tiruin I thought we were past this one.

LARD
On this note:

Ok. I'm pretty sure we already established that that first point only lead to a dead end (wifom) so it is irrelevant.

No, we haven't. We haven't established that the point is in exacts that the mafia even know you exist yet you word it as if they already know who you are. This is the context. Now to the point you address to 4mask-it seems more of a benign 'situational assessment' type question to get to know how others act as.
On how it could only be used by mafia is something that intrigues my curiosity-you state that out but not how. I'd like to know more about why it is so specific, thanks.
On how the mafia would not assume--could you dictate how this works to me?

And on the last: I was being snarky.

Everyone  Ambiguous answers, are they scummy?

Like the one I give you now?

> I wanted to see your response to that.
On the reason behind it? It depends on what the question was. If you asked me what color my underwear is and I'd reply a '...', how would that be scummy?
Things like these kinds of questions-to-all, while exaggerated in my example above, need to have their wording put out in such a way that you'd be gaining something from the other person.
Because they could be scummy but not-actually-scummy for a number of reasons: Language barrier, misconception of the question, misreading of the question, differing viewpoint...
The list is too vast to pinpoint them.
So for me? No they aren't scummy. It depends on the question.

1. The point was that if the mafia knew what everybody would do if they were jailkeeper and the cop had claimed and was proven right. They could use that information to their advantage. The information is not that useful for the mafia because they don't know if there is a jailkeeper, unless they attacked and didn't get a kill. The mafia could then use their guesses as to who was the jailkeeper and that person's reply to the question in question to decide who to nk in the circumstances.  The point is that the info gained from the question is of no value to the village, because they can't do anything with it but it has a minute amount of value to the mafia. It was a lousy piece of evidence and that is the point I am trying to make. It was an RVS scumhunt. That was all.

2. The ambiguous answer question was just me asking for a little newb help.

LARD

As for my reads,
Lard: poor, misunderstood, sad, pathetic lump at the bottom of dogpile. (just kidding)
Tiruin: Quite scummy. Voted me on first post with very little explanation. Perhaps that means she is dropping hints in order not to destroy us too bad, maybe she is busy and under strain, or maybe just a pressure vote. Pressure vote seems unlikely do to lack of reasons.
Graknorke: I don't have a very good read on him because he's more experienced, seems to be legitimately fishing very hard for information though. I'm sorry about you needing to pressure me. town lean, and I'm not just saying that to get you on my side.
TDS:
Solymr You are not fishing very hard for information, seem unacceptably ambiguous,

LARD: pretty much everything he says points to scum.

, and above reasons.
TheDarkStar: voted with not that much reasoning other than what other people had said. Med scum lean.

On those you find scummy--can you back them up with a little context? As in, I see accusations, but I want to see the exacts.
Point being: There are more variants of who you find scummy--yet those are more on who voted you out of the general audience.
And the reads on others?

Scum reads:
Solymr: He pointed the FoS at me and seems unwilling to vote me, perhaps scared of joining a dogpile. (which doesn't exist anymore, thanks)
Tiruin: I didn't find your answer to my accusation of not giving a reason for voting me, sorry if I just missed it.  If you were scum, you might try to go easy on us a bit by accusing the easy target right away. I don't have as good a read on you because you're an experienced player.
TDS I don't have that much on him, but he seems to non commiting
I am the most opinionated on the ones who have accused me because it was a bit of a dogpile, and we got to see who responded to it. As for the ones who haven't had that much to do with it:
MastahcheeseGenuinely fishing for info, hasn't done anything terrible yet, and hasn't got any telling information either.
4maskwolf Answered to my earlier pressure with tact, charm and reason. He seems to be fine.

All the others I have not been able to get that much from their posts.

This will likely be my last post before day end (if we don't extend). I'd rather you lynch me than have a no-lynch, but I think if we could lynch Solymr instead of me that would be even better.

[Graknorke]

My last post ended kind of quickly, sorry about that. I wrote it in the morning before I left the house.

Anyway, in the light of both Tiruin and LARD needing more time, I'm going to back the extension.

