Print

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

[Org]

Yay,, weekend. School leaves me with not much time, so Ill try to be a bit more active.

Nuke.You are shifting attention to me.

[dakarian]

@Nuke

About the soft attack: 
 "Naturally, ,

As you phrase it:
Condition: once more solid evidence is provided
Action: your instinct should be as good as ignored,
Reason:  for it is so often wrong.

Contradiction: But it is not more often wrong than right."

If you are right more often than you are wrong, then it doesn't make sense to ignore your instincts.  If you should ignore your instincts because they are often wrong, then it is because you are wrong more often than right.

Why would you ignore something with a 60% success rate?

And why is mafia theory being used to explain why you suggested, but did not press an attack on Nihilist?

About the vote on AN

IF nothing changed for the rest of the day, IF we had to stop talking and make our minds up right then as who to lynch, I would choose AN at that point. That was my meaning and if you do not realise this, then (no offence) you are stupid.
But that did not happen; the game moved on. MrPerson was lurking, and I voted for him to make him stop lurking.

When I mix it with this:

At that point I considered MrPerson a better target than AN. Once again, you must agree, that given a slightly scummy person, and someone scummier still, it is best to vote for the scummiest?

Ok.. so:

At the time of that post, you felt that lurking was more scummy than bad acting (which is what, I believe, you are attacking AN for)?

Also, since your vote was on Person and not AN, does that mean that, at that moment, you would've rather lynched Person than AN?

I never said "everyone vote AN". I did not press my attack with undue intensity. I am not in charge of everyone's votes.

Just a little above this:

IF nothing changed for the rest of the day, IF we had to stop talking and make our minds up right then as who to lynch, I would choose AN at that point.

So you choose someone to lynch but you don't care if the town lynches them.

Also, does that mean:

However, it is enough that, given no better targets, I consider him a worthwhile lynch.

Was supposed to be ignored by the town?

Better targets arise over the day.

So by 'he's suitable to lynch' you REALLY meant, 'we need to push harder for better targets'... right?

I can sort of understand the confusion here. Substitute scumminess in my quote with goodtargetness. I considered it no longer useful to vote for AN, or rather, I considered it more useful to vote for MrPerson.

Backtrack and a poor one at that. 

And it NOW makes it seem that you had no reason at ALL to talk about AN since it was 'no longer useful' to vote for him. 

So we should just ignore the entire bottom half and just read your post as "Vote Person"?

I had no case on AN. It would be stupid and waaay more scummy of me if I were to vote him in the beginning of the day and maintain my vote come hell or high water.
That big post was not intended as an attack on AN, but rather a defence of myself.

So you pulled your vote to protect yourself by not looking like you were attacking for no reason.

And you want me to read that as pro-town.....

Well then, all the less reason for me to want to press the attack on him. Which you, if I understand correctly, have criticized me for?

You're using my information on his Meta to defend yourself against something you did a few days ago?

It is tunnelvision. Between my post and my prod you did no scumhunting towards anyone but me. When I didn't appear for a while, you didn't make a two part post with A)Nuke stop lurking and B)some other scumhunting in the meantime.
I do believe that I did my best to discredit your arguments first, and it was not my intention to discredit you, but rather to bring it to your attention.

I have a Wide Scan that I use to watch others.  I run that scan DURING a debate to see how others react (Hi Mr.Person! Also, yes, I do notice the SEVERE lack of talk from everyone else).  When lurking happens, I wait and let the host handle things.  It's how I handle lurkers.  Hate it or love it, it's what I do.  If you claim that waiting for lurkers is tunnelling then fine.  Call it Anti-Lurker Tunnelling if you wish. 

Thing is, until you actually crush my argument, you WON'T shake me off.  Again, speak to Mr.Person about how hard I pressed him and Alex until the former calmed down and ended my argument. 

Are you suggesting suggest this is wrong? Are you seriously saying that if I had not pre defended myself you would not have jumped on me for shifting attention to org?

That's EXACTLY what I'm suggesting.  I think you're losing your cool though.  Careful.

And finally
I feel that a great deal of your arguments against me are based on me being very stupid.
It is pretty meta to say so, but I am not stupid.
Seriously.
I am pretty intelligent.

What you did wasn't stupid scum.  It was just Passive scum.  In fact, if you DID claim stupidity, it would be a harder argument for me, since the only thing that looked 'obviously bad' is the lurking and you can't lynch just for THAT. 


