Print

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

[Mysteriousbluepuppet]

Heh, serve me right to only read the post i could reach during composition. I am not sorry, but i'll be more carefull on the matter next time.

Extension please

[Nirur Torir]

*Looks at post*

WOW

I'M TALENTED

Nice OMGUS, but I'll drop this for the time being - you'd best have some content next post, though.

Unvote, vote Nirur Torir.

NT, are you still attacking me for when I attacked Archangel?

Partially.
1) You spent the day pre-extend active lurking. Your only accomplishments were an answer post, one non-RVS question, and stating what you think Org wanted to say.

2) Your first "real" action of the game was after the first extension was likely to go through, attacking IronyOwl for his buddying. You voted him without a question.

My greatest single suspicion is IronyOwl for his general grouping of him and Zathras, which I find odd. I feel like he's trying to have it be blatant for some reason.

In your own words, people likely to be blatant about it are jesters, scum with powerful death roles, and townies with anti-town living roles. A townie with an anti-town living role trying to die would be more blatant about trying to die. You weren't poising questions at him to try to see which he was, you just voted him as your most suspicious.

3) Your quick switch to an Archangel vote. He may have deflected your question, but you didn't do anything when you next posted, having posted to say that you only had two scumpicks.

4) When Mr.Person called you out on it, you said you had answered him, here. You had not.

5)

Unsure if Joe is being stupid, lazy, or scummy. Attempting to determine. I definitely won't say I'm leaning town on him so far, though. Forming an opinion on the content of his posts would require, well, content. :I

It's funny because there had been *plenty* of content on Jokerman. If you even were trying to read him, you weren't taking an active role, and weren't reading his old posts, as though you didn't care.

6) I feel like you're trying to deter my attacks by telling me I'm acting scummy. Guess what? That won't work against me after I know I have scum.

7) You tried to defend yourself from having to actually take a stance on Jokerman.

8)

Lack of hunting: I'm going to get a goddamn response out of Archangel or one of us is going to die waiting for it. As for everyone else, it's not like I'm not watching and reading. I've formed suspicions, you're just saying I don't have them because you're one of them.

Having your vote on a lurker is the most pathetic reason for not scumhunting I've seen so far. I've been here, and you could have questioned me further at any time.

I'll be more helpful tomorrow, as in Day 2, not as in 12/21/10

Stop waiting on your powers and do stuff now.

Along those lines, Jokerman: I'm increasingly feeling like you're trying to hide in the shadows today so you can use your night ability.

[Jokerman-EXE]

Well, I don't have a Night ability anymore.

I'll just drop this here: I used to be a Vigilante, which is why I was so sure Zathras was scum. At first I didn't want to go after him because he felt like aggressive town, but as time went I started to realize that he didn't feel right and I knew I was onto something.

I was attempting to not draw too much attention to third-party teams because I was looking for them. My stance on lurkers is the same as it always has been, but I figured that if it got to be too much trouble this game I would just take them out myself - I tried to get other town to hunt active people, but that backfired on me.

I gave up my ability to NK, however, in order to use my one-shot Daykill on Zathras. I still feel like it was the right choice, and in the long run I'm sure you'd agree.

Org: Come on, dude. I'm not going to stick my neck out and say we shouldn't policy lynch you if you're going to dick around. -_-

Archangel: I'm really going to be waiting on that post, because WOW was that special.

[Toaster]

Native:

Wouldn't you consider that scum suicide? Zathras has been on Joker from the start and was the first to bring up any suspicion towards Joker, that seems like it would be a pretty stupid move if they were a scumteam.

Well, Zathras seems to be a pretty aggressive scumhunter, so you could very well be trying to avoid getting in his sights. The reason you would be next on my list of suspects if Joker should flip scum is because you could have been trying to distance yourself from Jokerman by siding with Zathras.

See, here's the problem. You figure Zathras wouldn't bus his scumbuddy because it'd be suicide, but I might because Zathras is aggressive. Why?

