Print

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

[hector13]

fillipk

Sorry for ignoring all my other questions, I saw them but I was being lazy about it, didn't mean to pull a Roo you see.

However I should be asleep so I'll get to them by Monday.

I have a *few* words to say to heydude too, but PFP probably until Monday so they will have to wait.

Promises noted.


heydude

Spoiler: Spoiler 'cause big (click to show/hide)

A veritable plethora of information!

Also, question for heydude: Do you think you may be reading a little too much into one of the first posts fillipk made in the game, especially using it as a basis for wanting to lynch him?

This is where most people are getting confused.

What makes you think people are confused? Because they don't agree with you?

When I started voting for fillipk, it was merely a justified RVS.

False. When a vote is justified, however strong the reason, it is not an RVS vote. I think you meant it was a pressure vote to draw out more information.

There were several legitimate reasons why fillipk could have voted for Roo. I just wanted to see which one he would give me. Unfortunately, fillipk gave a confusing answer in the form of the bolded sentence and from then on, he began to dig himself into a ditch.

So... you think he's scum because he gave a confusing answer..? Given what you say later, perhaps it's because he gave an answer you didn't expect?

As a matter of fact, I have a question for you. hector13 what is inadequate about my reasoning for saying that fillipk is mafia (not the one I just gave you, the one in my previous post)? Why have I not convinced you?

The fact that your interpretation of what fillipk said is not the only interpretation that can be drawn.

Also also, perhaps you'd like to consider your own question to fillipk? Not necessarily answer it just... think about it.

How does voting for Roo help you determine if he engages troll mode or legit mode?

I understand what you mean about that, but it is more important to hear fillipk's answer. He was the one who created the circumstances that lead to the question in the first place.

And I have tried to internally answer my questions to fillipk for him. The answers he gives are always something unexpected that I never thought of so I find it extra important for him to answer the question himself. If I give fillipk my hypothetical answers, then he is more likely to use one of those rather than give the honest one.

I don't think you do understand, and also the fact fillipk always gives an answer you don't expect tells me you're not considering your question well enough.

I don't want you to answer the question, as I mentioned, but just think about the answers thoroughly. More specifically, the motivation fillipk has that might be shown in any particular answer. Does it feel more towny, scummy or perhaps both?

Bonus points for noticing you're focusing on fillipk too much.

Moonlit

Hector with what heydude just quoted, do you still think Tawa is scum?

My feelings are unchanged.


Hazard

DA said it well enough, so have 'nother quoted question. (and a lovely alliteration!)

Hazard:

PFT(you get it?)

So the main thing is RVS votes don't matter until the person seriously makes a case that the guy is scum, until then try not to bandwagon or take it too seriously.

Which means... roo should be ignored d1. If you want to kill lynch him, do it at d2.

Why?

Unless he says something crazy other than simple votes(votes include obv/really scum are simple votes too), lynch at d2.

Why would you want to lynch him on day 2 if he wasn't doing anything that warranted him getting lynched during day 1?

jwoodward

Whoa, sorry, got the prod. What's going on?

(BTW, not a lurker. Someone with a RL is more like it.)

Indeed. Perhaps you'd like to offer opinions on what's happening, anyway?


I would like to note the dichotomy between the ICs in regards to self-preservation:

1: For town players, your life is virtually worthless. You do not win by being alive at the end of the game, you win by getting the scum team lynched. Don't be put off pressuring someone just because you think it will draw attention to yourself as well. Even in the worst case scenario, you die but the town has more information to work with and will take your suspicions into account.

Note: Looking out for yourself is not a scumtell. Most, if not all, players are interested in their own well-being, along with that of their faction.

I'd also disagree with Tawa on the usefulness of RVS, but the intertia involved from a gameplay standpoint can be quite challenging to overcome. Standing by watching is unlikely to aid that, however...

[Tawa]

I'm speaking from my own experience, and Deus is speaking from his. I'm rather more cautious in my playstyle as both scum and town; I like playing Mafia more than I like watching other people play Mafia, so I try not to draw scumteam attention to myself and I try not to get lynched. I'm not the only guy who plays this way, trust me.

