Print

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

[Jetsquirrel]

And i may have dropped some tells which jim only sees them as SCUmtells and nothing else, while i'm noob and post stupid answers for a few games straight because i need to learn stuff etc.

EDIT by post :

while those tells may be just noobtells of a clearly inexperienced player.

[Jim Groovester]

And i may have dropped some tells which jim only sees them as SCUmtells and nothing else, while i'm noob and post stupid answers for a few games straight because i need to learn stuff etc.

EDIT by post :

while those tells may be just noobtells of a clearly inexperienced player.

RRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHH

Gee, if you know you're dropping noob tells, why are you dropping them at all? You could have stopped dropping them anyyyy time, if, as you say, you know you are dropping them.

Noob knowingly being noob is a horrifically scummy defense.

And also Jim why are you trying to get Zathras off your back? In the last 2-3 pages you voted for me, later you vote for Zathras and a post later you immideatly vote for org without too much evidence expect heavy lurking which is very suspicious but not neccesarly scummy. I atleast now think that you are really trying to blame someone else for beng scum and shove Zathras away from yourself thus avoiding your own scummy lynch.

Because he's annoying? Because he's pretty obviously town and he's trying to lynch me? Because I am town and he's trying to lynch me? Because I'm tired of answering walls of texts? Pick one or all four.

If you're confused about my vote, I'm voting for pressure. Didn't you say something about that? Let's look at that too.

I must say Jim and criptfeind(who horribly died) but at that point i still didn't see enough reason to vote as i didn't see enough evidence to label one of them as scum. And is voting neccesary? I see it as a pressure tool and a real vote if you are convinced that some player i scum.

Is voting necessary? Absolutely. You can't get away with not voting. If you're not interested in lynching someone then you are not interested in finding scum. The implication of this is that you are scum. Voting is absolutely critical.

And since you're saying that you think voting is a tool used for pressure, you shouldn't have any confusion about how I've used my vote. Unless you're just completely full of crap and once again parroting what everybody else says.

Zathras, this:

Noooo! OK. It's true that most of Jim's Day Two play (except for the plan-related stuff) has been townie enough. I've pushed him, and he's not verbally cracking as scum. It might be better to stop trying. But I have one major problem with this:

Is more important than this:

Yesterday's Support
Red Magic - 1 Apprentice
Black Magic - 0 Apprentices
White Magic - 1 Apprentice

Even if we discount all the verbal play, there is this. If he is town, and he voted in accordance with his plan, it means that the entire scum team voted "none" or simply forgot. I find this extremely hard to swallow. It would be rank incompetence if they forgot, so much that I find it implausible, or a very cunning gambit, so cunning that I find it implausible as well. Therefore, I have no option but to remain convinced that Jim did vote red, supporting it as scum supporting his scum school. The alternative is too implausible.

You're holding a bunch of ifs, about my alignment, about how competent the scum are, more important than the things I've actually done. And you're holding rigidly to an unverifiable assumption.

Is it really such a stretch to believe the scum are incompetent? I mean, you suspect Org and Jetsquirrel, right? Look at the night kill too, if you want some more evidence. What purpose did the scum gain by killing Jokerman-EXE? I have no fucking clue. They actually did me a favor, since I suspected him at the end of Day 1.

And indulge me the WIFOM for a moment. Don't you think I'd be running a tighter ship than just one assist? If you don't believe that, then at the very least, don't you think I'd have picked a more productive night kill target?

You shouldn't vote me on a bunch of ifs and maybes if everything else I'm doing says I'm town.

[IronyOwl]

IronyOwl and Eduren are attacking each other with stupid useless shit that in no way helps me to tell anything about the two

I'm guessing Eduren is town. After that I'd look at IronyOwl because I have a bad feeling.

So you're not getting anything on Eduren from our argument but you think he's town? Where is this coming from? I don't think he's done anything other than said argument. Are you just running out of scumslots so he wins by default?

Zathras and Jim I'm neutral about for now.

I don't know how to read Zathras

In any case, me and you not seeing eye-to-eye on certain things is making it somewhat hard for me to figure out if the stuff you do is because you're scum or because you don't see any problems with what you're saying and doing. I'm leaning towards the latter right now.

On that note, I think you're just very, very misguided about some things.

I say this because I really do think the two of you are in a townie vs townie argument when your energies are better spent actually catching the scum.

So you can't read Zathras, are neutral about Zathras and Jim... but think Zathras is misguided town and both are townies tunneling each other? Which is it?

Currently the case is "you're not posting very much" to which all I can say is "I don't post very much compared to some other people but I have read every post and voted Org with reasons I've clearly stated. As far as I'm concerned, that's enough."

So you don't feel the need to do any scumhunting yourself, and are content with reading others' posts and lynching Org. No questions, no new statements, just... "Look stop accusing me of lurking also let's kill Org."

