Print

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

[Urist_McArathos]

Alright, finally free from work.

Firstly, questions that need answerin'.

Oh fuck, we have a SK.

That Other Urist, what do you think about this?

I think we have either a SK or Vigilante.  Unless I'm missing something, it's impossible to tell which with 100% certainty, right?  If so, then we are speculating based on the night kills.  Jim makes a pretty convincing argument, but it's not worth exploring the matter any further.  I stand by my statement that demanding a vig-claim now is both a bad move and a major scumtell.

The only other questions I've been asked are about my absence.  I've explained that already.

Orangebottle

You asked for my picks/opinions.

Jim: Impossible for me to read so far.  Town Jim and Scum Jim are pretty much identical.  The hard part is telling if his cases hold water or not; Jim tunnels his scumpicks as Town because he's certain he nailed them.  Scum Jim does the same thing because he mislynches often enough as Town that nobody questions when he tunnels and is wrong.  Both times he's aggressive with strong, sound cases.
Native: Town vibe; he's been questioning your extremely shaky start to the day, and been active enough and looking around enough to seem seirous about scumhunting.
Urist Imiknorris: Possible scum.  I haven't like some of your hunting today, but it's taken a turn for the much-better.  Still got my eye on you, though.
Shark: Screaming newb vibes, I'm guessing newb Town who's trying very hard to play the game "right" without knowing too much what that is, not so much trying to act Town.  A lot of his fuck-ups and tripping over his own words seem to reinforce the fact that he's town helplessly trying to stop doing stupid shit.  If he's not a newb, he's doing an impressive job of acting enough like one to fly right off my radar.
Orangebottle: You're a tough one to read, here.  You've got some town activity going on, but your hunting seems...off, to me.

I've been following the day as best as I can, and I'm torn between Shark and Orangebottle.  So, some probing to help me decide which of you deserves to swing once and for all.  I'll start with my top pick for scum.

Shark

You're flailing, and clearly afraid of being lynched and trying hard to avoid it.  Why are you spending the day defending yourself instead of hunting down the remaining scum, and proving to the rest of us it's them, not you, we should be lynching?  Why aren't you building a case?

Random sidenote I just thought of: If the mysterious killer is a serial killer pretending to be a vigilante, if you guys mislynch on me today, there is literally no way for town to win unless the SK kills the scum and you guys lynch the SK the next day.

Let's hope it's a vigil.

This is a bullshit appeal to the Town.  "Guys, if you kill me we could be completely screwed!  You can't kill me!"  First off, it's wrong (as has been thoroughly pointed out by everyone else tearing apart your logic here).  Secondly, it requires two assumptions we simply aren't sharing:

1) That it's a crafty SK we're after, not a Vigilante.
2) That your lynch would be a mislynch.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Random sidenote I just thought of: If the mysterious killer is a serial killer pretending to be a vigilante, if you guys mislynch on me today, there is literally no way for town to win unless the SK kills the scum and you guys lynch the SK the next day.

Let's hope it's a vigil.

Alright. Let's give you the benefit of the doubt here.
Who's this mysterious killer, and why?
And why do you think they haven't claimed vigilante yet?

Check out the first post. Vigil and SK are both possible roles.
There were 2 night kills, so we have once of them in this game.
Vigilante is a pretty safe thing to claim because you can kill anyone who would counter claim. It's either that the vigil doesn't want to be killed by the mafia, or that the person is a SK. If they're an SK, then it's MYLO today, unless scum kills SK.

If anyone's got a vig claim, it would help.

Also orangebottle I was thinking of some hypothetical situations while walking the dog.

Let's assume in these situations I get lynched as a result of your argument.
I'm also assuming that running an aggresive campaign against someone, which you are doing to me, is scummy if they turn out to be town.

1.I'm scum, you're town. You win.

2.I'm town, you're scum, 3rd guy is vigil. Running a very aggresive campaign against someone who ends up being town would raise a lot of suspicion against you. If the vigil doesn't kill you, the last day will be 2 town and you, unless the vigil doesn't kill for whatever reason, if they're allowed to. You can win, but it doesn't seem likely to me unless everyone wants you alive for something, because if I get lynched it'll be your fault. The scum in this situation would prolly not be lynched or vig killed because there's not much suspicion toward Jim/Native/Urist/Urist

3.I'm town, you're scum, 3rd guy is SK. SK are forced to kill in many setups, i'm assuming that. If he misses you, the final day will be him, you, and one town, meaning you win, unless you kill him at night. You have a better chance of winning than if this is a vigilante.

