Well thanksAdel wrote:posting to avoid prod
Mini 491: Porly Ritten Flayver. Game over.
Forum rules
- d3sisted
- d3sisted
-
d3sisted
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1085
- Joined: August 7, 2007
- Location: Vancouver, BC
I realize that, but there was also nothing stopping him from using it in a future attack. And quite frankly, I had admitted that it had substance, after Seol's confirmation. Why he chose to continue bringing it up is anyone's guess.Sir Tornado wrote:You are wrong on two counts here.
1) Javert cannot be pushing to vote MeMe out if he was voting for Adel.
2) He was not attempting to give it substance in order to lynch MeMe. He was giving it substance to defend against your attacks.
If ever anyone brings up any bit of a possible "scumtell", that is indication enough that they have intention of voting said player. Casting suspicion without any intention whatsoever to vote, to me anyway, would be suspicious.Sir Tornado wrote:Cite one post past first three pages where Javert has the intention of voting off MeMe. He agrees himself that his tell on MeMe is a weak tell. What his arguments later on D1 state is defending his scum tell -- people accuse his tell of being a nulltell while he maintains that it is a weak scumtell. I really don't see any "direct attacks on MeMe" from Javert apart from. The last post even mildly attacking MeMe is when Javert questions MeMe about the times she was on line during confirmation stage.
Yes, I recognize that possibility, so I look toward him for an explanation to his vote. Am I accusing him of being scum because he has not yet provided explanation? No. To me, mafiascum is about voting, explaining, discussing and swaying others to follow with proper reasoning. Frankly, if he's just going to plop down unexplained votes, then he becomes a detriment to town and he'd be better off lynched.Javert wrote:Come again? What if CO was not trying to convince others to vote with him? Would he need to explain/defend himself in that scenario?
I really don't see why you'd want to advocate that style of playing either.
ChaosOmega placed a vote on SirT without providing supportive reasons. I subsequently ask him to provide those reasons. So tell me what I'm supposed to defend, and how I'm supposed to do it.Javert wrote:Youdorecall that logicticusnever voted, right? Does he therefore have nothing to defend?The stances you take and the reasoning you give are all open to attack and defense, regardless of whether or not you accommodate those stances or reasons with a vote.
Why, is it bothering you?Javert wrote:1.)Out of sheer curiosity, do you usually swear this much?
So you say. I read your actions differently.Javert wrote:2.)As I had stated multiple times, I was defending the use of my tell, not trying to get MeMe lynched because of it. Iprobedat MeMe by asking her a few follow-up questions, but that is not equivalent to "throwing whatever dirt I could" at her.
Fair enough. It was a bad tell, I'll leave it at that.Javert wrote:3.)Tells are not going to work 100% of the time – there is no such thing as perfect tell. Calling my tell "shitty" because it was wrong in this single instance is an overstatement to say the least.
If that's how you're reading my posts, so be it. I've given you my side of the bit, take it or leave it. Everyone is open to interpretations.Javert wrote: Your reasons in Post 44 are as follows:
->a.I am making a "big deal out of nothing"
->b.I am using "inane, insignificant details"
->c.I am better off random voting (because on-line status is unreliable)
->d.I am trying to "grab hold of anything" to use as a reason to vote MeMe
The Fonz attacks me in Post 48. His reasons are:
->e.Pre-game is not night (i.e. scum could not talk together)
->f.I should not use 'irrational arguments' in place of random votes
->g.I criticize Adel for my 'really bad argument'
You then claim in Post 56 that "The Fonz summed it up nicely", and in Post 61. In your Post 63 you throw out a couple more reasons:
->h.I tried to target MeMe, couldn't think of a reason, so I substituted slop about being on-line and unconfirmed
->i.I got 'agitated pretty quick' (though it is unclear whetheryouthink this is scummy)
When Seol confirms that scum could talk pre-game in Post 64, you immediately unvote in Post 65. Out of the reasons you and The Fonz gave for voting, the only one which seems to have been tossed out from your point of view was
So even if I sided with Fonz's attack on you, why is that such a big deal? As soon as two people agree, they are immediately labeled scumbuddies? Also, you fail to notice I dropped off long before Fonz did.Javert wrote:e., meaning that your entire vote on me looks like it was precipitated from The Fonz's attack, and you dropped off as soon as The Fonz's main point was disproved, because you still seem to be very much of the opinion that my tell is "shitty" and a "nontell". Your play (in addition to the 'scumtell?' line inviting others to attack me) makes it look like you were not going to vote for me unless you had somebody else backing you up.
