@Org: I posed a question for you early on in my first WoT, I want you to answer that.
No spoilers for you guys because everybody needs to read this.
Do you want me to put "I'm not saying 'don't attack me', by the way, go right on ahead. Just please FFS don't lump Lonewolf in with whatever I've done to make you think I'm scummy." at the end? At what point did I say or even imply don't attack me? And in any case, of course I don't want people to vote for me and attack me and what not. I fail to see how that's scummy.
I want you to not be so damned defensive. And it's the exact same sort of defensiveness with which you answer me. "Man, don't whack out on me, dude. I didn't do anything." Either way, I do not like 'go right on ahead' and attack Lonewolf. You spend a lot of time explaining yourself - thus, defensiveness. Shouldn't you be worrying about the scum out there?
You didn't answer my question. At what point did I say or imply not to attack me?
So you think explaining oneself is scummy? Brilliant!
I take particular offense to the portion of the original post wherein you say "Go ahead and attack Lonewolf." Yes, you
claim you're trying to separate yourself from him. That actually makes it worse, come to think of it. But the fact that you felt the need to point out "Lonewolf is an okay target too, guys," makes me feel mighty bad about you.
And yes, it is, if you're not willing to do anything but explain. Especially when you're not willing to do anything but explain. One-liners, one-liners, one-liners - until you get accused. You can only be assed enough to make the effort to retaliate, not to scum-hunt. Well, that's a scum-habit.
As for what you call WIFOM, I call it Org running around with a bloody knife. There's one of two scenarios. Either the player is scum trying RiA or the player is town or scum and just simply isn't very good. Either you've lynched good scum, bad scum, or a bad townie. Lynching ToonyMan was ToonyMan's fault. If we lynch Org and he's town, it's his fault. I'm not putting WIFOM into the situation, Org is. My way of killing the WIFOM is to vote the player until they explain themself or die. If they never explain themself, my best guess is that they were bad scum. If they do, they might still be scum, but at least it's possible to determine without any WIFOM.
Okay, I refuse to honestly believe that you don't see the WIFOM. Can you not comprehend that THE EXACT MISTAKE YOU MADE WITH TOONYMAN IS YOUR PRECISE ARGUMENT IN ATTACKING ORG? The idea that they are acting stupid, while possibly legitimate, is still so fraught with WIFOM (which is a tool of the scum, may I remind you) that it's useless as a scumtell. Ergo you're not scum-hunting, you're looking for a noisy, common patsy to put a vote on. Come on.
Once again, ToonyMan getting lynched was ToonyMan's fault. Either they're acting stupid or just are stupid, but either way the situation is filled with WIFOM. It's one of the two, and it's hard to tell which. So I questioned ToonyMan to try and figure out which one it was. ToonyMan kept being silly and stupid, so I assumed he was acting that way. If he ever stopped and explained himself properly, I would of reevaluated. I stand by lynching ToonyMan despite the fact he flipped town.
And everything being fraught with WIFOM was EXACTLY why I pressed in. Either he acts different or he doesn't. If he does, now we can scumhunt normally. If he doesn't, we lynch him. Most people are smart enough to realize that if you're getting voted because you're acting crazy and stupid, you start acting differently. ToonyMan did not, Org still seems to be the same to me.
So what, if Org happens to get lynched, it's his fault? WHOOPS! JEEZ, ALL THE VOTES THERE DON'T INDICATE ANYTHING. HE MUST'VE KILLED HIMSELF. FREAKIN' BRILLIANT.
The fact that you are
trying to figure out which one it is is the WIFOM. ToonyMan's actions were exactly what they were. WIFOM came from you. And you're consistently trying to convince me otherwise. You know what you did and you're guilty.
Oh, and a reminder - change of behavior upon receiving votes is a scum-tell. "Most people are smart enough to realize that if you're getting voted because you're acting crazy and stupid, you start acting differently." Uh, no. That's not how Mafia is played. Unless, of course, you're obvscum, which apparently you are.
Oh, then would you have me spend all my time in my first posts joking around? The fun is in the scum-hunt. The fun is in the game. And now I'm having fun. Scum-hunting you.