4.I'm town, you're town, 3rd is vigil. This is pointless and your fault for lynching me. If the vigil misses the scum, it'll be you, another town, and a scum. Suspicion will probably be high on you for lynching me, a town. You probably lose.

5.I'm town, you're town, 3rd is SK. If the SK kills the scum, town has a chance to lynch him last day. If SK kills a town, mafia wins. You probably lose.

6.I'm town, you're vigil. This situation will not happen because you're wondering why vigil hasn't been claimed. If you ARE the vigil, good luck finding the scum, you'd have to shoot him during the night, or town would be suspicious of you for getting a town killed. Scum in this situation is prolly someone like jim or one of the urists and is unlikely to get lynched because there's not much suspicion to them.

7.I'm town or scum, you're SK You're trying to kill the scum so you have a chance at winning. To have a chance to win you have to get him lynched today or kill him at night tommorow. If you don't get him killed, last day will be you, a scum, and a town if the scum doesn't kill you at night. Scum outnumbers town, they win.

8.I'm vigil, you're town. I'd just claim vigil so town would know there's not an SK. If i'm really vig, next day is MYLO.

9.I'm SK. I'd be unable to claim vigil, scum would kill me. If you're scum, you win unless you get lynched the next day. If you're town, you have to deal with a MYLO.

If no one claims vigil, someone is prolly a killer. This leaves situations 1,3,5,7,9 unless we get a vig claim. I'm assuming SK has to kill like in many setups. (I know epicmafia forces killer to kill and it's generally beneficial to kill)

In situation 1, you win.

In situation 3, you're scum, and you'd be going for me because i'm the easiest to lynch and you're trying to get a town or the SK lynched. If this situation is true, if the SK is suspicious of you you're screwed. You win if the SK kills town, unless you kill the SK at night, making the final day 2 town and you. It's a toss up.

In situation 5, you lose unless SK gets lucky and kills the scum. Not likely. You probably lose.

In situation 7, you have to lynch the scum today, or have to pick correctly out of 4 night targets, AND not have the scum target you. Not likely. You probably lose.

In situation 9, looks good if you're scum. Otherwise, bad.

So because these situations look pretty bad for you, besides 1, I say we put our argument on hold and look at other people, you need to lynch the correct person today to win.

Now, the reason I did all this?

Normally i'd be willing to sacrifice myself if it means we get the scum but until we get a vig claim, there's an SK. It's MYLO unless scum finds the SK. I can't afford to let myself die.

In the situations where you're scum or SK, you have a really good reason to lead the lynch today. SK needs to get the scum to have a chance. Scum needs to attract attention on other people.

In the situations where you're town, why would you be so desperate to get the correct lynch today? You've been hounding on my ass the whole day no matter what I say, ignoring every other person. At least examine them.

You have time for this elaborate and ultimately useless crap, but no time to find flaws and tells or scummy behavior to explore?  You are WAY too concerned with your defense, Shark.  You've also pretty blatantly pushed for a vig-claim.  Despite backpedaling a bit with your "they don't have to, but it would help", you've continued to encourage the vigilante to claim by saying it would help, we can only get one more kill anyway, etc.  You're rationalizing why it's a good idea, when it's been repeated over and over that it isn't.  My remark about viewing this as unforgivably scummy wasn't an idle threat, Shark.  If you don't have a damn good reason for being so encouraging of a Vig claim, I have no choice but to view it as a scummy move to help you identify a night kill target.  Also, UI back there raised a good point: if your fight with Orangebottle is a town-town tunnel match, why don't you unvote him?  Any particular reason you're voting a townie while hinting at the benefits of a vig-claim?

Orangebottle

Your behavior is odd, to me, to say the least.  I won't fault your arguments themselves, since they don't seem to be that poor.

For accusing me of trying too hard to look town, you sure look an awful lot like you're trying to out-town everybody else, what with how you're giving everybody shit for anything you can grasp at in a needlessly hostile way.