I already had my case made. Javert responded to my accusations with a ferocity that may indicate a position of apprehension by scum, yet is equally as likely to be coming from a townie. The two points negate to make it a null-tell, a fact I acknowledge by asking Javert himself, "scumtell?". This was originally meant for him to answer, a chance for him to explain the fierceness of his response, but I later dismissed it altogether because it was indeed too farfetched.The Fonz wrote:It's basically asking someone else to make your case for you.
I believe you missed my point. I have stated time and time again that the rhetoric was directed to Javert personally, and not to anyone else.Sir Tornado wrote:I think that depends on person to person basis. I sometimes end my points by adding "scumtell, anyone?" after pointing an obvious scumtell. That is my way of trying to bring the others into the discussion and get their views on the subject. I am not sure if that was what desisted was doing, however because the town's attention was fixed on your debate at that time, so I think that rhetorical question was unnecessary. However, I don't think asking rhetorical questions is necessarily a scumtell, especially if it is obvious what your views on the issue are.
@Adel: perhaps you would like to add something to this discussion rather than "Posting to avoid prod"?
This. Is. [color=red][b]SPARTA![/b][/color]
[color=red][b][i]V/LA Dec 22 - Jan 4[/i][/b][/color]
[color=red][b][i]V/LA Dec 22 - Jan 4[/i][/b][/color]
- ChaosOmega
- ChaosOmega
-
ChaosOmega
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2283
- Joined: May 2, 2007
So you're not accusing me of scum because I'm not providing information, but you want me lynched. So you want non-scum lynched?d3sisted wrote:Am I accusing him of being scum because he has not yet provided explanation? No. To me, mafiascum is about voting, explaining, discussing and swaying others to follow with proper reasoning. Frankly, if he's just going to plop down unexplained votes, then he becomes a detriment to town and he'd be better off lynched.
- d3sisted
- d3sisted
-
d3sisted
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1085
- Joined: August 7, 2007
- Location: Vancouver, BC
Sigh.ChaosOmega wrote:So you're not accusing me of scum because I'm not providing information, but you want me lynched. So you want non-scum lynched?d3sisted wrote:Am I accusing him of being scum because he has not yet provided explanation? No. To me, mafiascum is about voting, explaining, discussing and swaying others to follow with proper reasoning. Frankly, if he's just going to plop down unexplained votes, then he becomes a detriment to town and he'd be better off lynched.
If you had continued to refuse to provide supporting reasons, then you would be better off lynched because you are not helping town. You have, however, provided reasons so that is not the case.
Man, it's like everyone in here is hell bent on bending my words to hell.
This. Is. [color=red][b]SPARTA![/b][/color]
[color=red][b][i]V/LA Dec 22 - Jan 4[/i][/b][/color]
[color=red][b][i]V/LA Dec 22 - Jan 4[/i][/b][/color]
I seem to be shouting into the wind when it comes to d3sisted, and deadline is getting closer. Also, Jack and ChaosOmega: please answer the question I asked to the town.
In the interests of movement, I will toss my lots to somebody who I still think is more likely to be scum than the average person, but actually seems lynchable.
No spark in me to respond to d3sisted again at the moment, but if people think our discussion/argument is enlightening I will be willing to continue it.
