Randomvoted Cheeetar
In the same post, was interested in who Cheeetar would protect as JanetFourEyes.
In the SAME spot, he asked Red to find more information about the 'Arg' role from Leaf.
Yes, I do smell rolefish.
He then comments to Pandar about if the Caps were because of his role.
Next post is a comment about Alex's jitteriness. He basically marks it as a null tell. He pokes at brothernature for going to his xbox instead of posting content. He also says that he believes that Pandar is a little laidback for his actions but looks town.
After that came the proposal for the Reset.
Now to consider how the Rest fits, we'd need to figure out just what would Scum lose by NOT doing it, since it was clearly a pro-town act. Brother would've spoken up about the role, causing everyone to go into a panic over who's role has what. It might've lead to a mass MC since a confirmed townie and a vig shot is THAT much useful. If the MC happened, Josh would be ferreted out, forced to use his power, then hammered as scum. On the other hand, Josh spoke first, earning him Townie points that he could ride for days.
Of course, if he was town it would be a no brainer to do it.
Thus, Null tell with the SLIGHTEST lean towards town (to compensate for the idea that scum might not think of all that).
Moving on: Next post is a swipe on Person in defense of me. Josh agreed that caution was a smart move.
Thus the reset occurs.
He is the first one to vote for Person do to being 'too defensive for the suspicion placed'.
A small quirk on brothernature, who wanted to use a lack of understanding to lurk.
His next big thing was a WOT to Alex who asked him about his vote on Person.
The response involved him watching me and Person and seeing that Person was too hostile over 'a very slight poke'. He did agree that focusing on a few means too many others are missed.
He then posts Alex's analysis and asks for responses from everyone. He says he has his own but keeps them to himself.
Lastly, he pokes at cheeetar who suggests that Person is being bussed by Josh. Josh asks for an elaboration.
Next post is towards alex and is about me.
He asks me for a definition of WOT, tells Alex that the sarcasm isn't helping, and asks if my reasoning about meta use is true (I was speaking to Alex about how Alex judged Person as town based on IRC games)
Next post: Aggression.
He makes a passive hit on Alex for question evasion, votes on Red for passive lurking, strikes at Panda for ignoring prods, and ..honestly, stretched too far with Toony (you used a lot of red so now Leaf may think you were voting?)
After a while Panda shows up asking for questions. Josh then pulls a quote from me from way back with questions I asked him that he didn't yet answer. Later on Panda used his own meta game to defend himself. Josh attacked this as being weak since meta game knowledge is what others use on you, not the other way around.
Note: I did also attack Panda for self defending with Meta but Josh came first with it.
Later on, Alex asks about the point to killing Person: whether his flip will make any difference. Josh replies, YES it does since Alex was willing to kill so fast early on yet hesitates due to 'meta game knowledge'. he says it makes him even more curious over Person's flip.
Up to now, he's been aggressive and leading, rather than following arguments. There were a few times when I would be thinking of something and he would jump in before I post about it.
However, so far, unless I'm wrong on Person, he's been attacking townies. Doesn't' mean a lot since he wasn't alone, but I wanted interactions involving Meph and Boksi to see if there's any change in tone.
Found one:
Also, everyone, Mephansteras is scum. Alexhans, if you're going to hammer someone DON'T HAMMER HIM!
Hammer... I dunno. Whoever you think is scum.
Wait... what? You think Meph is scum but you don't want Alex to day kill him?
Well, it's fairly role related.
You know what's funny: No one is listening to me, the confirmed townie, and are rather more focused on yourselves. Why is that? Why is no one asking me questions about people?
Hmm? Or are you just not going to care?
I'm here WA. Can you explain again why Meph is scum?
Do you have any opinions on other people?
He did NOT like that. Not one bit.
It continues:
I did. He plays the Questionnaire Game as scum, and that's what he's doing. He's also got a laid-back attitude, which is also something he does. Funny thing is, in Vote Mafia 3, I made him scum to watch what he does, in the case I ever am against him. Yes, I'm just that evil. And I get a small feeling (Not as pronounced, but it's there) that he's scum.
Josh's response?:
I see, so what you're saying is this is a hunch? Might I ask what the "Questionnaire Game" is?
Do you have any other hunches? Because you're in the most perfect position to lord over everyone, and I'm surprised you have limited your lording.
Web says "Meph is scum". Josh replies with "Can you pick someone else?"
Well, we go on and he's reminding Leaf that his vote is on Red, not Person. He compliments this with an attack on Red for ignoring the accusation made earlier.
he also goes after Alex again for many of the reasons me and others end up taking up.
MEANWHILE, when the topic of Boksi comes up:
Toon votes for Boksi as his 'third on the list' asking to 'do something useful'.
Response comes from Josh
So Toon, I take it your entire accusation of Boksi is that he's lurking?
From here, they
exchange words.
Toony explains that it's because Boksi is using 'scum logic' while showing evidence. Josh shows ignorance towards what toony is talking about. Toony brings more quotes for evidence.
The result:
Ah, I suppose that is a good reason, but then again, it's also a very convenient reason.
I got a funny feeling...
