[Standard] #Pony Mafia - Night 1

Post #1 by Rubik

Arguments are flying furiously right now on #Pony. The banhammer was dropped on Cerpin last night, the official reason coming from wyldryde's admin, Jeff, is somewhere along the lines of "spreading illicit pictures of ponies". It's clear to everyone that someone's playing dirty, and it's clear to everyone that they need to be removed. Tension is high, the banhammer is poised, who's going to be the next to follow cerpin to his #pony-less grave?


Welcome to #Pony Mafia! Role-PMs are going out, so please confirm your role in thread, but not before the back-up mod posts.


Rules:


1. Bold and Color your votes and unvotes (Example: Vote: Rubik, Unvote: Rubik)
2. The deadline will be set at the beginning of each day. It may be changed depending on activity levels. Votes after the deadline has passed will not be counted.
3. A lynch will happen as soon as a majority has been reached. In the event of a deadline, the player with the most votes will be lynched. In the event of a tie, the newest votes will be unvoted until the tie is broken.
4. Do not post in the thread after your death scene has been posted. One "blargh i'm dead" post is fine, just don't include any game-relevant information.
5. Do not discuss the game outside the thread, unless your role PM specifically tells you that you can do so.
6. Do not post inside the thread once night has been announced.
7. Night lasts 72 hours. Please have all night targets in to both me and my back-up mod by then. If you don't send one in, it will be assumed that you aren't using your ability.
8. If you haven't posted in the thread for a period of 24 hours you will be prodded. If you receive three consecutive prods you will be replaced or nightkilled. If you anticipate being gone for more than 72 hours, please inform me to avoid being replaced/modkilled. This game will now be following the prodding/replacement rules outlined here:  community.wizards.com/paranoia/go/thread...
9. Do not edit your post.
10. Do not quote your role PM. Paraphrasing is fine.
11. Do not post in invisible or white text, or try to communicate with players via avatar or sig.
12. Avoid meta strategies. Not everyone's win-cons and etc. are necessarily worded the same way.
13. Have fun!


Living:
1. Sleeping
2. Freddeh
3. PeregrineV
4. theatog
5. ProphetKing
6. razorborne
7. Silly_Dragons
8. Feroz-s_Familiar_Pheldy
9. Ahlyis
10. Pdr_Br
11. Somestyle Niklor


Banned:
12. shadowfyre77 - D1 - febbtalicious42, Mafia-Aligned Godfather


Replacements:


1. Niklor
2. febbstalicious42
3. Zindaras


Sample Role PM: [Player: Zammm, Role: Suudsu]


Post #2 by Ragnarokio

post post post

Post #3 by Pdr_Br

Post. Got role and confirm.

Post #4 by ProphetKing

12.

Post #5 by Niklor

Prepared to deploy.

Post #6 by razorborne

conform.

 

Post #7 by shadowfyre77

I EXIST! :D

Post #8 by Silly_Dragons

WTF RUBIK I WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT THE ROLES WOULD BE PONIES. NOT GODDAMN RANDOM PX2ERS.

I HATE YOU.

Post #9 by Silly_Dragons

Also confirm.

Post #10 by Feroz-s_Familiar_Pheldy

confrim

Post #11 by Sleeping

Jeff shouldn't have banned anyone, banning people is mean and makes me sad. ;-;

Post #12 by Freddeh

Apr 17, 2012 -- 1:36PM, razorborne wrote:

conform.

 




Stealing my Confirmed line.

Vote: Razor

Post #13 by ProphetKing

Vote: PariahKing

Post #14 by Freddeh

Apr 17, 2012 -- 2:13PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

WTF RUBIK I WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT THE ROLES WOULD BE PONIES. NOT GODDAMN RANDOM PX2ERS.

I HATE YOU.




Dat breadcrumb.

Post #15 by ProphetKing


Dat breadcrumb.



Post #16 by ProphetKing

[/color]

Post #17 by Freddeh

Fail.

Post #18 by PeregrineV

Confirm.

Vote: Sleeping

WAKE UP!!

Post #19 by Sleeping

Vote: theatog

Post #20 by Silly_Dragons

Query, is rag in this game?

Post #21 by ProphetKing

Rag helped design it.

Post #22 by Ragnarokio

I am the BuM.

Post #23 by Niklor

Probably. Rag is the type of bigwig to make the cut.

Post #24 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 17, 2012 -- 4:53PM, Ragnarokio wrote:

I am the BuM.



But. Then how am I supposed to get you killed?

Post #25 by Pdr_Br

Apr 17, 2012 -- 2:13PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

WTF RUBIK I WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT THE ROLES WOULD BE PONIES. NOT GODDAMN RANDOM PX2ERS.

I HATE YOU.




I think our roles are based on people who use the #pony IRC not random PX2 users, it just happens that some people of PX2 use the channel as well.

And you knew that this isn't Brony Mafia!

Post #26 by stinkyjoeterry

This thread is temporarily locked. I need to review something with Rubik.  We should resume this game as soon as Rubik contacts me.

Sorry for the delay.

Post #27 by stinkyjoeterry

Apr 18, 2012 -- 8:35AM, stinkyjoeterry wrote:

This thread is temporarily locked. I need to review something with Rubik.  We should resume this game as soon as Rubik contacts me.

Sorry for the delay.



This game has been unlocked. I reviewed said issue with Rag instead.  Thank you Rag.  You may proceed.

Post #28 by Pdr_Br

Hey people were art thou?

Post #29 by Freddeh

Unvote;Vote: Somestyle

CONFIRM! And since I think you're last, do it in a big way.

Post #30 by Ahlyis

I do NOT confirm.

I do NOT have a role!

I received a PM from Rubik that claims to be my Pony Mafia role, but the PM is entirely blank!

Literally the only thing it has is the title, which only says "#Pony Mafia Role".

Since I haven't EVER been on the #pony channel, I seriously doubt that I've somehow been given myself as a vanilla role!

Post #31 by Rubik

The image shows up fine in my "Sent Messages" section. Weird.

New PM sent with the image again, a link to the image, and a plaintext version of your role.

Post #32 by Ahlyis

It is possible it is a result of trying to read the original PM here at work.  The new PM is fine, but I can't view the link to the image because that site is blocked here at work. I'll check both once I get home.

Anyway, I am now confirming receipt of my role.

Post #33 by ProphetKing

If I had to lynch someone at this very second I would shoot Freddeh for saying Silly made a breadcrumb.

Post #34 by Silly_Dragons

If I had to lynch someone this very second I would lynch Rag because Rag is always my go-to target.

I'm interested why you specifically chose to use the word "shoot" when the obvious follow-up is "lynch". (can I combine two smilies?)

Post #35 by Silly_Dragons

Also, because I guess it was an old tradition.

I roleclaim Princess Celestia, Ruler of all Equestria.

Post #36 by ProphetKing

Thinking about instant kill abilities like Sunflowers for Ragnarokio and Peso del Grande.

The odd word in the sentence is "lynch" in the beginning. 

Post #37 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 18, 2012 -- 5:13PM, ProphetKing wrote:

Thinking about instant kill abilities like Sunflowers for Ragnarokio and Peso del Grande.

The odd word in the sentence is "lynch" in the beginning. 



You know. I just read Peso del Grande after you mentioned MTGS o_O

Also, in that context I guess the first lynch wouldn't make much sense.

SO WHY DID YOU USE IT

Post #38 by theatog

I'm here.

Post #39 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 18, 2012 -- 5:19PM, theatog wrote:

I'm here.



So you are.

Post #40 by Sleeping

*paces around in circles*

Post #41 by Sleeping

Wait, that's bad form. We're an IRC channel.

/me paces around in circles. 

Post #42 by Freddeh

Apr 18, 2012 -- 5:01PM, ProphetKing wrote:

If I had to lynch someone at this very second I would shoot Freddeh for saying Silly made a breadcrumb.




Lynch + Shoot does not compute.

Oh you mentioned this already.

Your random shots work so well PK, you should keep making them! (/sarcasm)


Post #43 by Silly_Dragons

But seriously.

PK is describing a situation where lynching makes no sense, yet he uses the word lynch. This makes it seem like he is trying to come across as town because lynch is a much nicer word on the ears than kill or shoot. Either that or he just derped because he is dumb.

For now, this point doesn't really say much at all, what with Hanlon's Razor and everything. But I'm interested in hearing back from PK about this.

Post #44 by Silly_Dragons

Also Freddeh, you're not being very helpful. Even though I'm trying to start a verbal shouting match with PK, I don't like the way you post.

THIS IS ME WATCHING YOU Show


Post #45 by Freddeh

Because I pointed out a joke breadcrumb in the joke phase? Or because I'm actually trying to play mafia?

Your eyes don't scare me, lurkers lurking scare me. Not that its early enough for lurkers to lurk, but rawr. This is an advance warning, if you are lurking day 1, you WILL be gone after, hard, and fast. Also the new rules make it so you can't lurk, so your non-lurking posts BETTER BE GOOD.

Post #46 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 18, 2012 -- 7:35PM, Freddeh wrote:

..."window.parent.tinyMCE.get('post_content').onLoad.dispatch();" contenteditable="true" />Your eyes don't scare me, lurkers lurking scare me. Not that its early enough for lurkers to lurk, but rawr. This is an advance warning, if you are lurking day 1, you WILL be gone after, hard, and fast. Also the new rules make it so you can't lurk, so your non-lurking posts BETTER BE GOOD.



Yeah, aren't lurkers easy targets to deflect onto? I mean, its so obvious and they can't even defend themselves adequately. Right? Right? RIGHT? And lurker crusades make it seem like you're contributing to discussion even when you aren't.


Post #47 by Freddeh

Hey now, what discussion should I be contributing to? The only possible real discussion that has happened was one regarding if you had breadcrumbed or not, which 1) I BROUGHT UP MYSELF. and 2) Has already been resolved.

Also your theory is fine and all, but I'm so sick and tired of lurkers right now that I don't give a damn if it makes me look scummy or not. Also going after people that are going after lurkers is pretty opportunistic, so blah.

Post #48 by Silly_Dragons

/daykill FREDDEH

Post #49 by Freddeh

Dat troll.

Post #50 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 18, 2012 -- 8:47PM, Freddeh wrote:

Dat troll.



shut up dead people cant talk

Post #51 by Freddeh

Why do you want me so quiet hmm? Only mafia should be wanting people to NOT talk.

Post #52 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 18, 2012 -- 9:08PM, Freddeh wrote:

Why do you want me so quiet hmm? Only mafia should be wanting people to NOT talk.



Because it clearly says in the rules that dead people can't talk.

Post #53 by Freddeh

Apr 18, 2012 -- 9:18PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

Apr 18, 2012 -- 9:08PM, Freddeh wrote:

Why do you want me so quiet hmm? Only mafia should be wanting people to NOT talk.



Because it clearly says in the rules that dead people can't talk.




And I'm not dead til Rubik says I'm dead!

Post #54 by shadowfyre77

clearly we should kill silly

Post #55 by Pdr_Br

  •  PK is talking about daykilling freddeh because of Silly's breadcrumb --> Odd statement since I doubt there is a daykill in a mini, perhaps he wants Freddeh as a possible Vig choice?


  • Silly saying PK is acting suspicious by using lynch and shoot in the same sentence when they aren't synonims --> I agree it's odd, it's a thing to remember but it's not scummy per se.


  • Freddeh and Silly's discussion --> Please continue I'm enjoying it if only we could get more people to participate.


Unvote, Vote: Everybody who didn't postred today (I don't care pick one)

Post #56 by Freddeh

Feel free to join it yourself Pdr. In all seriousness it feels like Silly is piggybacking off of PK's ploys right now, which feels most scummy out of anything, but Silly is Silly so its hard to really place it as a scumtell.

Post #57 by Pdr_Br

I agre that Silly is hard to analyse but I agree that PK's statement is odd but regarding your discussion I don't see PK as scum because of that statement; perhaps in addition to more things but for now it's just a footnote for the future.

As for Silly riding PK I don't think it's scummy I think it's more like Silly picked up PK's statement and started rolling with it:
  • does he think that PK is scum due to his post --> Silly town
  • or it's a way to push PK's lynch saying that his post is scummy --> Silly scum
  • or it was dowmplay it buy talking about it a shallow way because Silly is not pushing for a PK lynch he said that PK's post is odd only that --> Silly scum with PK scum

What do you think Freddeh?

Post #58 by Ahlyis

I can see the PM just fine from home.  Looks like the entire contents were a pic though, which my work blocked.  that's why the PM appeared completely empty.

*shrugs*

Post #59 by Freddeh

I meant it made silly look a tad scummier, not PK. PK I don't really have a read on right now.

As for silly, I think its probably more likely option D: Silly is just throwing out random day 1 votes/arguments/whatever. Which on second thought is more town, so perhaps I jumped the gun on the scummy read. Either way its too early in the day to really get a solid read on anyone, so I'm sticking with the voting of random people strategy for now.

Post #60 by ProphetKing

"Either that or he just derped because he is dumb."

I confuse words in sentences time all the.

Suggesting I want to say lynch to look more pro town is a stretch. 

Post #61 by Pdr_Br

Let me see who has only posted once....

Unvote, Vote: PeregrineV

Post #62 by ProphetKing

"Your random shots work so well PK, you should keep making them! (/sarcasm)"

They do work great, we're having real conversations already. 

Post #63 by Silly_Dragons

Did day 1 start yet?

Also Rubik is a meanieface.

Post #64 by Ragnarokio

just waiting on somestyle to confirm. Day'll probably start without him soon, though.

Post #65 by Pdr_Br

And here I thought day had already begun.

Post #66 by theatog

Apr 19, 2012 -- 5:11AM, Pdr_Br wrote:

Let me see who has only posted once....

Unvote, Vote: PeregrineV


hm.... me as well?

FoS you: Saying one thing and just vote whoever you really want anyway.

Post #67 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 19, 2012 -- 10:13AM, theatog wrote:

Apr 19, 2012 -- 5:11AM, Pdr_Br wrote:

Let me see who has only posted once....

Unvote, Vote: PeregrineV


hm.... me as well?

FoS you: Saying one thing and just vote whoever you really want anyway.



OH YES LETS FOS PEOPLE. I LOVE FINGERING.

Post #68 by Pdr_Br

Well if I could I would vote for everyone of only posted once.
I chose Peregrine because he was the first in the players list.

FoS people doesn't lead anywhere, if you think I did something scummy then vote me.
And how could you know who I want to vote or not? You could have asked me why I chose peregrine instead of that suspicious post you made.

Unvote, Vote: Atog

Look at that I found a reason to vote someone, or did I just voted someone for the sake of it?
Who knows...

Post #69 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 19, 2012 -- 11:30AM, Pdr_Br wrote:

Well if I could I would vote for everyone of only posted once.
I chose Peregrine because he was the first in the players list.

FoS people doesn't lead anywhere, if you think I did something scummy then vote me.
And how could you know who I want to vote or not? You could have asked me why I chose peregrine instead of that suspicious post you made.

Unvote, Vote: Atog

Look at that I found a reason to vote someone, or did I just voted someone for the sake of it?
Who knows...



You do realize that neither votes nor fingers mean anything, right?

Day hasn't started yet.

Post #70 by shadowfyre77

wait are you serious day hasn't started
i wasn't aware 

Post #71 by Ahlyis

Apr 19, 2012 -- 11:39AM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

You do realize that neither votes nor fingers mean anything, right?

Day hasn't started yet.


That only means votes mean the same as fingers, not that neither means anything.

Of course, your pov is that fingers never mean anything.  That's only your opinion though, it is NOT a fact.  They obviously DO mean something to others.  If they didn't, they never would have been introduced or at the very least wouldn't still be around!

Post #72 by shadowfyre77

fingers hurt
especially if you start throwing them at people

Post #73 by PeregrineV

Who hasn't confirmed yet?

Post #74 by shadowfyre77

Apr 19, 2012 -- 5:47AM, Ragnarokio wrote:

just waiting on somestyle to confirm. Day'll probably start without him soon, though.




Post #75 by Pdr_Br

If that is a roblem I will vote again when day starts.

At least people know my intentions regarding atog. I just hope this game will have less inactives than the Promo!

Post #76 by Pdr_Br

EBWOP: I meant to say problem.

Since tomorrow is saturday and I won't be here tonight I hope the weeked will be productive or somestyle will confirm before monday.

Post #77 by theatog

Apr 19, 2012 -- 5:21PM, shadowfyre77 wrote:

fingers hurt
especially if you start throwing them at people


zombie style?XD

Post #78 by theatog

OMGUS vote: Pdr
I just officially doubled PV's post. Voting you for not noticing that.

Post #79 by Rubik

Niklor replaces Somestyle

Post #80 by Niklor

Confirmed.

Let's get this game rolling. 

Post #81 by razorborne

oh hey I forgot about this.

fortunately I missed very little. four pages is not a lot to catch up on. anyway, Silly jumped all over PK for what amounts to a slip case, attempted to demonize a lurker lynch, and repeatedly announced that he "had his eye" on Freddeh before decrying FoSes as "meaningless". that's a lot of s**** it up for pre-day. I know votes don't matter yet, but VOTE: Silly. consider it an FoS if you like.

 

Post #82 by razorborne

so apparently this forum censors the verb form of the word scum.

intriguing.

 

Post #83 by Silly_Dragons

It's because the verb form is a sexual act with an s in the front.

Also, Razor you are retarded.

Post #84 by Rubik

Day 1



Living: (12)
1. Sleeping
2. Freddeh
3. PeregrineV
4. theatog
5. ProphetKing
6. razorborne
7. Silly_Dragons
8. Feroz-s_Familiar_Pheldy
9. Ahlyis
10. Pdr_Br
11. Niklor
12. shadowfyre77

Banned: (0)

With 12 alive, it's 7 to lynch. Day ends 2 weeks from this post.

Post #85 by Freddeh

Vote: Silly

Lets get things rollin then...that was a terrible 'defense'. Just because it was the joke phase doesn't mean we didn't have a fairly real conversation, and thus Razors points are at least partially valid.

Post #86 by Niklor

On day 1, a slip case, while not the perfect lynch, can be a good case to pursue for a bit. If nothing else, it demands that the person explain themselves while promoting discussion. As to the slip itself, I don't see a slip unless PK is breadcrumbing dayvig. If he is, I don't like it, but I don't recall PK blatantly breadcrumbing his role, so I will doubt it for now.

Nothing wrong with going after lurkers. Nothing says there is something right in it either. I don't like Freddeh declaring his intent to go after lurkers above all else. Go after lurkers if the lurker is more scummy than the actions of your most suspected active player. There is a difficulty in accurately measuring a lurker's threat, but there is no excuse to ignore scummy behavior to go after only lurkers.

FoSes are meaningless in all instances except where you are already voting for someone you think is scummier or in instances like Lylo where throwing your vote around fast and hard can lose the game for the town. That is the meaning and purpose of FoSing someone. So, throwing a FoS down before a vote is not good behavior, even if technically the votes didn't mean anything since day hadn't started yet.

Silly belittled the idea of going after lurkers more than demonizing it, which in all honesty with the new rules SJT has declared is not the greatest use of our time. After all, if lurkers are going to be replaced/modkilled for not making posts in a game, then they can only be at best lurking via the occassional post, which means it's easier to build a case on them even if they can still manage a low activity lurk. Anyway, the point is I don't see it in our best interests to go chasing after lurkers just because lurkers win the game.

So, why attack someone for that Freddeh and Razor? Particularly you Razor.

Vote: Razor 

Post #87 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 20, 2012 -- 12:09PM, Freddeh wrote:


Lets get things rollin then...that was a terrible 'defense'. Just because it was the joke phase doesn't mean we didn't have a fairly real conversation, and thus Razors points are at least partially valid.



Bro, I don't feel the need to point out things I feel are obvious to people who pay attention.

Also @Niklor dayvigs would be very dumb for this game, which I assume is beginner level.

Rag likes doing dumb things though. But I would err on the side that they proably don't exist, and I'm always right because I'm me.

Post #88 by shadowfyre77

i'm going to have to agree that lurker lynches aren't the best thing

you may not be able to get as good of a read on them but the actives have all the votes 

Post #89 by Silly_Dragons

Vote PKchu

Post #90 by Niklor

I doubt dayvigs exist in this game. Doesn't necessarily rule out the possibility. Variants on roles seem to be getting looser rather than tighter, so I won't rule out the possibility entirely. Though if PK was a dayvig, I don't see why he would breadcrumb it.

Post #91 by ProphetKing

I don't have a track record of breadcrumbing things.

Post #92 by Niklor

No one said you did. That just doesn't make much sense as a slip. So I think it was either a joke or a breadcrumb. Was it a joke PK?

Post #93 by Silly_Dragons

Unvote PK

Post #94 by ProphetKing

It wasn't a joke or breadcrumb. Instead of viewing the second instance of the word "shoot" as the brainfart, the word "lynch" is the brainfart and you can see that in context. I have a history of incoherent word placement.

I found criticizing Silly for a "breadcrumb" to be overly critical and forced. 

Post #95 by Niklor

If you were a dayvig, you would have killed Freddeh right then despite practically no evidence?

Post #96 by Silly_Dragons

Trying to play mafia and talk at the same time is hard. :/

Post #97 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 20, 2012 -- 1:02PM, Niklor wrote:

If you were a dayvig, you would have killed Freddeh right then despite practically no evidence?



If I were a dayvig the only person I would kill day 1 is Rag. Because he's Rag.

Otherwise, I would wait and save my kill until I thought I could screw something up with it.

Post #98 by Silly_Dragons

Vote Alice

Post #99 by Rubik

(This game will now be following the prodding/replacement rules outlined here: community.wizards.com/paranoia/go/thread...)

Post #100 by Ahlyis

Apr 20, 2012 -- 12:51PM, Niklor wrote:

Though if PK was a dayvig, I don't see why he would breadcrumb it.


If PK is a Dayvig, we'll know it the next time he posts...

Apr 20, 2012 -- 12:52PM, ProphetKing wrote:

I don't have a track record of breadcrumbing things.


And there you have it.  Nobody dead.  PK isn't a Dayvig or someone would be dead.

Post #101 by Niklor

I'm not suggesting he is a dayvig. I'm saying that's the only logical breadcrumb possibility that I think exists. Pay attention.

PK still needs to answer my inquiry. 

Post #102 by Freddeh

Apr 20, 2012 -- 12:55PM, Niklor wrote:

No one said you did. That just doesn't make much sense as a slip. So I think it was either a joke or a breadcrumb. Was it a joke PK?




I'm pretty sure it was just a reaction troll.

@Silly, thats no excuse for calling someone a retard just because they voted for you.

@PK, it wasn't a super serious accusation, and my reasonings for voting him are because of something not even related.

Unvote;Vote: Pere

Placeholder/Prod vote.

Post #103 by Niklor

I will wait until PK answers before I draw that conclusion, though that is a possibility I might be ignoring because I don't think about reaction trolling much other than in the context of "stop that."

Do you not find anyone even remotely suspicious at this point Freddeh or are you seriously trying to use a single vote to prod someone who is probably only not posting because they aren't here? 

Post #104 by ProphetKing

?

Why do I have a reputation as a proactive vigger?

I constantly echo ideas of restraining the trigger finger.

"If you were a dayvig, you would have killed Freddeh right then despite practically no evidence?"

No. 

Post #105 by Niklor

Then why did you say you would have?

Post #106 by ProphetKing

Because I didn't say that.

"If I had to lynch someone at this very second I would shoot Freddeh for saying Silly made a breadcrumb." 

Post #107 by Freddeh

You just pulled the trigger haphazardly in a currently running game PK, that might have a LITTLE to do with it. Also I'm still mad at you about it whenever I remember.

@Nik, Not especially no, theres nothing outwardly scummy feeling, and I don't get scummy vibes from the people that are talking right now (You, PK, Silly) so no. Its possible my mind will change at some point or another (I'm already thinking about a different place for my vote, but I'm waiting on something), but for now, I want to hear Pere comment. Because I like hearing his comments.

Post #108 by Niklor

@PK
What situation exists where you have to kill someone at a single moment besides a situation that you yourself impose? Also, why say something like that at all if you wouldn't do it? There was nothing compelling you to pick someone you would kill? If it was purely to gauge reactions to it, why not just discuss who would be best suited to die at this moment?

@Freddeh
I think Pere will comment when he gets on, which makes your vote fairly pointless. Also, just because you don't get the scum vibe from anyone yet doesn't mean you simply decide to wait for something to occur. You proactively make things occur.

Post #109 by ProphetKing

We've already discussed that issue in that game. I disagree with your assertion, look at the general context. That's all I will say given the game.

That said, one singular out of many games is an outlier. 

"What situation exists where you have to kill someone at a single moment besides a situation that you yourself impose?"

False analogy.

If I put a gun to your head, and make you pick if the Colts will make the playoffs or not, what would you say?

You're applying an intent in my post that does not exist.

"Also, why say something like that at all if you wouldn't do it?"
I'd do it if I had to kill someone that second.

I said it simply because it was a minor blip and I disliked it.
 

 

Post #110 by Freddeh

Meh, I'm not damning you for it, and I even assumed it was a troll the minute you said it, so be overdefensive about it if you like, but whatever.

@Niklor, I never said it had a point, its a placeholder vote. As far as proactive vs reactive, it depends on my mood and the game. If no one is talking on day 1 I tend to be more proactive, if its a bit more active like this game has been so far, I'm more reactive. There are exceptions of course but just in general thats how I usually play day 1.

Post #111 by ProphetKing

I do not feel I am being overdefensive to discuss the issue.

Post #112 by Freddeh

You're backpedaling a bit and explaining it away on word choice semantics instead of just owning up to it. I call that overdefensive.

Post #113 by ProphetKing


I'm not responsible for "backpeddling" away from errant and flawed overinterpretations.

"If I had to right now" is nowhere near "I want to now." 

Post #114 by Freddeh

I hate my memory, you voted for me, didn't 'Shoot:' me. Still, why bring up the whole 'if i had to right now' thing to begin with? The insta-vote more than got the point across, and no one even had brought up dayvigs until then.

Post #115 by Niklor

Actually, I brought up dayvigs Freddeh. Don't get your stories confused now.

I tend to play reactively when everyone is playing all at once. I probably play most proactively if I care about the game, usually meaning I'm scum because I usually care more about the game as scum, though not always.

PK is not being overdefensive to discuss the issue. I expected certain responses, like the one about him not actually meaning he wanted to kill you, though I still don't see why he even said it. 

Post #116 by razorborne

Apr 20, 2012 -- 11:17AM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

It's because the verb form is a sexual act with an s in the front.

Also, Razor you are retarded.


ouch bro.

Apr 20, 2012 -- 12:30PM, Niklor wrote:

On day 1, a slip case, while not the perfect lynch, can be a good case to pursue for a bit. If nothing else, it demands that the person explain themselves while promoting discussion. As to the slip itself, I don't see a slip unless PK is breadcrumbing dayvig. If he is, I don't like it, but I don't recall PK blatantly breadcrumbing his role, so I will doubt it for now.


slip cases are always awful. always. every time. the only "explaining" that needs to happen is "oh hey I used a dumb word OH NO". which is effectively what PK's given. the fact that Silly pushed it and now you are driving it into the ground is much more suspicious than anything PK said.

Apr 20, 2012 -- 12:30PM, Niklor wrote:

Nothing wrong with going after lurkers. Nothing says there is something right in it either. I don't like Freddeh declaring his intent to go after lurkers above all else. Go after lurkers if the lurker is more scummy than the actions of your most suspected active player. There is a difficulty in accurately measuring a lurker's threat, but there is no excuse to ignore scummy behavior to go after only lurkers.


I agree that going after lurkers to the exclusion of all else seems drastic, but, as I've said in the past, there is no other way to lynch lurkers. the idea of saving a lynch for a rainy doesn't work because there is no rain in mafia. there's always someone who has done something that, if you look at it right, is scummy, because they are doing things. in a game that's all about not trusting anyone, it's very easy to find something, somewhere, to drive a lynch. so if we don't make lynching lurkers a priority, it just won't get done. and if one of those lurkers happens to be scum, then the game is over before it started because the town decided to hand the mafia a get-out-of-lynch-free card. 

Apr 20, 2012 -- 12:30PM, Niklor wrote:

FoSes are meaningless in all instances except where you are already voting for someone you think is scummier or in instances like Lylo where throwing your vote around fast and hard can lose the game for the town. That is the meaning and purpose of FoSing someone. So, throwing a FoS down before a vote is not good behavior, even if technically the votes didn't mean anything since day hadn't started yet.


there's a difference between something mattering and something being mechanically significant. for instance, up to this point in this post, I have done nothing that interacts with the game mechanics in any way. I haven't voted, I haven't used any dayvig powers I may or may not have, I haven't done anything but talk. so, by this reasoning, I haven't done anything. FoSes have relevance because they draw attention and acknowledge suspicion. they are not mechanically relevant, but neither is conversation, and I think we can all agree that that matters.

also, you're ignoring the fact that silly used the functionally equivalent "I've got my eye on you" bit, twice. why is declaring your suspicions without voting okay when he does it?

Apr 20, 2012 -- 12:30PM, Niklor wrote:

Silly belittled the idea of going after lurkers more than demonizing it, which in all honesty with the new rules SJT has declared is not the greatest use of our time. After all, if lurkers are going to be replaced/modkilled for not making posts in a game, then they can only be at best lurking via the occassional post, which means it's easier to build a case on them even if they can still manage a low activity lurk. Anyway, the point is I don't see it in our best interests to go chasing after lurkers just because lurkers win the game.


I'm sorry, what new rules? I haven't been around here much lately.

anyway, since day has started, VOTE: Silly. I'm a little concerned by the five-paragraph essay to his defense, but at this stage everyone's looking to get conversation started so I don't think it means much.

 

Post #117 by razorborne

EBWOP: saving a lynch for a rainy day. sorry, that's gonna bug me.

 

Post #118 by Niklor

I'll put this here and then move to your post.

community.wizards.com/paranoia/go/thread... 

Post #119 by razorborne

I see. I still think people vastly underestimate the difficulty of pushing a low-activity lynch. I've seen it happen time and time again where I'm trying to go "this guy hasn't done anything, like, at all" and everyone else is like "YEAH BUT THIS GUY HAS DONE THIS ONE THING AND IT'S KINDA SCUMMY WE'LL LYNCH YOUR GUY LATER." and what I haven't seen happen is them actually lynching my guy later.

 

Post #120 by Niklor

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:03PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 12:30PM, Niklor wrote:

On day 1, a slip case, while not the perfect lynch, can be a good case to pursue for a bit. If nothing else, it demands that the person explain themselves while promoting discussion. As to the slip itself, I don't see a slip unless PK is breadcrumbing dayvig. If he is, I don't like it, but I don't recall PK blatantly breadcrumbing his role, so I will doubt it for now.


slip cases are always awful. always. every time. the only "explaining" that needs to happen is "oh hey I used a dumb word OH NO". which is effectively what PK's given. the fact that Silly pushed it and now you are driving it into the ground is much more suspicious than anything PK said.




Slip cases are bad, but excusable if nothing else has happened, which lately does happen on D1 to much. Slips are best used to build upon existing cases with actual evidence, mostly as minor points. 

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:03PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 12:30PM, Niklor wrote:

Nothing wrong with going after lurkers. Nothing says there is something right in it either. I don't like Freddeh declaring his intent to go after lurkers above all else. Go after lurkers if the lurker is more scummy than the actions of your most suspected active player. There is a difficulty in accurately measuring a lurker's threat, but there is no excuse to ignore scummy behavior to go after only lurkers.


I agree that going after lurkers to the exclusion of all else seems drastic, but, as I've said in the past, there is no other way to lynch lurkers. the idea of saving a lynch for a rainy doesn't work because there is no rain in mafia. there's always someone who has done something that, if you look at it right, is scummy, because they are doing things. in a game that's all about not trusting anyone, it's very easy to find something, somewhere, to drive a lynch. so if we don't make lynching lurkers a priority, it just won't get done. and if one of those lurkers happens to be scum, then the game is over before it started because the town decided to hand the mafia a get-out-of-lynch-free card.




So we should go balls to the walls against lurkers and ignore everything else? We need to both keep and eye on lurkers and pursue active cases without getting so attached to them we ignore lurkers. We don't need to ignore either category to pursue only one or the other. 

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:03PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 12:30PM, Niklor wrote:

FoSes are meaningless in all instances except where you are already voting for someone you think is scummier or in instances like Lylo where throwing your vote around fast and hard can lose the game for the town. That is the meaning and purpose of FoSing someone. So, throwing a FoS down before a vote is not good behavior, even if technically the votes didn't mean anything since day hadn't started yet.


there's a difference between something mattering and something being mechanically significant. for instance, up to this point in this post, I have done nothing that interacts with the game mechanics in any way. I haven't voted, I haven't used any dayvig powers I may or may not have, I haven't done anything but talk. so, by this reasoning, I haven't done anything. FoSes have relevance because they draw attention and acknowledge suspicion. they are not mechanically relevant, but neither is conversation, and I think we can all agree that that matters.




But why FoS when you could vote?

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:03PM, razorborne wrote:

also, you're ignoring the fact that silly used the functionally equivalent "I've got my eye on you" bit, twice. why is declaring your suspicions without voting okay when he does it?




Wasn't he voting for someone else already. Not technically, because day hadn't begun, but in general hadn't he already indicated someone was his prime lynch candidate?

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:03PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 12:30PM, Niklor wrote:

Silly belittled the idea of going after lurkers more than demonizing it, which in all honesty with the new rules SJT has declared is not the greatest use of our time. After all, if lurkers are going to be replaced/modkilled for not making posts in a game, then they can only be at best lurking via the occassional post, which means it's easier to build a case on them even if they can still manage a low activity lurk. Anyway, the point is I don't see it in our best interests to go chasing after lurkers just because lurkers win the game.


I'm sorry, what new rules? I haven't been around here much lately.




See my last post.

Post #121 by Ahlyis

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:01PM, Niklor wrote:

I tend to play reactively when everyone is playing all at once. I probably play most proactively if I care about the game, usually meaning I'm scum because I usually care more about the game as scum, though not always.


Nice preemptive deflection attempt.

Vote:  Niklor

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:03PM, razorborne wrote:

slip cases are always awful. always. every time. the only "explaining" that needs to happen is "oh hey I used a dumb word OH NO".


Depends on the type of slip.  Slip cases are NOT always bad. PK slipped in Touhou 3 and claimed a role ON the list he was given instead of a role NOT on the list he had.  It was definitely a slip and it was definitely NOT an awful case brought against him in that game.

No, I'm not saying the slip here is anything the same.  What I'm saying is that not all slip cases are awful.

Post #122 by PeregrineV

Too much. Glad day started, but will have to read/respond tonight.

Post #123 by Niklor

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:14PM, Ahlyis wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:01PM, Niklor wrote:

I tend to play reactively when everyone is playing all at once. I probably play most proactively if I care about the game, usually meaning I'm scum because I usually care more about the game as scum, though not always.


Nice preemptive deflection attempt.

Vote:  Niklor




I'm sorry, was I being too open about my position? I didn't know indicating that caring about the game makes me proactive was deflecting.

Post #124 by razorborne

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:13PM, Niklor wrote:

Slip cases are bad, but excusable if nothing else has happened, which lately does happen on D1 to much. Slips are best used to build upon existing cases with actual evidence, mostly as minor points.


no. slip cases are no more evidence than avatar cases, or sig cases, or any other case based on things that mean nothing. the level of idiocy required to go "hey I should confirm my role OH NO I ACCIDENTALLY CLAIMED MAFIA DON" is so massive that I don't think we're gonna have trouble catching the sort of person who would do that without using the slip case.

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:03PM, razorborne wrote:

So we should go balls to the walls against lurkers and ignore everything else? We need to both keep and eye on lurkers and pursue active cases without getting so attached to them we ignore lurkers. We don't need to ignore either category to pursue only one or the other.


yes, we should. full-on lurker warfare. it's the only way to actually solve the problem, because if you make it your first priority, then you'll never actually do it. you'll always find something "more serious".

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:03PM, razorborne wrote:

But why FoS when you could vote?


because you don't want the day to end yet? because you're not sure enough of your suspicion to be comfortable with that person being the lynch? because you have some unanswered questions you need them to address before you vote?

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:03PM, razorborne wrote:

Wasn't he voting for someone else already. Not technically, because day hadn't begun, but in general hadn't he already indicated someone was his prime lynch candidate?


doesn't matter, the "FoSing is okay if you're already voting" line is yours, not his.

Post #125 by razorborne

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:14PM, Ahlyis wrote:

Depends on the type of slip.  Slip cases are NOT always bad. PK slipped in Touhou 3 and claimed a role ON the list he was given instead of a role NOT on the list he had.  It was definitely a slip and it was definitely NOT an awful case brought against him in that game.

No, I'm not saying the slip here is anything the same.  What I'm saying is that not all slip cases are awful.


I'm not sure exactly what that means, since I either wasn't there or forgot, but that doesn't sound like a slip. that sounds like a lie. lie cases are a very different thing. slip cases, at least as I define them, and as they were applied in this case, are based on the idea that someone was subconciously thinking that they were scum so they accidentally used some word that scum would use instead of town. and, 11 times out of 10, it was a simple misinterpretation, and 0 times out of infinity have they yielded useful results.

Post #126 by ProphetKing

Getting flashbacks to Peso del Grande.

I did it because it was a thing, a blip and something instead of nothing. 

Post #127 by Freddeh

@Niklor: No, you didn't. You had TWO posts between the start of the game and PK's 'If I had to...' post, first was a confirm, and second was something about Rag being a bigwig.

Unvote;Vote: Niklor

White-knighted both Silly AND PK, the latter with false information, mess up sure, but the fact remains that he was trying to white-knight still. I was willing to overlook the Silly one because as Razor said, its day 1 and convos are getting started, but two in a row? Can't overlook both.

Furthering my point on PK: You bringing up that you would use a dayvig actually IS the same as saying you would like to dayvig, because of the sheer fact that it hadn't been brought up. If dayvigs were being discussed and it was 'a thing' then yes, your verbal schenanigans would be all find and dandy and make sense. But the way you brought it up and then worded it so you could back off on the statement later (like you subsequently did) is why you're getting all this heat. FoS: PK

Post #128 by Niklor

Since you seemed to have screwed up your quotes there...

It depends on the nature of the slip. Saying someone slipped by saying kill instead of lynch is Silly, but saying they referenced themselves as separate from the town is not. That can be a slip and would be one I would probably say you could use as a solid point of evidence.

If we did manage to go full-on lurker warfare, you know what would happen? Scum who used that as a strategy would stop using it as a strategy. Then, assuming the new rule SJT placed vanishes at some point, you would only catch inactives which would probably be mostly town. Then, it's bad to go after lurkers again. So scum start lurking again. We need to find a balance, not go one way or the other.

Assuming your vote isn't go to cause the day to end, you can vote and then remove your vote if necessary, so FoSing when you aren't already voting isn't helpful when your vote isn't going to cause the day to end prematurely.

It is my line, but you were saying I was ignoring it. I wasn't ignoring it. 

Post #129 by ProphetKing

We're discussing something I said but there is zero virtual heat or pressure on me. I'm rather comfortable, given that I'm on the stable logical side of the fence here.

"Furthering my point on PK: You bringing up that you would use a dayvig actually IS the same as saying you would like to dayvig,"

This just isn't true. You're trying to make something out of nothing.

Confirm Vote: Freddeh 

Post #130 by Niklor

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:31PM, Freddeh wrote:

@Niklor: No, you didn't. You had TWO posts between the start of the game and PK's 'If I had to...' post, first was a confirm, and second was something about Rag being a bigwig.




What are you responding to? Also, I wasn't in the game yet at that point. I was a replacement.

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:31PM, Freddeh wrote:

White-knighted both Silly AND PK, the latter with false information, mess up sure, but the fact remains that he was trying to white-knight still. I was willing to overlook the Silly one because as Razor said, its day 1 and convos are getting started, but two in a row? Can't overlook both.




Razor's post accusing Silly was BS.

How am I defending PK? I'm trying to get him to explain himself and his actions in a manner I find make sense as town.

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:31PM, Freddeh wrote:

Furthering my point on PK: You bringing up that you would use a dayvig actually IS the same as saying you would like to dayvig, because of the sheer fact that it hadn't been brought up. If dayvigs were being discussed and it was 'a thing' then yes, your verbal schenanigans would be all find and dandy and make sense. But the way you brought it up and then worded it so you could back off on the statement later (like you subsequently did) is why you're getting all this heat. FoS: PK




Show me where someone specifically mentioned dayvigs or dayvigging before I brought it up in response to Razor.

Post #131 by Freddeh

GJ ignoring my question but responding to my future post. You're totally legit.

Post #132 by Sleeping

If it didn't count because I did it pre-day I'll say it again.

Vote: theatog 

Post #133 by Niklor

Are you actively ignoring everything that is going on or do you have a reason to vote Theatog over anyone actually involved in the current discussion?

Post #134 by Freddeh

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:01PM, Niklor wrote:

Actually, I brought up dayvigs Freddeh. Don't get your stories confused now.


This was the comment I was referring to.

Razor's post accusing Silly was BS.


Opinion, not fact. Even if I agreed with you, its still white-knighting, and over a relatively small thing EARLY in day 1.

How am I defending PK? I'm trying to get him to explain himself and his actions in a manner I find make sense as town.


Perhaps I'm looking too far into your 'PK is not being overdefensive' comment, I'll grant you that.

Show me where someone specifically mentioned dayvigs or dayvigging before I brought it up in response to Razor.



community.wizards.com/paranoia/go/thread...

That is the first mention of shooting (and he did clarify later he meant shoot instead of lynch). Shooting = dayvig.

Post #135 by Ahlyis

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:19PM, Niklor wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:14PM, Ahlyis wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:01PM, Niklor wrote:

I tend to play reactively when everyone is playing all at once. I probably play most proactively if I care about the game, usually meaning I'm scum because I usually care more about the game as scum, though not always.


Nice preemptive deflection attempt.

Vote:  Niklor




I'm sorry, was I being too open about my position? I didn't know indicating that caring about the game makes me proactive was deflecting.


You are preemptively defending your behavior before anyone can even think about making a meta-game case against you.

It's a ridiculous thing to think you need to do and I can't see why a Townie would even be concerned about it enough to even think of it, let alone think it might be a good idea to mention.

Post #136 by Niklor

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:42PM, Freddeh wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:01PM, Niklor wrote:

Actually, I brought up dayvigs Freddeh. Don't get your stories confused now.


This was the comment I was referring to.




Do you see this word Freddeh: Shoot. That is the word. Can you see it? Yes? Good. Now can we agree that that word is not Dayvig? Because if you are arguing otherwise, apparently PGOs actually dayvig people.

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:42PM, Freddeh wrote:

Razor's post accusing Silly was BS.


Opinion, not fact. Even if I agreed with you, its still white-knighting, and over a relatively small thing EARLY in day 1.


Better to defend against a bad vote than do nothing.

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:42PM, Freddeh wrote:

How am I defending PK? I'm trying to get him to explain himself and his actions in a manner I find make sense as town.


Perhaps I'm looking too far into your 'PK is not being overdefensive' comment, I'll grant you that.




You seem to confuse overdefensive with being an active participant to an ongoing discussion.

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:42PM, Freddeh wrote:

Show me where someone specifically mentioned dayvigs or dayvigging before I brought it up in response to Razor.



community.wizards.com/paranoia/go/thread...

That is the first mention of shooting (and he did clarify later he meant shoot instead of lynch). Shooting = dayvig.




No it doesn't and I've already explained why it doesn't.

