Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 ... 24 25 [26] 27 28 ... 57

Author Topic: Pick Your Scumteam - Mafia wins - Thanks to everyone that stuck with it  (Read 78723 times)

webadict

  • Bay Watcher
  • Former King of the Mafia
    • View Profile
Re: Pick Your Scumteam - Day1 - [Replacement needed!]
« Reply #375 on: September 17, 2010, 06:46:05 am »

2. I'm saying that lurker- and noob-hunting is a fairly standard scumtell.  I'm not saying my targets are especially hard (I rate them a medium or so, with Zai and Webadict being "hard" and Elegy/Tack being "easy").

Toony isn't an especially easy player to lynch, in my point of view, especially since we have you to back him up and go "hurr, let's never lynch Toony because he's usually town and I can't read him!"  That is buddying and chainsaw defense, scumbucket.
...

It's not about being HARD or EASY. It's about lynching scum. Difficulty of the lynch does NOT correlate with scummitude. You'll need more than someone going after hard or easy targets, because last I checked, easy targets can be scum.

3. I don't know how you turn "You're attacking me for my behavior.  Obviously, I could just do whatever the hell I wanted, but that wouldn't be very good for the group as a whole--now would it?" into "me criticizing you for scumhunting."  Overreaction noted.

Behavior is the basis for scum suspects.  My point is that if I don't want to be suspected pointlessly (i.e. because I am town), I had better keep tabs on my behavior.
So, are you saying that you wouldn't have acted better if I hadn't shoved you? Because, really, you should be playing like this all of the time!

4. Let's go over this again.

a. Jokerman says his targets are Elegy, Tack, and Toony.
b. Vector thinks "Hmm, those are 'easy targets' and he hasn't even been attacking them or questioning them at all.  Plus, he's not even bothering to vote."
c. SirBayer says "YOU'RE HYPOCRITICAL FOR VOTING TOONYMAN"
d. I say "No, this is about target-profiling, not about voting ToonyMan in and of itself.  I am not doing what I think Jokerman is doing--i.e., attacking a portfolio of weak targets.  In fact, here are my suspects, so that you don't have to take my word on it."
e. SirBayer says "OH MY GOD WHY ARE YOU MENTIONING YOUR SUSPECTS ARE YOU SCARED HUH HUH HUH"
f. blah blah blah blah blah
You'll probably want to make this clearer for people that have no idea what you're talking about. Hyperboles don't transfer well without quotes. Otherwise, outsiders are going back trying to figure out what's up.

5. I haven't launched an attack on Webadict.  I have my hands full dealing with two people trying to crack me, the majority vote on my head, and two people I'm trying to crack myself.  I don't have time to get into another brawl with Webadict right now.

As you may have noted, I haven't been stirring anything up with Webadict (remember how he started the recriminations and the yelling and the attacking?).  In fact, that's what you're accusing me of--failing to stir things up with Webadict.  That's bad logic.
Perhaps you wouldn't have gotten in my way had you actually played well to start off with. Because, you're playing well now that there's a lot less accusing people of the things you yourself are doing.

And while we're at it, I think a good reason you're not going after me is because I AM NOT BEING ANYWHERE AS SCUMMY AS YOU. I think your biggest argument against me is "Webadict wasn't playing full strength right off the bat." Hey, look at that, there's all of your evidence you've got. You can even say I said it so it must be true (Which it is.)

If you HAD an argument, you would've posted it. Simple as that. I think it'd be easy to make an argument against me if you truly thought I was scum. But, instead I think you'll just try a "It's a gut thing" type of response, wait it out in hopes someone else will make a reasonable argument for you, and then you'll hop on and ride that wave.

I don't have anything specific, and no... I'm not going to drop my suspicion just because you wish I would.  Sorry, sweetheart, that isn't how it works.  I'm not sidelining on him.  I'm not even attacking him.  I'm just leaving a trail.  A reminder.  "When I die, please look at Webface.  Don't just be scared of him.  I can't see anything conclusive, but there's something there--so look, damn it."
They can go ahead and look at me all they want. In fact, they can look at me right now! There's a REASON I have no votes on me and you have 4. So, might as well post all the information you think the Town needs before you die.