This is a big problem I have with you so far.  You seem overly concerned with pointing out everything people are doing that you find odd, regardless of severity.  You seem like you're trying to make sure we all see how super-aware you are of everyone and what they need to do to be good players, like you're ICing in here.  We don't need a role model, Orange.  What are you trying to prove?

Yes. Exactly then. By giving so much advice to the newguys, they're going to trust you and think you're more likely to be town. It's something i tried as scum in BMXVI and it worked wonderfully.

This is a tactic you tried in a BM game, where learning to play is valued above trying to win.  This is not a BM game, it is a take-no-prisoners play to win battle royale.  Ergo, Jim (if he is scum) has just as much reason to crush the hapless newbies under his bootheel than to rescue them.  Explain to me how a new, flailing player like Shark is more useful to Scum Jim alive than dead (seeing as how he's really the only newbie left)?  If you can't, then how can you expect me to believe Jim would bother some drawn-out confidence building crap that could backfire or required him to lob softballs and be helpful, when he could just squash this newtown and move one lynch closer to LYLO?

I personally think it's a crock of shit.  Jim wasn't being a complete, relentless prick to the clearly in-over-their-heads new guys.  While this IS out of the ordinary for his meta (Jim is always a complete, relentless prick), how is it not, I don't know, maybe being nice to the new people so they don't run away crying and this board loses MORE potential players?  It seems like a huge stretch to turn a little courtesy into some convoluted scum plot.

[Urist_McArathos]

Quick question for Jim, out of curiosity:

Hypocrisy isn't a scumtell.

This isn't the first time you've told me this.  I trust that, since you've said this time and again regardless of being town or scum, it's the truth (at least to you).  Why not, if you don't mind explaining to me?

My thought is that, if someone is accusing you of doing something scummy or stupid or whatever, and then does it themselves, they are being scum by their own definition.  So, if they're claiming something is a scumtell while they're doing the same damn thing, aren't they just making up a case (since if they truly believed it wasn't scummy, they'd acknowledge that and back down or avoid it in the first place)?

[Orangebottle]

Orangebottle

Your behavior is odd, to me, to say the least.  I won't fault your arguments themselves, since they don't seem to be that poor.

You aren't the only one to say that.

This is a big problem I have with you so far.  You seem overly concerned with pointing out everything people are doing that you find odd, regardless of severity.  You seem like you're trying to make sure we all see how super-aware you are of everyone and what they need to do to be good players, like you're ICing in here.  We don't need a role model, Orange.  What are you trying to prove?

For one thing, I've always thought that if something is odd or suspicious, you should point it out.
Also, I've found that when I don't do this(as I did in RL3) I tend to slip up a lot more. Slipping up isn't going to convince anyone else that I'm town.

This is a tactic you tried in a BM game, where learning to play is valued above trying to win.  This is not a BM game, it is a take-no-prisoners play to win battle royale.  Ergo, Jim (if he is scum) has just as much reason to crush the hapless newbies under his bootheel than to rescue them.  Explain to me how a new, flailing player like Shark is more useful to Scum Jim alive than dead (seeing as how he's really the only newbie left)?  If you can't, then how can you expect me to believe Jim would bother some drawn-out confidence building crap that could backfire or required him to lob softballs and be helpful, when he could just squash this newtown and move one lynch closer to LYLO?

...Are you kidding me? You can't see how one extra person trusting you doesn't benefit you in the slightest?

Well, for one, that's another person voting in his favor. At least, until Shark gets lynched(which is apparently what is happening today). The timeline I was basing that opinion off of had 1/3 of the players being new. If they make it to LYLO, those are people who will be, at worst, reluctant to vote him.

I personally think it's a crock of shit.  Jim wasn't being a complete, relentless prick to the clearly in-over-their-heads new guys.  While this IS out of the ordinary for his meta (Jim is always a complete, relentless prick), how is it not, I don't know, maybe being nice to the new people so they don't run away crying and this board loses MORE potential players?  It seems like a huge stretch to turn a little courtesy into some convoluted scum plot.

I never said I thought he was scum. I said he was trying too hard to look town. Town can try too hard just as much as Scum can try too hard. Also, it was an opinion, not an entire case. Why do you feel the need to point this out?

