Print

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

[NativeForeigner]

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.

[Mr.Person]

Because bussing worked SO POORLY in Sorcerer's Apprentice.

[NativeForeigner]

Because bussing worked SO POORLY in Sorcerer's Apprentice.

I take it an early game bussing won the game for scum?

[Mysteriousbluepuppet]

Because bussing worked SO POORLY in Sorcerer's Apprentice.

Wow Mr Person, the readings on the Pent-up aggression gages are off the charts !

I can understand Native point, Zathras was the first to bring up jokerman flip-flop on lurking, and it would be idiotic to do that to a teammate unless you rely on an HEAVY dose of WIFOM. Still, considering that BYOR4 had 4 scum allegiance it's far from confirming him. Nobody is ever confirmed in a BYOR. B


At Nirur, you could simply have read the arguments on Irony. Ill do a short version for you so we can get over it. Voted Irony since in my opinion he was Buddying Zathras, and i mean not a slight, simple buddying. He said that he was going soft on Jokerman since Zath was already doing the job, extolled Zath work and the like.He used the exact expression too, and basically admitted he was buddying. He also apparently separeted him and zath from jokerman, but i'll admit for me it was a rather weak point. He took his distance now, obviously, but i'm still wary.  Thing is, buddying is a bad thing for town, all the time. If we compare this to Byor4, we probably got 4-5 scum (including 3rd parties). So the chances to buddy scum is basically 50%. You buddy scum, thats one more vote in some tense situation, and can give the win to the scums. Trying to buddy a town normally wont work, since people are ( or at least should be) suspicious of others trying to get their good graces.

Ive lost track of a bit of the thread, ill make another post tommorow.

[Pandarsenic]

I'M SORRY

YOUR CHAINSAW IS SO LOUD I CAN BARELY HEAR YOU

MAYBE YOU SHOULD STOP CHAINSAWING FIRST

(Heading to a friend's house, actual responses to your failures later)

(Also, I get that Ottofar can't be here but that's a general "where the fuck," not a specific-to-right-now one. He does this EVERY game.)

Your objection to being questioned has been noted.

Emphasis mine.

Giving this its own post, responding to your horseshit in a followup post.

[Pandarsenic]

Roles that would blatantly buddy:

Scum with a beneficial effect when they die trying to implicate someone as well - for example, Mad Gunman buddies Townie X, then when Mad Gunman dies, he shoots someone randomly (hopefully not the buddied Townie X, in his mind), and now Townie X looks bad for having scum extol his virtues.

Jesters

Townies who have anti-town effects while existing (for instance, "Troll" from BYOR5 ruining all roleflips)

Point made yet?

He seeks clarification for exactly why Toaster and MBP feel that IronyOwl was worth attacking for so long.

Ya, no.

Toaster and Puppet, please restate you cases against IronyOwl.

Not clarification. Restatement. The same stuff as before. Your attempt to reframe what he was doing shall be noted, however.

Joe isn't in the same suspicion category as IronyOwl. He's between that and the lower one because I can't decide where to place him for the REASONS I STATED.

But really, since I'm trying to decide whether someone is scummy or not, why've you got a problem? Is it because I'm suspicious of your buddy? And did you not notice my post, despite there being an hour between it and yours? Why did you come out of lurking just to repeat others' arguments and then bandwagon on Irony? Is it, perhaps, because you are scum?

IRONY OVERWHELMING

That aside, in order:
Reasons already stated http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=72355.msg1810383#msg1810383
No
Yes
Invalid question. I did no such thing and thus cannot answer why I "did" that.
Invalid question again.

[IronyOwl]

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.

I take it an early game bussing won the game for scum?

Spoiler: On WIFOM (click to show/hide)

It wasn't exactly early, but one scum thought he wasn't being scummy, and so told the other scum to attack him. He did, and that guy was scummy, so he got lynched and everyone assumed the guy who bussed couldn't be scum. Other factors were at work, but suffice to say he sat back and laughed while the three remaining townies bickered over who was scum. For added strangeness, the last remaining mostly-confirmed townie wasn't NKed that night, because the scum didn't get on that night to order the kill.

So, obviously that's an extreme example, but you can never be totally certain of something not making sense because you can never be totally certain what's going on, and because if scum know doing X is a terrible idea for scum, they might do X to prove they're not scum.

That said, I do think bussing seems unlikely with multiple factions, because proving themselves townie only solves half the problem, and makes the other half a lot worse.