You want to talk about "not helpful?"  Go kick the lurkers!  I'm not being lynched because I'm not helpful.  I'm being lynched because two people voted and left, because Webby is either trying to get rid of a high-level player or really wants to know my alignment, and because you found somebody to jump on and twist around.  EVERYONE is waiting on the lurkers.  We can't do anything else!  I'm not waiting on them to defend myself, to find someone to attack... none of that.  I'm waiting on them to show up, decide whether they want to hang me or not, and get scum-hunting.  To be present.  If you aren't waiting for them, then you must not care whether or not we actually discover anyone's alignment.
Again, it's not about "high-level." If Org was doing the exact thing you were doing, I'd have to lynch him. But, nice try. I mean, all of that evidence I have says that my voting you is COMPLETELY AND UTTERLY JUSTIFIED. Disagree if you want, but it's true.

AND WHY DON'T YOU KICK THE LURKERS?!?!? You can do it by saying
"Eduren: Prod Pandarsenic."
But you don't.

And waiting for anyone is just going to get you killed. We're not waiting for you to be done waiting. Mostly because we believe you're scum.

See, it's like you're failing logic. The people that are attacking you THINK YOU ARE SCUM. If we think you are scum, WE WILL LYNCH YOU. We don't need to wait for other people because WE HAVE A SCUM. So, think about the fact that while you're waiting, we're thinking you're more likely scum because you're too busy waiting for lurkers to defend yourself properly.

And instead of defending yourself, you're HOPING that people will simply vote someone else. You're somehow certain that I won't change my vote, which is odd because if I were you, and I had played as horribly to begin with, I'd probably try and show how greatly I've improved. Granted, you still did exceedingly horrible, but maybe you could've redeemed yourself had you not explicitly said you're just going to avoid me.
Logged

SirBayer

  • Bay Watcher
  • Legendary Riflepenguin
    • View Profile
Re: Pick Your Scumteam - Day1 - [Replacement needed!]
« Reply #376 on: September 17, 2010, 12:02:25 pm »

Not fair to ninja me when I'm asleep, Webby. >_> Anyhow.

1. I prompted you? I didn't really care until later. You still felt the need to bring it up to me.

2. See what Webadict said. Also, took you this long to get around to OMGUSing? Good work on the slow reaction.

And see, that's what I'm saying about you. You're going after what I consider an easy lynch.

3. Only scum worries what they look like. Only scum, ever.

4. You are scared, apparently. See #3.

5. See what Webadict said. There's nothing to add to it.
Logged
Dude, you don't want to be messing around with imperial assloads.  The conversion rate to horseloads is atrocious.
Rules are for suckers.

Vector

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Pick Your Scumteam - Day1 - [Replacement needed!]
« Reply #377 on: September 17, 2010, 12:28:47 pm »

...

It's not about being HARD or EASY. It's about lynching scum. Difficulty of the lynch does NOT correlate with scummitude. You'll need more than someone going after hard or easy targets, because last I checked, easy targets can be scum.

Scum often go for easy targets because, well, they're easy.  I certainly agree that easy targets can be scum, which is why the other thing I keep mentioning is important: Jokerman's targets were two newbies and the players that "no one can read," and he was voting none of them.  He was attacking none of them.  He showed up immediately when called, announced his suspicions, and then said he was holding onto his vote until he was sure.  Then he voted and disappeared.

That's scummy behavior, as a whole.


3. I don't know how you turn "You're attacking me for my behavior.  Obviously, I could just do whatever the hell I wanted, but that wouldn't be very good for the group as a whole--now would it?" into "me criticizing you for scumhunting."  Overreaction noted.

Behavior is the basis for scum suspects.  My point is that if I don't want to be suspected pointlessly (i.e. because I am town), I had better keep tabs on my behavior.
So, are you saying that you wouldn't have acted better if I hadn't shoved you? Because, really, you should be playing like this all of the time!

Of course I'm acting better because you shoved me.  It was really helpful, in fact--but ideally, shouldn't one be trying to play a perfect town game, rather than needing to have it kicked into them by Webadict?