[Jim Groovester]

I found something scummy about him and pressed. Hard.

. . .

It's scumhunting for a reason.
Joking aside, maybe I have been a little hard on him.
In my defense, he said he's played before.

Nice of you to backpedal immediately after being pressed about it.

So what about his play on Day 1 made you think that he was anything other than an inexperienced player and that pressing him with extreme pressure would do anything other than prove it?

Him saying he's played before does not mean he was an expert. He even said he was noobish.

Yes. Exactly then. By giving so much advice to the newguys, they're going to trust you and think you're more likely to be town. It's something i tried as scum in BMXVI and it worked wonderfully.
Here is Native's post, and here is yours. I may have been exaggerating a little as far as 'massive' goes, but most of your post was advice to the newguys.

Oh, sure. Because I spread three tidbits of advice to three new players across a single post that means I'm trying so much harder to look like town than NativeForeigner.

Is there any special reason why you're making crappy arguments with crappy justifications?

I'm just pointing out anything that looks odd or scummy to me. Sometimes both. How is it any different from what you normally do?

Because you're doing it for the sake of your appearance than actual concern about the issues you raise.

I never said I thought he was scum. I said he was trying too hard to look town. Town can try too hard just as much as Scum can try too hard. Also, it was an opinion, not an entire case. Why do you feel the need to point this out?

Bullshit.

It's something i tried as scum in BMXVI and it worked wonderfully.

Sure, you didn't say I was scum, but you damn well implied it.

This is mincing words, Orangebottle. Why are you doing it?

Shark: Screaming newb vibes, I'm guessing newb Town who's trying very hard to play the game "right" without knowing too much what that is, not so much trying to act Town.

. . .

I'll start with my top pick for scum.

Shark

What?

How?

Why?

You contradict yourself within several lines in your post.

I personally think it's a crock of shit.  Jim wasn't being a complete, relentless prick to the clearly in-over-their-heads new guys.  While this IS out of the ordinary for his meta (Jim is always a complete, relentless prick), how is it not, I don't know, maybe being nice to the new people so they don't run away crying and this board loses MORE potential players?  It seems like a huge stretch to turn a little courtesy into some convoluted scum plot.

The hell are you talking about? This is perfectly within my meta. I've held back for new players who have and haven't played Beginner's Mafias and offered them advice on... several occasions. (I don't exactly remember which games. I can think of one example off the top of my head.) Lynching newbies for being newbies is a waste of time, and I'd rather avoid it if it's at all possible.

I even say the same thing I normally do.

Hypocrisy isn't a scumtell.

This isn't the first time you've told me this.  I trust that, since you've said this time and again regardless of being town or scum, it's the truth (at least to you).  Why not, if you don't mind explaining to me?

My thought is that, if someone is accusing you of doing something scummy or stupid or whatever, and then does it themselves, they are being scum by their own definition.  So, if they're claiming something is a scumtell while they're doing the same damn thing, aren't they just making up a case (since if they truly believed it wasn't scummy, they'd acknowledge that and back down or avoid it in the first place)?

That's very similar to the argument I used to discredit NativeForeigner's case during lylo in Cult Mafia, but it doesn't necessarily mean I believe it or think it's good at all.

Hypocrisy isn't a scum tell because regardless of what offenses a player commits it says nothing about the validity of his arguments. Consider the following situation: Player A has posted infrequently because he has real life obligations, while Player B has posted infrequently because he is lurking scum. Player A accuses Player B of being scum for inactivity, and Player B immediately busts out the same accusation against Player A while also accusing him of hypocrisy. Who's right? Player A is, of course, but if hypocrisy were a scumtell then Player A would be in hot water for doing something he accused another player of doing. If it was considered standard practice to find hypocrites scummy then all it would take for scum to defend themselves is to find instances where their attackers committed some sort of wrongdoing. This would be a travesty of scumhunting.

It takes a judgment call to decide whether an argument against a player is valid or not, and for the most part, these decisions should be made without any consideration to where the argument comes from. (It's nice that I say that, but this doesn't always happen, and I catch myself very frequently not following my own advice.)

I started saying this because I frequently came across scum players who wanted to discredit my attacks by pointing out that some of my accusations against them were applicable to me as well. Naturally, I lynched them.