If that's not fun for you, all the better for me!
No, because if you did, you would be doing exactly what ToonyMan and Org are doing. I would vote you for it, too, by the way. You seem to be desperate to take an offhand joke I made and turn it into something scummy.
An offhand joke is exactly the sort of scumtell I'm hunting for. Trying to pass it off as nothing is a scumtell, the sort I'm hunting for. Thank you for proving me right again.
You seem to be under the impression that RVS had already ended. By Dakarian's instructions to me, RVS doesn't end until you're sure someone's scum. How do you RVS? You put a vote down. Random Vote. You've been in the Beginner Mafias, I'm pretty sure. You learned that lesson. Don't try to discount it.
Also, trying to turn my points on me? Scum-habit. Thanks for another scumtell.
Yeah, I don't vote outside RVS until I'm sure. That's what I just fucking said, why are you acting like I don't already know this?
And I've never been in or even read any Beginner Mafias except 1 and the one I IC'd, which was like 12 or 14 or something. They're not bad or anything, I just don't read games I'm not in. In any case, I have no idea what you're talking about, but it sounds to me like pressure voting, which I don't do. I've tried, it doesn't work well for me. It gets way too many false positives.
I was not trying to turn your argument back onto you, I was merely using you as an example of why your argument was fraught with error. Your argument was that being late out of RVS is scummy. I said that argument was incorrect because it would make you the scummiest player in the game.
You don't pressure-vote. Er. So why do you vote at all? Why vote and then
ask questions like you've been doing all game? Like you did with ToonyMan? You weren't sure he was scum. There was still room for doubt, so you asked him questions. That theory is contradictory, and therefore false. You're lying to excuse yourself.
Still didn't think he was scum.
See above.
So then why are you saying that I've acted scummy by not voting someone I don't see as scum?
Because, y'know. Pressure voting. Look up again.
Har har, you unvoted your Random Vote. Which, as I already pointed out, never happened. I've checked. I've checked every page in this game, there is not a Random Vote.
So this post never happened?
And since you've roleclaimed, what does that allow you to do?
Also, why did you roleclaim?
Jim Groovester, I don't see why you feel the need to press this issue.
Blaaaaaah guess I missed that one. Okay, you win that one.
You're riding their arguments in that you let them do the heavy lifting, and then you ride in with lame crap like "Hey, any reason you're passing blame?" Is that scum-hunting? HELL NO. Scum-hunting is accusation. That is wishy-washy flip-floppy crap. Scummy crap. You know that and I know that.
No need to scumhunt when you've already found the scum.
wat
watWATMay I remind you, again, as you continually ignore, that
TOONYMAN FLIPPED TOWN?!Yes, you were to blame for that at least partially. You were on the wagon. You were third on the wagon. You fit every goddamn wagoning description I have ever learned from Dak. You're wagoning and you're trying to weasel out of it.
I provided one vote on the wagon. Wait, what are you accusing me of again? I can't even remember. Wagoning? So you think my reasoning is bullshit? Are you trying to say that I made a literal copy of Criptfeind's and Jim's arguments? If so, you evidentally can't read since they're different. Not totally different, mind you, but they are different.
Different, absolutely. An excuse, absolutely. A wagoning excuse, ten times yes. Oh, and - you've only got one vote. Wagoning with only one vote doesn't somehow make it better.
Fuck you, these were very valuable questions. ToonyMan answered them poorly, so I kept my vote. Had he answered differently, I might of reevaluated.
Funny, that. I still just don't buy it. Active lurking is the worst kind of lurking. The first is a simple rhetorical question - without anything else to back it up. The second is just something you could probably have grabbed from the posts if you were willing to do the work on your scumgame. Apparently you're not. I take note again of wishy-washy accusations.
I can't prove ToonyMan's argument bullshit if he's NEVER MADE ONE TO BEGIN WITH. I was trying to get ToonyMan to say his line of reasoning. The fact he fought me every step of the way only served to piss me off.
So you killed him 'cuz he pissed you off? That's might pro-town, scumbucket.
I don't care about the whole "why" thing. Yeah, that's a fine question. What I care about is that it just smacks to me of hiding behind a self-assigned teaching role.