You like easy targets, Person?

IronyOwl, since you think Zathras' plan is awful, do you think he is scummy for suggesting it? It is a very anti-town plan, and there is a player in this game who has accused another player of being scum for proposing an anti-town plan. But this one's even worse.

I'm on the fence as to whether it was testing the waters or a legitimate but terrible plan. On the one hand, I'd rather not interpret any kind of bad suggestion as deliberate malice, and he must have known you'd shoot it down regardless. On the other hand, the only way it could have worked would be if sorcerers became invulnerable and powerful with three votes, in which case I'd assume they'd claim on their own. I guess I'm leaning towards it being harmless.

Criptfeind shit.

Creative storytelling. Since you wrote a limerick about it the buddying was obviously part of the reason you suspected me.
It should be obvious that whatever scumtells you think Criptfeind dropped that implicate me are completely null. You seem to have completely ignored this. This is not very good scumhunting methodology.

Bullshit. The story is there, in my cited posts. You being forgetful is one thing, now you're actively lying, after evidently having reread them. That's a wilful lie, and we know what liars are: scum.

You will be proven wrong and I am going to rub it in your face. With a limerick.

It's gratifying to know that attempting to discuss things with you was actually a pointless waste of time like I had previously thought, but don't say I didn't try.

Jim, why must you lie? And why, when Zathras called you out on it, did you simply respond with "FOOL! You'll pay for this! You'll see! You'll all see!"

Jetsquirrel - Since Jetsquirrel is a completely incompetent noob who can't string together a coherent thought, I have several issues with you thinking he is town.

This I vehemently dispute. I do not think he's town. I asked Eduren once, long ago "although JS has seemed townie enough to me, I may be missing something". Up to that point, he had seemed townie enough to me, then, partly thanks to your help, I realised several points I had missed before ("maybe I'm missing something" was the point of the question -- your answers were more helpful than Eduren's, though they took a more torturous road). I have since asked him about the stuff you so kindly pointed out that I had indeed missed: "are you buddying me? Why didn't you vote D1?" (and annex points).

I have never said he was town. I said that I didn't have anything on him yet, asked others for pointers on what I had missed, and you helpfully obliged. I now no longer think he "seems townie enough", at least until he answers my pending questions to my satisfaction.

although JS has seemed townie enough to me, I may be missing something.

There's three scum out there. I think I've been able to smoke out only one (you), and get smells of scum from another (Org). Whoever has most support at end of day will hang, and my vote will be on one of these two... unless someone else comes and becomes even scummier -- I'm pretty sure at least one of Eduren, IronyOwl & Person is scum, but I don't know which (since almost half the players are scum by now, it's not a particularly adventurous guess, but there you go).

Zathras, why must you lie? He was "townie enough" for you, and you were "pretty sure" he wasn't scum by process of elimination, but now you're trying to deny it.


Org. Do stuff. You've got plenty to work with and we're a day and a half from a potential lylo.

I also notice Eduren's vanished. HMMMM.

[JanusTwoface]

Current Vote Count

Day ends: 5 pm EST; 3 Nov 2010

Apprentices should send me a PM with the school they plan to assist by the end of the day.
Assists can be changed via PM until the day ends.

Activity warnings have been sent. 

Jim Groovester	(2)	- Jetsquirrel, Zathras
Org	(2)	- Jim Groovester, Mr.Person
Eduren	(1)	- IronyOwl
IronyOwl	(1)	- Eduren
Jetsquirrel	(0)	-
Mr.Person	(0)	-
Zathras	(0)	-

Not Voting: Org


Let me know if I missed anything.

[Jim Groovester]

Criptfeind shit.

Creative storytelling. Since you wrote a limerick about it the buddying was obviously part of the reason you suspected me.
It should be obvious that whatever scumtells you think Criptfeind dropped that implicate me are completely null. You seem to have completely ignored this. This is not very good scumhunting methodology.

Bullshit. The story is there, in my cited posts. You being forgetful is one thing, now you're actively lying, after evidently having reread them. That's a wilful lie, and we know what liars are: scum.

You will be proven wrong and I am going to rub it in your face. With a limerick.

It's gratifying to know that attempting to discuss things with you was actually a pointless waste of time like I had previously thought, but don't say I didn't try.

Jim, why must you lie? And why, when Zathras called you out on it, did you simply respond with "FOOL! You'll pay for this! You'll see! You'll all see!"

Isn't calling it lying a hyperbolic?

From my point of view Zathras only began seriously suspecting me after Criptfeind decided to agree with The Fucking Goddamn Plan. He obviously disagrees. I never intentionally warped the sequence of events as I understood them for my own purposes.

And me saying the Zathras will be proven wrong was not specifically in response to the accusation of lying, but was me giving up on arguing any further.


