Print

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

[NativeForeigner]

Finishing up some homework. I'll get to working on a post after I'm finished.

[Shark]

After a busy day of being Batman, I'm back.

Anyways, before I make a decision I want to wait for this:

Exremely busy weekend ahead of me. I won't be posting until probably Monday afternoon.

It seems like NativeForeigner and Shark aren't making their cases on IronyOwl, but I'd rather wait to see if that's because of availability instead of any other reason.

Unless both of them suddenly become very convincing it's probably going to be Shark. The closer and closer I look at IronyOwl's case (shame on me for not doing that sooner) the more I can see where he's coming from about it. In particular, this quote is where I see Shark more as being scum than being a noob.

I was speaking about games in general, like I said earlier. I guess it wasn't how I should of answered, and it's apparently something you guys didn't want to hear. I was trying to be more interesting, the game was moving pretty slowly.

Playing it off his answers earlier in the game like he meant to do it that way is crap.

I did mean to do it, and always ment to do it. You're going to lynch me for telling the truth over a rather stupid topic, but whatever.

Really, how is that supposed to work out? "Whatever, who cares if I didn't vote somebody I said I suspected, I said I suspected him before everyone else did." I think you know how hollow saying you suspect someone without voting them looks.

If you can find a place where I tried to leave myself an escape route, please point it out. Otherwise, I don't see why declaring someone scum, then declaring that I want to be certain and not end the day too fast is scummy or hollow, especially since I was clear enough on my intentions to get flak from multiple people for not adding the vote on there.

What makes you think this is him being scum more than him just being a noob? Noobs sometimes can't help but change their stories around a lot whenever pressured.

Well for one thing, even if he is a noob, I can't fathom why he'd mentally switch himself to the more interesting team to give an answer, then fail to mention that he was doing so.

Secondly, his first explanation for that was an anecdote about meta-tells ruining a different game. If he somehow had done the aforementioned, I'd assume his first response would be either explaining as much, or digging himself deeper in a panicky and similarly bizarre fashion. This was more of a calculated excuse, and he didn't bother mentioning it again, instead switching to different stories.


Basically, he's been lying to cover his tracks after acting bizarrely. If he's somehow not scum, I don't know how I'd ever be able to tell that.

Jim's got nothing, and hasn't been especially keen on fixing that. What I find most interesting, however, is that he doesn't really find Shark scummy, despite noticing and calling him out on some of his scumtells. Usually when I'm scum with a noob partner, I tend to underestimate their scumminess for whatever reason. Jim's a lot more brutal than I am, but it still looks a lot like that sort of situation, especially since, as I've just said, Jim's usually a lot more brutal than this.

This I don't understand. I dispute that I'm not keen on fixing the problem; I've asked plenty of questions to people. Maybe it bugs you that I'm not being as much of a raging douche as usual, but I'm not standing back in the sidelines.

You've seemed rather slow and low-key to me. Usually one, sometimes two people at a time, usually fairly gentle questions, and in several cases admitting you don't really have anything, are grasping at straws, etc.

I felt that I'd gotten solid enough reads on everyone else, or at least as good as I was probably going to based on Shark interactions. Your Sharkvote post, Jim's scumtell answer, and Native's hypothetical explanation were all very important to that.

How important to your case on Shark are all three of those things?

Not at all. All three were largely dependent on Shark being alive and unflipped, however.

I'm not OMGUSing, I'm going after you because you've been hesitant to do anything without approval, not because of your suspicion. Your hesitance makes it seem that you're scared about your image. I'm not the only person who has been asking you about your hesitance, Jim also made a post with nothing but a question on why you were "dancing around a vote."

I did forget parroting, didn't I?

You say that you weren't sure until then, but I know I've been your top scumpick for a good chunk of this game.

"Top scumpick" and "ready to have lynched" are two separate things. I'm pretty sure I've explained multiple times that I wasn't ready for the day to end even after I was ready to lynch you, and I know I've explained multiple times that I wanted to be damned sure before placing my vote.

You're the one OMGUSing, you said that you had "lost any real doubt that he was scum" until I made the post where I voted you.

No, the one you voted me in was the ironclad guarantee. Losing any serious doubts was the one before that, where you changed your story again, to something that didn't make any sense, again.