Post #137 by razorborne

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:31PM, Niklor wrote:

Since you seemed to have screwed up your quotes there...


yeah whoops. copied the wrong thing.

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:31PM, Niklor wrote:

It depends on the nature of the slip. Saying someone slipped by saying kill instead of lynch is Silly, but saying they referenced themselves as separate from the town is not. That can be a slip and would be one I would probably say you could use as a solid point of evidence.


it can be. but it never is. why? because in general scum are more careful with their words than townies are. the idea that they would actually say something that meant, to them, that they were not a part of the town is absurd. it's an insult to the intelligence of everyone playing the game. what's infinitely more likely ("infinitely" because it actually happens) is that someone misread it. someone saw "the town's gonna have to lynch this guy" and went "OH SO YOU'RE NOT PART OF THE TOWN WHAT ARE YOU THEN MAFIA? DOUBLE MAFIA?" and then we go down the lovely rabbit hole of slip cases, eventually finding out, sometimes with a lynch, that the whole thing was stupid.

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:31PM, Niklor wrote:

If we did manage to go full-on lurker warfare, you know what would happen? Scum who used that as a strategy would stop using it as a strategy. Then, assuming the new rule SJT placed vanishes at some point, you would only catch inactives which would probably be mostly town. Then, it's bad to go after lurkers again. So scum start lurking again. We need to find a balance, not go one way or the other.


inactives aren't lurkers bro. dealing with inactives is the mod's job, whether or not SJT has rules in place. dealing with lurkers is the players'. if everyone in the game is either inactive or actively participating, then there are no lurkers to lynch. your point is equivalent to arguing against a Lynch all Liars policy on the grounds that if no one has lied we're gonna have to start going after people who just haven't told the truth hard enough. that's not what the policy is. here's a flowchart:

............v----------------------------------
________________................____|_____
|is someone lurking?|---YES--->|lynch them|
..........|
.........NO
..........|
_____V_____________________
|lynch someone for something else|

I don't know if the formatting's gonna work on that.

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:31PM, Niklor wrote:

Assuming your vote isn't go to cause the day to end, you can vote and then remove your vote if necessary, so FoSing when you aren't already voting isn't helpful when your vote isn't going to cause the day to end prematurely.


right because I am on, checking the thread, 24 hours a day, just in case votes begin to pile up on someone.

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:31PM, Niklor wrote:

It is my line, but you were saying I was ignoring it. I wasn't ignoring it. 


my point has nothing to do with whether or not it was okay for Silly to announce his suspicions. it obviously was. my point is that he then attacked someone for doing the same thing. so how you feel about FoSes doesn't matter here. what matters is how you feel about hypocrisy.

Post #138 by Niklor

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:48PM, Ahlyis wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:19PM, Niklor wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:14PM, Ahlyis wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:01PM, Niklor wrote:

I tend to play reactively when everyone is playing all at once. I probably play most proactively if I care about the game, usually meaning I'm scum because I usually care more about the game as scum, though not always.


Nice preemptive deflection attempt.

Vote:  Niklor




I'm sorry, was I being too open about my position? I didn't know indicating that caring about the game makes me proactive was deflecting.


You are preemptively defending your behavior before anyone can even think about making a meta-game case against you.

It's a ridiculous thing to think you need to do and I can't see why a Townie would even be concerned about it enough to even think of it, let alone think it might be a good idea to mention.




It's always a good idea to explain your position. How is that a defense anyway? It says if I care about the game, I'm proactive and more likely scum than town. If anything, I'm incriminating myself as long as I keep up the pace I'm going at right now?

Post #139 by Freddeh

Since when did PGO's shoot during the day? Thats the worst reasoning you could have come up with Nik.

Post #140 by razorborne

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:01PM, Niklor wrote:

Actually, I brought up dayvigs Freddeh. Don't get your stories confused now.



just did a quick review, this claim is correct unless you count silly's "Dayvig: Freddeh" post.

 

Post #141 by Freddeh

Since when is 'Dayvig:' not mentioning Dayvigs? Since when is the word 'SHOOT' having to do with anything BUT dayvigs?

Niklors claim is incorrect no matter how you look at it.

Post #142 by Niklor

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:53PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:31PM, Niklor wrote:

It depends on the nature of the slip. Saying someone slipped by saying kill instead of lynch is Silly, but saying they referenced themselves as separate from the town is not. That can be a slip and would be one I would probably say you could use as a solid point of evidence.


it can be. but it never is. why? because in general scum are more careful with their words than townies are. the idea that they would actually say something that meant, to them, that they were not a part of the town is absurd. it's an insult to the intelligence of everyone playing the game. what's infinitely more likely ("infinitely" because it actually happens) is that someone misread it. someone saw "the town's gonna have to lynch this guy" and went "OH SO YOU'RE NOT PART OF THE TOWN WHAT ARE YOU THEN MAFIA? DOUBLE MAFIA?" and then we go down the lovely rabbit hole of slip cases, eventually finding out, sometimes with a lynch, that the whole thing was stupid.




I will admit that is unlikely to mean anything on it's own, but you want to reject it as evidence entirely. Plus, you want to attribute it to non-scummy behavior instead of just dismissing it entirely. Scum are just as likely to screw up as Town.

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:53PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:31PM, Niklor wrote:

If we did manage to go full-on lurker warfare, you know what would happen? Scum who used that as a strategy would stop using it as a strategy. Then, assuming the new rule SJT placed vanishes at some point, you would only catch inactives which would probably be mostly town. Then, it's bad to go after lurkers again. So scum start lurking again. We need to find a balance, not go one way or the other.


inactives aren't lurkers bro. dealing with inactives is the mod's job, whether or not SJT has rules in place. dealing with lurkers is the players'. if everyone in the game is either inactive or actively participating, then there are no lurkers to lynch. your point is equivalent to arguing against a Lynch all Liars policy on the grounds that if no one has lied we're gonna have to start going after people who just haven't told the truth hard enough. that's not what the policy is. here's a flowchart:

............v----------------------------------
________________................____|_____
|is someone lurking?|---YES--->|lynch them|
..........|
.........NO
..........|
_____V_____________________
|lynch someone for something else|

I don't know if the formatting's gonna work on that.




Chart looks fine to me.

Some people may just not have the time to get on and sit here and read point after point and respond, but do have the time to make a quick post in response to a few recent points. Is that person lurking? Are they inactive? If we want to make war against people who aren't being contributive, say that. Lurker implies more than not contributing to me.

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:53PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:31PM, Niklor wrote:

Assuming your vote isn't go to cause the day to end, you can vote and then remove your vote if necessary, so FoSing when you aren't already voting isn't helpful when your vote isn't going to cause the day to end prematurely.


right because I am on, checking the thread, 24 hours a day, just in case votes begin to pile up on someone.




In theory, yes. Also, you shouldn't be afraid to place a vote because the possibility exists that the town is going to dogpile on someone.

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:53PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:31PM, Niklor wrote:

It is my line, but you were saying I was ignoring it. I wasn't ignoring it. 


my point has nothing to do with whether or not it was okay for Silly to announce his suspicions. it obviously was. my point is that he then attacked someone for doing the same thing. so how you feel about FoSes doesn't matter here. what matters is how you feel about hypocrisy.




As long as Silly admits its hypocritical, I'm fine with it. I have hypocritical opinions on things. Doesn't mean I'm wrong, just means I happen to say and do things that conflict with each other on occassions.

Post #143 by Niklor

Apr 20, 2012 -- 5:00PM, Freddeh wrote:

Since when did PGO's shoot during the day? Thats the worst reasoning you could have come up with Nik.




PGO's don't shoot during the day, but they do shoot. And you are arguing that mentioning shooting is akin to mentioning dayvigs, which is incorrect.

Apr 20, 2012 -- 5:01PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:01PM, Niklor wrote:

Actually, I brought up dayvigs Freddeh. Don't get your stories confused now.



just did a quick review, this claim is correct unless you count silly's "Dayvig: Freddeh" post.

 




I meant in reference to PK, though I didn't reread the thread before posting that. 

Post #144 by razorborne

Apr 20, 2012 -- 5:10PM, Niklor wrote:

I will admit that is unlikely to mean anything on it's own, but you want to reject it as evidence entirely. Plus, you want to attribute it to non-scummy behavior instead of just dismissing it entirely. Scum are just as likely to screw up as Town.


"a cop investigated Niklor as scum and also his avatar is spiderman in a tux." that is what it looks like when you incorporate slip cases into real cases. they're not evidence, they're diversions. they serve no purpose, just like my case on Silly is not in any way helped by quoting his join date, no matter how scummy August 25th may be.

Apr 20, 2012 -- 5:10PM, Niklor wrote:

Some people may just not have the time to get on and sit here and read point after point and respond, but do have the time to make a quick post in response to a few recent points. Is that person lurking? Are they inactive? If we want to make war against people who aren't being contributive, say that. Lurker implies more than not contributing to me.


then you're jot using the term correctly. actively not contributing is exactly what lurking is. posting enough to avoid prods while adding nothing meaningful and doing nothing that could be used as evidence against you is lurking. actually not looking at the site or the game is being inactive.

the good thing, by the way, about pushing lurker lynches is that often times when pressure builds on someone for not contributing they will start contributing. so it doesn't even cost the town its lynch.

Apr 20, 2012 -- 5:10PM, Niklor wrote:

In theory, yes. Also, you shouldn't be afraid to place a vote because the possibility exists that the town is going to dogpile on someone.


first of all, I don't play mafia in theory, I play it in real life, where I have friends, school, and a band, and also a need for sleep. second of all, I'm not afraid to vote someone if I think they are the best lynch. FoSing over voting is for when you don't know that. for instance, person X says something potentially scummy. I go "woah, that's kinda scummy, could you clarify?" I do not want to lynch them yet, but I am definitely suspicious of them, and might vote them, depending on their explanation/reaction. hence, I FoS them.

Apr 20, 2012 -- 5:10PM, Niklor wrote:

As long as Silly admits its hypocritical, I'm fine with it. I have hypocritical opinions on things. Doesn't mean I'm wrong, just means I happen to say and do things that conflict with each other on occassions.


you're actually coming out on the pro-hypocrisy side of this? yes, being hypocritical does mean you're wrong, in one case or the other. that's what hypocrisy is. if he was willing to admit one of them was wrong, that'd be different although considering the proximity of the two, I don't think that would be enough here. the fact will remain that he tried to make Freddeh look bad for doing a perfectly normal thing that he also did.

Post #145 by Sleeping

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:40PM, Niklor wrote:

Are you actively ignoring everything that is going on or do you have a reason to vote Theatog over anyone actually involved in the current discussion?




If I give reasons people will probably accuse me of doing something and vote for me. =(
People generally try to look too hard into things.
And since nobody seems to care about me at the moment I don't see an obvious reason to change my ways.
This post might even make people look at me differently and perhaps even vote for me, I considered just not responding at all. Though not responding also could be interpreted certain ways. Such are the workings of this game.

Post #146 by razorborne

Apr 20, 2012 -- 6:33PM, Sleeping wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:40PM, Niklor wrote:

Are you actively ignoring everything that is going on or do you have a reason to vote Theatog over anyone actually involved in the current discussion?




If I give reasons people will probably accuse me of doing something and vote for me. =(
People generally try to look too hard into things.
And since nobody seems to care about me at the moment I don't see an obvious reason to change my ways.
This post might even make people look at me differently and perhaps even vote for me, I considered just not responding at all. Though not responding also could be interpreted certain ways. Such are the workings of this game.



unvote, VOTE: Sleeping

 

Post #147 by Niklor

Apr 20, 2012 -- 6:18PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 5:10PM, Niklor wrote:

I will admit that is unlikely to mean anything on it's own, but you want to reject it as evidence entirely. Plus, you want to attribute it to non-scummy behavior instead of just dismissing it entirely. Scum are just as likely to screw up as Town.


"a cop investigated Niklor as scum and also his avatar is spiderman in a tux." that is what it looks like when you incorporate slip cases into real cases. they're not evidence, they're diversions. they serve no purpose, just like my case on Silly is not in any way helped by quoting his join date, no matter how scummy August 25th may be.




Spiderman has a distinctive red and blue costume you know. Unrelated, but I felt the need to point it out.

Slips, unlike avatars and join dates, are a type of inconsistency in what is being said though. Saying someone is scummy because they have an avatar or joined on the June 6th, 2006 is based on things that are not relevant to the game. What someone is saying and how they say it is.

Apr 20, 2012 -- 6:18PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 5:10PM, Niklor wrote:

Some people may just not have the time to get on and sit here and read point after point and respond, but do have the time to make a quick post in response to a few recent points. Is that person lurking? Are they inactive? If we want to make war against people who aren't being contributive, say that. Lurker implies more than not contributing to me.


then you're jot using the term correctly. actively not contributing is exactly what lurking is. posting enough to avoid prods while adding nothing meaningful and doing nothing that could be used as evidence against you is lurking. actually not looking at the site or the game is being inactive.




It could be, but there are people who don't have the time to put much effort into their posts and some might call that not contributing. Does that make them lurkers, since they clearly are posting, or are they inactive by not having the time to look at the posts and contribute well?

Apr 20, 2012 -- 6:18PM, razorborne wrote:

the good thing, by the way, about pushing lurker lynches is that often times when pressure builds on someone for not contributing they will start contributing. so it doesn't even cost the town its lynch.




It depends on the person and their alignment, though I would say scum would more likely end up bussing their teammate since trying to save a lurking scumbuddy can end up being a death sentence for the both of them.

Apr 20, 2012 -- 6:18PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 5:10PM, Niklor wrote:

In theory, yes. Also, you shouldn't be afraid to place a vote because the possibility exists that the town is going to dogpile on someone.


first of all, I don't play mafia in theory, I play it in real life, where I have friends, school, and a band, and also a need for sleep. second of all, I'm not afraid to vote someone if I think they are the best lynch. FoSing over voting is for when you don't know that. for instance, person X says something potentially scummy. I go "woah, that's kinda scummy, could you clarify?" I do not want to lynch them yet, but I am definitely suspicious of them, and might vote them, depending on their explanation/reaction. hence, I FoS them.




I would rather cast a vote myself, even if there is a chance it will end up screwing the town over. Of course, that chance always exists.

Apr 20, 2012 -- 6:18PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 5:10PM, Niklor wrote:

As long as Silly admits its hypocritical, I'm fine with it. I have hypocritical opinions on things. Doesn't mean I'm wrong, just means I happen to say and do things that conflict with each other on occassions.


you're actually coming out on the pro-hypocrisy side of this? yes, being hypocritical does mean you're wrong, in one case or the other. that's what hypocrisy is. if he was willing to admit one of them was wrong, that'd be different although considering the proximity of the two, I don't think that would be enough here. the fact will remain that he tried to make Freddeh look bad for doing a perfectly normal thing that he also did.




The fact Silly says he doesn't believe in FoSes, but uses an equivalent of a FoS is hypocritical, but since the use of FoSes as good or bad is almost completely opinion based, I don't see it as necessary to call him out for having a hypocritical opinion.

Post #148 by Niklor

Apr 20, 2012 -- 6:33PM, Sleeping wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:40PM, Niklor wrote:

Are you actively ignoring everything that is going on or do you have a reason to vote Theatog over anyone actually involved in the current discussion?




If I give reasons people will probably accuse me of doing something and vote for me. =(
People generally try to look too hard into things.
And since nobody seems to care about me at the moment I don't see an obvious reason to change my ways.
This post might even make people look at me differently and perhaps even vote for me, I considered just not responding at all. Though not responding also could be interpreted certain ways. Such are the workings of this game.




Avoiding the radar is something scum strive for. I'm not saying make yourself the target, but assuming you are town, you need to worry more about catching scum than avoiding the town's attentions.

Unvote; Vote: Sleeping

So give me your reasons to vote for Theatog or you can expect to see this vote remaining and depending on your reasons it may remain regardless. 

Post #149 by razorborne

Apr 20, 2012 -- 6:46PM, Niklor wrote:

Spiderman has a distinctive red and blue costume you know. Unrelated, but I felt the need to point it out.


I thought it was a black and white picture. if it's not spiderman, who is it?

Apr 20, 2012 -- 6:46PM, Niklor wrote:

Slips, unlike avatars and join dates, are a type of inconsistency in what is being said though. Saying someone is scummy because they have an avatar or joined on the June 6th, 2006 is based on things that are not relevant to the game. What someone is saying and how they say it is.


fine, then, would you accept the analogy of improper capitalization? this sentence started with a lower-case letter, therefore I am trying to hide it, only scum hide information, vote: Razor. there are aspects of what people say that matter, like what they say, and aspects that don't, like how they say it.

Apr 20, 2012 -- 6:46PM, Niklor wrote:

It could be, but there are people who don't have the time to put much effort into their posts and some might call that not contributing. Does that make them lurkers, since they clearly are posting, or are they inactive by not having the time to look at the posts and contribute well?


then those people shouldn't be playing. this is why I'm not currently involved in a basketball game: if I was, I'd be off on my computer posting to some forum, and letting down everyone else who was trying to play basketball. I don't expect posting every second, but if you are going to commit to playing the game, play the actual game.

Apr 20, 2012 -- 6:46PM, Niklor wrote:

It depends on the person and their alignment, though I would say scum would more likely end up bussing their teammate since trying to save a lurking scumbuddy can end up being a death sentence for the both of them.


yes, sometimes we lynch them. but if they weren't going to contribute at that point, they were just never going to contribute, ever. and that means that we have to lynch them because if they are scum, you will never, ever find any evidence of it.

Apr 20, 2012 -- 6:46PM, Niklor wrote:

I would rather cast a vote myself, even if there is a chance it will end up screwing the town over. Of course, that chance always exists.


so you're terrified of maybe lynching a townie who's not contributing anything, but if they're actively involved and posting then it's no sweat? I'm beginning to see why you're defending hypocrisy.

Apr 20, 2012 -- 6:46PM, Niklor wrote:

The fact Silly says he doesn't believe in FoSes, but uses an equivalent of a FoS is hypocritical, but since the use of FoSes as good or bad is almost completely opinion based, I don't see it as necessary to call him out for having a hypocritical opinion.


it matters because he tried to make Freddeh look bad for something he also did. that's what's important here. it doesn't matter that it was FoSing. if he'd tried to mudsling at Freddeh for spelling "colour" with a u, then turned around and did the same thing, that would be scummy too. if you say something is scummy and you do it, that's scummy, whether or not the actual thing is.

Post #150 by razorborne

Apr 20, 2012 -- 6:49PM, Niklor wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 6:33PM, Sleeping wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:40PM, Niklor wrote:

Are you actively ignoring everything that is going on or do you have a reason to vote Theatog over anyone actually involved in the current discussion?




If I give reasons people will probably accuse me of doing something and vote for me. =(
People generally try to look too hard into things.
And since nobody seems to care about me at the moment I don't see an obvious reason to change my ways.
This post might even make people look at me differently and perhaps even vote for me, I considered just not responding at all. Though not responding also could be interpreted certain ways. Such are the workings of this game.




Avoiding the radar is something scum strive for. I'm not saying make yourself the target, but assuming you are town, you need to worry more about catching scum than avoiding the town's attentions.

Unvote; Vote: Sleeping

So give me your reasons to vote for Theatog or you can expect to see this vote remaining and depending on your reasons it may remain regardless. 



but Niklor maybe he just doesn't have the time to put that much effort into his posts.

 

Post #151 by Niklor

Apr 20, 2012 -- 6:56PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 6:46PM, Niklor wrote:

Spiderman has a distinctive red and blue costume you know. Unrelated, but I felt the need to point it out.


I thought it was a black and white picture. if it's not spiderman, who is it?




Nergil, from Nerf This. I will try to find a link to the specific picture.

Apr 20, 2012 -- 6:56PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 6:46PM, Niklor wrote:

Slips, unlike avatars and join dates, are a type of inconsistency in what is being said though. Saying someone is scummy because they have an avatar or joined on the June 6th, 2006 is based on things that are not relevant to the game. What someone is saying and how they say it is.


fine, then, would you accept the analogy of improper capitalization? this sentence started with a lower-case letter, therefore I am trying to hide it, only scum hide information, vote: Razor. there are aspects of what people say that matter, like what they say, and aspects that don't, like how they say it.




We interpret what people are saying based on how they say it, so I'm afraid the idea of completely ignoring discrepencies in speech merely because they may be just mistakes is beyond me.

Apr 20, 2012 -- 6:56PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 6:46PM, Niklor wrote:

It depends on the person and their alignment, though I would say scum would more likely end up bussing their teammate since trying to save a lurking scumbuddy can end up being a death sentence for the both of them.


yes, sometimes we lynch them. but if they weren't going to contribute at that point, they were just never going to contribute, ever. and that means that we have to lynch them because if they are scum, you will never, ever find any evidence of it.




Good point.

Apr 20, 2012 -- 6:56PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 6:46PM, Niklor wrote:

I would rather cast a vote myself, even if there is a chance it will end up screwing the town over. Of course, that chance always exists.


so you're terrified of maybe lynching a townie who's not contributing anything, but if they're actively involved and posting then it's no sweat? I'm beginning to see why you're defending hypocrisy.




I'm not terrified of lynching a townie who's lurking. I'm terrified of declaring lurking a scumtell when both town and scum do it. I'd rather base my vote on something I can see than something that I cannot.

Apr 20, 2012 -- 6:56PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 6:46PM, Niklor wrote:

The fact Silly says he doesn't believe in FoSes, but uses an equivalent of a FoS is hypocritical, but since the use of FoSes as good or bad is almost completely opinion based, I don't see it as necessary to call him out for having a hypocritical opinion.


it matters because he tried to make Freddeh look bad for something he also did. that's what's important here. it doesn't matter that it was FoSing. if he'd tried to mudsling at Freddeh for spelling "colour" with a u, then turned around and did the same thing, that would be scummy too. if you say something is scummy and you do it, that's scummy, whether or not the actual thing is.




You know that's the actual way to spell colour, right?

So you're saying Silly is scum not because he is doing something scummy, but because he is calling something scummy that he is doing even though I think we can both agree that FoSing isn't scummy?

Post #152 by Niklor

Apr 20, 2012 -- 6:57PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 6:49PM, Niklor wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 6:33PM, Sleeping wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:40PM, Niklor wrote:

Are you actively ignoring everything that is going on or do you have a reason to vote Theatog over anyone actually involved in the current discussion?




If I give reasons people will probably accuse me of doing something and vote for me. =(
People generally try to look too hard into things.
And since nobody seems to care about me at the moment I don't see an obvious reason to change my ways.
This post might even make people look at me differently and perhaps even vote for me, I considered just not responding at all. Though not responding also could be interpreted certain ways. Such are the workings of this game.




Avoiding the radar is something scum strive for. I'm not saying make yourself the target, but assuming you are town, you need to worry more about catching scum than avoiding the town's attentions.

Unvote; Vote: Sleeping

So give me your reasons to vote for Theatog or you can expect to see this vote remaining and depending on your reasons it may remain regardless. 



but Niklor maybe he just doesn't have the time to put that much effort into his posts.

 




It be more clever if I didn't know "Sleeping" outside this game.

Post #153 by Niklor

nerf-this.com/too-awesome/

Post #154 by razorborne

Apr 20, 2012 -- 7:06PM, Niklor wrote:

We interpret what people are saying based on how they say it, so I'm afraid the idea of completely ignoring discrepencies in speech merely because they may be just mistakes is beyond me.


to an extent. for instance, if I were to say "I am the mafia don" I would be very hard-pressed to claim that I meant something else. but if it feels like you have to jump through a hoop to get to the "real" meaning, odds are that wasn't the real meaning.

Apr 20, 2012 -- 7:06PM, Niklor wrote:

I'm not terrified of lynching a townie who's lurking. I'm terrified of declaring lurking a scumtell when both town and scum do it. I'd rather base my vote on something I can see than something that I cannot.


and that's the issue. when you try to get a lurker lynch going, "I'd rather base my vote on something I can see than something that I cannot" is the first response people give. because it seems like it makes sense. but then, again, you will never lynch lurkers, because there will always be some case or another available. and, as you seem to have agreed to above, we need to lynch lurkers or it becomes a dominate scum strategy.

Apr 20, 2012 -- 7:06PM, Niklor wrote:

You know that's the actual way to spell colour, right?


it's the right way to spell colour, but the wrong way to spell "color".

Apr 20, 2012 -- 7:06PM, Niklor wrote:

So you're saying Silly is scum not because he is doing something scummy, but because he is calling something scummy that he is doing even though I think we can both agree that FoSing isn't scummy?


no, he's doing something scummy. it's just that that thing isn't FoSing, it's being a hypocrite.

Post #155 by Sleeping

Now you can see why I was worried about posting. Before I said anything nobody had accused me of anything.
And you are very misguided Razorborne. If I am, indeed town, then avoiding the town's attentions and catching scum are essentially the same thing.
I'm a hundred percent sure I'm town, can't say the same about anyone else. So it is beneficial to the town if they vote for someone who isn't me (of course they can't know that.) By avoiding the radar I am making that happen, but Niklor has forced me to crawl out of the woodwork, and I was doing so well too, nobody even questioned my vote before.
I voted for theatog for no particular reason at all, I could choose to bandwagon with another vote, but I don't want to seem too anything at the moment, so I'm going to hold off a bit.

Post #156 by Niklor

Apr 20, 2012 -- 7:34PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 7:06PM, Niklor wrote:

We interpret what people are saying based on how they say it, so I'm afraid the idea of completely ignoring discrepencies in speech merely because they may be just mistakes is beyond me.


to an extent. for instance, if I were to say "I am the mafia don" I would be very hard-pressed to claim that I meant something else. but if it feels like you have to jump through a hoop to get to the "real" meaning, odds are that wasn't the real meaning.




I guess it comes down to what we see as jumping through hoops. I don't feel what PK did constitutes a slip personally, but when I do see a slip I don't see it as jumping through hoops.

Apr 20, 2012 -- 7:34PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 7:06PM, Niklor wrote:

I'm not terrified of lynching a townie who's lurking. I'm terrified of declaring lurking a scumtell when both town and scum do it. I'd rather base my vote on something I can see than something that I cannot.


and that's the issue. when you try to get a lurker lynch going, "I'd rather base my vote on something I can see than something that I cannot" is the first response people give. because it seems like it makes sense. but then, again, you will never lynch lurkers, because there will always be some case or another available. and, as you seem to have agreed to above, we need to lynch lurkers or it becomes a dominate scum strategy.




I've seen days where lurkers are more scummy than anyone active in the game, but it's really the problem of getting people to agree that the lurkers are being scummier than anyone else. Of course, that is the problem with getting anyone lynched.

Apr 20, 2012 -- 7:34PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 7:06PM, Niklor wrote:

You know that's the actual way to spell colour, right?


it's the right way to spell colour, but the wrong way to spell "color".




No, it's the wrong way.

Apr 20, 2012 -- 7:06PM, Niklor wrote:

So you're saying Silly is scum not because he is doing something scummy, but because he is calling something scummy that he is doing even though I think we can both agree that FoSing isn't scummy?


no, he's doing something scummy. it's just that that thing isn't FoSing, it's being a hypocrite.




I don't recall hypocrisy in and of itself being scummy.

Post #157 by Niklor

EBWOP: The part at the end where it says "no, he's doing something scummy. it's just that that thing isn't FoSing, it's being a hypocrite.

" is Razorborne, just messed up one of the quote tags.

Post #158 by Niklor

Apr 20, 2012 -- 7:36PM, Sleeping wrote:

Now you can see why I was worried about posting. Before I said anything nobody had accused me of anything.




You realize eventually that you would likely be chased after for not contributing? Especially in the current atmosphere.

Apr 20, 2012 -- 7:36PM, Sleeping wrote:

And you are very misguided Razorborne. If I am, indeed town, then avoiding the town's attentions and catching scum are essentially the same thing.




To hunt scum, you need to be vocal to some degree because even if you've found scum, or so believe, you have to convince the town they are scum. Yes, don't strive to be the center of attention, but don't avoid contributing to avoid the radar.

Apr 20, 2012 -- 7:36PM, Sleeping wrote:

I'm a hundred percent sure I'm town, can't say the same about anyone else. So it is beneficial to the town if they vote for someone who isn't me (of course they can't know that.) By avoiding the radar I am making that happen, but Niklor has forced me to crawl out of the woodwork, and I was doing so well too, nobody even questioned my vote before.




You cast a vote on a player without a reason in the middle of a large discussion. Did you really expect you could just do that?

Apr 20, 2012 -- 7:36PM, Sleeping wrote:

I voted for theatog for no particular reason at all, I could choose to bandwagon with another vote, but I don't want to seem too anything at the moment, so I'm going to hold off a bit.




Why cast the vote at all then?

Post #159 by Silly_Dragons

Holy balls why where there 60 posts in the time I was drafting magic.

Post #160 by Silly_Dragons

Going to start from the first post that I haven't seen and work my way through.

If I point out something extremely obvious that somebody else has already said, well tough ****.

Post #161 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 20, 2012 -- 2:56PM, Ahlyis wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 12:51PM, Niklor wrote:

Though if PK was a dayvig, I don't see why he would breadcrumb it.


If PK is a Dayvig, we'll know it the next time he posts...

Apr 20, 2012 -- 12:52PM, ProphetKing wrote:

I don't have a track record of breadcrumbing things.


And there you have it.  Nobody dead.  PK isn't a Dayvig or someone would be dead.



Not necessarily. While I agree that it's very unlikely for dayvigs to exist, PK not killing someone with his first post day 1 doesn't exclude him from being one. He could, you know, not choose to kill anyone until he actually gets a scum read.

Apr 20, 2012 -- 3:06PM, Freddeh wrote:

..."window.parent.tinyMCE.get('post_content').onLoad.dispatch();" contenteditable="true" />@Silly, thats no excuse for calling someone a retard just because they voted for you.



New policy. For this game at least, I am going to be rude and abrasive. Expect plenty of calling people bad names. I guess you could call it testing out a playstyle. Or maybe it's because I like roleplaying in mafia.

I cleared this up with everyone important before hand. I PMed SJT, he told me he was fine with me being a hard ass if Rubik was fine with it. I chatted up Rubik on IRC and he said he was fine with it as long as Rag was fine with it. And Rag said he had no problems.

Post #162 by Silly_Dragons

In Fred's quote above, ignore the whole "window.parent.blah.blah... whatever true>" thing. These boards suck ass.

Post #163 by Niklor

I'm now wondering if that was the reason SJT locked up the thread temporarily. Also, having a good laugh if it is.

Post #164 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 20, 2012 -- 3:21PM, Niklor wrote:

Then why did you say you would have?




Apr 20, 2012 -- 3:22PM, ProphetKing wrote:

Because I didn't say that.

"If I had to lynch someone at this very second I would shoot Freddeh for saying Silly made a breadcrumb." 




Apr 20, 2012 -- 3:22PM, Freddeh wrote:

You just pulled the trigger haphazardly in a currently running game PK, that might have a LITTLE to do with it. Also I'm still mad at you about it whenever I remember.

@Nik, Not especially no, theres nothing outwardly scummy feeling, and I don't get scummy vibes from the people that are talking right now (You, PK, Silly) so no. Its possible my mind will change at some point or another (I'm already thinking about a different place for my vote, but I'm waiting on something), but for now, I want to hear Pere comment. Because I like hearing his comments.




In my opinion, PK saying that implies something along the lines of "oh hai Freddeh. You've done the first thing in the game to trigger my scumdar". It doesn't mean that PK would kill him right this instant, but it does sort of imply at least a somewhat aggressive stance on the game. By saying you would shoot Fred right now, you give off a vibe that you're fine with killing him, even if you weren't intending too. (OR WERE YOU? DUN DUN DUN.)

Post #165 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 20, 2012 -- 3:32PM, ProphetKing wrote:

We've already discussed that issue in that game. I disagree with your assertion, look at the general context. That's all I will say given the game.

That said, one singular out of many games is an outlier. 

"What situation exists where you have to kill someone at a single moment besides a situation that you yourself impose?"

False analogy.

If I put a gun to your head, and make you pick if the Colts will make the playoffs or not, what would you say?

You're applying an intent in my post that does not exist.

"Also, why say something like that at all if you wouldn't do it?"
I'd do it if I had to kill someone that second.

I said it simply because it was a minor blip and I disliked it.
 

 



To talk about this point, sometimes talking about hypotheticals can help. Like if I asked:

Niklor, if you had to pick someone to lynch someone right now, who would you pick?

However, I obviously would have phrased the question like I did above. Talking about hypotheticals like PK was doing is probably not the best way to go about doing so.

Post #166 by razorborne

Apr 20, 2012 -- 7:36PM, Sleeping wrote:

Now you can see why I was worried about posting. Before I said anything nobody had accused me of anything.
And you are very misguided Razorborne. If I am, indeed town, then avoiding the town's attentions and catching scum are essentially the same thing.
I'm a hundred percent sure I'm town, can't say the same about anyone else. So it is beneficial to the town if they vote for someone who isn't me (of course they can't know that.) By avoiding the radar I am making that happen, but Niklor has forced me to crawl out of the woodwork, and I was doing so well too, nobody even questioned my vote before.
I voted for theatog for no particular reason at all, I could choose to bandwagon with another vote, but I don't want to seem too anything at the moment, so I'm going to hold off a bit.


if it's correct for an individual townie to not participate or contribute at all, then one can conclude it is correct for each individual townie to not contribute. and if no townies are contributing, who are we letting control the conversation?

Apr 20, 2012 -- 7:51PM, Niklor wrote:

I guess it comes down to what we see as jumping through hoops. I don't feel what PK did constitutes a slip personally, but when I do see a slip I don't see it as jumping through hoops.


can you give an example of something you'd consider a slip?

Apr 20, 2012 -- 7:51PM, Niklor wrote:

I've seen days where lurkers are more scummy than anyone active in the game, but it's really the problem of getting people to agree that the lurkers are being scummier than anyone else. Of course, that is the problem with getting anyone lynched.


I've seen plenty of days where lurkers are scummier than anyone active in the game. like any day with lurkers. the problem is people like you and Silly who ignore them and let their lurking work.

Apr 20, 2012 -- 7:51PM, Niklor wrote:

I don't recall hypocrisy in and of itself being scummy.


I don't even know how to explain this then. can someone help me out? is claiming that something is scummy while doing that thing not a bad thing?

Post #167 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:03PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 11:17AM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

It's because the verb form is a sexual act with an s in the front.

Also, Razor you are retarded.


ouch bro.




Sorry bro. Don't take it personally.

No hard feelings?

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:03PM, razorborne wrote:


Apr 20, 2012 -- 12:30PM, Niklor wrote:

On day 1, a slip case, while not the perfect lynch, can be a good case to pursue for a bit. If nothing else, it demands that the person explain themselves while promoting discussion. As to the slip itself, I don't see a slip unless PK is breadcrumbing dayvig. If he is, I don't like it, but I don't recall PK blatantly breadcrumbing his role, so I will doubt it for now.


slip cases are always awful. always. every time. the only "explaining" that needs to happen is "oh hey I used a dumb word OH NO". which is effectively what PK's given. the fact that Silly pushed it and now you are driving it into the ground is much more suspicious than anything PK said.




I might have to explain this to you. But I was sort of being sarcastic attacking PK like that. I know perfectly well what he means. Or at least, I have the common sense (unlike some people who shall not be mentioned) to interpret it. I am a strong proponent of Hanlon's Razor when reading into posts.

Also, I agree that the PK case is kind of bad (though I also can sort of see why some people may see it as somewhat legitimate). But I guess I started it with my reaction trolling.

MY BAD GUISE.

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:03PM, razorborne wrote:


Apr 20, 2012 -- 12:30PM, Niklor wrote:

Nothing wrong with going after lurkers. Nothing says there is something right in it either. I don't like Freddeh declaring his intent to go after lurkers above all else. Go after lurkers if the lurker is more scummy than the actions of your most suspected active player. There is a difficulty in accurately measuring a lurker's threat, but there is no excuse to ignore scummy behavior to go after only lurkers.


I agree that going after lurkers to the exclusion of all else seems drastic, but, as I've said in the past, there is no other way to lynch lurkers. the idea of saving a lynch for a rainy doesn't work because there is no rain in mafia. there's always someone who has done something that, if you look at it right, is scummy, because they are doing things. in a game that's all about not trusting anyone, it's very easy to find something, somewhere, to drive a lynch. so if we don't make lynching lurkers a priority, it just won't get done. and if one of those lurkers happens to be scum, then the game is over before it started because the town decided to hand the mafia a get-out-of-lynch-free card. 




Going after lurkers at the beginning of day 1 is retarded. In fact, words cannot even describe... I'm just going to stop right there.

First of all, people may just not be online. It hasn't even been one day into Day 1 in this game so far. Second, activity is always low in the beginning of the game (well not now I guess, with 60 goddamn posts when I was playing magic), and some people are just not as vocal as others (shadowfyre comes to mind, but I haven't been to px2 in quite a while, so he may have changed). Finally, we have the freaking inactivity rule. If someone is truly just AWOL, then they'll get replaced. If someone is just purposely avoiding posting content, then yes we can start a manhunt or something on them to get them to post useful stuff, but we kind of can't single someone out for not being useful at the beginning of ****ing Day 1.

Also, this may just be metagaming or some ****, but I tend to go after lurkers heavily as mafia, since it makes me seem pro town without having to contribute much to serious discussion.

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:03PM, razorborne wrote:

..."window.parent.tinyMCE.get('post_content').onLoad.dispatch();" contenteditable="true" />also, you're ignoring the fact that silly used the functionally equivalent "I've got my eye on you" bit, twice. why is declaring your suspicions without voting okay when he does it?




Man, you suck at figuring out when I'm trolling. Either that, or I'm the one being trolled.

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:03PM, razorborne wrote:


anyway, since day has started, VOTE: Silly. I'm a little concerned by the five-paragraph essay to his defense, but at this stage everyone's looking to get conversation started so I don't think it means much.

 



I'm sad that you voted me, and will now cut myself why crying in a corner.
I do feel that Nik's overzealous defense of me is a bit odd.
I am happy that we have activity now, but unhappy that it happened when I was busy because now I have a shitload of posts to go through.

Post #168 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:10PM, razorborne wrote:

I see. I still think people vastly underestimate the difficulty of pushing a low-activity lynch. I've seen it happen time and time again where I'm trying to go "this guy hasn't done anything, like, at all" and everyone else is like "YEAH BUT THIS GUY HAS DONE THIS ONE THING AND IT'S KINDA SCUMMY WE'LL LYNCH YOUR GUY LATER." and what I haven't seen happen is them actually lynching my guy later.

 



I don't think that lurkers are good lynches unless we have to.

To be honest, lynching a lurker gives us minimal info. There are really no arguments to be had over his lynch, considering everybody's reason for lynching him is "yeah bro he lurked", and you can't really dispute that case very much.

Rather, I think we should wait a little. If we have a vigilante and he feels it to be prudent, then he can shoot lurkers to save us from wasting a lynch obtaining very little information. Otherwise, we can always lynch a lurker when they actually become a problem (aka not less than goddamn 24 hours into the game).

Post #169 by Niklor

Apr 20, 2012 -- 8:43PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 7:51PM, Niklor wrote:

I guess it comes down to what we see as jumping through hoops. I don't feel what PK did constitutes a slip personally, but when I do see a slip I don't see it as jumping through hoops.


can you give an example of something you'd consider a slip?




I'm not good at giving actual examples, but I've previously mentioned referring to the town as if you aren't a part of them. Not in an excited, rushed manner as you highlighted, but in more of a complex post where they refer to the town as a separate entity from themselves.

Apr 20, 2012 -- 8:43PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 7:51PM, Niklor wrote:

I've seen days where lurkers are more scummy than anyone active in the game, but it's really the problem of getting people to agree that the lurkers are being scummier than anyone else. Of course, that is the problem with getting anyone lynched.


I've seen plenty of days where lurkers are scummier than anyone active in the game. like any day with lurkers. the problem is people like you and Silly who ignore them and let their lurking work.




I'm not saying I want to ignore lurkers. I don't want to focus on them to the exclusion of active participants in the game though.

Apr 20, 2012 -- 8:43PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 7:51PM, Niklor wrote:

I don't recall hypocrisy in and of itself being scummy.


I don't even know how to explain this then. can someone help me out? is claiming that something is scummy while doing that thing not a bad thing?




Things that are bad to do as a player of the game are not necessarily scummy. I'm not saying Silly is playing well by declaring something as scummy and then doing it himself. I'm just not saying a bad move on his part is scummy.

Post #170 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:13PM, Niklor wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:03PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 12:30PM, Niklor wrote:

On day 1, a slip case, while not the perfect lynch, can be a good case to pursue for a bit. If nothing else, it demands that the person explain themselves while promoting discussion. As to the slip itself, I don't see a slip unless PK is breadcrumbing dayvig. If he is, I don't like it, but I don't recall PK blatantly breadcrumbing his role, so I will doubt it for now.


slip cases are always awful. always. every time. the only "explaining" that needs to happen is "oh hey I used a dumb word OH NO". which is effectively what PK's given. the fact that Silly pushed it and now you are driving it into the ground is much more suspicious than anything PK said.




Slip cases are bad, but excusable if nothing else has happened, which lately does happen on D1 to much. Slips are best used to build upon existing cases with actual evidence, mostly as minor points.



Cases based solely on the way someone worded a post are retarded. Humans aren't like machines, and often times what we say might mean something obvious to us, but will be read completely differently by others. Mafia are just as likely as town to make stupid word errors imo. Maybe even less since I presume as mafia you would be more careful and check your posts over more for tidbits that might give you away.

Cases based on what people say they will do vs what they actually do are good. Cases that are just lawyering wording schemantics are terribad, even as supplements imo.

Post #171 by Silly_Dragons

Finished page 3 (40 ppp). Will do page 4 and 5 shortly.

Also, I had a revelation that I suck at being mean unless I purposely try. :/

But I must persevere.

Post #172 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:14PM, Ahlyis wrote:

Depends on the type of slip.  Slip cases are NOT always bad. PK slipped in Touhou 3 and claimed a role ON the list he was given instead of a role NOT on the list he had.  It was definitely a slip and it was definitely NOT an awful case brought against him in that game.

No, I'm not saying the slip here is anything the same.  What I'm saying is that not all slip cases are awful.



Oh I had totally forgotten about that.

Okay, changing my opinion. Slips that have mechanical relevance are one thing. They could be useful. Slips that are just arguing the meanings of words though are bad.

Post #173 by Niklor

I still believe you have the power to deeply offend us all Silly.

Post #174 by razorborne

Apr 20, 2012 -- 8:44PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:03PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 11:17AM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

It's because the verb form is a sexual act with an s in the front.

Also, Razor you are retarded.


ouch bro.




Sorry bro. Don't take it personally.

No hard feelings?


psh, like I care what you think...

Apr 20, 2012 -- 8:44PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

I might have to explain this to you. But I was sort of being sarcastic attacking PK like that. I know perfectly well what he means. Or at least, I have the common sense (unlike some people who shall not be mentioned) to interpret it. I am a strong proponent of Hanlon's Razor when reading into posts.

Also, I agree that the PK case is kind of bad (though I also can sort of see why some people may see it as somewhat legitimate). But I guess I started it with my reaction trolling.

MY BAD GUISE.


yeah, sarcastic cases are the best idea when everyones' intentions are unclear.

Apr 20, 2012 -- 8:44PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

Going after lurkers at the beginning of day 1 is retarded. In fact, words cannot even describe... I'm just going to stop right there.