And, uh... if ToonyMan hasn't learned by now, he ain't gonna. Word to the town or the scum, he's gonna do what he's gonna do.
Fine, I think I could help a few players be better because I'm pretty damn good at playing mafia. You caught me, oh noes. The aside was more generally for everyone. I was trying to teach ToonyMan to explain himself so that he'd explain himself. I wasn't going to hold his hand or anything because he's been playing mafia for a very long time. He knows the rules and strategies and what not.
But ToonyMan acting crazy AND stupid is unnacceptable. Period. Either one is fine. Stupid arguments are ok as long as we can all follow them. Well-reasoned craziness is amazingly fun. ToonyMan's good at tunneling. He's good at getting other players to vote with him. And he's really fucking good at scumhunting an open field and picking scum to tunnel. Problem is, he's really bad at getting players to stop voting him because sometimes, we can't follow his arguments and they're fucking stupid anyways. I'm forced to conclude that he's doing it on purpose if he's making no sense. It's an easy fix; just slow down and re-explain your argument. If it makes sense, I'll unvote ToonyMan. That's what I wanted. That's what ToonyMan needs to do, or he's a liability by being unreadable.
So - hold on. You just said the meta-game here was that
what you voted ToonyMan for doing was normal. So you're saying... you punish him for playing the game he punishes? You're still blaming the victim here. That's bullshit.
They just kept condemning ToonyMan more and more... Huh. Remind me now, friend, what he flipped? Wasn't he... town? Just how I remember it.
So if your questions lead you to lynch a townie, then why are they quality now? Stop throwing excuses at me. Stop wasting time.
ToonyMan being town doesn't prove my arguments invalid. ToonyMan refused to explain himself, so he got lynched for it. I wasn't asking anything crazy out of him. My argument was really simple. ToonyMan explains himself or he gets lynched because not explaining oneself is scummy.
Want to prove that argument invalid? Go right on ahead, be my guest.
"He got lynched for it". You're still blaming the victim. I would make a comparison to rape, but this is just a game. Still, I have to point out that
blaming the victim for his own death is inevitably bullshit. See my last argument, too.
"More scumkilling Toonyman"? Really? Have you FORGOTTEN THAT THE MAN FLIPPED TOWN? Are you trying to convince me that somehow, during the day, he has changed (while dead, I might mention) from Town to Scum? I just... I just don't get it. It doesn't work that way. Maybe if you'd spent time scum-hunting you would've found scum. More likely you wouldn't have, since you ARE scum.
And yeah, I guess I am. When you had the power to stop that bank robbery and you wasted time helping that little old lady, well, I'm gonna have to guess that you're in cahoots with the bank robbers.
By "scumkilling" I meant trying to get the town to lynch the scum ToonyMan. Later events (such as ToonyMan flipping town) do not affect previous events.
What do you want me to do, critically examine everything I know about mafia because I accidentally thought ToonyMan was scum when he was town? That's ridiculous and you know it. I might rethink some shit, but not in the middle of a fucking game.
You trying to paint me as scummy by giving advice to another player is utterly ridiculous. Me voting ToonyMan was not effected by the help at all. It's not like I'm incapable of doing more than one thing in a post. Would I have not lynched ToonyMan if I hadn't of offered the advice? No.
Here's the metaphor as it really is:
I'm flying over to a bank robbery to stop it. On the way, I notice a little old lady crossing the street. I pick her up, fly her over to the other side, and then continue on my way to the robbery. The entire trip to help the lady took seconds and I still got to the robbery in time.
So tell me, how does that prove that the hero (me) is in cahoots with the robbers (scum)? It doesn't. Now, let's continue the metaphor for a bit, shall we?
While fighting the robbers, I mistake a hostage for one of them, so I shoot him. Woops, I just killed an innocent bystander (ToonyMan). Is the hero really a supervillian? THAT'S what you're trying to prove.
