Print

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

[Max White]

Max: It's one thing to share info, it's another to beg for it. Why those three in particular? Why painting yourself like a martyr? Are you going to do anything aside from defend yourself?

Three good players who know what they are doing, and between them chances are they are not all scum. Even the tiniest bit of disagreement and I resort to the default 'do nothing', but they seem to all agree on this, and that is to do nothing.

[Jim Groovester]

You lynch people for trying to explain themselves? I lynch people for being scum.

You're not being nearly as clever as you think you are.

You said you were really good at mincing words. I've got no reason to take you at anything other than your word, even though I know that's not what you meant. It should be obvious that making insincere admissions like that is a bad idea.

Toony/Pandar stuff

*sigh*

I can see why you thought that but it's a complete misread of what Pandarsenic was doing. He was attacking you for your reasoning about ToonyMan. He wasn't trying to save ToonyMan from getting lynched.

Well, if you're not going to fight it, then I have no reason to reconsider.

I intend to fight, but I don't think I will win. I ask if it would be appropriate to share any info, and you accuse me of role fishing. From here on any attempt to defend myself is no longer a townie explaining them self, but a scum mincing words to you.

Everybody accused you of rolefishing because it looked like you were trying to ask everybody else what their role information was. That's a big no no.

And it's good that you're not planning on giving up, but don't you remember what I told everybody in BMXXIV about the only way to save yourself from a lynch? It's not by roleclaiming, it's by scumhunting.

You haven't done that yet. Did you forget? None of your posts today have anywhere approached trying to make a case. I suggest you start.

I didn't say it made you look scummy - go ahead and check. It's interesting that you react that way, though. What I was saying was that you've spent all of D2 and the vast majority of D1 on attacking Max, and if he flips town then who are you going to have? What suspicions will you push?

Bullshit. What else is reeeeal interesting supposed to mean?

If Max White doesn't pan out I'll find new suspicions. That's how the game is played. I lynch my top choice, and if that doesn't pan out, I move on.

Pretty basic, right? Oh wait, never mind. You don't lynch anybody.

In fact, I would go so far as you say you're tunneling Max pretty heavily. I think it only counts as scumhunting if you're looking at everyone; attacking one person over and over again isn't real hunting.

And now you're accusing me of not scumhunting.

Yep, you're really laying down the groundwork for an argument against me.

Yes, I'm aware of how I look to you. Got a problem with it? Throw your vote at me. I, on the other hand, hold on to mine until I find a place to put it and a reason as to why.

So I guess you don't have any suspicions and don't suspect anybody. Otherwise your vote would be there, right?

That's a problem. It is Day 2, after all.

Day ends ~10am Pacific Friday

Extension.

The amount of activity going on is kind of pathetic right now. Only four votes? Come on.

[Think0028]

Agreed, extension.

[Max White]

I would also like an extension.

[Max White]

You're not being nearly as clever as you think you are.

You said you were really good at mincing words. I've got no reason to take you at anything other than your word, even though I know that's not what you meant. It should be obvious that making insincere admissions like that is a bad idea.

If lying and mincing are the only two options you give me to choose from, then is all reality I am making the more honest choice. You can twist it however you like, but the choice between 'making insincere admissions like that' and saying I was just straight out lying is a fairly clear one.

*sigh*

I can see why you thought that but it's a complete misread of what Pandarsenic was doing. He was attacking you for your reasoning about ToonyMan. He wasn't trying to save ToonyMan from getting lynched.

Apart from the fact that Toony was a guard, wouldn't Pandar want to protect the guy who can give away who wanted to kill him?

Everybody accused you of rolefishing because it looked like you were trying to ask everybody else what their role information was. That's a big no no.

And it's good that you're not planning on giving up, but don't you remember what I told everybody in BMXXIV about the only way to save yourself from a lynch? It's not by roleclaiming, it's by scumhunting.

I didn't think a roleclaim is going to achieve much for myself. Not when so many of those roles have human/dopp race choices.

You haven't done that yet. Did you forget? None of your posts today have anywhere approached trying to make a case. I suggest you start.

I would prefer to avoid putting together any case until it is ready. I don't have enough.

[Jokerman-EXE]

Extend, no time for a real post tonight. I'll try to get one up before work tomorrow.

[IronyOwl]

Yeah, extend.

So you consider "involving yourself" and "picking one side or the other" synonymous? Can't have your own opinion or stance on something, have to choose one of the people involved and ally with them for a while? That's not scummy at all.