First of all, people may just not be online. It hasn't even been one day into Day 1 in this game so far. Second, activity is always low in the beginning of the game (well not now I guess, with 60 goddamn posts when I was playing magic), and some people are just not as vocal as others (shadowfyre comes to mind, but I haven't been to px2 in quite a while, so he may have changed). Finally, we have the freaking inactivity rule. If someone is truly just AWOL, then they'll get replaced. If someone is just purposely avoiding posting content, then yes we can start a manhunt or something on them to get them to post useful stuff, but we kind of can't single someone out for not being useful at the beginning of ****ing Day 1.


he wasn't singling someone out. don't make his comment out to be something it's not. he was saying "I am going to go after lurkers btw" not "look at this specific person he is lurking let's go after him/her." in fact he was doing the exact opposite of what you're describing here, because, as he pointed out at the time, you are exactly right about that phase of the game. no one was pushing a specific lurker lynch, or trying to build steam for one at that point.

Apr 20, 2012 -- 8:44PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

Also, this may just be metagaming or some ****, but I tend to go after lurkers heavily as mafia, since it makes me seem pro town without having to contribute much to serious discussion.


I tend to go after lurkers heavily as anything because they are a serious issue in any game they are present.

Apr 20, 2012 -- 8:44PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

Man, you suck at figuring out when I'm trolling. Either that, or I'm the one being trolled.


I mean, I get that you were making a joke of it, what with the picture of Deniro and stuff. but you were still making a serious case against Freddeh while doing it. so, again, sarcasm doesn't work in games of deception. 

Apr 20, 2012 -- 8:44PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

I'm sad that you voted me, and will now cut myself why crying in a corner.


it's okay I stopped.

Post #175 by Silly_Dragons

Razor's post following the Alice quote that I posted above is about arguing the schemantics of FoS vs voting. If there are any more posts like that in the next page or so, I'm just going to ignore them because my opinion will be posted in the paragraph below.

I personally hate FoSs and don't think they mean anything, but I don't think getting caught up in an argument about them will be very productive at all. Some people think they do mean things, some people don't, but they really won't change the outcome of anything and wasting time arguing about that is just that, wasting time. At the end of the day, all we're going to be looking at is where people's votes lie, not who they've FoSed. A FoS is basically the same as saying "I'm suspicious of you and might want to vote you". It's not much different from PK saying "If I had to kill you right now I would".

Post #176 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:31PM, Freddeh wrote:

@Niklor: No, you didn't. You had TWO posts between the start of the game and PK's 'If I had to...' post, first was a confirm, and second was something about Rag being a bigwig.

Unvote;Vote: Niklor

White-knighted both Silly AND PK, the latter with false information, mess up sure, but the fact remains that he was trying to white-knight still. I was willing to overlook the Silly one because as Razor said, its day 1 and convos are getting started, but two in a row? Can't overlook both.

Furthering my point on PK: You bringing up that you would use a dayvig actually IS the same as saying you would like to dayvig, because of the sheer fact that it hadn't been brought up. If dayvigs were being discussed and it was 'a thing' then yes, your verbal schenanigans would be all find and dandy and make sense. But the way you brought it up and then worded it so you could back off on the statement later (like you subsequently did) is why you're getting all this heat. FoS: PK




Um... wat.

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:33PM, ProphetKing wrote:

We're discussing something I said but there is zero virtual heat or pressure on me. I'm rather comfortable, given that I'm on the stable logical side of the fence here.

"Furthering my point on PK: You bringing up that you would use a dayvig actually IS the same as saying you would like to dayvig,"

This just isn't true. You're trying to make something out of nothing.

Confirm Vote: Freddeh 



PK teach me how to come across as aloof and arrogant without trying please. I really need to learn this to get in character.

Post #177 by razorborne

Apr 20, 2012 -- 8:49PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:10PM, razorborne wrote:

I see. I still think people vastly underestimate the difficulty of pushing a low-activity lynch. I've seen it happen time and time again where I'm trying to go "this guy hasn't done anything, like, at all" and everyone else is like "YEAH BUT THIS GUY HAS DONE THIS ONE THING AND IT'S KINDA SCUMMY WE'LL LYNCH YOUR GUY LATER." and what I haven't seen happen is them actually lynching my guy later.

 



I don't think that lurkers are good lynches unless we have to.

To be honest, lynching a lurker gives us minimal info. There are really no arguments to be had over his lynch, considering everybody's reason for lynching him is "yeah bro he lurked", and you can't really dispute that case very much.

Rather, I think we should wait a little. If we have a vigilante and he feels it to be prudent, then he can shoot lurkers to save us from wasting a lynch obtaining very little information. Otherwise, we can always lynch a lurker when they actually become a problem (aka not less than goddamn 24 hours into the game).


so whenever I'm mafia, I'll just not post anything, and then I'll never be lynched ever and win every game. got it.

Post #178 by razorborne

Apr 20, 2012 -- 9:06PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

PK teach me how to come across as aloof and arrogant without trying please. I really need to learn this to get in character.



I've found that a complete disregard for the feelings of others goes a long way.

 

Post #179 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:48PM, Ahlyis wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:19PM, Niklor wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:14PM, Ahlyis wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:01PM, Niklor wrote:

I tend to play reactively when everyone is playing all at once. I probably play most proactively if I care about the game, usually meaning I'm scum because I usually care more about the game as scum, though not always.


Nice preemptive deflection attempt.

Vote:  Niklor




I'm sorry, was I being too open about my position? I didn't know indicating that caring about the game makes me proactive was deflecting.


You are preemptively defending your behavior before anyone can even think about making a meta-game case against you.

It's a ridiculous thing to think you need to do and I can't see why a Townie would even be concerned about it enough to even think of it, let alone think it might be a good idea to mention.




Might be what you're referring to. I talk about my playstyle sometimes too, as reference points. But not in the way that Niklor is (at least I don't think I do). Point noted.

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:51PM, Niklor wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:42PM, Freddeh wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:01PM, Niklor wrote:

Actually, I brought up dayvigs Freddeh. Don't get your stories confused now.


This was the comment I was referring to.




Do you see this word Freddeh: Shoot. That is the word. Can you see it? Yes? Good. Now can we agree that that word is not Dayvig? Because if you are arguing otherwise, apparently PGOs actually dayvig people.




While I don't really agree with Fred, this is a terrible point, and you should feel terrible. What else is shoot supposed to mean D1?

Post #180 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 20, 2012 -- 5:01PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:01PM, Niklor wrote:

Actually, I brought up dayvigs Freddeh. Don't get your stories confused now.



just did a quick review, this claim is correct unless you count silly's "Dayvig: Freddeh" post.

 



Dem jokes mang.

As a completely unrelated sidenote (because I like telling this story), there was one game I was playing in where I Dayvigged someone (I think Niklor) D1 near the beginning. Except I wasn't actually a vig and they flipped out. It was funny.

Post #181 by Sleeping

To hunt scum, you need to be vocal to some degree because even if you've found scum, or so believe, you have to convince the town they are scum. Yes, don't strive to be the center of attention, but don't avoid contributing to avoid the radar.

I don't believe that I've found scum. Also please don't tell me how to play. A town player could play any way, a mafia player could play any way. It is just a selection.


You cast a vote on a player without a reason in the middle of a large discussion. Did you really expect you could just do that?

No I didn't. I cast a vote early in the thread and just confirmed my vote later on (in case I had to since day one was actually declared.) And yes, I could just do that. Stop using that tone like there is a way I must do things. This isn't a game of procedures.


Why cast the vote at all then?

It would be a waste to not use my vote. Like I said, I might change it, but I want it to be used somehow rather than not getting used at all. My econ teacher always said sitting money is a waste. 


if it's correct for an individual townie to not participate or contribute at all, then one can conclude it is correct for each individual townie to not contribute. and if no townies are contributing, who are we letting control the conversation?

You are correct, it is a terrible strategy if everyone does it, the game goes nowhere. But it is fine if one individual does it and does it successfully, it is obviously a good idea for both a town and a mafia player. If nobody else is stealing from the cookie jar that is their loss, I'll eat all the cookies, yum yum yum.
 

Post #182 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 20, 2012 -- 5:10PM, Niklor wrote:

As long as Silly admits its hypocritical, I'm fine with it. I have hypocritical opinions on things. Doesn't mean I'm wrong, just means I happen to say and do things that conflict with each other on occassions.




Niklor, y u so dumb? *Insert appropriate meme here*

Hipocracy is probably one of the most useful points in catching mafia. What I did there was kind of bad I guess, but that was mostly because it was day 1 and I was trying to be fancy and SJTesque by reaction trolling.

Apr 20, 2012 -- 6:18PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 5:10PM, Niklor wrote:

I will admit that is unlikely to mean anything on it's own, but you want to reject it as evidence entirely. Plus, you want to attribute it to non-scummy behavior instead of just dismissing it entirely. Scum are just as likely to screw up as Town.


"a cop investigated Niklor as scum and also his avatar is spiderman in a tux." that is what it looks like when you incorporate slip cases into real cases. they're not evidence, they're diversions. they serve no purpose, just like my case on Silly is not in any way helped by quoting his join date, no matter how scummy August 25th may be.



**** you. August 25th is a great date.

Also, I've already posted my opinion on this, but incase whoever is reading this became temporarily blind and missed it, I pretty much agree with what Razor is saying.

Apr 20, 2012 -- 6:18PM, razorborne wrote:


Apr 20, 2012 -- 5:10PM, Niklor wrote:

Some people may just not have the time to get on and sit here and read point after point and respond, but do have the time to make a quick post in response to a few recent points. Is that person lurking? Are they inactive? If we want to make war against people who aren't being contributive, say that. Lurker implies more than not contributing to me.


then you're jot using the term correctly. actively not contributing is exactly what lurking is. posting enough to avoid prods while adding nothing meaningful and doing nothing that could be used as evidence against you is lurking. actually not looking at the site or the game is being inactive.

the good thing, by the way, about pushing lurker lynches is that often times when pressure builds on someone for not contributing they will start contributing. so it doesn't even cost the town its lynch.




I've probably stated this before, but I'm all for lynching lurkers if they refuse to contribute. But as I've stated before, why on D1? Shouldn't we at least wait to see if they're actually lurking?

IF YOU DON'T THINK THIS IS A VIRUS, THEN YOU CAN LISTEN TO THIS CLIP WHICH SUMMARIZES MY OPINION.
..."window.parent.tinyMCE.get('post_content').onLoad.dispatch();" class="mceContentBody " contenteditable="true" />

Post #183 by Silly_Dragons

**** you boards.

This should be the correct, nonbroken link. If it breaks, I'm editing this post. Screw the rules.

LINK

Post #184 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 20, 2012 -- 6:33PM, Sleeping wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:40PM, Niklor wrote:

Are you actively ignoring everything that is going on or do you have a reason to vote Theatog over anyone actually involved in the current discussion?




If I give reasons people will probably accuse me of doing something and vote for me. =(
People generally try to look too hard into things.
And since nobody seems to care about me at the moment I don't see an obvious reason to change my ways.
This post might even make people look at me differently and perhaps even vote for me, I considered just not responding at all. Though not responding also could be interpreted certain ways. Such are the workings of this game.



I hate you. Your stance on the game is terrible.

Post #185 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 20, 2012 -- 7:06PM, Niklor wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 6:56PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 6:46PM, Niklor wrote:

Spiderman has a distinctive red and blue costume you know. Unrelated, but I felt the need to point it out.


I thought it was a black and white picture. if it's not spiderman, who is it?




Nergil, from Nerf This. I will try to find a link to the specific picture.




On a completely unrelated note, I thought it was deadpool. Seriously, compare them.

Post #186 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 20, 2012 -- 7:36PM, Sleeping wrote:

Now you can see why I was worried about posting. Before I said anything nobody had accused me of anything.
And you are very misguided Razorborne. If I am, indeed town, then avoiding the town's attentions and catching scum are essentially the same thing.
I'm a hundred percent sure I'm town, can't say the same about anyone else. So it is beneficial to the town if they vote for someone who isn't me (of course they can't know that.) By avoiding the radar I am making that happen, but Niklor has forced me to crawl out of the woodwork, and I was doing so well too, nobody even questioned my vote before.
I voted for theatog for no particular reason at all, I could choose to bandwagon with another vote, but I don't want to seem too anything at the moment, so I'm going to hold off a bit.



You're a terrible person. It is not beneficial to do nothing. If everyone did nothing, then the game would just suck ass.

Rather, a proper townie is active and as transparent as possible. That allows him to help the rest of the town catch scum, while also showing everyone that he is not mafia. If you just try to lay low, eventually someone will question you, or else mafia would win every game by doing nothing.

Post #187 by Silly_Dragons

Oh hey page 4 is done wheeeee. Almost there.

Apr 20, 2012 -- 8:28PM, Niklor wrote:

I'm now wondering if that was the reason SJT locked up the thread temporarily. Also, having a good laugh if it is.



Not really game related, but probably not. The time that SJT locked the thread and the time I asked him the question don't really match up. At least, I don't think they do.

Post #188 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 20, 2012 -- 8:43PM, razorborne wrote:

..."window.parent.tinyMCE.get('post_content').onLoad.dispatch();" contenteditable="true" />

Apr 20, 2012 -- 7:51PM, Niklor wrote:

I've seen days where lurkers are more scummy than anyone active in the game, but it's really the problem of getting people to agree that the lurkers are being scummier than anyone else. Of course, that is the problem with getting anyone lynched.


I've seen plenty of days where lurkers are scummier than anyone active in the game. like any day with lurkers. the problem is people like you and Silly who ignore them and let their lurking work.



Bro. Lurkers should be dealt with. But not right now. And by vigilante if we have one. We can lynch someone or pressure them into posting, but we need to give them a reasonable amount of time to respond. As you brought up, people have lives too.

Granted, this case doesn't apply if you're someone like Sleeping, who openly admits to lurking.

:/

Post #189 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 20, 2012 -- 8:57PM, Niklor wrote:

I still believe you have the power to deeply offend us all Silly.




Yay.

Apr 20, 2012 -- 8:57PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 8:44PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:03PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 11:17AM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

It's because the verb form is a sexual act with an s in the front.

Also, Razor you are retarded.


ouch bro.




Sorry bro. Don't take it personally.

No hard feelings?


psh, like I care what you think...




I thought we were closer than that ;_;

Apr 20, 2012 -- 8:57PM, Niklor wrote:


Apr 20, 2012 -- 8:44PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

I might have to explain this to you. But I was sort of being sarcastic attacking PK like that. I know perfectly well what he means. Or at least, I have the common sense (unlike some people who shall not be mentioned) to interpret it. I am a strong proponent of Hanlon's Razor when reading into posts.

Also, I agree that the PK case is kind of bad (though I also can sort of see why some people may see it as somewhat legitimate). But I guess I started it with my reaction trolling.

MY BAD GUISE.


yeah, sarcastic cases are the best idea when everyones' intentions are unclear.




BRO IT WAS PREGAME AND NOBODY WAS DOING ANYTHING. WHAT ELSE AM I SUPPOSED TO DO? PLAY TIDDYWINKS? OR TROLL PEOPLE. YOU DECIDE.

ALSO, EVEN IF TROLLING PEOPLE DIDN'T LEAD TO ACTIVITY, IT IS STILL FUN. BUT IN THIS CASE, I WOULD ARGUE THAT IT DID LEAD TO ACTIVITY. LIKE THIS HAS BEEN THE SHORTEST JOKE PHASE I HAVE EVER BEEN IN.

Apr 20, 2012 -- 8:57PM, Niklor wrote:


Apr 20, 2012 -- 8:44PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

Going after lurkers at the beginning of day 1 is retarded. In fact, words cannot even describe... I'm just going to stop right there.

First of all, people may just not be online. It hasn't even been one day into Day 1 in this game so far. Second, activity is always low in the beginning of the game (well not now I guess, with 60 goddamn posts when I was playing magic), and some people are just not as vocal as others (shadowfyre comes to mind, but I haven't been to px2 in quite a while, so he may have changed). Finally, we have the freaking inactivity rule. If someone is truly just AWOL, then they'll get replaced. If someone is just purposely avoiding posting content, then yes we can start a manhunt or something on them to get them to post useful stuff, but we kind of can't single someone out for not being useful at the beginning of ****ing Day 1.


he wasn't singling someone out. don't make his comment out to be something it's not. he was saying "I am going to go after lurkers btw" not "look at this specific person he is lurking let's go after him/her." in fact he was doing the exact opposite of what you're describing here, because, as he pointed out at the time, you are exactly right about that phase of the game. no one was pushing a specific lurker lynch, or trying to build steam for one at that point.




Aight. Maybe I just read something wrong or whatever. I have no idea what this argument was about anymore. You guys already have my opinion on the matter, and I'll chime back in if I find something important to point out.

Post #190 by razorborne

Apr 20, 2012 -- 9:23PM, Sleeping wrote:

I don't believe that I've found scum. Also please don't tell me how to play. A town player could play any way, a mafia player could play any way. It is just a selection.


by this logic there's no point in scumhunting. you're getting too focused on the fact that you know you're town. no one else does. the sooner you accept that, the sooner you can start trying to prove it. until then I'm happy voting for you because either you're scum or you're worthless town.

Apr 20, 2012 -- 9:23PM, Sleeping wrote:

No I didn't. I cast a vote early in the thread and just confirmed my vote later on (in case I had to since day one was actually declared.) And yes, I could just do that. Stop using that tone like there is a way I must do things. This isn't a game of procedures.


no, but it's a game of strategies. and they're not all equally valid. stop pretending they are.

Apr 20, 2012 -- 9:23PM, Sleeping wrote:

It would be a waste to not use my vote. Like I said, I might change it, but I want it to be used somehow rather than not getting used at all. My econ teacher always said sitting money is a waste.


voting "just because" is dumb. it's worse than just not voting, because it can lead to the lynch of someone you have no legitimate reason to want to lynch. if you have a case on atog, make it. if you don't, find somewhere you can make a case. don't just vote for someone you have nothing on and expect to be left alone.

Apr 20, 2012 -- 9:23PM, Sleeping wrote:

You are correct, it is a terrible strategy if everyone does it, the game goes nowhere. But it is fine if one individual does it and does it successfully, it is obviously a good idea for both a town and a mafia player. If nobody else is stealing from the cookie jar that is their loss, I'll eat all the cookies, yum yum yum. 


hey guys, are Jesters allowed in minis?

Post #191 by Silly_Dragons

Apparently in my post above, all of my quotes got ****ed up. My apologies.

Post #192 by razorborne

Apr 20, 2012 -- 9:32PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

**** you. August 25th is a great date.


not if you're Pliny the Elder.

Apr 20, 2012 -- 9:32PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

I've probably stated this before, but I'm all for lynching lurkers if they refuse to contribute. But as I've stated before, why on D1? Shouldn't we at least wait to see if they're actually lurking?


whose lynch was being pushed for?

Post #193 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 20, 2012 -- 8:57PM, razorborne wrote:

so whenever I'm mafia, I'll just not post anything, and then I'll never be lynched ever and win every game. got it.



You'll get lynched day 3 or so. Maybe day 2. But as I was saying, lynching lurkers at the beginning of D1 is a bad idea, and vigging them would be a better alternative than lynching, but I'm all for lynching when necessary.


Apr 20, 2012 -- 9:10PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 9:06PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

PK teach me how to come across as aloof and arrogant without trying please. I really need to learn this to get in character.



I've found that a complete disregard for the feelings of others goes a long way.

 



Probably. Maybe I'm too empathetic.

Post #194 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 20, 2012 -- 9:23PM, Sleeping wrote:


I don't believe that I've found scum. Also please don't tell me how to play.
 A town player could play any way, a mafia player could play any way. It is just a selection.




The problem is, there are better ways to play than others. For example, say I decide my way of playing baseball is closing my eyes every time I go to bat. Sure, I may have fun, and I may even hit the ball sometimes, but the problem is, the game is not just you. Like baseball, mafia is a team game (more or less), and if you screw around by closing your eyes at bat, then you're going to be ruining the game for everyone else.

Now I can't stop you from playing like you are now. But I will say that if you keep your current attitude, I wouldn't be surprised if you died early in every game you played.

The rest of the post I feel is summed up more or less by my statements above. If you would like me to elaborate, please do ask.

Post #195 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 20, 2012 -- 10:11PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 9:23PM, Sleeping wrote:

I don't believe that I've found scum. Also please don't tell me how to play. A town player could play any way, a mafia player could play any way. It is just a selection.


by this logic there's no point in scumhunting. you're getting too focused on the fact that you know you're town. no one else does. the sooner you accept that, the sooner you can start trying to prove it. until then I'm happy voting for you because either you're scum or you're worthless town.




Bro, in my opinion, you should never try to lynch someone you think is town. Even if they are useless, retarded, and don't post at all. At the very worst, they're a warm body that protects against the mafia.

But granted, he could be scum, so I see your reasoning that the benefits outweigh the downsides.

Apr 20, 2012 -- 10:11PM, razorborne wrote:


Apr 20, 2012 -- 9:23PM, Sleeping wrote:

You are correct, it is a terrible strategy if everyone does it, the game goes nowhere. But it is fine if one individual does it and does it successfully, it is obviously a good idea for both a town and a mafia player. If nobody else is stealing from the cookie jar that is their loss, I'll eat all the cookies, yum yum yum. 


hey guys, are Jesters allowed in minis?



I'm not to familiar with the rules anymore, but I think they relaxed the rules on minis. So a jester maaaay be possible (though unlikely). I would check with SJT/Rubik/Rag though.

Speaking of that.

MODS: IS JESTER A POSSIBLE ROLE IN THIS GAME, OR IS IT FORBIDDEN BY THE RULES?

Post #196 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 20, 2012 -- 10:14PM, razorborne wrote:

..."window.parent.tinyMCE.get('post_content').onLoad.dispatch();" contenteditable="true" />

Apr 20, 2012 -- 9:32PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

I've probably stated this before, but I'm all for lynching lurkers if they refuse to contribute. But as I've stated before, why on D1? Shouldn't we at least wait to see if they're actually lurking?


whose lynch was being pushed for?



I think I've pointed this out somewhere above, but I guess I misread your arguments. I thought you were going "RAWR FOAMING AT THE MOUTH MUST KILL LURKERS NOW" or something.

Post #197 by Sleeping

I hate you. Your stance on the game is terrible.


Sometimes the truth is terrible. =)


by this logic there's no point in scumhunting. you're getting too focused on the fact that you know you're town. no one else does. the sooner you accept that, the sooner you can start trying to prove it. until then I'm happy voting for you because either you're scum or you're worthless town.


I didn't say there's no point in scumhunting. I'm saying if nobody notices me for a couple rounds then I can effectively narrow the chances of picking an incorrect player. I feel like this is doing a greater deed than trying to pitch in info based on my gut feelings, which could be correct or incorrect. If you think this is a scumtell go ahead and lynch me, but you'd be wrong. ;3

Also tell me what this "proof" is I can give you. Could a mafia player not give the same "proof"? At least I've been interacting, right? There are some who have done less.


no, but it's a game of strategies. and they're not all equally valid. stop pretending they are.


Oh wise one, please tell me the superiorist of the strategies so I may follow!

This isn't chess, it is a game of people. I don't know how anybody here plays (this is my first time playing mafia on this site) so I can't pattern seek or anything. And in my opinion generic scumtells are very weak things, I'd rather learn about some of these players before I say anything with confidence.


voting "just because" is dumb. it's worse than just not voting, because it can lead to the lynch of someone you have no legitimate reason to want to lynch. if you have a case on atog, make it. if you don't, find somewhere you can make a case. don't just vote for someone you have nothing on and expect to be left alone.

I don't have the confidence yet to find someone else to vote for. theatog is simply a player who isn't me at the moment, it isn't a good vote but it is better than nothing in my opinion. If I find someone to be a more likely mafia candidate I'll happily switch my vote. The important thing about the vote is that no player's opinion led to making it, therefor I couldn't have been misguided by the mafia, which makes me feel safer. Once again, if I hear a "convincing" case I'll probably change my vote, but like you can't tell me what proof would show I'm town I can't tell you what kind of case would be convincing. Anyway, I'll be reviewing this entire thread again later. Maybe then I'll see something in a new light, some things you need to see a couple times.


hey guys, are Jesters allowed in minis?

ur cute :3 

Post #198 by Rubik

@SILLY: community.wizards.com/paranoia/go/thread...(Read_This_First!)&post_num=2#470174245

There are no roles in this game that are not variations of the roles provided in this list.

Post #199 by Ahlyis

This whole thread has become a giant tl;dr

I did read all of the shorter posts, but many of the quote towers only got skimmed.

Despite all that, or perhaps because of it, I don't really see anything new that needs commenting on... and I still like my vote on Niklor.

Post #200 by Ragnarokio

Vote Count

Niklor - 2 (Freddeh, Ahlyis)
Ahlyis - 1 (Silly)
Freddeh - 1 (PK)
Theatog - 1 (Sleeping)
Sleeping - 2 (Razorborne, Niklor)
Not Voting - 5 (PeregrineV, TheAtog, FFP, Pdr_Br, ShadowFyre)


Deadline: ~13 Days, 8 Hours

Post Count (not completely accurate)

Silly - 34
Niklor - 30
Razorborne - 18
Freddeh - 11
PK - 10
Sleeping - 5
Ahlyis - 4
Peregrine - 1
Shadowfyre - 1
Theatog - 0
FFP - 0
Pdr_Br - 0

Prodding...

Ahlyis in 68 hours
Sleeping in 67 hours
Silly in 66 hours
Razorborne in 66 hours 
Niklor in 64 hours
Freddeh in 61 hours
PK in 60 hours
Peregrine in 60 hours
Shadowfyre in  56 hours
Theatog in 56 hours
FFP in 56 hours
Pdr_Br in 56 hours

Post #201 by Niklor

Sleeping, learn to use quotes.

Ahlyis, what do you think about Sleeping?

Post #202 by Niklor

Apr 20, 2012 -- 9:20PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:48PM, Ahlyis wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:19PM, Niklor wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:14PM, Ahlyis wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:01PM, Niklor wrote:

I tend to play reactively when everyone is playing all at once. I probably play most proactively if I care about the game, usually meaning I'm scum because I usually care more about the game as scum, though not always.


Nice preemptive deflection attempt.

Vote:  Niklor




I'm sorry, was I being too open about my position? I didn't know indicating that caring about the game makes me proactive was deflecting.


You are preemptively defending your behavior before anyone can even think about making a meta-game case against you.

It's a ridiculous thing to think you need to do and I can't see why a Townie would even be concerned about it enough to even think of it, let alone think it might be a good idea to mention.




Might be what you're referring to. I talk about my playstyle sometimes too, as reference points. But not in the way that Niklor is (at least I don't think I do). Point noted.




I seem to be one of the few players who sees no problem in speaking about how you play the game.

Apr 20, 2012 -- 9:20PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:51PM, Niklor wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:42PM, Freddeh wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:01PM, Niklor wrote:

Actually, I brought up dayvigs Freddeh. Don't get your stories confused now.


This was the comment I was referring to.




Do you see this word Freddeh: Shoot. That is the word. Can you see it? Yes? Good. Now can we agree that that word is not Dayvig? Because if you are arguing otherwise, apparently PGOs actually dayvig people.




While I don't really agree with Fred, this is a terrible point, and you should feel terrible. What else is shoot supposed to mean D1?




The argument was that PK brought up dayvigs when he clearly didn't. Shoot is likely to be interpreted as dayvigging, as I did, but it's a stretch to say PK brought it up.

Post #203 by Niklor

Apr 20, 2012 -- 9:23PM, Sleeping wrote:

To hunt scum, you need to be vocal to some degree because even if you've found scum, or so believe, you have to convince the town they are scum. Yes, don't strive to be the center of attention, but don't avoid contributing to avoid the radar.


I don't believe that I've found scum. Also please don't tell me how to play. A town player could play any way, a mafia player could play any way. It is just a selection.




I will tell anyone I want how to play. Don't try to silence me with you free will.

If you are intentionally silent and later try to come in with evidence, people are more likely to focus on you until you explain away everything to their satisfaction.


Apr 20, 2012 -- 9:23PM, Sleeping wrote:

You cast a vote on a player without a reason in the middle of a large discussion. Did you really expect you could just do that?

No I didn't. I cast a vote early in the thread and just confirmed my vote later on (in case I had to since day one was actually declared.) And yes, I could just do that. Stop using that tone like there is a way I must do things. This isn't a game of procedures.




A meta exists and players are expected to play inside that meta. You can feel free to try to not play within it, but don't expect to not take flak for it. Also, when you voted Theatog in the confirmation phase among many flying joke votes, it looked like a joke vote. When you recast it in the middle of a large amount of activity, it became something to be looked at. 


Apr 20, 2012 -- 9:23PM, Sleeping wrote:

Why cast the vote at all then?

It would be a waste to not use my vote. Like I said, I might change it, but I want it to be used somehow rather than not getting used at all. My econ teacher always said sitting money is a waste.




If you cast your vote late in the day, it still gets used. All casting a vote on someone for no reason looks like is lurking. 


Apr 20, 2012 -- 9:23PM, Sleeping wrote:

if it's correct for an individual townie to not participate or contribute at all, then one can conclude it is correct for each individual townie to not contribute. and if no townies are contributing, who are we letting control the conversation?

You are correct, it is a terrible strategy if everyone does it, the game goes nowhere. But it is fine if one individual does it and does it successfully, it is obviously a good idea for both a town and a mafia player. If nobody else is stealing from the cookie jar that is their loss, I'll eat all the cookies, yum yum yum.



You're not playing in a way that avoids attention, though, so in fact you're not contributing and you're not avoiding attention. So how is this a good strategy?

Post #204 by Niklor

Apr 20, 2012 -- 9:32PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 5:10PM, Niklor wrote:

As long as Silly admits its hypocritical, I'm fine with it. I have hypocritical opinions on things. Doesn't mean I'm wrong, just means I happen to say and do things that conflict with each other on occassions.




Niklor, y u so dumb? *Insert appropriate meme here*

Hipocracy is probably one of the most useful points in catching mafia. What I did there was kind of bad I guess, but that was mostly because it was day 1 and I was trying to be fancy and SJTesque by reaction trolling.




It depends on the nature of the hypocrisy.

Apr 20, 2012 -- 9:32PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 6:18PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 5:10PM, Niklor wrote:

I will admit that is unlikely to mean anything on it's own, but you want to reject it as evidence entirely. Plus, you want to attribute it to non-scummy behavior instead of just dismissing it entirely. Scum are just as likely to screw up as Town.


"a cop investigated Niklor as scum and also his avatar is spiderman in a tux." that is what it looks like when you incorporate slip cases into real cases. they're not evidence, they're diversions. they serve no purpose, just like my case on Silly is not in any way helped by quoting his join date, no matter how scummy August 25th may be.



**** you. August 25th is a great date.

Also, I've already posted my opinion on this, but incase whoever is reading this became temporarily blind and missed it, I pretty much agree with what Razor is saying.




That's what you would say with your join date.

Post #205 by Feroz-s_Familiar_Pheldy

lol, yesterday that game hadn't even started yet and now there are 6 pages?
too lazy to read
official vote: Niklor
those other people will surely have their reason to do so why no blindly tag along for now.

Post #206 by Niklor

Because bandwagoning out of laziness is worse than Sleeping wanting to play below the radar.

Unvote; Vote: FPP

Post #207 by ProphetKing

Unvote: Fred, Vote: FFP

Play or don't join games. 

Post #208 by Ahlyis

I agree with Niklor and PK regarding FFP.  I'm tempted to vote for him as well, but three votes that quickly wouldn't be good either.

FFP, either start playing, or expect to get lynched!

Post #209 by ProphetKing

That kind of attitude is the exact thing that needs to be policy lynched out of this meta.

Post #210 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 21, 2012 -- 6:29AM, Niklor wrote:

..."window.parent.tinyMCE.get('post_content').onLoad.dispatch();" class="mceContentBody " contenteditable="true" />I seem to be one of the few players who sees no problem in speaking about how you play the game.




I'm not saying that there's anything wrong with talking about playstyles, but I was just pointing out that it's a little weird that you brought it up in the way you did. It doesn't really mean anything right now though (but potentially miiiiight in the future), which I why I basically only noted that I had read Ahl's arguments.

Post #211 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 21, 2012 -- 7:16AM, Feroz-s_Familiar_Pheldy wrote:

lol, yesterday that game hadn't even started yet and now there are 6 pages?
too lazy to read
official vote: Niklor
those other people will surely have their reason to do so why no blindly tag along for now.




...

...

...

****.

Okay, so if you've been keeping up with the giant amounts of posts, you might notice that I'm all for giving people who seem to be lurking the benefit of the doubt for at least a little bit. But some people have sort of forced me to change my stance. I'll give someone who contributes every once and a while but seems like they have time issues the benefit of the doubt when it comes to lurking, but if somebody pretty much openly admits to lurking, then that's a completely different ballgame.

Post #212 by ProphetKing

It's like saying, "I want to join mafia games and not actually play them."

Post #213 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 21, 2012 -- 10:29AM, ProphetKing wrote:

It's like saying, "I want to join mafia games and not actually play them."



Sort of.

Also, I'm beating you at postwhoring.

Post #214 by Niklor

Apr 21, 2012 -- 10:16AM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

Apr 21, 2012 -- 6:29AM, Niklor wrote:

..."window.parent.tinyMCE.get('post_content').onLoad.dispatch();" class="mceContentBody " contenteditable="true" />I seem to be one of the few players who sees no problem in speaking about how you play the game.




I'm not saying that there's anything wrong with talking about playstyles, but I was just pointing out that it's a little weird that you brought it up in the way you did. It doesn't really mean anything right now though (but potentially miiiiight in the future), which I why I basically only noted that I had read Ahl's arguments.




Then bring it up in the future when it's actually a black mark against me and not just an irrelevent note on how another player is playing.

Post #215 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 21, 2012 -- 10:33AM, Niklor wrote:

Apr 21, 2012 -- 10:16AM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

Apr 21, 2012 -- 6:29AM, Niklor wrote:

..."window.parent.tinyMCE.get('post_content').onLoad.dispatch();" class="mceContentBody " contenteditable="true" />I seem to be one of the few players who sees no problem in speaking about how you play the game.




I'm not saying that there's anything wrong with talking about playstyles, but I was just pointing out that it's a little weird that you brought it up in the way you did. It doesn't really mean anything right now though (but potentially miiiiight in the future), which I why I basically only noted that I had read Ahl's arguments.




Then bring it up in the future when it's actually a black mark against me and not just an irrelevent note on how another player is playing.



HAVE YOU EVER PLAYED MOOFIA WITH GLARE OF THE LOXODON?

Post #216 by ProphetKing

Apr 21, 2012 -- 10:31AM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

Apr 21, 2012 -- 10:29AM, ProphetKing wrote:

It's like saying, "I want to join mafia games and not actually play them."



Sort of.

Also, I'm beating you at postwhoring.


FFP just did this in Dwarf Fortress. And Yoshi's Revenge. 

Post #217 by Niklor

Apr 21, 2012 -- 10:35AM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

Apr 21, 2012 -- 10:33AM, Niklor wrote:

Apr 21, 2012 -- 10:16AM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

Apr 21, 2012 -- 6:29AM, Niklor wrote:

..."window.parent.tinyMCE.get('post_content').onLoad.dispatch();" class="mceContentBody " contenteditable="true" />I seem to be one of the few players who sees no problem in speaking about how you play the game.




I'm not saying that there's anything wrong with talking about playstyles, but I was just pointing out that it's a little weird that you brought it up in the way you did. It doesn't really mean anything right now though (but potentially miiiiight in the future), which I why I basically only noted that I had read Ahl's arguments.




Then bring it up in the future when it's actually a black mark against me and not just an irrelevent note on how another player is playing.



HAVE YOU EVER PLAYED MOOFIA WITH GLARE OF THE LOXODON?




A long time ago once or twice. What about it?

Post #218 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 21, 2012 -- 10:36AM, Niklor wrote:

Apr 21, 2012 -- 10:35AM, Silly_Dragons wrote:


HAVE YOU EVER PLAYED MOOFIA WITH GLARE OF THE LOXODON?



A long time ago once or twice. What about it?



MY POINT HAS BEEN MADE.

Post #219 by Niklor

Apr 21, 2012 -- 10:38AM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

Apr 21, 2012 -- 10:36AM, Niklor wrote:

A long time ago once or twice. What about it?



MY POINT HAS BEEN MADE.




What was your point again?

Post #220 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 21, 2012 -- 10:41AM, Niklor wrote:

Apr 21, 2012 -- 10:38AM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

Apr 21, 2012 -- 10:36AM, Niklor wrote:

A long time ago once or twice. What about it?



MY POINT HAS BEEN MADE.




What was your point again?



Maybe you could get somebody else to explain it to you.

Post #221 by Niklor

Apr 21, 2012 -- 10:43AM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

Apr 21, 2012 -- 10:41AM, Niklor wrote:

What was your point again?



Maybe you could get somebody else to explain it to you.




FoS: Silly

Post #222 by ProphetKing

Apr 21, 2012 -- 10:31AM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

Apr 21, 2012 -- 10:29AM, ProphetKing wrote:

It's like saying, "I want to join mafia games and not actually play them."



Sort of.

Also, I'm beating you at postwhoring.


Only Salty Garrus is allowed to poop all over threads in excessive quanities.  

Post #223 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 21, 2012 -- 10:48AM, ProphetKing wrote:

Only Salty Garrus is allowed to poop all over threads in excessive quanities.  



False.

Post #224 by razorborne

couple things:

1) there's nothing wrong with bringing attention to something that might be meaningful later, as long as you mark it as such.

2) there's something wrong with not reading the thread. this goes for both FFP and Ahlyis.

 

Post #225 by Feroz-s_Familiar_Pheldy

will read thread tomorrow

Post #226 by ProphetKing

Great, thanks.

Post #227 by Niklor

I'll move my vote off FFP provided he does something tomorrow.

If what I did was intended as a pre-emptive deflection, why point it out before I've actually done something I am trying to deflect away? If we assume that it was a pre-emptive deflection, then we could assume I was going to do something. Now that I've been called out on it however, why would I go through with whatever I was planning? Essentially, calling me on something so minor instead of watching me closely and waiting for me to potentially screw up by using this alledged deflection is a bad move on the part of the townie trying to catch scum.

@Ahlyis
So why call me out on it in the first place?

Post #228 by Sleeping

Silly:
The problem is, there are better ways to play than others. For example, say I decide my way of playing baseball is closing my eyes every time I go to bat. Sure, I may have fun, and I may even hit the ball sometimes, but the problem is, the game is not just you. Like baseball, mafia is a team game (more or less), and if you screw around by closing your eyes at bat, then you're going to be ruining the game for everyone else.


Now I can't stop you from playing like you are now. But I will say that if you keep your current attitude, I wouldn't be surprised if you died early in every game you played.

Calm down dog, day one isn't even over. Perhaps I hit better blindfolded. But if that is supposed to be a more literal metaphor then I can assure you that isn't what I'm doing. Sure theatog was a random pick, but like I said that is prone to change. If it really bothers you so much I'll unvote until I come up with something better.

unvote theatog

Niklor:
I will tell anyone I want how to play. Don't try to silence me with you free will.


If you are intentionally silent and later try to come in with evidence, people are more likely to focus on you until you explain away everything to their satisfaction.

I wasn't saying that you literally couldn't tell me how to play if you wanted to. I'm just trying to tell you not to expect me to conform to your prefered style of play. I could  about your style of play too. I don't think the game is as formulaic as you make it out to be.

And I haven't even brought any kind of evidence up yet, so I don't know what this "bringing up evidence later" thing is about.

A meta exists and players are expected to play inside that meta. You can feel free to try to not play within it, but don't expect to not take flak for it. Also, when you voted Theatog in the confirmation phase among many flying joke votes, it looked like a joke vote. When you recast it in the middle of a large amount of activity, it became something to be looked at. 

I didn't realize those were joke votes, I thought they all counted. They were colored and bolded after all.

If you cast your vote late in the day, it still gets used. All casting a vote on someone for no reason looks like is lurking. 

That's what it looks like to you, sure. Maybe you shouldn't look at it that way.
As I said, the reason I have not actively responded to accusations of others being mafia is because I'd like to get a better feel for people before saying anything with any kind of confidence, if I respond now I am most likely not going to be much help and am more likely to make myself look like mafia.
Anyway, I don't see anything wrong with casting a random vote while I'm making my decission, especially early in the game. What distinguishes any other kind of initial vote from that vote? 


You're not playing in a way that avoids attention, though, so in fact you're not contributing and you're not avoiding attention. So how is this a good strategy?

It obviously isn't now, since you called me out, or else I wouldn't bother replying. But it seemed to be working fine. And I didn't say I was going to try to avoid attention forever, I just thought it was the best thing to do till I could add something with confidence, if day one ended quickly I didn't want it to end with myself getting lynched.

Post #229 by ProphetKing

Oh man, Sleeping is bringing the noise with some real opinions. Excellent.

Post #230 by Niklor

Apr 21, 2012 -- 4:01PM, Sleeping wrote:

I wasn't saying that you literally couldn't tell me how to play if you wanted to. I'm just trying to tell you not to expect me to conform to your prefered style of play. I could  about your style of play too. I don't think the game is as formulaic as you make it out to be.


And I haven't even brought any kind of evidence up yet, so I don't know what this "bringing up evidence later" thing is about.




If you find scum, how will you get them lynched? That is what it boils down to.

Oh, the game is not formulaic unless the people who play it do so in a manner that expects certain behavior from themselves and other. It's just that the game should be more easily readable like that, as the goal for playing the game should be victory. Things are not always so straightforward, but they should be. Essentially, playing in a manner that is seen as different can be dangerous, especially if that manner of play is seen as something scum would be likely to do.

Apr 21, 2012 -- 4:01PM, Sleeping wrote:

I didn't realize those were joke votes, I thought they all counted. They were colored and bolded after all.




Some people may end up taking them seriously, but for most people joke votes are casting votes on someone before the game has really started for no real reason.

Apr 21, 2012 -- 4:01PM, Sleeping wrote:

That's what it looks like to you, sure. Maybe you shouldn't look at it that way.
As I said, the reason I have not actively responded to accusations of others being mafia is because I'd like to get a better feel for people before saying anything with any kind of confidence, if I respond now I am most likely not going to be much help and am more likely to make myself look like mafia.
Anyway, I don't see anything wrong with casting a random vote while I'm making my decission, especially early in the game. What distinguishes any other kind of initial vote from that vote?




Most early votes are reactionary to how others are currently playing, which does tend to end up getting one unlucky townie lynched, though the information gained from that lynch is what will usually lead to a scum lynch on subsequent days. Regardless of that, the fact is your vote is declared random, meaning you have no reason to cast it other than wanting to cast it. Votes are the only tool everyone has and to use it without reason is essentially just playing with your vote.



Apr 21, 2012 -- 4:01PM, Sleeping wrote:

It obviously isn't now, since you called me out, or else I wouldn't bother replying. But it seemed to be working fine. And I didn't say I was going to try to avoid attention forever, I just thought it was the best thing to do till I could add something with confidence, if day one ended quickly I didn't want it to end with myself getting lynched.




In the current state of the game, if I hadn't called you out for just chiming in with a random vote, someone would have. I just happened to be the first available player at the scene.

Lurking, even with good intentions, makes you harder to read. If you are harder to read, it will be harder for people to determine whether you are town or scum. There is nothing necessarily wrong with not wanting to be the lynch D1 or on any subsequent days, unless of course your lynch would be more beneficial to your faction than fighting to survive would be. However, you can't read lurkers well and by just casting a vote on someone without explaining it (~Looks at FFP~), you are lurking, which is only ultimately beneficial to scum in the end.

