Before I say anything else, I just find it funny when other people call somebody else scum as though it were a fact. Unless you're scum yourself, you cannot claim the affiliation of another player. So unless you're either scum or enjoy being wrong, I'd appreciate the dropping of the term "scumbucket".
I will reserve my vote until later on in the day when I have seen some discussion - I was never a fan of random voting.
So, Alsark, here's the deal. You show up D1, make some hemming and hawing excuses about how you "don't typically do anything D1." You say you'll start voting once people start voting for reasons--which immediately starts happening once you make that particular announcement.
Voting for me because of my consistent playing style, you mean? Yeah, that's a good reason :/.
... What is there to ask? It's day 1. In my opinion, any possible questions would be irrelevant and could not aid in finding scum. For example, I do not see how asking somebody to make up a rule would in any way help us to scum hunt. That is why I have nothing to ask and shall also be withholding my vote. Besides, we have extremely long day phases so there's no rush.
When requested to help enliven the discussion, you effectively kill it, saying that there's no need to kick-start things (especially because days are so long~!). Rather than attempting to figure out a better mode of behavior, you decide that our efforts are pointless... and so you will sit back, and watch the town languish. This is perhaps the definition of non-proactive.
I've already stated my opinion on this. I really don't see how a lot of what was being said helps to find scum -
at all. It's like talking about a football game and trying to find scum while doing it. It's just not going to happen.
<snipped excuses>
Obviously I do not discourage the discussion - discussion is always nice, but I guess I just don't really see how asking trivial questions will help in finding scum. If it helps you then that's great, but I probably won't pick up on much until people start voting for people with reasonings.
Right--you don't discourage the discussion. You just pass it off as trivial and figure you'll ignore it, rather than doing anything about it. That's called "discouragement by omission," doodabuddy. Additionally, reasoning has been supplied for votes... and yet you still haven't been active at all. Hm. What a lovely nest of lies you weave.
Reasoning as in the past couple of days? Honestly I couldn't tell you because I haven't been checking the site. So of course I wasn't active - I wasn't even here. That's why I'm trying to find a replacement. I have other things going on that came up after my joining, so participating in a round where a lot of people were already against me due to my playing style in the first place wasn't exactly top priority.
So I agree that I don't particularly do much at the beginning of a round, but I pick up mid-game and late-game. Also, perhaps it can be regarded as a bit selfish, but there are already people asking one another questions to get discussion going, so there is no need for me to do the same (especially when I do not see the point in such).
There is no means by which to "scum slip" from the questions that are being asked unless you are just a tremendously awful mafia player. So I don't really believe that, through the discussion, any one lynch will be any easier through the questions asked and answers received unless you happen to get extremely lucky and somehow hit the nail on the head. I don't see that as happening. Rather, it seems more like a way just to keep the thread busy until the actual game gets going. There's no problem with that, but I also don't see how it aids in finding scum. The fact of the matter is, at least to me, the day 1 lynch will almost always be the hardest lynch because you have absolutely nothing to go off of in a logical sense. You can try asking questions to get discussion going, which is nice, and certainly doesn't hurt, but I also don't know how much it would help.
Passiveness, excuses, etc., etc. "Well, I don't know how much it will help, so I'm just going to sit here until someone decides to make things look game-like. You'd have to be really lucky to hit someone on the head, right? Yeah, lucky..."
Looks to me like Zai got lucky, hey?
Not even sure what this means, so no comment.
I suppose I'll go ahead and ask the only question that seems of any relevance to me, and why not go ahead and just have everybody answer it at once? So to everybody: "What three players would you most prefer as scumbuddies and why?" Obviously Apostolic Nihilist needn't answer since he already has.
Then, you proceed to provide... even less information. This is called piggybacking/buddying. It doesn't matter whether you're doing it WRT an entire argument or just stealing someone's question during RVS: you're thefting someone else's work and running with it.
Now, as for why this is scummy, rather than merely lazy. Mafia is largely a game of information control. When you copy others' thoughts, chosen questions, whatever, it becomes impossible to read you. You are throwing up a smokescreen of other people's thoughts and feelings, which in turn will help make you look artificially town.
Nice try, scumbucket.