Why are you bringing this up right now instead of, oh, two days ago when it happened? Why does it concern you now, suddenly?

It feels like you're trying to reignite old arguments.

*sniff*

You smelled a little like scum before, but now you're really starting to reek, IronyOwl.

[Jim Groovester]

Isn't calling it lying a hyperbolic?

FFFFFFFFFFFF-

A bit hyperbolic is what that should read.

[Eduren]

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

-You're a rampant and unabashed hypocrite. Specifically, after having done even less yourself, you feel my lack of contribution means that I'm scum.

In the meantime, are you denying being a hypocrite now? You didn't seem to bother earlier.

The act of calling me a hypocrite is inherently deflection. But at the same time, I deny any hypocrisy on my part.

It's "inherently" deflection? Meaning the specifics of, say, whether or not it's correct are irrelevant?

You claim, that by being useless myself, that it is hypocritical for me to call you useless. Where this falls apart is the fact that I am not accusing you of being useless.

[spoiler=Let's Check On That]

This is, as I stated before, my reason for voting you (as far as Day 1 is concerned)

And I feel that your vote was doing nothing. First lets examine the rationale you gave me for voting Mr.Person. You claim that there is a question you want answering. Which is it? It couldn't be this one (your original reason to vote him), he had answered that very quickly. So it must be this one. Mr.Person did indeed not respond to it, but you didn't seem to care much. You didn't make it an issue, let alone mention it again until today. That's odd. You didn't care about it yesterday, but you do today! The only way I feel that this can be seen is that you had no reasons yesterday to leave your vote on Person and any reasons you claim today are fabrications.

Now, even if you were voting Mr.Person for the reasons that you claimed, I don't see why your vote should have been there. As you stated, I was looking like the scummiest person in the game to you. Don't you think that that warrants a vote? Don't you think that a vote on your scumpick would have been more useful than getting the answer to a question that didn't really matter?

In this, I am not claiming your uselessness. I am claiming that you had left your vote on Mr.Person for no legitimate reason yesterday, in order to avoid really scumhunting. You consciously used FoSes to cast suspicion without having to put yourself into the spotlight.

D1: He doesn't use his vote like a townie might, instead he forgets about it and solely uses FoSes to cast suspicion. I believe that he wasn't showing any aggression and that any attempts at finding scum were simply fake.

So? If I was the scummiest person yesterday why didn't you VOTE me. You were just casting suspicion and not pushing or scumhunting. That's why you're scum.

I think that IronyOwls "focus" on Criptfeind was really weak. He asked him some prodding questions but didn't actually try to determine alignment. This is why I questioned him on his Person vote, because I felt that if his suspicion of Cript was legitimate, he would have transferred his vote.

It's not so much who you are voting, but who you're not. The only thing you've done today is question Criptfeind. You have done nothing useful with your vote and are content to throw FoSes at people instead of scumhunting.

Not only do you mention I'm useless almost every post, the only other premise you have depends on it. If I wasn't being useless with my Person vote, there's no reason to think it's unusual. You entire argument is, directly or indirectly, that I am useless and therefore scum.

Feel free to show me where I've declined to explain why your accusations are bullshit.

Gladly. Here you dismiss my accusations by analyzing my posting history.

I suppose I could have elaborated, but I thought it was common sense.

If your argument depends on something being scummy, and you exhibit this trait moreso than the subject, there's really only 3 options:

1. You are more obviously scum than the target, and should be lynched prior to them.
2. The rules apply differently to you
3. You don't care about basic logic and are merely looking for an excuse.

If your entire argument is "IronyOwl is useless and therefore scum" (which it is), and you yourself are even worse, you are clearly my less adept compatriot and should be lynched as well. Anything else and you're just grasping for an excuse, and should therefore be lynched anyway.

And not only that, but every time you do this (which is a lot):

What is your obsession with that vote? Your chainsaw was too obvious, so now you've got to keep making a big deal of it?

You are dismissing my accusations as me just me chainsawing for Mr.Person. What you are doing is attacking my credibility in order to avoid actually refuting my accusations.

Your stated reason is garbage, so I'm trying to figure out what your actual reason is. Chainsawing Mr.Person seems like a good theory, since you jumped on something that wasn't otherwise particularly noteworthy.

As far as your accusations go, the only times I've declined to refute them is when I didn't realize I had to explain the blindingly obvious. Feel free to point out any further issues that need to be addressed in painstaking detail.

But lets take a quick look at what you have done Day 2. You have been voting me ever since I voted you today.

As far as I can tell, these are your reasons.

-You're obsessed with votes. Specifically, leaving my vote on Mr.Person is half of the reason you're convinced I'm scum.

-You're a rampant and unabashed hypocrite. Specifically, after having done even less yourself, you feel my lack of contribution means that I'm scum.