Post #231 by Niklor

Apr 21, 2012 -- 4:10PM, ProphetKing wrote:

Oh man, Sleeping is bringing the noise with some real opinions. Excellent.




Have you actually contributed anything of note today?

Post #232 by ProphetKing

Besides my criticism of FFP?

Post #233 by razorborne

@Sleeping: I think the biggest misconception you have here is that a townie's job is to avoid looking like mafia. it's not. you don't want to be lynched, but if you're going to actually scumhunt, you need to get in the action, and sometimes you wind up looking scummy for it. that's the nature of the game. it's very rare that you have a perfect win for the town, lynching scum straight from start to finish. but hiding in the corner, paralyzed by the fear that someone might vote for you, makes you dead weight. and it's also a really good thing to do if you're scum, since you leave no evidence, so by its nature it's a very suspicious act.

basically, a good townie tries to help, they don't just try to avoid hurting. make sure you know the difference.

 

Post #234 by Niklor

I meant today as in the in-game day, but congratz on jumping on a lurker.  

Post #235 by theatog

Apr 20, 2012 -- 10:11AM, Niklor wrote:

Confirmed.

Let's get this game rolling. 


Rolling is an understatement. This is where i left off and i have 156 posts to read lol

Post #236 by Freddeh

So no, Niklor, he hasn't, FoS: PK again for that piggyback off of you. And I'm out on voting for you now, I like your thoughts and activity more recently.

Unvote;Vote: Razor

Razor, you feel pretty detatched from this game so far, and thats always suspicious to me, especially on day 1.

Post #237 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 21, 2012 -- 5:21PM, theatog wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 10:11AM, Niklor wrote:

Confirmed.

Let's get this game rolling. 


Rolling is an understatement. This is where i left off and i have 156 posts to read lol



Dat postwhoring.

Anyways, I disagree with most of what Sleeping is saying, but I've already said what I've wanted to, and arguing further about it seems slightly pointless to me.

Post #238 by theatog

ok. rolled through about 40 posts down. I have a feeling that If i don't read them carefully, they are just gonna pile up crazy. 

Vote Niklor for now. Day one reasons. He strikes me as weirdly inquisitive. 

Post #239 by razorborne

Apr 21, 2012 -- 5:26PM, Freddeh wrote:

So no, Niklor, he hasn't, FoS: PK again for that piggyback off of you. And I'm out on voting for you now, I like your thoughts and activity more recently.

Unvote;Vote: Razor

Razor, you feel pretty detatched from this game so far, and thats always suspicious to me, especially on day 1.



how so?

 

Post #240 by Niklor

The Niklor wagon is almost always rolling about when I am doing my best to find scum, so I'll take it as a good luck sign that it's there.

Freddeh, I prefer for PK to try to word his own rebuttals, but thank you for you insight. Razor has managed to not get into a verbal brawl with anyone despite being a key contributor thus far on this best of recent day 1's. That either indicates wisdom or discretion, neither of which is scummy in and of itself. I applaud him involving himself without being drawn into what would likely grow to become a large mess of posts arguing semantics.

Theatog, I'm intentionally trying to play at my best right now. From things I've said about myself on numerous occassions, you may assume I am scummy for daring to inquire into things. Of course, it may be simply because I want Rubik's game to be a great success. However, I hope you find more to vote for than "Niklor is being oddly inquisitive."

PK, Freddeh thinks you are indeed only lurking today, what have you to say about that?

 

Post #241 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 21, 2012 -- 5:43PM, Niklor wrote:

The Niklor wagon is almost always rolling about when I am doing my best to find scum, so I'll take it as a good luck sign that it's there.

Freddeh, I prefer for PK to try to word his own rebuttals, but thank you for you insight. Razor has managed to not get into a verbal brawl with anyone despite being a key contributor thus far on this best of recent day 1's. That either indicates wisdom or discretion, neither of which is scummy in and of itself. I applaud him involving himself without being drawn into what would likely grow to become a large mess of posts arguing semantics.

Theatog, I'm intentionally trying to play at my best right now. From things I've said about myself on numerous occassions, you may assume I am scummy for daring to inquire into things. Of course, it may be simply because I want Rubik's game to be a great success. However, I hope you find more to vote for than "Niklor is being oddly inquisitive."

PK, Freddeh thinks you are indeed only lurking today, what have you to say about that?

 



Why do I not get a comment. I hate you.

Post #242 by Niklor

Silly, why do you insist on being so silly?

Does that meet your expectations? 

Post #243 by theatog

Wow this game is active. I was hoping that I can do my thing and the thread would rest a little while i'm at it.

Just so people know, I post before I finish reading. My vote on Niklor happens before the 2 subsequent vote I came upon later. Not that it really matters. i'm a big fan of pushing wagons anyway. But either way I need to drop down notes as I read along.


Up to #137
Just personal motto: never get carried away with a discussion that probably going nowhere. 

Minus points for Raz or ramping on about slip cases. 

Minus points for Ahlyis piling on Niklor with little further contribution. Feels like mob mentality.


I swear one of these days PK's agreeable (to myself) logic is going to kick me in the nut when he's scum. But he's towny for now.

And for promptly being active during weekend times lol I will let go for now. Unvote Niklor.

Post #244 by Silly_Dragons

I'm a big fan of pushing wagons.

Unvote Niklor.

Post #245 by ProphetKing

Freddeh really is trying to instigate something with me this game.

Post #246 by theatog

Apr 20, 2012 -- 7:36PM, Sleeping wrote:

Now you can see why I was worried about posting. Before I said anything nobody had accused me of anything.
And you are very misguided Razorborne. If I am, indeed town, then avoiding the town's attentions and catching scum are essentially the same thing.
I'm a hundred percent sure I'm town, can't say the same about anyone else. So it is beneficial to the town if they vote for someone who isn't me (of course they can't know that.) By avoiding the radar I am making that happen, but Niklor has forced me to crawl out of the woodwork, and I was doing so well too, nobody even questioned my vote before.
I voted for theatog for no particular reason at all, I could choose to bandwagon with another vote, but I don't want to seem too anything at the moment, so I'm going to hold off a bit.


Can someone remind me sleeping's mafia's age, please?

Honestly honestly honestly no offense. Just want to know. I consider myself a relatively new player as well. I apologize if this sounds offensive in anyway. 

Post #247 by Niklor

I've never understood the idea that the weekends are the time you are too busy to get with your computer and make sweet, sweet love.

And when you're not doing those questionable acts while looking at questionable sites, why not drop a post or two in things you are a part of?

Ahlyis seems to have had a reason, though I would like to hear his thoughts on the matter I highlighted earlier.

PK logic is hard to refute because it's so damn logical. Though that doesn't excuse his less than stellar contributions when outside this game he is demanding a need for such things as contributing and activity.

If I care about the game, I will be prepared to come in at any moment I am awake and at my noble laptop, assuming I haven't fallen off the earth into a distracting video game. Such as when I was killing floors earlier today. I can't say I was watching out for fresh activity with all those poor specimens just waiting for a little shotgun rain to quench both my thirst and theirs.  

Post #248 by Ragnarokio

Vote Count

Niklor - 2 (Ahlyis, FFP)
Ahlyis - 1 (Silly)
FFP - 2 (Niklor, PK)
Sleeping - 1 (Razorborne)
Razor - 1 (Freddeh)
Not Voting - 5 (PeregrineV, Pdr_Br, ShadowFyre, Sleeping, Theatog)


Deadline: ~12 Days, 18 Hours

Post Count (not completely accurate)

Silly - 45
Niklor - 45
Razorborne - 21
PK - 18
Freddeh - 12
Sleeping - 6
Ahlyis - 5
Theatog - 4
FFP - 2
Peregrine - 1
Shadowfyre - 1
Pdr_Br - 0

Prodding...

PK in 72 hours
Silly in 72 hours
Niklor in 72 hours
Razorborne in 72 hours 
Theatog in 72 hours
Freddeh in 72 hours
Sleeping in 70 hours
FFP in 67 hours
Ahlyis in 64 hours
Peregrine in 46 hours
Shadowfyre in  42 hours
Pdr_Br in 42 hours

Post #249 by Freddeh

Apr 21, 2012 -- 6:02PM, ProphetKing wrote:

Freddeh really is trying to instigate something with me this game.




Funny, I was just thinking the same about you...

Post #250 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 21, 2012 -- 6:04PM, theatog wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 7:36PM, Sleeping wrote:

Now you can see why I was worried about posting. Before I said anything nobody had accused me of anything.
And you are very misguided Razorborne. If I am, indeed town, then avoiding the town's attentions and catching scum are essentially the same thing.
I'm a hundred percent sure I'm town, can't say the same about anyone else. So it is beneficial to the town if they vote for someone who isn't me (of course they can't know that.) By avoiding the radar I am making that happen, but Niklor has forced me to crawl out of the woodwork, and I was doing so well too, nobody even questioned my vote before.
I voted for theatog for no particular reason at all, I could choose to bandwagon with another vote, but I don't want to seem too anything at the moment, so I'm going to hold off a bit.


Can someone remind me sleeping's mafia's age, please?

Honestly honestly honestly no offense. Just want to know. I consider myself a relatively new player as well. I apologize if this sounds offensive in anyway. 



He's relatively new I think. I think this may be his first Px2 game, but I could be wrong.

Post #251 by Niklor

Apr 21, 2012 -- 6:04PM, theatog wrote:

Can someone remind me sleeping's mafia's age, please?

Honestly honestly honestly no offense. Just want to know. I consider myself a relatively new player as well. I apologize if this sounds offensive in anyway. 




As far as I'm aware, Sleeping has not played in any mafia games, though I think he understands the general theory, just disagrees with Px2's general interpretation of it.

Post #252 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 21, 2012 -- 6:05PM, Ragnarokio wrote:


Post Count (not completely accurate)

Silly - 45
Niklor - 45



**** you Niklor nobody can out-postwhore me.

Post #253 by Silly_Dragons

It is unpossible.

Post #254 by ProphetKing

I don't feel like I haven't said anything this game. Frankly I'd say the opposite.

Weren't we just discussing my word choice and my defense of it earlier? And then I voted for Fred for making something out of nothing. Then FFP refused to play, now we're waiting on him to contribute. 

Right now I'm giving the forum you're posting on an enema, so I'm not dominating the game with a post wall or anything yet.
 

Post #255 by Niklor

PK&Freddeh
Could you two stop exchanging vague suspicions and actually say something about each other that the rest of us can follow along?

I can and I will outpost you Silly and I will do so without making an obscene amount of silly posts. 

Post #256 by ProphetKing

Ragnarokio deserves serious props for working hard to keep the meta going strong. That's doing an excellent job keeping up with the new rules, going beyong really.

Post #257 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 21, 2012 -- 6:10PM, ProphetKing wrote:


Right now I'm giving the forum you're posting on an enema, so I'm not dominating the game with a post wall or anything yet.
 



A can confirm this.

Although there are a few other things that you could probably comment on while we're waiting for FFP.

Post #258 by theatog

Apr 20, 2012 -- 8:56PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:14PM, Ahlyis wrote:

Depends on the type of slip.  Slip cases are NOT always bad. PK slipped in Touhou 3 and claimed a role ON the list he was given instead of a role NOT on the list he had.  It was definitely a slip and it was definitely NOT an awful case brought against him in that game.

No, I'm not saying the slip here is anything the same.  What I'm saying is that not all slip cases are awful.



Oh I had totally forgotten about that.

Okay, changing my opinion. Slips that have mechanical relevance are one thing. They could be useful. Slips that are just arguing the meanings of words though are bad.


This. And strangely raz and nik have the urge to keep going on. And even asking for examples at that lol.

Post #259 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 21, 2012 -- 6:11PM, Niklor wrote:

PK&Freddeh
Could you two stop exchanging vague suspicions and actually say something about each other that the rest of us can follow along?



They were saying stuff about eachother before, but I don't think the argument has developed beyond that.

Post #260 by theatog

Apr 20, 2012 -- 9:10PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 9:06PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

PK teach me how to come across as aloof and arrogant without trying please. I really need to learn this to get in character.



I've found that a complete disregard for the feelings of others goes a long way.

 


that's my freaking problem. I care too much. i hate me.

Post #261 by Niklor

PK, you sort of cruised through an argument that was about you letting the other players discuss it. And calling out a lurker doesn't take a huge amount out of anyone in terms of contributing. And knowing your track record, I find it odd that you can seriously call what you are doing the opposite of silence.

I EXPECT GIANT WALLS OF TEXT!

Ragnarokio is doing a good job as BuM, that is all. I will admit I find it refreshing to see someone else taking the job seriously, but that doesn't mean he is doing something extraordinary. It just means most BuMs can't be bothered.

 

Post #262 by Ragnarokio

o//o

Post #263 by ProphetKing

"PK teach me how to come across as aloof and arrogant without trying please. I really need to learn this to get in character."


This is hilarious, can't believe I missed this somehow. 
 
My best advice: don't take any threats against you seriously, ever. 

Post #264 by Rubik

Best BuM.

Post #265 by Freddeh

Part of the reason on my end is because its too early to really call someone out for lurking, I was just noting that I couldn't remember anything that he actually said that was useful, unless you count that stupid dayvig/shoot/wtfever argument or the piggyback onto FFP. Which I don't.

Also, I wasn't trying to give him a counterargument Nik, didn't know you were trying to hide that he piggybacked off of you.

Also Rag.

Post #266 by ProphetKing

Anyway, hold the QQ, I'll give you an excessive amount of PK sooner than later.

 

Post #267 by ProphetKing

I find the suggestion that I need Niklor's help to defend myself hilarious. 

Post #268 by Freddeh

Well, not too early in general, but too early for PK. If that makes any sense.

Post #269 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 21, 2012 -- 6:23PM, Freddeh wrote:

Part of the reason on my end is because its too early to really call someone out for lurking




This is like the point I was trying to make 50 billion posts ago...."window.parent.tinyMCE.get('post_content').onLoad.dispatch();" contenteditable="true" />

Post #270 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 21, 2012 -- 6:25PM, ProphetKing wrote:

I find the suggestion that I need Niklor's help to defend myself hilarious. 



I don't know if this is a good thing or a bad thing, but Niklor seems very overzealous in trying to defend other people before they get a chance to post.

I personally view it as slightly negative, but what's your opinion on that?

Post #271 by Freddeh

Silly, the vote on Pere was just a random prod as somewhere to place my vote, not a complete 'omg you're lurking die' vote. I even said placeholder when i made it...

Post #272 by Niklor

And yet Freddeh was the one who said he was going to go after lurkers hard and fast if they appeared D1. How ironic.

I don't see why it matters that PK allegedly piggybacked on me. I'm not trying to hide it, it's just not an important issue of any merit.

And, even if I am guilty of it myself, I prefer the people I direct my accusations at to be the ones who answer them, not other players. 

Post #273 by theatog

Vote Freddeh.

Rag, do you mind doing another vote count plaese? Sorry didn't know you'd count between me unvoting and voting again.

Post #274 by Niklor

As soon as someone explains a real reason to me why people need a placeholder to rest their vote on, we can ignore the fact of randomly placing votes without reason.

Post #275 by theatog

You know what? screw you nik. 

Unvote. Vote Niklor.
I'm the law here : P

Post #276 by Niklor

So why the Freddeh vote?

Post #277 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 21, 2012 -- 6:32PM, Niklor wrote:

As soon as someone explains a real reason to me why people need a placeholder to rest their vote on, we can ignore the fact of randomly placing votes without reason.



Because not voting makes you seem mafia and nobody wants to seem mafia.

Post #278 by Niklor

And why the sudden change to me?

Would you stop slinging your vote around without rhyme or reason being applied please and thank you? 

Post #279 by Niklor

Apr 21, 2012 -- 6:37PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

Apr 21, 2012 -- 6:32PM, Niklor wrote:

As soon as someone explains a real reason to me why people need a placeholder to rest their vote on, we can ignore the fact of randomly placing votes without reason.



Because not voting makes you seem mafia and nobody wants to seem mafia.




I'm a little lost on this logic. Why would mafia not want to vote?

Post #280 by theatog

freddeh is doing that minimal presense thing. Or I just don't know what he's doing. 


He's essentially the ahlyis FFP group but the only one who doesn't explicitly say so. All his response are reactive. 

and it helps a tiny bit when PK shoots. 


But yea, back to you. I took my vote off you thinking you are actively town. Then I realize you'd probably be just as active if you were scum coz' silly is being silly : P Does that make sense?

Post #281 by Silly_Dragons

I'm so confused at what is going on between Atog and Niklor.

:o

Post #282 by Ragnarokio

Vote Count

Niklor - 4 (Ahlyis, FFP, Theatog)
Ahlyis - 1 (Silly)
FFP - 2 (Niklor, PK)
Sleeping - 1 (Razorborne)
Razor - 1 (Freddeh)
Not Voting - 4 (PeregrineV, Pdr_Br, ShadowFyre, Sleeping)

Post #283 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 21, 2012 -- 6:38PM, Niklor wrote:

Apr 21, 2012 -- 6:37PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

Apr 21, 2012 -- 6:32PM, Niklor wrote:

As soon as someone explains a real reason to me why people need a placeholder to rest their vote on, we can ignore the fact of randomly placing votes without reason.



Because not voting makes you seem mafia and nobody wants to seem mafia.




I'm a little lost on this logic. Why would mafia not want to vote?




Because votes, to some extent (they matter more the longer the game goes), are the best way of telling who a person truly wants to lynch. They may say one thing, but their votes will tell differently.

Apr 21, 2012 -- 6:40PM, theatog wrote:


But yea, back to you. I took my vote off you thinking you are actively town. Then I realize you'd probably be just as active if you were scum coz' silly is being silly : P Does that make sense?



I'm confuuuuuused.

What does me being silly have anything to do with someone else being scum.

Post #284 by theatog

Can I ask you to lessen your posthore effort a bit?

Post #285 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 21, 2012 -- 6:41PM, Ragnarokio wrote:

Vote Count

Niklor - 4 (Ahlyis, FFP, Theatog)



Wha wha whaaaaaaaaaaat?

Post #286 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 21, 2012 -- 6:47PM, theatog wrote:

Can I ask you to lessen your posthore effort a bit?



Me or Niklor?

Post #287 by theatog

Apr 21, 2012 -- 6:47PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

Apr 21, 2012 -- 6:47PM, theatog wrote:

Can I ask you to lessen your posthore effort a bit?



Me or Niklor?


you.

niklor hore better with winning style. you just go for post count : P shame on that : P 
on that : P on that : P

Post #288 by theatog

Apr 21, 2012 -- 6:09PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

Apr 21, 2012 -- 6:05PM, Ragnarokio wrote:


Post Count (not completely accurate)

Silly - 45
Niklor - 45



**** you Niklor nobody can out-postwhore me.




Apr 21, 2012 -- 6:09PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

It is unpossible.


Evidence. btw.



Post #289 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 21, 2012 -- 6:51PM, theatog wrote:

Apr 21, 2012 -- 6:47PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

Apr 21, 2012 -- 6:47PM, theatog wrote:

Can I ask you to lessen your posthore effort a bit?



Me or Niklor?


you.

niklor hore better with winning style. you just go for post count : P shame on that : P 
on that : P on that : P



I post lots of content. In fact, I think my joke:content ratio is pretty low this game.

I might need to fix that.

Post #290 by Silly_Dragons

Also, can I ask you to unvote Atog?

Post #291 by Niklor

Im completely lost on your reasons to vote me in the first place, but go ahead and do what you must.

On the note of votes revealing true intentions, I can't say that is really well applied to the idea of random placeholder votes and even if it is, scum could obviously vote for someone they don't want to see lynched. So the whole idea of placeholder votes being useful in any meaningful way is still not apparent.

On the matter of your apparent charisma, is that what you've been given or is Rag making errors?

Post #292 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 21, 2012 -- 6:58PM, Niklor wrote:

..."window.parent.tinyMCE.get('post_content').onLoad.dispatch();" contenteditable="true" />On the matter of your apparent charisma, is that what you've been given or is Rag making errors?




The votecount is correct. I just asked rag.

Post #293 by Freddeh

Apr 21, 2012 -- 6:40PM, theatog wrote:

freddeh is doing that minimal presense thing. Or I just don't know what he's doing. 


He's essentially the ahlyis FFP group but the only one who doesn't explicitly say so. All his response are reactive.




1) Things are getting slightly mixed up between 'lurking' and 'active lurking'. I'm accusing razor and PK of 'active lurking', its hard to pin actual 'lurking' this early in day 1, though there are the usual suspects there like SF.

2) I actually did explicitly say so:

Apr 20, 2012 -- 3:41PM, Freddeh wrote:

@Niklor, I never said it had a point, its a placeholder vote. As far as proactive vs reactive, it depends on my mood and the game. If no one is talking on day 1 I tend to be more proactive, if its a bit more active like this game has been so far, I'm more reactive. There are exceptions of course but just in general thats how I usually play day 1.


Post #294 by PeregrineV

171 posts?!? Are you freaking kidding?

I'll start on this, but I have homework this weekend.

Unvote. 

Post #295 by Freddeh

These are how games (mostly) are supposed to go tbh. Minus a little bit of spam maybe, but theres really not that much that I can remember.

Post #296 by theatog

Here's what i have so far.

Raz and Nik banter on slips. Think ahlyis furthered it a bit? Nik is walling on every issue, big or mundane, as usual. 

Silly pretty much spamming

Ahlyis and FFP and PV too busy to read.

PK commenting on everyone's play.

Freddeh is posting noncontent.

Sleeping is justifying his play (which imo not really anywhere a classic definition of good play); also no content. When confronted, forego of the placeholder vote on myself.

SF not posting.

After a bit of thought, I'm actually leaning more on a silly lynch today. This is probably a very stupid reason, but that's what I usually make-do for a day 1 lynch:

ever since lurking lynch's been brought up, silly's post count seems to surge. I understand it could be his nature to whore a bit more when encouraged, but overall i feel like he's hiding something. I just don't think it's that exciting for anything at all so far yet he seems hyped. My gut tells me that he's scum with a fun ability?

Who did I miss?

Unvote. Confirm vote silly until further notice.

Post #297 by Feroz-s_Familiar_Pheldy

ok, I have read the thread
here are my thoughts
I'll totally let my vote stick on Niklor
Niklor is using the good old look-at-me-I'm-so-protown-and-active-I-can't-be-scum tactic. he is commenting on everything and everyone, at one point, he posted three times in a row. he uses quote towers as much as possible, because quote towers are hard and tiring to read. he questions everything and therefore exploitable hooks turn up sooner or later. his endless posts crowd up the thread so much that the actual game vanishes into obscurity behind the mega-debate that is niklor.

Post #298 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 22, 2012 -- 4:51AM, theatog wrote:

Here's what i have so far.

Raz and Nik banter on slips. Think ahlyis furthered it a bit? Nik is walling on every issue, big or mundane, as usual. 

Silly pretty much spamming

Ahlyis and FFP and PV too busy to read.

PK commenting on everyone's play.

Freddeh is posting noncontent.

Sleeping is justifying his play (which imo not really anywhere a classic definition of good play); also no content. When confronted, forego of the placeholder vote on myself.

SF not posting.

After a bit of thought, I'm actually leaning more on a silly lynch today. This is probably a very stupid reason, but that's what I usually make-do for a day 1 lynch:

ever since lurking lynch's been brought up, silly's post count seems to surge. I understand it could be his nature to whore a bit more when encouraged, but overall i feel like he's hiding something. I just don't think it's that exciting for anything at all so far yet he seems hyped. My gut tells me that he's scum with a fun ability?

Who did I miss?

Unvote. Confirm vote silly until further notice.



Did you even read the thread.

Post #299 by Niklor

Apr 22, 2012 -- 4:51AM, theatog wrote:

Raz and Nik banter on slips. Think ahlyis furthered it a bit? Nik is walling on every issue, big or mundane, as usual.




Is that my usual?

Apr 22, 2012 -- 4:51AM, theatog wrote:

Silly pretty much spamming




Silly was also contributing to the Raz and Nik banter, I'm sorry to tell you.

Apr 22, 2012 -- 4:51AM, theatog wrote:

Ahlyis and FFP and PV too busy to read.




They need to get some more free time.

Apr 22, 2012 -- 4:51AM, theatog wrote:

PK commenting on everyone's play.




With as little effort as he has to muster IMO.

Apr 22, 2012 -- 4:51AM, theatog wrote:

Freddeh is posting noncontent.




Um, what?

Apr 22, 2012 -- 4:51AM, theatog wrote:

Sleeping is justifying his play (which imo not really anywhere a classic definition of good play); also no content. When confronted, forego of the placeholder vote on myself.




While he still hasn't offered a bevy of opinions on everyone in this game, we have pulled him out of his non-content strategy a bit. We just need to keep prodding and poking.

Apr 22, 2012 -- 4:51AM, theatog wrote:

SF not posting.




Also, Pdr

Apr 22, 2012 -- 4:51AM, theatog wrote:

After a bit of thought, I'm actually leaning more on a silly lynch today. This is probably a very stupid reason, but that's what I usually make-do for a day 1 lynch:

ever since lurking lynch's been brought up, silly's post count seems to surge. I understand it could be his nature to whore a bit more when encouraged, but overall i feel like he's hiding something. I just don't think it's that exciting for anything at all so far yet he seems hyped. My gut tells me that he's scum with a fun ability?




Under that logic, wouldn't I be the logical lynch? I'm not trying to spam the game, but I am clearly trying to stay very active and be available to comment on everything.

Post #300 by Niklor

Apr 22, 2012 -- 7:43AM, Feroz-s_Familiar_Pheldy wrote:

ok, I have read the thread
here are my thoughts
I'll totally let my vote stick on Niklor
Niklor is using the good old look-at-me-I'm-so-protown-and-active-I-can't-be-scum tactic. he is commenting on everything and everyone, at one point, he posted three times in a row. he uses quote towers as much as possible, because quote towers are hard and tiring to read. he questions everything and therefore exploitable hooks turn up sooner or later. his endless posts crowd up the thread so much that the actual game vanishes into obscurity behind the mega-debate that is niklor.




Turn this into a niklor hunt all you like, but don't argue that content is bad for the game just because your own playstyle prefers short posts like this that avoid offering ledges for us to poke and prod at you to determine if you are scum.

Unvote

Though if this is all you plan to offer in summary of all that was said, my vote may return to you later.

Post #301 by Feroz-s_Familiar_Pheldy

there is a vast difference between content and spam

Post #302 by Niklor

Which is irrelevent to your accussations, unless you are trying to argue that I am spamming the game by being an active and contributive player, which I am.

Post #303 by razorborne

so about 60 posts since I last came on. cool. unfortunately a lot of the issues I wanted to address got covered by someone else before I got to them, but a few things worth noting:

Apr 21, 2012 -- 6:28PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

Apr 21, 2012 -- 6:25PM, ProphetKing wrote:

I find the suggestion that I need Niklor's help to defend myself hilarious. 


 
I don't know if this is a good thing or a bad thing, but Niklor seems very overzealous in trying to defend other people before they get a chance to post.

I personally view it as slightly negative, but what's your opinion on that?


I think this is a good point. Niklor definitely seems to be jumping on every single thing that happens. but at this stage of the game, it's also a good idea to try to create content wherever you can, so I don't think it's necessarily all that bad. still, something to keep an eye on.

Apr 21, 2012 -- 6:43PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

Because votes, to some extent (they matter more the longer the game goes), are the best way of telling who a person truly wants to lynch. They may say one thing, but their votes will tell differently.


then random voting is actively detrimental, since it says nothing about who you actually want to lynch and winds up falsifying the records.

Apr 22, 2012 -- 4:51AM, theatog wrote:

After a bit of thought, I'm actually leaning more on a silly lynch today. This is probably a very stupid reason, but that's what I usually make-do for a day 1 lynch:

ever since lurking lynch's been brought up, silly's post count seems to surge. I understand it could be his nature to whore a bit more when encouraged, but overall i feel like he's hiding something. I just don't think it's that exciting for anything at all so far yet he seems hyped. My gut tells me that he's scum with a fun ability?


if I recall correctly, and I do, the lurker lynch possibility was brought up during a large discussion with silly. which means he was already active before it was raised. which means this isn't a reaction to it. which means your case is invalid.

Apr 22, 2012 -- 7:43AM, Feroz-s_Familiar_Pheldy wrote:

ok, I have read the thread
here are my thoughts
I'll totally let my vote stick on Niklor
Niklor is using the good old look-at-me-I'm-so-protown-and-active-I-can't-be-scum tactic. he is commenting on everything and everyone, at one point, he posted three times in a row. he uses quote towers as much as possible, because quote towers are hard and tiring to read. he questions everything and therefore exploitable hooks turn up sooner or later. his endless posts crowd up the thread so much that the actual game vanishes into obscurity behind the mega-debate that is niklor.


parts of this seem like a real case, but a lot of it just seems like you're voting Nik because you don't like to read. who has trouble with quote towers? you don't have to reread every quote in it. just skip to the last one to remind yourself what was said, then read the response. and who cares if he posted three times in a row? it means he had three things to respond to. I'm having no trouble keeping track of what's going on besides Niklor, if you are then I suggest you try a little harder.

 

Post #304 by Niklor

Apr 22, 2012 -- 12:08PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 21, 2012 -- 6:28PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

Apr 21, 2012 -- 6:25PM, ProphetKing wrote:

I find the suggestion that I need Niklor's help to defend myself hilarious. 


 
I don't know if this is a good thing or a bad thing, but Niklor seems very overzealous in trying to defend other people before they get a chance to post.

I personally view it as slightly negative, but what's your opinion on that?


I think this is a good point. Niklor definitely seems to be jumping on every single thing that happens. but at this stage of the game, it's also a good idea to try to create content wherever you can, so I don't think it's necessarily all that bad. still, something to keep an eye on.




Everything is something to keep your eye on.

Post #305 by razorborne

Apr 22, 2012 -- 12:18PM, Niklor wrote:

Apr 22, 2012 -- 12:08PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 21, 2012 -- 6:28PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

Apr 21, 2012 -- 6:25PM, ProphetKing wrote:

I find the suggestion that I need Niklor's help to defend myself hilarious. 


 
I don't know if this is a good thing or a bad thing, but Niklor seems very overzealous in trying to defend other people before they get a chance to post.

I personally view it as slightly negative, but what's your opinion on that?


I think this is a good point. Niklor definitely seems to be jumping on every single thing that happens. but at this stage of the game, it's also a good idea to try to create content wherever you can, so I don't think it's necessarily all that bad. still, something to keep an eye on.




Everything is something to keep your eye on.



we only have so many eyes.

 

Post #306 by Niklor

If you can't keep your "eyes" peeled for something in a game that consists only of written words, you're not trying to keep them peeled.

Post #307 by Freddeh

@Atog: If I'm posting noncontent what are YOU posting? I even responded to you (which you promptly ignored). Also, you're not let off the hook just because of your role, your last post was scummy as hell, a (short and not totally correct) summary of whats going on combined with a pretty terrible reasoning for a serious vote on Silly?

As far as Niks play is concerned, FFP could be correct, but personally I like the way hes playing this game so far, and its something I'd rather encourage than discourage via lynching. So Nik is off the table today for me.

Unvote

Thank you for actual real posts Razor, still slightly suspicious because of the speed at which you changed your style despite seeming to ignore my vote, but my original reasoning is invalid now.

I might just end up voting SF as a default policy lynch, but I need to read back through and see if anything jumps out at me.

Post #308 by shadowfyre77

suddenly posts

anyways, i think commenting on everything as niklor's doing isn't a terrible thing, it gives us something to look at when we try to get reads

also it gives us something to talk about and stuff.

Post #309 by Freddeh

Apr 22, 2012 -- 3:11PM, shadowfyre77 wrote:

suddenly posts

anyways, i think commenting on everything as niklor's doing isn't a terrible thing, it gives us something to look at when we try to get reads

also it gives us something to talk about and stuff.




Talking about reads, do you actually have any?

Post #310 by Ragnarokio

Vote Count

Niklor - 2 (Ahlyis, FFP)
Ahlyis - 1 (Silly)
FFP - 2 (Niklor, PK)
Sleeping - 1 (Razorborne)
Silly - 2 (Theatog)
Not Voting - 5 (PeregrineV, Pdr_Br, ShadowFyre, Sleeping, Freddeh)


Deadline: ~11 Days, 21 Hours

Post Count (not completely accurate)

Silly - 61
Niklor - 59
Razorborne - 23
PK - 23
Freddeh - 20
Theatog - 14
Sleeping - 6
Ahlyis - 5
FFP - 4
Peregrine - 2
Shadowfyre - 2
Pdr_Br - 0

Prodding...

Freddeh in 72 hours
Shadowfyre in 72 hours
Niklor in 70 hours
Razorborne in 70 hours
FFP in 68 hours
Silly in 66 hours
Theatog in 62 hours
Peregrine in 56 hours
PK in 51 hours
Sleeping in 49 hours
Ahlyis in 43 hours
Pdr_Br in 21 hours

Post #311 by shadowfyre77

Apr 22, 2012 -- 3:22PM, Freddeh wrote:

Apr 22, 2012 -- 3:11PM, shadowfyre77 wrote:

suddenly posts

anyways, i think commenting on everything as niklor's doing isn't a terrible thing, it gives us something to look at when we try to get reads

also it gives us something to talk about and stuff.




Talking about reads, do you actually have any?



at some point, yes, but i forgot them

i'll remember them when i go back a couple of pages 

Post #312 by shadowfyre77

right why did atog vote freddeh then change to niklor
did he ever answer that question or what 

Post #313 by theatog

Apr 22, 2012 -- 3:11PM, shadowfyre77 wrote:

suddenly posts

anyways, i think commenting on everything as niklor's doing isn't a terrible thing, it gives us something to look at when we try to get reads

also it gives us something to talk about and stuff.


Actually I find the opposite to be ture. If you "blanket" comment on everything, essentially nothing is really more important than other events, which can't possibly be true.

I think my vote went from Nik -> fred? -> nik -> silly.


Nik vote was before i know people are wagoning on him. But Since I did vote for him, the wagon is not unreasonable I would say. his early posts are scummy for that they tend to say a lot of nothing , or something like that. Also the first two votes were really to confirm my charismatic vote. It just so happened the vote count happened in between my first unvote that I have to throw a semi-placeholder vote (on freddeh in that case) to see it in a vote count.

I moved the vote to fred coz' I find his vote on nik very opportunistic. Also I agree with PK's semi-accusation that he was kinda sorta scummy. All in all it's a gut vote.

Then I moved it back to nik coz' he was being defensive and yet doesn't seem to defend himself very well.

Then silly as mentioned. his posts just didn't read right - again, gut vote.

Post #314 by Niklor

Apr 22, 2012 -- 3:05PM, Freddeh wrote:

As far as Niks play is concerned, FFP could be correct, but personally I like the way hes playing this game so far, and its something I'd rather encourage than discourage via lynching. So Nik is off the table today for me.




Instead of just saying you aren't going after me today, why not just say you aren't going after me unless I do something suspicious. Are you trying to make friends with me? Seriously, I can't see any other reason to just decide to ignore another player's actions for the day other than buddying up with them.

Unvote; Vote: Freddeh

Post #315 by Niklor

Apr 22, 2012 -- 3:56PM, shadowfyre77 wrote:

right why did atog vote freddeh then change to niklor
did he ever answer that question or what 




He went back to me for his original reason I believe, which was being oddly active.

Post #316 by Niklor

Apr 22, 2012 -- 4:16PM, theatog wrote:

Actually I find the opposite to be ture. If you "blanket" comment on everything, essentially nothing is really more important than other events, which can't possibly be true.




I don't see why that is the conclusion. There are multiple scum, not a single one. So there is no reason to pursue only one event or issue instead of actively trying to get to the bottom of every thing going on. I don't see why an issue is any more important than any other just because I dedicate myself to it solely. It would be more important to me, but not necessarily more important than anything else going on. And even if that catches me scum, where does that leave me?

Plus, if I don't actively talk about something it is liable to become less important to me, which can mean something slips by me later merely because it's an extension of something I had already chosen not to comment on earlier.

Apr 22, 2012 -- 4:16PM, theatog wrote:

Then I moved it back to nik coz' he was being defensive and yet doesn't seem to defend himself very well.




I am less worried about defending myself and more worried about catching scum.

Post #317 by Niklor

Shadowfyre, do you actually plan on going back those couple pages and getting those reads? 

Post #318 by Freddeh

Apr 22, 2012 -- 4:17PM, Niklor wrote:

Apr 22, 2012 -- 3:05PM, Freddeh wrote:

As far as Niks play is concerned, FFP could be correct, but personally I like the way hes playing this game so far, and its something I'd rather encourage than discourage via lynching. So Nik is off the table today for me.




Instead of just saying you aren't going after me today, why not just say you aren't going after me unless I do something suspicious. Are you trying to make friends with me? Seriously, I can't see any other reason to just decide to ignore another player's actions for the day other than buddying up with them.

Unvote; Vote: Freddeh




Where did I say I was going to ignore your actions? Just because you're off the table doesn't mean I'm not going to pay attention to your actions, it just means that I'm not going to vote for you today, unless you do something drastically scummy, because I don't want to lynch someone that is posting a lot day 1 with solid content, again, unless those posts happen to be rather scummy beyond a reasonable doubt.

If you do 'something suspicious' I would look into it, and keep it in mind for day 2 in combination with how the rest of today went, but I probably won't vote you for it today.

Off-topic: I find it rather curious that FFP is getting most of the heat when Ahlyis and Pere are doing virtually the same things.

Post #319 by Niklor

Apr 22, 2012 -- 4:44PM, Freddeh wrote:

Where did I say I was going to ignore your actions? Just because you're off the table doesn't mean I'm not going to pay attention to your actions, it just means that I'm not going to vote for you today, unless you do something drastically scummy, because I don't want to lynch someone that is posting a lot day 1 with solid content, again, unless those posts happen to be rather scummy beyond a reasonable doubt.




Than say that, because saying someone is off the table implies they are off the table and the only reason someone should be off the table is because you think there is no chance they are scum.

Apr 22, 2012 -- 4:44PM, Freddeh wrote:

If you do 'something suspicious' I would look into it, and keep it in mind for day 2 in combination with how the rest of today went, but I probably won't vote you for it today.




That seems flimsy. Even I know that I wouldn't make a bad D1 lynch given the opinions that have formed up about what I am doing, so if I do something suspicious, why would you hold off on voting me? From your point of view, there is a chance you will catch scum. And if you're mistaken, you still get the information on the opinions that have been placed on me.

Apr 22, 2012 -- 4:44PM, Freddeh wrote:

Off-topic: I find it rather curious that FFP is getting most of the heat when Ahlyis and Pere are doing virtually the same things.




Ahlyis contributed slightly coming in and we have yet to hear from him again. Peregrine hasn't yet done anything but say he is busy during the weekend.

FFP said he would read the thread, though, which says he is going to form opinions, but he has very little to say about the several pages he supposedly read. Of the three, he is currently the worst. 

Post #320 by Silly_Dragons

Working my way through the thread again. Apologies if I talk about something that has already been discussed or is no longer valid (like bringing up Razor voting me after he had already unvoted later in the thread )

Apr 22, 2012 -- 7:43AM, Feroz-s_Familiar_Pheldy wrote:

at one point, he posted three times in a row



There was one point when I was answering all those posts yesterday that I posted eight times in a row or something. :/

Apr 22, 2012 -- 12:08PM, razorborne wrote:

..."window.parent.tinyMCE.get('post_content').onLoad.dispatch();" contenteditable="true" />

Apr 21, 2012 -- 6:43PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

Because votes, to some extent (they matter more the longer the game goes), are the best way of telling who a person truly wants to lynch. They may say one thing, but their votes will tell differently.


then random voting is actively detrimental, since it says nothing about who you actually want to lynch and winds up falsifying the records.




I did note that votes mean more the longer the game goes. Beginning of D1 votes are often times joke votes and stuff, so its hard to get much from them. What we should really look for is the voting record when the deadline for each day is almost up.

Post #321 by shadowfyre77

Apr 22, 2012 -- 4:29PM, Niklor wrote:

Shadowfyre, do you actually plan on going back those couple pages and getting those reads? 



yes but not now because i have to go eat food

Post #322 by Freddeh

Apr 22, 2012 -- 5:10PM, Niklor wrote:

Than say that, because saying someone is off the table implies they are off the table and the only reason someone should be off the table is because you think there is no chance they are scum.



Off the lynch table and thinking you are scum/town are two very different things. Obviously people I think are town are off the table, but you can be off the table for various different reasons, at least in my book, and especially on day 1 where there are a lot of people and not a lot of evidence. Basically, I'm saying that you're looking into it too much. True, I think you are the most likely to be town here, but thats not saying much this early into day 1, and I'm still not going to blindly trust or believe anything you say, to do so would be dumb.

That seems flimsy. Even I know that I wouldn't make a bad D1 lynch given the opinions that have formed up about what I am doing, so if I do something suspicious, why would you hold off on voting me? From your point of view, there is a chance you will catch scum. And if you're mistaken, you still get the information on the opinions that have been placed on me.



Once again, you are making something up that I didn't even say or imply. If the choices were between you doing something suspicious (as opposed to outright scummy, which WOULD probably prompt a vote), or a bad D1 lynch, I would go for option 3, try to push someone else, because both 1 and 2 are the same in this case. tldr: I think YOU are a bad D1 lynch, thus your point is invalid.

Ahlyis contributed slightly coming in and we have yet to hear from him again. Peregrine hasn't yet done anything but say he is busy during the weekend.

FFP said he would read the thread, though, which says he is going to form opinions, but he has very little to say about the several pages he supposedly read. Of the three, he is currently the worst. 



I can't remember the last game FFP DIDN'T do something like this on D1. Policy lynch sure whatever, but Ahlyis said the same thing as FFP (cba to read the thread) and Pere only made an excuse, which I don't like but whatever, its the weekend, we'll see what happens over the week with him.

However FFP and SF have also actually made some content since then, while Ahlyis hasn't. I'd like to see some more out of Sleeping as well.

Post #323 by Freddeh

Hm, guess who else is trying to lurk his way out of suspicion.

Vote: PK

Post #324 by Niklor

Apr 22, 2012 -- 5:40PM, Freddeh wrote:

Apr 22, 2012 -- 5:10PM, Niklor wrote:

Than say that, because saying someone is off the table implies they are off the table and the only reason someone should be off the table is because you think there is no chance they are scum.



Off the lynch table and thinking you are scum/town are two very different things. Obviously people I think are town are off the table, but you can be off the table for various different reasons, at least in my book, and especially on day 1 where there are a lot of people and not a lot of evidence. Basically, I'm saying that you're looking into it too much. True, I think you are the most likely to be town here, but thats not saying much this early into day 1, and I'm still not going to blindly trust or believe anything you say, to do so would be dumb.




I think you and I interpret what being on the table means differently. Being on the table means you are in the pool of people I am looking through for scum. People off the table are off because they are dead or confirmed town in some respect that is very unlikely to be false.

I'm not worried about you trusting me. I'm bothered in the way you said you were dropping me as a candidate for the day. It feels like you are trying to buddy up with me, which is something scum has motivations to do.

Apr 22, 2012 -- 5:40PM, Freddeh wrote:

That seems flimsy. Even I know that I wouldn't make a bad D1 lynch given the opinions that have formed up about what I am doing, so if I do something suspicious, why would you hold off on voting me? From your point of view, there is a chance you will catch scum. And if you're mistaken, you still get the information on the opinions that have been placed on me.