This would be tunneling, not bussing. And I'm not saying you're bussing, just distancing (hypothetically). It wouldn't make sense for anyone to be bussing this early in the game, it could be a fatal mistake to do so.

Hold it.  You'd say it'd be tunnelling... why?  The only way I see your meaning is that you're saying Joker is town, not scum.  How do you know that?

I'm not really sure what you're trying to say here, could you clarify?
It would be tunnelling because Zathras was the first one after Joker and he never let go. I don't see what Joker being town would have to do with it.

Toaster, what do you think of Zathras' roleflip? Do you think it clears Jokerman's name or do you think Zathras' points still hold?

Basically, I want to know why you said it'd be tunnelling and not bussing.

As for Zath, it really doesn't change my opinion of anything.  Since he's not a team-based scum, we can't use it to hunt for connections.  Specifically, it does zero to clear Jokerman.


Archangel:

Don't have time for more than this because of procrastination.

Unvote, vote Pandarsenic. Extend. I'll explain my vote and answer the questions posed to me tomorrow, however I damn well did say why I voted MBP immediately after Pandar voted me, you blind fuckwits! Look at my last post!

Eagerly awaiting more from you.  Explained or not, it's still lazy.


Org:

I'll be more helpful tomorrow, as in Day 2, not as in 12/21/10

Inexcusable.  Get hunting.


Jokerman:  Given that Zathras is dead, who is your next target?

[Jokerman-EXE]

I hadn't really decided. If I still had to, I would say...Pandar is kind of suspicious, but not really someone I would kill. Native or Mr.Person, maybe, out of sheer spite. 

The plan was pretty much to kill Zathras, but he was leading town towards killing a role that's very beneficial towards town, so I figured it was a better investment to give up my NK ability and save a scumhunter.

[NativeForeigner]

Native:

Wouldn't you consider that scum suicide? Zathras has been on Joker from the start and was the first to bring up any suspicion towards Joker, that seems like it would be a pretty stupid move if they were a scumteam.

Well, Zathras seems to be a pretty aggressive scumhunter, so you could very well be trying to avoid getting in his sights. The reason you would be next on my list of suspects if Joker should flip scum is because you could have been trying to distance yourself from Jokerman by siding with Zathras.

See, here's the problem. You figure Zathras wouldn't bus his scumbuddy because it'd be suicide, but I might because Zathras is aggressive. Why?

This would be tunneling, not bussing. And I'm not saying you're bussing, just distancing (hypothetically). It wouldn't make sense for anyone to be bussing this early in the game, it could be a fatal mistake to do so.

Hold it.  You'd say it'd be tunnelling... why?  The only way I see your meaning is that you're saying Joker is town, not scum.  How do you know that?

I'm not really sure what you're trying to say here, could you clarify?
It would be tunnelling because Zathras was the first one after Joker and he never let go. I don't see what Joker being town would have to do with it.

Toaster, what do you think of Zathras' roleflip? Do you think it clears Jokerman's name or do you think Zathras' points still hold?

Basically, I want to know why you said it'd be tunnelling and not bussing.

As for Zath, it really doesn't change my opinion of anything.  Since he's not a team-based scum, we can't use it to hunt for connections.  Specifically, it does zero to clear Jokerman.

Well Zath was the first to go after Jokerman and he showed absolutely no signs of letting go, so in my opinion, that would be more tunneling than bussing. Especially since he was the first to go after him. I would have considered it bussing if someone else had initiated against Jokerman.

[Toaster]

What's your stance on his alignment, then?


I forgot to support the extension last time.

[IronyOwl]

Spoiler: MysteriousBluePuppet, not that you read normal posts much less spoilers (click to show/hide)

IronyOwl : Could do a little happy dance and start shouting told you so, but i'm a class act so i won't.

Happy dance about what? You didn't call Zathras on being scum. You never called Zathras on being anything.

Still, the roleflip brings up so much new information.

Enlighten us, then. What did we learn from Zathras' roleflip?

