Mini 780 - Chosen - Game over
Forum rules
- AceMarksman
- AceMarksman
-
AceMarksman
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1432
- Joined: January 23, 2009
- Location: The OA
spring, you're on a wild goose chase, these questions are getting neither of us anywhere, unless you had a point for perusing this inquiry?
Show
"either he's scum and yay 1 less scum, or he's town and yay 1 less zwetschenwasser. " ~Moratorium
Words to live by.
My record: W/L/T/A
Overall:5/2/0/1
Town:5/2/0/1
Scum:0/0/0/0
3rd Party:0/0/0/0
Words to live by.
My record: W/L/T/A
Overall:5/2/0/1
Town:5/2/0/1
Scum:0/0/0/0
3rd Party:0/0/0/0
- Incognito
- Incognito
-
Incognito
- Not Rex
- Not Rex
- Posts: 5953
- Joined: November 4, 2007
- Location: Philadelphia, PA
- Contact:
Vote Count #3 of Day 1
hp [leaves] (2) <-~ Nuwen, ekiM
ekiM (1) <-~ AceMarksman
Nuwen (3) <-~ hp [leaves], q21, Claus
q21 (2) <-~ springlullaby, Albert B. Rampage
Not voting (1) <-~ Lawrencelot
ekiM (1) <-~ AceMarksman
Nuwen (3) <-~ hp [leaves], q21, Claus
q21 (2) <-~ springlullaby, Albert B. Rampage
Not voting (1) <-~ Lawrencelot
With 9 alive, 5 will do it.
Deadline wrote:
[ooc][color=black]patrickgower2006 (8:12:03 PM): all beer tastes same to me
patrickgower2006 (8:12:07 PM): like dish water
If you see Patrick drinking dish water, please try and stop him. Friends don't let friends drink dish water.[/color][/ooc]
patrickgower2006 (8:12:07 PM): like dish water
If you see Patrick drinking dish water, please try and stop him. Friends don't let friends drink dish water.[/color][/ooc]
- springlullaby
- springlullaby
-
springlullaby
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 3770
- Joined: January 13, 2008
Are you serious? What wild goose chase?
Yes, I have a point: I find your post 66 to be scummy because I think it is fake naiveté.
I ask you precise questions: you state that you think scum are lurking - I said that I want you to name names, because if you are not going to cast suspicion on somebody in particular, then your post 66 is totally useless, and it would be scummy for that reason.
What don't you understand there?
Let me repeat, who do you think is 'lurking scum'?
Yes, I have a point: I find your post 66 to be scummy because I think it is fake naiveté.
I ask you precise questions: you state that you think scum are lurking - I said that I want you to name names, because if you are not going to cast suspicion on somebody in particular, then your post 66 is totally useless, and it would be scummy for that reason.
What don't you understand there?
Let me repeat, who do you think is 'lurking scum'?
Unvote, vote AceMarkman
- Albert B. Rampage
- Albert B. Rampage
-
Albert B. Rampage
- Illogical Rampage
- Illogical Rampage
- Posts: 27261
- Joined: April 8, 2007
- Location: Albuquerque, New Mexico
Because I don't have anything to add to your amazing post.springlullaby wrote:I don't get it, why do you need to be apologetic while agreeing with me?Albert B. Rampage wrote:Sorry, but I agree with springlullaby for now.
Unvote, vote q21
Anything you find particularly worthy of agreement?
Guard your honor. Let your reputation fall where it will. And outlive the bastards.
Ace, responding to "Give me names of who is lurking scum" with "The theory discussion is a null tell" is a complete non sequitur. Then when asked again you say the question is pointless. Evasiveness is scummy.
If you actually believe that some players are lurking scum, why not name them? Why aren't you voting for them? If you don't actually think that, why did you say it?
If you had genuinely read the thread and looked for lurkers, there is no way you would not have noticed hp. hp's posts so far:
7: Random vote.
15: Random OMGUS vote.
33: Three word post responding to questions.
65: "I agree that a lynch is better than no lynch."
Four posts, none of which have any content at all, in nearly six days. Blatantly non-interactive. Yet when asked to name someone you suspect for lurking, you got nothing. Doesn't add up.
FoS:AceMarksman
.If you actually believe that some players are lurking scum, why not name them? Why aren't you voting for them? If you don't actually think that, why did you say it?