So I am allied with Jim? Isn't that putting words into my mouth?
I chose my side to attack, but I will reiterate, that doesn't mean I'm putting my trust in Jim. I pushed Toony for myself, questioning him on what I could, rather than ally.

So now all this mention of "picking a side" meant "picking a side to attack," not the more obvious meaning. You sure talk scummy when it suits you.

And this still doesn't address why the only way to "involve yourself" is to pick a target from the most currently visible dispute and bandwagon them. "Bandwagon? My arguments are my own!" you say? "Bullshit," I'm inclined to respond, when your reason for attacking them, quite literally, is that it's gotta be one or the other.

It's also nice to know that, since that seems to be the only time you "took sides," that was the only time you were actually playing the game. Any thoughts on that?

I err what? So your trying to say that lynching Toony is the only thing I have done so far, correct?
Well I would be interested in what makes you say that.

You do. That's the only issue you seem to have "taken a side" in, and since your justification for it was some garbage about it being that or doing nothing, I can only assume that's the only thing you've done all game.

[Jim Groovester]

I would prefer to avoid putting together any case until it is ready. I don't have enough.

Scumhunt or die.

The rest of your post is useless blabbering. I'm tired of exchanging pointless volleys with you if all you can do is make yourself out to be the victim.

It really is as simple as that. Either make a convincing case on somebody and prove that you're town by thorough scumhunting, or be lynched for being passive scum.

[Max White]

And this still doesn't address why the only way to "involve yourself" is to pick a target from the most currently visible dispute and bandwagon them. "Bandwagon? My arguments are my own!" you say? "Bullshit," I'm inclined to respond, when your reason for attacking them, quite literally, is that it's gotta be one or the other.

*Goes to think's lurker tracker*
*Picks random own post*

EDIT: Sorry, while cutting down those quotes to make to try and make them readable, I think I lost some of my first paragraph. Let me fix that.

Toony statred his first post off with a bandwagon vote, sort of. Well he was mimicking the vote of Think at least, then soon after goes on to say that

That's your excuse for not being able to shake me, you have the most votes right now for a reason.

but this is hardly good reasoning for a vote. Yes Toony, he has the most votes because one was a RVS vote, and the other was yours. You invented your own reason to try and frame Jim. And after all,

Even if every single player agrees with something doesn't mean it's right.  For example, let's say everybody think Jim is town, that doesn't mean Jim is town.

Yes, I dare say I was pushing Toony on my own accord. If you want more evidence of this, try reading the thread. Your argument that this is a bandwagon is bullshit.

I involved myself, I pushed somebody, I got a scummy reply from both Toony and Pandar, and I followed through. Regardless of Jim's support.

You do. That's the only issue you seem to have "taken a side" in, and since your justification for it was some garbage about it being that or doing nothing, I can only assume that's the only thing you've done all game.

Not all circumstances are mutually exclusive.

Scumhunt or die.

The rest of your post is useless blabbering. I'm tired of exchanging pointless volleys with you if all you can do is make yourself out to be the victim.

It really is as simple as that. Either make a convincing case on somebody and prove that you're town by thorough scumhunting, or be lynched for being passive scum.

It is funny that you have already outlined my biggest problem in this.

The amount of activity going on is kind of pathetic right now.

There are too many lurkers right now to make any case based on lurking. And really, inactivity is a poor reason to lynch somebody, unless it has gotten so bad you want them out regardless of role.

Also, for every victim, there is a villain. I couldn't play such a role without one.

[Max White]

SON OF A ******** I wish I could just edit. Ah well, the price I pay for trying to format nicely.

And this still doesn't address why the only way to "involve yourself" is to pick a target from the most currently visible dispute and bandwagon them. "Bandwagon? My arguments are my own!" you say? "Bullshit," I'm inclined to respond, when your reason for attacking them, quite literally, is that it's gotta be one or the other.

*Goes to think's lurker tracker*
*Picks random own post*

EDIT: Sorry, while cutting down those quotes to make to try and make them readable, I think I lost some of my first paragraph. Let me fix that.

Toony statred his first post off with a bandwagon vote, sort of. Well he was mimicking the vote of Think at least, then soon after goes on to say that

That's your excuse for not being able to shake me, you have the most votes right now for a reason.

but this is hardly good reasoning for a vote. Yes Toony, he has the most votes because one was a RVS vote, and the other was yours. You invented your own reason to try and frame Jim. And after all,

Even if every single player agrees with something doesn't mean it's right.  For example, let's say everybody think Jim is town, that doesn't mean Jim is town.