Once again, you are making something up that I didn't even say or imply. If the choices were between you doing something suspicious (as opposed to outright scummy, which WOULD probably prompt a vote), or a bad D1 lynch, I would go for option 3, try to push someone else, because both 1 and 2 are the same in this case. tldr: I think YOU are a bad D1 lynch, thus your point is invalid.




Why am I a bad D1 lynch? Answer me that.

Post #325 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 22, 2012 -- 4:16PM, theatog wrote:

Apr 22, 2012 -- 3:11PM, shadowfyre77 wrote:

suddenly posts

anyways, i think commenting on everything as niklor's doing isn't a terrible thing, it gives us something to look at when we try to get reads

also it gives us something to talk about and stuff.


Actually I find the opposite to be ture. If you "blanket" comment on everything, essentially nothing is really more important than other events, which can't possibly be true.

I think my vote went from Nik -> fred? -> nik -> silly.


Nik vote was before i know people are wagoning on him. But Since I did vote for him, the wagon is not unreasonable I would say. his early posts are scummy for that they tend to say a lot of nothing , or something like that. Also the first two votes were really to confirm my charismatic vote. It just so happened the vote count happened in between my first unvote that I have to throw a semi-placeholder vote (on freddeh in that case) to see it in a vote count.

I moved the vote to fred coz' I find his vote on nik very opportunistic. Also I agree with PK's semi-accusation that he was kinda sorta scummy. All in all it's a gut vote.

Then I moved it back to nik coz' he was being defensive and yet doesn't seem to defend himself very well.

Then silly as mentioned. his posts just didn't read right - again, gut vote.




... ... ...What.

LET ME JUST EMPHASIZE THAT FOR A MINUTE Show



Alright gentlemen and ladies. This post is probably as serious as it gets. I have no idea what the **** you're doing right now.

Apr 21, 2012 -- 5:27PM, theatog wrote:

ok. rolled through about 40 posts down. I have a feeling that If i don't read them carefully, they are just gonna pile up crazy. 

Vote Niklor for now. Day one reasons. He strikes me as weirdly inquisitive. 




First off, you vote Niklor D1 in post 238. The reason you give is that he's "weirdly inquisitive". You call this a gut vote. Now this I can sort of buy. But it's what follows that I feel doesn't really add up.

Apr 21, 2012 -- 5:56PM, theatog wrote:

Wow this game is active. I was hoping that I can do my thing and the thread would rest a little while i'm at it.

Just so people know, I post before I finish reading. My vote on Niklor happens before the 2 subsequent vote I came upon later. Not that it really matters. i'm a big fan of pushing wagons anyway. But either way I need to drop down notes as I read along.


Up to #137
Just personal motto: never get carried away with a discussion that probably going nowhere. 

Minus points for Raz or ramping on about slip cases. 

Minus points for Ahlyis piling on Niklor with little further contribution. Feels like mob mentality.


I swear one of these days PK's agreeable (to myself) logic is going to kick me in the nut when he's scum. But he's towny for now.

And for promptly being active during weekend times lol I will let go for now. Unvote Niklor.




Now, you find out that your vote puts Nik at L-3. This occurs in post 243. You say this was on accident, and you use the excuse that you "like pushing wagons" to cover up your vote. But then you promptly unvote Niklor. That doesn't really make sense to me. If you liked pushing wagons, then you probably should have actually pushed the wagon. Like, brought up some points against Niklor and had him respond. Instead of just going "vote niklor for no reason and then unvote him five posts later". To me, you bringing up the fact that you like pushing wagons is an excuse, because you don't want to draw heat for putting Niklor close to the lynch. I mean, you clearly don't like actually pushing wagons.

Apr 21, 2012 -- 6:31PM, theatog wrote:

Vote Freddeh.

Rag, do you mind doing another vote count plaese? Sorry didn't know you'd count between me unvoting and voting again.




Apr 21, 2012 -- 6:36PM, theatog wrote:

You know what? screw you nik. 

Unvote. Vote Niklor.
I'm the law here : P




Then you vote freddeh randomly (post 273), and then immediately afterwards decide to unvote him (even before anyone really responds) and vote Niklor again as a joke. You later use this to justify your votes:

Apr 21, 2012 -- 6:40PM, theatog wrote:

freddeh is doing that minimal presense thing. Or I just don't know what he's doing. 


He's essentially the ahlyis FFP group but the only one who doesn't explicitly say so. All his response are reactive. 

and it helps a tiny bit when PK shoots. 


But yea, back to you. I took my vote off you thinking you are actively town. Then I realize you'd probably be just as active if you were scum coz' silly is being silly : P Does that make sense?




By this post, your justification for voting for Fred is to get him to post more, since he's trying to have "minimal presence", or something like that. Except, you vote him and then unvote in the next five minutes or something. Without giving anyone the chance to really post at all. How does that even pressure anyone into stopping their "minimal presence". And then your justification for voting Niklor the second time I can't even decipher, as it just seems like random jibberish. I asked you to clarify this (post 283), but you never responded.

Finally, you unvote Niklor and then vote me. (post 296)

Apr 22, 2012 -- 4:51AM, theatog wrote:

Here's what i have so far.

Raz and Nik banter on slips. Think ahlyis furthered it a bit? Nik is walling on every issue, big or mundane, as usual. 

Silly pretty much spamming

Ahlyis and FFP and PV too busy to read.

PK commenting on everyone's play.

Freddeh is posting noncontent.

Sleeping is justifying his play (which imo not really anywhere a classic definition of good play); also no content. When confronted, forego of the placeholder vote on myself.

SF not posting.

After a bit of thought, I'm actually leaning more on a silly lynch today. This is probably a very stupid reason, but that's what I usually make-do for a day 1 lynch:

ever since lurking lynch's been brought up, silly's post count seems to surge. I understand it could be his nature to whore a bit more when encouraged, but overall i feel like he's hiding something. I just don't think it's that exciting for anything at all so far yet he seems hyped. My gut tells me that he's scum with a fun ability?

Who did I miss?

Unvote. Confirm vote silly until further notice.




Your justification of this is that my post count "surged" after people started discussion lurkers. This is a pretty stupid reason not only because I was already posting when people were discussion lurkers, and I had already pointed out that I was playing magic when 60 posts decided to show up (post 159). You know, because it was FRIDAY NIGHT, and I was at ****ING FRIDAY NIGHT MAGIC.

Afterwards, instead of responding to people telling you that you were wrong (I don't think you've actually seriously responded anytime somebody has tried to debate the justifications behind your votes), you instead make post 313 (post quoted at top of this post), that you votes were all gut votes. This seems like you're just trying to cover up your failed votes by blowing them off as gut votes, even though there are plenty of posts by Niklor and me (and some by Fred) that you could have used to actually justify your vote instead of saying it was a gut vote. Basically, this looks to me like you're hopping around trying to find an easy place to rest your vote, and whenever somebody calls you out on it, you switch your votes without much justification.

TL;DR SECTION:

1) Switches votes frequently with little to no justification.
2) Tries to make excuses for his votes that do not seem very valid.
3) Conveniently ignores people when they try to debate the reasons for his vote.
4) Based on 1, 2, and 3, seems like somebody trying to find an excuse to place his vote on someone and not be questioned on it.
5) Is therefore totally scum.

Post #326 by Silly_Dragons

[color = Green]Unvote Alice[/color]

[color = Red]Vote thetoga[/color]

Post #327 by Silly_Dragons

Unvote Alice

Vote thetoga

****ing board formatting.

Post #328 by Silly_Dragons

ALSO APPARENTLY MY CAT PICTURE BROKE BECAUSE THE BOARDS ARE DUMB.

THE SBLOCK SHOULD HAVE CONTAINED THIS.


www.toptenz.net/wp-content/uploads/2010/...

Post #329 by theatog

I saw your post back when i switched vote. I intentionally left it unanswered. 

I read until you said " You say this was on accident, and you use the excuse that you "like pushing wagons" to cover up your vote." and the rest is tl;dr.

Just a quick clarification, liking to push wagons have nothing to do with my vote.

Just because I like to push wagon, doesn't mean it's an excuse for my vote. I'm simply saying something that's true to my playstyle. My vote can do just that or go the complete opposite for all i care. 

And thank you for your OMGUS vote. You certainly did put a lot of effort in it to try to make it not look like one. It only makes me more certain of my vote. I want day one scum blood. HA-HA-HA-HA-HA

Post #330 by Silly_Dragons

Are you even reading this thread.

I think I've asked this twice now.

Post #331 by Niklor

Apr 22, 2012 -- 6:03PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

Afterwards, instead of responding to people telling you that you were wrong (I don't think you've actually seriously responded anytime somebody has tried to debate the justifications behind your votes), you instead make post 313 (post quoted at top of this post), that you votes were all gut votes. This seems like you're just trying to cover up your failed votes by blowing them off as gut votes, even though there are plenty of posts by Niklor and me (and some by Fred) that you could have used to actually justify your vote instead of saying it was a gut vote. Basically, this looks to me like you're hopping around trying to find an easy place to rest your vote, and whenever somebody calls you out on it, you switch your votes without much justification.

TL;DR SECTION:

1) Switches votes frequently with little to no justification.
2) Tries to make excuses for his votes that do not seem very valid.
3) Conveniently ignores people when they try to debate the reasons for his vote.
4) Based on 1, 2, and 3, seems like somebody trying to find an excuse to place his vote on someone and not be questioned on it.
5) Is therefore totally scum.




1) I find that hard to argue.
2) Many votes based on your gut is hard to swallow.
3) Short answers are not necessarily ignoring the person.
5) While it's possibly you've found scum, it feels a bit forced to call everything he has done into question and try to tie it all together with a nice bow. 

Post #332 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 22, 2012 -- 6:32PM, Niklor wrote:

Apr 22, 2012 -- 6:03PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

Afterwards, instead of responding to people telling you that you were wrong (I don't think you've actually seriously responded anytime somebody has tried to debate the justifications behind your votes), you instead make post 313 (post quoted at top of this post), that you votes were all gut votes. This seems like you're just trying to cover up your failed votes by blowing them off as gut votes, even though there are plenty of posts by Niklor and me (and some by Fred) that you could have used to actually justify your vote instead of saying it was a gut vote. Basically, this looks to me like you're hopping around trying to find an easy place to rest your vote, and whenever somebody calls you out on it, you switch your votes without much justification.

TL;DR SECTION:

1) Switches votes frequently with little to no justification.
2) Tries to make excuses for his votes that do not seem very valid.
3) Conveniently ignores people when they try to debate the reasons for his vote.
4) Based on 1, 2, and 3, seems like somebody trying to find an excuse to place his vote on someone and not be questioned on it.
5) Is therefore totally scum.




1) I find that hard to argue.
2) Many votes based on your gut is hard to swallow.
3) Short answers are not necessarily ignoring the person.
5) While it's possibly you've found scum, it feels a bit forced to call everything he has done into question and try to tie it all together with a nice bow. 



TL;DR is not meant to be extensive. I just put that there because people will complain otherwise.

Post #333 by Freddeh

Apr 22, 2012 -- 5:57PM, Niklor wrote:

I think you and I interpret what being on the table means differently. Being on the table means you are in the pool of people I am looking through for scum. People off the table are off because they are dead or confirmed town in some respect that is very unlikely to be false.

I'm not worried about you trusting me. I'm bothered in the way you said you were dropping me as a candidate for the day. It feels like you are trying to buddy up with me, which is something scum has motivations to do.



We have the same interpretation of being on the table. But we have different interpretations of the pool of people we are looking through for scum. Yours is 'everyone in the game that I'm not sure are town'. Mine is 'people I'm trying to focus on'. Basically broadview vs narrowview. We can argue endlessly about the merits and detriments of both, but that would be a dumb distraction to take town on at this point.

Buddying up with you so much that I'm disagreeing with a lot of the things you are saying, as well as your vote? Right now if I wanted to buddy up with someone it would probably be Silly, because his thoughts are mirroring mine right now, at least regarding theatog.

Why am I a bad D1 lynch? Answer me that.


And now we've come full circle. I said all the way back when I said you were off the table, because I like how you're posting right now, and I'd rather encourage it by not lynching rather than discourage it by lynching.

Post #334 by Niklor

Apr 22, 2012 -- 6:19PM, theatog wrote:

I saw your post back when i switched vote. I intentionally left it unanswered.




Why would you intentionally not answer a question leveled at you?

Apr 22, 2012 -- 6:19PM, theatog wrote:

I read until you said " You say this was on accident, and you use the excuse that you "like pushing wagons" to cover up your vote." and the rest is tl;dr.




I'm very glad you can't be bothered to read a case against you and instead are trying to dismiss it with one of the more pointless accuassations leveled at you.

Apr 22, 2012 -- 6:19PM, theatog wrote:

Just a quick clarification, liking to push wagons have nothing to do with my vote.

Just because I like to push wagon, doesn't mean it's an excuse for my vote. I'm simply saying something that's true to my playstyle. My vote can do just that or go the complete opposite for all i care.




If you like to push wagons, it does play into your gameplay likely. You will be more likely to cast a vote to push a wagon than to cast a vote on another player even though your suspicions on them are equal.

Apr 22, 2012 -- 6:19PM, theatog wrote:

And thank you for your OMGUS vote. You certainly did put a lot of effort in it to try to make it not look like one. It only makes me more certain of my vote. I want day one scum blood. HA-HA-HA-HA-HA




If you're going to downplay a case, responding to the individual points goes a long way.

It would be an OMGUS vote if it wasn't for the several separate points leveled against you. Not all of them are good, but some of them are actually incriminating, and on the whole a series of gut votes is not a good place to be in. 

Post #335 by Niklor

Apr 22, 2012 -- 6:34PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

Apr 22, 2012 -- 6:32PM, Niklor wrote:

Apr 22, 2012 -- 6:03PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

Afterwards, instead of responding to people telling you that you were wrong (I don't think you've actually seriously responded anytime somebody has tried to debate the justifications behind your votes), you instead make post 313 (post quoted at top of this post), that you votes were all gut votes. This seems like you're just trying to cover up your failed votes by blowing them off as gut votes, even though there are plenty of posts by Niklor and me (and some by Fred) that you could have used to actually justify your vote instead of saying it was a gut vote. Basically, this looks to me like you're hopping around trying to find an easy place to rest your vote, and whenever somebody calls you out on it, you switch your votes without much justification.

TL;DR SECTION:

1) Switches votes frequently with little to no justification.
2) Tries to make excuses for his votes that do not seem very valid.
3) Conveniently ignores people when they try to debate the reasons for his vote.
4) Based on 1, 2, and 3, seems like somebody trying to find an excuse to place his vote on someone and not be questioned on it.
5) Is therefore totally scum.




1) I find that hard to argue.
2) Many votes based on your gut is hard to swallow.
3) Short answers are not necessarily ignoring the person.
5) While it's possibly you've found scum, it feels a bit forced to call everything he has done into question and try to tie it all together with a nice bow. 



TL;DR is not meant to be extensive. I just put that there because people will complain otherwise.




I read the whole thing Silly, I just found it only necessary to respond to the last bit.

Post #336 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 22, 2012 -- 6:40PM, Niklor wrote:


I read the whole thing Silly, I just found it only necessary to respond to the last bit.



Then you should probably realize that my TL;DR is a gross oversimplification (probably to the point where a lot of my statements were either over or underplayed).

But I feel it's a necessary component, because otherwise some people will be like "oh this is too long I'm just not going to read this". If they get a extremely simplified version of my statement, well, it's better than getting nothing.

Post #337 by Niklor

Apr 22, 2012 -- 6:38PM, Freddeh wrote:

Apr 22, 2012 -- 5:57PM, Niklor wrote:

I think you and I interpret what being on the table means differently. Being on the table means you are in the pool of people I am looking through for scum. People off the table are off because they are dead or confirmed town in some respect that is very unlikely to be false.

I'm not worried about you trusting me. I'm bothered in the way you said you were dropping me as a candidate for the day. It feels like you are trying to buddy up with me, which is something scum has motivations to do.



We have the same interpretation of being on the table. But we have different interpretations of the pool of people we are looking through for scum. Yours is 'everyone in the game that I'm not sure are town'. Mine is 'people I'm trying to focus on'. Basically broadview vs narrowview. We can argue endlessly about the merits and detriments of both, but that would be a dumb distraction to take town on at this point.




It's ok to focus on certain people, but you seem to have this mindset of setting people aside. Saying you took me off the table you are looking at feels like that, being ignored. You can focus on certain people on the table while keeping tags on others.

Apr 22, 2012 -- 6:38PM, Freddeh wrote:

Buddying up with you so much that I'm disagreeing with a lot of the things you are saying, as well as your vote? Right now if I wanted to buddy up with someone it would probably be Silly, because his thoughts are mirroring mine right now, at least regarding theatog.




Well, if you are scum you wouldn't have kept trying to buddy with me once called out for it. So I'm not sure what that proves.

Apr 22, 2012 -- 6:38PM, Freddeh wrote:

Why am I a bad D1 lynch? Answer me that.


And now we've come full circle. I said all the way back when I said you were off the table, because I like how you're posting right now, and I'd rather encourage it by not lynching rather than discourage it by lynching.




I'm not going to alter how I played just because it gets me lynched and the idea that I am so malleable to be constantly affected by being lynched is insulting.

And lynching someone on D1 who's posting is generally better than lynching someone who isn't posting or posting far less frequently.

So again, what about that makes me a bad D1 lynch? Or do you really believe that we shouldn't lynch people who contribute a lot? Because that is a bad attitude.

Post #338 by Silly_Dragons

I probably should be more clear. What sounded right in my head looked completely different when I actually wrote it.

If you actually read my long ass posts, I would prefer that you respond to the actual content than the TL;DR. That's only there for the blundering idiots who can't be bothered to read whole posts.

Post #339 by Niklor

Apr 22, 2012 -- 6:45PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

Apr 22, 2012 -- 6:40PM, Niklor wrote:


I read the whole thing Silly, I just found it only necessary to respond to the last bit.



Then you should probably realize that my TL;DR is a gross oversimplification (probably to the point where a lot of my statements were either over or underplayed).

But I feel it's a necessary component, because otherwise some people will be like "oh this is too long I'm just not going to read this". If they get a extremely simplified version of my statement, well, it's better than getting nothing.




So you're saying that you don't actual think what you simplified it to, because from what I read it was a fine summary of what you were saying about Theatog?

Post #340 by Niklor

Apr 22, 2012 -- 6:48PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

I probably should be more clear. What sounded right in my head looked completely different when I actually wrote it.

If you actually read my long ass posts, I would prefer that you respond to the actual content than the TL;DR. That's only there for the blundering idiots who can't be bothered to read whole posts.




I don't see a need to revisit your "case". The only thing of real note I saw is that most of Theatog's votes were based on a gut that quickly kept changing opinions. Other than that you attacked gut votes for being gut vote, for a variety of reason and picked out a phrase about Theatog liking to push wagons.

Did you know I like to hammer? Doesn't mean I'm always go to do so. Just means it's something I like to do.

Post #341 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 22, 2012 -- 6:49PM, Niklor wrote:

Apr 22, 2012 -- 6:45PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

Apr 22, 2012 -- 6:40PM, Niklor wrote:


I read the whole thing Silly, I just found it only necessary to respond to the last bit.



Then you should probably realize that my TL;DR is a gross oversimplification (probably to the point where a lot of my statements were either over or underplayed).

But I feel it's a necessary component, because otherwise some people will be like "oh this is too long I'm just not going to read this". If they get a extremely simplified version of my statement, well, it's better than getting nothing.




So you're saying that you don't actual think what you simplified it to, because from what I read it was a fine summary of what you were saying about Theatog?



I think it's oversimplified, in that some points are underemphasized, and some are overemphasized, because they are all labeled as seperate bullet points. But it sort of mirrors what I was saying.

Also, the last statement is obviously somewhat of a joke. I can't know for sure who is and who isn't scum, especially not based on this many posts. But for now, I'm going with my best guess and pushing it (actual pushing, not "vote, unvote five minutes later") until I get a better opinion.

Post #342 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 22, 2012 -- 6:54PM, Niklor wrote:

Apr 22, 2012 -- 6:48PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

I probably should be more clear. What sounded right in my head looked completely different when I actually wrote it.

If you actually read my long ass posts, I would prefer that you respond to the actual content than the TL;DR. That's only there for the blundering idiots who can't be bothered to read whole posts.




I don't see a need to revisit your "case". The only thing of real note I saw is that most of Theatog's votes were based on a gut that quickly kept changing opinions. Other than that you attacked gut votes for being gut vote, for a variety of reason and picked out a phrase about Theatog liking to push wagons.

Did you know I like to hammer? Doesn't mean I'm always go to do so. Just means it's something I like to do.



I attacked his votes because I don't think they're gut votes. You know, we have enough evidence to make actual cases (as I have just demonstrated), and voting just based on your gut shouldn't be necessary nearly 350 posts into the game. I feel like he's trying to find a nice place to slip his vote into where he won't be questioned too much, not actually "voting off his gut".

Also, I know you like to hammer. I talked to PK (in a completely unrelated convo) and he thinks that you hammering constantly (especially as town) is "detrimental to your alignment".

Post #343 by Niklor

I think PK is referring to the fact I self-hammer, which is a part of me liking to hammer. I was talking about hammering others mainly. I like it, but I don't go out of my way to hammer anyone and everyone who reaches L-1.

I agree that gut voting should be unnecessary once discussion has peaked, but I'm not saying Theatog actually is gut voting. That seeming to gut vote back and forth like that is the suspicious element highlighted by your case. 

Post #344 by razorborne

Apr 22, 2012 -- 5:28PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

I did note that votes mean more the longer the game goes. Beginning of D1 votes are often times joke votes and stuff, so its hard to get much from them. What we should really look for is the voting record when the deadline for each day is almost up.


but that wasn't the question you were answering. the question was "why put your vote on a random person over not putting it anywhere?" either it affects the voting record, in which case randomly voting is actively detrimental, or it doesn't, in which case it's useless. either way, it's not contributing.

Apr 22, 2012 -- 6:03PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

*SILLY'S CASE AGAINST ATOG*


this is an excellently laid-out case. once sleeping is dead and maybe FFP, I would be very much behind an atog lynch.

Apr 22, 2012 -- 6:19PM, theatog wrote:

I saw your post back when i switched vote. I intentionally left it unanswered. 

I read until you said " You say this was on accident, and you use the excuse that you "like pushing wagons" to cover up your vote." and the rest is tl;dr.


these two paragraphs are exactly why I said the things I said above. you don't purposefully ignore direct questions, and you don't skip through cases just because they're long.

Apr 22, 2012 -- 6:32PM, Niklor wrote:

Apr 22, 2012 -- 6:03PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

Afterwards, instead of responding to people telling you that you were wrong (I don't think you've actually seriously responded anytime somebody has tried to debate the justifications behind your votes), you instead make post 313 (post quoted at top of this post), that you votes were all gut votes. This seems like you're just trying to cover up your failed votes by blowing them off as gut votes, even though there are plenty of posts by Niklor and me (and some by Fred) that you could have used to actually justify your vote instead of saying it was a gut vote. Basically, this looks to me like you're hopping around trying to find an easy place to rest your vote, and whenever somebody calls you out on it, you switch your votes without much justification.

TL;DR SECTION:

1) Switches votes frequently with little to no justification.
2) Tries to make excuses for his votes that do not seem very valid.
3) Conveniently ignores people when they try to debate the reasons for his vote.
4) Based on 1, 2, and 3, seems like somebody trying to find an excuse to place his vote on someone and not be questioned on it.
5) Is therefore totally scum.




1) I find that hard to argue.
2) Many votes based on your gut is hard to swallow.
3) Short answers are not necessarily ignoring the person.
5) While it's possibly you've found scum, it feels a bit forced to call everything he has done into question and try to tie it all together with a nice bow. 


this may be me making mountains out of molehills, but is this a subtle defense of atog here? like, I know Nik then went on to attack atog for some stuff, but this feels like sort of hedging bets. Silly obviously wasn't serious on point 5, and on point 3 he clearly, admittedly did ignore people.

Apr 22, 2012 -- 6:45PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

Apr 22, 2012 -- 6:40PM, Niklor wrote:


I read the whole thing Silly, I just found it only necessary to respond to the last bit.



Then you should probably realize that my TL;DR is a gross oversimplification (probably to the point where a lot of my statements were either over or underplayed).

But I feel it's a necessary component, because otherwise some people will be like "oh this is too long I'm just not going to read this". If they get a extremely simplified version of my statement, well, it's better than getting nothing.



it's really sad that this is necessary.

 

Post #345 by Feroz-s_Familiar_Pheldy

Apr 22, 2012 -- 6:48PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:



If you actually read my long ass posts, I would prefer that you respond to the actual content than the TL;DR. That's only there for the blundering idiots who can't be bothered to read whole posts.




...

...




my friendship, you lost it

Post #346 by Freddeh

BUT, Silly gets town points from me for actually making a TL;DR, instead of just letting his points get lost in mountains of post.

Post #347 by Freddeh

Apr 22, 2012 -- 6:47PM, Niklor wrote:

I'm not going to alter how I played just because it gets me lynched and the idea that I am so malleable to be constantly affected by being lynched is insulting.

And lynching someone on D1 who's posting is generally better than lynching someone who isn't posting or posting far less frequently.

So again, what about that makes me a bad D1 lynch? Or do you really believe that we shouldn't lynch people who contribute a lot? Because that is a bad attitude.



Forgot I didn't finish this reply earlier.

I'm not talking about you specifically, I'm talking about the meta in general. Namely that too many people believe that posting a lot == asking to get lynched, or at least questioned/jumped on a lot (usually over little things, but thats for another argument...). Which is simply NOT TRUE, but many recent games have been furthering that mindset to the point where it happens all the time.

Yes its a general meta-reasoning, but you keep hounding me for it so I'll keep defending my viewpoint.

Your second paragraph is EXACTLY the thought process I want to avoid. Saying that lynching someone on D1 that posts more is better than posting someone that posts less is an attitude that has been slowly killing the meta since I've joined this area of the forums. All it does is encourage lurking. Lurking makes mafia suck.

Post #348 by Ahlyis

Trying to catch up now.  Responding to posts 209-240 with this post...

Apr 21, 2012 -- 10:43AM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

Apr 21, 2012 -- 10:41AM, Niklor wrote:

Apr 21, 2012 -- 10:38AM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

Apr 21, 2012 -- 10:36AM, Niklor wrote:

A long time ago once or twice. What about it?



MY POINT HAS BEEN MADE.




What was your point again?



Maybe you could get somebody else to explain it to you.


Doesn't look like anyone explained this for him.

Glare was well known for quoting posts he thought were relevant and only adding "Noted." to the post. Silly sort of did the same thing.  She pointed out a post she thought merited attention, either now or for review later.

Apr 21, 2012 -- 2:06PM, Niklor wrote:

@Ahlyis
So why call me out on it in the first place?


I saw something I felt was scummy, so I pointed it out.  And in this particular case, You've already done what you said you do as scum.  You've certainly shown an interest in this game and been one of the more active players. Isn't that what you said you tend to do when you are scum? Wasn't that post I flagged and voted you for your pre-emptive attempt to deflect from the behavior that YOU said indicates you are scum?

I'm liking my vote more and more all the time.

The funny thing is, if you hadn't flat out told us that being active and interested in the game was a scumtell for you, I doubt anyone would've noticed anyway. They might have, sure. But metagaming arguments haven't been in much (or any) use at all lately. I think your attempt to defend against a metagame argument has actually provided a stronger case against you than if you'd just not said anything.

Apr 21, 2012 -- 5:43PM, Niklor wrote:

The Niklor wagon is almost always rolling about when I am doing my best to find scum, so I'll take it as a good luck sign that it's there.


This post doesn't sit right either. It feels pretty slimy.

It's possible I'm just seeing things because I want to see them at this point. Still, I can't help but feel there's something off about that statement.

Okay, on to the next 40 posts...

Post #349 by Niklor

Apr 22, 2012 -- 9:19PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 22, 2012 -- 6:32PM, Niklor wrote:

Apr 22, 2012 -- 6:03PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

Afterwards, instead of responding to people telling you that you were wrong (I don't think you've actually seriously responded anytime somebody has tried to debate the justifications behind your votes), you instead make post 313 (post quoted at top of this post), that you votes were all gut votes. This seems like you're just trying to cover up your failed votes by blowing them off as gut votes, even though there are plenty of posts by Niklor and me (and some by Fred) that you could have used to actually justify your vote instead of saying it was a gut vote. Basically, this looks to me like you're hopping around trying to find an easy place to rest your vote, and whenever somebody calls you out on it, you switch your votes without much justification.

TL;DR SECTION:

1) Switches votes frequently with little to no justification.
2) Tries to make excuses for his votes that do not seem very valid.
3) Conveniently ignores people when they try to debate the reasons for his vote.
4) Based on 1, 2, and 3, seems like somebody trying to find an excuse to place his vote on someone and not be questioned on it.
5) Is therefore totally scum.




1) I find that hard to argue.
2) Many votes based on your gut is hard to swallow.
3) Short answers are not necessarily ignoring the person.
5) While it's possibly you've found scum, it feels a bit forced to call everything he has done into question and try to tie it all together with a nice bow. 


this may be me making mountains out of molehills, but is this a subtle defense of atog here? like, I know Nik then went on to attack atog for some stuff, but this feels like sort of hedging bets. Silly obviously wasn't serious on point 5, and on point 3 he clearly, admittedly did ignore people.




I don't find the case against Theatog to be that well-written aside from the fact of the voting pattern of Theatog as a whole. Whenever anyone says they have found scum, they need to be serious about it unless it's clearly a very early on joke.

Apr 22, 2012 -- 9:19PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 22, 2012 -- 6:45PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

Apr 22, 2012 -- 6:40PM, Niklor wrote:


I read the whole thing Silly, I just found it only necessary to respond to the last bit.



Then you should probably realize that my TL;DR is a gross oversimplification (probably to the point where a lot of my statements were either over or underplayed).

But I feel it's a necessary component, because otherwise some people will be like "oh this is too long I'm just not going to read this". If they get a extremely simplified version of my statement, well, it's better than getting nothing.



it's really sad that this is necessary.

 




I don't understand this. If I had only read the TL;DR and responded to it without reading the whole case, that is one thing. But I did read the case and then the TL;DR and I found it summarized the case more than well enough for what I needed to respond too. I don't need to respond to the whole case if I can respond to a summary with the same points.

Post #350 by Niklor

Apr 22, 2012 -- 11:33PM, Feroz-s_Familiar_Pheldy wrote:

Apr 22, 2012 -- 6:48PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:



If you actually read my long ass posts, I would prefer that you respond to the actual content than the TL;DR. That's only there for the blundering idiots who can't be bothered to read whole posts.




...

...




my friendship, you lost it




Friendship of a man who can't be bothered to read your cases. You didn't need it.

Post #351 by Ahlyis

Responses for posts 241-280:

Apr 21, 2012 -- 5:56PM, theatog wrote:

Minus points for Ahlyis piling on Niklor with little further contribution. Feels like mob mentality.


Buh?

If someone else has presented more of a case against Niklor than I have, please show me!

Apr 21, 2012 -- 6:05PM, Niklor wrote:

If I care about the game, I will be prepared to come in at any moment I am awake and at my noble laptop, assuming I haven't fallen off the earth into a distracting video game.


This is exactly what I'm talking about.

Please compare this post with the one I originally flagged as Niklor trying to pre-emptively deflect.  Here, I'll repost that piece to make it easy for everyone to compare the two...

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:01PM, Niklor wrote:

I tend to play reactively when everyone is playing all at once. I probably play most proactively if I care about the game, usually meaning I'm scum because I usually care more about the game as scum, though not always.


Does anyone want to argue that Niklor hasn't been proactive this game? That he doesn't care?

Post #352 by Niklor

Apr 23, 2012 -- 12:04AM, Freddeh wrote:

BUT, Silly gets town points from me for actually making a TL;DR, instead of just letting his points get lost in mountains of post.




Why? If Silly hadn't made a TL;DR, what terrible thing would have happened? His post wasn't even surpassingly large and if you can't be bothered to read it all the way through, what point is there for the TL;DR? It's not there so you can avoid reading the case. It's there to remind you what you read.

Apr 23, 2012 -- 12:09AM, Freddeh wrote:

Apr 22, 2012 -- 6:47PM, Niklor wrote:

I'm not going to alter how I played just because it gets me lynched and the idea that I am so malleable to be constantly affected by being lynched is insulting.

And lynching someone on D1 who's posting is generally better than lynching someone who isn't posting or posting far less frequently.

So again, what about that makes me a bad D1 lynch? Or do you really believe that we shouldn't lynch people who contribute a lot? Because that is a bad attitude.



Forgot I didn't finish this reply earlier.

I'm not talking about you specifically, I'm talking about the meta in general. Namely that too many people believe that posting a lot == asking to get lynched, or at least questioned/jumped on a lot (usually over little things, but thats for another argument...). Which is simply NOT TRUE, but many recent games have been furthering that mindset to the point where it happens all the time.




It's more the lurker problem than the contributing gets you lynched problem. If everyone is forced to contribute to a point, it's less likely attacking a vocal member of the town will be seen as attacking a vocal member of the town.

Apr 23, 2012 -- 12:09AM, Freddeh wrote:

Your second paragraph is EXACTLY the thought process I want to avoid. Saying that lynching someone on D1 that posts more is better than posting someone that posts less is an attitude that has been slowly killing the meta since I've joined this area of the forums. All it does is encourage lurking. Lurking makes mafia suck.




If we kill a lurker on D1, what do we gain from it? Yes, lurkers need to be eliminated, but removing them from the game is probably not going to help us catch scum if we have to remove them from each game by lynching or nking them. If we kill a lurker, the only opposition to it is likely to be that we're not going to gain information from it or this person has been acting scummier. What does that gain us as the town?

That is an awful argument for lynching lurkers. The game is dying because scum are lurking, tedious douchebags that they are. PLAY THE F****** GAME OR REQUEST REPLACEMENT/MODKILL! But the idea that we need to lynch lurkers is going to lead to us constantly having to deal with inactive townies, giving scum an advantage which will probably allow them to keep winning games.

Essentially, scum will almost always have a slight upper hand unless we can reach a state where there are no lurkers ever, which is not going to happen I feel even if we lynch a lurker everytime one pops up. We can prevent scum from lurking if we commit to it, but we're still going to have to deal with townies lurking, which prevents us from hunting scum in the end. 

Post #353 by Ahlyis

Responses for posts 281-320:

Apr 22, 2012 -- 4:44PM, Freddeh wrote:

Off-topic: I find it rather curious that FFP is getting most of the heat when Ahlyis and Pere are doing virtually the same things.


To be fair, I never said I wasn't reading the thread. I said the thread was a giant tl/dr. I said I read the thread, but skimmed several of the quote towers as I did so.

Apr 21, 2012 -- 6:41PM, Ragnarokio wrote:

Vote Count

Niklor - 4 (Ahlyis, FFP, Theatog)
Ahlyis - 1 (Silly)
FFP - 2 (Niklor, PK)
Sleeping - 1 (Razorborne)
Razor - 1 (Freddeh)
Not Voting - 4 (PeregrineV, Pdr_Br, ShadowFyre, Sleeping)




Apr 22, 2012 -- 3:29PM, Ragnarokio wrote:

Vote Count

Niklor - 2 (Ahlyis, FFP)
Ahlyis - 1 (Silly)
FFP - 2 (Niklor, PK)
Sleeping - 1 (Razorborne)
Silly - 2 (Theatog)
Not Voting - 5 (PeregrineV, Pdr_Br, ShadowFyre, Sleeping, Freddeh)


No idea why Niklor's name gets bolded, but it looks like theatog has a double vote.

Post #354 by Niklor

Apr 23, 2012 -- 10:08AM, Ahlyis wrote:

Apr 21, 2012 -- 10:43AM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

Apr 21, 2012 -- 10:41AM, Niklor wrote:

Apr 21, 2012 -- 10:38AM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

Apr 21, 2012 -- 10:36AM, Niklor wrote:

A long time ago once or twice. What about it?



MY POINT HAS BEEN MADE.




What was your point again?



Maybe you could get somebody else to explain it to you.


Doesn't look like anyone explained this for him.

Glare was well known for quoting posts he thought were relevant and only adding "Noted." to the post. Silly sort of did the same thing.  She pointed out a post she thought merited attention, either now or for review later.




That feels entirely pointless. I keep my eyes on certain people based on things they say in posts, but I don't feel a need to tell everyone I am doing so, especially the person I am keeping my eye on.

Apr 23, 2012 -- 10:08AM, Ahlyis wrote:

Apr 21, 2012 -- 2:06PM, Niklor wrote:

@Ahlyis
So why call me out on it in the first place?


I saw something I felt was scummy, so I pointed it out.  And in this particular case, You've already done what you said you do as scum.  You've certainly shown an interest in this game and been one of the more active players. Isn't that what you said you tend to do when you are scum? Wasn't that post I flagged and voted you for your pre-emptive attempt to deflect from the behavior that YOU said indicates you are scum?

I'm liking my vote more and more all the time.

The funny thing is, if you hadn't flat out told us that being active and interested in the game was a scumtell for you, I doubt anyone would've noticed anyway. They might have, sure. But metagaming arguments haven't been in much (or any) use at all lately. I think your attempt to defend against a metagame argument has actually provided a stronger case against you than if you'd just not said anything.




I said being active in a game meant I was interested which is almost always true when I'm scum because really, what kind of scum isn't interesting in trying to actively deceive everyone in the game. However, you seem to take that to mean it's impossible for me to be active and town, which is simply incorrect. You can look through my past games and find examples where I am active when I am town or scum. You can find examples where I am lurking or inactive when I am town or scum. You're whole argument hinges on the fact I am active in a game, knowing I am interested, which may mean I am scum because I'm more likely to be interested in a game as scum.

Apr 23, 2012 -- 10:08AM, Ahlyis wrote:

Apr 21, 2012 -- 5:43PM, Niklor wrote:

The Niklor wagon is almost always rolling about when I am doing my best to find scum, so I'll take it as a good luck sign that it's there.


This post doesn't sit right either. It feels pretty slimy.

It's possible I'm just seeing things because I want to see them at this point. Still, I can't help but feel there's something off about that statement..




Whenever I am doing my best scumhunting, the town is out to get me. You can say it doesn't feel right, but it's true. I am amused by that fact, that I cannot play the game well enough to scumhunt and avoid massive amounts of attention. And you are seeing things which aren't there.

Post #355 by Ahlyis

Apr 22, 2012 -- 5:40PM, Freddeh wrote:

I can't remember the last game FFP DIDN'T do something like this on D1. Policy lynch sure whatever, but Ahlyis said the same thing as FFP (cba to read the thread) and Pere only made an excuse, which I don't like but whatever, its the weekend, we'll see what happens over the week with him.

However FFP and SF have also actually made some content since then, while Ahlyis hasn't. I'd like to see some more out of Sleeping as well.


You're rarely going to get much out of me over a weekend. I check the threads regularly while I'm at work, but Mafia isn't even close to the top of my list of things to do when I'm NOT at work! :-)

Also, as I said earlier, I didn't do what FFP did. I never said I didn't read the thread. I only said I didn't fully read all of the huge quote towers. To call me out on that seems a bit odd since I think it was you that mentioned skipping the quote towers entirely and just reading the last response to the last quote. Apologies if that wasn't you, but someone in this thread said that. I don't see how that's acceptable, but me saying I skimmed them isn't!

Post #356 by Niklor

Apr 23, 2012 -- 10:27AM, Ahlyis wrote:

Apr 21, 2012 -- 6:05PM, Niklor wrote:

If I care about the game, I will be prepared to come in at any moment I am awake and at my noble laptop, assuming I haven't fallen off the earth into a distracting video game.


This is exactly what I'm talking about.

Please compare this post with the one I originally flagged as Niklor trying to pre-emptively deflect.  Here, I'll repost that piece to make it easy for everyone to compare the two...

Apr 20, 2012 -- 4:01PM, Niklor wrote:

I tend to play reactively when everyone is playing all at once. I probably play most proactively if I care about the game, usually meaning I'm scum because I usually care more about the game as scum, though not always.


Does anyone want to argue that Niklor hasn't been proactive this game? That he doesn't care?




I'm sure it would be a hard position to take up, but I'd be interested in seeing someone who disagrees with it.

However, once again, you are saying I am scum because I care, which is a logical fallacy. You can say that it's more likely I might be scum than town because I care, though that proves very little.

Also, why is it deflecting to indicate I may not be available because I am playing a video game? Just yesterday I was in a riveting game of Killing Floor for a good two hours I believe. During that time, I did not check this thread because I was busy elsewhere. I don't see why it's deflection to say I may not be checking the thread at all times. It's a statement of fact and I have provided reasonable explanations as to why it is so. 

Post #357 by Pdr_Br

This is going to take a wille to digest all this posts you guys made while i was away.

I'll start by looking at this with a page by page analysis. It won't be a in detail repport since I'll try to focus only in the things I think are important.

Post #358 by Ahlyis

Apr 23, 2012 -- 10:43AM, Niklor wrote:

I said being active in a game meant I was interested which is almost always true when I'm scum because really, what kind of scum isn't interesting in trying to actively deceive everyone in the game. However, you seem to take that to mean it's impossible for me to be active and town, which is simply incorrect. You can look through my past games and find examples where I am active when I am town or scum. You can find examples where I am lurking or inactive when I am town or scum. You're whole argument hinges on the fact I am active in a game, knowing I am interested, which may mean I am scum because I'm more likely to be interested in a game as scum.


My case is NOT built on the fact you are active in the game.  That is NOT what my case is about. In fact, I even said that your activity by itself probably wouldn't have drawn any attention if YOU hadn't specifically told us that's what you do when you're scum.

I know you can be active as either Town or Scum.  That's so completely NOT the point. The point is, why did you feel a need to post about how your activity level sometimes indicates scum for you? What possible purpose did that post serve? As Town, I don't think it would even occur to you. Or if it did, I think you would've worded it completely differently. But as scum, that looks very much like a pre-emptive deflection attempt. The fact that you then went on to be one of the most active people in the game just makes that first post which I flagged stand out even more as a pre-emptive attempt to deflect metagame arguments.

I never would have built a metagame argument against you. But I don't even have to. I'm not even trying to metagame this. My case against you is entirely within this thread. It doesn't even matter whether your statement about activity levels often indicating your alignment is even true. All that matters is that you felt a need to pre-emptively defend your high level of activity in this game. THAT is what my case is based on.

Post #359 by Ahlyis

Apr 23, 2012 -- 10:48AM, Niklor wrote:

However, once again, you are saying I am scum because I care, which is a logical fallacy. You can say that it's more likely I might be scum than town because I care, though that proves very little.


As I said in my last post, I think you are scum because you felt a need to warn us ahead of time that you intended to "care" about this game, and did so by also pointing out that in the past, caring has often indicated scum for you. What was the point of warning us you would be active this game, and warning us in the way that you did?

Apr 23, 2012 -- 10:48AM, Niklor wrote:

Also, why is it deflecting to indicate I may not be available because I am playing a video game? Just yesterday I was in a riveting game of Killing Floor for a good two hours I believe. During that time, I did not check this thread because I was busy elsewhere. I don't see why it's deflection to say I may not be checking the thread at all times. It's a statement of fact and I have provided reasonable explanations as to why it is so. 


You misunderstood. The "deflecting" I'm talking about is all in that first post I flagged. That post is all about deflecting potential suspicion due to your high activity level in this game.