I will agree with you on the first one, half of my reasons for voting for you are your actions Day1. But why does that make me scum?

Because they're terrible. Town doesn't grab a random excuse and latch onto it in defiance of common sense. You have. The fact that one of the potential targets you could have gone after includes yourself only makes it more obvious that you have no interest in finding scum.

And I just showed you that my hypocrisy is just in your imagination.

No, I showed you that you're a liar who can't read.

So why am I scum again? You seem so convinced that I am scum, but I don't see any overwhelming evidence. All you've done today is to defend yourself and deflect onto me.

More hypocrisy. You want "overwhelming evidence" after calling me scum for not moving my vote as you wished.

How come your only defense is my supposed hypocrisy?

If I weren't here would you be going after yourself? Because that's what you're claiming I should do. That I should commit Seppuku before even thinking about attacking others for their actions.

[Zathras]

So, thanks for the remainder. JetSquirrel, are you buddying me, or merely agreeing with the unvarnished truth that is my impeccable analysis?

I'm agreeing with your arguments which are very convincing atleast from my point of view, while some can disagree like jim

are you convinced Jim is scum or do you just think it likely? What do you think Jim's scummitude says, if anything, about Zathras?

I am clearly convinced that jim is scum due to the things Zathras mentoined and a few other things. Scummitude? I honestly dont think Zathras is scum, he's giving good reasoning, good solid defense and a good scumhunting attitude.

How could I disagree with this kid when he's so obviously correct? His arguments are strong and reasoned, a shining beacon of clarity and truth...

But, JetSquirrel, while I am very full of myself and proud of my impeccable and persuasive analysis, it would be good for you to add a few original thoughts to lessen the impression that you are just buddying me and using my words to avoid scumhunting of your own. I'm easily swayed by flattery, sure, and can't fault you for being right, but this does seem a bit fishy of you. Leaving Jim aside, if you wish, how about you expound on the scumminess of Org and Person? IronyOwl did have some insighful thoughts about Person, but I don't want to see you repeat them -- I want to hear you make your own.

Zathras, this:

Noooo! OK. It's true that most of Jim's Day Two play (except for the plan-related stuff) has been townie enough. I've pushed him, and he's not verbally cracking as scum. It might be better to stop trying. But I have one major problem with this:

Is more important than this:

Yesterday's Support
Red Magic - 1 Apprentice
Black Magic - 0 Apprentices
White Magic - 1 Apprentice

Even if we discount all the verbal play, there is this. If he is town, and he voted in accordance with his plan, it means that the entire scum team voted "none" or simply forgot. I find this extremely hard to swallow. It would be rank incompetence if they forgot, so much that I find it implausible, or a very cunning gambit, so cunning that I find it implausible as well. Therefore, I have no option but to remain convinced that Jim did vote red, supporting it as scum supporting his scum school. The alternative is too implausible.

You're holding a bunch of ifs, about my alignment, about how competent the scum are, more important than the things I've actually done. And you're holding rigidly to an unverifiable assumption.
Is it really such a stretch to believe the scum are incompetent? I mean, you suspect Org and Jetsquirrel, right? Look at the night kill too, if you want some more evidence. What purpose did the scum gain by killing Jokerman-EXE? I have no fucking clue. They actually did me a favor, since I suspected him at the end of Day 1.
And indulge me the WIFOM for a moment. Don't you think I'd be running a tighter ship than just one assist? If you don't believe that, then at the very least, don't you think I'd have picked a more productive night kill target?
You shouldn't vote me on a bunch of ifs and maybes if everything else I'm doing says I'm town.

I disagree. First, the fact that you aren't verbally cracking may just be good scumplay, or insufficient hunting on my part. It doesn't absolve you, it merely does not condemn you. Second, you have seemed "mostly townie enough", except where you haven't, like when talking about the (fucking goddamned) plan, and other bits. It ain't like you're sporting a clean bill of health. There is no "everything else says I'm town". It's merely "mostly townie enough".

On the incompetence theory, no I really don't think they would all forget or vote none. JetSquirrel might, but not Org. Sure, he talks funny and walks with a limp, but it's irresponsible to dismiss him as incompetent. He's good, especially at playing with night actions and powers and gaming the system. No, from the field of play, JS is the only one I could grant may have "forgotten" to support his scum school. All the others must have chosen it, and I see that difficult.

On the other, I don't see Jokerman's kill as a bad choice; you generally want to NK someone who hasn't taken the spotlight much. Sure, he may not have been the best target, but within acceptable limits of competence. As to how tight a ship you would run, I can't say. Two supports would have been too conspicuous, so one was probably the right number. And one is what scum had, with my theory. No need for untidy ships.

And I did consider other options and permutations (which I can list if people are curious, but I'm sure you can work them out). The only other one that makes sense with you being town is that all three schools are town, and scum is all vanilla. Not impossible, I suppose, but just as implausible as the others.