What I mean is, some posts prior to your vote for Boksi, Pandar made an interesting post:
It occurs to me - does it seem like anyone is making a point of encouraging Toony - subtly or overtly - in his crusade?
If he's town aiming at town, a little encouragement can go a long way for scum, as I learned in Beginner II. Toony always acts confident, but his true confidence level rises (naturally) when others agree with him. If several people "reluctantly" begin to side with him, "convinced" by his arguments, there might be scum letting Toony take the lead so he'll do their legwork. Just throwing this out there as a bit of food for thought.
Here, Pandar off-handedly mentions that the people agreeing with you and voting with you might be scum.
Your next post after this, you change your vote to Boksi.
That seems a tad relevant to me, if only because your position changed from "I'm not unvoting from Mr.Person NO MATTER WHAT!" to "Oh, I found a reason to vote for Boksi, nevermind.", and you did this immediately after it was mentioned that those voting with you might be scum...
That's one heck of a coincidence, isn't it ToonyMan?
This is called "Attacking the Person". Instead of debating as to why Boksi might be town he strikes at Toonyman instead bringing up an elaborate plot to take down the people who are voting for Boksi.
It's Not a Good Thing to do that type of argument. It suggests that you can't win against the debate point itself but want to win no matter what.
He next gives a side slap on Alex for an outburst and
strikes harder on Toonyman.
Btw, I don't get this part:
Just know this however Toon, when I made that post saying that MP's hammer would greatly effect my suspicions, I wasn't just referring to Alex, I was talking about everyone involved. Don't think I didn't notice you using my argument against Alex to attack MP with no effort on your part, because I've been keeping my eye on you since then.
Toon was the one that pushed for that bet in the first place. He was ready to risk dying in order to prove Person as guilty. As such, he was doing a lot more than just using josh's argument.
The point: What IS he seeing as the possible scum right now? Alex, Person, and Toony? Since Pandar slipped in that comment which caused the whole mess, would that mean Pandar would be the 4th?
Very elaborate.
The meaning behind these comments: It looks like once Toony attacked Boksi, Josh struck against toony and is now using the Alex/Toony argument to push the issue.
Eventually, Alex gets more pressure, the bandwagon forms, and Toony gives up on Boksi to go after Alex.
Josh's next post apperently forgot all about Toony and, thus,
goes back to Alex againSo Josh attacks alex and HARD. He keeps at it until I receive the 3 paragraph Person post that caused me to pull away from Alex.
Josh comments on it, asking why. I state my reasonings, saying that you can't have Alexscum/PersonTown, though any other combination works.
Josh then agrees, Unvotes, then asks for toonyman's idea on the situation.
Eventually, we move on to the bandwagon on Redwarrior. I got it going. Josh joined in, not liking Alex's 'power over the town' but following anyway.
Meph then posts to join the bandwagon and says that Boksi will be his next vote (which never happens).
Josh replies to him asking whether red's flip will change his ideas. Meph never answers
Red dies town.
Josh gives a poke to Toony over his attack on panda, then votes for me for not commenting over Red's death. He threatens that he has a theory on the scum team with me in it, then asks me who I think they are.
Day 1 ends.
Day 2 starts and by the time he posts, Web has already declared his proof on Meph. Josh says that he didn't really think of Meph as scum but joins the wagon. He then declares that I'm next but can't explain why due to a headache.
He also attacks Cheeetar for his comment on Alex (the claim: that Cheeetar is following toony's example. However, Although Cheeetar did SOUND ilke toony, he has been after Alex for some time if rather wishy washy near the end)
Later on, he flings out this
number, A full accusation against me.
Reasoning: I am very townish but the Alex thing turned him off since I was the first to start and first to end with him based on some "circumstantial" idea (that he agreed with). He then brings some elaborate theory on how Alex and I set things up.
Next post he's attacking alex again.
After that, I come in and tear at his argument. His
response is to back away and bring up a vague comment about me missing 'a lot of people' and being 'reactive'. I tear that one and he stays silent until Day 3
Day 3, he steps against Web saying that my reaction + Alex's flip shows I'm town. Meanwhile he goes after Toony for not posting the zaniness 'we're used to'. I call him on it and he says that 'he doesn't know toony well, but scum typically hate tension'
I've played in less games with Toony and I already know that just about all of the old scumtells don't work on him. He's just 'odd' like that. He's readable.. just not traditional. Besides, awkwardness in tension isn't exactly Lynchable material.
The rest is attacks against people who have voted for me.
Now, if you havn't noticed, I tend to suspect those who defend me. I just get a "OMG scum's trying to use me to hide" reflex. I keep it a VERY low matter but it's still there.
Why? Because when I'm town (and, excluding Religious mafia, I've only been mafia ONCE in my mafia-playing career, and that was on a very different forum than here) I know only two groups of people KNOW I'm town:
Me, of course
And the mafia.
So I know that everyone else that's honest do NOT know my alignment. So, when you get a situation where the town is about to lynch me, it makes sense for the mafia, who KNOW, to jump to my aid. Of course, it's safe to attack me when no one is bothered with me since it won't go anywhere.
Author
Topic: Bay 12 Mafia - Game Over - The Computer's Revenge (Read 72732 times)