[Jim Groovester]

I even say the same thing I normally do.

I thought I had completed this thought.

What I say to Noodlerex here is my typical warning to players who bypass Beginner's Mafias and join games anyway.

E.G., here, and... I'm sure I've said it somewhere else. It wouldn't be typical if I only said it in one other game. Oh, well, I can't be bothered to find it.

[Orangebottle]

Nice of you to backpedal immediately after being pressed about it.

So what about his play on Day 1 made you think that he was anything other than an inexperienced player and that pressing him with extreme pressure would do anything other than prove it?

Him saying he's played before does not mean he was an expert. He even said he was noobish.

That's not backpedaling. It's admitting that I may have been wrong. We can't all possess your infallible competence. Being wrong is a scumtell now, is it jim?

I gave my reasons in the post I voted for him. Those reasons then expanded into more as he gave in to the pressure. A case isn't a tree. You can't just rip it out by the roots and call the whole thing dead.

That doesn't mean he's a total scrub either, Jim. I expected him to be able to handle some pressure.

Oh, sure. Because I spread three tidbits of advice to three new players across a single post that means I'm trying so much harder to look like town than NativeForeigner.

Is there any special reason why you're making crappy arguments with crappy justifications?

I never made any arguments against you. I don't know what you find so hard to understand about that.
You were much more detailed about it than Native was. That's the difference here.

Because you're doing it for the sake of your appearance than actual concern about the issues you raise.

Yeah. Right. Because nothing I point out is ever a valid concern.

Bullshit.

...
No you?

You're the one who's attacking me over a simple opinion I had.

Why are you so sure that the strategy could only work for scum? There are some situations in which it could work for town, too.

Sure, you didn't say I was scum, but you damn well implied it.

This is mincing words, Orangebottle. Why are you doing it?

Jim. I'm going to ask you something a certain lizard has asked me in the past. Am I voting for you?

Arathos:Why is your vote split between myself and Shark if you think my behavior is odd, not scummy? Our goal as townies is to lynch scum, not odd people.

[Shark]

McArathos

I don't blame you for not reading my giant posts well, but I did tell orange that we should drop it for the moment and hunt other people.

"Why are you spending the day defending yourself instead of hunting down the remaining scum, and proving to the rest of us it's them, not you, we should be lynching?  Why aren't you building a case?"

This is what i'm trying to do now. Also, i'm not switching my vote until I think someone is scum, but if it makes you happy, Unvote. I'm not really sure why this matters right now because it's not like orange is going to get lynched in 4 seconds.

Answers to Imiknorris are underlined.

Shark:

Imiknorris, Why are you only going after Native and Arathos?

Jim's vanished, your logic is terrible enough that I can't tell if you're scum or just bad, I can't find anything suspicious from OB (which means I need to go back and read again), and I'm not going to attack myself.

Check out the first post. Vigil and SK are both possible roles.
There were 2 night kills, so we have once of them in this game.
Vigilante is a pretty safe thing to claim because you can kill anyone who would counter claim. It's either that the vigil doesn't want to be killed by the mafia, or that the person is a SK. If they're an SK, then it's MYLO today, unless scum kills SK.

Congratulations on missing the obvious. Why would a vig not be afraid of being a mafia target?Don't we only get on more vig kill anyway? Or am I mistaken?

Normally i'd be willing to sacrifice myself if it means we get the scum but until we get a vig claim, there's an SK. It's MYLO unless scum finds the SK. I can't afford to let myself die.

In the situations where you're town, why would you be so desperate to get the correct lynch today? You've been hounding on my ass the whole day no matter what I say, ignoring every other person. At least examine them.

Why would you ask him that? You even said yourself that (according to you) the town can't afford to mislynch. So what is it about Orangebottle's "desperation" that's bad coming from him but good coming from you?He didn't question anyone else for a long time.

Dumb post was too wrong, didn't say what I wanted to clearly. At the very end there i'm saying that if you're town, you should at least have an opinion on everyone. Right now everyone is getting off scot free because of what I believe to probably be a town trying to lynch a town while the mafia giggles in the corner. We need a good look at everyone. If you weren't asking other people questions now, i'd call you scum, but this is a dumb town attacking town thing. For the moment, let's just drop it. Keep your vote on me if you want, though.