If you had genuinely read the thread and looked for lurkers, there is no way you would not have noticed hp. hp's posts so far:
7: Random vote.
15: Random OMGUS vote.
33: Three word post responding to questions.
65: "I agree that a lynch is better than no lynch."
Four posts, none of which have any content at all, in nearly six days. Blatantly non-interactive. Yet when asked to name someone you suspect for lurking, you got nothing. Doesn't add up.
- AceMarksman
- AceMarksman
-
AceMarksman
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1432
- Joined: January 23, 2009
- Location: The OA
*sigh* Really now? I answered "null tell" to number three because I don't have any concrete suspects yet, I just had a gut feeling that we're going to be screwed over by scum if we keep biting each other's heads off.
Show
"either he's scum and yay 1 less scum, or he's town and yay 1 less zwetschenwasser. " ~Moratorium
Words to live by.
My record: W/L/T/A
Overall:5/2/0/1
Town:5/2/0/1
Scum:0/0/0/0
3rd Party:0/0/0/0
Words to live by.
My record: W/L/T/A
Overall:5/2/0/1
Town:5/2/0/1
Scum:0/0/0/0
3rd Party:0/0/0/0
- hp [leaves]
- hp [leaves]
-
hp [leaves]
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1170
- Joined: September 28, 2008
Four posts in six days is actually good for me. I live in Europe so it is rare for someone to post when I'm online. I also don't have computer access every day.ekiM wrote:Ace, responding to "Give me names of who is lurking scum" with "The theory discussion is a null tell" is a complete non sequitur. Then when asked again you say the question is pointless. Evasiveness is scummy.FoS:AceMarksman.
If you actually believe that some players are lurking scum, why not name them? Why aren't you voting for them? If you don't actually think that, why did you say it?
If you had genuinely read the thread and looked for lurkers, there is no way you would not have noticed hp. hp's posts so far:
7: Random vote.
15: Random OMGUS vote.
33: Three word post responding to questions.
65: "I agree that a lynch is better than no lynch."
Four posts, none of which have any content at all, in nearly six days. Blatantly non-interactive. Yet when asked to name someone you suspect for lurking, you got nothing. Doesn't add up.
We must embrace the pain and burn it as fuel for our journey.
- Albert B. Rampage
- Albert B. Rampage
-
Albert B. Rampage
- Illogical Rampage
- Illogical Rampage
- Posts: 27261
- Joined: April 8, 2007
- Location: Albuquerque, New Mexico
- AceMarksman
- AceMarksman
-
AceMarksman
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1432
- Joined: January 23, 2009
- Location: The OA
ABR, that's three votes on hp. Are you on his bandwagon because you think he is scum or are you on it just to be on it?
Show
"either he's scum and yay 1 less scum, or he's town and yay 1 less zwetschenwasser. " ~Moratorium
Words to live by.
My record: W/L/T/A
Overall:5/2/0/1
Town:5/2/0/1
Scum:0/0/0/0
3rd Party:0/0/0/0
Words to live by.
My record: W/L/T/A
Overall:5/2/0/1
Town:5/2/0/1
Scum:0/0/0/0
3rd Party:0/0/0/0
- Albert B. Rampage
- Albert B. Rampage
-
Albert B. Rampage
- Illogical Rampage
- Illogical Rampage
- Posts: 27261
- Joined: April 8, 2007
- Location: Albuquerque, New Mexico
The reasons for which I am on hp leave's bandwagon are not easily explainable to everyone, more like a personal choice such as abortion. Sometimes its better to vote without giving any reasoning. Mafia isn't a game of complete control, it must always contain an element of spontaneous action, and votes like mine are variables in the equation full of constants.
Guard your honor. Let your reputation fall where it will. And outlive the bastards.
- Lawrencelot
- Lawrencelot
-
Lawrencelot
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1766
- Joined: October 3, 2006
- Location: the Netherlands Alignment: Town
Normally, almost everyone looks town to me. This game, almost everyone looks scum to me. I agree with most things that are said about Ace, but Claus also looks pretty agressive to me. Unfortunately, from experience I know that being agressive is not a scumtell at all. Since these are my highest suspects at the moment, I'll
Vote: AceMarksman
. Mostly gut, but I don't have much more this early in D1.Leaving mafiascum temporarily or not due to circumstances
- AceMarksman
- AceMarksman
-
AceMarksman
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1432
- Joined: January 23, 2009
- Location: The OA
Eh, I can't really defend myself from people's gut
(well, there's weight loss pills)
. Does anyone have a formal case against me that I can respond to (did I miss one? I'm very liable to do that atm)?Show
"either he's scum and yay 1 less scum, or he's town and yay 1 less zwetschenwasser. " ~Moratorium
Words to live by.