I keep my vote on you because the support numbers are hard data, as opposed to people's wording or lurking or missteps or whatnot. It is indisputable that this happened. Interpretations may vary, and the alternatives are not impossible, merely too implausible, but I can't in good conscience call you "town".

When we close up on the end of the day, I may switch my vote to some other scum, if consensus is building and the reasons valid, but I'm afraid you won't leave my "scum" column for the rest of the game. For the reasons above. Colour choices.

Jetsquirrel - Since Jetsquirrel is a completely incompetent noob who can't string together a coherent thought, I have several issues with you thinking he is town.

This I vehemently dispute. I do not think he's town. I asked Eduren once, long ago "although JS has seemed townie enough to me, I may be missing something". Up to that point, he had seemed townie enough to me, then, partly thanks to your help, I realised several points I had missed before ("maybe I'm missing something" was the point of the question -- your answers were more helpful than Eduren's, though they took a more torturous road). I have since asked him about the stuff you so kindly pointed out that I had indeed missed: "are you buddying me? Why didn't you vote D1?" (and annex points).

I have never said he was town. I said that I didn't have anything on him yet, asked others for pointers on what I had missed, and you helpfully obliged. I now no longer think he "seems townie enough", at least until he answers my pending questions to my satisfaction.

although JS has seemed townie enough to me, I may be missing something.

There's three scum out there. I think I've been able to smoke out only one (you), and get smells of scum from another (Org). Whoever has most support at end of day will hang, and my vote will be on one of these two... unless someone else comes and becomes even scummier -- I'm pretty sure at least one of Eduren, IronyOwl & Person is scum, but I don't know which (since almost half the players are scum by now, it's not a particularly adventurous guess, but there you go).

Zathras, why must you lie? He was "townie enough" for you, and you were "pretty sure" he wasn't scum by process of elimination, but now you're trying to deny it.

[bi]Irony[/b], you are being wilfully disingenuous. I clearly made the point in my earlier note that I never thought he was town. I thought he "seemed townie enough so far, but I may be missing something". Which I was, as I suspected, and has since been corrected. No lie. The second one with the "pretty sure" is at the same time as my question to Eduren, and indeed just because at the time I thought he was the least scummy that doesn't mean I thought he was town. If you order your thoughts in order of decreasing scummitude, the last place is not necessarily someone you think is town, is it? Who is your least scummy pick as of right now? Are they town?

You lie when you say I lie, and I have proved it. Liars are scum.

[IronyOwl]

Isn't calling it lying a hyperbolic?

From my point of view Zathras only began seriously suspecting me after Criptfeind decided to agree with The Fucking Goddamn Plan. He obviously disagrees. I never intentionally warped the sequence of events as I understood them for my own purposes.

And me saying the Zathras will be proven wrong was not specifically in response to the accusation of lying, but was me giving up on arguing any further.

Erm, I sort of got the beginning wrong. Didn't look at it closely enough; you're correct that he didn't bother to FoS you until he lumped you as Criptfeind's scumbuddy. He didn't full on vote you until you kept at it, which was what fouled me up.

My bad.

Why are you bringing this up right now instead of, oh, two days ago when it happened? Why does it concern you now, suddenly?

It feels like you're trying to reignite old arguments.

*sniff*

You smelled a little like scum before, but now you're really starting to reek, IronyOwl.

To be honest, because I couldn't be bothered to sift through the entire thread again to see which one was correct. I brought it up now because I decided to reread the thread anyway, and that jumped out at me. Or I thought it did, anyway.

You seem awfully keen to leave the past behind though, Jim. Why is bringing up something that happened earlier in the game day scummy to you?


NINJA'D:

How come your only defense is my supposed hypocrisy?

It's not. It's also highly dependent on the fact that your arguments are garbage. Why is your only argument to the contrary that calling you out on being a hypocrite is deflection? I claim you're a liar with no argument and you respond with "hurrr deflect more" again?

If I weren't here would you be going after yourself? Because that's what you're claiming I should do. That I should commit Seppuku before even thinking about attacking others for their actions.

I'm claiming that if you're a pot, you shouldn't claim being dark in color is a scumtell, because it means you're being scummy but won't stop, or are making up bullshit. Why do I have to explain this a second time?

[bi]Irony[/b], you are being wilfully disingenuous. I clearly made the point in my earlier note that I never thought he was town. I thought he "seemed townie enough so far, but I may be missing something". Which I was, as I suspected, and has since been corrected. No lie. The second one with the "pretty sure" is at the same time as my question to Eduren, and indeed just because at the time I thought he was the least scummy that doesn't mean I thought he was town. If you order your thoughts in order of decreasing scummitude, the last place is not necessarily someone you think is town, is it? Who is your least scummy pick as of right now? Are they town?