And thus I ask this: Do you fear the more experienced person? Why or why not?
Next: Are you more likely to target the experienced person with an: inspect, block or protect? Why or why not? You may pick any or all of the choices.

This question is to see if there is any discrepancy between personal value attached to certain terms that people deem important.

Yes, I fear the more experienced people. They have enough experience in these kinds of things that they could argue their own way better than others, which is problematic if they are scum, and even if not scum they have the power to steer the game how they want. That's reason enough to be concerned.
I would be more likely to target the experienced player with an inspect so that I know for certain what alignment they are so I can know what to be looking out for from them and how wary to be of any manipulation. Blocking and protecting though I don't think would be affected, because that's not something that is based on how much you can tell about a person, it's how their interactions with other people are.

LARD

Solymr: He pointed the FoS at me and seems unwilling to vote me, perhaps scared of joining a dogpile. (which doesn't exist anymore, thanks)
Tiruin: I didn't find your answer to my accusation of not giving a reason for voting me, sorry if I just missed it.  If you were scum, you might try to go easy on us a bit by accusing the easy target right away. I don't have as good a read on you because you're an experienced player.
TDS I don't have that much on him, but he seems to non commiting
I am the most opinionated on the ones who have accused me because it was a bit of a dogpile, and we got to see who responded to it. As for the ones who haven't had that much to do with it:
MastahcheeseGenuinely fishing for info, hasn't done anything terrible yet, and hasn't got any telling information either.
4maskwolf Answered to my earlier pressure with tact, charm and reason. He seems to be fine.

You'd best not be ignoring me on your scum reads just to try and get on my good side. I might not be voting for you anymore, but I'm not going to take something like that either. It looks bad on you too, so please don't.

[mastahcheese]

Graknorke

Why do you care about what I do or don't like?

saying something is well and truly useless if nobody listens.

why did you not answer my question?

Really?

I like how you trimmed your part of the post to imitate an answer, but the particular part to trim it to is the part I have already stated as being completely invalid. I'm going to listen. I have been listening. The fact that you are attempting to stall your responses for as long as possible does wonders to your attempt to convince me that you aren't scum.

You seem very easy to change your opinions of something, and very.. non-caring about it. Why do you not feel more of an investment toward your suspicions?

You're using that as an example? Because it wasn't founded on much to begin with. It was just musing about a possibility that got easily explained away by my lack of understanding of the standard course a game takes. Do you have a problem with people being wrong?

Because you're taking the attitude of someone who simply doesn't care about the things they perceive. Think about what you did from this perspective.
Scum: "That looks like something I could use to get someone accused with! I'll go after that."
Other player: "Actually that's something very common."
Scum: "Oh, well I better back off of this and act never it never happened to save face."
What you're trying to do is brush it off and sweep it under the rug, not explain that what you're trying to do is find scum, and was simply unaware of what constitutes scummy behavior. Yes, there is a difference. If you can't see that then you aren't looking as hard at it as you should be.
And no, I don't have a problem with people being wrong. If people were never wrong, they would never learn. And that's what this is for.
And why didn't you answer my question this time, either?

No, I'm not seeing how that's scummy. [1] You're saying I could keep trying to pressure somebody when there is literally nothing to go on?
And I didn't act like it never happened. That would be ridiculous, because it obviously did happen (it's recorded there in text, it's not like you couldn't go back and check). [2] It's just not important. I made a mistake because of my lack of experience.
And your question was not only a leading question, but I answered it fine. I explained to you why I changed my opinion in the answer you gave. [3] If you aren't satisfied with that, ask me about another one. To be honest, I don't think there is another.

[1] No, that is not what I'm saying. I'm saying that if you find some something suspicious, you shouldn't just be willing to cast that out at a moment's notice. Regardless of what is considered normal or not, if something sets off a bell, then you pursue it. If the only thing you ever went off of was what you believed to be fact, then what is even the point in talking?
[2] Everything is important! Whether it looks like it or not, it is! If it was just a simple mistake, then did you learn anything from it?
[3] This, is once again deflection. Rather then continuing the line the subject is on, you are attempting to change it. That is still a scum tactic.