As for RVS, in all of my experiences, I've found that practically nobody ever lynches scum during RVS because there is absolutely no information at that point, and I theorize that scumteams sometimes try to prolong RVS because of this. I'll probably be more active now that things are picking up, though.

[heydude6]

Also, question for heydude: Do you think you may be reading a little too much into one of the first posts fillipk made in the game, especially using it as a basis for wanting to lynch him?

This is where most people are getting confused.

What makes you think people are confused? Because they don't agree with you?

No Hector, it's not that. It's because questions like the above are based on the premise that I saw fillipk voting for Roo and then immediately decided that he needed to be lynched. That premise is false though. What happened is that I asked fillipk some questions that were inspired by the first post and he gave some suspicious answers. A few answers later and only then did I get convinced that fillpik is mafia.

A more aprpriate question you should have asked to prove that you weren't confused is:

"Do you think you may be reading a little too much into the 3rd-5th posts fillipk made in the game, especially using it as a basis for wanting to lynch him?"

And the answer I'll give you for that is honestly, I don't know. It could be just a big understanding, but what I do know is this. Mafia is a game entirely about analysis. You're supposed to look for the subtle clues in your opponents in order to discover their identity and possibly give them a lynching. In a game like this, underanalysis is much worse than overanalysis, because while underanalysis gives you no information, overanalysis gives several gems that you may have to polish a bit before they reveal their true shine. And even if I'm wrong, no harm is done. Unless my overanalysis contains some insight that appeals to the masses. It probably isn't gonna get someone lynched. I'm only one vote among 7.

When I started voting for fillipk, it was merely a justified RVS.

False. When a vote is justified, however strong the reason, it is not an RVS vote. I think you meant it was a pressure vote to draw out more information.

Yeah, pressure vote is probably the correct word for it.

There were several legitimate reasons why fillipk could have voted for Roo. I just wanted to see which one he would give me. Unfortunately, fillipk gave a confusing answer in the form of the bolded sentence and from then on, he began to dig himself into a ditch.

So... you think he's scum because he gave a confusing answer..? Given what you say later, perhaps it's because he gave an answer you didn't expect?

See below for my response to that.

As a matter of fact, I have a question for you. hector13 what is inadequate about my reasoning for saying that fillipk is mafia (not the one I just gave you, the one in my previous post)? Why have I not convinced you?

The fact that your interpretation of what fillipk said is not the only interpretation that can be drawn.

Ok, I can understand that.

Also also, perhaps you'd like to consider your own question to fillipk? Not necessarily answer it just... think about it.

How does voting for Roo help you determine if he engages troll mode or legit mode?

I understand what you mean about that, but it is more important to hear fillipk's answer. He was the one who created the circumstances that lead to the question in the first place.

And I have tried to internally answer my questions to fillipk for him. The answers he gives are always something unexpected that I never thought of so I find it extra important for him to answer the question himself. If I give fillipk my hypothetical answers, then he is more likely to use one of those rather than give the honest one.

I don't think you do understand, and also the fact fillipk always gives an answer you don't expect tells me you're not considering your question well enough.

I don't want you to answer the question, as I mentioned, but just think about the answers thoroughly. More specifically, the motivation fillipk has that might be shown in any particular answer. Does it feel more towny, scummy or perhaps both?

I don't think you do understand, and also the fact fillipk always gives an answer you don't expect tells me you're not considering your question well enough.

Hector13, let me walk you through all of the questions I asked filllipk and show you why I kept getting surprised. I don't believe I wasn't thinking about the question hard enough.

Let's start with the first question:

Fillipk why did you target a player who has been offline for the duration of the entire game?!

There were several answers to that question I could think of (for example, he just happened to be the player chosen by the randomness of the RVS), but the "correct" answer was because of the reputation that player had in previous mafia games. How am I supposed to predict that? I didn't watch any mafia games that player participated in so how am I supposed to come up with the idea that he might be a troll.

Now the second question, about clarification of the bolded sentence:

Because Roo has a reputation which has held true all of the games he's played, I want to know which Roo we have with us right now.

This sentence in bold is confusing. What exactly are you trying to know? If Roo is gonna start trolling this game? His alignment? If the former were the case, then I fail to understand how voting to get him lynched helps you accomplish that goal. As a matter of fact, lynching him will prevent you from knowing if he would have trolled this game.

