Print

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

[Jack A T]

Addendum to my answer to Leafsnail's question: Taking the possibility of a third party into account increases the chance of B by a good bit, but that still feels unlikely.

[JanusTwoface]

Somewhat, to be more clear : No, i'm am not certain enough to put you up definitevely for lynch, i will change my vote if i get anything better. Still for now i will keep my vote on you.

Hold water or not, not responding is not helping too. If i said nothing you would have used it as further proof of scumminess.

Nope. When I first made the comment about the double post, I didn't actually think you were scummy. I just thought it was unusual, something to look back into down the road.

The only reason I'm even voting you right now is that you did over-defend yourself (and not attack anyone, but you're not the only one doing that). You've calmed down somewhat, but I still want to see you scumhunt.

If asking questions isn't your thing, there are other options. Go back in the thread and read people's posts. Look for anything contradictions or unusual behavior. Town don't have to act, so their behavior will usually be slightly more natural.

Again? On which wagon did I jump earlier? As for him, I don't think the reason is flimsy, and it had been said elsewhere by him, so it's not like he's parroting it. Neither am I, before you say it, I arrived independently at the conclusion that your attack on MBP was scummy while I was rereading, and your deflection/intimidation attempts only cemented my conclusions.

You tunnel. You've done it in two previous games I've either played or modded with you. I really don't think that I'm either deflecting or trying to be intimidating. You've said the former of me (when tunneling) and I didn't see it then and the latter is what I honestly think. The intention is *not* to get him to shut it, it's quite the opposite. I want him to expand his case, which he's doing (not that I agree with his points, but there you have it).

Oh, are you playing the "if you lynch me you'll regret it!" card? Yeah, that's another nail in your coffin.

I do admit that the game is more fun with active players, but playing to win means lynching the scummiest, and right now that is you.

I hesitated posting that because I knew that's who you (and possibly others would react), but it's exactly my point.  If you lynch me today, the Mafia kills an another of the more active players tonight, and one or more of the remaining ones is scum, they can easily just lurk to victory. Happened before, sure it will happen again. Would rather it not be this game.

There are *always* mislynches built into Mafia. I really do think that even if you're 80% convinced I'm scum, you can always lynch me later.

[Zathras]

You tunnel.

I prefer to think of it as being focused. If I find a scummy thread, I'll pull it, and sometimes a big fish (like you) is caught, which is great. But if not, then I'll move on; and I never entirely ignore everyone else, which is the definition of tunneling.

I really don't think that I'm either deflecting or trying to be intimidating.

This is a deflection:

Archangel has 2 posts; the last 16 hours ago. Red text: Posts: [1][2]
Org has 2 posts; the last 45 hours ago. Red text: Posts: [1][2]

This is inexcusible. You have 2/3 as many posts PUT TOGETHER as the MODERATOR for crying out loud.

It's not false. They both should get their ass in here and play, but you pulling it out just when people are focusing on you is exactly what a deflection is. "Quit bugging me! There are perfectly good targets here! Go get them instead! Zathras, you like hounding lurkers, don't you? How about these?" That's a clear deflection.

This is an intimidation attempt:

You're jumping from bandwagon to bandwagon without giving your reasoning. That *is* scummy around here.

Telling the new guy "*this* is how we roll around here", threatening to "nail" him for a major scumtell (for bogus reasons), explicitly after you saw how he reacted to earlier differences in playstyle (moving votes, pointing contradictions); it seems to me you were trying to provoke him into a reaction like here or here. Get him to back down; it'll be one less vote to shake off later in the day.

Oh, are you playing the "if you lynch me you'll regret it!" card? Yeah, that's another nail in your coffin.

I hesitated posting that because I knew that's how you (and possibly others would react), but it's exactly my point.  If you lynch me today, the Mafia kills an another of the more active players tonight, and one or more of the remaining ones is scum, they can easily just lurk to victory. Happened before, sure it will happen again. Would rather it not be this game.
There are *always* mislynches built into Mafia. I really do think that even if you're 80% convinced I'm scum, you can always lynch me later.

Bah. I want to be clear: you are definitely scummy enough to hang. However, I will concede that Org is nearly as much, and your continued presence is better for the day game than his, so I'll go on record and say: I'm ready to support a lynch of Org, who is my second scummiest target, if it seems like it's doable by the end of the day. If we decide to go this route, then I request investigative roles, blockers or somesuch to try to get a reading on Janus.

If I could, I'd vote them both.

[JanusTwoface]

I prefer to think of it as being focused. If I find a scummy thread, I'll pull it, and sometimes a big fish (like you) is caught, which is great. But if not, then I'll move on; and I never entirely ignore everyone else, which is the definition of tunneling.