My record: W/L/T/A
Overall:5/2/0/1
Town:5/2/0/1
Scum:0/0/0/0
3rd Party:0/0/0/0
Words to live by.
My record: W/L/T/A
Overall:5/2/0/1
Town:5/2/0/1
Scum:0/0/0/0
3rd Party:0/0/0/0
- Nuwen
- Nuwen
-
Nuwen
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2487
- Joined: December 22, 2008
- Location: Charlotte, NC
- Contact:
You can start by naming which lurkers you believe are scum - most players in this game have been responsive, with the glaring exception of HP [leaves]. Do you think his scant few posts are scummy?AceMarksman wrote:Eh, I can't really defend myself from people's gut(well, there's weight loss pills). Does anyone have a formal case against me that I can respond to (did I miss one? I'm very liable to do that atm)?
It isn't the quantity in which you post, but the quality. Thus far, you've failed to comment on majory events in this game. Your only contribution to the recent wagon on me was an "I agree" coupled with a blanket statement expressing an obvious sentiment: "Any lynch is better than a no lynch as it reveals information."hp [leaves] wrote: Four posts in six days is actually good for me. I live in Europe so it is rare for someone to post when I'm online. I also don't have computer access every day.
What do you think of ABR's vote on you right now?
So high, so low, so many things to know.
aim:gochat?roomname=ScumChat&Exchange=5
aim:gochat?roomname=ScumChat&Exchange=5
- hp [leaves]
- hp [leaves]
-
hp [leaves]
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1170
- Joined: September 28, 2008
As he didn't give a reason with it, I can only speculate. He might have voted me because he isn't satisfied with my activity, or my last reply. Or he just wants to give the bandwagon some momentum.Nuwen wrote:What do you think of ABR's vote on you right now?
We must embrace the pain and burn it as fuel for our journey.
Ok. This is a quick catchup post. I thought I would have the night free. Fortunately, that is not the case After this post I'll be away until the 5th, and then back to usual. (I might get a post in tomorrow, don't count on it though).
=======
===
66: Aceman -> Hoping he helps solving the problem he is (correctly) pointing out. (Extra: he didn't)
===
===
Because of a game I've been very recently lynched on. Can't really comment on it as it is ongoing, but if you read it I think you'll understand my rage.
===
77 - another disagreement vote from spring. hmm. Actually, I find that a bit pro-town.
80 - I have to remind myself to read some other games with this guy. I agree with this in principle (and I know I'm often guilty of it)
84 - This is the Albert that I know and love (still keeping an eye on you, though).
85- I feel this vote to be EXTREMELY opportunistic.
87 - This is much better from Nuwen. Nuwen, what do you think of Lawrence?
====================
Don't like Lawrencelot's 67. He is not contributing to scumhunting. My vote on Nuwen was an overreaction.
I would like to invite others to share with me their opinions on how useless Lawrencelot has been (more or less than HPleaves/Ace?). Feel free to join me/try to convince me I'm wrong.
And with that I go on my trip. Hope I'll be less grumpy when I return!
=======
Yeah, I was a bit boggled by that too. I share this mindset. I found Nuwen making a big deal of this weird. Specially because she seemed to actually believe what she was saying.ekiM wrote:You seem to be saying that probably some of these three people are scum, because it is 100% the case that you are right and RVS OMGUS is a strong scum tell. Is it really so cut and dried?
Sorry for getting your name wrong. For some reason, it always come out "ikem" when I type it out. And I take back the "newbie card", I re-read the post to quote it, and now I see what you meant - you just don't seem to be that confrontational.ekiM wrote:Assuming this is directed at me... I don't think I "pulled the newbie card".
Hmmm. Unless you are going to tell me that the sole vote on a guy who hadn't posted at all yet was a serious case, for me your vote was a second random vote (=non-serious vote), and I don't like that. And a six line post is a bit big for a random vote.I'm also don't see what's wrong with voting for people who aren't saying anything, or how a six line post is 'elaborate'.