Zath had a marvelous control vote, and he could have easily turned a vote around. What turned the fastest was you, to. Why the sudden vote change to Pandar ?

Once again, you prove in spectacular fashion that you aren't actually reading the thread. I've been voting Pandar since the beginning of the game.

Jokerman was miraculously salvaged by Zath scumflip? You said yourself thtat the reasoning was sound, but the only reason i see in your post to vote Pandar is that he does not have an opinion on Joker. While you quote the part where he say that he will reread the thread to make a good one. thats ridculous in so many extent.

If you'd bothered to read the thread, you might have noticed my numerous other questions to Pandar largely involved why he wasn't being useful. How convenient that the only ones you remember were "inane."

Where are your votes on Ottofar, Org, Argem, hell, even me for not having comprehnsive and annoted opinions on Joker?

I thought it was somewhat obvious, but I'll go ahead and FoS you if it makes you feel better. I've only got one vote to pass around.

You're right that I've been largely ignoring lurkers in favor of scum and active lurkers. Unfortunate, but I can't focus on everyone.

All you ever did until no is wait for people to post then latch on and ride the train. That's what a parasite do. What did you actually contribute to the town scumhunting ? What nugget of insight did you discover ? Show me that you actually have done any work so far.

Amusing as all hell, coming from someone who's ridden the Toaster Train to Tunneltown. I've repeatedly shown you where I've hunted for scum and pointed out that you haven't been, as well as where you've outright lied and not bothered to read the thread. You've repeatedly failed to answer any of them, except for earlier when you made things worse.

I'm truly sorry if my repeatedly calling you a tunneling liar gave you the impression that I didn't think you were scum, MBP. But you are, and you need to hang.

Spoiler: Toaster (click to show/hide)

Are you that lazy as to be unable to read the thread?  Are you even paying attention?  The fact that you haven't posted since a quick follow up to this post pretty much answers those questions.  I'll play your game, though:

He started out by buddying Zathras and built on it by grouping him and Zath together against Joker needlessly.  Keep reading-  Irony is up next.

And here we have why asking someone to restate their case is handy. "He buddied Zathras once and then used a grammatical construction I didn't like" is the totality of your argument.

IronyOwl:

Like I said, I only brought attention to it because of the initial occurrence.  If it hadn't happened the first time, I wouldn't have looked twice at the second one.

So you admit to tunneling, then. There's nothing scummy or noteworthy about them, it's just that you've already called me scum and therefore figure you can get away with adding them to the pile.

Absolutely not.  I'm presenting what I see against you.  Don't use plural either- I said one instance was weaker.  The first and third are still firm.

There you go again, trying to abstract things when they're inconvenient. "I'm presenting what I see against you?" What kind of a response is that?

I don't even know what you're trying to say here, so I'll just restate my problem with your initial statement.  You asked first about Jokerman's scummitude.  Then you asked about you and Zath together.

As I've said, you consider mentioning both our names together to be scummy.

The non-scummy way to have done that would be to ask one blanket question about the whole situation.

Uh oh. You just dug yourself a hole.

So you don't think anything Jokerman's said is scummy? Do you think any of what me or Zath has said is scummy? What's your take on this nonsense situation?

"Do you think any of the three of us are scummy?  What's your take on this nonsense situation?"

Neither of those are "blanket" questions- one just features the three of us in one group, the other breaks off Jokerman from his attackers. Neither are one blanket question, either. "One blanket question about the situation" would have been just the last line. Aside from why specific questions are scummy, you should probably explain why you lied the first time.

I've stated something like four times now that I wanted to point out one thing, but not step on Zathras' toes by going after him for the exact same reasons. There's no chance you haven't noticed this explanation, so what about it seems scummy/false to you? And why didn't you address that directly instead of bringing up something that's already been explained?

My problem is this: if it wasn't worth adding to your argument, why mention it at all?

It was worth saying, I just assumed Zathras was going to say it (he did, though not as harshly as I would have).

My question remains: Why not ask this directly the first time?