Quote from: Vector
a. Jokerman says his targets are Elegy, Tack, and Toony.
b. Vector thinks "Hmm, those are 'easy targets' and he hasn't even been attacking them or questioning them at all.  Plus, he's not even bothering to vote."
c. SirBayer says "YOU'RE HYPOCRITICAL FOR VOTING TOONYMAN"
d. I say "No, this is about target-profiling, not about voting ToonyMan in and of itself.  I am not doing what I think Jokerman is doing--i.e., attacking a portfolio of weak targets.  In fact, here are my suspects, so that you don't have to take my word on it."
e. SirBayer says "OH MY GOD WHY ARE YOU MENTIONING YOUR SUSPECTS ARE YOU SCARED HUH HUH HUH"
f. blah blah blah blah blah
You'll probably want to make this clearer for people that have no idea what you're talking about. Hyperboles don't transfer well without quotes. Otherwise, outsiders are going back trying to figure out what's up.

Sure.  URLs attached to letters, now.


Perhaps you wouldn't have gotten in my way had you actually played well to start off with. Because, you're playing well now that there's a lot less accusing people of the things you yourself are doing.

And while we're at it, I think a good reason you're not going after me is because I AM NOT BEING ANYWHERE AS SCUMMY AS YOU. I think your biggest argument against me is "Webadict wasn't playing full strength right off the bat." Hey, look at that, there's all of your evidence you've got. You can even say I said it so it must be true (Which it is.)

If you HAD an argument, you would've posted it. Simple as that. I think it'd be easy to make an argument against me if you truly thought I was scum. But, instead I think you'll just try a "It's a gut thing" type of response, wait it out in hopes someone else will make a reasonable argument for you, and then you'll hop on and ride that wave.

Yes, unfortunately I had to spend a while accusing people of things I, myself was doing, because there wasn't a wide array of other scumtells to pick out.  My biggest argument isn't "Webadict wasn't playing full strength off the bat."  It looked bad at the time (especially in comparison to how you usually play), but now that you've shown up, I think I'm satisfied.  I went back to look at my posts and yours from the beginning of the game, and in retrospect what looked like overreactions/attempts to make me curl up and die, rather than attacking anyone or defending myself, were just vintage Webadict.  This quotation, in particular, had bothered me:

Right, so you're saying that somebody who has yet to post (And is therefore a null player) is one of your suspicions. Which can hardly be convincing for the rest of your list. I mean, who would take that seriously?

I also like your little maneuver to generate a lack of confidence in my list.  Clever, but no thanks.

You're accusing, but you're also making a suggestion--that my list wouldn't convince anyone.  This is a technique people often use to shift opinion, like saying "thank you for the speedy reply" at the bottom of an email.  It's pressure and a reminder that a reply had better be forthcoming (or else!), in a very indirect fashion.  At the time, it reminded me of things I'd do to diminish other people's cases, and break them down until no one would pay attention to them.  A suggestion.  You've stopped doing that, though, and for now I am satisfied.

I'm not going to say that I think you're town, but I don't especially think you're scum, either.  My accusations are retracted.


Again, it's not about "high-level." If Org was doing the exact thing you were doing, I'd have to lynch him. But, nice try. I mean, all of that evidence I have says that my voting you is COMPLETELY AND UTTERLY JUSTIFIED. Disagree if you want, but it's true.

AND WHY DON'T YOU KICK THE LURKERS?!?!? You can do it by saying
"Eduren: Prod Pandarsenic."
But you don't.

And waiting for anyone is just going to get you killed. We're not waiting for you to be done waiting. Mostly because we believe you're scum.

See, it's like you're failing logic. The people that are attacking you THINK YOU ARE SCUM. If we think you are scum, WE WILL LYNCH YOU. We don't need to wait for other people because WE HAVE A SCUM. So, think about the fact that while you're waiting, we're thinking you're more likely scum because you're too busy waiting for lurkers to defend yourself properly.

And instead of defending yourself, you're HOPING that people will simply vote someone else. You're somehow certain that I won't change my vote, which is odd because if I were you, and I had played as horribly to begin with, I'd probably try and show how greatly I've improved. Granted, you still did exceedingly horrible, but maybe you could've redeemed yourself had you not explicitly said you're just going to avoid me.

I can't disagree that your vote on me is justified, because I was playing really, really badly.  I'm not "waiting for lurkers" to help defend me--obviously, only I can defend myself, and I don't really expect the lurkers to do anything but come back and plop another vote on my head.

I wasn't asking for a prod on Pandarsenic previously because he had what appeared to be a legitimate excuse.  Now that he is presumably back from his doctor's appointment, I will request a prod on Pandar.