Now trying to figure out his alignment makes more sense. He either flips town or scum and we get this:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

It must suck playing a game like mafia where the guy who is supposed to be your ally is causing chaos and inadvertently helping the enemy. Eventually, in fear of the RNG having made him the scum you have to waste a lynch to make sure he isn't, no competent mafia would night kill such a guy.

over with as soon as possible. Thereby, giving a valid reason for wanting to kill him, and supporting the idea that this sentence was an expression of a desire to lynch him.

In the very question that I asked him, I considered the possibility of this being because he wants to figure out if Roo is trolling or not, and then decided that it wouldn't really make sense.

Then Roo answers:

Roo has too modes, the weird I do what I want and irritate everyone mode, and the play normally mode, I want to know which one is playing with us before I make an alignment judgement on anyone else.  And you are over analyzing it its just an RVS but it could turn real, depends on how Roo responds.

He gives the exact answer that I had disproven to myself (and shown my disproving to the public). In my opinion, in a situation like this, the burden of proof rests on him now. I feel like I've done enough. I will give him some credit though. If he was mafia, then why would he give that answer rather than the easy one that probably would have deflected my suspicion from him. Hmmmm...

I'm now going to admit that after this, I do stop considering the question and I simply ask him:

How does voting for Roo help you determine if he engages troll mode or legit mode?

just interested in hearing what answer I can get.

Roo them manages break new ground in the surprise departement.

Eh, the only reason why I haven't unvoted yet is because with very the little evidence we do have, fillipk is the most likely person to be scum. It's perfectly possible that this is all just a misunderstanding but until a more likely candidate arrives, my vote is the same.

Let me get one thing straight, the only reason you are voting for me is because you misinterpreted what I said and thought I actually meant my vote, and you admit this yet you are still voting for me.  Unvote,

Heydude6 you admitted that you see TheMoonlitShadow as suspicious because he bandwagon'd me for the exact same reasons you did, a vote, a vote in the first post of the game, where there is no possible way for me to know anything about anyone at all, what evidence do you have besides a misunderstanding of my posts.

He doesn't even try to answer my question and instead attacks me with faulty logic that at best is the confusion that I talked about at the top, and at worse is deliberate misdirection. He also cast a vote that many people wouldn't hesitate to call an OMGUS.

After addressing the faulty logic, I then ask the question again and he answered with this:

heydude, you mentioned in your first posts to fillipk that his behaviour in voting for roo was more bloodthirsty than it needed to be in comparison to other people. No one else is voting for roo, so what did you mean by that?

First answer this.

Second:  I counter your question with my own question, how does voting someone random in your first post help find scum, by seeing how people react and you have jumped on me for no reason in particular with moonlit shadow backing you up, just because I voted first doesn't make me anymore bloodthirsty then anyone else until I actually mean my vote, and yes I mean my vote on you.

Using more of that faulty logic I mentioned earlier as well as asking a question that shows he wasn't reading one of my posts properly. I don't want to waste more space so I'll give you a link to my response.

Anyway, I think I'm done with my walkthrough. I finally did ponder my final question myself and I came up with two answers, one scum and one town. It took a lot of hard work to come up with these answers and they aren't perfect but for the life of me I can't come up with any more ideas.

[fillipk]

Lets do the question thing first

fillipk: How do you mind?

Everyone: Is it a bad idea i was saying 'is it a bad idea' on the 3 last questions(or 4 or 5, depending on your mind)?
Do you know what i am talking about the 'how do you mind' question at fillipk and roo? (hint: It's not the exact same question. It's 'about' a different thing.)

I don't know what you mean by that question so I was kinda ignoring it, and I don't want to dictate on how you ask your questions and I don't think that it's a bad idea.  No idea about the second part though.

Random Voting Stage, and I'm going to save you a lot of time, everyone is going to claim town, but there will probably be a lot of sarcasm. 

Speaking of which; great pep talk IC, I feel so prepared to go out and fine scum knowing my life is meaningless even though that statement is completely true.  Deus if you could pick one non-IC person to be a scum buddy who would it be.

Here is the question you missed Deus, sorry I forgot to bold your name.

[TheDarkStar]

The day will end in 1.5 hours. Unfortunately, I will not be able to post under a few hours later. Please remember to be quiet after the day ends.