In the interests of movement, I will toss my lots to somebody who I still think is more likely to be scum than the average person, but actually seems lynchable.
Unvote: d3sisted, Vote: K-Scope
; my thoughts on him having been outlined in an earlier post in response to Patrick, in Post 251.No spark in me to respond to d3sisted again at the moment, but if people think our discussion/argument is enlightening I will be willing to continue it.
"I was born with scum like you."
- Sir Tornado
- Sir Tornado
-
Sir Tornado
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2255
- Joined: May 17, 2007
- Contact:
I think Javert and D3sisted are both town, although D3sisted is increasingly grasping at straws.
D3sisted: Why are you getting so worked up at CO voting me without any reason? If I have to worry at all, I would worry about Adel voting me for lurking, keeping the vote there after I stop lurking and then begining to lurk herself.
Kscope needs to post more. I favour a KScope lynch more than Kravhen lynch although I will vote Kravhen if that is necessary at deadline.
I will reply to Javert's question to me later today.
D3sisted: Why are you getting so worked up at CO voting me without any reason? If I have to worry at all, I would worry about Adel voting me for lurking, keeping the vote there after I stop lurking and then begining to lurk herself.
Kscope needs to post more. I favour a KScope lynch more than Kravhen lynch although I will vote Kravhen if that is necessary at deadline.
I will reply to Javert's question to me later today.
I'm back!
- d3sisted
- d3sisted
-
d3sisted
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1085
- Joined: August 7, 2007
- Location: Vancouver, BC
You and Javert seem to think so. I'm not. CO voted without reason, I asked him why, he provided reasons, I was satisfied, case closed end of discussion. Javert, however, seems to think I'm scum for doing that.Sir Tornado wrote:D3sisted: Why are you getting so worked up at CO voting me without any reason?
This. Is. [color=red][b]SPARTA![/b][/color]
[color=red][b][i]V/LA Dec 22 - Jan 4[/i][/b][/color]
[color=red][b][i]V/LA Dec 22 - Jan 4[/i][/b][/color]
I've been neglecting a bit.
Adel's last post sucks, if you don't want to play then get replaced. Note that I say sucks more than scummy, but I hate that kind of attitude. Sir Tornado doesn't bother me as much as he did before.
The recent desisted/Javert argument I'm finding hard to follow for some reason.
I'm finding kravhen scummy again. He seemed to manage to post quite alot of volume without making much of a case for his vote on The Fonz. He mentioned an allergy to PBP, and said that The Fonz is hedging/throwing stuff out there, which is a point of view I find baffling. I think Fonz has been pretty obvious most of the time who he suspects, and when he voted kravhen I'm not left with a vibe of just "throwing stuff out there". Not too happy with the unvote either, seems more placatory than anything. I see him as a reasonable alternative to K-Scope, but I prefer my vote on the latter still.
Adel's last post sucks, if you don't want to play then get replaced. Note that I say sucks more than scummy, but I hate that kind of attitude. Sir Tornado doesn't bother me as much as he did before.
The recent desisted/Javert argument I'm finding hard to follow for some reason.
I share your point of view on this, as I pointed out that scumtell on day 1. It looks more like a suggestion to others than a rhetorical to Javert from my point of view.Javert wrote:Let's get some opinions on this. When somebody ends a post with "Scumtell?", for some reason I think that that person is asking other people to decide if they think it is a scumtell. It strikes me as an invitation for others to jump in and pick up on the attack. It does not strike me as a rhetorical question to the person you are attacking, however.
What do others think about this? I want opinions.
I'm finding kravhen scummy again. He seemed to manage to post quite alot of volume without making much of a case for his vote on The Fonz. He mentioned an allergy to PBP, and said that The Fonz is hedging/throwing stuff out there, which is a point of view I find baffling. I think Fonz has been pretty obvious most of the time who he suspects, and when he voted kravhen I'm not left with a vibe of just "throwing stuff out there". Not too happy with the unvote either, seems more placatory than anything. I see him as a reasonable alternative to K-Scope, but I prefer my vote on the latter still.