You lie when you say I lie, and I have proved it. Liars are scum.

You never said he was absolute, confirmed, inescapably town, no, but why would you? You said he was "townie enough" while admitting you may have missed something; that isn't even remotely the same as saying you don't have anything on him but would like someone to point out anything you've missed. "Not particularly scummy" and "fairly town" aren't the same, and even if they were, why can't you scumhunt yourself? Why wait until you're called on it to ask for someone else to feed you answers?

The second one is much closer to "not scummy," but you still said you were "pretty sure," and innocence by elimination is still innocence. To vehemently oppose the notion that you had called him town after this strikes me as incredibly shifty.

[Zathras]

If I weren't here would you be going after yourself? Because that's what you're claiming I should do. That I should commit Seppuku before even thinking about attacking others for their actions.

I'm claiming that if you're a pot, you shouldn't claim being dark in color is a scumtell, because it means you're being scummy but won't stop, or are making up bullshit. Why do I have to explain this a second time?

Bullshit. A scumtell is a scumtell, regardless of what the person noticing it has done. You may call the pot black too, but you cannot deny your own blackness. Your saying "you shouldn't call me on lying because you've lied too" (or whatever scumtell) is a bullshit defence, and you know it.  Own up to the arguments or refute them on their own merits, not based on who pointed them out.

You should know this. In fact, I'm pretty sure you do. Which adds up to your scummitude.

You never said he was absolute, confirmed, inescapably town, no, but why would you? You said he was "townie enough" while admitting you may have missed something; that isn't even remotely the same as saying you don't have anything on him but would like someone to point out anything you've missed. "Not particularly scummy" and "fairly town" aren't the same, and even if they were, why can't you scumhunt yourself? Why wait until you're called on it to ask for someone else to feed you answers?
The second one is much closer to "not scummy," but you still said you were "pretty sure," and innocence by elimination is still innocence.

Bullshit the second. I didn't say he was "townie enough", I said "he seems townie enough so far, but I may be missing something". Have the courtesy of quoting and interpreting on full sentences. What I said explicitly calls for pointers for further doubting his alignment. It doesn't establish his towniness, it challenges it.

There's nothing wrong with asking others for pointers, this is a game where arguments build from person to person and exchanges of information; "I got nothing on him yet, do you have anything?" is a perfectly valid question. Jim obliged, so I followed up. At no point I absolved JS. Also, there's no such thing as "innocence by elimination". There are only shades of scummitude. You are pulling that one entirely out of your ass.

To vehemently oppose the notion that you had called him town after this strikes me as incredibly shifty.

It would be, except that I did not call him town. Your deliberate mangling of words to conjure up a contradiction where none exists is very scummy. Since I didn't lie, I maintain that you lied when you said I lied. Liars are scum.

[Zathras]

Edit-by-post: Meh. Messed up the quotes. The second one is Irony's, not mine. The right header should be:

stuff

Bah.

[IronyOwl]

If I weren't here would you be going after yourself? Because that's what you're claiming I should do. That I should commit Seppuku before even thinking about attacking others for their actions.

I'm claiming that if you're a pot, you shouldn't claim being dark in color is a scumtell, because it means you're being scummy but won't stop, or are making up bullshit. Why do I have to explain this a second time?

Bullshit. A scumtell is a scumtell, regardless of what the person noticing it has done. You may call the pot black too, but you cannot deny your own blackness. Your saying "you shouldn't call me on lying because you've lied too" (or whatever scumtell) is a bullshit defence, and you know it.  Own up to the arguments or refute them on their own merits, not based on who pointed them out.

I have. Show me what he's said that I haven't addressed. In fact, that part was as much calling him scum as refuting my own scumminess.

You never said he was absolute, confirmed, inescapably town, no, but why would you? You said he was "townie enough" while admitting you may have missed something; that isn't even remotely the same as saying you don't have anything on him but would like someone to point out anything you've missed. "Not particularly scummy" and "fairly town" aren't the same, and even if they were, why can't you scumhunt yourself? Why wait until you're called on it to ask for someone else to feed you answers?
The second one is much closer to "not scummy," but you still said you were "pretty sure," and innocence by elimination is still innocence.

Bullshit the second. I didn't say he was "townie enough", I said "he seems townie enough so far, but I may be missing something". Have the courtesy of quoting and interpreting on full sentences. What I said explicitly calls for pointers for further doubting his alignment. It doesn't establish his towniness, it challenges it.

So in the context of calling every other player potential scum, "seems townie enough so far, but I may be missing something" means "I have no immediate scumtells on him but am beginning to suspect there are some?"

Bullshit.

But please, explain why you chose those words when they don't mean anything. Why does "townie" mean "neutral" for you?

Also, there's no such thing as "innocence by elimination". There are only shades of scummitude. You are pulling that one entirely out of your ass.