You're still not addressing why my precise wording is so relevant, but with MBP you just sort of gloss it over into "my interpretation."

It's vague because I don't have any strong opinions of MBP.   I do have something for him now, but it's about his most recent post- see later for it.

Your wording was important because of the grouping.   There's no place in his words for such grouping, so asking me about them isn't going to get you anything specific.

Then why is precise wording vitally important, but only with regards to grouping, wherein it's vital?

I deny the defending charge; just because I think you're scum doesn't mean I think he isn't.  I'm not looking for teams here- I'm looking at individuals, and right now, you stick out like a sore thumb.  What do you want from me- to stop voting you and vote him instead?  I'm not going to base my vote off other people's arguments when I have solid suspicions of my own.

Fascinating.

You "deny the defender charge," then point out that me being scum doesn't mean Jokerman isn't; but that was never the point. The point was, at every opportunity to lightly defend Jokerman, you have. I never even mentioned myself in that accusation, other than to mention tunneling me was your other great hobby. Where did anyone say anything about teams?

You then go off onto some sort of "what do you want from me" tangent, complete with the most defensive line I have ever seen: "I'm not going to base my vote off other people's arguments when I have solid suspicions of my own." You're trying to justify voting me instead of Jokerman, despite maintaining that I'm obvscum and Jokerman is merely suspicious. Why feel the need to justify yourself beyond he's scum and he's not? It's because you know Jokerman's going to roleflip soon, isn't it?

I think you just cracked, Toaster. You saw all that up there and realized you'd been defending Jokerman a little too much, and panicked a bit.

No one did- I brought them up.  The reason I said it was to emphasize that I'm taking everyone's case at this point on its on points, and less on "If X is scum then Y is/isn't!"

But you mentioned this unbidden. Why did you suddenly feel the need to mention that you weren't thinking in terms of scumteams?

You've been drawing a connection between us this whole time, so I made comment on that.  I've been getting "You should be paying attention to Jokerman instead of me" out of you, which admittedly is a reasonable argument for you to be making based on your view on him.

Once again- precise when it gives you an excuse, vague abstractions everywhere else. My questions about Jokerman were to see how you thought- as I recall, you refused to answer clearly on any of them.

This also does nothing to address your subtle but frequent defense of him.

Toaster appears to agree with me that Archangel's "reason" for voting is bullshit. Do you find it suspicious from him? Why or why not?

No. I took it as a pressure vote to clarify MBP's position. I also find your distinction between "clarify" and "restate" to be ridiculous, especially when you've just admitted you weren't paying full attention to everything that's been said previously.

Owlface:
I am reading posts. I just didn't go back to read the ones before I recovered coherency and began posting. Skimming is meh for opinion formation.

Lack of hunting: I'm going to get a goddamn response out of Archangel or one of us is going to die waiting for it. As for everyone else, it's not like I'm not watching and reading. I've formed suspicions, you're just saying I don't have them because you're one of them.

Your first question was here, and consisted of riding Toaster's assertion. You did nothing with the response.

Your first vote was here, still riding Toaster's grouping claim, and still doing nothing with it. This was after the extension was fairly well guaranteed; but you never stated you needed an extension, so it seems reasonable to assume you were pleased with the situation up until that point.

The very next post, you unvoted and asked a question instead, seeming to imply that you wanted to lynch or scumhunt, or perhaps that the bandwagon was too obvious, then voted and asked a very accusational question to someone else, whose post you hadn't read the first time. Once again, you did nothing with either answer.

The next time you requested information was here, requesting an extension to read Joker's posts shortly afterwards.

Finally, you asked here for Org to explain himself and here for Nirur's reason for attacking you.

While some of your non-questions have included accusations that could very well be addressed, this is largely the extent of your scumhunting- six "questions," a few accusations, and no interest in following them up.

I'll just drop this here: I used to be a Vigilante, which is why I was so sure Zathras was scum.