Primpod 11:13 pm
chamber can you please come to ukmeet
i would love to finally touch your face
chamber can you please come to ukmeet
i would love to finally touch your face
- Sir Tornado
- Sir Tornado
-
Sir Tornado
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2255
- Joined: May 17, 2007
- Contact:
I don't think this was a rhetorical question by you, D3sisted. You did not point any scum tells in your post, nor did you attack Javert in that post. I think you were trying to garner support for your attack against Javert because you were fast running out of arguments.D3sisted wrote: At any rate, you got agitated pretty quickly after you saw the third vote put on you; more so than was necessary. Scumtell?
I always felt the "get agitated after being put on a -1/-2/-3" scum tell was over rated. That may happen in face to face, but I think in forum mafia, you get enough chance to calm yourself down to type. The agitation conveyed from posts is almost always intended and calculated. This makes it a shaky scum tell, because most scum tells are dropped subconsciously. I do think that players are likely to get more agitated (and express it) when they are scum than when they are town, but this always varies from player to player. In addition, frustration can be interpreted as agitation many times. This is true especially when there is a long argument between two people like the one between Javert and Desisted. I think there are a few posts by both of them which can be interpreted as agitation, but are in fact products of frustration.
I'm back!
- Adel
- Adel
-
Adel
- Crystalline Logick
- Crystalline Logick
- Posts: 6743
- Joined: May 23, 2007
- Location: Central Oregon / High Desert
I've asked to be replaced. Our Mod said that he should have no problem finding a replacement.Patrick wrote:I've been neglecting a bit.
Adel's last post sucks, if you don't want to play then get replaced. Note that I say sucks more than scummy, but I hate that kind of attitude.
I
want
to play in this game, but I just haven't been able
to. My apologies to all of you, I've always hated it when other people got replaced.- Seol
- Seol
-
Seol
- Logical Rampage
- Logical Rampage
- Posts: 1563
- Joined: November 26, 2004
- Location: In the wrong
Confirm I am looking for a replacement for Adel. Please note that this
Vote count:
sir tornado: 2 (chaosomega, adel)
jack: 1 (kaleidoscope)
kravhen: 1 (the_fonz)
will not affect the deadline
which is a little over two days away.Vote count:
kaleidoscope: 3 (jack, patrick, javert)
sir tornado: 2 (chaosomega, adel)
jack: 1 (kaleidoscope)
kravhen: 1 (the_fonz)
[i]The hungry maw of Twilight snaps, but shall not have its fill,
Until one man hangs by his neck, by half this curs'd town's will[/i]
Until one man hangs by his neck, by half this curs'd town's will[/i]
Mod
, can we get prods for K-Scope and kravhen? When those two return, I ask that they answer my questions to them included in Post 278.To whoever replaces Adel – we are on a deadline, so please do not put this game 'on the back burner'. We really cannot afford for you to come in, say you're going to read the game, and then have day end without you having contributed. Thanks in advance.
"I was born with scum like you."
What do you want from that post? It was made on page THREE and I still think there's nothing wrong with the post for that point of the game. Why does it make a diff if she was attacked or not? I just saw people going into metagame so I threw in my "twisted logic" metagame info and vote.Kravhen
1.) Javert, Post 165 wrote:
Kravhen, since Adel was not attacked for using her tell in that newbie game, what happens to your Post 53?
If I remember correctly it's MeMe's strong stance defending Logicticus. Then Logic turned out scum, which approved that theory even more, but then MeMe died as town, bursting my bubble. I also thought maybe because of MeMe's experience, she thought she could and wanted to help his scumbuddy even in his big moment of distress.2.) Earlier today you said:
kravhen, Post 222 wrote:
To be honest one of the people I had gotten scumvibes and probably would've probed day 2 was meme..