There's only so many scum. When you claim you have one pegged, strongly suspect another, and one of these three is probably the last, it implies anyone left is town, at whatever strength your other claims were made at. You can't say you're "pretty sure" one of a JS-excluding group is the last scum without being "pretty sure" JS himself is not scum.

[Jim Groovester]

How could I disagree with this kid when he's so obviously correct? His arguments are strong and reasoned, a shining beacon of clarity and truth...

But, JetSquirrel, while I am very full of myself and proud of my impeccable and persuasive analysis, it would be good for you to add a few original thoughts to lessen the impression that you are just buddying me and using my words to avoid scumhunting of your own. I'm easily swayed by flattery, sure, and can't fault you for being right, but this does seem a bit fishy of you. Leaving Jim aside, if you wish, how about you expound on the scumminess of Org and Person? IronyOwl did have some insighful thoughts about Person, but I don't want to see you repeat them -- I want to hear you make your own.

This is seriously ridiculous. Now you're buddying him. This is way more slack than anyone deserves.

"Come on, little buddy, you can do it. You can have an original thought! Come on, I know you can! I believe in you!"

How far backwards are you going to bend trying to coach and coax him into looking like town? The accusations of buddying and parroting are already there; coaching him into doing something original won't make them go away, because you had to hold his hand through the whole goddamn process. And if he does somehow manage to do it, how meaningful will it be?

What the hell, Zathras? Why do you care so much that Jetsquirrel have an original thought of his own? Why is it so important that Jetsquirrel agree with you in a legitimate way?

Being stubborn.

I see I have obviously taken the wrong approach. Attempting to convince you with reasonable arguments has proven a failure. I guess I'll have to flatter the fuck out of you like Jetsquirrel instead.

Why, Zathras. My Zathras. One of your intelligence and scumhunting stature should have no need to think of me as a villain! Why, these unverifiable assumptions that you're idly positing in your spare time are well beneath the sagacity and erudition you have made yourself known for. Cast them away post-haste, they are worthless suppositions, and there are villains about whom would fear your illuminating gaze if you would just turn your eyes in their direction.

_{I feel sick.}

To be honest, because I couldn't be bothered to sift through the entire thread again to see which one was correct. I brought it up now because I decided to reread the thread anyway, and that jumped out at me. Or I thought it did, anyway.

You seem awfully keen to leave the past behind though, Jim. Why is bringing up something that happened earlier in the game day scummy to you?

The timing of it seemed suspect. I feel like you slipped that out of your back pocket as the argument was winding down to reignite it and make me and Zathras argue it out through the deadline, which would be pretty damn beneficial if you were scum. Keeping two townies locked in eternal conflict that absorbed the whole discussion? Seems like a good idea to me.

It's not so unreasonable, though, especially if it turned up in a reread of the thread.

[Zathras]

"Come on, little buddy, you can do it. You can have an original thought! Come on, I know you can! I believe in you!"

Well, asking him for an original thought is what you have been pushing him to do all game, yes? It's just our approaches are different. Tone aside, the message would have been the same if I did it in your style: "Hey you worthless motherfucker! Get your damn thumb out of your ass and onto the fucking keyboard and engage them fuckin' synapses! I triple-dog dare you to come up with something original or I'll hang you so hard your trachea will twist like a balloon animal, you worthless piece of shit!"

Same thing. Do note that I tell him that if he can't, then it will be too fishy, therefore scummy. But we're saying the same thing.

How far backwards are you going to bend trying to coach and coax him into looking like town? The accusations of buddying and parroting are already there; coaching him into doing something original won't make them go away, because you had to hold his hand through the whole goddamn process. And if he does somehow manage to do it, how meaningful will it be?
What the hell, Zathras? Why do you care so much that Jetsquirrel have an original thought of his own? Why is it so important that Jetsquirrel agree with you in a legitimate way?

I don't, and it's not. If he doesn't, then he's scum, and should hang. If he does, then it still needs to be weighed against everything else he's done, and his other answers. His ability to come up with an original analysis on, say, Person, would be quite meaningful: it would tell us something about his abilities for us to decide whether his earlier agreement with me was reasoned or merely parroted (and maybe even giving us something new on Person). But don't say that I'm protecting him or that I'd prefer it one way or the other. I want to see the results, and will evaluate his alignment based on those results.

Why, Zathras. My Zathras. One of your intelligence and scumhunting stature should have no need to think of me as a villain! Why, these unverifiable assumptions that you're idly positing in your spare time are well beneath the sagacity and erudition you have made yourself known for. Cast them away post-haste, they are worthless suppositions, and there are villains about whom would fear your illuminating gaze if you would just turn your eyes in their direction.

Yes, yes! I see now. Your argument is very persuasive. Unvote.


Wait, no, there were no original points there. Just honeyed words, parroted arguments, and buddying! That must mean you are scum! Vote Jim.