No.  You aren't stupid.  You just aren't town. 

[Vector]

Vector: For all your talk of getting people out here to talk, you seem to have composed very few questions and stated no suspicions at all. What's up with that?

I apologize and promise to pay more attention to this game.  Once I am done with this post, I will go through the thread again.

My excuse is that this week, I had an analysis assignment that took at least 30 hours to finish, as well as homework for my other 5 classes.  The end of NSBM took up most of my Mafia time, so I have been able to post only perfunctorily in this thread (mostly in attempts to keep the game from dying).

I will also submit that it takes me an exceedingly long time to process all the data from a Mafia game, which is why I haven't been able to post my suspicions (because until I've spent a lot of time processing, I don't have any).  I will spend that time today and write a rundown of the thread.

[Apostolic Nihilist]

Yay,, weekend. School leaves me with not much time, so Ill try to be a bit more active.

Nuke.You are shifting attention to me.
[/quot
Well, I'd like to say something but there's this huge debate going on between Dakarian/NUKE now so I'd rather not butt in. Instead, I'll question Org since he has more time and hasn't said much.

What do you think of this argument that's going on right now?
It's either skilled scum vs. skilled town, or skilled town vs. skilled town, it would seem. If one is lynched and flips scum, the other is likely town -- the reverse would also probably be true simply because I doubt that scum would wage such a huge debate.
Thoughts?

[Vector]

Actually, scratch that.  I'll probably do the analysis later tonight.  For now I'm going to celebrate finishing the problem set of doom with some Civ.

[Org]

Yay,, weekend. School leaves me with not much time, so Ill try to be a bit more active.

Nuke.You are shifting attention to me.
[/quot
Well, I'd like to say something but there's this huge debate going on between Dakarian/NUKE now so I'd rather not butt in. Instead, I'll question Org since he has more time and hasn't said much.

What do you think of this argument that's going on right now?
It's either skilled scum vs. skilled town, or skilled town vs. skilled town, it would seem. If one is lynched and flips scum, the other is likely town -- the reverse would also probably be true simply because I doubt that scum would wage such a huge debate.
Thoughts?

Dont really know what to think, but it prob. is scum and towny, or both scum, but I would doubt thatt although it would be a great thing to do if you are a scum to drop attention from yourself I guess.

[NUKE9.13]

Giant Post Here

Spoiler: Giant post. (click to show/hide)

Oh, come on, org. Don't be stupid. Dakarian is definitely town; he is not stupid, so as scum, he wouldn't make such a big deal about it; it puts way to much attention on you.
And I know that I too am town. So yes, this is a town wasting its time fighting with town debate.
If we were both scum, how would we orchestrate this? Did we plan this entire thing out during the night, all the huge, page-long posts? That would be silly, and not very advantageous to scum; both parties get lots of attention and have tons of chances to make mistakes, and besides, how does it help them, really?
No, I think you will find that the scum at this point are sitting idly by the sidelines, eating popcorn and watching the arguments fly.

How do you figure that it is not possible that we are both town? That is an huge fallacy which is often exploited by the scum. Org, please explain why you think that one of us is definitely scum.
And I am not shifting attention to you. That is not funny, you are active lurking and it is wrong.
Also your quote tags are broken. Use preview.

@Nuke

About the soft attack: 
 "Naturally, ,

As you phrase it:
Condition: once more solid evidence is provided
Action: your instinct should be as good as ignored,
Reason:  for it is so often wrong.

Contradiction: But it is not more often wrong than right."

If you are right more often than you are wrong, then it doesn't make sense to ignore your instincts.  If you should ignore your instincts because they are often wrong, then it is because you are wrong more often than right.

Why would you ignore something with a 60% success rate? Because solid evidence has an 80% success rate.

And why is mafia theory being used to explain why you suggested, but did not press an attack on Nihilist?

I do not consider often to mean more than 50% of the time. I consider 40% of the time 'often'.

5 player mafia. One guy is scum.
Each person has an equal chance of being scum.
However, you find player A slightly scummy (his behaviour is slightly off). You can't say why; it is instinct. Thus you conclude that A would- at that point- be a good lynch.
It is only your instinct that tells you A is scum.
Now player B does something scummy. Bandwagons for no reason, say.
You could say that both A and B are equally scummy.
But instinct is wrong 40% of the time, whereas the scumtell is wrong only 15% of the time. The difference is significant enough that the instinct can be ignored.