I like this. What about Lawrence? Do you think he contributed more or less than HPLeaves as of that post?ekiM wrote:Right now I am more interested in making sure everyone is involved in the thread, both so that they can help scumhunt if they are town, and so that scum aren't allowed to lurk.
===
66: Aceman -> Hoping he helps solving the problem he is (correctly) pointing out. (Extra: he didn't)
===
Yes. Scumhunting doesn't come from nowhere. Theory discussion is another place where scumhunting doesn't come from. Making cases and questioning those cases is a much better place to generate scumhunting.lawrencelot wrote:I don't get Claus, why he's supporting q21. I agree with post 54. Especially the 'scumhunting doesn't come from nowhere' part. I would like to hear both q21 and Claus's opinion on that.
Post 41 is a big nothing. I call that "active lurking" - you post, but you don't contribute to the thread. 44 is another "nothing" post, but in it, you call people who hold a position similar to q21's as scummy, without accusing him. And this post is another "nothing" post, because you comment on the currents events without positioning youself.I don't really understand what you mean. And I totally don't understand what post 41 has to do with it.
When those things are not related to scumhunting. There is such thing as overloading the town to apathy with useless information.(really, in what case does discussing things NOT help town?)
===
Thanks The game needed a hard shake out of the RSV. (and my week was pretty shitty)springlullaby wrote:Olé, the big guns already? This is kinda surprising.
Hmmm. Actually, I do, and you may be right that she was cut off too early. But from her responses to q21, it didn't look too likely. q21 had a better argument. Maybe I was bitchy.Do you agree with this?
So what is your reason to vote q21 that is not based on the fact that he and Nuwen disagrees about theory? (real curiosity here)I don't think that's true.It is a disagreement vote, and not a scumhunting vote.
Here:Were did I say that he wasn't scumhunting?
But if you take that back, then okay.when you say 'more scumhunting please' what exactly do you have in mind? I think your call here is entirely empty.
RSV will eventually lead to a lynch. Which doesn't mean that the lynch will be random. Bandwagon, counter bandwagon, counter counter bandwagon. Much better than theory discussion.He said that the RSV stage would eventually lead to a lynch, which was be superior to theory discussion because it supposedly wouldn't.
That is not the problem of Theory discussion. Scum can post "pro-town" things honestly without hurting their game with theory discussion. Also, theory discussion will delay a lynch and demotivate the town. Because of that, it is sub-optimal. I've seen both happen quite often enough.a town which somehow never reaches a lynch because of theory discussion is a fiction I don't envisage ever happening
... Yeah, actually I was weary.so why do you sound so weary?
Because of a game I've been very recently lynched on. Can't really comment on it as it is ongoing, but if you read it I think you'll understand my rage.
Still you vote him. How strong is your vote?And I differ on the assessment of q21 's post. I don't think it is extraordinarily scummy, but I don't think it as pro-town as you make it out to be.
===
77 - another disagreement vote from spring. hmm. Actually, I find that a bit pro-town.
80 - I have to remind myself to read some other games with this guy. I agree with this in principle (and I know I'm often guilty of it)
84 - This is the Albert that I know and love (still keeping an eye on you, though).
85- I feel this vote to be EXTREMELY opportunistic.
87 - This is much better from Nuwen. Nuwen, what do you think of Lawrence?
====================
Don't like Lawrencelot's 67. He is not contributing to scumhunting. My vote on Nuwen was an overreaction.
unvote: Vote Lawrencelot
- Die scum die!I would like to invite others to share with me their opinions on how useless Lawrencelot has been (more or less than HPleaves/Ace?). Feel free to join me/try to convince me I'm wrong.
And with that I go on my trip. Hope I'll be less grumpy when I return!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XVVmAG0RXmo
- springlullaby
- springlullaby
-
springlullaby
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 3770
- Joined: January 13, 2008
Well, if Nuwen had not engaged that conversation, q21 would have had nothing to comment on: fact is scumhunting doesn't arise from nothing.Claus wrote:Here:Were did I say that he wasn't scumhunting?
when you say 'more scumhunting please' what exactly do you have in mind? I think your call here is entirely empty.
Now, you say that my vote is a disagreement vote - what would you call q21's vote then?