I... don't know how to explain to you that ToonyMan was still a townie, and that according to yourself, you voted him for doing stuff he normally did. So let's play that metaphor out again, hmm? You pick up the old lady, hooray! You drop her off by the side of the road. Townies nearby gasp in pleasure! A super-hero! But in that time the bank robbers grab hostages. And then you shoot the hostage, and then you try to pass it off as just fine because y’know, he was asking for it. And as it turns out, you’re actually a supervillain playing at superhero, the way scumbuckets tend to do, y’know?
And a fun side-note: You never thought he was scum.
The WIFOM is not mine, my friend, it was ToonyMan making it. If ToonyMan didn't act stupid, he wouldn't cause WIFOM. Don't like the WIFOM? Do something to break it. ToonyMan never stopped acting retarded, so I concluded he was scum.
That doesn't make sense. That doesn't make sense and you know it doesn't make sense. The WIFOM was from you. You know the WIFOM was from you. You're the only one saying "BUT THAT'S WHAT HE WANTS ME TO THINK!" That's WIFOM. Remember? You know that's what it is, dammit.
I was never WIFOM'd for a second. I was like "ToonyMan is being hard to read (normal) and is deflecting, that's out of character for him. Vote him." Trying to figure things out, I asked him some questions. He never stopped being hard to read and never explained the deflection, so I never stopped voting him. The WIFOM was "Is ToonyMan being hard to read on purpose or accidentally?" I never cared since it doesn't matter. The solution is the same in either case; vote him until he becomes easier to read. He never became easier to read, so I never stopped voting him. If ToonyMan never acted crazy, there would of been no WIFOM. The fact I noticed it and pointed it out doesn't mean that I was the one making it. ToonyMan had dozens of chances to clear things up, but he didn't. So he got lynched. If he had cleared things up, he might be alive today.
That is completely unrelated to what I said. That is not an answer to that argument, and as a consequence I refuse to try to argue back. You are still blaming the goddamn victim. Why are you doing this?
Please define "attacking." This isn't attacking.
Getting everyone else to vote the player.
That’s your definition? Interesting. Coincidentally, the scum defines it the same way. Oh wait, that’s not coincidental.
You’re saying that
attacking = lynching. Any time you vote, you intend to at that moment kill that player, apparently regardless of any certainty of scumship, as I’ve proved already. So, uh. Not quite sure why this is a good counter-argument for you.
Being defensive isn't scummy. If somebody attacks me with bullshit, I'm going to clear it up.
No, uh, being defensive really is scummy. Like, really scummy.
You're right, I'm sorry. Being overly defensive is scummy. What I meant to say was this:
Defending oneself isn't scummy. If somebody attacks me with bullshit, I'm going to clear it up.
And yet that’s not what you’re doing, is it?
How on earth is asking what Org is thinking NOT a useful question?
The question, I find, is rather nonaggressive. Therefore, my primary complaint is that it isn't rhetorical. This isn't an attack. A pertinent question has an obvious, inevitable, scum-tell answer. A question asked like this is either RVS holding over too long or scum buying time, trying to pretend at scum-hunting. As I've made clear, I'm fairly sure it's the latter.
No, I was trying to figure out what Org is thinking. I have to start somewhere like who he thinks is scum and why. Only after he says that can I figure out his alignment. Again, you're right, it's not an attack. It's me trying to figure things out.
If you’re not attacking, then you’re not scumhunting. If you’re not scumhunting, you’re scum.
But... but that is dumb. You already mislynched ToonyMan for literally exactly the same thing. Either it's accidental - which I don't believe - or it's intentional and you want to mislynch the easy targets. I'm confident when I say that's definitely the case.
You act as though Org's earlier actions were OK and not something to lynch him for. Here's a hint, they are. ToonyMan's actions were also worth lynching him for. You explain yourself in mafia games or you get the fuck out. If you don't, the rest of us have no way of figuring out your alignment.
Maybe they weren’t okay. But if you constantly, as I’ve pointed out, blame the victim, then all I hear is you trying to draw attention away from yourself. Especially blame. ToonyMan, despite all your ramblings to the contrary, didn’t kill himself. Sure, you weren’t alone, but I am quite positive you weren’t sorry to see him go.
Author
Topic: Vote Mafia 7 - Game Over: Mafia Wins! (Read 45866 times)