I have, in fact, been defending myself, but there's a certain element of just "hoping" that one will be unvoted.  I have no way to force anyone to unvote me, and I don't particularly expect to be unvoted given the way I was playing.  Certainly, I hope that my improved behavior will result in not being lynched, but ... well, can I blame anyone?  Not really.




1. I prompted you? I didn't really care until later. You still felt the need to bring it up to me.

Again, as I stated previously, I brought up my list to establish context and explain what I was actually talking about.  You accused me of doing "what I was accusing Jokerman of."  I explained what my accusation was, and then proceeded to bring up my list to show how my behavior was different from my accusations of Jokerman.


2. See what Webadict said. Also, took you this long to get around to OMGUSing? Good work on the slow reaction.

And see, that's what I'm saying about you. You're going after what I consider an easy lynch.

The fact that I attack my attacker only when he does something scummy implies that it isn't an OMGUS.  OMGUS requires a certain lack of evidence.

You are blowing my actions, such as they are, out of proportion.  If you're scumhunting, then look at what I am doing, rather than how you could force my actions to appear for your own advantage.


3. Only scum worries what they look like. Only scum, ever.

This is false.  Look at all the beginner's games that have ever run, if you like.  The beginners start off looking scummy and, as they are attacked, change their play.  They care what they look like, for otherwise there would be no incentive to change.

This is like saying "only scum care whether they're lynched or not."  It isn't true.


4. You are scared, apparently. See #3.

I see more townies give up than scum players.  Yes, an idealized townie is never scared.  That doesn't mean that a townie cannot be scared--does it?
Logged
"The question of the usefulness of poetry arises only in periods of its decline, while in periods of its flowering, no one doubts its total uselessness." - Boris Pasternak

nonbinary/genderfluid/genderqueer renegade mathematician and mafia subforum limpet. please avoid quoting me.

pronouns: prefer neutral ones, others are fine. height: 5'3".

Eduren

  • Bay Watcher
  • A new theme!
    • View Profile
Re: Pick Your Scumteam - Day1 - [Replacement needed!]
« Reply #378 on: September 17, 2010, 01:56:47 pm »

Pandarsenic has been prodded.
Logged
I don't know.  Duke wants me to stop playing mafia.
That's the sign of an abusive boyfriend, Toony... you don't have to listen to him.

Eduren

  • Bay Watcher
  • A new theme!
    • View Profile
Re: Pick Your Scumteam - Day1 - [Replacement needed!]
« Reply #379 on: September 17, 2010, 02:00:47 pm »

Votecount

Zai -1- ToonyMan, 
Org --
Elegy -3- Zai, Org, Tack,
Pandarsenic --
Jokerman-EXE --
Tack -2- Lonewolf I, Jokerman-EXE,
Webadict --
Lonewolf I --
ToonyMan -2- Vector, Elegy,
SirBayer --
Vector -4- Pandarsenic, Mr.Person, Webadict, SirBayer,
Mr.Person --
JoshuaFH --

Not Voting: JoshuaFH,

Day ends in 4 hours.
« Last Edit: September 17, 2010, 02:27:35 pm by Eduren »
Logged
I don't know.  Duke wants me to stop playing mafia.
That's the sign of an abusive boyfriend, Toony... you don't have to listen to him.

SirBayer

  • Bay Watcher
  • Legendary Riflepenguin
    • View Profile
Re: Pick Your Scumteam - Day1 - [Replacement needed!]
« Reply #380 on: September 17, 2010, 02:16:17 pm »

...

It's not about being HARD or EASY. It's about lynching scum. Difficulty of the lynch does NOT correlate with scummitude. You'll need more than someone going after hard or easy targets, because last I checked, easy targets can be scum.

Scum often go for easy targets because, well, they're easy.  I certainly agree that easy targets can be scum, which is why the other thing I keep mentioning is important: Jokerman's targets were two newbies and the players that "no one can read," and he was voting none of them.  He was attacking none of them.  He showed up immediately when called, announced his suspicions, and then said he was holding onto his vote until he was sure.  Then he voted and disappeared.

That's scummy behavior, as a whole.

I suppose I can't argue with that.

I can point out that now you're redirecting. "Look at Jokerman. He's scum."

Quote from: Vector
I'm not going to say that I think you're town, but I don't especially think you're scum, either.  My accusations are retracted.

Backing off so soon after I call you on that little slip-up? You say I grasp for scumtells and then feed me what I'm looking for.