[fillipk]

Now for the mega post

Roo what crazy gambit are you planning to pull this time?

This is the question everyone is getting on me about, third post in the game, 1 and-a-half hours into the game.

Why not pick on jwoodward48df?

Although I haven't figured out how to use lurkertraker yet, I checked his account at it's quite clear that he is lurking though. A bit suspicious, especially since he hasn't posted within the 2 days the game has been up.

Roo isn't a lurker, he has been offline before the game even began. Wait a minute...

Fillipk why did you target a player who has been offline for the duration of the entire game?!

One day later heydude asks me this question which in itself is sort of okay, it shows he takes the time to look at how long people have been offline, but not at what time a post was submitted, and before you go and say I could have changed my vote to someone else allow me to quote you.

Eh, the only reason why I haven't unvoted yet is because with very the little evidence we do have, fillipk is the most likely person to be scum. It's perfectly possible that this is all just a misunderstanding but until a more likely candidate arrives, my vote is the same.

kinda hypocritical when you look at it.  However I haven't even gotten to the meat of your argument yet, my "infamous bolded sentence."

Because Roo has a reputation which has held true all of the games he's played, I want to know which Roo we have with us right now.

This sentence in bold is confusing. What exactly are you trying to know? If Roo is gonna start trolling this game? His alignment? If the former were the case, then I fail to understand how voting to get him lynched helps you accomplish that goal. As a matter of fact, lynching him will prevent you from knowing if he would have trolled this game.

Looking at it I can see where you get a little confused, I was intentionally being unclear there to keep Roo from messing with my reads of him and the silly thing is this whole argument never would have happened if Roo had just posted yet he didn't so I'm left with some obtuse statements about Roo that could be interpreted as you said except for one thing, punctuation, or lack of.

Because Roo has a reputation which has held true all of the games he's played, I want to know which Roo we have with us right now.

((notice the bolded sentence))

In order to explain why I felt his post was bloodthirsty, first of all I interpreted the bolded sentence as meaning that he wanted to know Roo's alignment (by lynching him for example). The "right now" part also contributed to the overall bloodthirsty feel, giving the impression of impatience. And finally, the tone I read it in was the tone that would require the sentence to end in an explanation mark. Perhaps it was a mistake to read it that way but it's very difficult to figure out what the tone of a sentence is just through words.

Anyway, it was just a feeling that I acted on and then I got rewarded with some contradictions.

In this quote you argue that the right now made the sentence feel bloodthirsty, yet there is no comma between us and right now which means the right now is talking about a specific time, and it isn't being used as a command, also you read the sentence with extra punctuation which is a huuuuge no no in mafia.  If you read the sentence as it is written it read as I have a desire to know how Roo is acting at this given moment. This piece of evidence right here is the biggest proof you are constructing a case on me, but it's definitely not the only one for example your "contradictions"

Previously, you said that:

Roo has too modes, the weird I do what I want and irritate everyone mode, and the play normally mode, I want to know which one is playing with us before I make an alignment judgement on anyone else.  And you are over analyzing it its just an RVS but it could turn real, depends on how Roo responds.

But this contradiction still exists.

What exactly are you trying to know? If Roo is gonna start trolling this game? His alignment? If the former were the case, then I fail to understand how voting to get him lynched helps you accomplish that goal. As a matter of fact, lynching him will prevent you from knowing if he would have trolled this game.

First a post by me and a post by you does not make a contradiction by me, it makes an argument or a misunderstanding.  Second your post is answered by my post, where I clearly state I wanted to know which mode Roo was using in this game.  Third, there are so many things wrong with the second and third part of your quote that I really don't know where to begin, first, one vote 90 minutes into the game doesn't mean I want him lynched, it means I want activity which would help me know if he was trolling the game, (which means he is usually town) or he is playing more conservatively and not drawing attention to himself (which has indicated a scummy Roo) which is actually what I was going for.

Spoiler: another discrepancy (click to show/hide)

Second:  I counter your question with my own question, how does voting someone random in your first post help find scum,

You did not vote for someone random, you voted for Roo for a specific reason that you gave to me:[/quote]Your right I worded that badly, if I had asked how does voting someone in the RVS stage in your first post help you find scum, and then answer it in the way I did it would have been better sorry for that.  However nitpicking out a badly worded question isn't indicative of scum as your making it out to be.