And now you're starting to get passive-aggressive. And going off of a "vague accusation" is a very common reason to start pressuring someone, for your information. And if you want more focus, Graknorke, then tell me why I shouldn't believe you to be scum? Or for that matter, why you are once again questioning my methods of scum-hunting like you did here? I'm starting to doubt that excuse you gave to that.

That... is not scumhunting. That's just you telling us your feelings.
And your request is both ridiculous and nearly impossible. Everything I've posted is evidence that I'm not scum, considering that I've been asking and answering questions in the hopes of uncovering something scummy from someone. You can argue about the quality of them certainly, but you can't say I haven't been trying. Also, there's a reason why we have scumhunting rather than townproving. The burden of proof is on you to find something scummy on me, rather than on me to show you all of the non-scummy things I've done.

I'm sorry, how is what I said in any way just "telling you my feelings?" I never included my feeling into that in any way. What you're doing is called "deflection" which is trying to change the topic to something else entirely, probably in an attempt to incriminate me, in this case.
"And your request is both ridiculous and nearly impossible." Um, no, it's not. People have done this many times before, and very well, in many cases. Telling someone else that it "isn't your job" to prove their innocence, and blaming the other person, telling them to find the proof, is something that I've never heard from anyone that isn't town. Accusing the accuser is called OMGUS, whether a vote is attached or not.

Since when was saying that someone mentioned their feelings at attempt to incriminate someone? I can't find a way to read my post as even implying that you are scum. I'm just saying that asking me to prove my innocence doesn't really make sense, not only seeing as I'm biased, but apparently even a crime as heinous as making a mistake is a scumtell. So naturally I would miss things that you wouldn't.

The mentioning of feelings isn't an attempt at incrimination, trying to claim that I'm not scumhunting is, when I clearly have been by talking to you. So tell me then, which part of what I said in the above quote did you consider to be nothing but "feelings"? Since you failed to specify. Also since you appear to be under the belief that my request in an impossibility, how many games of Mafia have you read? Because my request is by no means at all an uncommon one, nor one that never gets answered.

Would you care to show us these "slip-ups" that you are so aware of? Or perhaps why you are loathe to have pressure applied to you?

Oh come now, I'd hope you would remember. After all, you're the one who pointed it out.

[2] Well at least now there is an attempt. I'm sorry, what is this "gaoler"? Asking questions regarding (what I assume to be a role) that aren't even in the game seem to be far less effective at finding scum, than my methods, which you are doubting. And when you are protected, you don't know that you are protected. You are completely unaware of such an event.

So your "slip up" in this case is simply a clerical error, or misunderstanding of the rules? That's not a "slip up" by Mafia terms, and you should know that.
And why did you, for the third time now in this post alone, not answer my question? In case you missed it, it was right after the one you did answer. "Or perhaps why you are loathe to have pressure applied to you?" <- Right here.

In the context I was using it, it's clear that by "slip-up" I meant mistake, since I applied it to townies. But of course, how could I forget that not understanding terminology properly is a scumtell right?
And that is a leading question, another from you. I'm not loathe to have pressure applied to me. It would just not be conducive to my ability to play and learn Mafia.

I'm sorry, I'm not quite understanding what you are meaning by "leading question", this is the second time you've used it, and I fail to grasp you are referencing with it.
Also, Really? " it's clear that by "slip-up" I meant mistake, since I applied it to townies" I actually went back and found the exact quote to show that it was in direct reference to scum!

So I take it from your answers that you'd dislike being scum, for the reason that you'd be bad at it? If you had to be scum, what do you think you'd find most interesting about it?

Not necessarily that I'd be bad at it. I've made a bunch of slip ups already without the added pressure of having to be an antagonist. But the extra pressure certainly wouldn't help.
The most interesting part I think would be the first and second day, where the scum are too outnumbered to swing a lynch vote and has to play smart to convince other people. That seems to be where the meat of basic scum gameplay is at.