Random votes don't lead to lynches of any value (see Killing Verses Mafia and fail town D1 with a random lynch to convince you of that), pushing through the random phase does. I maintain that the phantom menace of 'nothing but theory discussion' is a fantasy that isn't likely to happen, unless there is something really wrong with the town.RSV will eventually lead to a lynch. Which doesn't mean that the lynch will be random. Bandwagon, counter bandwagon, counter counter bandwagon. Much better than theory discussion.
---
That is not the problem of Theory discussion. Scum can post "pro-town" things honestly without hurting their game with theory discussion. Also, theory discussion will delay a lynch and demotivate the town. Because of that, it is sub-optimal. I've seen both happen quite often enough.
I'm adding to that that if you suspect someone of offering nothing but noise theories, than the best strategy for town is not to nip the suspicious behaviour in the bud, but to let it develop for a certain time and see.
Not to appears unsympathetic or overly paranoid, but link please?... Yeah, actually I was weary.
Because of a game I've been very recently lynched on. Can't really comment on it as it is ongoing, but if you read it I think you'll understand my rage.
I would say that q21 is mildly scummy. His vote look vaguely pro townish for the displayed desire to move things along (in much the same manner as Nuwen actually), but objectively it accomplished very little, and doesn't constitute a strong scumhunting vote. I would also say scummy on a gut level because I can cite a game in which I made a vote very similar to his as scum, whereas on the other hand I made moves similar to Nuwen's as town.Still you vote him. How strong is your vote?
But right now I think Ace is scummier.
- springlullaby
- springlullaby
-
springlullaby
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 3770
- Joined: January 13, 2008
- Nuwen
- Nuwen
-
Nuwen
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2487
- Joined: December 22, 2008
- Location: Charlotte, NC
- Contact:
Claus wrote: Nuwen's theory questions are spurious - she is starting from a misleading premise, and seems to be trying to shape the town's mind into a "one of these three is scum" mentality.
These posts misunderstand what I originally posted:Claus wrote:Yeah, I was a bit boggled by that too. I share this mindset. I found Nuwen making a big deal of this weird. Specially because she seemed to actually believe what she was saying.ekiM wrote:You seem to be saying that probably some of these three people are scum, because it is 100% the case that you are right and RVS OMGUS is a strong scum tell. Is it really so cut and dried?
"At least one of these players is town" is not equivalent to "x number of these players are scum." Spring caught on and recognized that in an open setup with two scum, any one of three players must be town. Seeing three players commit an inherently anti-town action begs the question: why is one town player behaving in an anti-town manner? I used theory polling to extract positions on OMGUS and absolute tells to determine whether or not the certain town player out of Ace, Hp leaves, and Lawrence was acting consistently with a conflicting theory. Action consistent with an opposing theoryNuwen wrote:At least one of these votes comes from a town player, so I'd like to pose the following questions to the above voters:
would not constitute a tell and could also be used as a reference for future behavior
.------------------------------
Upon a quick rehash, these posts stick out the most to me:
I dislike two-directional scum buddy theory that assume one person's alignment in order to prove another - there's no independent case against Spring. Trying to prove that someone is defending, distancing, bussing (or any other buddy-interactive tell) without an independent case is idiotic;q21 wrote: nuwen is scum for going on about a topic that has no real benefit to the town. springlullaby is her buddy for spurring her on.
Discuss.
any
action can become an interactive tell if it's being used to prove one half's alignment. Example:
Player 1: Player 2 is scum, guys. Lynch now. Vote: Player 2
Player 3: Player 1 is pushing for a lynch with no case; I find that scummy. Vote: Player 1.
Player 1: Player 3 is obviously partners with Player 2 and is guilty of defending his scumbuddy.
This snippet bothers me the most. Posing theory and scumhunting as mutually exclusive items is a form of strawmanning - does theory discussion (and being aware of players' theory)q21 wrote: Less theory, more scumhunting, please.
never
aid the town under any circumstance?So high, so low, so many things to know.
aim:gochat?roomname=ScumChat&Exchange=5
aim:gochat?roomname=ScumChat&Exchange=5
- AceMarksman
- AceMarksman
-
AceMarksman
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1432
- Joined: January 23, 2009
- Location: The OA
spring, I don't think you understand my position. I meant that if we carry on with this argument amongst ourselvs, then scum will start to lurk and let us kill each other. I'm starting to notice patterns of lurking from q21 and hp, so they are at the top of my suspect list at the moment. I would say q21 is more scummy than hp, because q21 started this entire argument in the first place. So,
Unvote, vote:q21
Show
"either he's scum and yay 1 less scum, or he's town and yay 1 less zwetschenwasser. " ~Moratorium
Words to live by.