Roo has too modes, the weird I do what I want and irritate everyone mode, and the play normally mode, I want to know which one is playing with us before I make an alignment judgement on anyone else.

Perhaps that reason might be false, but I find it unfair that you would claim that your vote against Roo was completely random when a reason is so blatantly out in the open.

Lets be honest, did I ever claim my vote was completely random, no.  I asked you a question about a similar situation that had ties to my situation but never did I say this is what I did, because it isn't I had a specific reason for voting Roo that is null and void now since he was replaced.

Anyway, let's continue with what I was saying. The reason why that last post made me believe you were mafia was because of a problem with the idea that voting for Roo would help you determine if he would play legitimately or troll. A problem I pointed out in that last post!

What exactly are you trying to know? If Roo is gonna start trolling this game? His alignment? If the former were the case, then I fail to understand how voting to get him lynched helps you accomplish that goal. As a matter of fact, lynching him will prevent you from knowing if he would have trolled this game.

Eventually after a good night's sleep, I voiced my concerns to the public and asked you this question

How does voting for Roo help you determine if he engages troll mode or legit mode?

And now, so far, I have asked you this question twice, and you still refuse to give me a proper answer. Instead, you decided to vote against me and try to convince people that I'm the mafia.

Well I answered all your concerns in the above post now on to why I think your mafia.
#1. You blatantly constructed a case on me by reading and interpreting my statements with extra punctuation which I can kind of excuse because this is your first game, I mean you explained how you misinterpreted my statements and you get props for noticing you were only focusing me however
#2.

Why not pick on jwoodward48df?

Although I haven't figured out how to use lurkertraker yet, I checked his account at it's quite clear that he is lurking though. A bit suspicious, especially since he hasn't posted within the 2 days the game has been up.

Roo isn't a lurker, he has been offline before the game even began. Wait a minute...

Fillipk why did you target a player who has been offline for the duration of the entire game?!

You defended Roo, not just in voting me but providing everyone with the information that he isn't a lurker which is fine if people were calling him out for lurking, but they weren't which is more then a little bit suspicious.  This is expanded on by the fact that your attitude on my case was changed when Roo was replaced, you backed off and I had given no reason for you to back off if you kept interpreting things as you were.  That strikes me as really suspicious, I want to claim that the scum team is Hector, Heydude but that just leads to a lot of WIFOM which I don't want so I will just stick with heydude for now.

[fillipk]

Now for the mega post

Roo what crazy gambit are you planning to pull this time?

This is the question everyone is getting on me about, third post in the game, 1 and-a-half hours into the game.

Why not pick on jwoodward48df?

Although I haven't figured out how to use lurkertraker yet, I checked his account at it's quite clear that he is lurking though. A bit suspicious, especially since he hasn't posted within the 2 days the game has been up.

Roo isn't a lurker, he has been offline before the game even began. Wait a minute...

Fillipk why did you target a player who has been offline for the duration of the entire game?!

One day later heydude asks me this question which in itself is sort of okay, it shows he takes the time to look at how long people have been offline, but not at what time a post was submitted, and before you go and say I could have changed my vote to someone else allow me to quote you.

Eh, the only reason why I haven't unvoted yet is because with very the little evidence we do have, fillipk is the most likely person to be scum. It's perfectly possible that this is all just a misunderstanding but until a more likely candidate arrives, my vote is the same.

kinda hypocritical when you look at it.  However I haven't even gotten to the meat of your argument yet, my "infamous bolded sentence."

Because Roo has a reputation which has held true all of the games he's played, I want to know which Roo we have with us right now.

This sentence in bold is confusing. What exactly are you trying to know? If Roo is gonna start trolling this game? His alignment? If the former were the case, then I fail to understand how voting to get him lynched helps you accomplish that goal. As a matter of fact, lynching him will prevent you from knowing if he would have trolled this game.

Looking at it I can see where you get a little confused, I was intentionally being unclear there to keep Roo from messing with my reads of him and the silly thing is this whole argument never would have happened if Roo had just posted yet he didn't so I'm left with some obtuse statements about Roo that could be interpreted as you said except for one thing, punctuation, or lack of.