I don't try to play the "well I did say 'without the added pressure of having to be an antagonist'" because guess what? Scum is fond of these little subtle hints of being town, to get suspicion away from them.

As with all of these "not answering my question"s you've been getting so excited over, with the first two (the third was actually a question I didn't answer) it seems like you just want a specific answer. When you get tired of this ridiculous song-and-dance, would you like to tell me what it is? Really, you've dug up a few things you don't like, demanded an explanation, then when you get the explanation you just ask for it again.

No, I'm not demanding re-explanations, I'm demanding that you stop dodging the questions! And I like how you repeated attempt to call all of my attempts to get anything out of you "ridiculous", I take it that you'd rather me simply back off? Leave you alone? Pretend it never happened?

Tiruin

Mastahcheese/Everybody

I'm loathe to post reads on IC's, due both to their experience, and the fact that they're here to help, so null for now.

I'd like everyone here to question your terminology and what you identify with it, first.
In any game-there will be people who are more experienced than you. There will be people less experienced than you.
And thus I ask this: [1] Do you fear the more experienced person? Why or why not?
Next: [2] Are you more likely to target the experienced person with an: inspect, block or protect? Why or why not? You may pick any or all of the choices.

This question is to see if there is any discrepancy between personal value attached to certain terms that people deem important.

[1] I don't fear them, but I respect them, and their ability to cover they're own scumtells, and root out those of others.
[2] If I don't have a better target, maybe, the answer to all three are the same. Overall, I try to view experienced people like everyone else, but IC's, I view a little differently because they are here to teach. For actual game-related abilities, however, I view them like everyone else.

[Jim Groovester]

Day 1 Continues...

[3] LARD: Graknorke, Tiruin, TheDarkStar
[1] darkpaladin109: Persus13
[1] Persus13: 4maskwolf
[1] Graknorke: mastahcheese
[1] Solymr: LARD


Day 1 will end Tuesday 12:00 PM MST in approximately 21 hours. Three votes have been cast for an extension. One more is required to extend the day to Wednesday 12:00 PM MST.

Solymr has requested a replacement.

[darkpaladin109]

I'm alright with extending if the other players need it.

[Tiruin]

LARD

Scum reads:
Solymr: He pointed the FoS at me and seems unwilling to vote me, perhaps scared of joining a dogpile. (which doesn't exist anymore, thanks)
Tiruin: I didn't find your answer to my accusation of not giving a reason for voting me, sorry if I just missed it.  If you were scum, you might try to go easy on us a bit by accusing the easy target right away. I don't have as good a read on you because you're an experienced player.
TDS I don't have that much on him, but he seems to non commiting
I am the most opinionated on the ones who have accused me because it was a bit of a dogpile, and we got to see who responded to it. As for the ones who haven't had that much to do with it:
MastahcheeseGenuinely fishing for info, hasn't done anything terrible yet, and hasn't got any telling information either.
4maskwolf Answered to my earlier pressure with tact, charm and reason. He seems to be fine.

All the others I have not been able to get that much from their posts.

This will likely be my last post before day end (if we don't extend). I'd rather you lynch me than have a no-lynch, but I think if we could lynch Solymr instead of me that would be even better.

I'll make this quick--the reason I didn't say my point on you was that I found you initially suspicious given the wording on your answer to 4mask earlier, in how you worded it. Much more of a pressure vote-I lacked insight in how you easily denounced that point without giving the reason behind why you did so.

On your scum reads: I see a sense of personalism there. Is there anything wrong in FoS'ing you?
Know that the vote is more sticking than not--due to that personalism I see. For what reason is there for you to suspect those even poking at you? Are you on the impression that, if your role is a townie, those attacking you would suffice suspicion?

PS: If I was scum, why would I go easy on y'all? Are not my methods conducive to teaching if I do such--then you could look back post-game to check? [more of a hypothetical, since I'll be answering this later but still.]

Next: Why Solymr? Primarily for those reasons in the post where you suspected him, maybe? Which I pretty much would like to see what are the reasons behind it?