You did it in Bastard Paranormal, granted you were scum then. And in the first Sorcerer's Apprentice, although it wasn't against me that time. 

Can't wait to say 'I told you so' (again). Actually... no, I can wait. I would love to wait.

It's not false. They both should get their ass in here and play, but you pulling it out just when people are focusing on you is exactly what a deflection is. "Quit bugging me! There are perfectly good targets here! Go get them instead! Zathras, you like hounding lurkers, don't you? How about these?" That's a clear deflection.

... I brought it up because I saw your LurkerTracker. I'll admit to being a bit self-serving. I don't want to by lynched, particularly on Day 1 and particularly not while people get away with *2 contentless posts*.

This is an intimidation attempt:

You're jumping from bandwagon to bandwagon without giving your reasoning. That *is* scummy around here.

Telling the new guy "*this* is how we roll around here", threatening to "nail" him for a major scumtell (for bogus reasons), explicitly after you saw how he reacted to earlier differences in playstyle (moving votes, pointing contradictions); it seems to me you were trying to provoke him into a reaction like here or here. Get him to back down; it'll be one less vote to shake off later in the day.

Not how I meant it. The 'around here' was because he brought up playing other places. Jumping to whoever has the most votes (particularly being the third vote) *is* scummy, so I pointed it out.

Bah. I want to be clear: you are definitely scummy enough to hang.

I'm really not...

However, I will concede that Org is nearly as much, and your continued presence is better for the day game than his, so I'll go on record and say: I'm ready to support a lynch of Org, who is my second scummiest target, if it seems like it's doable by the end of the day. If we decide to go this route, then I request investigative roles, blockers or somesuch to try to get a reading on Janus.

Go for it. Well, I'd prefer you not block me, but if that's what it takes, have at it.


Mysteriousbluepuppet, you still need to scumhunt. I'm not going to unvote you if you don't even if it kills me (and it might).

[Jack A T]

This is an intimidation attempt:

You're jumping from bandwagon to bandwagon without giving your reasoning. That *is* scummy around here.

Telling the new guy "*this* is how we roll around here", threatening to "nail" him for a major scumtell (for bogus reasons), explicitly after you saw how he reacted to earlier differences in playstyle (moving votes, pointing contradictions); it seems to me you were trying to provoke him into a reaction like here or here. Get him to back down; it'll be one less vote to shake off later in the day.

Not how I meant it. The 'around here' was because he brought up playing other places. Jumping to whoever has the most votes (particularly being the third vote) *is* scummy, so I pointed it out.

Jumping to you person with actual reasoning (not the greatest reasoning, but still), however...

Especially when I've already stated I suspect you.

ESPECIALLY when there's more people voting for MBP at the time.

[JanusTwoface]

Say what exactly?  When you voted me Mysteriousbluepuppet had 4 votes (JanusTwoface, Mr.Person, NativeForeigner, Ottofar) and I had 3 (Dariush, Mysteriousbluepuppet, and Zathras), making you the 4th...

[JanusTwoface]

Oops, didn't mean to hit the post button.

Turns out, looking back, Zathras was the actually 3rd vote. You just wanted to be...

Not actually sure if that makes you more or less scummy. Does make Zathras look scummier.

[Jack A T]

Say what exactly?  When you voted me Mysteriousbluepuppet had 4 votes (JanusTwoface, Mr.Person, NativeForeigner, Ottofar) and I had 3 (Dariush, Mysteriousbluepuppet, and Zathras), making you the 4th...

I was referring to the time when I was writing.  The whole ninjaing thing got in the way.

I love how you were using my claimed writing time to make me the third voter and are now using my exact posting time to make me the fourth, but oh well.

Meh. Just rambling now.

Oops, didn't mean to hit the post button.

Turns out, looking back, Zathras was the actually 3rd vote. You just wanted to be...

Not actually sure if that makes you more or less scummy. Does make Zathras look scummier.

Well, um...that just...NINJAS! Someone get me some pirates!

I have to wonder, though, what makes bandwagoning bandwagoning?  Is bandwagoning considered to be joining a semi-popular vote on it's own?  Is it doing so without giving any reason?

[Toaster]

Unvote Jack A T.  You just don't smell scummy to me right now.  To answer your question, scummy bandwagonning is when you add an additional vote on someone without giving a reason or just giving a simple reason that many others have said.  Traditionally, the third vote is the most suspect.


On Janus vs MBP:  I need to reread this, but my brain isn't working right- I need sleep.  I'll just ask you both the same question and reread in the morning:
Who, besides the other, do you think is scummy and why?