Ill do a short version for you so we can get over it. Voted Irony since in my opinion he was Buddying Zathras, and i mean not a slight, simple buddying. He said that he was going soft on Jokerman since Zath was already doing the job, extolled Zath work and the like.

"And the like?" What else did I do in that vein? Or are you just lying again?

Thing is, buddying is a bad thing for town, all the time. If we compare this to Byor4, we probably got 4-5 scum (including 3rd parties). So the chances to buddy scum is basically 50%. You buddy scum, thats one more vote in some tense situation, and can give the win to the scums. Trying to buddy a town normally wont work, since people are ( or at least should be) suspicious of others trying to get their good graces.

So...

-I have a 50% chance of buddying scum
-If I buddy scum they get my vote

But... I thought I was scum. Why are you worried about scum giving scum a vote? And since when does buddying mean voting whatever way they vote in the first place?

Ive lost track of a bit of the thread, ill make another post tommorow.

Oh good. You still haven't responded to the last time I called you on your nonsense:

Am i now ? Why dont you re-read yourself ? Now with actually relevant titles

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

IronyOwl Posts
RV Question
-Yes

Fuck yeah Zathras mode. Calling Jokerman on lurking policy
-Yes

Attacking Jokerman with Zathras argument. It's ok since hes good.
-*BZZZZRT*, we have bullshit. I was attacking him for one of the same reasons as Zath, but I wasn't copying him. You have the last part backwards- I felt it was okay to attack him THAT LIGHTLY because Zath was already on it.

Nothing usefull, why cant you see that Jokerman is scummier than meeeeeeeee, Irony edition
-You don't think questioning Pandar and pointing out that Jokerman is going back on his own policy to avoid attention is useful? I also see that you're now using Toaster's argument, which is both ironic and the same issue you've had before with reading key phrases and nothing else.

Me , buddying ?? But that's non-possible
-*BZZZRT*, bullshit again! It had already been established that I buddied him the first time; Toaster was grasping at straws for the rest. But please, if you agree with him use your own words and quotes, I'd like to see your reasoning.

But i'm totaly fine with it. It's normal after all.
-Now you're just trying to make me look bad, in the same way you (and Toaster, hrm) have been- taking things I've stated and trying to make them look scummy. Why don't you explain- again, in your own words, precisely, and with quotes when appropriate- what about this was scummy?

I totally should not have said that fuck yeah Zathras thing
-*BZZZZZRT*, yet more bullshit! Not being a native speaker will only excuse so much of this shit. I said I didn't have to have said it, but I've never said I shouldn't have.

I don't understand/ I don't trust him, i just let him do my scumhunting for me
-That's odd, in the third link attacking the same guy as Zath was a scumtell! Now not attacking him is a scumtell? Which is it, MBP?

Oh hell NAW i wasn't buddying that man, Zathras.
-Once AGAIN, there's a difference between "I was buddying here" and the horseshit Toaster's been spewing. I see you STILL refuse to read the goddamned thread, and insist on latching onto Toaster's strategy instead.

Where is that scumhunting you want me to see ? You did ask a few question on Jokerman, then just stood back throwing flowers at Zathras from the side.Oh,  you also threw a few inane question at Pandar then tried to get yourself out of the pit you dug yourself. That's scumhunting like i've never seen.

Answers included. So, here we have the sum of your arguments:

-Attacking the same target as Zath is scummy
-Letting Zath attack the target instead is scummy
-Poking Pandarsenic is inane, and therefore scummy
-Responding to questions directed at me is attempting to dig myself out of a pit, and therefore scummy
-Buddying once means "throwing flowers at Zathras the whole game," and is therefore scummy

Congratulations, you're tunneling like crazy, despite needing to outright lie to do so.

Hey Pandar.

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

So you don't think his numerous posts thus far have held any insight?

I'm also curious how you're going about trying to determine anything. I don't see any questions for him from you. Or for anyone, for that matter.

[Zathras]

Pandar, your post is utter bullshit, and makes me think you are also scum. I'm considering moving my vote from Joker to you. I'll be happy if either of you scumbuckets hang today.

Roles that would blatantly buddy:
Scum with a beneficial effect when they die trying to implicate someone as well - for example, Mad Gunman buddies Townie X, then when Mad Gunman dies, he shoots someone randomly (hopefully not the buddied Townie X, in his mind), and now Townie X looks bad for having scum extol his virtues.
Jesters
Townies who have anti-town effects while existing (for instance, "Troll" from BYOR5 ruining all roleflips)

Point made yet?

