jonathantan86 wrote:Discussion is currently revolving around:
- StrangerCoug's random vote on himself (which is the second vote for him)
- MafiaMann's third vote on SC (second if you don't count SC's own vote) which some people think is opportunistic to start a wagon
- some people think SC's random vote is scummy, some think it's a null-tell
- SC complains when more votes pile on him, so does ClockworkRuse (Clock says it's because the wagon is too quick and scum-driven, and this wagon draws discussion away from other things)
Is this all?
Welcome to the game Jonathantan86. Have anything useful to add besides what's going on in the town? With three posts in the game, I would think you would be able to re-read five pages and form some opinion rather then trying to get someone to confirm everything for you.
Rhinox wrote:
clock wrote:It's not that I'm against people being at L-3 or L-4, it's that I'm against people being at those numbers on the second/third page for little reason.
clock wrote:L-5 would have been adaqute pressure on page two...
2 votes... your telling me 2 votes is adequate pressure? Thats BS is what it is. who's going to react to 2 votes? If it was still in the random stage on page 2, thats completely different. I'd say its a minor scum tell to say you want to limit pressure to 2 votes because the town would never learn anything helpful. When is it acceptable to place more than 2 votes? page 3? page 4? how can you place a limit based on page numbers. I'd think the content and pace of game should determine how much pressure is appropriate.
[ Cougs self vote got the game going very rapidly. He deserved pressure so he would be forced to justify his actions.
It was my personal opinion, think of it what you will to be honest. Maybe I can explain it a little bit better;
The wagons yesterday were being pushed way to fast, I felt that people were pushing the random lynch [as discussion was just barely picking up at the point IIRC] and I decided that I needed to draw at least some attention to it. If it made me seem suspicious, so be it. I don't care if you say that 'There was no threat of a lynch though!'because to me I felt that some pressure needed to be applied. Lucky I did too, because I think we caught Mafiamann.
That being said Rhinox, very good posting by you. This game might teach me more then I thought it would about hunting.
Ectomancer wrote:Nice post Rhinox.
unvote
I'm unvoting because I think that Clock has made an overall better case against MafiaMann than I have against TPT, and if I read the case properly, it looks like for Clock's case against to have ground, TPT would probably not be scum in order for MM to be going for an opportunistic wagon.
Backing Clock's case:
vote MafiaMann
Don't just ditch a case against some one, save it for later. He may very well have been bussing so keep what ever reactions, posts, or actions that Coug has said and keep them in mind. Don't just write him off as town. Just saying.
MafiaMann wrote:Do i have to claim soon
I would say yes, it would be good for you to claim soon. Plus, please add any flavor your pm might have because the rules state the scum have been given safe-claims.
Bogre wrote:*nod*
That's what I was looking for, just some sort of evaluation on your part by him, because at the point in time that I posted it originally, neither of you had commented on each other
.
I -would- like to see more explanation and reasons of why Ectomancer jumped on mafiamann with very little reason besides my own and the previous vote on him.
Opportunistic much? I admit a bit WIFOM to suggest overeager bussing, but I do believe he has not played too terribly much here.
Your reasoning? Well, let's take a closer look at 'your reasoning.'
Bogre wrote:Rhinox wrote:
bogre wrote:
Ectomancer had weak reasons to vote Strangercoug.
Admittedly selfvoting is idiotic but its a null tell, really.
Mafiamann's unwillingness to vote is quite scummy, as well.
This post screams to me as facade of activity without providing any content...
coug wrote:
Bogre wrote:
Mafiamann's unwillingness to vote is quite scummy, as well.
I don't consider conservative play like this scummy per se.
Its not conservative play, its denying the town its best weapon early in the game - the power of votes. Imagine if all 12 of us said in our first post: "I'm not going to vote because random votes don't mean anything and I don't find anyone scummy" How would the game get started? How would the town ever get any information? Thats why not voting is scummy. IMO, self-voting is exactly the same thing as not voting.
So I don't post content, yet you agree with my accusation? *boggle*. As for the lurkerish comments, as I have stated in other threads I am on vacation, and for the past three days have been in travel from one place to the next. The past two times I've been on a comp I have posted. They have been a bit anemic, but that was because they were on a borrowed computer. They also point to a lot of different people because a lot of players in this game have done suspicious things so far, and I mentioned the ones I felt have. Take note that you have just done what you accuse me of doing, except you threw more words in between the spaces. I personally don't have any problem with seeing people point out what they see is scummy over a mass of other players.
Rhinox, I would like to hear your opinions on muffinman, and hear those of muffinman on you. Notice that Muffin has not answered anything I said.
Cass put it very well: Mafiamann's tactic is a tactic of appeasement. This, in my opinion, is one of the biggest scumtells, and deserving of my concentration.
Unvote
Vote: Mafiamann
Is this your case against Mafiamann?
Well, first I'd like to point out that Cass
has
no case against Mafiamann. In fact, he said
Cass wrote:Pro-tip for Mafiamann: if you can't spell a word, use copy/paste.
That's practically the only time he's addressed MM. I think there was one other time, but it was barely significant if I'm remembering it right.
Strike one for being an uninformed player.
Second, you don't present a case. You backed mine. So saying that Ecto was being opportunistic for following
your
reasoning sounds like an attempt to get credit where credit
isn't
due.
Strike two, for trying to take credit for a case that you didn't present.
And before this post, you had barely hunted at all. With a grand total of eight posts in this forum, including your confirm, I see you parroting other cases without adding anything to your own.
Strikes three and four for active lurking and parroting.
Major FoS Borge
- For the reasons mentioned above.
Please note that this FoS is much more based on your parroting and active lurking then the other two strikes, but I feel they are well worth mentioning.
Minor FoS Johnny-Boy
for having a grand total of three posts at page six, lurking and posting almost useless information. I'd also like to point out to everyone who believes that not voting during the random stage, that he hasn't voted once all game.
As for calling Ecto opportunistic, I don't know if I would buy that. In my opinion, when a good case is presented that has covered everything or mostly everything that can be said, you can't really add anything while voting. I have no reason to suspect Ecto. As;
1. He's been hunting with good reason.
2. Supplying the town with good answers to any question given.
3. Applying pressure where he believes it deserves to be and not where someone says it should be. AKA Not being led by someone.
This does not mean I am writing him off as town. Everyone is scum until proven otherwise.
Laughter and tears are both responses to frustration and exhaustion. I myself prefer to laugh, since there is less cleaning up to do afterward.
- Kurt Vonnegut
Returning with apologies to games I was in when I disappeared.