Now the precise numbers are not important; the point is, instinct is wrong a lot more often than more solid evidence. But also that instinct is not something to be ignored all the time (if the odds were 50/50) or to be inverted (if the chance it was wrong was higher than if it were right)

About the vote on AN

IF nothing changed for the rest of the day, IF we had to stop talking and make our minds up right then as who to lynch, I would choose AN at that point. That was my meaning and if you do not realise this, then (no offence) you are stupid.
But that did not happen; the game moved on. MrPerson was lurking, and I voted for him to make him stop lurking.

When I mix it with this:

At that point I considered MrPerson a better target than AN. Once again, you must agree, that given a slightly scummy person, and someone scummier still, it is best to vote for the scummiest?

Ok.. so:
At the time of that post, you felt that lurking was more scummy than bad acting (which is what, I believe, you are attacking AN for)?
Also, since your vote was on Person and not AN, does that mean that, at that moment, you would've rather lynched Person than AN?

Well no. If, at that point, we had to choose someone to lynch, I would have probably chosen AN again. The confusion here is my use of the word scummy which, as I mentioned, is best substituted with goodtargetness.

1

I never said "everyone vote AN". I did not press my attack with undue intensity. I am not in charge of everyone's votes.

Just a little above this:
2

IF nothing changed for the rest of the day, IF we had to stop talking and make our minds up right then as who to lynch, I would choose AN at that point.

So you choose someone to lynch but you don't care if the town lynches them.

I am confused.
In quote one I am indicating that I do not choose who is lynched. This was in response to you saying I nonchalantly chose someone to lynch; "Someone needs to die, oh well, you'll do= scummy!"
I was indicating that I was merely putting down my vote in favour of his death, rather than choosing him as the person to die.
In quote 2 I am saying that 'I would choose AN'. I wouldn't force everyone else to choose AN as well.
I do not choose someone to lynch, I put down my vote in favour of who should be lynched. If the town does not agree with me, well, it is called democratic murder for a reason. I am not going to whine about it, no.

Also, does that mean:

However, it is enough that, given no better targets, I consider him a worthwhile lynch.

Was supposed to be ignored by the town?

Yes. It was an indication of my own motivation. Pre defence. Open flow of opinions.

Better targets arise over the day.

So by 'he's suitable to lynch' you REALLY meant, 'we need to push harder for better targets'... right?

Well that isn't what I meant precisely, no. What I meant was is written up there; he's suitable to lynch if the day ends right now and we have to choose someone.
I am always* in favour of further scumhunting (perhaps not as scum). So I don't feel the need to write 'I also think we should continue scumhunting' at the end of each post; it is a given.

I can sort of understand the confusion here. Substitute scumminess in my quote with goodtargetness. I considered it no longer useful to vote for AN, or rather, I considered it more useful to vote for MrPerson.

Backtrack and a poor one at that. 
And it NOW makes it seem that you had no reason at ALL to talk about AN since it was 'no longer useful' to vote for him. 
So we should just ignore the entire bottom half and just read your post as "Vote Person"?

Please try to consider the possibility I am town. I feel your mind is clouded slightly with the assumption that I am scum. Thus things like 'backtrack and a poor one at that'. No. This was my meaning, and it is self-evident that it is so throughout.

The post in question had two parts; one, a message aimed at lurkers, including MrPerson. The other, a response to people who requested an explanation of my AN vote.
If I had simply unvoted AN and said no more about it, would you not be screaming bloody murder at me for not explaining my AN vote? I would.

I had no case on AN. It would be stupid and waaay more scummy of me if I were to vote him in the beginning of the day and maintain my vote come hell or high water.
That big post was not intended as an attack on AN, but rather a defence of myself.

So you pulled your vote to protect yourself by not looking like you were attacking for no reason.
And you want me to read that as pro-town.....

...No, I had a reason for my attack. I pulled my vote because I thought it would be better employed elsewhere. I explained why I voted. I explained my reason.
I feel like you are contradicting yourself; here you attack me for not giving a reason. Above you attack me for giving a reason.

Well then, all the less reason for me to want to press the attack on him. Which you, if I understand correctly, have criticized me for?

You're using my information on his Meta to defend yourself against something you did a few days ago?