Not even close. Jesters or townies with a deathwish would be trying harder (and Troll persisted after death in BYOR5, so death doesn't help there; bad example), and scum mad gunman is full of ifs and would not have defended himself as much. Your notion that someone would play it like that on purpose is far fetched at best, pulled out of your ass to cover a scummy and vacuous argument at worst.

He seeks clarification for exactly why Toaster and MBP feel that IronyOwl was worth attacking for so long.

Ya, no.

Toaster and Puppet, please restate you cases against IronyOwl.

Not clarification. Restatement. The same stuff as before. Your attempt to reframe what he was doing shall be noted, however.

No. Restatement of one's case is, as I said, what I did earlier with Jokerman. A summary of the argument with evidence to show that the case is solid. It's not mindless repeating, it's a restatement of the premises, evidence, and process to prove it. Your continued reluctance to see this is scummy, and makes me think there's a reason you don't want people to prove their cases. Is it MBP's case in particular, or do you object to it in general? Let's see.

As the day will be over in a bit over 36 hours, I call everyone to restate (briefly, with evidence) their case on the person they are voting or would like most to see lynched by day end. It will help form a consensus and compare the weight of evidence present. A lot has been said in the last week, and we could use a summary on everyone's position. I presented mine on Jokerman[1], and can do one on Pandar if needed, but would prefer others to do it.

Joe isn't in the same suspicion category as IronyOwl. He's between that and the lower one because I can't decide where to place him for the REASONS I STATED.
That aside, in order:
Reasons already stated http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=72355.msg1810383#msg1810383

Again, no. Your "reasons already stated" post states no actual reasons. It says "Archangel asking MBP to restate his case is bad/scummy", which is bullshit, and it fails to give reasons on whether Jokerman's OMGUS was scummy or not ("no content!" you say, and yet he has posted plenty of content. Go read it and give a fucking opinion). Your continued indirect defence of both Jokerman and MBP is very scummy, and reflects badly on both of them. You still have played an utterly useless D1. If anyone is a jester here, it's probably you (or maybe Org, but less likely; he'd be trying harder, like you are).

You are dripping scumminess, and I'll be happy to see you hang for it. I'll go on record and say that I'll support a lynch of either Jokerman, Pandar or Org. If it's only up to me, I'll probably choose in that order, although I'm concerned about one of the last two being a Jester.


PS: Please don't do that huge font thing. It's sophomoric and obnoxious.

[Pandarsenic]

Working from the bottom up:

Nirur Torir's attempts to twist my clear statement that I'd be back later but was giving an impression of his post for the time being into "HE DODGIN QUESTUMS" was not something I was or am in the mood to tolerate.

I'm uncertain whether Joe's OMGUS was laziness, business, or scumminess. If you don't read what I say why should I even bother saying it? -.-

I didn't say I believed he was trying to die, but I did say his buddying of you was very blatant, borderline intentionally so. He asked why someone would do it intentionally and I gave examples. Do I think he's one of those? Likely not. But he wanted possibilities so I named them. Org didn't know Troll would persist post-death. I was the only player who had knowledge of that until it was too late.

[Pandarsenic]

Agck hit tab before enter on accident. Not done yet.

[Pandarsenic]

Continuing:

Asking a restatement isn't scummy?

Fine.

Archangel, restate your reasons for voting MysteriousBluePuppet when you asked for him to restate. If you ever said them in the first place, which I can find no evidence you did.


As I've said every time I'm asked about Jokerman, I've reached no real conclusion over Jokerman, and am still forming my opinion of him.

If anyone continues to push me on it I will assume you're trying to force my hand on a matter involving wanting him dead for some reason and as such consider you scummy for it. If I gave you a more in-depth opinion on Jokerman I would be lying. If I were scum I'd be giving you a definite opinion to disperse the heat this is gaining me - either calling him town to look like I have ground and am holding it or calling him scum because you all seem to want me to. But I won't be coerced into acting on something I don't have a definite stance on yet so stop trying to get me to.

[Zathras]

I'm uncertain whether Joe's OMGUS was laziness, business, or scumminess. If you don't read what I say why should I even bother saying it? -.-

As I've said every time I'm asked about Jokerman, I've reached no real conclusion over Jokerman, and am still forming my opinion of him.

I did read it, and to prove I did, I explicitly said you failed to give an opinion on it, which you confirm in your continuation. I'm glad that nothing in your post disputes that your "reasons already stated" post didn't actually state any.