Quote from: Vector
Again, it's not about "high-level." If Org was doing the exact thing you were doing, I'd have to lynch him. But, nice try. I mean, all of that evidence I have says that my voting you is COMPLETELY AND UTTERLY JUSTIFIED. Disagree if you want, but it's true.

AND WHY DON'T YOU KICK THE LURKERS?!?!? You can do it by saying
"Eduren: Prod Pandarsenic."
But you don't.

And waiting for anyone is just going to get you killed. We're not waiting for you to be done waiting. Mostly because we believe you're scum.

See, it's like you're failing logic. The people that are attacking you THINK YOU ARE SCUM. If we think you are scum, WE WILL LYNCH YOU. We don't need to wait for other people because WE HAVE A SCUM. So, think about the fact that while you're waiting, we're thinking you're more likely scum because you're too busy waiting for lurkers to defend yourself properly.

And instead of defending yourself, you're HOPING that people will simply vote someone else. You're somehow certain that I won't change my vote, which is odd because if I were you, and I had played as horribly to begin with, I'd probably try and show how greatly I've improved. Granted, you still did exceedingly horrible, but maybe you could've redeemed yourself had you not explicitly said you're just going to avoid me.

I can't disagree that your vote on me is justified, because I was playing really, really badly.  I'm not "waiting for lurkers" to help defend me--obviously, only I can defend myself, and I don't really expect the lurkers to do anything but come back and plop another vote on my head.

I wasn't asking for a prod on Pandarsenic previously because he had what appeared to be a legitimate excuse.  Now that he is presumably back from his doctor's appointment, I will request a prod on Pandar.

I have, in fact, been defending myself, but there's a certain element of just "hoping" that one will be unvoted.  I have no way to force anyone to unvote me, and I don't particularly expect to be unvoted given the way I was playing.  Certainly, I hope that my improved behavior will result in not being lynched, but ... well, can I blame anyone?  Not really.

This doesn't sound like Vector. Vector has an ego. She admits it. She thinks she's the best player on the face of the planet. Kow-towing to Webadict does not sound like Vector. Vector's and Webadict's egos do not get along. You're trying to get him less annoyed and suspicious of you, aren't you?



Quote from: Vector
1. I prompted you? I didn't really care until later. You still felt the need to bring it up to me.

Again, as I stated previously, I brought up my list to establish context and explain what I was actually talking about.  You accused me of doing "what I was accusing Jokerman of."  I explained what my accusation was, and then proceeded to bring up my list to show how my behavior was different from my accusations of Jokerman.

Perhaps I was unclear when I made my accusation. Perhaps that lead to this mixup. That happens, I'm not great with words.

What I meant was that you were chasing ToonyMan, who you yourself said was an unacceptable target. I considered that scummy.

Quote from: Vector
2. See what Webadict said. Also, took you this long to get around to OMGUSing? Good work on the slow reaction.

And see, that's what I'm saying about you. You're going after what I consider an easy lynch.

The fact that I attack my attacker only when he does something scummy implies that it isn't an OMGUS.  OMGUS requires a certain lack of evidence.

You are blowing my actions, such as they are, out of proportion.  If you're scumhunting, then look at what I am doing, rather than how you could force my actions to appear for your own advantage.

I suppose.

Hey, guess what I'm doing? Looking at what you're doing! And isn't scumhunting about blowing those little tiny errors up to scale? Isn't it about finding the tiny slip-ups and identifying them?

Quote from: Vector
3. Only scum worries what they look like. Only scum, ever.

This is false.  Look at all the beginner's games that have ever run, if you like.  The beginners start off looking scummy and, as they are attacked, change their play.  They care what they look like, for otherwise there would be no incentive to change.

This is like saying "only scum care whether they're lynched or not."  It isn't true.

Are you saying you're a beginner?

You're out of you're mind, right? The change is that they stop worrying about themselves and start worrying about the scum. Come on. You know this stuff.

Quote from: Vector
4. You are scared, apparently. See #3.

I see more townies give up than scum players.  Yes, an idealized townie is never scared.  That doesn't mean that a townie cannot be scared--does it?

No. But when you are town, you are darned close to the idealized townie, Vector. You play a good town game. This isn't a good town game. Not before, not now. Therefore, my only conclusion is that you're not town.