What are your opinions on everyone, as you say every town should at least have? And why are you suggesting that the two of you drop it? Is that the only defense you have left? Also, what makes you sure he's town, but not sure enough to unvote him? I'm planning not to change my vote until I find someone i'm sure is scum. Orange originally got on my ass for not using my vote the way he thinks I should, so i'm going to me more careful.
Also, if you want to know my opinions:
Orange: Probably misguided town.
You: Toss-up.
Arathos: Toss-up.
Jim: Probably town, although I might be thinking this just because he helped defend me.
Native: Not sure. He doesn't have a vote right now, and isn't questioning people at the moment. Might just be schedule stuff.

My original thoughts about halfway through day one were that diak and noodle might be scumteam, if that clears anything up.

No, it really doesn't. If you thought Diakron and Noodlerex were the scumteam, why didn't you say so during D1? I think you're making this up to justify your vote on Diakron. How am I making this up? Through my posts today you can see that they were my top 2.

Jim, what are your reasons for defending me?

McArathos, I know this has been said already, but you're hunting me after saying i'm probably newb town. What caused you to backpedal on that statement? If you don't think i'm town, why did you call me newb town in the first place?

Orangebottle, you're overreacting when questioned like I did when you questioned me. You have a bit more than a simple opinion. You're making yourself look smaller by understating what you did. You're also asking the town why they aren't treating you like some sort of town leader.
"Yeah. Right. Because nothing I point out is ever a valid concern."  Is this a valid concern or simple opinion? You say it's both in the same post, to get a better answer to the current question. It's bullshit.

"Jim. I'm going to ask you something a certain lizard has asked me in the past. Am I voting for you?" Just because you don't vote someone doesn't mean you can't call them scummy.

[Orangebottle]

You're also asking the town why they aren't treating you like some sort of town leader.

I'm pretty sure I never asked that. There are very, very few reasons to vote for someone besides their scumminess when you're town.

"Yeah. Right. Because nothing I point out is ever a valid concern."  Is this a valid concern or simple opinion? You say it's both in the same post, to get a better answer to the current question. It's bullshit.

These were about two separate things. The opinion is 'Jim's been trying too hard to look town'. The whole valid concern thing comes from what Jim said here:

I'm just pointing out anything that looks odd or scummy to me. Sometimes both. How is it any different from what you normally do?

Because you're doing it for the sake of your appearance than actual concern about the issues you raise.

"Jim. I'm going to ask you something a certain lizard has asked me in the past. Am I voting for you?" Just because you don't vote someone doesn't mean you can't call them scummy.

Yes, but I haven't voted for him all game. I haven't even thrown an FoS his way. Let's face it: if Jim is scum, he's doing his job damn well and deserves to win.

[Urist_McArathos]

Sorry, my play last night was rather sloppy.  I'd voted Shark initially, then changed or switched my vote four or so times after re-reading the thread.

Moral of the story is that it's a bad idea to play Mafia after four hours sleep and 18 hours work.

Alrighty, then.  Unvote Shark.  Not much I can do about this fuckup than own up to it, and take the consequences.  I was tired, and wasn't paying enough attention to my vote.

Shark: You're looking very new town to me, but the things I asked you were very questionable things I wanted explained since they were hard to ignore, they were so scummy.  I did see your request to Orange that you two drop it and hunt others; I wanted to know why your vote didn't match your advice.  If you don't think someone is scum, you shouldn't vote for them.  I made the same mistake with you today, but it doesn't change the fact people expect you to put your vote where your mouth is, unless you don't really care about it.  Expect people (like Jim did to me) to call you out when you don't.

Orangebottle: My vote is split because I can't tell if you're just odd, or because it doesn't add up because you're scum.  I am probing to find out which way you break.  To be blunt, I'm having a hard time reading anyone right now, but you and Shark had the most questionable behavior so far.

As Jim pointed out, you implied HEAVILY you thought he was scum.  Saying that you did the same thing "as scum" and it worked well implies that you believe that's the reason it's happening here.  It also leaves you a convenient out if you're called on it ("I never SAID he was scum...")