[JanusTwoface]

@Jack A T:
Basically what Toaster said. Depending on how flimsy you read the reasons for the votes on me, it may or may not be a bandwagon. I think it was/is.

@Toaster:
Org/Archangel - Useless and anti-town at the very least thus far, may or may not be scum
Zathras - Third vote, tunneling again (was scum last time he did it to me)
NativeForeigner - Might actually be third party, based on this
You (Toaster) - I can't ever read you, gut feeling of suspicion, not enough to go on yet

[Jim Groovester]

I like the idea that Janus and Org are scumbuddies. That's a fun team. But it would also explain why Janus hasn't been pushing Org as much as he normally does (he has mentioned him as one of his picks, and one or two half-assed pokes, but that's it). I think they are both scum, but Janus should hang first, as his day game is more useful. So, unvote; vote Janus, FoS Org.

Isn't it a little early to be calling scumteams? I know you do it all the time, and you look ridiculous every time. But it's Day 1, and Org has posted only twice. You can't implicate either JTF or Org for what they may or may not be doing to each other, because they're not really doing anything.

Calling a scum team this early strikes me as odd.

I really don't think that I'm either deflecting or trying to be intimidating.

This is a deflection:

Archangel has 2 posts; the last 16 hours ago. Red text: Posts: [1][2]
Org has 2 posts; the last 45 hours ago. Red text: Posts: [1][2]

This is inexcusible. You have 2/3 as many posts PUT TOGETHER as the MODERATOR for crying out loud.

It's not false. They both should get their ass in here and play, but you pulling it out just when people are focusing on you is exactly what a deflection is. "Quit bugging me! There are perfectly good targets here! Go get them instead! Zathras, you like hounding lurkers, don't you? How about these?" That's a clear deflection.

Deflections are shitty scumtells, in that it's almost never what the person is doing.

You thinking it is actually a deflection seems like wishful thinking on your part, because I don't really see it. This is a single line from a single post of many where he's arguing with a bunch of different people, so how is it a deflection if he takes a bit of time to call out some unforgivable lurkers? Seems like normal scum hunting.

And there's the thing. The difference between deflections and scumhunting is only in how much you suspect the person. This is being unforgivably hard on JTF for no good reason except to get JTF lynched when he shouldn't be.

You're jumping from bandwagon to bandwagon without giving your reasoning. That *is* scummy around here.

Bullshit. He provided reasons on the post I quote earlier; you are just trying to intimidate the new guy into silience. His vote on you is hardly a bandwagon (being second, and it seems would have been first but I ninja'd him), and he stated his suspicion of you as early as his initial MBP vote. You know this; you read it then, and read it again when I quoted it, so your saying "without giving your reasoning" is a blatant lie. Liars are scum. Lynch all liars.

This is an intimidation attempt:

You're jumping from bandwagon to bandwagon without giving your reasoning. That *is* scummy around here.

Telling the new guy "*this* is how we roll around here", threatening to "nail" him for a major scumtell (for bogus reasons), explicitly after you saw how he reacted to earlier differences in playstyle (moving votes, pointing contradictions); it seems to me you were trying to provoke him into a reaction like here or here. Get him to back down; it'll be one less vote to shake off later in the day.

If you'll recall, I believe I was first in telling Jack A T what does and does not constitute a scum tell on this here forum. That's even what I said.

So, if JTF was trying to intimidate the new guy, wasn't I doing the same thing? What makes it okay for me to do but not for JTF? Does it have to do with the amount of votes already on JTF? Seems like it to me.

I think you're trying to invent a case that isn't there, Zathras. And that's not just me handing out a little blue candy. I do suspect you, but Jack A T earns my vote for hopping on the bandwagon of most convenience for the second (third? I lost track) time.

[Jack A T]

I think you're trying to invent a case that isn't there, Zathras. And that's not just me handing out a little blue candy. I do suspect you, but Jack A T earns my vote for hopping on the bandwagon of most convenience for the second (third? I lost track) time.

Second.

And, as I tried to say a bit earlier, MBP was still the most convenient one at the time of my vote.  More people, and he was an easy target at that time (he's become slightly less so with his lower overall anger and increased coherence).

[Jim Groovester]

So you're actually admitting to voting the target of most convenience?

That's a rather damning admission, by any standard.

[Jack A T]

So you're actually admitting to voting the target of most convenience?

That's a rather damning admission, by any standard.

Erm...my later vote.

The Janus vote.

[Jim Groovester]

I don't follow anymore.

Who are you stating you voted as a target of the most convenience?