My record: W/L/T/A
Overall:5/2/0/1
Town:5/2/0/1
Scum:0/0/0/0
3rd Party:0/0/0/0
Words to live by.
My record: W/L/T/A
Overall:5/2/0/1
Town:5/2/0/1
Scum:0/0/0/0
3rd Party:0/0/0/0
- springlullaby
- springlullaby
-
springlullaby
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 3770
- Joined: January 13, 2008
I'm trying to evaluate how likely it is for this to be awkwardness/newbishness because, well, I kinda expect scum to be better than that.AceMarksman wrote:spring, I don't think you understand my position. I meant that if we carry on with this argument amongst ourselvs, then scum will start to lurk and let us kill each other. I'm starting to notice patterns of lurking from q21 and hp, so they are at the top of my suspect list at the moment. I would say q21 is more scummy than hp, because q21 started this entire argument in the first place. So,Unvote, vote:q21
But bottom line is, it's one hell of a scumslip. So yeah, my vote is probably sticking, short of scum claiming scum.
So you don't have any suspects who might be lurking scum? I think you're saying that people should stop arguing theory and get down to scumhunting. A fine sentiment, but you should really back it up with some scumhunting yourself...AceMarksman wrote:*sigh* Really now? I answered "null tell" to number three because I don't have any concrete suspects yet, I just had a gut feeling that we're going to be screwed over by scum if we keep biting each other's heads off.
You said scum were staying out of the argument to avoid attention. Now you're finding the person who started the argument suspicious. Not very consistent...AceMarksman wrote:spring, I don't think you understand my position. I meant that if we carry on with this argument amongst ourselvs, then scum will start to lurk and let us kill each other. I'm starting to notice patterns of lurking from q21 and hp, so they are at the top of my suspect list at the moment. I would say q21 is more scummy than hp, because q21 started this entire argument in the first place. So, Unvote, vote:q21
Posting every other day or so would be fine if those postings had a lot of content. Your posts so far in this thread really haven't. You've done no scumhunting at all, and that's not a good sign. Reading the thread, who do you suspect? Do you have any questions for anyone?hp wrote:Four posts in six days is actually good for me. I live in Europe so it is rare for someone to post when I'm online. I also don't have computer access every day.
I don't see what you're getting at with nobody posting when you're online. You can still comment on things that got posted when you weren't online.
No worries, people often seem to have problems typing it; maybe being backwards makes it hard to process.Claus wrote:Sorry for getting your name wrong. For some reason, it always come out "ikem" when I type it out. And I take back the "newbie card", I re-read the post to quote it, and now I see what you meant - you just don't seem to be that confrontational.
Why is two random votes bad? Also the six lines of text was responding to something else, not reasoning for the vote.Claus wrote:Hmmm. Unless you are going to tell me that the sole vote on a guy who hadn't posted at all yet was a serious case, for me your vote was a second random vote (=non-serious vote), and I don't like that. And a six line post is a bit big for a random vote.
He had contributed slightly more, but not by much. Right now, the three biggest non-contributers are Hp, Lawrence, and Ace.Claus wrote:I like this. What about Lawrence? Do you think he contributed more or less than HPLeaves as of that post?
Hp has still said literally nothing at all so far this game. Hard-lurking.
Lawrence has written more words, but only just said more than Hp in terms of content. Most of Ace's posts are one-liners, voicing feelings. 95 also contradicts 66, which makes his suspicions look worryingly insincere. Both of these two are active lurkers.
Not finding anyone else suspicious at the moment.
It is suggestive though, especially when you insist that their action was brazenly anti-town.Nuwen wrote:"At least one of these players is town" is not equivalent to "x number of these players are scum."
Well, maybe they don't see RVS OMGUS as especially anti-town?Nuwen wrote:Spring caught on and recognized that in an open setup with two scum, any one of three players must be town. Seeing three players commit an inherently anti-town action begs the question: why is one town player behaving in an anti-town manner?
Is this referring to the contradiction with his previous thinking, or something else?springlullaby wrote:I'm trying to evaluate how likely it is for this to be awkwardness/newbishness because, well, I kinda expect scum to be better than that.