What in the hell do these two have to do with each other? Does Vigilante give you non-power-related scum-sensing ability? Would only scum attack your pure townlike vigilanteish visage?

At first I didn't want to go after him because he felt like aggressive town, but as time went I started to realize that he didn't feel right and I knew I was onto something.

Interesting, because this would seem to mean his attack on Pandar was what finally lead to your realization. Was that it? What specifically made you feel confident enough to kill him?

I was attempting to not draw too much attention to third-party teams because I was looking for them.

What's your reasoning here, that people would be more likely to let out cultslips if nobody else mentioned cult?

My stance on lurkers is the same as it always has been, but I figured that if it got to be too much trouble this game I would just take them out myself - I tried to get other town to hunt active people, but that backfired on me.

That's a lot of targets this game. Do you really think ignoring and then NKing them is the most efficient way to combat lurking?

I hadn't really decided. If I still had to, I would say...Pandar is kind of suspicious, but not really someone I would kill. Native or Mr.Person, maybe, out of sheer spite. 

The plan was pretty much to kill Zathras, but he was leading town towards killing a role that's very beneficial towards town, so I figured it was a better investment to give up my NK ability and save a scumhunter.

I see no saved scumhunter. I hope you're not talking about yourself.

[Toaster]

IronyOwl:

The non-scummy way to have done that would be to ask one blanket question about the whole situation.

Uh oh. You just dug yourself a hole.

So you don't think anything Jokerman's said is scummy? Do you think any of what me or Zath has said is scummy? What's your take on this nonsense situation?

"Do you think any of the three of us are scummy?  What's your take on this nonsense situation?"

Neither of those are "blanket" questions- one just features the three of us in one group, the other breaks off Jokerman from his attackers. Neither are one blanket question, either. "One blanket question about the situation" would have been just the last line. Aside from why specific questions are scummy, you should probably explain why you lied the first time.

I call "Do you think any of the three of us are scummy?" a blanket question.  Asking about specific points would not be a blanket question.  And yes, there were two questions.  Gee, sorry.

I've stated something like four times now that I wanted to point out one thing, but not step on Zathras' toes by going after him for the exact same reasons. There's no chance you haven't noticed this explanation, so what about it seems scummy/false to you? And why didn't you address that directly instead of bringing up something that's already been explained?

My problem is this: if it wasn't worth adding to your argument, why mention it at all?

It was worth saying, I just assumed Zathras was going to say it (he did, though not as harshly as I would have).

My question remains: Why not ask this directly the first time?

I thought I had.  I guess I wasn't clear enough.

You're still not addressing why my precise wording is so relevant, but with MBP you just sort of gloss it over into "my interpretation."

It's vague because I don't have any strong opinions of MBP.   I do have something for him now, but it's about his most recent post- see later for it.

Your wording was important because of the grouping.   There's no place in his words for such grouping, so asking me about them isn't going to get you anything specific.

Then why is precise wording vitally important, but only with regards to grouping, wherein it's vital?

It was important in this case.  When it's important, I look at it; if there's nothing to be had from it, I don't use it.

I deny the defending charge; just because I think you're scum doesn't mean I think he isn't.  I'm not looking for teams here- I'm looking at individuals, and right now, you stick out like a sore thumb.  What do you want from me- to stop voting you and vote him instead?  I'm not going to base my vote off other people's arguments when I have solid suspicions of my own.

Fascinating.

You "deny the defender charge," then point out that me being scum doesn't mean Jokerman isn't; but that was never the point. The point was, at every opportunity to lightly defend Jokerman, you have. I never even mentioned myself in that accusation, other than to mention tunneling me was your other great hobby. Where did anyone say anything about teams?

You then go off onto some sort of "what do you want from me" tangent, complete with the most defensive line I have ever seen: "I'm not going to base my vote off other people's arguments when I have solid suspicions of my own." You're trying to justify voting me instead of Jokerman, despite maintaining that I'm obvscum and Jokerman is merely suspicious. Why feel the need to justify yourself beyond he's scum and he's not? It's because you know Jokerman's going to roleflip soon, isn't it?