Yeah sorry about not being active. I've got a first aid course this weekend and I wasn't expecting people to be so active on weekends.

I wish I could pressure-vote LARD a second time.

Come on LARD, what's keeping you? You promised that you'd at least OMGUS me, you really need to do something. You were active before.
Kind of the same with darkpaladin too. We could really do with more input from you.

So, it seems like LARD is way out ahead in terms of vote count.
Everyone, how comfortable do you feel with a lynch at this point?
I mean, I think LARD is scum, but at the same time it feels like he hasn't really responded properly to any accusations. I know that it's his fault for being slow or whatever, but I'd kind of like to see what he has to say. Maybe it could clear some things up, at least. 55 hours to go for that.

Sorry about the promise to OMGUS you, I looked over your posts and it doesn't look like you're scum to me.  Originally I had thought you were because you jumped on me so quickly. Sorry about my rash promise to come after you, it was just a defensive measure.

OMGUS has a negative connotation. Do not use it as anything in casual chatter. Why are you and he talking about these promises as of late? There are guarantees wherein you'd both be ending up doing something? (ie vote)

Tiruin I thought we were past this one.

Not much given our seemingly different viewpoints, or that you made a specific scenario out of a general one wherein you assume the Mafia knows your role.

1. The point was that if the mafia knew what everybody would do if they were jailkeeper and the cop had claimed and was proven right. They could use that information to their advantage. The information is not that useful for the mafia because they don't know if there is a jailkeeper, unless they attacked and didn't get a kill. The mafia could then use their guesses as to who was the jailkeeper and that person's reply to the question in question to decide who to nk in the circumstances.  The point is that the info gained from the question is of no value to the village, because they can't do anything with it but it has a minute amount of value to the mafia. It was a lousy piece of evidence and that is the point I am trying to make. It was an RVS scumhunt. That was all.

The Jailkeeper is a Town-only role. I fail to see how 'they' = 'mafia context'. Ever.
You did mention that the question was directly specified in the second person (You). Why are you going onto who they are, when they = Mafia?
Because the third sentence contradicts the first two. Information not useful for the Mafia when they know who the Jailkeeper is?
On the Orange portion: There'd only be a speculation that there will be a Jailkeeper! It isn't a proven scenario, and given how 4mask's question was, it was a situation in which you are the Jailkeeper and no, your existence is not proven to the Mafia!

@Purple: That hardly continues to follow my question on how this matters to be specifics in value to mafia or town. As if there's an ulterior motive behind it in how you say it is important to a single alignment. Why is the information gained of no value to the Town yet has value to the Mafia?

[Tiruin]

I'm alright with extending if the other players need it.

Day 1 Continues...

[3] LARD: Graknorke, Tiruin, TheDarkStar
[1] darkpaladin109: Persus13
[1] Persus13: 4maskwolf
[1] Graknorke: mastahcheese
[1] Solymr: LARD


Day 1 will end Tuesday 12:00 PM MST in approximately 21 hours. Three votes have been cast for an extension. One more is required to extend the day to Wednesday 12:00 PM MST.

Solymr has requested a replacement.

@Darkpaladin: Do you not think this indicates where the need is?
Jim: Could you mark who asked for an extension in your votecounts? Thanks!

[Graknorke]

Graknorke

Why do you care about what I do or don't like?

saying something is well and truly useless if nobody listens.

why did you not answer my question?

Really?

I like how you trimmed your part of the post to imitate an answer, but the particular part to trim it to is the part I have already stated as being completely invalid. I'm going to listen. I have been listening. The fact that you are attempting to stall your responses for as long as possible does wonders to your attempt to convince me that you aren't scum.

That is the answer I gave at the time. You can say that it's invalid all you want (ironically enough), but that doesn't change the fact that it was an answer.

