Print

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

[GlyphGryph]

SirBayer,
It wasn't a question that had a good answer, but that's alright - it is about the way you answer questions like that, not the content. Do you deflect, panic, scramble? Do you counter, aggress, react with anger? OR do you do something else? The type of response Dakarian suggested would have been "right" answers, for various reasons.

So, how would YOU have reacted to that question? And do you think Shade's response was good enough?

Regardless,
Unvote
Shades
Shades:

other than scum of course who know who the scum are so can start pushing an agenda from the get go.

What sort of Agenda are you seeing? Why does someone have to be pushing an Agenda to attack you?

[SirBayer]

Well, since he got coaching, I'm assuming that he needed it - I didn't really read his response carefully.

That's a good point, though. I hadn't thought of scumhunting through unanswerable questions.

I, of course, would have answered perfectly, seeing as I am the perfect pinnacle of Mafia-playing.

Anyway, you didn't address my other point. And don't take pressure off the guy 'till you're positive!

[Org]

Don't bandwagon.

[GlyphGryph]

You had another point I was supposed to answer? The part you bolded? Yes, I did write that. What do you want me to add to that? Rysith wanted to know I why I was here, I let him know.

So what flaws will you be working on.

That's a good point, though. I hadn't thought of scumhunting through unanswerable questions.

Of course you haven't. Because you're scum.
Would you have answered perfectly as town AND mafia, or only as one or the other?

[dakarian]

So if Dak is telling the truth (and he is, he's a mentor) then what GlyphGryph (if I read this right) did was try to trick him with an unanswerable question.

Scumhunting is ALL.  Townies are not angels fluttering their oversized eyes of pure white.  The townies are fully and truly desiring to MURDER people.  These are not kind individuals.

So yes, it is a trap (though some townies don't realize it is, while others do).  However, if it catches scum then that's that. 


A trap I personally love to fling is to tell a potential scum what they SHOULD be doing if they were town.  The 'trap' is if they actually start doing it, since it shows they are willing to do what it takes to get me off their case. 

The solution?  To stand up to your principles.  Whatever caused you to do what you were doing before I started telling you what to do, you STICK to what you're doing and tell what you do that instead of what I want you to do. 

Note, if I tell you to do something you realize you should be doing, then do it and just accept the fact that I'm going to be trying to lynch you for it. 

In general, the best defense is "explain yourself, believe in what you are doing, and be already doing what you know you're supposed to be doing".  That's the Townie Way.


Note to Mentors: if it seems like I'm "giving away my secrets" then, yes.. I am.  This the main POINT of this game is to teach, REALLY teach the players how to work their town game: it's actually more important than the game itself.  If it means that they become so pro-town that they bypass me when I'm scumhunting next game then it's a job well done.  Feel free to REALLY get in there and fine tune your trainees.

[SirBayer]

Anyways, I have a tendency to panic, even when (especially when?) I'm not guilty of something. As long as I'm the one on the offense I'm fine, but I don't always have time to be on the offensive in RL - and for a good chunk of this game I won't. So I need to work on not panicking (especially when I'm not actually guilty of something) and on resisting the urge to overexplain - which I'm failing at here, mind you.

Bold added for emphasis.

Taking the time to explain away the scumslips he'll later make, that he knows he'll make. That's, uh, real great, GlyphGryph. Thanks for tipping us off on things to watch for.

This. You never said a thing about this. Silence is concession, dear GlyphGryph, and you are being suspiciously quiet about this.

I always answer perfectly, of course. <- WARNING: A JOKE

I'm not scum. I simply hadn't thought of that specific idea.

[Vector]

*sigh*

My secret to scumhunting?  It's really, really simple.

"Good morning, Doodabuddy.  Let's talk about being scum."

Or, if you like: "Listen up, scumbucket.  You [BLAH BLAH BLAH SCUMBUCKET BLAH SCUMBUCKET BLAH SCUM BLAH SCUM SCUM SCUM]."

Or, further: "[OUTRAGED STATEMENTS ABOUT CAULIFLOWER PRINCESSES]"

"It's a scumtell bargain sale!  Wake up and smell the cypress!"

Mostly, I use catchphrases and try to look smarter than I really am.  I never lay traps.  I just watch people carefully and make an effort to shake answers out.  The repetitive nature of my game means that 1. I'm harder to read as scum (almost no one tries to use meta on me) and 2. the people I'm trying to shake down can remember all the times my technique has worked in the past, thus making me more effective.

I can't say I'm the best town player, but it works most of the time.

[GlyphGryph]

[quote author=SirBayer link=topic=49383.msg1049710#msg1049710
This. You never said a thing about this. Silence is concession, dear GlyphGryph, and you are being suspiciously quiet about this.
[/quote]

Uhm, I said:

The part you bolded? Yes, I did write that. What do you want me to add to that? Rysith wanted to know I why I was here, I let him know.

I honestly don't know what you're expecting from me on that front. If you see me doing any of those things this game, lay into me for it. Its not acceptable.

So lets get some slightly more serious questions:
If you were scum, who would you kill tonight, and why?

As a townie (ostensibly), what do you make of the various players right now?

[Eduren]

anyway, Eduren why are you in this? I thought your town game was ok.

You kidding me? My town game is atrocious.