I think you just cracked, Toaster. You saw all that up there and realized you'd been defending Jokerman a little too much, and panicked a bit.

No one did- I brought them up.  The reason I said it was to emphasize that I'm taking everyone's case at this point on its on points, and less on "If X is scum then Y is/isn't!"

But you mentioned this unbidden. Why did you suddenly feel the need to mention that you weren't thinking in terms of scumteams?

I felt it deserved mention.

You've been drawing a connection between us this whole time, so I made comment on that.  I've been getting "You should be paying attention to Jokerman instead of me" out of you, which admittedly is a reasonable argument for you to be making based on your view on him.

Once again- precise when it gives you an excuse, vague abstractions everywhere else. My questions about Jokerman were to see how you thought- as I recall, you refused to answer clearly on any of them.

This also does nothing to address your subtle but frequent defense of him.

If you have any questions left for me about him (or anything),  I'll be happy to answer them.

Are you that lazy as to be unable to read the thread?  Are you even paying attention?  The fact that you haven't posted since a quick follow up to this post pretty much answers those questions.  I'll play your game, though:

He started out by buddying Zathras and built on it by grouping him and Zath together against Joker needlessly.  Keep reading-  Irony is up next.

And here we have why asking someone to restate their case is handy. "He buddied Zathras once and then used a grammatical construction I didn't like" is the totality of your argument.

IronyOwl:

Like I said, I only brought attention to it because of the initial occurrence.  If it hadn't happened the first time, I wouldn't have looked twice at the second one.

So you admit to tunneling, then. There's nothing scummy or noteworthy about them, it's just that you've already called me scum and therefore figure you can get away with adding them to the pile.

Absolutely not.  I'm presenting what I see against you.  Don't use plural either- I said one instance was weaker.  The first and third are still firm.

There you go again, trying to abstract things when they're inconvenient. "I'm presenting what I see against you?" What kind of a response is that?

You'll notice I haven't revoted you.  I've been doubting my case against you, but I wanted to keep it up until the I was deep into doubt.  I'm there now, so I'm going to be focusing elsewhere.  If you have anything else you want from me, I'll be happy to answer, but I'm not going to push you myself.

[NativeForeigner]

What's your stance on his alignment, then?

I feel it hasn't changed. Even if his vigilante story is true there's been vigilante scum before from what I've heard. And I don't know what Joker means when he says that being vigilante means he knew for sure that Zathras was scum.

[Toaster]

I've been rereading the thread, and I've noticed several counts of sidelining and non-participation.


Ottofar, Archangel and Org:  I've already bugged you for more.  Org, specifically, waiting for the next game day is a non-option here.


Argembarger:  You're being very passive.  Out of your seven posts, we have:

http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=72355.msg1798409#msg1798409  RV
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=72355.msg1799040#msg1799040  Sidelining  (Commentary without analysis)
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=72355.msg1803648#msg1803648  Single question
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=72355.msg1807005#msg1807005  Single question, that was a repeat of one asked you
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=72355.msg1807867#msg1807867  Bandwagon vote
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=72355.msg1808072#msg1808072  Defense of said vote
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=72355.msg1813615#msg1813615  Useless

Do you still suspect Archangel?  Regardless of that, who else do you suspect and why?

[Mysteriousbluepuppet]

Hello again IronyOwl. I am both angry and amused by your post. First up i read the the thread, and i'm hurt that you would say that i just charge on without reading everything. Thing is i don't always go back to read 15 pages of text just for your little eyes. Deal with it.

In order !

Happy dance since I said that you had good chance of buddying scum, and that buddying is scummy. Zath got killed and flips scum. A good example of why buddying is a bad idea. Dunno if you knew or not, If you also flip scum i'll dance around my hat.

We learned that we got an SK less. Feels liberating, but also show that your buddying was to be  detrimental. If he had not been killed, you would have continued trusting his opinion like you did ? Just saying, however strong a case he could have gotten on someone, you still need to do your own fucking work.