But bottom line is, it's one hell of a scumslip. So yeah, my vote is probably sticking, short of scum claiming scum.
- Nuwen
- Nuwen
-
Nuwen
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2487
- Joined: December 22, 2008
- Location: Charlotte, NC
- Contact:
And that's what I was attempting to find out.ekiM wrote: Well, maybe they don't see RVS OMGUS as especially anti-town?
OMGUS is one of those binary scum tells. A vote is either OMGUS-motivated or it isn't. A solely OMGUS-motivated vote is either always scummy or not a tell. I wanted to find out if A) Any of the three voters I addressed believed in similar absolute tells, which I feel OMGUS falls under and B) Whether they felt these tells could be taken more lightly during RVS (explaining why a town player might feel it appropriate to behave in an anti-town manner,Nuwen wrote:1. Do you believe in any absolute and universal scum tells?
2. Do any of the above tells, if existent, carry less or more weight during RVS?
if
he believed it anti-town in the first place).Responses were as follows,
Lawrencelot wrote:1. no
2. less
Those 3 examples aren't really omgus because a) it's the random voting stage b) the voters do not really use it in a case
AceMarksman wrote:1)no, tells should always be taken with a grain of salt and should be considered in context. For example, my OMGUS vote was for shits and giggles and isn't inherently scummy.
2)less.
All of which are consistent with their actions. Nothing to continue pursuing on those three votes.hp [leaves] wrote: 1. no
2. no weight
-----------------------
I absolutely agree that HP [leaves] is actively lurking in the worst possible manner. His comments on the game thus far are sparse, noncommittal, and provide very little insight into his opinion of other players. His play is reactive, not proactive, and seeks to put forth the least possible amount of solid positioning.
HP, name your two top scum suspects in your next post.
Vote: hp [leaves
So high, so low, so many things to know.
aim:gochat?roomname=ScumChat&Exchange=5
aim:gochat?roomname=ScumChat&Exchange=5
- Lawrencelot
- Lawrencelot
-
Lawrencelot
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1766
- Joined: October 3, 2006
- Location: the Netherlands Alignment: Town
I see Nuwen got what she wanted with her theory about OMGUS, but I still would like to add that my (random) vote wasn't even OMGUS, as you can notice from the post itself, so you were kinda chasing nothing there. I don't really think this is scummy though.
What I do find scummy is q21, Claus, and Ace's behaviour. q21 mostly because I disagree with everything he says, Claus for his first reaction to 'theory discussion' and his latest post, though in both these players I might be biased, I'm not going to vote anyone just because I think they're wrong.
Wanted to post more about Ace, but I gottago. I'll try to make a case on him later.
What I do find scummy is q21, Claus, and Ace's behaviour. q21 mostly because I disagree with everything he says, Claus for his first reaction to 'theory discussion' and his latest post, though in both these players I might be biased, I'm not going to vote anyone just because I think they're wrong.
I disagree. Any discussion, including theory discussion, is a place to start scumhunting, for example by looking for inconsistencies, motivations, or scumtells in general. Normally, the RVS flows into a discussion about lynching lurkers, massclaim, questions for a specific player, or in this case, theory discussion. You can't make a case or question a case if there is no discussion. If you say we shouldn't talk about theory discussion, you should provide an alternative so that we have a source to look at.Claus wrote:Yes. Scumhunting doesn't come from nowhere. Theory discussion is another place where scumhunting doesn't come from. Making cases and questioning those cases is a much better place to generate scumhunting.
Fos: Claus and q21
Unless you're skipping like half of post 44, I was definitely positioning myself there.Claus wrote:Post 41 is a big nothing. I call that "active lurking" - you post, but you don't contribute to the thread. 44 is another "nothing" post, but in it, you call people who hold a position similar to q21's as scummy, without accusing him. And this post is another "nothing" post, because you comment on the currents events without positioning youself.
I'd argue that there is no thing as useless information, besides things that are off-topic. Anything can be used for scum-hunting, if it isn't good for anything else you can just check if a post is consistent with the previous posts, or see what the differences are with the posts of the same player in a different game.Claus wrote:When those things are not related to scumhunting. There is such thing as overloading the town to apathy with useless information.
Wanted to post more about Ace, but I gottago. I'll try to make a case on him later.
Unvote
before that happens.Leaving mafiascum temporarily or not due to circumstances