If you're going to tell me I exaggerated and posted nonsensical arguments, post some evidence. I'm not scared to move this game forward, and you vote me for doing so.

You claimed I was "scared" and "paralyzed" because I hadn't voted you yet, but without any reasons why my explanation for that was false.

You claimed that nobody would look at the first vote on a target, while implying that I didn't want to vote you first to avoid attention. I pointed this out earlier, but you ignored it.

You claimed that you misspoke because you're new at mafia. That doesn't explain anything, when the "misspeak" involves unspoken hypotheticals and changing your story.

I never changed my story, both reasons are correct. I didn't want to post both reasons at once because I feared you guys would think I overreacted to the question. Either way, you guys freaked out.

Also, "I did forget parroting, didn't I?" isn't an answer. That's you dismissing me and looking superior so jim won't pay attention to what I said, and will look at the other things you've said. You're scared to reply or explain yourself under pressure.

"You claimed that nobody would look at the first vote on a target, while implying that I didn't want to vote you first to avoid attention. I pointed this out earlier, but you ignored it." You misread what I said. I was saying that you wouldn't even make the first vote, which, in my opinion, is safer than say, the 2nd or 3rd vote.

Here's my quote: "Do you really not want attention on you? If I got hammered, no one would look at the first voter."

I read that as: You don't want attention on you so badly you won't vote. I then point out that it's pointless to be scared to make the first vote.

I only see that kind of pointless hesitation as scummy.

"No, the one you voted me in was the ironclad guarantee." What the hell are you going on about? I never implied otherwise, I clicked your link to confirm that the post where I voted you was the ironclad guarentee.

Reread this quote from me: "You're the one OMGUSing, you said that you had "lost any real doubt that he was scum" until I made the post where I voted you."

That says that you has lost doubt in me, which you did do before I voted you, until I made the post where I voted you and your opinion flipped.

You're going to say i'm parroting, but seriously, you're the one who changed your story to something nonsensical(and you didn't give evidence again), because you're misreading my posts to use as fodder against me, which is a bullshit tactic. Anything you don't want to see you just dismissed, such as when I called you out for OMGUSing. Many of these reasons you're using against are exactly what YOU'RE doing, it feels like you set this up just so you can whine about parroting and not have real reasons, because i'm still looking for good reasons in your recent post. So far, you're voting me because:

1. You didn't like how I answered a question from a different perspective.

2. I voted you.

So basically all your recent arguments against me recently are just badly thought out responses that don't mean a thing, just because Jim is leaning toward me. Relaxing because you're off the hook? No matter who gets vote, you're going to die, take a moment and think about why. You've dug yourself into a hole because you were finally forced into action.

[Jim Groovester]

I did mean to do it, and always ment to do it. You're going to lynch me for telling the truth over a rather stupid topic, but whatever.

So you meant to answer questions in a more 'interesting' (by which you mean scum) fashion? The hell for?

And if that was always your intention, why didn't you answer the questions directed at you with more confidence and certainty?

Sorry, still not buying it.

So basically all your recent arguments against me recently are just badly thought out responses that don't mean a thing, just because Jim is leaning toward me. Relaxing because you're off the hook? No matter who gets vote, you're going to die, take a moment and think about why. You've dug yourself into a hole because you were finally forced into action.

Question for everybody: Is it generally good practice to think about or care who the target is going to vengekill if it turns out to be a mislynch?

I'm generally thinking no, but I'd like input from the more experienced players of this gametype.

[NativeForeigner]

Working on a post now, stand by.

Question for everybody: Is it generally good practice to think about or care who the target is going to vengekill if it turns out to be a mislynch?

The way I feel about it is if you're not confident enough in your choice that you're contemplating the vengekills, you should look at your case again or you're just scum.

[NativeForeigner]

You weren't asking nearly enough questions for me to believe that, you were trying to get everyone else to do most of the hunting for you.

Explain.

Scratch this, after looking back, I realized that you were actually asking questions. However, it still seems to me like you were waiting for approval or backing from someone before you cast your vote. You stated a few times that you were almost sure Shark was scum, but for whatever reason you didn't actually vote him until AFTER Urist did. That doesn't sit well with me. It also seemed like you were trying to lead people into agreeing that Shark was definitely (but apparently not definitely enough to vote) scum. Especially here where you ask Jim what the scummiest thing Shark has done. Not what his read on Shark was, what the scummiest thing he's done was. That tends to force the player to see someone only in a negative light and miss the whole.