Oh hey, you see, i did not remember that. Mostly since all i remember you doing form the start of the game was praising Zathbuddy then defending yourself when the shitstorm hit. Well, congratulation !!! There was actually some post complaining about Pandar when he said he would not be there. Did not see the same kind of hate to MrPerson, Argem, org etc etc especially since those only post a few sentences then get away without a damn reason.

Pandar, You are not being helpfull . Man, i've never seen such a strong, well strung argument! Clearly people being useless should be lynched outright !

Hey, some logic in your head after all. Maybe not too late for you yet.

Clearly, we don't see eye to eye on that one. Show it to me. Show me those embarassing question you got, something.  Right now it always come back to  : Zathras did it before, but if it was ME, i would have done it better, more agressively, whatever. Way to try and look important without doing anything remotely usefull. You actually got the gall to say that you dont need to investigate someone that had many scumtells since someone else did it already? That's pure grade AAA Bullshit.


On other stuff.:

What made you so certain that Zath was scum, Joker ? I'll admit i had not pegged him as possible scum, so if you got anything we don't know feel free to share it. 
All the lurker should get in here before day end, but again id be more surprised if they DID come back.

[Mr.Person]

Alright Jokerman, that actually satisfies me for now. Unvote, vote Pandarsenic.

Pand, why are you ignoring my otherwise valid question? You asked a question which Archangel responded to, but then go on to ignore Archangel. When I ask you about it, you just pretend that it's Archangel that's ignoring you. No sir, Archangel responded and you're just standing there refusing to continue the conversation. Why is that?

There's also the fact you keep jumping your suspicions around. Without you asking them any questions or even seeing them posting, you keep jumping players up and down several scuminess levels for seemingly no reason. For instance, why is Nirur scummy? You haven't said.

[Jokerman-EXE]

I'll just drop this here: I used to be a Vigilante, which is why I was so sure Zathras was scum.

What in the hell do these two have to do with each other? Does Vigilante give you non-power-related scum-sensing ability? Would only scum attack your pure townlike vigilanteish visage?

At first I didn't want to go after him because he felt like aggressive town, but as time went I started to realize that he didn't feel right and I knew I was onto something.

Interesting, because this would seem to mean his attack on Pandar was what finally lead to your realization. Was that it? What specifically made you feel confident enough to kill him?

I was attempting to not draw too much attention to third-party teams because I was looking for them.

What's your reasoning here, that people would be more likely to let out cultslips if nobody else mentioned cult?

My stance on lurkers is the same as it always has been, but I figured that if it got to be too much trouble this game I would just take them out myself - I tried to get other town to hunt active people, but that backfired on me.

That's a lot of targets this game. Do you really think ignoring and then NKing them is the most efficient way to combat lurking?

I hadn't really decided. If I still had to, I would say...Pandar is kind of suspicious, but not really someone I would kill. Native or Mr.Person, maybe, out of sheer spite. 

The plan was pretty much to kill Zathras, but he was leading town towards killing a role that's very beneficial towards town, so I figured it was a better investment to give up my NK ability and save a scumhunter.

I see no saved scumhunter. I hope you're not talking about yourself.

1. Honestly, yes. Maybe that's a little vain of me, but I felt that I wasn't being as scummy as he was trying to make me seem (seeing as, y'know, I know I'm not scum?), and that he should have gotten what I was trying to say. Yes, I was a little off about it - I've been really busy, if you missed that. I'm just getting back into the game.

2. It wasn't his attack on Pandar that did it - I don't even recall the particulars of that attack. However, he was tunneling me heavily, and it seemed to me that he was seriously jumping the gun; he posted twice to rage at me for lurking when I posted saying I would be gone, then had two separate people come by to let you guys know. Seriously, no one gets that riled up D1 without knowing something, and on D1 there's only one faction that knows something the others don't.