Because Roo has a reputation which has held true all of the games he's played, I want to know which Roo we have with us right now.

((notice the bolded sentence))

In order to explain why I felt his post was bloodthirsty, first of all I interpreted the bolded sentence as meaning that he wanted to know Roo's alignment (by lynching him for example). The "right now" part also contributed to the overall bloodthirsty feel, giving the impression of impatience. And finally, the tone I read it in was the tone that would require the sentence to end in an explanation mark. Perhaps it was a mistake to read it that way but it's very difficult to figure out what the tone of a sentence is just through words.

Anyway, it was just a feeling that I acted on and then I got rewarded with some contradictions.

In this quote you argue that the right now made the sentence feel bloodthirsty, yet there is no comma between us and right now which means the right now is talking about a specific time, and it isn't being used as a command, also you read the sentence with extra punctuation which is a huuuuge no no in mafia.  If you read the sentence as it is written it read as I have a desire to know how Roo is acting at this given moment. This piece of evidence right here is the biggest proof you are constructing a case on me, but it's definitely not the only one for example your "contradictions"

Previously, you said that:

Roo has too modes, the weird I do what I want and irritate everyone mode, and the play normally mode, I want to know which one is playing with us before I make an alignment judgement on anyone else.  And you are over analyzing it its just an RVS but it could turn real, depends on how Roo responds.

But this contradiction still exists.

What exactly are you trying to know? If Roo is gonna start trolling this game? His alignment? If the former were the case, then I fail to understand how voting to get him lynched helps you accomplish that goal. As a matter of fact, lynching him will prevent you from knowing if he would have trolled this game.

First a post by me and a post by you does not make a contradiction by me, it makes an argument or a misunderstanding.  Second your post is answered by my post, where I clearly state I wanted to know which mode Roo was using in this game.  Third, there are so many things wrong with the second and third part of your quote that I really don't know where to begin, first, one vote 90 minutes into the game doesn't mean I want him lynched, it means I want activity which would help me know if he was trolling the game, (which means he is usually town) or he is playing more conservatively and not drawing attention to himself (which has indicated a scummy Roo) which is actually what I was going for.

Spoiler: another discrepancy (click to show/hide)

Second:  I counter your question with my own question, how does voting someone random in your first post help find scum,

You did not vote for someone random, you voted for Roo for a specific reason that you gave to me:[/quote]Your right I worded that badly, if I had asked how does voting someone in the RVS stage in your first post help you find scum, and then answer it in the way I did it would have been better sorry for that.  However nitpicking out a badly worded question isn't indicative of scum as your making it out to be.

Roo has too modes, the weird I do what I want and irritate everyone mode, and the play normally mode, I want to know which one is playing with us before I make an alignment judgement on anyone else.

Perhaps that reason might be false, but I find it unfair that you would claim that your vote against Roo was completely random when a reason is so blatantly out in the open.

Lets be honest, did I ever claim my vote was completely random, no.  I asked you a question about a similar situation that had ties to my situation but never did I say this is what I did, because it isn't I had a specific reason for voting Roo that is null and void now since he was replaced.

Anyway, let's continue with what I was saying. The reason why that last post made me believe you were mafia was because of a problem with the idea that voting for Roo would help you determine if he would play legitimately or troll. A problem I pointed out in that last post!

What exactly are you trying to know? If Roo is gonna start trolling this game? His alignment? If the former were the case, then I fail to understand how voting to get him lynched helps you accomplish that goal. As a matter of fact, lynching him will prevent you from knowing if he would have trolled this game.

Eventually after a good night's sleep, I voiced my concerns to the public and asked you this question

How does voting for Roo help you determine if he engages troll mode or legit mode?

And now, so far, I have asked you this question twice, and you still refuse to give me a proper answer. Instead, you decided to vote against me and try to convince people that I'm the mafia.

Well I answered all your concerns in the above post now on to why I think your mafia.
#1. You blatantly constructed a case on me by reading and interpreting my statements with extra punctuation which I can kind of excuse because this is your first game, I mean you explained how you misinterpreted my statements and you get props for noticing you were only focusing me however
#2.