Yes, I dare say I was pushing Toony on my own accord. If you want more evidence of this, try reading the thread. Your argument that this is a bandwagon is bullshit.

I involved myself, I pushed somebody, I got a scummy reply from both Toony and Pandar, and I followed through. Regardless of Jim's support.

You do. That's the only issue you seem to have "taken a side" in, and since your justification for it was some garbage about it being that or doing nothing, I can only assume that's the only thing you've done all game.

Not all circumstances are mutually exclusive.

Scumhunt or die.

The rest of your post is useless blabbering. I'm tired of exchanging pointless volleys with you if all you can do is make yourself out to be the victim.

It really is as simple as that. Either make a convincing case on somebody and prove that you're town by thorough scumhunting, or be lynched for being passive scum.

It is funny that you have already outlined my biggest problem in this.

The amount of activity going on is kind of pathetic right now.

There are too many lurkers right now to make any case based on lurking. And really, inactivity is a poor reason to lynch somebody, unless it has gotten so bad you want them out regardless of role.

Also, for every victim, there is a villain. I couldn't play such a role without one.

[Vector]

Sorry.  Another German test =/

Extend

[lordnincompoop]

Extend.

Well, I'm most likely going to be lynched, I have seen how these things go.

What makes you think that? Two votes are hardly enough to fret over.

Somebody said to claim if you were a kook, but nobody said anything for any other role, so are there roles that should reveal themselves now, especially if they are about to die?

I'd imagine that most town power roles - especially investigative ones - would do well in fullclaiming and posting info on the hour of their death. It likely won't change things, but should the player flip town, that info would potentially be useful.

IronyOwl for lurking which is unlike him, Jokerman for lurking which is like him and Max White for buddying, but he seems sufficiently pressured to allow me to observe his reactions and determine which questions need to be asked.

Okay. Do you have anything original, or for that matter, substantial?

There are too many lurkers right now to make any case based on lurking. And really, inactivity is a poor reason to lynch somebody, unless it has gotten so bad you want them out regardless of role.

Also, for every victim, there is a villain. I couldn't play such a role without one.

What is it really that hard to find tells in the backlog?

There should be enough material to work with for now, and even if there isn't, don't you think it's a better idea to do that instead of sitting on your ass whining about lurkers and being useless?

[Toaster]

Jokerman:  Asking four people their suspicion list is not scum hunting.  I don't think you've so much as called a single person scummy all game.  You are passive, lazy, non-side-taking scum.  Go hang.


Extend to give people more time to vote Jokerman.


Max:  The preview post button is your friend.

[Dariush]

This scumlist is lazy.  What is the difference in scumminess between in-meta lurking and not-in-meta lurking?

The first indicates that nothing is out of order. The second indicates that the lurker wants to be ignored.

Why not question now?

Because I don't have sufficient material to work with.

What do you gain from waiting to question that you couldn't by just questioning current non-posters after they post?

That's exactly what I'm waiting for.

Why not question them on D1 material?

I don't like using material from previous days unless there's been some glaring and obvious mistake which I want to explore farther. Which there wasn't.

Dariush: It's true, though; you aren't really pushing anyone. You're very defensive, haven't attacked anyone,...who are your suspects?

Lrn2readplz.
Irony:

Eh, I remembered some weirdness with you and whether or not it was an RV, which now appears to not exist. Must have been thinking of a different person and/or game.

So, you admit that you voted me by mistake aaaand... don't change your vote. Duly noted.

Nonetheless, I don't like how you voted Toony for an RV, then didn't really bother to question him. Do you have any non-lurking suspects at all? You know, suspects that are actually scummy as opposed to just absent? Shouldn't you be scumhunting to get or improve some either way?

Toony was digging a pit for himself and finally fell into it. My questioning wouldn't have changed anything. Max already dug half a pit and is now desperately trying to get out of it. The bad thing about lurkers is that they don't say anything substantial which makes it impossible to base any case on them except 'they're lurking'. What are your other suspects?

LNCP, you seem pretty relaxed down there. If I'm going to go to LT and look at your last posts, what am I going to find there?... Let's see - bandwagoning onto Max - check. Parroting other people's mentions of my inactivity - check. Scumhunting - ... ... sorry, can't find it. The closest you came there is by carefully detailing why Toony ought to hang. After he was halfway in the noose. What is your read on IronyOwl? What do you think should be done with lurkers in general?

[Mephansteras]

Day is Extended to ~10am Pacific Monday