WOOP WOOP WOOP

Either Eduren is bad at counting, or Lonewolf I or Jokerman-EXE has a doublevote.
Logged
Dude, you don't want to be messing around with imperial assloads.  The conversion rate to horseloads is atrocious.
Rules are for suckers.

Eduren

  • Bay Watcher
  • A new theme!
    • View Profile
Re: Pick Your Scumteam - Day1 - [Replacement needed!]
« Reply #381 on: September 17, 2010, 02:28:11 pm »

Eduren are bad at counting.
Logged
I don't know.  Duke wants me to stop playing mafia.
That's the sign of an abusive boyfriend, Toony... you don't have to listen to him.

Vector

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Pick Your Scumteam - Day1 - [Replacement needed!]
« Reply #382 on: September 17, 2010, 03:14:00 pm »

Extension while waiting for Pandar to respond.  We've effectively had two people gone for all of D1.
Logged
"The question of the usefulness of poetry arises only in periods of its decline, while in periods of its flowering, no one doubts its total uselessness." - Boris Pasternak

nonbinary/genderfluid/genderqueer renegade mathematician and mafia subforum limpet. please avoid quoting me.

pronouns: prefer neutral ones, others are fine. height: 5'3".

Vector

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Pick Your Scumteam - Day1 - [Replacement needed!]
« Reply #383 on: September 17, 2010, 03:39:06 pm »

Scum often go for easy targets because, well, they're easy.  I certainly agree that easy targets can be scum, which is why the other thing I keep mentioning is important: Jokerman's targets were two newbies and the players that "no one can read," and he was voting none of them.  He was attacking none of them.  He showed up immediately when called, announced his suspicions, and then said he was holding onto his vote until he was sure.  Then he voted and disappeared.

That's scummy behavior, as a whole.

I suppose I can't argue with that.

I can point out that now you're redirecting. "Look at Jokerman. He's scum."

... We are currently talking about my "hypocrisy" vis-a-vis my thoughts on Jokerman.  I cannot discuss my attack on Jokerman without discussing my attack on Jokerman.  Seriously, man, you're just reaching at this point.


This doesn't sound like Vector. Vector has an ego. She admits it. She thinks she's the best player on the face of the planet. Kow-towing to Webadict does not sound like Vector. Vector's and Webadict's egos do not get along. You're trying to get him less annoyed and suspicious of you, aren't you?

No, I don't think I'm the best player on the face of the planet.  I have a lot to learn, and I've always been willing to admit that.

Just because I think I play better scum than anyone else on this board doesn't mean my game is perfect--because it isn't.  And yes, OF COURSE I'm trying to get him less annoyed and suspicious of me.  What should I be doing, trying to drop more scumtells?  Do my best to play worse?  No, I'm not just doing "anything to get him off my back," if that's what you think you're accusing me of.  I'm not desperate to keep from being lynched.  I just hope I won't be.


Quote from: Vector
1. I prompted you? I didn't really care until later. You still felt the need to bring it up to me.

Again, as I stated previously, I brought up my list to establish context and explain what I was actually talking about.  You accused me of doing "what I was accusing Jokerman of."  I explained what my accusation was, and then proceeded to bring up my list to show how my behavior was different from my accusations of Jokerman.

Perhaps I was unclear when I made my accusation. Perhaps that lead to this mixup. That happens, I'm not great with words.

What I meant was that you were chasing ToonyMan, who you yourself said was an unacceptable target. I considered that scummy.

You're the one who said he was unacceptable.

If that's what it takes, Vector, then yeah. We should never lynch ToonyMan.

Not me.  So stop screwing around.


Quote from: Vector
2. See what Webadict said. Also, took you this long to get around to OMGUSing? Good work on the slow reaction.

And see, that's what I'm saying about you. You're going after what I consider an easy lynch.

The fact that I attack my attacker only when he does something scummy implies that it isn't an OMGUS.  OMGUS requires a certain lack of evidence.

You are blowing my actions, such as they are, out of proportion.  If you're scumhunting, then look at what I am doing, rather than how you could force my actions to appear for your own advantage.

I suppose.

Hey, guess what I'm doing? Looking at what you're doing! And isn't scumhunting about blowing those little tiny errors up to scale? Isn't it about finding the tiny slip-ups and identifying them?