If I was waiting for approval, why was I the first one to state such a concrete suspicion?

To have something to fall back on when you jump on the second vote.

If you weren't waiting for approval and your suspicions were so concrete, why weren't you the first one to vote him? You can still look for interactions between players and your "confirmed scum". A vote won't have any effect that your announcement of your suspicion didn't other than showing that you're going to act on your suspicions. Additionally, the game won't end immediately after the first vote is cast (just look where we are now), so I don't think your worries of ending the day too quickly had any real ground.

I do agree that his little loophole he threw in there is odd. There's no reason for that if you think someone's scum, unless his only reason for voting you is actually just because you were stalling.

Shark: State your entire case against IronyOwl. I see bits here and there, but I want to see the whole thing in one post.

Urist: Your last post was extremely unhelpful. Is there a reason for that? Why aren't you strengthening your case against Shark?

[Jim Groovester]

Consider this T-24:00 for hammering Shark unless anybody has anything they want to say.

[NativeForeigner]

Consider this T-24:00 for hammering Shark unless anybody has anything they want to say.

What about you, Jim? Do you have anything you'd like to ask or do you think you're pretty much set?

[Jim Groovester]

I've picked at everything I wanted to and I've pretty much made up my mind. I don't want to cut discussion short if it's still going on but nothing's happening, so, time to get ready to drop the hammer.

[NativeForeigner]

I've picked at everything I wanted to and I've pretty much made up my mind. I don't want to cut discussion short if it's still going on but nothing's happening, so, time to get ready to drop the hammer.

I'd prefer if you waited until my questions were answered. It might not change your mind, but it could help after the hammer.

[Jim Groovester]

Sure, no problem. It was the whole point of setting a time, to get things moving.

[IronyOwl]

Jim:

Question for everybody: Is it generally good practice to think about or care who the target is going to vengekill if it turns out to be a mislynch?

Pretty much what Native said. It's one of those things that's important enough to warrant consideration in theory, but that almost always gets eclipsed by concerns like "If you're that worried about it why are you killing them" and "If they're this scummy and town we're probably screwed anyway."



Native:

Scratch this, after looking back, I realized that you were actually asking questions. However, it still seems to me like you were waiting for approval or backing from someone before you cast your vote. You stated a few times that you were almost sure Shark was scum, but for whatever reason you didn't actually vote him until AFTER Urist did. That doesn't sit well with me.

As I've said, I was both overly cautious and wanted more non-Shark reads before the day end.

It also seemed like you were trying to lead people into agreeing that Shark was definitely (but apparently not definitely enough to vote) scum. Especially here where you ask Jim what the scummiest thing Shark has done. Not what his read on Shark was, what the scummiest thing he's done was. That tends to force the player to see someone only in a negative light and miss the whole.

I'd already inferred his overall read from the fact that he wasn't destroying Shark for his scumminess; most of his attacks were fairly neutral, so it didn't seem like he considered him overt scum. I wanted something more specific on how he was viewing Shark, so I asked about what Jim felt his worst offense was. I don't think asking someone for what they consider someone's worst scumtell to be overly manipulative, and even if it was I don't think Jim's particularly mindrapeable.

To have something to fall back on when you jump on the second vote.

Then... what was the point of waiting for a first vote in the first place? If I'd already made up my mind that I was going to prep myself for voting Shark and only Shark, what's the big delay for?

If you weren't waiting for approval and your suspicions were so concrete, why weren't you the first one to vote him? You can still look for interactions between players and your "confirmed scum". A vote won't have any effect that your announcement of your suspicion didn't other than showing that you're going to act on your suspicions. Additionally, the game won't end immediately after the first vote is cast (just look where we are now), so I don't think your worries of ending the day too quickly had any real ground.

I knew the day wouldn't end immediately upon voting him, but I wasn't sure when it would end, and once I vote him it's a bit late to try to say I'm not ready yet. Plus, if the day's only being dragged out because I've specifically requested it, I'm not going to get very good Shark interaction data.




Shark:

I never changed my story, both reasons are correct. I didn't want to post both reasons at once because I feared you guys would think I overreacted to the question. Either way, you guys freaked out.