I still think you would have been far better off just going active and trying to deflect any metagame arguments if they appeared than by giving us that pre-emptive deflection attempt.

Post #360 by Niklor

Ahlyis, how can I get this through your head?

There was never any kind of deflection. I'm not trying to excuse my high activity. I'm merely pointing out a fact about me because I was talking about myself to a degree. You want to demonize a simple statement of fact into some kind of defense for something that doesn't make sense anyway. You don't attack someone because they are actively posting or lurking, unless as a matter of policy. It's a null-tell. What possible reason would I even have to try to pre-emptively defend against an argument that doesn't even have a leg to stand on?

Why would I do this as scum, is what I'm asking? Why would I bother pre-emptively defending from such a piss-poor accusation? The answer is, I wouldn't.

You can believe that I would, for whatever strange reason exists in your head. But it doesn't alter the fact that a pre-emptive deflection is a bad tactic in general, even if I was scum. If I defend myself from arguments that haven't yet appeared, that makes it look like I'm worried about such. And town has no need to worry about such in general.

This is my problem with your case. You misinterpret something I said in a manner that doesn't make any sense if I am scum. The only way it really works is if it wasn't a deflection at all, which it wasn't.

We can debate that point from here until the moment one of us is dead, but your whole "case" hinges on a point which is false. 

Post #361 by Freddeh

Apr 23, 2012 -- 10:48AM, Ahlyis wrote:

Apr 22, 2012 -- 5:40PM, Freddeh wrote:

I can't remember the last game FFP DIDN'T do something like this on D1. Policy lynch sure whatever, but Ahlyis said the same thing as FFP (cba to read the thread) and Pere only made an excuse, which I don't like but whatever, its the weekend, we'll see what happens over the week with him.

However FFP and SF have also actually made some content since then, while Ahlyis hasn't. I'd like to see some more out of Sleeping as well.


You're rarely going to get much out of me over a weekend. I check the threads regularly while I'm at work, but Mafia isn't even close to the top of my list of things to do when I'm NOT at work! :-)

Also, as I said earlier, I didn't do what FFP did. I never said I didn't read the thread. I only said I didn't fully read all of the huge quote towers. To call me out on that seems a bit odd since I think it was you that mentioned skipping the quote towers entirely and just reading the last response to the last quote. Apologies if that wasn't you, but someone in this thread said that. I don't see how that's acceptable, but me saying I skimmed them isn't!




Fair enough, I also noticed I forgot about Pdr, though hes been more on the inactive side than not.

I thought you basically did. Also it wasn't me that mentioned that, but I agree with the person that did, because if you're reading the thread you dang well don't need to read through quote towers to know what they're responding to (maybe the first line as a refresher). Just a misunderstanding.

@Nik: Because it says that he wants people to actually understand what he says. Now that could be argued that a scum would want that as well, but I think a town would want it even more. I could be wrong but thats my view on it.

The contributing gets you lynched view is what contributes to the lurking problem. If town are scared to post then they won't, then scum can just hide in the middle of them and none are the wiser. It happens ALL the time.

We get almost as much information from lynching lurkers as we do from lynching non-lurkers. Especially considering that you will usually have a split vote from people who dont' want to lynch the targeted lurker as opposed to those that do. I'm kinda at the point to where people don't even take info from past days much anymore anyway, so why does it matter if you get a little bit less info from lynching a lurker? >_> Better than just losing a game outright because mafia has killed all the active people.

Post #362 by Niklor

Apr 23, 2012 -- 12:52PM, Freddeh wrote:

@Nik: Because it says that he wants people to actually understand what he says. Now that could be argued that a scum would want that as well, but I think a town would want it even more. I could be wrong but thats my view on it.




A TL;DR is more often used as a handicap than it is a proper reminder, so it could easily be argued by not including it you are forcing the town who would otherwise not read your case to do so. Really, that is the problem here. A TL;DR is being used as an excuse not to read the case and if you don't include one you are attacked for not summarizing your long ass case, even though everyone should read the long ass case.

In general though, I think it's more of a null tell, as including a TL;DR is more of a personal choice about how to push your case and both town and scum want to push their cases.

Apr 23, 2012 -- 12:52PM, Freddeh wrote:

The contributing gets you lynched view is what contributes to the lurking problem. If town are scared to post then they won't, then scum can just hide in the middle of them and none are the wiser. It happens ALL the time.




Lurking town are more likely to be lurking, unless they are odd like Sleeping, because they don't care about the game. Good townies should never be scared of the lynch. This is a game after all and getting lynched isn't going to end anything significant. They should try to avoid the lynch, but never in a manner that hinders their contributions.

Apr 23, 2012 -- 12:52PM, Freddeh wrote:

We get almost as much information from lynching lurkers as we do from lynching non-lurkers. Especially considering that you will usually have a split vote from people who dont' want to lynch the targeted lurker as opposed to those that do. I'm kinda at the point to where people don't even take info from past days much anymore anyway, so why does it matter if you get a little bit less info from lynching a lurker? >_> Better than just losing a game outright because mafia has killed all the active people.




Yes, but people who don't want to lynch lurkers usually are doing so for logical reasons. It's not like lynching someone because you think they are lying. It's lynching someone because they aren't contributing, so the opinions on them are going to be narrow and easily explained.

Mafia shouldn't be able to kill all the active people in the first place. Essentially, everyone should be active. 

Post #363 by Freddeh

Yes, everyone SHOULD be active. But the fact remains that they AREN'T.

"Lurking town are more likely to be lurking, unless they are odd like Sleeping, because they don't care about the game." Was this a slip? How do you know hes town?

Post #364 by Ahlyis

Apr 23, 2012 -- 11:32AM, Niklor wrote:

Why would I do this as scum, is what I'm asking? Why would I bother pre-emptively defending from such a piss-poor accusation? The answer is, I wouldn't.


A better question is why would you post that at all?  I've given a reason why you might as scum, I've yet to hear any explanation from you though. Why comment on a link between activity and alignment at all?  Or are you now denying even that much?

Apr 23, 2012 -- 11:32AM, Niklor wrote:

You can believe that I would, for whatever strange reason exists in your head. But it doesn't alter the fact that a pre-emptive deflection is a bad tactic in general, even if I was scum. If I defend myself from arguments that haven't yet appeared, that makes it look like I'm worried about such. And town has no need to worry about such in general.


Agreed on all counts. It was a horrible tactic, scum or town. Town has no need to even worry about such in general. Scum does have a small reason to worry. And the simpe fact is you DID make that post.  If that post makes little sense for Scum to make, but makes zero sense for a Townie to make, you wouldn't expect anyone to make such a post.  Given that you DID make such a post though, by your own arguments the only one who might have thought it was worth it is Scum.

Post #365 by Niklor

Speaking of lurkers...


FFP's first non confirm post was saying he was too lazy to read and bandwagon voted me because people were voting for me, the very definition of bandwagoning.


He then proceeded to promise to read the thread tomorrow after being asked to, but in his next post the only thoughts he provided were on me and they weren't in response to anything that had been said, rather a single accussation and nothing else.


He then makes a post with a somewhat clever remark of their being a difference between content and spam without actually clarifying the difference nor showing us what he is talking about and then is insulted because he can't be bothered to read a case, which makes me doubt if he ever read the thread in the first place given some of the posts were nearly as long as that one case.


Moving on...


Shadowfyre was able to make a few more posts after his confirmation, but before day had started, but they weren't contributive in any real respect.


He then says something about lurker lynches not being good because actives have all the votes, whatever that actually means.


He then chimes in much later, saying commenting on everything is good because it gives us something to discuss and get reads off of.


Then when asked if he has any reads, he says he will have to read back a couple pages to recall them and after a bit more asks for an explanation about Theatog's votehopping from Freddeh to me, though not from me to Freddeh to me, from which I am inferring Shadowfyre either hadn't read the thread or didn't really remember most of it.


Finally, when asked about his reads again, he excuses himself to go eat and hasn't yet said anything.


Past him...


PK comes in and does some joking. Good for him.


Says community.wizards.com/paranoia/go/thread...


I'm still unsure on what is was, though reaction troll seems to be the popular opinion. He explains he meant to say "shoot" instead of "lynch." Regardless, this is all well and good as it seems to stimulate the town into actively discussing what he says, as it seems were his intentions.


Continues to refute certain arguments as long as they are centered about him or what he said.


Votes FFP after FFP declares he is too lazy to read.


Has some playful banter with Silly.


Comments on Sleeping commenting, though he doesn't actual bother to offer any opinion on what Sleeping says.


He is accussed of starting to do nothing and reminds the thread he critisized FFP for lurking.


Says Freddeh is trying to start something with him.


Finally, gives some reasons explaining why he isn't lurking. Explains what he has done so far and then says he's busy trying to save the forum, so that is his excuse for not posting like the PK of old.


Makes some comments about Rag being a good BuM, gives Silly some advice on being aloof and arrogant, promises excessive amounts of PK in the future, and mocks the suggestion that he needs help defending himself.


Yes, he started off doing stuff, but PK is currently lurking as he hasn't contributed anything since he voted FFP for lurking. And before that all the content he was producing was centered around himself and what he had said earlier, which was more a game of him refuting things than actually giving opinions on other players.


In the end though...


Sleeping confirms and then *paces around in circles*. Oh, excuse me. /me paces around in circles.


He also throws a vote on Theatog before day has started. Once day is underway, he throws that vote back on, with no explanation given.


When challenged on it, he says he is working to avoid attention for which he receives votes.


His defense is that avoiding attention and catching scum are the same thing as town. He also says his vote on Theatog had no reason.


He gets defensive when challenged about how he is playing, which is natural for almost everyone, and then proceeds to explain his strategy is good for either town or mafia as long as everyone isn't doing it.


He continues to argue for his style of play in one more post and then vanishes again.


Now...


Of these four PK is lurking the least, even though he is very lurky at the moment having said nothing about anything of import for some time.


Sleeping, while claiming to lurk, is not as suspicious as the others, who make promises they don't keep. Sleeping has given his reasons for lurking and they are in and of themselves a null-tell. He will need to be dealt with, of course, if this strategy of his doesn't move onto him contributing in the near future, but he is overshadowed by the other two.


FFP has done little, but he has given a real opinion on one player. As slight as that contribution was, it was contributing.


SF however has done nothing but ask about a vote and say he has reads that he has yet to produce.


If we must lynch a lurker today, which if we want to rid ourselves of the strategy entirely we must, I think SF would be the best choice as he has the done the least.

Post #366 by Niklor

@Sleeping
What is your opinion on me? What do you think of the case brought against Theatog by Silly? What do you think about lynching lurkers? 

Post #367 by Pdr_Br

All my opinions are chronologically stated so don't jump to quotes before reading all the stuff. Thank you.

Page 3:
Silly, Niklor and PK discuss the PK post made before say started.
Razor, Niklor and Freddeh discuss the advantages and/or disavantages of lynching lurkers.
Also Razor doesn't like slip cases in opposition to Niklor's opinion that slip cases can be used to supplement existing cases and are good Day 1 cases. Niklor says that linching lurkers should be done at the same time that lynching scumm, one cannot prioritise one in favor of the other.

Personal thoughts on this page:
I still think that PK's post is odd but insuficient to make a case based upon it; it can be considered as a slip but it's not clear one.
Regarding the hunting lurkers discussion I think that when hunting scum and lurkers I prefer to have a case to case approach, sometimes scummy people should be lynched first or vice versa.

Post #368 by Niklor

Apr 23, 2012 -- 1:11PM, Freddeh wrote:

"Lurking town are more likely to be lurking, unless they are odd like Sleeping, because they don't care about the game." Was this a slip? How do you know hes town?




I get the feeling he is town, though I obviously could be completely wrong about that.

In regards to his mention in the actual sentence, I mean how he is playing. He has declared how he is lurking to ensure town don't lynch town until he is comfortable with reads being accurate. While I disagree on that style of play, I feel the normal reason for town lurking is that they don't care about the game. 

Post #369 by Pdr_Br

My opinions are the ones in the brackets:
..."window.parent.tinyMCE.get('post_content').onLoad.dispatch();" contenteditable="true" />Page 4:
The first post of this page is Ahlyis voting Niklor based on his statement that his playstyle depends on his interest on the game. (Could this be a slip from Niklor?)

Razor continues to explain that slip cases are not valid cases since scum isn't stupid enough.(Well I did that in PK's Yoshi Mafia when Pere accused me of being Mafia and I awswered that I wasn't Yoshi, which was the Mafia Don's rolename, because I was one of the goons)

Razor also says that we must focus on lurker lynching as policy lynch.
Freddeh votes Niklor for white-knighting Silly and PK.

PK votes Freddeh because Freddeh is implying that since PK would dayvig if he had that chance then PK likes to dayvig. (This is a false, the first does not imply the second because having the ability to kill someone doesn't imply one should like to use or is compelled to use it)

Niklor refutes Freddeh accusations by saying that Razor's post on Silly was BS and he wants PK to better explain himself; Freddeh says Niklor is ignoring his question about convos (I don't understand what Freddeh is refering to here)

Sleeping shows up and votes for theatog with no apparrent reason behind (Random voting or active lurking? Perhaps both)

Ahlyis says that Niklor's playstyle statement is a preemptive attempt to defend his behaviour in case someone makes a meta case againt Niklor. (I think it's a nitpick by Ahlyis and his statement can work both ways: as scum is a excuse but as town as well, it seems rather an excuse to lurk but not a scum tell)

Razor tells that is players' resposability to take care of lurkers (And I agree with that statement)
Freddeh and Niklor discuss the semantics of shooting and dayvigging in Mafia while RAzor and Niklor talk about lurking and inactivity.

Sleeping says that he voted Atog because is inaction could be mistaken as a sign of scumminess and his reasons for voting can also be a reason to make people look at him as a suspicious person. (This comes out as a player that felt that he had to do something in order to not be considered as inactive/lurker that is why he voted for atog; his lack of reasoning seems like he is afraid that his reasons might bring people's attention to him rather than to the person he is voting for. I don't know if he has some experience in playing Mafia and since this is my game with him and perhaps his first game as well here in Px2 I can understand his action since has a new player he doesn't really know how to get actively participating in the discussion. Need more posts to confirm or refute this hypothesis)

Obviously Razor votes for Sleeping.
Niklor votes for Sleeping and explains wthat Sleeping must do in order to lose Niklor's vote and how to better play. (I agree with Niklor's post)

Sleeping posts again: He has a mindset that hurts town because he feels that having people's attention is sign that you're going to get lynched and that scumhunting is the same as lurking, which is not! also that he random voted for Atog and that he doesn't feel compelled to scumhunt and that he can bandwagon at any given time.
Can someone so blatatly scummy be scum? It feels to scummy to be scum. At least his a lynch choice if noting else pops up. <-- This is my opinion of Sleeping's post

Post #370 by Pdr_Br

Off topic: I don't know how the boards can screw up a simply copy paste from the note page.

I'll try to still post today my thoughts on the remaining pages. If not then only tomorrow. I will only talk about recent stuff when I got to it witch includes comments about my posts.

Page 5:

Silly begins to talk about the previous 2 pages posts.
Razor analyses Sleelping's last post.

Silly says the case on PK is bad (I agree), he also makes a metagame statement that he (Silly) goes hard on lurkers and Mafia as well. (this seems like bait for Ahlyis or am I nitpicking as well? feels like a trap). Agrees that Niklor's defense of him is suspicious.

Niklor and Razor are still talking about slip cases; and Silly joins them by saying that slip cases are bad but coherence cases are good, i.e. when players say something but do another thing afterwards; also that cases based on slips based on game mechanics can be good cases. (I agree, this reminds me of the PM breaking game where Silly foud out scum due to scum having role PMs worded different than the town role PMs can recall the name of the game though)

Silly wants to be as arrogant as PK. (I don't care)

Sleeping posts that he doesn't want to be schooled in out to play the game (Then accept that you need to take the resposability of the consequences of your playstyle); still thinks that lurking as town is a good strategy. (I want to lynch this guy so hard but I don't think his worth it, I'll just vote for him instead)

|
|
V

Vote: Sleeping

Silly says that hypocrasy is a scumm tell and I agree players that don't do what they say or vice versa are not town players! Also says that lurking lurkers for lurking shouldn't be done day 1 since it's early (but in a game like this where he have had a massive number of posts in so little time won't we have enough information in who is active lurking by the end of the first day? Perhaps we should lynch lurkers today although it will depend if the posting rythim remains like this during two weeks)

Silly says that Sleeping's stance on the game is unhelpfull --> Cookie for Silly!

Silly says that vigs should take care of lurkers --> I agree and saves town from wasting a lynch.

Razor brings up the bed points of Sleeping's post and thinks that perhaps Sleeping is a jester.

Sleeping posts again saying that by lurking he can pinpoint more accuratly who is scum and who is not, based on his reads of each player. He wants to first see how the rest of players play in order to see who is scum or not. For me the problem with this is that the rest of the players are denied of Sleeping's opinions and can only talk about Sleeping decision to lurk in order to gauge if Sleeping is scum or not. He also confirms that it's his first game here in Px2.
(There isn't a rulebook in out to play Mafia and people can have different playstyles, the only think that I ask of Sleeping is that if he is chosen to be the lycnh choice that he says what he thinks of people before dieing. Actually his playstyle makes me remeber of some players who don't do anything day 1 because they feel that day 1 cases are not good cases and day 1 consists on jokes and random votes.)

|
|
V

Unvote: Sleeping

His final statement in his post (#197) rings true. Perhaps our community can't accept different playstyles as viable ones.
Ahlyis is happy with his vote on Niklor.

Post #371 by Niklor

Apr 23, 2012 -- 1:40PM, Ahlyis wrote:

Apr 23, 2012 -- 11:32AM, Niklor wrote:

Why would I do this as scum, is what I'm asking? Why would I bother pre-emptively defending from such a piss-poor accusation? The answer is, I wouldn't.


A better question is why would you post that at all?  I've given a reason why you might as scum, I've yet to hear any explanation from you though. Why comment on a link between activity and alignment at all?  Or are you now denying even that much?




I've explained I was talking about myself. That was my sole reason for saying it. I wasn't thinking about any effect it would have on the game. My every word is not a calculated angle to change opinions or gain knowledge. I'm not saying that's now how it shouldn't be, but that's just not how it is.

I linking activity with interest and noting I am more likely interested in games I am scum in. It was a note about myself and observations about how I've played in past games. There was no meaning to it beyond that.

Apr 23, 2012 -- 1:40PM, Ahlyis wrote:

Apr 23, 2012 -- 11:32AM, Niklor wrote:

You can believe that I would, for whatever strange reason exists in your head. But it doesn't alter the fact that a pre-emptive deflection is a bad tactic in general, even if I was scum. If I defend myself from arguments that haven't yet appeared, that makes it look like I'm worried about such. And town has no need to worry about such in general.


Agreed on all counts. It was a horrible tactic, scum or town. Town has no need to even worry about such in general. Scum does have a small reason to worry. And the simpe fact is you DID make that post.  If that post makes little sense for Scum to make, but makes zero sense for a Townie to make, you wouldn't expect anyone to make such a post.  Given that you DID make such a post though, by your own arguments the only one who might have thought it was worth it is Scum.




This assumes it was any sort of tactic at all, which is the error.

Post #372 by Ahlyis

Apr 23, 2012 -- 1:50PM, Pdr_Br wrote:

Ahlyis says that Niklor's playstyle statement is a preemptive attempt to defend his behaviour in case someone makes a meta case againt Niklor. (I think it's a nitpick by Ahlyis and his statement can work both ways: as scum is a excuse but as town as well, it seems rather an excuse to lurk but not a scum tell)


That might be the case if Niklor then went on to lurk.  But that's not what happened. Niklor has been one of the most active people in the thread.  With that in mind, there's no use of it as an excuse for a townie to lurk and we're left with it as a scum excuse.

Post #373 by Ahlyis

Apr 23, 2012 -- 1:55PM, Niklor wrote:

Apr 23, 2012 -- 1:40PM, Ahlyis wrote:

Apr 23, 2012 -- 11:32AM, Niklor wrote:

Why would I do this as scum, is what I'm asking? Why would I bother pre-emptively defending from such a piss-poor accusation? The answer is, I wouldn't.


A better question is why would you post that at all?  I've given a reason why you might as scum, I've yet to hear any explanation from you though. Why comment on a link between activity and alignment at all?  Or are you now denying even that much?




I've explained I was talking about myself. That was my sole reason for saying it. I wasn't thinking about any effect it would have on the game. My every word is not a calculated angle to change opinions or gain knowledge. I'm not saying that's now how it shouldn't be, but that's just not how it is.

I linking activity with interest and noting I am more likely interested in games I am scum in. It was a note about myself and observations about how I've played in past games. There was no meaning to it beyond that.

Apr 23, 2012 -- 1:40PM, Ahlyis wrote:

Apr 23, 2012 -- 11:32AM, Niklor wrote:

You can believe that I would, for whatever strange reason exists in your head. But it doesn't alter the fact that a pre-emptive deflection is a bad tactic in general, even if I was scum. If I defend myself from arguments that haven't yet appeared, that makes it look like I'm worried about such. And town has no need to worry about such in general.


Agreed on all counts. It was a horrible tactic, scum or town. Town has no need to even worry about such in general. Scum does have a small reason to worry. And the simpe fact is you DID make that post.  If that post makes little sense for Scum to make, but makes zero sense for a Townie to make, you wouldn't expect anyone to make such a post.  Given that you DID make such a post though, by your own arguments the only one who might have thought it was worth it is Scum.




This assumes it was any sort of tactic at all, which is the error.


So you say.  Please excuse me if I choose not to take your word for it!

Post #374 by Niklor

Apr 23, 2012 -- 2:01PM, Ahlyis wrote:

Apr 23, 2012 -- 1:50PM, Pdr_Br wrote:

Ahlyis says that Niklor's playstyle statement is a preemptive attempt to defend his behaviour in case someone makes a meta case againt Niklor. (I think it's a nitpick by Ahlyis and his statement can work both ways: as scum is a excuse but as town as well, it seems rather an excuse to lurk but not a scum tell)


That might be the case if Niklor then went on to lurk.  But that's not what happened. Niklor has been one of the most active people in the thread.  With that in mind, there's no use of it as an excuse for a townie to lurk and we're left with it as a scum excuse.




Or it was never intended as an excuse and you read too much into a simple statement.

Post #375 by Niklor

You don't have to take my word for anything I say Ahlyis. No one expects you to.

Post #376 by Pdr_Br

Ahlyis take it as you want but I wrote that when I was starting to read page 3, if I recall correctly, so I could have I know if Niklor would keep on talking or not? Still it's a meta-game reason against Niklor and without something more suspicious from him I'm not seeing it as a valid point against Niklor.

Here we have page 6 it seems the rest will be done tomorrow.

Page 6:

Niklor responds to Sleeping that his current behavior isn't coherent to what Sleeping says he will do and ends it by asking what Sleeping will do change that. (I'm interested in his response)

FFP posts for the first time after the day as started, votes for Niklor and says he didn't read the big posts. (Is he too old to policy lynch? I'm talking old in terms that he is not a new player)

PK and Niklor vote FFP for his attitude --> Cookie for both of them.

Ahlyis agrees with both of them but it's reluctant to vote for FFP because 3 votes that quicly on FFP aren't good.
(I disagree, how else can we show that we condemn his actions if not by voting him? Yes it can be a way for scum to bandwagon with an excuse but I doubt FFP would be put at hammer range this early since I know some people would unvote before he would be on range)

Cue people saying that FFP's attitude is bad and should be punished, mostly PK and Silly.
Silly and Niklor discuss playstyles quirks.
FFP agrees to read the thread; Pk and Niklor are pleased with this.

Sleeping says to Silly that he voted for atog at random and will try to find a better choice to vote for and that he will unvote while he doesn't find a suitable replacement for his vote choice. He then talks to Niklor that Niklor can't impose Niklor's playstyle into Sleeping and that for him the votes before day started counted since they were bolded and such. He says that he prefers to analyze people's actions before making a constructive vote; him making a random vote is just that a random vote while he is making his decision. Responds to Niklor that had Niklor not called for Sleeping, he would had remain silent unless he had made a good enough case on someone or if people wanted to lynch him.
(I like how he explains his reasons and for me it's better to have a solid case than people rambling on semantics which this thread seems to have a lot. I now feel comfortable of having unvoted Sleeping --> Sleeping gets a cookie)

Razor brings up a good point: a townie must put itself in harms way, i.e., spotlight if it wants to lynch scum and must be able to risk being lynched or lynch a townie in order to get scum. --> Razor has a cookie commin'!

Atog shows up.
Freddeh votes Razor for being detached from the game. (I'm not seeing it)

Atog votes for Niklor because Niklor seems oddly inquisitive??? (He wants to make a playstyle case on Niklor, that is a bad case atog no cookie for you! since I'm liking very much how Niklor has been playing this game)

Post #377 by Freddeh

Re: Razor, He wasn't bringing opinions on players, he was bringing opinions on general mafia theory. That is a major day 1 scumtell to me, because I've seen it happen many times where mafia can get away with things like that while saying that they've 'contributed' when they really haven't. It got better afterwards, so my point was invalid, thus the future unvote.

I'm on board the PK lynch at this point.

@Nik: Hes still a wild card because we don't really know his usual mannerisms, and the way you worded it doesn't imply thats what you meant, especially considering our recent argument about people being 'off the table'.

Post #378 by Niklor

Apr 23, 2012 -- 3:39PM, Freddeh wrote:

@Nik: Hes still a wild card because we don't really know his usual mannerisms, and the way you worded it doesn't imply thats what you meant, especially considering our recent argument about people being 'off the table'.




The way I worded it was supposed to reference the manner in which he is playing, not his alignment. What I meant is what I meant. You infer things from it which were not implied.

Post #379 by Freddeh

Probable, I've been having a regular dose of that type of thing lately, must have gotten into my system.

Post #380 by Niklor

Why are you so quick to drop things?

Post #381 by ProphetKing

Freddeh, I am not trying to lurk my way out of "anything." Again, the suggestion I am unable to defend myself from trite day one accusations is, again, silly.

Right now I'm just under the highest volume of work on the site. I am still reading the thread but because of the blocks of text and already length of the thread, I want to sit down and think over things beyond "wow, Freddeh is really trying to troll me." 

Post #382 by Niklor

Apr 23, 2012 -- 4:34PM, Niklor wrote:

I, Niklor, in the event of a situation where I am placed at L-1, in other words 1 vote away from being lynched, I will bring the hammer vote down upon myself unless it is a known Lylo situation by either announcement or general consensus. Note, if the general consensus is that it's Lylo on days when it clearly isn't, I will ignore them. Please respect the self-hammer by not hammering Niklor in non-Lylo scenarios.


Post #383 by razorborne

Apr 23, 2012 -- 10:21AM, Niklor wrote:

I don't find the case against Theatog to be that well-written aside from the fact of the voting pattern of Theatog as a whole. Whenever anyone says they have found scum, they need to be serious about it unless it's clearly a very early on joke.


unless they're claiming cop, they can't have guaranteed found scum, which means it's always clearly a joke. it's a way of putting a nice little button on it, like "and that's my case." every vote means "I think I've found scum."

Apr 23, 2012 -- 10:21AM, Niklor wrote:

I don't understand this. If I had only read the TL;DR and responded to it without reading the whole case, that is one thing. But I did read the case and then the TL;DR and I found it summarized the case more than well enough for what I needed to respond too. I don't need to respond to the whole case if I can respond to a summary with the same points.


sorry, I should clarify. I wasn't talking about you there, just that it was necessary to include a short version of the case for those who were too lazy to read it. you're all good.

Apr 23, 2012 -- 10:41AM, Ahlyis wrote:

To be fair, I never said I wasn't reading the thread. I said the thread was a giant tl/dr. I said I read the thread, but skimmed several of the quote towers as I did so.


skimming isn't reading. do you mean you skimmed the quotes themselves and read the responses, or that you skimmed the large posts themselves?

Apr 23, 2012 -- 10:43AM, Niklor wrote:

That feels entirely pointless. I keep my eyes on certain people based on things they say in posts, but I don't feel a need to tell everyone I am doing so, especially the person I am keeping my eye on.


you can keep your eyes wherever you want. the point is to make sure everyone else's eyes are there too.

Apr 23, 2012 -- 11:32AM, Niklor wrote:

You don't attack someone because they are actively posting or lurking, unless as a matter of policy. It's a null-tell.


while I agree with most of what's going on in this post, lurking is not a null tell. it's something both town and scum do, like pretty much every other scum tell, but it's still something that benefits scum and hurts town. if a townie is doing it, it's bad play, and if a mafiate is doing it, it's good play. that tilts the scales pretty clearly.



Apr 23, 2012 -- 1:04PM, Niklor wrote:

Lurking town are more likely to be lurking, unless they are odd like Sleeping, because they don't care about the game. Good townies should never be scared of the lynch. This is a game after all and getting lynched isn't going to end anything significant. They should try to avoid the lynch, but never in a manner that hinders their contributions.


this, exactly. a townie's job is not to avoid dying. playing like it is is playing like something that doesn't play very well. a trombone? metaphors are hard.

@Pdr's series of posts: a lot of good stuff in here. anyone who did not read them in their entirety is not playing the game.

Apr 23, 2012 -- 3:20PM, Pdr_Br wrote:

FFP posts for the first time after the day as started, votes for Niklor and says he didn't read the big posts. (Is he too old to policy lynch? I'm talking old in terms that he is not a new player)


no one's too old for a policy lynch.

Post #384 by Freddeh

Apr 23, 2012 -- 4:00PM, Niklor wrote:

Why are you so quick to drop things?




Because I'm currently involved in a rediculous argument in another game, so I don't feel like repeating the process in this game. At least right now.

Post #385 by Freddeh

Apr 23, 2012 -- 4:02PM, ProphetKing wrote:

Freddeh, I am not trying to lurk my way out of "anything." Again, the suggestion I am unable to defend myself from trite day one accusations is, again, silly.

Right now I'm just under the highest volume of work on the site. I am still reading the thread but because of the blocks of text and already length of the thread, I want to sit down and think over things beyond "wow, Freddeh is really trying to troll me." 




I thought the highest amount of work was basically done as of a couple days ago. Silly has been helping with that seemingly a lot as well and hes still been plenty active.

Irregardless, a lot of my problems with you don't have to do with you not posting, its what you've been posting when you did post.

Post #386 by shadowfyre77

oh
right
um
atog, why to gut vote and change so many?
waiting until you have some evidence against them and stuff works just as well right

uhh
also maybe freddeh although i'd have to go back further pages

@ahlyis i have no idea what atog having 2 votes has anything to do with anything

uhhh niklor seems fine i guess, we're hearing his opinininininoinoinoinoinoinionoinons opinions and stuff

also  freddeh, irregardless is wrong and doesn't really mean anything and you should never use it ever again because grammar is important

Post #387 by Freddeh

But its a fun word.

Post #388 by Ahlyis

Apr 23, 2012 -- 6:51PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 23, 2012 -- 10:41AM, Ahlyis wrote:

To be fair, I never said I wasn't reading the thread. I said the thread was a giant tl/dr. I said I read the thread, but skimmed several of the quote towers as I did so.


skimming isn't reading. do you mean you skimmed the quotes themselves and read the responses, or that you skimmed the large posts themselves?


What happened is, there was a point early on where two players (Niklor and Freddeh?) got into a huge, quote tower war of words. I actually read the first few, but then just started skimming them. And yes, I just skimmed the entire quote towers at that point.


Post #389 by Niklor

Apr 23, 2012 -- 6:51PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 23, 2012 -- 10:21AM, Niklor wrote:

I don't find the case against Theatog to be that well-written aside from the fact of the voting pattern of Theatog as a whole. Whenever anyone says they have found scum, they need to be serious about it unless it's clearly a very early on joke.


unless they're claiming cop, they can't have guaranteed found scum, which means it's always clearly a joke. it's a way of putting a nice little button on it, like "and that's my case." every vote means "I think I've found scum."



Then say it. In past, when I've said I've found scum, with the exception of instances where I was scum and was obviously lying, I'm certain that I've found scum, even though I have no proof beyond the evidence and my suspicions.

Apr 23, 2012 -- 6:51PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 23, 2012 -- 10:21AM, Niklor wrote:

I don't understand this. If I had only read the TL;DR and responded to it without reading the whole case, that is one thing. But I did read the case and then the TL;DR and I found it summarized the case more than well enough for what I needed to respond too. I don't need to respond to the whole case if I can respond to a summary with the same points.


sorry, I should clarify. I wasn't talking about you there, just that it was necessary to include a short version of the case for those who were too lazy to read it. you're all good.




Why is it necessary to enable people not to read?

Apr 23, 2012 -- 6:51PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 23, 2012 -- 10:43AM, Niklor wrote:

That feels entirely pointless. I keep my eyes on certain people based on things they say in posts, but I don't feel a need to tell everyone I am doing so, especially the person I am keeping my eye on.


you can keep your eyes wherever you want. the point is to make sure everyone else's eyes are there too.




I'd much rather everyone kept their own eyes on everything possible that they can.

Apr 23, 2012 -- 6:51PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 23, 2012 -- 11:32AM, Niklor wrote:

You don't attack someone because they are actively posting or lurking, unless as a matter of policy. It's a null-tell.


while I agree with most of what's going on in this post, lurking is not a null tell. it's something both town and scum do, like pretty much every other scum tell, but it's still something that benefits scum and hurts town. if a townie is doing it, it's bad play, and if a mafiate is doing it, it's good play. that tilts the scales pretty clearly.




Regardless of whether it is a good play, the fact that both town and scum do it for varying reasons are what make it a null tell.

Post #390 by Niklor

Apr 23, 2012 -- 8:58PM, shadowfyre77 wrote:

oh
right
um
atog, why to gut vote and change so many?
waiting until you have some evidence against them and stuff works just as well right




Theatog already explained his reasons. Can you please be bothered to read the thread.

Apr 23, 2012 -- 8:58PM, shadowfyre77 wrote:

uhh
also maybe freddeh although i'd have to go back further pages




Reread everything and make notes as you go through.

Apr 23, 2012 -- 8:58PM, shadowfyre77 wrote:

@ahlyis i have no idea what atog having 2 votes has anything to do with anything




It means he is charismatic, which some people would argue is more likely a town role than a scum role, though as the role can go either way I personally feel it should be treated as such.

Apr 23, 2012 -- 8:58PM, shadowfyre77 wrote:

uhhh niklor seems fine i guess, we're hearing his opinininininoinoinoinoinoinionoinons opinions and stuff




So you're going to ignore what I say just because I'm saying it?

Apr 23, 2012 -- 8:58PM, shadowfyre77 wrote:

also  freddeh, irregardless is wrong and doesn't really mean anything and you should never use it ever again because grammar is important




SF, why are you the one commenting on someone's grammar?

Also, how are any of these reads? Do you have any suspicions of anyone? Do you think various players are being honest in their posts and apparent intentions? 

Post #391 by Niklor

Apr 24, 2012 -- 8:31AM, Ahlyis wrote:

Apr 23, 2012 -- 6:51PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 23, 2012 -- 10:41AM, Ahlyis wrote:

To be fair, I never said I wasn't reading the thread. I said the thread was a giant tl/dr. I said I read the thread, but skimmed several of the quote towers as I did so.


skimming isn't reading. do you mean you skimmed the quotes themselves and read the responses, or that you skimmed the large posts themselves?


What happened is, there was a point early on where two players (Niklor and Freddeh?) got into a huge, quote tower war of words. I actually read the first few, but then just started skimming them. And yes, I just skimmed the entire quote towers at that point.




Niklor and Razor were the main large quote towers I believe, with some input from Freddeh and Silly helping to build other large towers.

Thanks for not bothering to read them. 

Post #392 by Niklor

@SF, FFP, SLEEPING, & PK

Spoiler: Show

Apr 23, 2012 -- 1:46PM, Niklor wrote:

Speaking of lurkers...

FFP's first non confirm post was saying he was too lazy to read and bandwagon voted me because people were voting for me, the very definition of bandwagoning.


He then proceeded to promise to read the thread tomorrow after being asked to, but in his next post the only thoughts he provided were on me and they weren't in response to anything that had been said, rather a single accussation and nothing else.


He then makes a post with a somewhat clever remark of their being a difference between content and spam without actually clarifying the difference nor showing us what he is talking about and then is insulted because he can't be bothered to read a case, which makes me doubt if he ever read the thread in the first place given some of the posts were nearly as long as that one case.


Moving on...


Shadowfyre was able to make a few more posts after his confirmation, but before day had started, but they weren't contributive in any real respect.


He then says something about lurker lynches not being good because actives have all the votes, whatever that actually means.


He then chimes in much later, saying commenting on everything is good because it gives us something to discuss and get reads off of.


Then when asked if he has any reads, he says he will have to read back a couple pages to recall them and after a bit more asks for an explanation about Theatog's votehopping from Freddeh to me, though not from me to Freddeh to me, from which I am inferring Shadowfyre either hadn't read the thread or didn't really remember most of it.


Finally, when asked about his reads again, he excuses himself to go eat and hasn't yet said anything.


Past him...


PK comes in and does some joking. Good for him.


Says community.wizards.com/paranoia/go/thread...


I'm still unsure on what is was, though reaction troll seems to be the popular opinion. He explains he meant to say "shoot" instead of "lynch." Regardless, this is all well and good as it seems to stimulate the town into actively discussing what he says, as it seems were his intentions.


Continues to refute certain arguments as long as they are centered about him or what he said.


Votes FFP after FFP declares he is too lazy to read.


Has some playful banter with Silly.


Comments on Sleeping commenting, though he doesn't actual bother to offer any opinion on what Sleeping says.


He is accussed of starting to do nothing and reminds the thread he critisized FFP for lurking.


Says Freddeh is trying to start something with him.


Finally, gives some reasons explaining why he isn't lurking. Explains what he has done so far and then says he's busy trying to save the forum, so that is his excuse for not posting like the PK of old.


Makes some comments about Rag being a good BuM, gives Silly some advice on being aloof and arrogant, promises excessive amounts of PK in the future, and mocks the suggestion that he needs help defending himself.


Yes, he started off doing stuff, but PK is currently lurking as he hasn't contributed anything since he voted FFP for lurking. And before that all the content he was producing was centered around himself and what he had said earlier, which was more a game of him refuting things than actually giving opinions on other players.


In the end though...


Sleeping confirms and then *paces around in circles*. Oh, excuse me. /me paces around in circles.


He also throws a vote on Theatog before day has started. Once day is underway, he throws that vote back on, with no explanation given.


When challenged on it, he says he is working to avoid attention for which he receives votes.


His defense is that avoiding attention and catching scum are the same thing as town. He also says his vote on Theatog had no reason.


He gets defensive when challenged about how he is playing, which is natural for almost everyone, and then proceeds to explain his strategy is good for either town or mafia as long as everyone isn't doing it.


He continues to argue for his style of play in one more post and then vanishes again.


Now...


Of these four PK is lurking the least, even though he is very lurky at the moment having said nothing about anything of import for some time.


Sleeping, while claiming to lurk, is not as suspicious as the others, who make promises they don't keep. Sleeping has given his reasons for lurking and they are in and of themselves a null-tell. He will need to be dealt with, of course, if this strategy of his doesn't move onto him contributing in the near future, but he is overshadowed by the other two.


FFP has done little, but he has given a real opinion on one player. As slight as that contribution was, it was contributing.


SF however has done nothing but ask about a vote and say he has reads that he has yet to produce.


If we must lynch a lurker today, which if we want to rid ourselves of the strategy entirely we must, I think SF would be the best choice as he has the done the least.




If any of the rest of you have opinions on this, I would also be glad to hear them, but I want those four specifically to read this and respond to it in some manner.

Post #393 by theatog

Apr 22, 2012 -- 7:02PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

You know, we have enough evidence to make actual cases (as I have just demonstrated), and voting just based on your gut shouldn't be necessary nearly 350 posts into the game.



Good job sherlock. you just broke mafia.

you are really that desperate to pin someone on the chopping block eh? 

awesome Day 1 cases are awesome.

Post #394 by Feroz-s_Familiar_Pheldy

Apr 24, 2012 -- 12:57PM, theatog wrote:

Apr 22, 2012 -- 7:02PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

You know, we have enough evidence to make actual cases (as I have just demonstrated), and voting just based on your gut shouldn't be necessary nearly 350 posts into the game.



Good job sherlock. you just broke mafia.

you are really that desperate to pin someone on the chopping block eh? 

awesome Day 1 cases are awesome.



amen

Post #395 by theatog

Apr 22, 2012 -- 9:19PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 22, 2012 -- 6:03PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

*SILLY'S CASE AGAINST ATOG*


this is an excellently laid-out case. once sleeping is dead and maybe FFP, I would be very much behind an atog lynch.

Apr 22, 2012 -- 6:19PM, theatog wrote:

I saw your post back when i switched vote. I intentionally left it unanswered. 

I read until you said " You say this was on accident, and you use the excuse that you "like pushing wagons" to cover up your vote." and the rest is tl;dr.


these two paragraphs are exactly why I said the things I said above. you don't purposefully ignore direct questions, and you don't skip through cases just because they're long.
 


Raz, there were no direct question if you know which "your post back when I switch vote" I was talking about.

Again, I see "purposeful" silence as a strategy. If you see responding to every single word in the thread is a good rule, go form a committee with Niklor. 

And you know why everyone has been having a hard time reading, including Silly multiple preachings of "are you even reading the thread?"? It's because someone is spamming the threads heavily. 

Post #396 by theatog

Spoiler: Show

Apr 23, 2012 -- 10:41AM, Ahlyis wrote:

Responses for posts 281-320:

Apr 22, 2012 -- 4:44PM, Freddeh wrote:

Off-topic: I find it rather curious that FFP is getting most of the heat when Ahlyis and Pere are doing virtually the same things.


To be fair, I never said I wasn't reading the thread. I said the thread was a giant tl/dr. I said I read the thread, but skimmed several of the quote towers as I did so.

Apr 21, 2012 -- 6:41PM, Ragnarokio wrote:

Vote Count

Niklor - 4 (Ahlyis, FFP, Theatog)
Ahlyis - 1 (Silly)
FFP - 2 (Niklor, PK)
Sleeping - 1 (Razorborne)
Razor - 1 (Freddeh)
Not Voting - 4 (PeregrineV, Pdr_Br, ShadowFyre, Sleeping)




Apr 22, 2012 -- 3:29PM, Ragnarokio wrote:

Vote Count

Niklor - 2 (Ahlyis, FFP)
Ahlyis - 1 (Silly)
FFP - 2 (Niklor, PK)
Sleeping - 1 (Razorborne)
Silly - 2 (Theatog)
Not Voting - 5 (PeregrineV, Pdr_Br, ShadowFyre, Sleeping, Freddeh)


No idea why Niklor's name gets bolded, but it looks like theatog has a double vote.


He gets bolded coz' he will be lynch based on the current result when the day ends. I think.

I'm sorry if someone already answered this. Still moving on @ #354

Post #397 by Pdr_Br

Page 7 impressions:

Atog says that he voted for Niklor before checking if Niklor was already being voted for; he says he likes to push wagons so no bad was done with his vote. Atog disagrees with Razor on the slip cases stance and also disagrees with Ahlyis for going after Niklor with a poor contribution for the game, he thinks that Ahlyis is just sheeping. Thinks that PK's logic is sound and finishes by unvoting Niklor.
|--> I agree with his opinions on the people he mentioned as I have said before.

PK feels that Freddeh is gunning for him.
Niklor agrees that PK's logic is good but PK should contribute more.
Niklor asks Freddeh and PK to put their cards on table and be clear on their stances about the other one.
Niklor keeps pushing PK to post more.