Also, this:

I'm just pointing out anything that looks odd or scummy to me. Sometimes both. How is it any different from what you normally do?

Because you're doing it for the sake of your appearance than actual concern about the issues you raise.

You're pointing out things that are scummy or odd, but never pursuing or questioning them.  Again, I feel like you're acting more like a referee than hunting with these statements.  You're blowing a warning whistle as if to say, "I'm watching you, buddy!" but then you proceed to not pursue any of the points you raise.  You're doing it just to make yourself look active and aggressively on the hunt for scummy behavior.

Jim

What?

How?

Why?

You contradict yourself within several lines in your post.

Sorry, I explained this big fuck up earlier.  It's a poor explanation, but it's the truth.  I was tired and sloppy.

I personally think it's a crock of shit.  Jim wasn't being a complete, relentless prick to the clearly in-over-their-heads new guys.  While this IS out of the ordinary for his meta (Jim is always a complete, relentless prick), how is it not, I don't know, maybe being nice to the new people so they don't run away crying and this board loses MORE potential players?  It seems like a huge stretch to turn a little courtesy into some convoluted scum plot.

The hell are you talking about? This is perfectly within my meta. I've held back for new players who have and haven't played Beginner's Mafias and offered them advice on... several occasions. (I don't exactly remember which games. I can think of one example off the top of my head.) Lynching newbies for being newbies is a waste of time, and I'd rather avoid it if it's at all possible.

This was a joke; I didn't like that Orangebottle was going after you for advising the new guys, and felt that he wasn't taking into account the very real possibility that your actions were doing precisely dick to help you as scum, or even as town really, and were more likely just some advice to new players.  Assuming you were gradually building trust so they wouldn't lynch you later seemed like an ass-pull of a reason.  I didn't realize you wouldn't find the statement "Jim is always a complete, relentless prick" a humorous bit of exaggeration about your meta.

Probably because you're a complete, relentless prick.

[Orangebottle]

How have you not got it through your thick skull yet? I never went after Jim. Ever.

As Jim pointed out, you implied HEAVILY you thought he was scum.  Saying that you did the same thing "as scum" and it worked well implies that you believe that's the reason it's happening here.  It also leaves you a convenient out if you're called on it ("I never SAID he was scum...")

Sure, you could read it that way. Or you could actually read what's going on in the thread.
Y'know, the part where I said I never thought Jim was scum and if he is he'd deserve the win.
Certain scum strategies work for town in specific situations. This one would be great for a skilled townie, as they won't have to defend themselves as much and they can concentrate on finding scum.

Also, this:

I'm just pointing out anything that looks odd or scummy to me. Sometimes both. How is it any different from what you normally do?

Because you're doing it for the sake of your appearance than actual concern about the issues you raise.

You're pointing out things that are scummy or odd, but never pursuing or questioning them.  Again, I feel like you're acting more like a referee than hunting with these statements.  You're blowing a warning whistle as if to say, "I'm watching you, buddy!" but then you proceed to not pursue any of the points you raise.  You're doing it just to make yourself look active and aggressively on the hunt for scummy behavior.

I'll correct my behavior now, then.
Arathos: I find it hard to believe that you'd put a serious case on someone, with logic that I would've used had I noticed it, then backpedal because 'you're tired'.
If Shark is such a newb, he shouldn't be on the top of your scumlist. No, he should be further down.
Why aren't you trying to go after the person on the top of your list?

Shark:What makes you think that Jim's defending you instead of attacking me?

[Urist Imiknorris]

Don't we only get on more vig kill anyway? Or am I mistaken?

There's a possible roleblocker. If the second gunman claims, he could be roleblocked and we would have zero vig kills. Why didn't you account for that?

[Shark]

Don't we only get on more vig kill anyway? Or am I mistaken?

There's a possible roleblocker. If the second gunman claims, he could be roleblocked and we would have zero vig kills. Why didn't you account for that?

Oh.

I'm a dumbass, sorry. I really have no excuse.

[Shark]

How have you not got it through your thick skull yet? I never went after Jim. Ever.

As Jim pointed out, you implied HEAVILY you thought he was scum.  Saying that you did the same thing "as scum" and it worked well implies that you believe that's the reason it's happening here.  It also leaves you a convenient out if you're called on it ("I never SAID he was scum...")