Ugh. Yes. Of course. I am an idiot, and am doing this.
No, I am not an idiot. This was a joke. I already had little reason to attack him (although I did have one). I did not need less of a reason to press the attack; I already had [no reason to press the attack]

It is tunnelvision. Between my post and my prod you did no scumhunting towards anyone but me. When I didn't appear for a while, you didn't make a two part post with A)Nuke stop lurking and B)some other scumhunting in the meantime.
I do believe that I did my best to discredit your arguments first, and it was not my intention to discredit you, but rather to bring it to your attention.

I have a Wide Scan that I use to watch others.  I run that scan DURING a debate to see how others react (Hi Mr.Person! Also, yes, I do notice the SEVERE lack of talk from everyone else).  When lurking happens, I wait and let the host handle things.  It's how I handle lurkers.  Hate it or love it, it's what I do.  If you claim that waiting for lurkers is tunnelling then fine.  Call it Anti-Lurker Tunnelling if you wish. 

You honestly couldn't think of anything else to do in the day I was absent? There were others present, you could have asked them what they thought of various things.

Thing is, until you actually crush my argument, you WON'T shake me off.  Again, speak to Mr.Person about how hard I pressed him and Alex until the former calmed down and ended my argument. 

I am calm. I am completely convinced that I can convince you that I am town. However it relies on you being calm. If you could just, temporarily, forget your pre-existent certainty I am scum, go back, and read everything I have said, I believe you would find much of your case against me is based on your own coloured reading of my actions. (aka, circular reasoning)

Are you suggesting suggest this is wrong? Are you seriously saying that if I had not pre defended myself you would not have jumped on me for shifting attention to org?

That's EXACTLY what I'm suggesting.  I think you're losing your cool though.  Careful.

If this is truly so, then I have misjudged you. My apologies.

And finally
I feel that a great deal of your arguments against me are based on me being very stupid.
It is pretty meta to say so, but I am not stupid.
Seriously.
I am pretty intelligent.

What you did wasn't stupid scum.  It was just Passive scum.  In fact, if you DID claim stupidity, it would be a harder argument for me, since the only thing that looked 'obviously bad' is the lurking and you can't lynch just for THAT. 

I think that the primary factor in convincing you of my scumitude is the 'evil lurking' I did.
That really does rely on me being very stupid.
Firstly. You assume that I assume that, if I ignore you, you will give up. That is stupid. And what's more, even if you did give up, it would be stupid not to reply to your accusations anyway once I returned, or you (or someone else) would immediately notice it and say 'Hey nuke I notice you conveniently missed all those questions! Pretty scummy!'
Further, if I was ignoring you (stupid already), I would then come out just for a second voter? Leafsnail's vote was just to get me out. If I was really ignoring it, I wouldn't have been very intimidated by that. And even if I was, it would be contradictorly stupid of me not to go '*moustache twirl*, hahaha, I shall wait for a while before posting, so zat it does not look like I am coming out just because of leafsnail's vote, hahaha'

Giant post spoilered for your convenience

[Apostolic Nihilist]

Yay,, weekend. School leaves me with not much time, so Ill try to be a bit more active.

Nuke.You are shifting attention to me.

Well, I'd like to say something but there's this huge debate going on between Dakarian/NUKE now so I'd rather not butt in. Instead, I'll question Org since he has more time and hasn't said much.

What do you think of this argument that's going on right now?
It's either skilled scum vs. skilled town, or skilled town vs. skilled town, it would seem. If one is lynched and flips scum, the other is likely town -- the reverse would also probably be true simply because I doubt that scum would wage such a huge debate.
Thoughts?

Dont really know what to think, but it prob. is scum and towny, or both scum, but I would doubt thatt although it would be a great thing to do if you are a scum to drop attention from yourself I guess.

Unvote.
Org.
Listen, this is not a constructive post. This is, "I agree with 2/3s of the things you just said for the reasons you stated, kbai."
What do you honestly make of this situation? It's changed my perception quite a bit, the longer it goes on the less it seems to involve scum on either side.
At the very least, there are other targets to go after.
Org, you're famous for lurking, but you aren't just doing that anymore. You're active lurking.

These are (most, I missed one or two) of your posts from the past 10 pages:

Hurr Hurr.
Oh wait this is color mafia. Huh.

And just because I missed a single thing doesnt seem good enough a reason.

Dak seems suspicious. Freaking out because of the color thing.

When asked to elaborate:

What is assassins?.!

Dakarian, for acting weird and a bit strange, as well as going crazy over colors, which means 3 things,
a)Townie, wants to survive
b)Scum, wants to survive
c)Power role, a or b

I haven't seen those arguments before!