Freddeh says that it's too early to accuse someone of lurking, he was on to PK because PK hasn't said anything important even taking in consideration the dayvig stuff and the vote for FFP.
|--> I think that is odd that PK isn't being as vocal as he can be.

PK says that he will eventually post huge walls of text!
|--> We will pass the number of posts of the Promo game before this game ends!

Silly posts that Niklor tendence to defend people before they have the chance the post strange.
|--> I agree, people should defend themselves this sort of behavior can come across as white kighting.

Atog votes for Freddeh without an explicity reason
Niklor posts after saying "As soon as someone explains a real reason to me why people need a placeholder to rest their vote on, we can ignore the fact of randomly placing votes without reason."
Atog posts right afterwards unvoting and voting for Niklor still without saying why.
|--> Why Atog, why!!!!!!!!

Silly answers to Niklor saying that people like to vote because not voting is a scum tell.
|--> For me voting or not voting has the same weight. It's the backing of why you're voting or not voting that makes you suspicious or not.
|--> Silly loses a cookie!

Atog points out that what Freddeh is doing is activte lurking and that is why he voted for him.
|--> How can we measure if someone is activly lurking when each day this game gets a ton of posts? If someone is posting once a day can you consider him as actively lurking? Well it all depends on the content the players give whem they post. It's true that Freddeh hasn't posted a lot and his posts are mainly reactions to what is happening but how can we blame him? In a game with high activity is hard to make an impact if you post less than others. Your posts need to make an impact or people will say that you're posting for posting sake. I assume that I'm on the same situation of Freddeh, especially since I have a tendency to post even less than him.

Post #398 by Pdr_Br

Thoughts on Page 8:

Freddeh responds to Atog that he is accusing PK and Razor of actively lurking and that is hard to find lurkers this early on Day 1.
|--> Isn't him as well actively lurking?

Atog makes his recap of what happened so far and votes Silly because Silly is post whoring and that means that Silly has a nice role so he must be scum.
|--> Should I even comment on the last part? That is streching at minimun and metagaming at maximum. Can't you find a better reason?

FFP returns after reading the thread and makes a huge post where he says that Niklor is the person to lynch because the way Niklor has been playing seems to much town so he cannot be scum and the way he responds to everything and everyone clutters the thread and makes him almost omnipresent which with the recent activity push had been going on on the forum seems like pro town.
|--> Whow, when FFP wants he plays like a boss. Brings up good points about Niklor that I haven't think about and it makes me see Niklor has a possible Day 1 viable lynch choice.
|--> Cookie jar for FFP

Niklor answers to FFP that FFP is doing this because low post game favor FFP playstyle because it prevents town for better analysing the players.
FFP responds that there is a difference between content and spam.
|--> Or better there is a difference between content and fluff.

Razor says that the way Niklor is playing in this game is nor hurtfull for town per se because town needs content Day 1, but it's a thing to remember for future days.
He also says that FFP case on Niklor could be a good case but it seems that most of his case on Niklor is just because FFP doesn't like to read and is being lazy.
|--> Could be but it still is a good case.

Freddeh says that FFP case on Niklor is good but Niklor playstyle is actually helping town so he doesn't want to lynch Niklor today and that is happy that Razor is posting real content. Also says that Atog shouldn't be accusing people of doing the same thing Atog is doing.
|-->I agree on the Atog and RAzor points but lynching Niklor isn't bad to town, lynching people we feel are scum shouldn't be stop because they are activelly participating in the discussion we don't give town pants to people just because they are playing pro town.

Shadowfire shows up, talks but doesn't post any content, mainly says that Niklor alive is good for town.
|--> Could it be a way of defending Niklor? Could them be buddies?

Shadow posts again talking about atog vote hopping which atog explains in the post after.
Atog says that his first votes were to confirm his charismatic ability, and he vote hopped because the vote count happened when he had unvoted.
He voted for Freddeh because he felt that Freddeh's vote was opportunistic, he voted for Niklor because Niklor was been defensive and still couldn't defend himself well,  and finally he voted for silly due to a gut feeling that silly is scum.
|--> I would prefer if he had kept voting Niklor.

Niklor responds to Freddeh by voting because of Freddeh saying that he wouldn't vote for Niklor.
|--> Now Freddeh is white-kinghting Niklor who had been accused of white-kinghting by Freddeh, Irony thy name is Mafia!
|--> Freddeh has become suspicious to me: I'll keep my eye on you!

Niklor responds to atog that his way of responding to anything that happens helps him keep attention to everything. Also says that he is more concerned in catching scum than defeding himself.

Freddeh responds to Niklor that he might note vote for Niklor today but can still vote for him after or even today if Niklor does something scummy.
Also says that people are giving heat to FFP for lurking but nobody is talking about Ahlyis and Peregrine.
|--> Suddenly I feel lonely and sad. At least Niklor remembers me.

Post #399 by theatog

Apr 23, 2012 -- 8:58PM, shadowfyre77 wrote:

oh
right
um
atog, why to gut vote and change so many?
waiting until you have some evidence against them and stuff works just as well right

uhh
also maybe freddeh although i'd have to go back further pages

@ahlyis i have no idea what atog having 2 votes has anything to do with anything

uhhh niklor seems fine i guess, we're hearing his opinininininoinoinoinoinoinionoinons opinions and stuff

also  freddeh, irregardless is wrong and doesn't really mean anything and you should never use it ever again because grammar is important


I vote as I read. 

And high activities corresponds to more changing votes. Not that I really planned for it but now that I said it, i thought it made perfect sense lol. I swear I just came up with that reason as I type.



 I don't believe in confronting people or just finger pointing based on "EVIDENCE". Because how that usually boils down to is this: either they would go "ok, that's not what i meant" or "no, you're wrong" plus endless arguments that derails the thread.


Post #400 by theatog

Apr 24, 2012 -- 1:19PM, Pdr_Br wrote:


Atog makes his recap of what happened so far and votes Silly because Silly is post whoring and that means that Silly has a nice role so he must be scum.
|--> Should I even comment on the last part? That is streching at minimun and metagaming at maximum. Can't you find a better reason?



Yea please don't blow things out of proportion. I understand it's only human nature to read every word as equal weight coz' they DO appear in the same font and size and color in a form post like this. The "scum with cool ability" is of course an over-reaching speculation. And no, my vote is not based solely on that. 

But basing on the reaction I've seen so far, I'm liking the vote more as time goes by. Again, I always say it's a good sign when votes are spreaded out in day one. I see it being likely one of these two situations: scum are clearly not directing the lynch (well technically nobody is). Or that one of those people on the block is scum and scums are too self-conscious to be pushing either a scum or a nonscum wagon. 

Post #401 by Pdr_Br

My opinions on page 9:

Freddeh votes PK for lurking.

Silly brings the heat on Atog: (I'm liking Silly very much in this game)

"TL;DR SECTION:

1) Switches votes frequently with little to no justification.
2) Tries to make excuses for his votes that do not seem very valid.
3) Conveniently ignores people when they try to debate the reasons for his vote.
4) Based on 1, 2, and 3, seems like somebody trying to find an excuse to place his vote on someone and not be questioned on it.
5) Is therefore totally scum. "
|--> PS: he is charismatic scum which adds a new reason to lynch him if you want to.
|--> At least seems like someone to keep my eye on!
|--> Silly cookie for a good case on theatog but I'm not sold, perhaps gut feeling let me finish reading the thread and perhaps I will have a clearer mind.

Silly then votes Atog.
Atog answers that Silly is OMGUS voting him.
|--> You know that you're only supporting Silly's case on you by posting like this. Makes want to vote him.

Vote: Atog

Freddeh and Niklor keep discussing semantics of each other posts.
|--> Get a life people, or a case on someone whichever comes first (joke)

Niklor responds to Atog that he must do a better of clarifying that Silly case on him is bogus instead of just dismissing the points Silly brought up agains him.

Razor says that Silly case on Atog is good, but (yes there is a but there) only after sleeping is dead and FFP follows.
|-->Why Razor? Is there a better case ouy there on Sleepind and FFP because I didn't saw it, unless your only reasons to vote them is because of their activity. Atog is the best Day 1 lynch up to now.

Ahlyis shows up and starts analysing past posts giving his opinion on them.
Niklor keeps responding to the points Ahlyis brings up that directly relate to him.

Ahlyis and Niklor discuss back and forth Niklor's statement from the beginning of the game where Niklor said that his playstyle depends on his interest on the game, namely his activity.

Post #402 by Niklor

Apr 24, 2012 -- 12:57PM, theatog wrote:

Apr 22, 2012 -- 7:02PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

You know, we have enough evidence to make actual cases (as I have just demonstrated), and voting just based on your gut shouldn't be necessary nearly 350 posts into the game.



Good job sherlock. you just broke mafia.

you are really that desperate to pin someone on the chopping block eh? 

awesome Day 1 cases are awesome.




Are you trying to advocate only voting by your gut on D1?

Post #403 by Niklor

Apr 24, 2012 -- 1:03PM, theatog wrote:

Apr 22, 2012 -- 9:19PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 22, 2012 -- 6:03PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

*SILLY'S CASE AGAINST ATOG*


this is an excellently laid-out case. once sleeping is dead and maybe FFP, I would be very much behind an atog lynch.

Apr 22, 2012 -- 6:19PM, theatog wrote:

I saw your post back when i switched vote. I intentionally left it unanswered. 

I read until you said " You say this was on accident, and you use the excuse that you "like pushing wagons" to cover up your vote." and the rest is tl;dr.


these two paragraphs are exactly why I said the things I said above. you don't purposefully ignore direct questions, and you don't skip through cases just because they're long.
 


Raz, there were no direct question if you know which "your post back when I switch vote" I was talking about.

Again, I see "purposeful" silence as a strategy. If you see responding to every single word in the thread is a good rule, go form a committee with Niklor. 

And you know why everyone has been having a hard time reading, including Silly multiple preachings of "are you even reading the thread?"? It's because someone is spamming the threads heavily. 




What was the purpose of your silence then? That's assuming it is indeed a strategy and not an excuse to avoid answering questions you don't have a good explanation for.

I have been able to keep up with this game fine and I have read every single post as I come across them. The excuse that there is too much to read is a piss poor one. If you have to, ask to be replaced out or allocate some more time to the game. I know there are RL issues, but everyone seems to forget that "playing mafia is a commitment." If you don't have the time to commit to playing a game of mafia, don't get involved in the first place and don't complain when some of us are involved in the game.

Post #404 by Pdr_Br

Page 10:

Fredeh remembers me I'm happy!
Freddeh and Niklor discuss lurkers and TL;DR in today's games and activities of players.

Niklor talks about all the lurkers: FFP, Shadow, PK and Sleeping and finishes by saying that Shadow is the better lynch choice.
|-->Unfortunatly I have to agree, Shadow always comes up as the lazy, lurking player who avoids content like the plague.

Shadow shows up, ask atog about his gut votes and vote hopping.
|-->Can you please do something other people haven't done already? Why don't you give us what are your reads on all people so far. Everytime I read your posts is like you copy pasted someone else and they always sound vague and uninterested in the game.

Niklor asks for the opinions of the lurkers on his post about them.

Post #405 by Pdr_Br

Yay, I finally catch up to this game.

Atog saying people are scum due to their playstyle is metagaming. For me that is not a viable argument, perhaps I blow it out of proportion regarding your stance on this but for me your statement felt exactly as I said.

Hasta tomorrow guys, I need sleep.

Post #406 by Niklor

Apr 24, 2012 -- 1:27PM, theatog wrote:

Apr 23, 2012 -- 8:58PM, shadowfyre77 wrote:

oh
right
um
atog, why to gut vote and change so many?
waiting until you have some evidence against them and stuff works just as well right

uhh
also maybe freddeh although i'd have to go back further pages

@ahlyis i have no idea what atog having 2 votes has anything to do with anything

uhhh niklor seems fine i guess, we're hearing his opinininininoinoinoinoinoinionoinons opinions and stuff

also  freddeh, irregardless is wrong and doesn't really mean anything and you should never use it ever again because grammar is important


I vote as I read. 

And high activities corresponds to more changing votes. Not that I really planned for it but now that I said it, i thought it made perfect sense lol. I swear I just came up with that reason as I type.



 I don't believe in confronting people or just finger pointing based on "EVIDENCE". Because how that usually boils down to is this: either they would go "ok, that's not what i meant" or "no, you're wrong" plus endless arguments that derails the thread.





That's a piss poor excuse to not accuse people of things and rather go with your gut, especially since guts are rarely spot on even a quarter of the time. People do refute things Theatog, that is how the game moves. Someone spots something amiss, points it out, people debate about it, and people form up opinions on what just happened. 

Post #407 by Niklor

Apr 24, 2012 -- 1:44PM, theatog wrote:

Apr 24, 2012 -- 1:19PM, Pdr_Br wrote:


Atog makes his recap of what happened so far and votes Silly because Silly is post whoring and that means that Silly has a nice role so he must be scum.
|--> Should I even comment on the last part? That is streching at minimun and metagaming at maximum. Can't you find a better reason?



Yea please don't blow things out of proportion. I understand it's only human nature to read every word as equal weight coz' they DO appear in the same font and size and color in a form post like this. The "scum with cool ability" is of course an over-reaching speculation. And no, my vote is not based solely on that. 

But basing on the reaction I've seen so far, I'm liking the vote more as time goes by. Again, I always say it's a good sign when votes are spreaded out in day one. I see it being likely one of these two situations: scum are clearly not directing the lynch (well technically nobody is). Or that one of those people on the block is scum and scums are too self-conscious to be pushing either a scum or a nonscum wagon. 




It really depends more on why the votes are placed on different people than the statistical evidence. I'm voting Freddeh more because I placed my vote on Freddeh and haven't bothered to move it off him yet. I think that regardless of who I think is most scummy at the end of the day, I'm going to vote for a lurker I think can be lynched because unfortunately that is the only way to deal with the lurker problem that exists in the current meta, especially with a fourth of the current players doing so.

Post #408 by Niklor

Apr 24, 2012 -- 2:22PM, Pdr_Br wrote:

Yay, I finally catch up to this game.

Atog saying people are scum due to their playstyle is metagaming. For me that is not a viable argument, perhaps I blow it out of proportion regarding your stance on this but for me your statement felt exactly as I said.

Hasta tomorrow guys, I need sleep.




Welcome Pdr.

It depends on whose playstyle it is. For example, FFP doesn't lie and presently anyone who calls into question anything FFP says that cannot be tied to his alignment is an idiot.

Similarly, one of the adjustments to my self-hammer that PK suggested was that I would only self-hammer if I was not town, which, if that had become the agreed upon terms, though I would never have agreed to such a thing, would have meant that all town would have had to do to confirm me as town once it became apparent to most of you that the self hammer is a matter of importance to me would be to put me at L-1 because if I was town I would not have been allowed to self-hammer.

Now some of you, probably the same lot who doubt FFP's NLP and a few more would never have accepted this, but it would have been metagaming and it would have been successful.

Point is, metagaming arguments can be valid. 

Post #409 by Rubik

Vote Count


Niklor - 2 (Ahlyis, FFP)
theatog - 2 (Silly, Pdr_Br)
FFP - 1 (PK)
Sleeping - 1 (Razorborne)
Silly - 2 (Theatog)
Freddeh - 1 (Niklor)
PK - 1 (Freddeh)
Not Voting - 3 (PeregrineV, ShadowFyre, Sleeping)

Post #410 by PeregrineV

Page 4. And despite it all, theAtog is the vote leader with 2?

Post #411 by shadowfyre77

Apr 24, 2012 -- 1:27PM, theatog wrote:

Apr 23, 2012 -- 8:58PM, shadowfyre77 wrote:

oh
right
um
atog, why to gut vote and change so many?
waiting until you have some evidence against them and stuff works just as well right

uhh
also maybe freddeh although i'd have to go back further pages

@ahlyis i have no idea what atog having 2 votes has anything to do with anything

uhhh niklor seems fine i guess, we're hearing his opinininininoinoinoinoinoinionoinons opinions and stuff

also  freddeh, irregardless is wrong and doesn't really mean anything and you should never use it ever again because grammar is important


I vote as I read. 

And high activities corresponds to more changing votes. Not that I really planned for it but now that I said it, i thought it made perfect sense lol. I swear I just came up with that reason as I type.



 I don't believe in confronting people or just finger pointing based on "EVIDENCE". Because how that usually boils down to is this: either they would go "ok, that's not what i meant" or "no, you're wrong" plus endless arguments that derails the thread.




but i don't think endless arguments derail the thread, it forces the players involved to talk and stuff which allows the rest of people to look at their arguments vote on who they think is best to.

it's not really finger pointing if it's based on evidence, imo. If they have evidence, it means they have observed something (or multiple things) that a player has done that they believe marks them as scum, and that would be why they voted. imo, fingerpointing is more like when a player just randomly votes people.

(hopefully that made sense, it made sense my head)

Post #412 by theatog

Nik. i'm just gonna say this once. 

I like to vote by gut. But voting by gut does not mean I vote random. It could just mean the gut portion of any of my vote could be comparably heavier than other players? I Don't know. 
I do so even after Day 1. I did so in all my past games. Even in Lylo, if one is not sure of one's vote, there's always a gut portion of any one vote on a person with loosely unconfirmed alignment. 

I did not say it's pure gut. I do not advocate this way of play to anyone else. And this is not open to discussion. I don't not want the next 50 posts telling me how this is not the way of play. That is not "involved in the game". That is hobby debate when done logically/tastefully and otherwise just hobby spamming. 

Post #413 by razorborne

Apr 24, 2012 -- 8:31AM, Ahlyis wrote:

Apr 23, 2012 -- 6:51PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 23, 2012 -- 10:41AM, Ahlyis wrote:

To be fair, I never said I wasn't reading the thread. I said the thread was a giant tl/dr. I said I read the thread, but skimmed several of the quote towers as I did so.


skimming isn't reading. do you mean you skimmed the quotes themselves and read the responses, or that you skimmed the large posts themselves?


What happened is, there was a point early on where two players (Niklor and Freddeh?) got into a huge, quote tower war of words. I actually read the first few, but then just started skimming them. And yes, I just skimmed the entire quote towers at that point.


that's not reading. you didn't read the thread.

Apr 24, 2012 -- 9:43AM, Niklor wrote:

Then say it. In past, when I've said I've found scum, with the exception of instances where I was scum and was obviously lying, I'm certain that I've found scum, even though I have no proof beyond the evidence and my suspicions.


that seems like a personal thing. it may be your definition, but I don't think it's fair to impose it on everyone else.


Apr 24, 2012 -- 9:43AM, Niklor wrote:

Why is it necessary to enable people not to read?


have you not been paying attention to the scores of people who have been saying "yeah I don't read long things because I don't like when the town wins"? without a TLDR I guarantee you at least three players would have skipped the entire thing.

Apr 24, 2012 -- 9:43AM, Niklor wrote:

I'd much rather everyone kept their own eyes on everything possible that they can.


right, but, again: only so many eyes. if something is suspicious, I want to make sure people remember it, because if I just let it go I don't know who else caught it.

Apr 24, 2012 -- 9:43AM, Niklor wrote:

Regardless of whether it is a good play, the fact that both town and scum do it for varying reasons are what make it a null tell.


town and scum lie. town and scum bandwagon. town and scum push for lynches of townies. hell, in some games town and scum come up as scum in cop investigations. the fact that both sides do it doesn't mean it's not an indicator.



Apr 24, 2012 -- 12:57PM, theatog wrote:

Apr 22, 2012 -- 7:02PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

You know, we have enough evidence to make actual cases (as I have just demonstrated), and voting just based on your gut shouldn't be necessary nearly 350 posts into the game.


 
Good job sherlock. you just broke mafia.

you are really that desperate to pin someone on the chopping block eh? 

awesome Day 1 cases are awesome.


this sort of attitude is exactly what's wrong with Px2 right now. the idea that things will work out or they won't so it's not your job to put any effort toward getting the outcome you desire is an attitude more suited for the craps table than a mafia game. content doesn't come out of nowhere. you need to make it. and you do that by making cases, by looking for evidence, by pushing at cracks until everything comes tumbling down, not just from day 1, but from post 1. that's your job. if you don't like it, don't play.

Apr 24, 2012 -- 1:03PM, theatog wrote:

And you know why everyone has been having a hard time reading, including Silly multiple preachings of "are you even reading the thread?"? It's because someone is spamming the threads heavily. 


this amounts to "I don't want to work hard, so you need to stop working so hard so it'll be easier for me to be lazy." nothing I've said has been irrelevant fluff. if you're not reading what me, Nik, Silly, Pdr, and others have been putting out, that's not on us.

Apr 24, 2012 -- 1:27PM, theatog wrote:

I don't believe in confronting people or just finger pointing based on "EVIDENCE". Because how that usually boils down to is this: either they would go "ok, that's not what i meant" or "no, you're wrong" plus endless arguments that derails the thread.


now I just feel like I'm ganging up on you, but I don't think I've ever seen anyone come down on the anti-evidence and debate side before.

Apr 24, 2012 -- 1:49PM, Pdr_Br wrote:

Razor says that Silly case on Atog is good, but (yes there is a but there) only after sleeping is dead and FFP follows.
|-->Why Razor? Is there a better case ouy there on Sleepind and FFP because I didn't saw it, unless your only reasons to vote them is because of their activity. Atog is the best Day 1 lynch up to now.


there's an excellent case. both of them have acknowledged a lack of intention to contribute. this means we'll never have any evidence to indicate their alignments, so might as well get the lynching out of the way now. I think I've made my stance on lurkers fairly clear.

Post #414 by theatog

Apr 24, 2012 -- 6:24PM, shadowfyre77 wrote:


but i don't think endless arguments derail the thread, it forces the players involved to talk and stuff which allows the rest of people to look at their arguments vote on who they think is best to.

it's not really finger pointing if it's based on evidence, imo. If they have evidence, it means they have observed something (or multiple things) that a player has done that they believe marks them as scum, and that would be why they voted. imo, fingerpointing is more like when a player just randomly votes people.

(hopefully that made sense, it made sense my head)



- Again, if nik starts to fire at me how he believes no gut vote should ever be made, what does that have to do with scumhunting? 

That is exactly what happened to all those "slip case talk" earlier if you were following.

- it's semantic. I never like "it's not something" or "it's something" statement. I used finger pointing as something else. And I also don't believe in so called "evidence" unless they are in some way mod-confirmable. Given that no one have any extra information as we don't even have a single Night action, (and i assume no neighbour or whatever shinaniganze that starts the game with something), EVERY day one case is fingerpointing to me. So you can "imo" all you want. doesn't make your point any less moot.

Post #415 by Silly_Dragons

Sorry I haven't been active in the past day or so. I was doing boards stuff with PK, putting the finishing touches on my (and Rag's) mafia game, and doing real life stuff (open mic night).

I'll read through all the posts that I miss and respond to stuff.

Post #416 by shadowfyre77

Apr 24, 2012 -- 9:54AM, Niklor wrote:

@SF, FFP, SLEEPING, & PK

Spoiler: Show

Apr 23, 2012 -- 1:46PM, Niklor wrote:

Speaking of lurkers...

FFP's first non confirm post was saying he was too lazy to read and bandwagon voted me because people were voting for me, the very definition of bandwagoning.


He then proceeded to promise to read the thread tomorrow after being asked to, but in his next post the only thoughts he provided were on me and they weren't in response to anything that had been said, rather a single accussation and nothing else.


He then makes a post with a somewhat clever remark of their being a difference between content and spam without actually clarifying the difference nor showing us what he is talking about and then is insulted because he can't be bothered to read a case, which makes me doubt if he ever read the thread in the first place given some of the posts were nearly as long as that one case.


Moving on...


Shadowfyre was able to make a few more posts after his confirmation, but before day had started, but they weren't contributive in any real respect.


He then says something about lurker lynches not being good because actives have all the votes, whatever that actually means.


He then chimes in much later, saying commenting on everything is good because it gives us something to discuss and get reads off of.


Then when asked if he has any reads, he says he will have to read back a couple pages to recall them and after a bit more asks for an explanation about Theatog's votehopping from Freddeh to me, though not from me to Freddeh to me, from which I am inferring Shadowfyre either hadn't read the thread or didn't really remember most of it.


Finally, when asked about his reads again, he excuses himself to go eat and hasn't yet said anything.


Past him...


PK comes in and does some joking. Good for him.


Says community.wizards.com/paranoia/go/thread...


I'm still unsure on what is was, though reaction troll seems to be the popular opinion. He explains he meant to say "shoot" instead of "lynch." Regardless, this is all well and good as it seems to stimulate the town into actively discussing what he says, as it seems were his intentions.


Continues to refute certain arguments as long as they are centered about him or what he said.


Votes FFP after FFP declares he is too lazy to read.


Has some playful banter with Silly.


Comments on Sleeping commenting, though he doesn't actual bother to offer any opinion on what Sleeping says.


He is accussed of starting to do nothing and reminds the thread he critisized FFP for lurking.


Says Freddeh is trying to start something with him.


Finally, gives some reasons explaining why he isn't lurking. Explains what he has done so far and then says he's busy trying to save the forum, so that is his excuse for not posting like the PK of old.


Makes some comments about Rag being a good BuM, gives Silly some advice on being aloof and arrogant, promises excessive amounts of PK in the future, and mocks the suggestion that he needs help defending himself.


Yes, he started off doing stuff, but PK is currently lurking as he hasn't contributed anything since he voted FFP for lurking. And before that all the content he was producing was centered around himself and what he had said earlier, which was more a game of him refuting things than actually giving opinions on other players.


In the end though...


Sleeping confirms and then *paces around in circles*. Oh, excuse me. /me paces around in circles.


He also throws a vote on Theatog before day has started. Once day is underway, he throws that vote back on, with no explanation given.


When challenged on it, he says he is working to avoid attention for which he receives votes.


His defense is that avoiding attention and catching scum are the same thing as town. He also says his vote on Theatog had no reason.


He gets defensive when challenged about how he is playing, which is natural for almost everyone, and then proceeds to explain his strategy is good for either town or mafia as long as everyone isn't doing it.


He continues to argue for his style of play in one more post and then vanishes again.


Now...


Of these four PK is lurking the least, even though he is very lurky at the moment having said nothing about anything of import for some time.


Sleeping, while claiming to lurk, is not as suspicious as the others, who make promises they don't keep. Sleeping has given his reasons for lurking and they are in and of themselves a null-tell. He will need to be dealt with, of course, if this strategy of his doesn't move onto him contributing in the near future, but he is overshadowed by the other two.


FFP has done little, but he has given a real opinion on one player. As slight as that contribution was, it was contributing.


SF however has done nothing but ask about a vote and say he has reads that he has yet to produce.


If we must lynch a lurker today, which if we want to rid ourselves of the strategy entirely we must, I think SF would be the best choice as he has the done the least.




If any of the rest of you have opinions on this, I would also be glad to hear them, but I want those four specifically to read this and respond to it in some manner.



"actives have all the votes" as in actives are the ones voting, therefore they control the lynch. Lurkers can lurk, sure, but they don't do anything towards actually lynching people. I feel like lynching lurkers shouldn't happen until town feels that there is actually no one else better to lynch. 

currently:
sleeping hasn't shown up for a while
derp derp derp
has pere posted actual stuff or am i just blind
currently most inclined to vote atog
what PK
niklor: posts feel very transparent, leaning towards town right now 

also, i just remembered, saying "shoot" doesn't necessarily mean dayvig or even vig, it could just be a replacment word for lynch (at least, that's what I would use it as :P) but that's probably a dead conversation anyways.

anyone not on that list right now i either don't have anything on, or i am neutral about that person

cjgakwekjg;laskdjlkfzmxoff to edit an essay

Post #417 by Niklor

Apr 24, 2012 -- 6:41PM, theatog wrote:

Nik. i'm just gonna say this once. 

I like to vote by gut. But voting by gut does not mean I vote random. It could just mean the gut portion of any of my vote could be comparably heavier than other players? I Don't know. 
I do so even after Day 1. I did so in all my past games. Even in Lylo, if one is not sure of one's vote, there's always a gut portion of any one vote on a person with loosely unconfirmed alignment. 

I did not say it's pure gut. I do not advocate this way of play to anyone else. And this is not open to discussion. I don't not want the next 50 posts telling me how this is not the way of play. That is not "involved in the game". That is hobby debate when done logically/tastefully and otherwise just hobby spamming. 




When did I indicate voting by gut was random?

I like this style of play that is "No one else should play this way." I like how your trying to curbstop the discussion by saying if it is I'm spamming. There is not a way to play the game, but there are ways to play the game that are not in the town's best interests. When we see someone playing in a manner that we see as anti-town, we try to stop it and discourage it. In short, it's not an irrelevant matter how someone plays the game. It's an active part of the game and if someone thinks someone is playing in a way that hinders the town, they should be called out on it.

Also, gut votes are not all bad. They're just rarely useful by themselves and are more prone to be incorrect if there is no "evidence" associated with them. If your gut tells you someone is scum and you can point out reasons they are scummy (evidence) then you have a better chance at getting someone you think is scum lynched. Purely calling on your gut in such matters only makes you look like an imbecile at best. I've done it before. I knew Silly was scum based on my gut, but I couldn't find any evidence to back it up. Therefore, I couldn't get him lynched.

Essentially, if your going to vote with your gut at the forefront of matters, do so based on the "evidence" and don't chase after people when the only thing pointing you at them is your gut. 

Post #418 by theatog

Apr 24, 2012 -- 6:50PM, razorborne wrote:

this sort of attitude is exactly what's wrong with Px2 right now. the idea that things will work out or they won't so it's not your job to put any effort toward getting the outcome you desire is an attitude more suited for the craps table than a mafia game. content doesn't come out of nowhere. you need to make it. and you do that by making cases, by looking for evidence, by pushing at cracks until everything comes tumbling down, not just from day 1, but from post 1. that's your job. if you don't like it, don't play.




WOW lol. How did me willingly decide not to defend myself turns into "I don't want to play". 

Tbh, I agree with most things you say. But I don't see myself possessing this "attitude" you talk of. So I play different than you; how does it warrant this attack?  Just because I don't argue against my case, doesn't mean there isn't a case already posted. Me deciding to  defend myself  or not doesn't make the case go away. I like to see how people weight in on my wagon versus actions I take throughout this day one.  What is so wrong about it?

And further more, it doesn't stop other people from finding cases on other people. In fact, even in the "worst" (in quotation, by extend of your logic) case scenario where every everyone just post a case and do no rebuttal, the game will still work perfectly.  

Post #419 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 22, 2012 -- 9:19PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 22, 2012 -- 5:28PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

I did note that votes mean more the longer the game goes. Beginning of D1 votes are often times joke votes and stuff, so its hard to get much from them. What we should really look for is the voting record when the deadline for each day is almost up.


but that wasn't the question you were answering. the question was "why put your vote on a random person over not putting it anywhere?" either it affects the voting record, in which case randomly voting is actively detrimental, or it doesn't, in which case it's useless. either way, it's not contributing.




Because people like making joke votes. Of course it's not helpful, but most people take very early day 1 with a grain of salt nowadays, so it's not too detrimental.

Apr 22, 2012 -- 9:19PM, razorborne wrote:


Apr 22, 2012 -- 6:03PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

*SILLY'S CASE AGAINST ATOG*


this is an excellently laid-out case. once sleeping is dead and maybe FFP, I would be very much behind an atog lynch.




Ah yes, the lurker issue. Normally, I would say to wait a little and let them post, but both Sleeping and FFP have stated philosophies/game policies/whatever you want to call it that I find to be detrimental to the game.

Apr 22, 2012 -- 9:19PM, razorborne wrote:


this may be me making mountains out of molehills, but is this a subtle defense of atog here? like, I know Nik then went on to attack atog for some stuff, but this feels like sort of hedging bets.




Another point that I will note for later I guess.

Apr 22, 2012 -- 9:19PM, razorborne wrote:


it's really sad that this is necessary.

 



Post #420 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 22, 2012 -- 11:33PM, Feroz-s_Familiar_Pheldy wrote:

Apr 22, 2012 -- 6:48PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:



If you actually read my long ass posts, I would prefer that you respond to the actual content than the TL;DR. That's only there for the blundering idiots who can't be bothered to read whole posts.




...

...




my friendship, you lost it



Well ****.

I lost FFP's friendship. How will I ever go on.

(THIS IS NOT SARCASM)

Post #421 by theatog

Apr 24, 2012 -- 7:07PM, Niklor wrote:

they should be called out on it.


I did. And that's how I got my vote on you at first and later translated to silly's head. 

Apr 24, 2012 -- 7:07PM, Niklor wrote:



Also, gut votes are not all bad. They're just rarely useful by themselves and are more prone to be incorrect if there is no "evidence" associated with them. If your gut tells you someone is scum and you can point out reasons they are scummy (evidence) then you have a better chance at getting someone you think is scum lynched. Purely calling on your gut in such matters only makes you look like an imbecile at best. I've done it before. I knew Silly was scum based on my gut, but I couldn't find any evidence to back it up. Therefore, I couldn't get him lynched.

Essentially, if your going to vote with your gut at the forefront of matters, do so based on the "evidence" and don't chase after people when the only thing pointing you at them is your gut.


Anyway, I will provide reasons whenever I can. That means If I think the reason on my vote is strong enough to be push for THE day 1 lynch, I will provide a better case. Right now, I don't see any  better candidate than silly. That's all.

Post #422 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 23, 2012 -- 12:04AM, Freddeh wrote:

BUT, Silly gets town points from me for actually making a TL;DR, instead of just letting his points get lost in mountains of post.




...Why would that be the case. I get points for "catering to a wider audience", and nothing (positive or negative) for posting an actual case? The TL;DR section seems like a very insignificant thing to focus on in that post.

Post #423 by Niklor

Apr 24, 2012 -- 6:50PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 24, 2012 -- 9:43AM, Niklor wrote:

Then say it. In past, when I've said I've found scum, with the exception of instances where I was scum and was obviously lying, I'm certain that I've found scum, even though I have no proof beyond the evidence and my suspicions.


that seems like a personal thing. it may be your definition, but I don't think it's fair to impose it on everyone else.





So you're saying it's fine to lie to the town saying you've got scum when you're not sure you have?

Apr 24, 2012 -- 6:50PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 24, 2012 -- 9:43AM, Niklor wrote:

Why is it necessary to enable people not to read?


have you not been paying attention to the scores of people who have been saying "yeah I don't read long things because I don't like when the town wins"? without a TLDR I guarantee you at least three players would have skipped the entire thing.




And eventually, those players would probably become bored with the whole game if no one enabled them to be able to not read and still play. Essentially, we are making it so more players can play the game without reading the thread. And there is no reason I need to enable that.

Apr 24, 2012 -- 6:50PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 24, 2012 -- 9:43AM, Niklor wrote:

I'd much rather everyone kept their own eyes on everything possible that they can.


right, but, again: only so many eyes. if something is suspicious, I want to make sure people remember it, because if I just let it go I don't know who else caught it.




I would accept the "only so many eyes" argument in a situation where we actually watched what people did. As it is, we read what people post, which gives us an exact record. As such, unless you are blind you can literally keep your eyes on everything that has happened and is happening.

Apr 24, 2012 -- 6:50PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 24, 2012 -- 9:43AM, Niklor wrote:

Regardless of whether it is a good play, the fact that both town and scum do it for varying reasons are what make it a null tell.


town and scum lie. town and scum bandwagon. town and scum push for lynches of townies. hell, in some games town and scum come up as scum in cop investigations. the fact that both sides do it doesn't mean it's not an indicator.




Neither does it mean it is. If you look at the number of lurkers and semi-lurkers we have, the number exceeds what is expected of scum. Clearly, there are not four scum, unless this game was designed under such particularly harsh conditions, which I somehow doubt would have been allowed. I'm not saying as a strategy, it isn't scum oriented in most forms, just that to pursue it as a scumtell is ludicrious because clearly there is at least 1 townie doing it. Should they be lynched as a matter of policy because they shouldn't be? I have to say they should, but I don't see it as particularly scummy of them to be doing so because it's such a common place thing for town and scum to do. It's similar to trying to go after someone for posting content, which is something town and scum both do.

Also, town will lie on occassion and it will be helpful to the town, though those instances are few and far between and should not be encouraged as a matter of policy. 



Apr 24, 2012 -- 6:50PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 24, 2012 -- 12:57PM, theatog wrote:

Apr 22, 2012 -- 7:02PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

You know, we have enough evidence to make actual cases (as I have just demonstrated), and voting just based on your gut shouldn't be necessary nearly 350 posts into the game.


 
Good job sherlock. you just broke mafia.

you are really that desperate to pin someone on the chopping block eh? 

awesome Day 1 cases are awesome.


this sort of attitude is exactly what's wrong with Px2 right now. the idea that things will work out or they won't so it's not your job to put any effort toward getting the outcome you desire is an attitude more suited for the craps table than a mafia game. content doesn't come out of nowhere. you need to make it. and you do that by making cases, by looking for evidence, by pushing at cracks until everything comes tumbling down, not just from day 1, but from post 1. that's your job. if you don't like it, don't play.

Apr 24, 2012 -- 1:03PM, theatog wrote:

And you know why everyone has been having a hard time reading, including Silly multiple preachings of "are you even reading the thread?"? It's because someone is spamming the threads heavily. 


this amounts to "I don't want to work hard, so you need to stop working so hard so it'll be easier for me to be lazy." nothing I've said has been irrelevant fluff. if you're not reading what me, Nik, Silly, Pdr, and others have been putting out, that's not on us.




AMEN!

Apr 24, 2012 -- 6:50PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 24, 2012 -- 1:49PM, Pdr_Br wrote:

Razor says that Silly case on Atog is good, but (yes there is a but there) only after sleeping is dead and FFP follows.
|-->Why Razor? Is there a better case ouy there on Sleepind and FFP because I didn't saw it, unless your only reasons to vote them is because of their activity. Atog is the best Day 1 lynch up to now.


there's an excellent case. both of them have acknowledged a lack of intention to contribute. this means we'll never have any evidence to indicate their alignments, so might as well get the lynching out of the way now. I think I've made my stance on lurkers fairly clear.




It is necessary to LaLurkers until town stops doing it, I must agree.

Post #424 by Silly_Dragons

Lots of stuff in the next few posts that I'm reading (around post 350ish) are about Lurking/being active and drabble about Niklor's choices of words. I'm going to conveniently skip over that, because for now I don't feel like I can contribute much to that.

There is something I wanted to point out though.

Apr 23, 2012 -- 11:32AM, Niklor wrote:


Why would I do this as scum, is what I'm asking? Why would I bother pre-emptively defending from such a piss-poor accusation? The answer is, I wouldn't.

You can believe that I would, for whatever strange reason exists in your head. But it doesn't alter the fact that a pre-emptive deflection is a bad tactic in general, even if I was scum. If I defend myself from arguments that haven't yet appeared, that makes it look like I'm worried about such. And town has no need to worry about such in general.



This sounds eerily similar to the example quote that I wrote when defining "WIFOM" in the new FAQ.

Post #425 by Niklor

Apr 24, 2012 -- 6:51PM, theatog wrote:

- Again, if nik starts to fire at me how he believes no gut vote should ever be made, what does that have to do with scumhunting?




More to do with not letting antitown behavior go by without comment.

Apr 24, 2012 -- 6:51PM, theatog wrote:

That is exactly what happened to all those "slip case talk" earlier if you were following.




Slip cases are gut votes with the barest amount of evidence possible, which in a slow D1 would be alright.

Post #426 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 23, 2012 -- 1:46PM, Niklor wrote:

Giant Niklor post that is #365



This isn't too related to the game, but I just want to point out that that post really annoyed me because it was a terribly long mish-mash of points that weren't really related or needed (the awkward spacing was also annoying). And the conclusion to that post wasn't even worth the read imo, since it didn't need all that random prefacing.

Post #427 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 23, 2012 -- 1:54PM, Pdr_Br wrote:

(I agree, this reminds me of the PM breaking game where Silly foud out scum due to scum having role PMs worded different than the town role PMs can recall the name of the game though)



Sorry for that game btw. I was young and rash back then. I actually discussed this with PK when writing the new rules, and if that were to have occurred today, the mod should have probably shut me up or modkilled me when I did that.

Post #428 by Niklor

Apr 24, 2012 -- 7:03PM, shadowfyre77 wrote:

"actives have all the votes" as in actives are the ones voting, therefore they control the lynch. Lurkers can lurk, sure, but they don't do anything towards actually lynching people. I feel like lynching lurkers shouldn't happen until town feels that there is actually no one else better to lynch.




Lurkers can still throw votes on people and continue to lurk, so you are correct that actives have all the votes, but lurkers are active, just not contributing.

Apr 24, 2012 -- 7:03PM, shadowfyre77 wrote:

currently:
sleeping hasn't shown up for a while
derp derp derp
has pere posted actual stuff or am i just blind
currently most inclined to vote atog
what PK
niklor: posts feel very transparent, leaning towards town right now




Sleeping is there I'm sure, just not saying anything as he thinks it is a good strategy to do so.
Peregrine hasn't posted much, but I don't think he has the read most of the thread.
Why do you feel inclined to vote for Theatog?
What about PK?
I think that's a wise way to lean, though you shouldn't be so quick to think of me as town or scum on D1.

Apr 24, 2012 -- 7:03PM, shadowfyre77 wrote:

also, i just remembered, saying "shoot" doesn't necessarily mean dayvig or even vig, it could just be a replacment word for lynch (at least, that's what I would use it as :P) but that's probably a dead conversation anyways.




PK meant to say shoot both times, not lynch at all, or so he says.

Post #429 by Silly_Dragons

More Ahl/Nik stuff around post 370. If you guys haven't already stopped arguing, please read the following.

Please stop arguing about that one, singular topic. Your entire exchange is literally:
Spoiler: Show

Ahl: "Niklor why did you say that and imply this."

Nik: "But I didn't mean to imply anything!"

Ahl: "But that makes no sense. Clearly you implied something!"

Nik: "No I didn't!"

Ahl: "Yes you did!"

Nik: "No I didn't!"

Ahl: "Yes you did!"

Nik: "No I didn't!"

Ahl: "Yes you did!"

...

Repeat ad infinitum.


Right now, there's really not much else on that point you can argue about. It's essentially Ahl's belief that Niklor had a hidden agenda behind is post vs Niklor saying that he didn't. It's nice that you've brought it to everybody's attention, but each person will have to decide for themselves what Niklor truly meant, and arguing the same point over and over again to death won't help.

Post #430 by theatog

The Silly I is back.

Post #431 by Niklor

Apr 24, 2012 -- 7:14PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

Apr 22, 2012 -- 9:19PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 22, 2012 -- 5:28PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

I did note that votes mean more the longer the game goes. Beginning of D1 votes are often times joke votes and stuff, so its hard to get much from them. What we should really look for is the voting record when the deadline for each day is almost up.


but that wasn't the question you were answering. the question was "why put your vote on a random person over not putting it anywhere?" either it affects the voting record, in which case randomly voting is actively detrimental, or it doesn't, in which case it's useless. either way, it's not contributing.




Because people like making joke votes. Of course it's not helpful, but most people take very early day 1 with a grain of salt nowadays, so it's not too detrimental.




I disagree in saying "I've found scum" at the end of a case is a good joke.

Apr 24, 2012 -- 7:14PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

Apr 22, 2012 -- 9:19PM, razorborne wrote:


Apr 22, 2012 -- 6:03PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

*SILLY'S CASE AGAINST ATOG*


this is an excellently laid-out case. once sleeping is dead and maybe FFP, I would be very much behind an atog lynch.