If anyone continues to push me on it I will assume you're trying to force my hand on a matter involving wanting him dead for some reason and as such consider you scummy for it. If I gave you a more in-depth opinion on Jokerman I would be lying. [...] so stop trying to get me to.

No. I continue to push you to form an opinion on one of the most interesting things that has happened because a) I'm interested in your opinion, and your justification for it; b) you have enough information to form an opinion on what has transpired so far; and c) if you were interested in forming an opinion, but felt you had insufficient data, you'd be asking him (or me) questions about it. You are doing none of these things; to me that says that you want "no opinion" to be your opinion of record on the matter when the day ends, not because you don't have one, but because you want to use not having stated it as a shield. Form a fucking opinion. If you need more data, ask for it, but stop sidelining the question and the game.

Archangel, restate your reasons for voting MysteriousBluePuppet when you asked for him to restate. If you ever said them in the first place, which I can find no evidence you did.

Just for my understanding, please clarify: you are voting Archangel for voting MBP without clearly stating his reasons, yes? No longer voting him for requesting a clarification? It is fine either way, I just want to make sure I understand your rationale.



Jokerman-EXE: A lot has happened since you just graced us with your presence. What is your updated read on Pandar now that he's posted some more? Can you also give us your latest scumminess thoughts, and specifically your reads on Mr.Person, Argembarger, NativeForeigner, IronyOwl, MBP and Nirur? Do you have anything new to say in response to my latest about you?

[Pandarsenic]

As far as I could tell, the vote was along with the (in my opinion, wholly unnecessary) request for, I repeat, NOT clarification, but repetition. Had the vote been with other reasons, or had he requested that clarification without voting, I wouldn't have found him voteworthy - not really suspicious in general, even.

But he did, so he is. It's the combination of factors that was voteworthy, and I apologize if this initially seemed not to be the case.

EBWOP: Wait a goddamn second. Archangel, that isn't... I don't... really? You're demanding someone say what they already have as your reason for voting them?

That's... I don't... seriously? IronyOwl, I want you to tell me why you kept grouping yourself and Zathras against Jokerman.

As painfully brief as that vote was, Unvote IronyOwl, vote Archangel, because that is unacceptable. Srsly? You sure you read what he posted before Archy?

Archangel never stated otherwise, that I recall. I also don't remember if IronyOwl posted a reply to me. Links to appropriate posts would be nice, but if there are no such links to be provided just being told what they answered with or reminders of their answers by them would be appreciated. If they haven't answered, answers now would be nice.

Also, I'm going to request another degree of extension. Tonight or tomorrow morning I'm going to review all of Joe's posts, particular the early ones I haven't given a look at post-OMGUS.

[webadict]

I sat watching the congregation with a sick fear and an even sicker joy. They were debating who was going to die. Their whisperings were growing louder too, and I soon felt like they were becoming less like ghosts.

I inched further into the corner.

Suddenly, shots rang out, and the one they called Zathras was their target. His sheet flew off, with stains of blood and holes littering it, falling by my feet. I kicked it away.

Zathras, dressed as Emperor Caligula, hands to his chest, spoke, "It seems... as though I-i can't win... ev...er..." He was breathing heavily, and whispers quieter than when I first arrived filled his bloody mouth. I moved closer to hear, avoiding the sheet.

"I'll get you n-next time."

The ghosts were silent, and then one of them spoke, almost ignoring the body of their deceased friend. I looked at him once more, before turning toward the new conversation.

Zathras has been killed!

Zathras was Emperor Caligula (sk).

Votes Reset.

Vote Count
------------------------
Pandarsenic -
Org -
Ottofar -
Argembarger -
Toaster -
Archangel -
MysteriousBluePuppet -
IronyOwl -
Jokerman-EXE -
NativeForeigner -
Nirur Torir -
Mr.Person -

Not Voting - NativeForeigner, Argembarger, Jokerman-EXE, IronyOwl, Nirur Torir, Ottofar, Archangel, Toaster, MysteriousBluePuppet, Pandarsenic, Mr.Person, Org,

7 To Hammer. Day Ends Monday 9 PM Central.

Zathras - Emperor Caligula
"All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent." -Thomas Jefferson

(Auto) Emperor: You have 3 votes.
(Night) Order [target][target]: The first target actions the second target instead of their intended target.

[Argembarger]

Wait, what the hell just happened?