Dont be mean Web. Just playing Last Stand.....a little to much.....

Old scumtell is old.

I am the king. I rule with an iron fist.

I actually think Pandar might be right about the colors. Or they are nothing. :I

I am not lurking actively, more of a passive lurking, if you will.

I will stick to my convictions.

No, I'm pretty sure this is called active lurking.

Apost has indeed been suspicious, but I'd also like to ask where Org is.  Why do you think Pandar was NK'd?  What do you think about Exkirby's lynch?

Wait. What. How does that make sense? Oh, maybe you mean why, as in why would scum kill them.... Maybe because he is good in mafias most of the time.


I think he may just be a noob, though he has been in a few mafias. Needs to stick his head down and try not to do scummy looking stuff.

So, they killed Pandarsenic (a person who was admittedly acting quite scummy) instead of a different target, like Leafsnail. Pandar is good at being mafia but people are also quite wary of him. Leaving him alive makes for an easy lynch later. I doubt they killed him 'just because he was good'; I think they killed him to spread WIFOM or to make the scum players look like newbs. At the time of the Pandarsenic lynch, Dakarian & Mr.Person were the only people voting for him. Inexperienced scum don't NK who they're voting for. You, coincidentally, were not voting for him (neither were many other people, but at least they weren't active lurking.)

Yay,, weekend. School leaves me with not much time, so Ill try to be a bit more active.

Nuke.You are shifting attention to me.

Er, he's not shifting attention to you -- right now, most eyes are still trained on the NUKE v. Dakarian battle that's waging futilely.
In NUKE's (perfectly valid arguments) he says that you're active lurking, which you are.

Explain yourself at once!

[dakarian]

Scanning other players based on after the attack on Nuke began.

NUKE9.13

Currently in my spotlight (havn't gotten to your recent post yet)

Mr.Person

Declaring me as a Tunnelvisioning Town.  Believes nuke to be not scum (due to the vote on Person)

All I'm saying is that you're focusing a bit too much on Nuke, but like I said, that's not scummy, so continue as you were. After all, there's some good questions you've posed to Nuke, I want to hear if he answers them correctly. Overall, I'm getting scum vibes from Dakarian, but I have no idea where they're coming from, so I'm going to ignore them. Blah blah, listen to your gut, I know, but since I have no real reason for him being scum, I'm not going to vote him. I will reread his posts, however.

UGLY.  You say I'm being a little bit scummy by focusing too much on Nuke, but likes my questions and wants Nuke to answer. He said I'm town but 'gettting scum vibes' so decided to ignore them.  Wanted to do a reread.


Vector

A "oh sorry I'll post more" nonpost.  Promised some content last night.. none showed.

Leafsnail

"woke up" Nuke with a second vote on him.  Has not posted since.

Org

Current target of Nuke.  Cause: active lurking

One post to Apostolic replying to the question of how me and nuke looks:  just isn't sure.


Apostolic Nihilist

What do you think of this argument that's going on right now?
It's either skilled scum vs. skilled town, or skilled town vs. skilled town, it would seem. If one is lynched and flips scum, the other is likely town -- the reverse would also probably be true simply because I doubt that scum would wage such a huge debate.

Dangerous: 

The smaller issue:
-Most scum cannot or will not perform a strong attack on one another like this.  However, you've declared both of us Skilled.  Understanding the skill level of the player is very important since a Newbie-Town-Tell is a Semi-skilled-Scum-Tell. 

Thus the problem: if we're both skilled then Skilled Scum is more likely to do crazy tricks like this. 

The point: don't take everything off the table that easily.

BIGGER issue: If one is lynched and flips scum, the other is likely town -- the reverse would also probably be true simply because I doubt that scum would wage such a huge debate.

Given your theory, the first part makes sense (though don't fully confirm based on it).  The reverse: If someone lynched is town the other is scum, is dangerous.  This CAN be a scum vs town fight or a town vs town fight and lynching one because of the other's flip is a quick way for the town to die. 

Note I'm not at the 'lynch Nuke now' quite yet (I make it VERY clear when I'm at that point).  Gotta push him more before then. 

After that, a large post against org.. will need to look into that seperately.

[dakarian]

1. Wow.. just completely messed up those quote tags.

2. The argument against Org is that he's active lurking. 

Another vote would just turn it into a bandwagon.  I will admit that he DOES need to get in here and scumhunt. 