[dakarian]

Last Vote Count:
Shades[3]: RedWarrior0(RV), Rysith(Nervousness, deflecting, WIFOM), GlyphGryph(disliked mention of Agenda)
Jokerman-EXE[2]: Org(RV), SirBayer(RV)
SirBayer[2]: Eduren(RV), Jokerman-EXE(Meta:Frantic and screechy)
Org[1]: Shades(RV)
Kashyyk[1]: Archangel(RV)
Eduren[1]: Kashyyk(RV)
Archangel[0]
Rysith[0]
RedWarrior0[0]:
GlyphGryph[0]:

1. Congrats.  Everyone has voted and has attended!

2. As stated before, the votes are WIPED at the 24 hour mark.  As of this moment, there are no votes on anyone.  You have until Wednesday, 10pm EST to place your new vote.

You may vote for the same person or a new person.  However, you must provide something OTHER than pure randomness.  The reason can suck, can be a lie, can be a flimsy question about the game, but by now you need to find SOMETHING about them to poke at.

Also note that Extensions can be requested at this time.

Deadline for end of day AND to vote: Wednesday, 10pm EST

Those who need to vote: Everyone!

[Jokerman-EXE]

For those that weren't voting out of randomness, are our reasons still sufficient, or do we need new ones?

[Rysith]

In general, the best defense is "explain yourself, believe in what you are doing, and be already doing what you know you're supposed to be doing".  That's the Townie Way.

While I'm by no means a mentor, I'd add that while you explain yourself, make sure you keep doing the other townie thing: Keep attacking, keep scumhunting. Someone who falls back to only defending themselves isn't thinking about the survival of the town over their own survival.

Now then:

I didn't think anyone would really consider it sensible to bandwagon on a reply to a day one random joke vote phase vote, other than scum of course who know who the scum are so can start pushing an agenda from the get go. It's possible this implies you are scum but my vote will stay on Org till he answers.

As to if that is the best I can do well you clearly need to read some of the very few games I've been in, I always seem to be thought of as scum on the first day. Something I really need to work on, but then that is why I joined this game.

Shades, you're making it easy. A soft OMGUS? More refuge in audacity ("I didn't think anyone would take me seriously!")? Losing your punctuation? Run-on sentences? Unable to address any of the previous complaints that were raised? You're nervous, my good scum. Nervous and defensive. You've been caught, and you're wondering how you can get out. But you aren't sure how, because you can't defend, and you can't attack anyone firmly. So you're nervous, defensive, spewing scumtells, and dead. Dead because I will nail you to the wall with every slip you make, scum.

Now then, Jokerman. I'm still suspicious of you.

Apologies if it looked like I was bandwagoning.

I'd like to unvote Shades in favor of voting SirBayer.

RL-meta aside, unvoting makes it look exactly like you were bandwagoning. You were asked to provide some backing or get off, and you got off. That says that you didn't have backing, and that (at this point) you don't find a convincing argument for Shades being scum. I can't believe that you changed directions that quickly, and what SirBayer did could hardly be termed an attack, especially an attack worthy of a "quick everyone he's trying to convince everyone I'm scum!" OMGUS. So get some decent reasoning in here or you'll make my list too.

Pre-post edit: Jokerman, you claimed you weren't voting randomly. Are you now claiming that both your votes for already-voted people, with flimsy reasons attached, were actually random?

[Jokerman-EXE]

Several points:

1. RL-meta aside? That's, uhh, like 90% of what I was saying. You put that aside, and of course there's no case.

2. I unvoted because I had no reasons other than what you had said and I had agreed with, so I figured instead of trying to prove I wasn't just following to follow, I'd pursue a different - though what I deemed weaker - position against SirBayer. I chose Shades at first because that was the direction that seemed the strongest position; once accused of bandwagoning, it no longer seemed that way. If that makes sense.

3. Neither vote was random. I think I've explained that sufficiently. As I read, I began to structure arguments against each. See #2 for where I am now.

[Rysith]

1. RL-meta aside? That's, uhh, like 90% of what I was saying. You put that aside, and of course there's no case.

2. I unvoted because I had no reasons other than what you had said and I had agreed with, so I figured instead of trying to prove I wasn't just following to follow, I'd pursue a different - though what I deemed weaker - position against SirBayer. I chose Shades at first because that was the direction that seemed the strongest position; once accused of bandwagoning, it no longer seemed that way. If that makes sense.

3. Neither vote was random. I think I've explained that sufficiently. As I read, I began to structure arguments against each. See #2 for where I am now.

1) I'm saying "Regardless of what the RL-meta was", not "ignoring the RL-meta". It looks like you voted, were questioned on it, and backed off. Plus, we have absolutely no way to verify the RL-meta, and no particular inclination to trust you. That makes it a bad reason, especially defensively.

2) Don't choose one target. Pursue what you feel is the strongest, and the second strongest, and watch for other things from other people. Why do you think I'm pressing you while attacking Shades? When you kill your first scum you need to have somewhere to go after that. And accusations of bandwagoning don't weaken your position, they are just a call to provide more evidence and reasoning with your vote. Backing down after an accusation of bandwagoning contributes to rather than diminishes the claim.

3) That's fine, I was just checking. A clarification, not an accusation.

So Jokerman: You've made something of a case for Shades and SirBayer. Do you have anything else for either of them, and what do you think of the rest of the players?

[dakarian]

For those that weren't voting out of randomness, are our reasons still sufficient, or do we need new ones?

If the reason is strong enough to fit the new standard there's no reason to change it.  That's similar to regular games where your reasons for targeting someone could exist for days before it's answered or the person is lynched for it.

Though be kind and don't write "for the same reasons" when voting again.  State the reason, even if it's the same one.