Seriously dude, the flattery is nice and all, but it should include some thoughts on the actual arguments. Quoted here if you've forgotten them:

I disagree. First, the fact that you aren't verbally cracking may just be good scumplay, or insufficient hunting on my part. It doesn't absolve you, it merely does not condemn you. Second, you have seemed "mostly townie enough", except where you haven't, like when talking about the (fucking goddamned) plan, and other bits. It ain't like you're sporting a clean bill of health. There is no "everything else says I'm town". It's merely "mostly townie enough".

On the incompetence theory, no I really don't think they would all forget or vote none. JetSquirrel might, but not Org. Sure, he talks funny and walks with a limp, but it's irresponsible to dismiss him as incompetent. He's good, especially at playing with night actions and powers and gaming the system. No, from the field of play, JS is the only one I could grant may have "forgotten" to support his scum school. All the others must have chosen it, and I see that difficult.

On the other, I don't see Jokerman's kill as a bad choice; you generally want to NK someone who hasn't taken the spotlight much. Sure, he may not have been the best target, but within acceptable limits of competence. As to how tight a ship you would run, I can't say. Two supports would have been too conspicuous, so one was probably the right number. And one is what scum had, with my theory. No need for untidy ships.

And I did consider other options and permutations (which I can list if people are curious, but I'm sure you can work them out). The only other one that makes sense with you being town is that all three schools are town, and scum is all vanilla. Not impossible, I suppose, but just as implausible as the others.

I keep my vote on you because the support numbers are hard data, as opposed to people's wording or lurking or missteps or whatnot. It is indisputable that this happened. Interpretations may vary, and the alternatives are not impossible, merely too implausible, but I can't in good conscience call you "town".

When we close up on the end of the day, I may switch my vote to some other scum, if consensus is building and the reasons valid, but I'm afraid you won't leave my "scum" column for the rest of the game. For the reasons above. Colour choices.

A point-by-point on that could be useful for your case.

[Jim Groovester]

"Come on, little buddy, you can do it. You can have an original thought! Come on, I know you can! I believe in you!"

Well, asking him for an original thought is what you have been pushing him to do all game, yes? It's just our approaches are different. Tone aside, the message would have been the same if I did it in your style: "Hey you worthless motherfucker! Get your damn thumb out of your ass and onto the fucking keyboard and engage them fuckin' synapses! I triple-dog dare you to come up with something original or I'll hang you so hard your trachea will twist like a balloon animal, you worthless piece of shit!"

Same thing. Do note that I tell him that if he can't, then it will be too fishy, therefore scummy. But we're saying the same thing.

How far backwards are you going to bend trying to coach and coax him into looking like town? The accusations of buddying and parroting are already there; coaching him into doing something original won't make them go away, because you had to hold his hand through the whole goddamn process. And if he does somehow manage to do it, how meaningful will it be?
What the hell, Zathras? Why do you care so much that Jetsquirrel have an original thought of his own? Why is it so important that Jetsquirrel agree with you in a legitimate way?

I don't, and it's not. If he doesn't, then he's scum, and should hang. If he does, then it still needs to be weighed against everything else he's done, and his other answers. His ability to come up with an original analysis on, say, Person, would be quite meaningful: it would tell us something about his abilities for us to decide whether his earlier agreement with me was reasoned or merely parroted (and maybe even giving us something new on Person). But don't say that I'm protecting him or that I'd prefer it one way or the other. I want to see the results, and will evaluate his alignment based on those results.

This is a smoldering heap of bullshit.

You and I are not doing the same things. I long ago made my judgment about Jetsquirrel, and I'm prodding him and pushing him to post to see if he'll change my mind. He hasn't yet, and I know he won't. You, on the other hand, keep prodding him and pushing him, perpetually waiting for Jetsquirrel to fulfill some requirement and then you'll make your judgment.

And that's what bugs me. You're guiding him towards it. You're trying to guide him to the golden post where you can say, yes, an original thought, he is obviously legitimized in agreeing with me. How are you scum hunting if you don't look at people's posts, and only judge them after they meet some acceptable standard?

You've asked him repeatedly for an original thought. I've done the same. He's heard both of our proddings, and even acknowledged them. And yet an original thought has yet to come.

What the fuck are you waiting for, Zathras?

And you're a liar if you won't admit that this has nothing to do with him agreeing with you.

A point-by-point on that could be useful for your case.

How about, no. Tell me it would be useful first. Tell me my time would not be better spent convincing a brick wall to fall over. Tell me you're not completely certain and that you want me to convince you. Tell me that before I jump through your hoops.


I've got an idea. Unvote Org. Let's lynch Jetsquirrel and see just what the fuck Zathras and he are buddying about. I don't like the unbelievably light touch he's treating Jetsquirrel with.