Not really.  You can find tiny errors on anyone, Bayer.  It's all about figuring out what is important, and what isn't.  I'm a townie.  I dropped scumtells.  I can list 5 other people that I could build lynch cases on, if I felt like it: You, Jokerman, ToonyMan, Tack, Elegy.  A lynch case can be built on anyone.  The trick is in figuring out which people who have dirt on them are town, and which are scum--and that's not done by blowing everything out of proportion.  That's done by looking at what is there, observing it, and analyzing it.

You're taking what you wish was there, for whatever reason, and twisting it into a very scummy picture.  It really isn't that bad, and I suggest that you step back to rethink your attack.


Quote from: Vector
3. Only scum worries what they look like. Only scum, ever.

This is false.  Look at all the beginner's games that have ever run, if you like.  The beginners start off looking scummy and, as they are attacked, change their play.  They care what they look like, for otherwise there would be no incentive to change.

This is like saying "only scum care whether they're lynched or not."  It isn't true.

Are you saying you're a beginner?

You're out of you're mind, right? The change is that they stop worrying about themselves and start worrying about the scum. Come on. You know this stuff.

No.  I'm using beginner's games as a large body of previously-established examples, because they're readily available and lend themselves well to the situation.  Look at NSBM 1, if you like.  There was plenty of freaking out by townies.  Myself.  ExKirby.  Look at Dakarian's fear of being lynched as anything but a jester.

There's a wide body of evidence.  The change is not that they stop worrying about themselves and start worrying about the scum.  The change is that they learn to govern themselves.  They learn what is acceptable behavior, and what isn't.


Quote from: Vector
4. You are scared, apparently. See #3.

I see more townies give up than scum players.  Yes, an idealized townie is never scared.  That doesn't mean that a townie cannot be scared--does it?

No. But when you are town, you are darned close to the idealized townie, Vector. You play a good town game. This isn't a good town game. Not before, not now. Therefore, my only conclusion is that you're not town.

I haven't played a town game for a long time.  I'm out of practice.
Logged
"The question of the usefulness of poetry arises only in periods of its decline, while in periods of its flowering, no one doubts its total uselessness." - Boris Pasternak

nonbinary/genderfluid/genderqueer renegade mathematician and mafia subforum limpet. please avoid quoting me.

pronouns: prefer neutral ones, others are fine. height: 5'3".

Mr.Person

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Pick Your Scumteam - Day1 - [Replacement needed!]
« Reply #384 on: September 17, 2010, 03:50:18 pm »

Extension while waiting for Pandar to respond.  We've effectively had two people gone for all of D1.

You seem to be missing something. You want an extension while waiting for Pand to respond. Respond to what? AFAIK, he has no outstanding questions posed to him. You've certainly posed none to him.

Not really.  You can find tiny errors on anyone, Bayer.  It's all about figuring out what is important, and what isn't.  I'm a townie.  I dropped scumtells.  I can list 5 other people that I could build lynch cases on, if I felt like it: You, Jokerman, ToonyMan, Tack, Elegy.  A lynch case can be built on anyone.  The trick is in figuring out which people who have dirt on them are town, and which are scum--and that's not done by blowing everything out of proportion.  That's done by looking at what is there, observing it, and analyzing it.

You're taking what you wish was there, for whatever reason, and twisting it into a very scummy picture.  It really isn't that bad, and I suggest that you step back to rethink your attack.

Why are you talking about building lynch cases when you haven't made one at all? You started building one on ToonyMan, but you kind of dropped that one to defend yourself, a very scummy move.
Logged
Youtube video of the year, all years.
Hmm...I've never been a big fan of CCGs - I mean, I did and still do collect Pokemon cards, but I never got heavily into the battling and trading thing.

By definition that makes you a fan since you still buy them.

Vector

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Pick Your Scumteam - Day1 - [Replacement needed!]
« Reply #385 on: September 17, 2010, 03:56:24 pm »

Extension while waiting for Pandar to respond.  We've effectively had two people gone for all of D1.

You seem to be missing something. You want an extension while waiting for Pand to respond. Respond to what? AFAIK, he has no outstanding questions posed to him. You've certainly posed none to him.

Waiting for him to respond to the thread.  Not to me specifically.

He's been gone for pretty much all of D1.  I'd say that there's more than enough stuff to respond to.