3. Uhh, yes. It's happened before, I think. If I'm quietly searching for something, it's probably easier to find than if a couple people are loudly stomping and shouting about it. That's what we like to call logical.

4. It was an attempt to get people to just fucking ignore it for at least one game day! Jesus Christ, it's so goddam frustrating - every single game, that's all people ever default to. I was hoping that we could make it through one game in which it wasn't a problem, because lurkers would find themselves dead and the actual hunting would have more room to happen. That was my plan, anyway.

5. Let's get to that, shall we?

NativeForeigner, I've seen you parroting Zath a lot after his death without actually presenting a case. All you've said is, "Nope, Zath's points are good." without adding to them. That's not how scumhunting works, and it's certainly not how it should work when the person you're parroting was the Serial Killer. You claim his points are valid, and yet I was arguing against them the entire time, when you were so sure he was town. He was ignoring every point I made and you rode right along with him. Why are you so complacent as to continue supporting the SK even after you know who he was?

Nirur Torir: You haven't posted since I responded to you. I'm curious to know your thoughts. What's your list of suspicions?

Argembarger: Toaster beat me to it, but you've been a passive little guy, haven't you? I'd like to see you actually participate, instead of trying to slip by. At least the lurkers in this game are fully lurking.

Pandarsenic: Almost the same as Argembarger, actually. Towards the end with Zath there, you were starting to show more activity; keep that up. Who are your top picks now, knowing Zath's flip?

MBP: I've answered your question. How do you feel about Zath's flip? Does it change your suspicions at all?

And back to IronyOwl: If you think MBP is scum, why aren't you voting him? Is Pandar more scummy? And where do you think I fall, after all this? You've made it clear that you don't think I'm town. So who exactly do you suspect?

If I missed anything, someone slap me and link to it, please.

[Argembarger]

Argembarger:

Wait, what the hell just happened?

You have one post since Friday, and you blow it on this?  Who do you plan to vote now?  Why?

I've been rereading the thread, and I've noticed several counts of sidelining and non-participation.


Argembarger:  You're being very passive.  Out of your seven posts, we have:

-snip-

Do you still suspect Archangel?  Regardless of that, who else do you suspect and why?

Since Archangel has promised an upcoming explanation, placing my vote back on him seems unnecessary. My suspicion of him will remain the same if no explanation is provided.


Not sure how I feel about Jokerman yet. On the one hand, he got rid of a Serial Killer with triple vote strength, but on the other hand, assuming he KNEW that Zath was a serial killer is stupid. Zath was gunning down Joker pretty hard, but with a SK flip... Hm... I don't feel like that totally nullifies the points that Zath made, but I guess it bumps Joker down a little bit on the list of suspects for me. I suppose. He's still up there, though.

Org, any particular reason you can't be helpful until tomorrow? Especially with Joker over here claiming Vigilante? You have no valuable Orgish insights to share with us? C'mon, pretty please?

Haters gonna hate, but your actions are starting to look silly and self-defeating.

Ottofar I have no idea about. But he ought to be back by now.

Pandar wobbles to and fro on my list but has stayed very neutral overall.

Actually, my brain can't seem to process any real solid reads on anybody after the daykill interruption.. Maybe I'm just tired. I'm loathe to place my vote in a sleepy state, and will try again to do better work tomorrow. I'll throw a vote on someone when I can more easily justify doing so in my head.

If I had to vote someone tonight though, at this moment it would probably be Org.

Also, just in the event that we still do not have enough to extend, Extend.


Warning - while you were typing a new reply has been posted. You may wish to review your post.

Argembarger: Toaster beat me to it, but you've been a passive little guy, haven't you? I'd like to see you actually participate, instead of trying to slip by. At least the lurkers in this game are fully lurking.

Oh alright so I'm worse than a complete lurker now, awesome thanks bro fist bunps all around

Well sheesh with all this negative attention I kinda feel bad claiming, effectively, "tired, more tomorrow"... but that is what I am going to have to do, as I am going to help nobody by mindlessly typing random carp at 1 AM.