Sure, you could read it that way. Or you could actually read what's going on in the thread.
Y'know, the part where I said I never thought Jim was scum and if he is he'd deserve the win.
Certain scum strategies work for town in specific situations. This one would be great for a skilled townie, as they won't have to defend themselves as much and they can concentrate on finding scum.

Also, this:

I'm just pointing out anything that looks odd or scummy to me. Sometimes both. How is it any different from what you normally do?

Because you're doing it for the sake of your appearance than actual concern about the issues you raise.

You're pointing out things that are scummy or odd, but never pursuing or questioning them.  Again, I feel like you're acting more like a referee than hunting with these statements.  You're blowing a warning whistle as if to say, "I'm watching you, buddy!" but then you proceed to not pursue any of the points you raise.  You're doing it just to make yourself look active and aggressively on the hunt for scummy behavior.

I'll correct my behavior now, then.
Arathos: I find it hard to believe that you'd put a serious case on someone, with logic that I would've used had I noticed it, then backpedal because 'you're tired'.
If Shark is such a newb, he shouldn't be on the top of your scumlist. No, he should be further down.
Why aren't you trying to go after the person on the top of your list?

Shark:What makes you think that Jim's defending you instead of attacking me?

He was attacking your arguments, which helps me. I assumed his was defending me without realizing me might not be at all.

[Orangebottle]

Oh.

I'm a dumbass, sorry. I really have no excuse.

Don't be so hard on yourself. Not knowing the game very well doesn't make you a dumbass. Just sign up for the next BM and learn.

[Jim Groovester]

That's not backpedaling. It's admitting that I may have been wrong. We can't all possess your infallible competence. Being wrong is a scumtell now, is it jim?

It is when you bend backwards with the slightest challenge.

I gave my reasons in the post I voted for him. Those reasons then expanded into more as he gave in to the pressure. A case isn't a tree. You can't just rip it out by the roots and call the whole thing dead.

That doesn't mean he's a total scrub either, Jim. I expected him to be able to handle some pressure.

This doesn't answer my question. Thank you for not answering my question.

I asked you what made you think he wasn't a complete noob. Instead you talk about your reasons for your vote. Conveniently you don't approach anywhere where it could be considered that you explained why you thought he could handle the pressure.

I never made any arguments against you. I don't know what you find so hard to understand about that.
You were much more detailed about it than Native was. That's the difference here.

. . .

...
No you?

You're the one who's attacking me over a simple opinion I had.

Why are you so sure that the strategy could only work for scum? There are some situations in which it could work for town, too.

Sure, you could read it that way. Or you could actually read what's going on in the thread.
Y'know, the part where I said I never thought Jim was scum and if he is he'd deserve the win.
Certain scum strategies work for town in specific situations. This one would be great for a skilled townie, as they won't have to defend themselves as much and they can concentrate on finding scum.

More mincing words.

If you thought it was a town strategy then you should have said that; you wouldn't want people to accuse you of scummy doubletalk, now would you? That we're having this conversation at all means you're lying or are incapable of detailing what you actually mean concerning anything, and I'm considerably more inclined to believe the former.

Your answer that my answer was simply more detailed than NativeForeigner's is weaselly.

Jim. I'm going to ask you something a certain lizard has asked me in the past. Am I voting for you?

This has nothing to do with anything. If your reasons are suspect I'm going to attack them no matter what your stance towards me is.

Is this supposed to placate me and get me off your tail? Shame on you for trying and thinking it would work if it was.

Nice dodging of my question while I'm at it.

"Jim. I'm going to ask you something a certain lizard has asked me in the past. Am I voting for you?" Just because you don't vote someone doesn't mean you can't call them scummy.

Yes, but I haven't voted for him all game. I haven't even thrown an FoS his way. Let's face it: if Jim is scum, he's doing his job damn well and deserves to win.

Again, this has nothing to do with anything at all. You do not have to reciprocate my suspicion in order for me to suspect you.

How is this supposed to be an effective answer?

Jim, what are your reasons for defending me?

Primarily, Orangebottle's reasons for attacking you are terrible. Secondarily, I don't think you're scum.

I had a ton of questions for you you should answer, or I might reconsider my position that you're just a noob.