As far as the rest:

Leafsnail needs to post more.


Person is VERY passive.

[Org]

Yay,, weekend. School leaves me with not much time, so Ill try to be a bit more active.

Nuke.You are shifting attention to me.

Well, I'd like to say something but there's this huge debate going on between Dakarian/NUKE now so I'd rather not butt in. Instead, I'll question Org since he has more time and hasn't said much.

What do you think of this argument that's going on right now?
It's either skilled scum vs. skilled town, or skilled town vs. skilled town, it would seem. If one is lynched and flips scum, the other is likely town -- the reverse would also probably be true simply because I doubt that scum would wage such a huge debate.
Thoughts?

Dont really know what to think, but it prob. is scum and towny, or both scum, but I would doubt thatt although it would be a great thing to do if you are a scum to drop attention from yourself I guess.

Unvote.
Org.
Listen, this is not a constructive post. This is, "I agree with 2/3s of the things you just said for the reasons you stated, kbai."
What do you honestly make of this situation? It's changed my perception quite a bit, the longer it goes on the less it seems to involve scum on either side.
At the very least, there are other targets to go after.
Org, you're famous for lurking, but you aren't just doing that anymore. You're active lurking.

These are (most, I missed one or two) of your posts from the past 10 pages:

Hurr Hurr.
Oh wait this is color mafia. Huh.

And just because I missed a single thing doesnt seem good enough a reason.

Dak seems suspicious. Freaking out because of the color thing.

When asked to elaborate:

What is assassins?.!

Dakarian, for acting weird and a bit strange, as well as going crazy over colors, which means 3 things,
a)Townie, wants to survive
b)Scum, wants to survive
c)Power role, a or b

I haven't seen those arguments before! I dont get it. Sarcasm?

Dont be mean Web. Just playing Last Stand.....a little to much.....

Old scumtell is old.

I am the king. I rule with an iron fist.

I actually think Pandar might be right about the colors. Or they are nothing. :I

I am not lurking actively, more of a passive lurking, if you will.

I will stick to my convictions.

No, I'm pretty sure this is called active lurking. Its a joke, if you will. Sorta. Not really.

Apost has indeed been suspicious, but I'd also like to ask where Org is.  Why do you think Pandar was NK'd?  What do you think about Exkirby's lynch?

Wait. What. How does that make sense? Oh, maybe you mean why, as in why would scum kill them.... Maybe because he is good in mafias most of the time.


I think he may just be a noob, though he has been in a few mafias. Needs to stick his head down and try not to do scummy looking stuff.

So, they killed Pandarsenic (a person who was admittedly acting quite scummy) instead of a different target, like Leafsnail. Pandar is good at being mafia but people are also quite wary of him. Leaving him alive makes for an easy lynch later. I doubt they killed him 'just because he was good'; I think they killed him to spread WIFOM or to make the scum players look like newbs. At the time of the Pandarsenic lynch, Dakarian & Mr.Person were the only people voting for him. Inexperienced scum don't NK who they're voting for. You, coincidentally, were not voting for him (neither were many other people, but at least they weren't active lurking.)
Not sure how to answer this, except that it means that even you did not vote them, as you said. As I have said many many times before, I can only sporadicaly check and post, at least once a day, unless I do not think I need to add anything. Specially weekdays 

Yay,, weekend. School leaves me with not much time, so Ill try to be a bit more active.

Nuke.You are shifting attention to me.

Er, he's not shifting attention to you -- right now, most eyes are still trained on the NUKE v. Dakarian battle that's waging futilely.
In NUKE's (perfectly valid arguments) he says that you're active lurking, which you are.
It seems so.
Explain yourself at once!

I do active lurk. but atleast I participate. Some people dont.

Bolded answers

[dakarian]

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Ok, on to Nuke:

First off, I'm putting aside the mafiatheory.  Arguing over theory is great outside the game, but doesn't determine if you are town or scum unless I go and claim that you are purposely misleading and I can't claim that.

Well no. If, at that point, we had to choose someone to lynch, I would have probably chosen AN again. The confusion here is my use of the word scummy which, as I mentioned, is best substituted with goodtargetness.

I'd rather you stay with 'scummy' because 'scummy' refers to how much the person looks like scum and not using that word suggests you are willing to kill someone for something OTHER than looking like scum.