-> a. Where did you get these scumvibes in particular?
That's right. After day 1 I felt like I was back at point 0 and didn't know where to shift my attention to anymore. After sitting back a bit, interesting things popped up.-> b. If you were so willing to "probe" at MeMe, where is your "probing" from today? Your posts seem to be responses to The Fonz rather than probing coming from yourself.
As I said, I felt lost. And somewhat dissapointed. Almost like I wanted MeMe to be scum, "dammit why couldn't she have been scum!!", because the scumbuddy scenario I had in my head looked so satisfying and made sense I believe. I felt I had caught 2 birds with one rock. Meh. One bird will have to be enough for now it seems. And by the way, you should feel special, usually when I lay down my thought process, it gets called filler.-> c. If you started the day thinking that you were going to go after MeMe, did this affect your opinion on other players at all? It would seem if you were under one mindset during the night to find you were wrong the next morning, you would have to do some rethinking. Pray tell what your thought process was.
I didn't plan for it to be some test. "You pass" was more silly flavor to the unvote I would say. I really thought his PBP post lacked substance. Also, at the time I read his "confident" post, I got vibes of a townie desperately trying to prove his point and stick to his beliefs. BUT. Here comes the shocker. Re-reading that confident post again just now, I just realized I'm not satisfied with it and he's still missing the point. I DID NOT DEFEND DESISTED AND IM NOT BLIND, THAT POST WASNT A DEFENSE. Just to point one of the things that tick me off.3.) When you tell The Fonz "you pass", are you implying that the purpose of your vote on him was simply a test? Furthermore, could you explain to me what about The Fonz's response to you in particular makes him look more town? Does having "confidence" make somebody more likely to be town, in your view?
But hey, this is just like I said earlier, sometimes I tend to act too fast and regret moves when I come back a while after to re-read with a cooler head, making sure my motives are good and aren't based on false things and omgus. Which means I was right the first time with my vote, WHICH ISNT OMGUS NO MATTER WHEN I VOTE. THE FACT YOU VOTE FOR ME DOESNT GRANT YOU MAGICAL IMMUNITY FROM MY VOTE POWER AS TOWN, and I am probably still right, right now.
Vote: The Fonz
It has come to our attention that you cheated off a classmate. You phail.
^^^^
Flavor.
- PookyTheMagicalBear
- PookyTheMagicalBear
-
PookyTheMagicalBear
- Pooky got your back
- Pooky got your back
- Posts: 36318
- Joined: August 17, 2003
some1 gimme a summary
quick'
double quick
quick'
double quick
Show
"I can't even look at the game anymore.
That evil teddy bear has got everyone twirling by his thumb.
It's like witnessing an slow but unavoidable train crash you can't stop."
-Norwee
"Please refrain from diverting our sleuths out there Pooky."
~Maple
That evil teddy bear has got everyone twirling by his thumb.
It's like witnessing an slow but unavoidable train crash you can't stop."
-Norwee
"Please refrain from diverting our sleuths out there Pooky."
~Maple
- PookyTheMagicalBear
- PookyTheMagicalBear
-
PookyTheMagicalBear
- Pooky got your back
- Pooky got your back
- Posts: 36318
- Joined: August 17, 2003
i just finished reading Kaleido's posts
are we killing him cuz he's lazy?
do we have nething else on him?
any1?
are we killing him cuz he's lazy?
do we have nething else on him?
any1?
Show
"I can't even look at the game anymore.
That evil teddy bear has got everyone twirling by his thumb.
It's like witnessing an slow but unavoidable train crash you can't stop."
-Norwee
"Please refrain from diverting our sleuths out there Pooky."
~Maple
That evil teddy bear has got everyone twirling by his thumb.
It's like witnessing an slow but unavoidable train crash you can't stop."
-Norwee
"Please refrain from diverting our sleuths out there Pooky."
~Maple