No, I'm not seeing how that's scummy. [1] You're saying I could keep trying to pressure somebody when there is literally nothing to go on?
And I didn't act like it never happened. That would be ridiculous, because it obviously did happen (it's recorded there in text, it's not like you couldn't go back and check). [2] It's just not important. I made a mistake because of my lack of experience.
And your question was not only a leading question, but I answered it fine. I explained to you why I changed my opinion in the answer you gave. [3] If you aren't satisfied with that, ask me about another one. To be honest, I don't think there is another.

[1] No, that is not what I'm saying. I'm saying that if you find some something suspicious, you shouldn't just be willing to cast that out at a moment's notice. Regardless of what is considered normal or not, if something sets off a bell, then you pursue it. If the only thing you ever went off of was what you believed to be fact, then what is even the point in talking?
[2] Everything is important! Whether it looks like it or not, it is! If it was just a simple mistake, then did you learn anything from it?
[3] This, is once again deflection. Rather then continuing the line the subject is on, you are attempting to change it. That is still a scum tactic.

[1&2] At the time, I deemed it not worth following that set of questions, because it could so easily be explained away. If you don't agree then you can, but I decided that line of inquiry wouldn't actually turn up anything meaningful. I suppose that were I to be in that position again, I would try a related question rather than just stopping.
[3]No, I did mean the same subject. You said that I didn't place much weight in my suspicions and changed my mind often, and when I explained the example chosen, you said I hadn't answered your question. I was simply suggesting that you find another example of the same thing if you weren't satisfied with the explanation for that particular example.

I'm sorry, how is what I said in any way just "telling you my feelings?" I never included my feeling into that in any way. What you're doing is called "deflection" which is trying to change the topic to something else entirely, probably in an attempt to incriminate me, in this case.
"And your request is both ridiculous and nearly impossible." Um, no, it's not. People have done this many times before, and very well, in many cases. Telling someone else that it "isn't your job" to prove their innocence, and blaming the other person, telling them to find the proof, is something that I've never heard from anyone that isn't town. Accusing the accuser is called OMGUS, whether a vote is attached or not.

Since when was saying that someone mentioned their feelings at attempt to incriminate someone? I can't find a way to read my post as even implying that you are scum. I'm just saying that asking me to prove my innocence doesn't really make sense, not only seeing as I'm biased, but apparently even a crime as heinous as making a mistake is a scumtell. So naturally I would miss things that you wouldn't.

The mentioning of feelings isn't an attempt at incrimination, trying to claim that I'm not scumhunting is, when I clearly have been by talking to you. So tell me then, which part of what I said in the above quote did you consider to be nothing but "feelings"? Since you failed to specify. Also since you appear to be under the belief that my request in an impossibility, how many games of Mafia have you read? Because my request is by no means at all an uncommon one, nor one that never gets answered.

The part where you said "something is off about you". It didn't actually add anything other than making you sound like you had more than a couple of things I said and you didn't like. Like how a pigeon puffs out its chest, something insubstantial but it makes you look bigger anyway.
It well and truly is impossible to prove that I'm town. I could argue it, but there's no absolute proof. There wouldn't be much of a game if there was. And past that, I suppose I fell into that most criminal of acts of assuming what someone's response will be. Though I don't think my assumptions were entirely misplaced, given 4mask's earlier mention of your propensity for tunnel-vision.I find it hard to believe that you wouldn't take anything I said as a scum tell in some way. I'll elaborate on that later in the post.

Would you care to show us these "slip-ups" that you are so aware of? Or perhaps why you are loathe to have pressure applied to you?

Oh come now, I'd hope you would remember. After all, you're the one who pointed it out.

[2] Well at least now there is an attempt. I'm sorry, what is this "gaoler"? Asking questions regarding (what I assume to be a role) that aren't even in the game seem to be far less effective at finding scum, than my methods, which you are doubting. And when you are protected, you don't know that you are protected. You are completely unaware of such an event.

So your "slip up" in this case is simply a clerical error, or misunderstanding of the rules? That's not a "slip up" by Mafia terms, and you should know that.
And why did you, for the third time now in this post alone, not answer my question? In case you missed it, it was right after the one you did answer. "Or perhaps why you are loathe to have pressure applied to you?" <- Right here.