Why are you talking about building lynch cases when you haven't made one at all? You started building one on ToonyMan, but you kind of dropped that one to defend yourself, a very scummy move.

I only have so much time in a day to play this game, you know, and when you're under barrages this heavy from both Webadict and SirBayer (who seems to be "Webadict minus skill plus enthusiasm") it's not easy to go and build a big argument.

I have a case on ToonyMan.  It is there.  I built it.  I have defended it for perhaps 10 pages now, probably more.  If it were up to me, I'd lynch him--but I cannot do anything if no one else listens to what I have said.

I have been working on Jokerman.  There is some evidence here.  I built that.  The case is incomplete because Jokerman hasn't shown up to defend himself.  SirBayer stepped in and did it for him.  Unfortunately, I am too busy dealing with Bayer and so on to do much good when it comes to Jokerman.
Logged
"The question of the usefulness of poetry arises only in periods of its decline, while in periods of its flowering, no one doubts its total uselessness." - Boris Pasternak

nonbinary/genderfluid/genderqueer renegade mathematician and mafia subforum limpet. please avoid quoting me.

pronouns: prefer neutral ones, others are fine. height: 5'3".

Mr.Person

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Pick Your Scumteam - Day1 - [Replacement needed!]
« Reply #386 on: September 17, 2010, 03:59:40 pm »

Sadly for you, I still see dropping your attack to defend yourself as scummy, no matter what the reason. I'm going to give you a really big hint: the votes on you are not going to go away from you doing nothing. A case against Web (I know you dropped this, so then a case against Jokerman) is not going to magically appear from the sky. You have to do it. I don't care if every player in the game is voting you, you have to show one of them is scummier than you if you expect them to unvote you.
Logged
Youtube video of the year, all years.
Hmm...I've never been a big fan of CCGs - I mean, I did and still do collect Pokemon cards, but I never got heavily into the battling and trading thing.

By definition that makes you a fan since you still buy them.

Vector

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Pick Your Scumteam - Day1 - [Replacement needed!]
« Reply #387 on: September 17, 2010, 04:01:48 pm »

Then I guess I'll just have to be lynched, because at this point I'm sick of being beaten up every time I open my mouth and try to attack somebody.

If all you guys can say is "you can't attack that person because you were scummier once than he has been for the entire game," then it's time to cut my losses and do something better with my afternoon.
Logged
"The question of the usefulness of poetry arises only in periods of its decline, while in periods of its flowering, no one doubts its total uselessness." - Boris Pasternak

nonbinary/genderfluid/genderqueer renegade mathematician and mafia subforum limpet. please avoid quoting me.

pronouns: prefer neutral ones, others are fine. height: 5'3".

Vector

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Pick Your Scumteam - Day1 - [Replacement needed!]
« Reply #388 on: September 17, 2010, 04:07:12 pm »

Seriously, I have made cases against Jokerman and Toony.  They are there.  If you spent five minutes looking at what I have said, rather than how my statements can be construed to the worst result, you would see them.

You keep accusing me of failing to make cases, but I think you simply aren't listening to what I'm saying.  You saw how I was playing and decided I was scum--yes, I understand that.  Now that I've changed my methodology, you're too busy remembering what I did once to see what I am saying.  You're too busy defending my "victims" to actually look at what I have to say about them.

Well, whatever.  If it's over, then it's over.
Logged
"The question of the usefulness of poetry arises only in periods of its decline, while in periods of its flowering, no one doubts its total uselessness." - Boris Pasternak

nonbinary/genderfluid/genderqueer renegade mathematician and mafia subforum limpet. please avoid quoting me.

pronouns: prefer neutral ones, others are fine. height: 5'3".

Mr.Person

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Pick Your Scumteam - Day1 - [Replacement needed!]
« Reply #389 on: September 17, 2010, 04:19:32 pm »

I don't see why you're even caring what Webadict's attack is.

Proper response: Fuck you Webadict, I'm not going to vote myself and scummy actions are scummy actions. *continue attacking*

What you did: Yeah, but I'm not doing that stuff ANYMORE! Ignore the past, my actions now are good, see!
Logged
Youtube video of the year, all years.
Hmm...I've never been a big fan of CCGs - I mean, I did and still do collect Pokemon cards, but I never got heavily into the battling and trading thing.

By definition that makes you a fan since you still buy them.
Pages: 1 ... 24 25 [26] 27 28 ... 57