I've seen townies willing to kill townies for things other than being scummy.  Is that how I should read 'goodtargetness'?

I am confused.
In quote one I am indicating that I do not choose who is lynched. This was in response to you saying I nonchalantly chose someone to lynch; "Someone needs to die, oh well, you'll do= scummy!"
I was indicating that I was merely putting down my vote in favour of his death, rather than choosing him as the person to die.

I am in favour of his death but I'm not choosing him to die.

The explanations aren't helping.

In quote 2 I am saying that 'I would choose AN'. I wouldn't force everyone else to choose AN as well.
I do not choose someone to lynch, I put down my vote in favour of who should be lynched. If the town does not agree with me, well, it is called democratic murder for a reason. I am not going to whine about it, no.

Bringing the others into it isn't helpful to you because how they react to your vote is irrelevant.

Reason:  Your post indicates that, if you had your way, AN would die.  Your VOTE indicates that, if you had your way, Person would die.

Not worrying about whether the town listens to you suggests that you throw votes and comments without really worrying about your words.  Your votes and comments are sounding that you don't worry if you target a true scum or not. 

Yes. It was an indication of my own motivation. Pre defence. Open flow of opinions.

So you are just active lurking while pretending to scumhunt and throwing comments for the sake of it.

So I don't feel the need to write 'I also think we should continue scumhunting' at the end of each post; it is a given.

No it isn't.

For example, I'm about close to ending my scumhunt with you and getting you lynched.

Please try to consider the possibility I am town. I feel your mind is clouded slightly with the assumption that I am scum. Thus things like 'backtrack and a poor one at that'. No. This was my meaning, and it is self-evident that it is so throughout.

But you ARE backtracking.  Before you said that AN was scummy.  Then you say that Person was more scummy.  Now you say you didn't mean 'scummy'. 

I don't argue with scum: I lynch scum.  I argue with you because I question.. I wonder "perhaps".  I question you to learn about you, to decide whether you are town or scum. 

When I assume you are scum, I'll stop speaking to you.

The post in question had two parts; one, a message aimed at lurkers, including MrPerson. The other, a response to people who requested an explanation of my AN vote.
If I had simply unvoted AN and said no more about it, would you not be screaming bloody murder at me for not explaining my AN vote? I would.

Do you typically do actions based on if people will suspect you for them?

...No, I had a reason for my attack. I pulled my vote because I thought it would be better employed elsewhere. I explained why I voted. I explained my reason.
I feel like you are contradicting yourself; here you attack me for not giving a reason. Above you attack me for giving a reason.

I attack you because you are passive and your ideas change regularly.  You are subject to pressure and want to act in a way that doesn't make you look bad. 

The "Would you have felt better if I did this" does NOT help.  Searching me out for what I consider 'town tells' is a scumtell.

Ugh. Yes. Of course. I am an idiot, and am doing this.
No, I am not an idiot. This was a joke. I already had little reason to attack him (although I did have one). I did not need less of a reason to press the attack; I already had [no reason to press the attack]

You had no reason to press the attack, but you were more than content to speak ill of him and to be willing to have him lynched.

I think that the primary factor in convincing you of my scumitude is the 'evil lurking' I did.
That really does rely on me being very stupid.

Funny.. most of my arguement against you is about your Nihilist post.  The lurking bit was extra topping.  So let's put aside the lurker mess that you spend way too much time on.

I pressed you and pushed you and you feel like puddy.  You try to play like you're firm and strong but you end up soft and willing to say whatever may help shake me off of you.  You try to make me look like a Foolish, buddy me up by declaring I'm Town, and change your stance on that post in order to make yourself look like you are aggressivly hunting... or testing the waters...or lurker hunting... or correcting a mistake... or just talking nonsense.


Well I'm settled.  You're scum.  I took my time to get to this post because, at first glance, I thought you were looking better and that I would have to pull back and dive deeper into my wide scan.  The scan was useful but now that I've read your post.. no.. you're scum.  I'm settled now.


@everyone

I firmly believe that Nuke is scum.  I've done my argument with him.  I know that the last batch of posts are large but please look over them.  Once you have, please do the following:

1. If you find anything wrong with my argument and my reasonings, then please post them.  That way, I can either further clerify the matter for you or understand the faults of my statement and reevaluate based on them.

2. if you believe my arguments but still have a concern or doubt please voice a question or accusation towards Nuke so he can reply to you about it and, thus, you can fully decide how you feel about him.

