TomasqueOkay, so I'm bad at real-time mafia. By all accounts
Kit is too. This sequence:
You vote for hector once he's already been voted by Nirur, then back off once Nirur questions whether you really should be voting so hastily. In response, Nirur tells you that hector is the safest lynch vote, so when hector begins questioning Nirur, you vote him again. Then, after Nirur has already answered hector's question, you jump in and defend him with an answer of your own.
I can accept as poor real-time-mafia scum play from a player who says they're bad at real-time-mafia. I disagree with your attempt to link it to Nirur Torir. This is me backpedaling from my previous position, because before I started writing my previous post on Kit's voting habits their posts just didn't make sense to me and it felt like you were trying to call something random deliberate buddying and/or an attempt to falseflag an attack on a teammate,
and the defense thereof. However, just because I can acknowledge the narrative in which this is you calling out scummy play, your conclusions still don't make sense. The Nirur/Kit and Kit/Hector interactions are separate. Kit and Nirur being partners trying to deflect suspicion doesn't make sense because they've made a lynch between them relatively likely, they're obviously not reading each other as town, and you haven't updated your case except to say that Kit hasn't done anything to shift your original reason for the lynch.
I think that we should lynch kit. He's been silent for a while, and in the last post he made, he accused me of calling him scum & submerging. His original behavior with Nirur seemed a suspicious to me and worthy of pressing him about it, but the fact that he voted me back right after and then went silent has convinced me that he is scum.
See, I don't like this. You're not wrong that the things that he has been doing are suspicious. The problem is that you never used them to create pressure to get a real case out on Kit. You've sort of noticed things and then left it at that. You found somewhere to park your vote and then sat on it, because you don't really care about finding scum or lynching Kit.
I don't think that your case on Kit is scummy. I think the way you're playing is scummy and your 'case' on Kit doesn't have enough merit to justify it. You're not doing anything to advance the game, and all you've done other than answer questions is say 'we should lynch Kit' or 'if we're not lynching Kit we should lynch webadict'. Either you're convinced both of them are scum
and it's obvious enough that you don't have to do any particular work to make the lynch happen, or, uh, I guess you don't care about lynching scum?
So let's take a look at everything that you've done so far:
Answered questions, asked Nirur to defend from a case you never made, called webadict scum, called Kit scumWebadict and Kit were and are incredibly soft targets and while your cases against them seem plausible, you just sort of posture about following up on them if they don't justify themselves satisfactorily to your incredibly vague criteria, which you never follow up on. It especially bothers me that you don't use the opportunity to pressure them into interacting with other players, and instead ask for a defense targeted towards you in particular.
Double down on saying that only webadict and Kit are scummy, accuse webadict of going after an easy target (even though at this point he's totally inactive besides what's essentially a policy vote on a lurker), double down on your claims about webadict and Kit without referring to any additional evidenceDespite being close to as large as your original post, there's no substance to this one at all. You literally request that webadict give a different answer to your standing question and ask nothing else of anyone else. At this point you're telling me you've got scum reads on webadict and Kit and nobody else, and you don't ask a single question to a single player. You don't ask Kit questions. You don't ask the other players who might be scum questions, even though you can reasonably assume there are more than two scum. You don't do anything, really.
Offhand response to a simple questionExcept you're literally adding nothing
I mean, technically you answered the question. But we're none the wiser about who is or isn't scum.
Answer a bunch of questions, double down on wanting a kit lynch, claim Kit has done something scummy (but give no evidence), ask me to put my case on you out thereWhat even was the point of this post, besides trying to save your own skin? You're literally not adding anything to the game here. You kill a bunch of dialogue by answering questions in a closed way and then ask me to do something that I said I was going to do anyway.
If there's a common pattern to notice in your posts, it's that you're not interested in what other players are doing or thinking so far as it doesn't directly concern what they are thinking and saying about you. There are a billion and one players in this game you could make an airtight case to lynch, and you chose to sit on two of them and do nothing with it. You don't press them for information. You don't ask around. You don't care about the players who are producing content if they're not talking to you, and you don't care about the players who aren't if they're not webadict or Kit. The only real difference between Webadict and FoU for most of this time is that webadict was shitting out metaposts. You say literally nothing about FoU, who is lurking to this day (he has, quite literally, done nothing but vote people for being inactive despite currently being the least active player in the game). You do nothing to make anyone other than you want to vote for Kit or Webadict, and your only real motivation for voting them seems to be that it's plausible that they're scum. That's a motivation which makes people vote for players so that they can
find out if those players are scum, either by pressuring them into answering questions or by killing them with the lynch. You're not asking questions, and you're not rallying for support to lynch either of them, so it doesn't feel like your vote is there to do either of those things. Really, I see you sitting there and it just seems like you're trying to look as inconspicuous as possible without becoming noticed for your absence.
Author
Topic: Re: TricMagic's ByoS Mafia: Day 4: Mafia Wins(5/10)+1 (Read 69662 times)