So asking a question somebody else asked is scummy? Explain. There simply aren't any good questions to ask that will net in scum or even come close to netting scum that you can ask on day 1. So obviously me asking people the ONLY question that actually seemed reasonable has to make me scum! :/ Plus I saw somebody else ask that question on another round - I figured it was a common question to ask. But evidently it's copy-righted and only one person can ask it per round; everybody else is scum. My bad.
I guess I should test out my vote to see if there is anything weird regarding it. I'll try voting for somebody who doesn't have a vote on them just to see if anything funny happens. For now, that vote will be LASD.
Could you be any more passive? "Oh, I do declare! What if I decided to vote LASD? Oh, my! Isn't it marvelous, Mr. Darcy?"
And you thought you objected to Zai. Sucks for you, Miss Elizabeth Bennett.
I was testing the voting system - I don't see any reason to get uppity about it.
I guess I should test out my vote to see if there is anything weird regarding it. I'll try voting for somebody who doesn't have a vote on them just to see if anything funny happens. For now, that vote will be LASD.
LASD has a vote on them, and was just voted for by Pandarsenic for that very reason. So well done for not actually reading what people have posted before you over-react to a day one randomness and also making it yet harder to work out what is going on.
Also well done for making me think your scum, I would vote for you but I'm not changing that till I know have the slightest idea what is going on.
Sorry, it was like 6:30 AM and I had pulled an all-nighter after doing homework all night. I didn't even see Pandarsenic's vote. I don't see how me also voting for LASD made things harder, though. Care to explain?
I guess I should feel proud. At least explain why you think that?
...
"Oh, my. I'm so proud of my ability to be scummy! Aren't I charming?"
No. No, you are not. What in the hell induced you to think that looking ragingly scummy was a positive?
It's called sarcasm. I'll be sure to point out every little intent in all of my posts just to not confuse you from now on. And I don't believe he ever did answer my question.
Oh, but yeah, as for having one fewer vote on me than I should... I don't know. I think you'd know if you had your voting rights removed since it said somewhere you'd get a warning first. So if you never got a warning there is no reason why you'd have no vote. So maybe Zai's vote doesn't count or maybe your vote doesn't count and you don't know it, or maybe votes on me are one fewer and I don't know it. I guess there could be a couple of weird reasons. Who knows with a semi-b round.
A most lovely BUCKET OF WIFOM. Seriously, dude. It's like you're a scumtell-o-matic.
I fail to see how one person saying, "Maybe Zai broke the rules," and then me explaining that that isn't a possibility (while offering a host of other possibilities) is WIFOM. I must not know the definition of WIFOM. Sorry!
I actually agree with Shades here. Theoretically, even if we KNEW the scum, it wouldn't do us much good if we didn't actually know how to vote for them. I'd say we need to do a fine balance between scumhunting and discovering how this system works. We cannot completely ignore scumhunting, but at the same time, we cannot just vote as though this were some normal game - because it clearly isn't.
Right. Now we don't need to scumhunt, we need to find out the voting mechanic. That's a perfectly valid opinion... or at least, it would be if you were doing anything. But no, first it's "Well, I'll scumhunt later." Then it's "Well, I'm not scumhunting because we need to figure out voting." Then it's "I'm being useless because other people are being useful for me."
This is ridiculous, young man. Absolutely ridiculous.
I
was testing out the voting system, but you ridiculed me for that, too. So obviously no matter what I do, I must be a "scumbucket".
Interesting... I wonder what triggers rule 4, precisely...
MORE PASSIVE USELESSNESS. Way to active-lurk to go with your passive-lurkery.
Yes, it was useless - just thinking aloud. Sorry, I guess I'm not allowed to.
I'm just going to go ahead and say that I have a power. I don't know how this round works - maybe everybody has a power. If that is the case, then it doesn't really matter; otherwise, I'd rather at least not let you all lynch me. I figure it's better to be night-killed than be lynched.
Unless the scum got royally shafted, I imagine that they have nightkills or something equally useful. Thanks for nothing, scumbucket. Glad to hear about it.
[/quote]
Not sure what this means, either, so no comment.
Anyway, hopefully I'll be replaced here soon. Obviously my playing style is not "appropriate" here, and due to time constraints anyway I can't dedicate much to this round.
Farewell.
Author
Topic: Rysith's Semi-Bastard Mod Mafia (Game over, LASD and Vector win!) (Read 56647 times)