Starbuck wrote:
Yes, I did. I was trying to catch up. Vote for who you think is scum, that's how the game works. If you think that I'm the scummiest, I expect you to vote for me. If not, then I expect you to vote for whoever else you think is.
So.... You don't feel the need to defend yourself? Ok. I have no reason to change my vote then. Explaining things is a pro-town thing to do... Ignoring them because you avoid any more slip ups... is scummy.
starbuck wrote:
Kise was repeatedly asked about his experience. He kept referring to his VAST offsite experience and the only thing he wrote about in his Wiki at that point was one newbie game on MS. He didn't give any type of links within the thread to his games offsite. Now his Wiki reflects it.
First time I've heard that not having an updated wiki is a scumtell....
VP Baltar KEPT asking him about his experience. That's why Kise kept repeating himself. He gave reasons to avoid that particular question and you decided to find that scummy.
camn wrote:
I was MILDLY trying to lay a trap.
I actually assumed that I was the only one.. and maybe I could get a scum fake-something... since I knew I was going to claim it anyway.
It didn't really occur to me that there might be more than one. Meh.
I understand... Not the greatest play ever but I've tried to pull similar - unsuccessful stunts in the past.
molestargazer wrote:alexhans wrote:Come on mole... It's called fishing for reactions... Don't try to make it look worst than it actually is.
Fishing for reactions is fine.
Trying to goad people into responding in a certain way, perhaps one that would make them look scummy, is not.
So you don't believe that town players may arm traps?
VP Baltar wrote:
I said we should lynch Taranski? Quotes please.
Well... I assume that cheerleading for someone's waggon should Imply that you don't disagree with their lynch... Or do you think that someone who doesn't log in MS will hear an alarm bell if he is at L-1?
VP Baltar wrote:awww, will you pick out my dress?
Sure... But only if I get an invitation.
VP Baltar wrote:Ok, I'm quickly noticing in your post that you are spending a lot of time coaching Kise. Why is that? There is more than one instance where you tell him what the 'proper' play would be...which suggests that under normal circumstances you would find what he did to be scummy. Why the free pass?
Because I'm reading his personality similarly to the reads I have on players like Zwets, Wall-e and some others... reckless players that become easy mislynches for scum to pull. And Kise, as opposed to Zwets or Wall-e, is a frantic poster wich will make it easy to catch him if he is scum. So I'd rather coach him to be pro-town than ignore my gut and lynch him for mild scum tells that may be tied to his personality.
That's why I separated him in my analysys and said that he was a special case.
alex wrote:That's it ... I think I might've found SCUM. You hate lurkers but waggon her and not on taranksi for instance?
HoS: Josh
While I'm pro-Josh hate, I have to call you on this one. Weren't you just busting my chops over voting Taranski on like page 2? I have a feeling that if he
had
voted Taranski there you would have found him just as suspicious, if not more. It's a lose-lose situation.
I don't know if you noticed by acknowledged his reason for choosing skitz over taranski... But that doesn't mean I have to delete what I thought... I make my notes as I read and they stay.
Josh had been scummy for a while before that vote anyway:
His push on kise for the hypothetical question and later for the experience thing... Then he went on a farfetched explanation that lead to an implicit conclusion that scumhunting was bad because townies could lie when pressured...
Then said that a townie would claim scum...
VP Baltar wrote: It just wouldn't happen. Second, You're accusing me of rolefishing under the premise that he himself could be a cop.
No. Because when someone rolefishes they always gain information. They can get a claim (cop, townie, etc) or they can get a denial (wich means that they have less people to choose from).
VP Baltar wrote:Keep in mind, I'm not the one who brought up the cop at all. If he's the cop, then it was an awful play because there was no reason to say what he did in the first place.
Yes. But the pro-town thing to do is shut your mouth when you think you might give dangerous info to scum.
VP Baltar wrote:And what do you expect him to tell you? yes, I am a godfather??? not enough. It seems that you people don't worry about outing power roles.
Where did I say I expected him to claim godfather? I said a godfather is a type of scum role where the scum would assume there to be an investigative role. You disagree with that logic?
If you had asked me that when I started playing in MS I might've answered yes... but I've seen more than one game with a godfather and no cop so... No.
VP Baltar wrote:And again, no I don't feel that the conversation was bordering anywhere near outing powerroles. Give people a bit of credit sometimes.
I REALLY, don't see the benefit of speculating about the setup or talking about PRs on D1. I think it can be very damaging. Sorry if I come off to strong but I feel the need to say what I think.
imaginality wrote:
Is it okay if I answer your questions after this weekend, since I'm competing in the NZ Rock Paper Scissors Championship?
lol! Abstract WIFOM!
Kise wrote:@alex - If you could find out whether 1 particular person was townie or mafia (besides me), who would it be?
Dude... this sure looks like rolefishing... If I hadn't skimmed the thread and noted that you had a day inspection I would've yelled at you...
I would go for camn or Starbucks... I think. Or someone who I have no read on... like Imaginality or mole.
camn wrote:
wow! It works!
I'm putting Lyman at L-1 now.
I am tired of today, and I am tired of his lurking.
I think it is time for a good old fashioned lurker-lynch.
So you just lynch him for lurking? You think the ones who are voting him or willing to vote him do it for his lurking?
Starbuck wrote:Kise wrote:But no one is telling me exactly HOW I endangered the PR's. Please explain.
This is only my speculation, but probably because now the mafia may have you ruled out as a PR, so that's one less person for the PR's to hide behind.
Well. That goes for ALL rolefishers here. Some may be town some may be scum... but they all helped scum.
Kise wrote:It's best if we don't put words in people's mouth.. I'd rather hear this direct from Kid & VP.
Starbuck wrote:You actually think that the mafia are gonna tell you what they are thinking?
EXCUUUUUSE ME??? So Kid and VP are scum? Are you voting any of them?
camn wrote:
Look how much nonsense-time has been spent talking about it. It is NOT helpful as far as finding scum is concerned.. which is why it is a bad idea.
QFT
camn wrote:
Can someone hammer Lyman and we can all think about things overnight, while basking in the awesomeness of a lurker-scum-lynch?
PS . . ^^drunk post
mmmmmmmmm.... I DONT like this. At ALL. You put him at L-1 with your 2 votes. Then you push for the hammer and say at the same time that it's a drunk post??? WTF?
VP Baltar wrote:There has been so much idiotic setup speculation this game it's making it nigh impossible to actually get conversation that can lead to finding scum going.
May I remind you something...?
VP Baltar 131 wrote:
molestargazer wrote:Why do you assume we HAVE a cop?
QFT.
You and mole started this.
camn wrote:Well, ME, of course..
thought I can't imagine you are SANE..
Or Josh Lyman?
Or whoever you think is scummiest.
wow... Camn YELLS for more minuses... The fact that she says herself although she doubts his sanity is SUPER weird. Then she says: inspect he who is about to be lynched... Waste it... And later she gives the answer she should've given (as town) in the first place.
In my wildest dreams... A replacement would come for Josh and we would lynch camn or starbucks...
Inspect someone Kise! We could use the info.