3. If you believe my arguments and cannot find any new questions or doubts then vote for him. 

For myself, I will say that I do want him lynched.

[Org]

I read through that and it does seem he is backtracking. And the fact that he is acting a bit strange with the scummy business does seem....well, scummy. Unvote Vote Nuke. I agree with dakarian's points. he does seem to be a bit active lurking, although more active than myself.

Clarify is spelled with an a, not an "e", by the way.

[Mr.Person]

Found it!

Nuke is AWOL but I've seen enough to believe he's a scum that's disappeared.  Not all who get replaced are town.

Bah, just do a mass prod.  A good few people are trying to forget about this one.

Does not match up with what you've said Dakarian.

But you ARE backtracking.  Before you said that AN was scummy.  Then you say that Person was more scummy.  Now you say you didn't mean 'scummy'. 

I don't argue with scum: I lynch scum.  I argue with you because I question.. I wonder "perhaps".  I question you to learn about you, to decide whether you are town or scum. 

When I assume you are scum, I'll stop speaking to you.

I pressed you and pushed you and you feel like puddy.  You try to play like you're firm and strong but you end up soft and willing to say whatever may help shake me off of you.  You try to make me look like a Foolish, buddy me up by declaring I'm Town, and change your stance on that post in order to make yourself look like you are aggressivly hunting... or testing the waters...or lurker hunting... or correcting a mistake... or just talking nonsense.


Well I'm settled.  You're scum.  I took my time to get to this post because, at first glance, I thought you were looking better and that I would have to pull back and dive deeper into my wide scan.  The scan was useful but now that I've read your post.. no.. you're scum.  I'm settled now.


@everyone

I firmly believe that Nuke is scum.  I've done my argument with him.  I know that the last batch of posts are large but please look over them.  Once you have, please do the following:

1. If you find anything wrong with my argument and my reasonings, then please post them.  That way, I can either further clerify the matter for you or understand the faults of my statement and reevaluate based on them.

2. if you believe my arguments but still have a concern or doubt please voice a question or accusation towards Nuke so he can reply to you about it and, thus, you can fully decide how you feel about him.

3. If you believe my arguments and cannot find any new questions or doubts then vote for him. 

For myself, I will say that I do want him lynched.

So, you thought he was scum before, yet then later you claim you wanted to give him a chance. Why? What specifically did he say that made you think he was town? In fact, Dakarian, you've never said what's making you think Nuke is scum now. You say "the Apostolic Nihilist post", but we can't read your fucking mind, so please direct us (me) to what you're talking about. You have this nasty habit of not saying the evidence against the accused. Seriously, I can't figure out what makes you believe Nuke is scum. I did notice he's being somewhat defensive in his posts, but again, that's the tunnelvision you have going on. I also can't figure out if you're scum who's making a bullshit case against Nuke, or if I just missed something major. So please, Dakarian, just tell me: What made you think Nuke was scum originally? I'll reread everything from there, I just want to know where to start.

@Org: That's not good enough, I'll get to you later. Just know this: I'm going to interrogate the SHIT out of you, Bandwagon Mcgee.

[NUKE9.13]

I read through that and it does seem he is backtracking. And the fact that he is acting a bit strange with the scummy business does seem....well, scummy. Unvote Vote Nuke. I agree with dakarian's points. he does seem to be a bit active lurking, although more active than myself.

Clarify is spelled with an a, not an "e", by the way.

What what
Active lurking is posting posts with no content. I believe my posts had content. You have yet to seriously participate in this game.

Dakarian: Very well. Do you want me to, once again, defend myself, or will you not read it? If you won't read it, well, we've already said all there is to say, and I doubt that another giant post is going to sway anyone else's opinions by this point.
One new point you brought up was an accusation of buddying. Well, I am not. I believe you are town. That is my opinion. If I were an impartial bystander, I would still believe you are town.
Please note that I am not giving up. Just because you are convinced I am scum does not mean that everyone else is, and, indeed, if anyone else thinks I am scum, please give a short summary of why, and I will indicate why you are wrong. Also, should I reach L-1, please give me a moment to say my last things before I go.

MrPerson: Don't be silly. You are misinterpreting dakarian there; it is clear that his first quote was indicating that, unless I return, he believes me scum. Once I returned, he decided to make sure I was scum. Apparently my posts went some way to convincing him I was town again, but then I messed up and slid back into 95% scum territory.
That is obvious.