In the context I was using it, it's clear that by "slip-up" I meant mistake, since I applied it to townies. But of course, how could I forget that not understanding terminology properly is a scumtell right?
And that is a leading question, another from you. I'm not loathe to have pressure applied to me. It would just not be conducive to my ability to play and learn Mafia.

I'm sorry, I'm not quite understanding what you are meaning by "leading question", this is the second time you've used it, and I fail to grasp you are referencing with it.
Also, Really? " it's clear that by "slip-up" I meant mistake, since I applied it to townies" I actually went back and found the exact quote to show that it was in direct reference to scum!

So I take it from your answers that you'd dislike being scum, for the reason that you'd be bad at it? If you had to be scum, what do you think you'd find most interesting about it?

Not necessarily that I'd be bad at it. I've made a bunch of slip ups already without the added pressure of having to be an antagonist. But the extra pressure certainly wouldn't help.
The most interesting part I think would be the first and second day, where the scum are too outnumbered to swing a lynch vote and has to play smart to convince other people. That seems to be where the meat of basic scum gameplay is at.

I don't try to play the "well I did say 'without the added pressure of having to be an antagonist'" because guess what? Scum is fond of these little subtle hints of being town, to get suspicion away from them.

Firstly, that is just begging WIFOM. "I can tell you're scum because you're acting like you're town." That is thinking that

would really only serve to benefit scum through causing chaos and distrust and WIFOM.

What I said was the truth. If you are going to refuse to listen to the truth, then you're not going to get an answer you're happy with. You aren't going to get very far if whenever you hear something that isn't incriminating you just insist that really, deep down, it means I'm scum. And you do that with everything. "You did a scummy thing? SCUM! You didn't do a scummy thing? SCUM!" According to you I am simultaneously a bumbling scum who drops clues left and right, while simultaneously being subtle and lurking. You pick up on individual points, but never put them all into a whole. So come on then, if I'm scum, what's my game plan? My overarching MO? Or of course you could take the easy way out and say something like "Well it was your plan to look less suspicious by acting in different ways."
A leading question is one that expects a certain answer, such as something that starts with, "Don't you think". More context relevant would be "How/why did you do..." because it assumes that you did do that thing at all. In this case it was "Why are you loathe to have pressure applied to you?"

As with all of these "not answering my question"s you've been getting so excited over, with the first two (the third was actually a question I didn't answer) it seems like you just want a specific answer. When you get tired of this ridiculous song-and-dance, would you like to tell me what it is? Really, you've dug up a few things you don't like, demanded an explanation, then when you get the explanation you just ask for it again.

No, I'm not demanding re-explanations, I'm demanding that you stop dodging the questions! And I like how you repeated attempt to call all of my attempts to get anything out of you "ridiculous", I take it that you'd rather me simply back off? Leave you alone? Pretend it never happened?

I would like you to acknowledge that I have answered the questions, regardless of whether or not you're pleased with what the answers are. At least be honest about it rather than just repeatedly saying that I'm dodging the questions.

[Graknorke]

Hey Darkpaladin109, I don't think we ever did get to hear your reads on other players? Would you share those with us please.

OMGUS has a negative connotation. Do not use it as anything in casual chatter. Why are you and he talking about these promises as of late? There are guarantees wherein you'd both be ending up doing something? (ie vote)

I know that it has a negative connotation. But he really did promise to OMGUS me shortly after I voted him.

I have to go now, but I'll tell you now that Graknorke is my next target.

[Tiruin]

Hey Darkpaladin109, I don't think we ever did get to hear your reads on other players? Would you share those with us please.

OMGUS has a negative connotation. Do not use it as anything in casual chatter. Why are you and he talking about these promises as of late? There are guarantees wherein you'd both be ending up doing something? (ie vote)

I know that it has a negative connotation. But he really did promise to OMGUS me shortly after I voted him.

I have to go now, but I'll tell you now that Graknorke is my next target.

...That doesn't necessarily mean OMGUS. Saying who his next target is, means that he has some sort of suspicion on said target.
Did you inquire about the matter with him?