So you're openly admitting to lying to us to appear more townlike, but are still surprised and offended that we think you're scum. Hmmm.

Also, "I did forget parroting, didn't I?" isn't an answer. That's you dismissing me and looking superior so jim won't pay attention to what I said, and will look at the other things you've said. You're scared to reply or explain yourself under pressure.

You're using Native's arguments. If you cared about the answers, you could see where I've responded to them to Native.

"You claimed that nobody would look at the first vote on a target, while implying that I didn't want to vote you first to avoid attention. I pointed this out earlier, but you ignored it." You misread what I said. I was saying that you wouldn't even make the first vote, which, in my opinion, is safer than say, the 2nd or 3rd vote.

What you said and what you meant are only as close as you made them.

Still, if I was too cowardly to be the first vote, why was I willing to be the more dangerous second vote?

Here's my quote: "Do you really not want attention on you? If I got hammered, no one would look at the first voter."

I read that as: You don't want attention on you so badly you won't vote. I then point out that it's pointless to be scared to make the first vote.

I only see that kind of pointless hesitation as scummy.

I've already explained why I didn't want to vote you then. It had nothing to do with being the first vote and everything to do with wanting to use you to find your partner.

"No, the one you voted me in was the ironclad guarantee." What the hell are you going on about? I never implied otherwise, I clicked your link to confirm that the post where I voted you was the ironclad guarentee.

Reread this quote from me: "You're the one OMGUSing, you said that you had "lost any real doubt that he was scum" until I made the post where I voted you."

That says that you has lost doubt in me, which you did do before I voted you, until I made the post where I voted you and your opinion flipped.

Now you're just not reading. It's a petty distinction anyway, but if you're going to attack me you should probably pay attention to what I'm saying.

I referenced two posts. The first, where you didn't vote me, was the one I said caused me to lose any real doubt that you were scum. The second, where you did vote me, was what gave me the ironclad guarantee.

More relevantly, I was almost certain you were scum before you voted me, and it wasn't just the vote that clinched it.

You're going to say i'm parroting, but seriously, you're the one who changed your story to something nonsensical(and you didn't give evidence again), because you're misreading my posts to use as fodder against me, which is a bullshit tactic.

You'll have to actually explain this. Going on long but vague tirades against someone doesn't really do anything.

Anything you don't want to see you just dismissed, such as when I called you out for OMGUSing. Many of these reasons you're using against are exactly what YOU'RE doing, it feels like you set this up just so you can whine about parroting and not have real reasons, because i'm still looking for good reasons in your recent post.

I dismissed your claim of OMGUSing because there was no case to it. What makes you say I was OMGUSing and not bandwagoning, or jumping to avoid Jim's notice, or genuinely found your case on me scummy, or decided I was ready for you to die, or any of a bunch of other options? You don't have anything, so it's a worthless claim. Maybe I voted you because I like cinnamon; without anything to back it up, we'd never know.

So basically all your recent arguments against me recently are just badly thought out responses that don't mean a thing, just because Jim is leaning toward me. Relaxing because you're off the hook? No matter who gets vote, you're going to die, take a moment and think about why. You've dug yourself into a hole because you were finally forced into action.

If I was forced into action, it sure as hell wasn't by you, and if by some miracle you do have a vengekill, we're probably fucked anyway.

[Urist_McArathos]

Urist: Your last post was extremely unhelpful. Is there a reason for that? Why aren't you strengthening your case against Shark?

While I was fairly satisfied with what I'd read on Shark thus far, the main reason is that I was away most of the weekend, and wanted to hear more from everyone else to get a better idea of who might be Shark's partner.  I didn't want to vote until I felt my case was fairly strong as it was anyway, since this is essentially a LYLO situation.  Seeing as I feel comfortable in the fact that Shark is scum, I'd like to get some reads on everyone else in the meanwhile.

Shark

You're still ignoring Native.  You also haven't responded at ALL to my vote post on you.  Any particular reason you're preferring to bicker endlessly with Jim?

[NativeForeigner]

Alright, this is ridiculous. Unvote, you've convinced me, Irony. I don't feel like I have anything on you anymore.

Shark: Get your ass in here or hang.

[Jim Groovester]

I'll note it's past hammertime.

If Shark doesn't come back by later tonight it will be hammertime.

[Shark]

Stop.

Hammertime!