Why not pick on jwoodward48df?

Although I haven't figured out how to use lurkertraker yet, I checked his account at it's quite clear that he is lurking though. A bit suspicious, especially since he hasn't posted within the 2 days the game has been up.

Roo isn't a lurker, he has been offline before the game even began. Wait a minute...

Fillipk why did you target a player who has been offline for the duration of the entire game?!

You defended Roo, not just in voting me but providing everyone with the information that he isn't a lurker which is fine if people were calling him out for lurking, but they weren't which is more then a little bit suspicious.  This is expanded on by the fact that your attitude on my case was changed when Roo was replaced, you backed off and I had given no reason for you to back off if you kept interpreting things as you were.  That strikes me as really suspicious, I want to claim that the scum team is Hector, Heydude but that just leads to a lot of WIFOM which I don't want so I will just stick with heydude for now.


EBWOP: I fixed it and it is exactly the same as the above post but it looks better, There is stuff in the spoiler tag that I wrote.

Extend

[hector13]

Extend

[fillipk]

Mod: Can I get permission to delete my first mega post as it clutters up the thread and it is exactly the same as the second but with quotes messed up a bit, you can read it over to confirm this?

[Deus Asmoth]

1: For town players, your life is virtually worthless. You do not win by being alive at the end of the game, you win by getting the scum team lynched. Don't be put off pressuring someone just because you think it will draw attention to yourself as well. Even in the worst case scenario, you die but the town has more information to work with and will take your suspicions into account.

Note: Looking out for yourself is not a scumtell. Most, if not all, players are interested in their own well-being, along with that of their faction.

As Tawa said, some of this is down to personal differences, but I've seen a fair few games (especially recently) that were lost for the town in part because town players were more concerned about not drawing attention to themselves than scumhunting. It is important not to do anything suicidal (unless you're a joker), sure, but at the end of the day self preservation shouldn't take priority over what benefits the town.

[Deus Asmoth]

Extend.

Sorry, people. I thought there was another day in this for some reason. At the moment, it looks like heydude is going to be lynched based off one RVS vote and one probably-serious vote, which isn't very good.

jwood

Whoa, sorry, got the prod. What's going on?

(BTW, not a lurker. Someone with a RL is more like it.)

Activity is fairly important in mafia games. Will you have more time soon?

[heydude6]

Well... good job fillipk. That post of yours addresses all of my doubts very well. I guess it is my fault for reading that sentence with extra punctuation.

My only question though is this, why did you wait so long to create this megapost to defend yourself? When I asked you some questions before, you addressed them is several pretty bad ways (such as the OMGUS for example). Anyway, we have now reset to mostly square one (other than the chance that I might be lynched) so I'll have to vote to extend

Tawarochir thinks forcing an extension might be a scumtell, but I think I've spent enough energy on this.

Unvote

To address a few minor points:

The reason I backed off when hector came was because he forced me to question my decisions in away that your attacks wouldn't (especially that OMGUS)

Another reason why I backed off when Hector came was because of time. I've been attacking you for over a week, you would think that eventually some common sense would come in and I would begin to calm down. Especially when the fantasy of a day 1 scum lynch fades away.

[hector13]

How do you know tawa thinks forcing an extension is a scumtell?

[heydude6]

I theorize that scumteams sometimes try to prolong RVS because of this.

Also, notice the might in my previous sentence.

Don't point it out to me, I think I already see the problem with my previous post. I said it too authoritatively. Truthfully, I don't know, I just have a pretty good feeling. The majority of mafia is about pretty good feelings. There is always an innocent explanation for why a particular player is acting scummy, but that's not going to stop you from lynching them when the stakes are high. So please, don't start attacking me just because I accidentally used poor sentence structure. We've already established that I do that a lot.

[hector13]

So we've not to scum read you when you do it, but you're fine scum reading others for doing it? Sounds like double standards.

You seem to like reading much into innocent things. Tawa said scum extend RVS, not extend days. Extending days is more of a townie thing, as it allows extra time for analysis and activity, something the scum don't really want happening. The scum always want to keep the game in a low-information state; I suspect that's what tawa meant. RVS isn't great for information, but that's usually because people ask stupid questions that can't be built off.

Also, your desire not to be attacked is noted.