Ah yes, the lurker issue. Normally, I would say to wait a little and let them post, but both Sleeping and FFP have stated philosophies/game policies/whatever you want to call it that I find to be detrimental to the game.




Yes, there lurking is a choice, which makes it hard for us to stop it other than by trying to lynch it out of them. And I sort of half expect PK to be intentionally lurking if he is scum to prove a point.

SF is coming out of the darkness of lurking though. Very nice.

Apr 24, 2012 -- 7:14PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

Apr 22, 2012 -- 9:19PM, razorborne wrote:


this may be me making mountains out of molehills, but is this a subtle defense of atog here? like, I know Nik then went on to attack atog for some stuff, but this feels like sort of hedging bets.




Another point that I will note for later I guess.




I'm not dedicating myself to any one thing yet, as that could inflict me with the terrible malady known as Tunnelvision or Zipperjawing. I am one who finds it hard to look elsewhere once I have convinced myself that I've found scum, so better to try to keep an eye on everything for now, especially since as a matter of policy we need to lynch a lurker.

Post #432 by Niklor

Apr 24, 2012 -- 7:16PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

Apr 22, 2012 -- 11:33PM, Feroz-s_Familiar_Pheldy wrote:

Apr 22, 2012 -- 6:48PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:



If you actually read my long ass posts, I would prefer that you respond to the actual content than the TL;DR. That's only there for the blundering idiots who can't be bothered to read whole posts.




...

...




my friendship, you lost it



Well ****.

I lost FFP's friendship. How will I ever go on.

(THIS IS NOT SARCASM)




Fill the hole in your heart with his demise. Or lynch this trait of not reading posts out of him. Or take back what you said. Or tell Rag your sorrows.

Post #433 by Niklor

Apr 24, 2012 -- 7:17PM, theatog wrote:

Apr 24, 2012 -- 7:07PM, Niklor wrote:

they should be called out on it.


I did. And that's how I got my vote on you at first and later translated to silly's head.


I find it odd you think contributing to discussion is antitown, but to each his own.

Post #434 by Niklor

Apr 24, 2012 -- 7:28PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

Apr 23, 2012 -- 11:32AM, Niklor wrote:


Why would I do this as scum, is what I'm asking? Why would I bother pre-emptively defending from such a piss-poor accusation? The answer is, I wouldn't.

You can believe that I would, for whatever strange reason exists in your head. But it doesn't alter the fact that a pre-emptive deflection is a bad tactic in general, even if I was scum. If I defend myself from arguments that haven't yet appeared, that makes it look like I'm worried about such. And town has no need to worry about such in general.



This sounds eerily similar to the example quote that I wrote when defining "WIFOM" in the new FAQ.




Maybe I am just that brilliant of a scum player that I stage a pre-emptive deflection attempt to be caught so I can argue that there is no way scum would have done that to gain town pants.

Or then again, maybe people were reading to much into the post as some sort of tactic or strategy to begin with, but you can believe whatever you want to.

Post #435 by Niklor

Apr 24, 2012 -- 7:36PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

Apr 23, 2012 -- 1:46PM, Niklor wrote:

Giant Niklor post that is #365



This isn't too related to the game, but I just want to point out that that post really annoyed me because it was a terribly long mish-mash of points that weren't really related or needed (the awkward spacing was also annoying). And the conclusion to that post wasn't even worth the read imo, since it didn't need all that random prefacing.




I think it needed to said, especially since many players seem to be skimming the thread rather than reading it. 

Post #436 by Niklor

Apr 24, 2012 -- 7:46PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

More Ahl/Nik stuff around post 370. If you guys haven't already stopped arguing, please read the following.

Please stop arguing about that one, singular topic. Your entire exchange is literally:
Spoiler: Show


Ahl: "Niklor why did you say that and imply this."

Nik: "But I didn't mean to imply anything!"

Ahl: "But that makes no sense. Clearly you implied something!"

Nik: "No I didn't!"

Ahl: "Yes you did!"

Nik: "No I didn't!"

Ahl: "Yes you did!"

Nik: "No I didn't!"

Ahl: "Yes you did!"

...

Repeat ad infinitum.


Right now, there's really not much else on that point you can argue about. It's essentially Ahl's belief that Niklor had a hidden agenda behind is post vs Niklor saying that he didn't. It's nice that you've brought it to everybody's attention, but each person will have to decide for themselves what Niklor truly meant, and arguing the same point over and over again to death won't help.




You forgot when I get frustrated at this and bring in WIFOM, but otherwise looks pretty accurate.

Post #437 by Niklor

Maybe I need to begin to take the time to multiquote. This is frankly starting to look a little bit ridiculous even to me.

Post #438 by Niklor

Before I forget it, which I almost did, I did want this specific point addressed Theatog.

Apr 24, 2012 -- 2:19PM, Niklor wrote:

Apr 24, 2012 -- 1:03PM, theatog wrote:

Again, I see "purposeful" silence as a strategy. If you see responding to every single word in the thread is a good rule, go form a committee with Niklor. 




What was the purpose of your silence then? That's assuming it is indeed a strategy and not an excuse to avoid answering questions you don't have a good explanation for.


Post #439 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 24, 2012 -- 9:43AM, Niklor wrote:

Apr 23, 2012 -- 6:51PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 23, 2012 -- 10:21AM, Niklor wrote:

I don't find the case against Theatog to be that well-written aside from the fact of the voting pattern of Theatog as a whole. Whenever anyone says they have found scum, they need to be serious about it unless it's clearly a very early on joke.


unless they're claiming cop, they can't have guaranteed found scum, which means it's always clearly a joke. it's a way of putting a nice little button on it, like "and that's my case." every vote means "I think I've found scum."



Then say it. In past, when I've said I've found scum, with the exception of instances where I was scum and was obviously lying, I'm certain that I've found scum, even though I have no proof beyond the evidence and my suspicions.



So every time you say you've found scum, that means that the person is 100% guaranteed to be scum, right?

Post #440 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 24, 2012 -- 9:43AM, Niklor wrote:



Apr 23, 2012 -- 6:51PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 23, 2012 -- 11:32AM, Niklor wrote:

You don't attack someone because they are actively posting or lurking, unless as a matter of policy. It's a null-tell.


while I agree with most of what's going on in this post, lurking is not a null tell. it's something both town and scum do, like pretty much every other scum tell, but it's still something that benefits scum and hurts town. if a townie is doing it, it's bad play, and if a mafiate is doing it, it's good play. that tilts the scales pretty clearly.




Regardless of whether it is a good play, the fact that both town and scum do it for varying reasons are what make it a null tell.



I agree with Razor here. Even if town and mafia both lurk, we should still label that action as scummy because it helps the mafia win.

Post #441 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 24, 2012 -- 12:57PM, theatog wrote:

Apr 22, 2012 -- 7:02PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

You know, we have enough evidence to make actual cases (as I have just demonstrated), and voting just based on your gut shouldn't be necessary nearly 350 posts into the game.



Good job sherlock. you just broke mafia.

you are really that desperate to pin someone on the chopping block eh? 

awesome Day 1 cases are awesome.



I think this is what? The third time I've pointed out that you still haven't responded to any of the points I brought up?

Post #442 by Niklor

Apr 24, 2012 -- 8:28PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

Apr 24, 2012 -- 9:43AM, Niklor wrote:

Apr 23, 2012 -- 6:51PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 23, 2012 -- 10:21AM, Niklor wrote:

I don't find the case against Theatog to be that well-written aside from the fact of the voting pattern of Theatog as a whole. Whenever anyone says they have found scum, they need to be serious about it unless it's clearly a very early on joke.


unless they're claiming cop, they can't have guaranteed found scum, which means it's always clearly a joke. it's a way of putting a nice little button on it, like "and that's my case." every vote means "I think I've found scum."



Then say it. In past, when I've said I've found scum, with the exception of instances where I was scum and was obviously lying, I'm certain that I've found scum, even though I have no proof beyond the evidence and my suspicions.



So every time you say you've found scum, that means that the person is 100% guaranteed to be scum, right?




In general, assuming I'm not myself lying scum, if I say I'm certain someone is scum I mean I'm as positive as I can be without actually knowing. So no it doesn't mean 100% guaranteed because even a cop investigation is not for certain always accurate, though it's usually taken as such, but it doesn't mean I'm pretty sure they are scum until evidence suggests otherwise unless by pretty sure you mean nothing is likely to distract me from my target and by evidence you mean how they flip once lynched.

Post #443 by Niklor

Apr 24, 2012 -- 8:30PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

Apr 24, 2012 -- 9:43AM, Niklor wrote:



Apr 23, 2012 -- 6:51PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 23, 2012 -- 11:32AM, Niklor wrote:

You don't attack someone because they are actively posting or lurking, unless as a matter of policy. It's a null-tell.


while I agree with most of what's going on in this post, lurking is not a null tell. it's something both town and scum do, like pretty much every other scum tell, but it's still something that benefits scum and hurts town. if a townie is doing it, it's bad play, and if a mafiate is doing it, it's good play. that tilts the scales pretty clearly.




Regardless of whether it is a good play, the fact that both town and scum do it for varying reasons are what make it a null tell.



I agree with Razor here. Even if town and mafia both lurk, we should still label that action as scummy because it helps the mafia win.




I'd rather not label something that is anti-town as scummy just because you want to policy lynch it.

Post #444 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 24, 2012 -- 6:41PM, theatog wrote:

Nik. i'm just gonna say this once. 

I like to vote by gut. But voting by gut does not mean I vote random. It could just mean the gut portion of any of my vote could be comparably heavier than other players? I Don't know. 
I do so even after Day 1. I did so in all my past games. Even in Lylo, if one is not sure of one's vote, there's always a gut portion of any one vote on a person with loosely unconfirmed alignment. 

I did not say it's pure gut. I do not advocate this way of play to anyone else. And this is not open to discussion. I don't not want the next 50 posts telling me how this is not the way of play. That is not "involved in the game". That is hobby debate when done logically/tastefully and otherwise just hobby spamming. 



Yes, there's always a gut instinct portion of mafia. But rarely is your gut instinct enough to "prove" (in quotes because the only real thing that confirms someone as mafia is a cop) somebody is mafia, especially to other people. What you need to do is also find evidence, reasons that the person you suspect is mafia. It's sort of hard to do anything useful if all you do is say "hay guize I think this person is mafia but I have no reasons for it".

I also find that it's helpful if you respond to posts directly addressed to you *coughcough*.


Post #445 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 24, 2012 -- 7:10PM, theatog wrote:

willingly decide not to defend myself 



...

Words do not even

Post #446 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 24, 2012 -- 7:20PM, Niklor wrote:

Apr 24, 2012 -- 6:50PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 24, 2012 -- 9:43AM, Niklor wrote:

Then say it. In past, when I've said I've found scum, with the exception of instances where I was scum and was obviously lying, I'm certain that I've found scum, even though I have no proof beyond the evidence and my suspicions.


that seems like a personal thing. it may be your definition, but I don't think it's fair to impose it on everyone else.





So you're saying it's fine to lie to the town saying you've got scum when you're not sure you have?


Post #447 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 24, 2012 -- 8:36PM, Niklor wrote:


I'd rather not label something that is anti-town as scummy just because you want to policy lynch it.




Apr 24, 2012 -- 8:36PM, Niklor wrote:


anti-town



Apr 24, 2012 -- 8:36PM, Niklor wrote:


scummy




What is your definition of those two words? Because they sorta mean the exact same thing to me.

Post #448 by Niklor

Is it scummy for me to hammer myself as town during Lylo? That is one example of something that is uniquely anti-town which is not scummy.

Another example is that I personally want to lynch claimed jesters, even though doing so is not a lynch which aims to catch scum, which is anti-town, but not scummy.

Essentially, if it's scummy it is anti-town, but not everything that is anti-town is actually scummy.

Also, even cops cannot be certain of their results, even though in most mini or basic games a cop result is almost always straightforwardly able to pick a player and know their alignment. There is still a chance that there are role interactions that have given false information or that the cop role is insane, naive, paranoid, etc...

Essentially, there is no positive way to know you have scum until the scum is dead, assuming no death millers of course. 

Post #449 by razorborne

Apr 24, 2012 -- 7:10PM, theatog wrote:

Apr 24, 2012 -- 6:50PM, razorborne wrote:

this sort of attitude is exactly what's wrong with Px2 right now. the idea that things will work out or they won't so it's not your job to put any effort toward getting the outcome you desire is an attitude more suited for the craps table than a mafia game. content doesn't come out of nowhere. you need to make it. and you do that by making cases, by looking for evidence, by pushing at cracks until everything comes tumbling down, not just from day 1, but from post 1. that's your job. if you don't like it, don't play.


 

WOW lol. How did me willingly decide not to defend myself turns into "I don't want to play".


the same way refusing to touch bats means you "don't want to play" in baseball. this is a game of discussion and conversation. refusing to participate in discussion and stonewalling attempts to get you to actually involve yourself ("I have a feeling" is not contribution) is functionally identical to contributing. however:

Apr 24, 2012 -- 7:10PM, theatog wrote:

Tbh, I agree with most things you say. But I don't see myself possessing this "attitude" you talk of. So I play different than you; how does it warrant this attack?  Just because I don't argue against my case, doesn't mean there isn't a case already posted. Me deciding to  defend myself  or not doesn't make the case go away. I like to see how people weight in on my wagon versus actions I take throughout this day one.  What is so wrong about it?

And further more, it doesn't stop other people from finding cases on other people. In fact, even in the "worst" (in quotation, by extend of your logic) case scenario where every everyone just post a case and do no rebuttal, the game will still work perfectly.


I'm willing to admit I got sidetracked ranting about a larger issue. the attitude I meant to address there is the "day 1 doesn't matter" attitude. the "until we have night actions we're basically just flipping coins" attitude. I touched on that briefly but it did get buried in the larger issue. however, that's another important point. the mod didn't make the game so that if you got the right cop results, or saved the right person, or hit the right guy with a vig, the town would win. games aren't balanced like that. you need to scum hunt. do it. from post 1.

Apr 24, 2012 -- 7:20PM, Niklor wrote:

So you're saying it's fine to lie to the town saying you've got scum when you're not sure you have?


it's only a lie if you expect people to take it as truth. I don't think it's reasonable to think Silly did.


Apr 24, 2012 -- 7:20PM, Niklor wrote:

And eventually, those players would probably become bored with the whole game if no one enabled them to be able to not read and still play. Essentially, we are making it so more players can play the game without reading the thread. And there is no reason I need to enable that.


true.

Apr 24, 2012 -- 7:20PM, Niklor wrote:

I would accept the "only so many eyes" argument in a situation where we actually watched what people did. As it is, we read what people post, which gives us an exact record. As such, unless you are blind you can literally keep your eyes on everything that has happened and is happening.


only if they notice it in the first place. why are you opposed to bringing things to peoples' attention?

Apr 24, 2012 -- 7:20PM, Niklor wrote:

Neither does it mean it is. If you look at the number of lurkers and semi-lurkers we have, the number exceeds what is expected of scum. Clearly, there are not four scum, unless this game was designed under such particularly harsh conditions, which I somehow doubt would have been allowed. I'm not saying as a strategy, it isn't scum oriented in most forms, just that to pursue it as a scumtell is ludicrious because clearly there is at least 1 townie doing it. Should they be lynched as a matter of policy because they shouldn't be? I have to say they should, but I don't see it as particularly scummy of them to be doing so because it's such a common place thing for town and scum to do. It's similar to trying to go after someone for posting content, which is something town and scum both do.


assuming 3 scum, since you did, there is at least one townie voting for a townie right now. does that mean that's not scummy?

Post #450 by Sleeping

Okay, let me start off by saying I was acting apathetically about the game because I wanted to add a different dynamic so I could see specifically how people would respond to it and thus gain more info. It was not because I did not want to contribute. I figured I'd have time to do so because I figured day ones probably last pretty long. I'll be contributing more now, hopefully. I have had the chance to digest this thread a few times.

theatog is extremely suspicious to me, I find it kinda funny that I random-voted him in the first place now. I will vote for him once again. I would give reasoning, but further into the thread other people basically said the things I would have said, and I don't really feel like saying the same things over again, I hope that isn't taken as not contributing.
Vote: theatog

Can't say I feel strongly about anyone else, but there are a couple people I am fairly suspecious of and a couple people who I get a fair town vibe from. I would like to hear more from PeregrineV though. Also, as razorborne said, Pdr_Br's posts are definitely worth reading in full if you've merely been skimming posts. Though I don't mean to imply that either Pdr_Br or razorborne are town.

Post #451 by Rubik

Vote Count


Niklor - 2 (Ahlyis, FFP)
theatog - 3 (Silly, Pdr_Br, Sleeping)
FFP - 1 (PK)
Sleeping - 1 (Razorborne)
Silly - 2 (Theatog)
Freddeh - 1 (Niklor)
PK - 1 (Freddeh)
Not Voting - 2 (PeregrineV, ShadowFyre)


 

Post #452 by theatog

Spoiler: Show

Apr 24, 2012 -- 10:04PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 24, 2012 -- 7:10PM, theatog wrote:

Apr 24, 2012 -- 6:50PM, razorborne wrote:

this sort of attitude is exactly what's wrong with Px2 right now. the idea that things will work out or they won't so it's not your job to put any effort toward getting the outcome you desire is an attitude more suited for the craps table than a mafia game. content doesn't come out of nowhere. you need to make it. and you do that by making cases, by looking for evidence, by pushing at cracks until everything comes tumbling down, not just from day 1, but from post 1. that's your job. if you don't like it, don't play.


 

WOW lol. How did me willingly decide not to defend myself turns into "I don't want to play".


the same way refusing to touch bats means you "don't want to play" in baseball. this is a game of discussion and conversation. refusing to participate in discussion and stonewalling attempts to get you to actually involve yourself ("I have a feeling" is not contribution) is functionally identical to contributing. however:

Apr 24, 2012 -- 7:10PM, theatog wrote:

Tbh, I agree with most things you say. But I don't see myself possessing this "attitude" you talk of. So I play different than you; how does it warrant this attack?  Just because I don't argue against my case, doesn't mean there isn't a case already posted. Me deciding to  defend myself  or not doesn't make the case go away. I like to see how people weight in on my wagon versus actions I take throughout this day one.  What is so wrong about it?

And further more, it doesn't stop other people from finding cases on other people. In fact, even in the "worst" (in quotation, by extend of your logic) case scenario where every everyone just post a case and do no rebuttal, the game will still work perfectly.


I'm willing to admit I got sidetracked ranting about a larger issue. the attitude I meant to address there is the "day 1 doesn't matter" attitude. the "until we have night actions we're basically just flipping coins" attitude. I touched on that briefly but it did get buried in the larger issue. however, that's another important point. the mod didn't make the game so that if you got the right cop results, or saved the right person, or hit the right guy with a vig, the town would win. games aren't balanced like that. you need to scum hunt. do it. from post 1.

Apr 24, 2012 -- 7:20PM, Niklor wrote:

So you're saying it's fine to lie to the town saying you've got scum when you're not sure you have?


it's only a lie if you expect people to take it as truth. I don't think it's reasonable to think Silly did.


Apr 24, 2012 -- 7:20PM, Niklor wrote:

And eventually, those players would probably become bored with the whole game if no one enabled them to be able to not read and still play. Essentially, we are making it so more players can play the game without reading the thread. And there is no reason I need to enable that.


true.

Apr 24, 2012 -- 7:20PM, Niklor wrote:

I would accept the "only so many eyes" argument in a situation where we actually watched what people did. As it is, we read what people post, which gives us an exact record. As such, unless you are blind you can literally keep your eyes on everything that has happened and is happening.


only if they notice it in the first place. why are you opposed to bringing things to peoples' attention?

Apr 24, 2012 -- 7:20PM, Niklor wrote:

Neither does it mean it is. If you look at the number of lurkers and semi-lurkers we have, the number exceeds what is expected of scum. Clearly, there are not four scum, unless this game was designed under such particularly harsh conditions, which I somehow doubt would have been allowed. I'm not saying as a strategy, it isn't scum oriented in most forms, just that to pursue it as a scumtell is ludicrious because clearly there is at least 1 townie doing it. Should they be lynched as a matter of policy because they shouldn't be? I have to say they should, but I don't see it as particularly scummy of them to be doing so because it's such a common place thing for town and scum to do. It's similar to trying to go after someone for posting content, which is something town and scum both do.


assuming 3 scum, since you did, there is at least one townie voting for a townie right now. does that mean that's not scummy?


Just want to say essentially we are not disagreeing. I understand what you are saying. I honestly do not have a day 1 don't matter attitude. And if you have played with me, I actually work hardest day 1 where pure player interaction gives me the drive for hunt rather having actual information that would skew discussion. 

Just want to clarify that I do not mean i "don't ever" respond to anything that is address to me. I don't see the need to address to everything. And that is one case I think my action will speak louder than "i'm not scum, you are wrong." If you will, go back to the silly case and imagine how anyone (or yourself) would defend themselves against such accusation anyway. It wouldn't be much different. This is closer to the exception rather than the norm. 



Thanks: Rubik for the frequent vote count. I have to say vote counts keep games enjoyable.


@sleeping. What you say don't really add up. I sense that "extremely suspicious" term you use is either (unintentionally) over dramatic or you just really want "mud" up the point. What I find weird is that following "extremely suspicious" you conjure up your random vote and seemingly pair them up as if they support each other. 

And you know what i'm accused of mostly? "Too lazy to reply to silly's case". While again i have to say, semi-meaninglessly, that it's not valid, you on the other hand is totally "Too lazy to state your own reason". From my point of view, "I would give reasoning, but further into the thread other people basically said the things I would have said" isn't much different than "I dont plan to rebuttal the case against myself". 

I have to say you are just as equally suspicious until you give your list of "couple people I am fairly suspecious of". Your post reeks of laziness and apathy everywhere.

Post #453 by Pdr_Br

Atog if you feel that the case on you by Silly is bogus then shows why it is instead of just waving it aside.

Also accusing other people of doing what you have been doing is hypocritical and doesn't help your defence only hinders it.

Post #454 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 25, 2012 -- 1:31AM, theatog wrote:

I actually work hardest day 1 where pure player interaction gives me the drive for hunt rather having actual information that would skew discussion.




I'm beginning to have aneurysms reading your posts.

ಠ_ಠ

Post #455 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 24, 2012 -- 9:45PM, Niklor wrote:


Also, even cops cannot be certain of their results, even though in most mini or basic games a cop result is almost always straightforwardly able to pick a player and know their alignment. There is still a chance that there are role interactions that have given false information or that the cop role is insane, naive, paranoid, etc...

Essentially, there is no positive way to know you have scum until the scum is dead, assuming no death millers of course. 



This is sort of arguing my point, but honestly, this discussion isn't very relevant to the game at all, so there's no need to argue this further.

Post #456 by Niklor

Let's try a multiquote and hope I dont's screw up the tags.

Apr 24, 2012 -- 10:04PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 24, 2012 -- 7:20PM, Niklor wrote:

So you're saying it's fine to lie to the town saying you've got scum when you're not sure you have?


it's only a lie if you expect people to take it as truth. I don't think it's reasonable to think Silly did.





I think it's unreasonable to make a case and make jokes in it, unless you specifically say that this is a joke.

Apr 24, 2012 -- 10:04PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 24, 2012 -- 7:20PM, Niklor wrote:

I would accept the "only so many eyes" argument in a situation where we actually watched what people did. As it is, we read what people post, which gives us an exact record. As such, unless you are blind you can literally keep your eyes on everything that has happened and is happening.


only if they notice it in the first place. why are you opposed to bringing things to peoples' attention?




I'm opposed to bringing attention to things to the scum, as it can potentially mean they will drop certain lines of thought, inquiry, attack, or defence. So I'm against saying noted when I can keep my eye on the data and avoid bringing it to the scum's attention.

Apr 24, 2012 -- 10:04PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 24, 2012 -- 7:20PM, Niklor wrote:

Neither does it mean it is. If you look at the number of lurkers and semi-lurkers we have, the number exceeds what is expected of scum. Clearly, there are not four scum, unless this game was designed under such particularly harsh conditions, which I somehow doubt would have been allowed. I'm not saying as a strategy, it isn't scum oriented in most forms, just that to pursue it as a scumtell is ludicrious because clearly there is at least 1 townie doing it. Should they be lynched as a matter of policy because they shouldn't be? I have to say they should, but I don't see it as particularly scummy of them to be doing so because it's such a common place thing for town and scum to do. It's similar to trying to go after someone for posting content, which is something town and scum both do.


assuming 3 scum, since you did, there is at least one townie voting for a townie right now. does that mean that's not scummy?




I don't see how you can say a townie voting for a townie is scummy. How is the townie able to know who is scum and who is not? I mean it's natural progression to assume that someone on a townie wagon is scum, especially someone pushing that wagon, after the townie flips, but that doesn't mean every single townie is scummy because they voted for someone who was town. You can stretch it to be anti-town, but better that they be voting someone for something than be voting for nothing.



Apr 25, 2012 -- 12:48AM, Sleeping wrote:

Okay, let me start off by saying I was acting apathetically about the game because I wanted to add a different dynamic so I could see specifically how people would respond to it and thus gain more info. It was not because I did not want to contribute. I figured I'd have time to do so because I figured day ones probably last pretty long. I'll be contributing more now, hopefully. I have had the chance to digest this thread a few times.




Interesting reaction troll or decent excuse for behavior you would have been lynched for eventually. We'll see how you contribute in future.

Apr 25, 2012 -- 12:48AM, Sleeping wrote:

theatog is extremely suspicious to me, I find it kinda funny that I random-voted him in the first place now. I will vote for him once again. I would give reasoning, but further into the thread other people basically said the things I would have said, and I don't really feel like saying the same things over again, I hope that isn't taken as not contributing.
Vote: theatog




Actually, you are just bandwagoning based on your gut right now. Give us the reasons. Even if they have been said, it's necessary to tell the town which reasons are yours. Not giving the reasons is akin to not having any, at least until you tell them, and this vote reaks more of opportunity based on the heat Theatog is currently taking than any actual reasons, specifically as you haven't given them.

Apr 25, 2012 -- 12:48AM, Sleeping wrote:

Can't say I feel strongly about anyone else, but there are a couple people I am fairly suspecious of and a couple people who I get a fair town vibe from. I would like to hear more from PeregrineV though. Also, as razorborne said, Pdr_Br's posts are definitely worth reading in full if you've merely been skimming posts. Though I don't mean to imply that either Pdr_Br or razorborne are town.




Or you could just read the thread.

If you are going to say you have suspicions, give them or explain why you aren't doing so presently.

Apr 25, 2012 -- 1:31AM, theatog wrote:

Just want to say essentially we are not disagreeing. I understand what you are saying. I honestly do not have a day 1 don't matter attitude. And if you have played with me, I actually work hardest day 1 where pure player interaction gives me the drive for hunt rather having actual information that would skew discussion.




This. You said it and we all went WTF? Explain why information skews discussion.

Apr 25, 2012 -- 1:31AM, theatog wrote:

Just want to clarify that I do not mean i "don't ever" respond to anything that is address to me. I don't see the need to address to everything. And that is one case I think my action will speak louder than "i'm not scum, you are wrong." If you will, go back to the silly case and imagine how anyone (or yourself) would defend themselves against such accusation anyway. It wouldn't be much different. This is closer to the exception rather than the norm.




Yes, but by not defending yourself from a case, it looks like you are trying to downplay it by ignoring it, which is more likely a scum tactic of defense than town IMO.

Also, that still doesn't answer my question.

Apr 25, 2012 -- 2:44AM, Pdr_Br wrote:

Atog if you feel that the case on you by Silly is bogus then shows why it is instead of just waving it aside.

Also accusing other people of doing what you have been doing is hypocritical and doesn't help your defence only hinders it.




Very much yes. Also answer Niklor's question.

Apr 25, 2012 -- 6:32AM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

Apr 24, 2012 -- 9:45PM, Niklor wrote:


Also, even cops cannot be certain of their results, even though in most mini or basic games a cop result is almost always straightforwardly able to pick a player and know their alignment. There is still a chance that there are role interactions that have given false information or that the cop role is insane, naive, paranoid, etc...

Essentially, there is no positive way to know you have scum until the scum is dead, assuming no death millers of course. 



This is sort of arguing my point, but honestly, this discussion isn't very relevant to the game at all, so there's no need to argue this further.




There never really was except someone wanted to argue it and there was the potential for something to be revealed through what was said.

Post #457 by Niklor

THEATOG

Apr 24, 2012 -- 8:04PM, Niklor wrote:

Before I forget it, which I almost did, I did want this specific point addressed Theatog.

Apr 24, 2012 -- 2:19PM, Niklor wrote:

Apr 24, 2012 -- 1:03PM, theatog wrote:

Again, I see "purposeful" silence as a strategy. If you see responding to every single word in the thread is a good rule, go form a committee with Niklor. 




What was the purpose of your silence then? That's assuming it is indeed a strategy and not an excuse to avoid answering questions you don't have a good explanation for.





Post #458 by Niklor

SF & Sleeping seem to be possibly headed down the path of not lurking and PK promises activity in future.

What of FFP? Still lurking and no promises of future content nor excuses on trying to fix the forum.

Unvote; Vote: FFP

Offer thoughts.

Post #459 by Silly_Dragons

If it really comes down to crunch time, I will support a lurker lynch.

There's really not much more I can say about the whole situation besides that.

Post #460 by Niklor

It was a demand meant for FFP actually.

Post #461 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 25, 2012 -- 9:07AM, Niklor wrote:

It was a demand meant for FFP actually.



I blame the fact that "offer thoughts" is really vague.

Post #462 by Rubik

Vote Count


Niklor - 2 (Ahlyis, FFP)
theatog - 3 (Silly, Pdr_Br, Sleeping)
FFP - 2 (PK, Niklor)
Sleeping - 1 (Razorborne)
Silly - 2 (Theatog)
PK - 1 (Freddeh)
Not Voting - 2 (PeregrineV, ShadowFyre)



 

Post #463 by theatog

Apr 25, 2012 -- 2:44AM, Pdr_Br wrote:

Atog if you feel that the case on you by Silly is bogus then shows why it is instead of just waving it aside.

Also accusing other people of doing what you have been doing is hypocritical and doesn't help your defence only hinders it.


On the contrary. I think silly's case is understandable. unlike sleeping, who just wagon.

And What I meant was that I'm not actually doing "what i'm have been doing" but he is instead.

Post #464 by theatog

Apr 25, 2012 -- 8:30AM, Niklor wrote:

THEATOG

Apr 24, 2012 -- 8:04PM, Niklor wrote:

Before I forget it, which I almost did, I did want this specific point addressed Theatog.

Apr 24, 2012 -- 2:19PM, Niklor wrote:

Apr 24, 2012 -- 1:03PM, theatog wrote:

Again, I see "purposeful" silence as a strategy. If you see responding to every single word in the thread is a good rule, go form a committee with Niklor. 




What was the purpose of your silence then? That's assuming it is indeed a strategy and not an excuse to avoid answering questions you don't have a good explanation for.






i answered it. read up

Post #465 by theatog

Apr 25, 2012 -- 6:29AM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

Apr 25, 2012 -- 1:31AM, theatog wrote:

I actually work hardest day 1 where pure player interaction gives me the drive for hunt rather having actual information that would skew discussion.




I'm beginning to have aneurysms reading your posts.

ಠ_ಠ




Apr 25, 2012 -- 8:30AM, Niklor wrote:


This. You said it and we all went WTF? Explain why information skews discussion.



Skew - make biased. i'm using the word right, right?

information "directs" discussion. 

Post #466 by Niklor

Apr 25, 2012 -- 9:50AM, theatog wrote:

i answered it. read up




Direct me to which post contained what you think answered this question, as having read all your posts including the recent ones I have not yet seen an answer to this.

Post #467 by Niklor

Apr 25, 2012 -- 9:54AM, theatog wrote:

Apr 25, 2012 -- 6:29AM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

Apr 25, 2012 -- 1:31AM, theatog wrote:

I actually work hardest day 1 where pure player interaction gives me the drive for hunt rather having actual information that would skew discussion.




I'm beginning to have aneurysms reading your posts.

ಠ_ಠ




Apr 25, 2012 -- 8:30AM, Niklor wrote:


This. You said it and we all went WTF? Explain why information skews discussion.



Skew - make biased. i'm using the word right, right?

information "directs" discussion. 




So do other elements, like following your gut. If you are saying the discussion becomes more directed once the information is available, say that. Don't make it sound like the discussion is being distorted from some truer path. The discussion was never undirected so it would be more accurate, even using the word "skew" to say it skews it more.

Post #468 by Ahlyis

Apr 24, 2012 -- 6:50PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 24, 2012 -- 8:31AM, Ahlyis wrote:

Apr 23, 2012 -- 6:51PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 23, 2012 -- 10:41AM, Ahlyis wrote:

To be fair, I never said I wasn't reading the thread. I said the thread was a giant tl/dr. I said I read the thread, but skimmed several of the quote towers as I did so.


skimming isn't reading. do you mean you skimmed the quotes themselves and read the responses, or that you skimmed the large posts themselves?


What happened is, there was a point early on where two players (Niklor and Freddeh?) got into a huge, quote tower war of words. I actually read the first few, but then just started skimming them. And yes, I just skimmed the entire quote towers at that point.


that's not reading. you didn't read the thread.


Get off your high horse. Do you have ZERO understanding of what the word "skimming" means? Let me see if I can help you understand the concept. I thought it was pretty self -evident, but apparently it's too difficult for some to understand without help. Don't feel too bad, apparently you're not the only one so challenged.

Let me try to explain it with an example...

Read post.
Read post.
Read post.
Read post, see that it is starting to be a quote tower.
Read post, see that there is now definitely a quote tower war going on.
Read post, confirm a quote tower war is going on.
Start to read post, more of the same two people just bickering back and forth with nothing new. Skim rest of post looking for anything different, but NOT reading every single word.
Repeat previous for each entry in the quote tower war. If something different shows up, read that bit fully, but continue to save massive amounts of time by just skimming the stuff you've already seen multiple times in previous posts, just worded differently.
Read post. Do this for each post that ISN'T part of the pointless bickering quote tower war.

Interspersed in there is "Post response, whenever appropriate."


Screw it.  You're right.  I haven't read ANYTHING IN THE ENTIRE THREAD. LYNCH ME!

I think I'd rather go that route at this point. Frown



Post #469 by Silly_Dragons

Daykill: Alice

Post #470 by theatog

 Nik. Tell me that you are not doing it intentionally. You focused on half of the original sentence and took it completely out of context and walled on it. WTF? I know I type bad english but honestly this is  ridiculous.

And I direct you to #418.

Post #471 by Niklor

Apr 25, 2012 -- 10:52AM, theatog wrote:

 Nik. Tell me that you are not doing it intentionally. You focused on half of the original sentence and took it completely out of context and walled on it. WTF? I know I type bad english but honestly this is  ridiculous.

And I direct you to #418.




I focused on the part of that sentence that was odd, refering to choosing not to answer as a strategy.

I don't see how post #418 explains how purposeful silence is a valid strategy. It just talks about how you chose not to answer. Never do you really explain why you choose not to answer, at least not in a manner that explains it to me. I can believe you mixed up the words strategy and playstyle, but you still haven't shown why playing this way isn't actively hindering the town, as you are not answering a case against you, but choosing not to.

That is my problem with this idea of purposeful silence. Choosing not to respond to accussations, even terrible ones, is not something a townie should be doing. 

Post #472 by theatog

See this is where I stop discussing with you and let the other 10 players read and digest what you and I are saying.

Further arguing "whether I did something antitown" or "what IS antitown" is NOT pro-town. Especially coming from a player who just told us the difference between antitown and scummy. So it's your call, do you want to pin "IT" on scummy or antitown. 

I would've not said a word to demostrate my purposeful silence. But you would not have caught it.

Post #473 by PeregrineV

Just finished page 5. Based on changes from "normal", Niklor and Silly are scum.

Post #474 by Niklor

Apr 25, 2012 -- 12:27PM, theatog wrote:

See this is where I stop discussing with you and let the other 10 players read and digest what you and I are saying.




If that is what you originally meant by purposeful silence, you could have mentioned that at some point in this straightforward manner. However, I don't see how that excuses answering the question. That just means you delay in answering it.

Also I'm very sorry, but there is no way of knowing when the other players are going to read this, or if some of them ever will. So the idea of pausing a discussion so the others can see it, even though if they read the thread they will see it, is ludicrous. I'd rather finish the discussion because the more that can be said in the time we have until the deadline is more opportunities to form opinions. Is every discussion going to be about something we think is scummy? No, but that doesn't mean that discussions are pointless or spam as things can be said that open new avenues of inquiry.

quote author=64133868 post=519015939]Further arguing "whether I did something antitown" or "what IS antitown" is NOT pro-town. Especially coming from a player who just told us the difference between antitown and scummy. So it's your call, do you want to pin "IT" on scummy or antitown.




If something is antitown, it's not good for town, regardless of whether it is scummy or not. If I thought it was likely to be scum motivated, I would say so. The fact of the matter is though, you think it's not antitown and I think it is. Are you saying I should let you do something I think is actively hurting town just because I don't think it is scummy because it adds more to the discussion and possibly will allow something smaller to not be as discussed? See because I don't. I'd rather continue to oppose behavior that is antitown even if there is a chance such behavoir will have repurcussions that will end up hurting the town because in the end there needs to be no antitown behavior.

Essentially I don't find it scummy that you don't want to talk for the same reason I don't find lurkers scummy. But I find it harmful to town for you to play that way. I don't mean the idea of delaying an answer to let town digest what is being said, but I mean intentionally ignoring accussations and continue onward with other discussions without addressing it.

quote author=64133868 post=519015939]I would've not said a word to demostrate my purposeful silence. But you would not have caught it.




No I wouldn't. I'm very sorry that I can't read your mind.

Post #475 by Niklor

Apr 25, 2012 -- 12:45PM, PeregrineV wrote:

Just finished page 5. Based on changes from "normal", Niklor and Silly are scum.




I'd prefer you elaborate on what you are talking about.

Post #476 by Ahlyis

Niklor, if something hurts town, does that make it anti-town by your definition?

Suppose I had an ability to instantly kill 5 players, 3 random Town and 2 random Mafia. Using that would hurt Town in that three Townies would be dead. But it would hurt Mafia as well in that 2 Mafia would be dead.

The benefits from a pure numbers standpoint clearly favor Town in this. But the fact that Town benefits overall from such an ability doesn't negate the fact that Town loses 3 random members, possibly power roles.

An ability like that hurts Town. It just hurts Mafia more. But since it hurts Town, doesn't that make it anti-town by the definitions you are using?

Post #477 by Niklor

Apr 25, 2012 -- 1:57PM, Ahlyis wrote:

Niklor, if something hurts town, does that make it anti-town by your definition?




In simple terms yes.

Apr 25, 2012 -- 1:57PM, Ahlyis wrote:

Suppose I had an ability to instantly kill 5 players, 3 random Town and 2 random Mafia. Using that would hurt Town in that three Townies would be dead. But it would hurt Mafia as well in that 2 Mafia would be dead.

The benefits from a pure numbers standpoint clearly favor Town in this. But the fact that Town benefits overall from such an ability doesn't negate the fact that Town loses 3 random members, possibly power roles.

An ability like that hurts Town. It just hurts Mafia more. But since it hurts Town, doesn't that make it anti-town by the definitions you are using?




Ahylis, I do not define things for every situation that may come up. Does that make the definition invalid? It does to some degree. Parts of the ability are antitown, though the whole ability by itself is not because it ultimately helps the town as a whole.

On a side note, why is it that the only thing you felt the need to comment on was an issue of semantics or are you building to a larger point here? 

Post #478 by Ahlyis

Apr 25, 2012 -- 2:10PM, Niklor wrote:

On a side note, why is it that the only thing you felt the need to comment on was an issue of semantics or are you building to a larger point here? 


It's the only thing because I personally think your whole argument, both sides, is essentially worthless.

Does it REALLY matter that you define something one way while someone else is using a slightly different definition? Beyond simply establishing the difference, the ongoing argument over it is pretty pointless.

Post #479 by Niklor

Apr 25, 2012 -- 4:11PM, Ahlyis wrote:

Apr 25, 2012 -- 2:10PM, Niklor wrote:

On a side note, why is it that the only thing you felt the need to comment on was an issue of semantics or are you building to a larger point here? 


It's the only thing because I personally think your whole argument, both sides, is essentially worthless.

Does it REALLY matter that you define something one way while someone else is using a slightly different definition? Beyond simply establishing the difference, the ongoing argument over it is pretty pointless.




The ongoing argument is over whether something is harmful to the town.

Post #480 by Ahlyis

Apr 25, 2012 -- 4:47PM, Niklor wrote:

The ongoing argument is over whether something is harmful to the town.


Not really.

The ongoing argument is over what constitutes whether something is harmful to the town or not.

You guys aren't arguing over a specific example, you are arguing over the general concept.  That's an argument which is completely pointless as far as this game is concerned.  And an argument over a specific example is easily resolved by simply stating your opinions on the matter. WHY each of you does or doesn't feel the action is harmful to the town doesn't belong in this thread.  All that's needed is clarity over how each of you feels so that the rest of your actions can be understood in that light.

You guys are way beyond simply trying to understand where each of you is coming from and are into the realm of trying to change each other's views.  Pointless. Take it elsewhere and stop spamming up the thread with it.

On a related note, this is VERY similar to the type of junk that was in the quote towers earlier and why I only bothered to skim them. I saw nothing in them particularly relevant to the actual game and felt no need to read the "theological" debate, as it were.

Post #481 by Niklor

Apr 25, 2012 -- 4:57PM, Ahlyis wrote:

Apr 25, 2012 -- 4:47PM, Niklor wrote:

The ongoing argument is over whether something is harmful to the town.


Not really.

The ongoing argument is over what constitutes whether something is harmful to the town or not.

You guys aren't arguing over a specific example, you are arguing over the general concept.  That's an argument which is completely pointless as far as this game is concerned.  And an argument over a specific example is easily resolved by simply stating your opinions on the matter. WHY each of you does or doesn't feel the action is harmful to the town doesn't belong in this thread.  All that's needed is clarity over how each of you feels so that the rest of your actions can be understood in that light.

You guys are way beyond simply trying to understand where each of you is coming from and are into the realm of trying to change each other's views.  Pointless. Take it elsewhere and stop spamming up the thread with it.

On a related note, this is VERY similar to the type of junk that was in the quote towers earlier and why I only bothered to skim them. I saw nothing in them particularly relevant to the actual game and felt no need to read the "theological" debate, as it were.




If you want me to discuss something else, explain to me why I shouldn't try to deter Theatog from play in a manner I think hinders the town. Without just calling spam because you think I shouldn't. Explain to me in clear cut reasons why it is bad for me to allow Theatog to play in a way that ignores questions directed at him for some sort of tactical reason.

Basically, you call it a theological debate. I call it an attempt to curb antitown behavior.

Also, there was nothing...absolutely nothing...that was important in what's been said since you last posted aside from an issue of semantics in a debate you think is spamming up the thread? 

Post #482 by Freddeh

So I've been skimming the thread, but every time I wake up it seems like theres 30 new posts. Someone want to summarize the last couple pages for me, because all it really looks like is tog/ahlyis and Nik bickering about general mafia theory. With a little bit of going after FFP for lurking.

Unvote;Vote: FFP

I still think PK has been TOO lurky despite his business (especially since I thought he liked to argue mafia theory ), but FFP doesn't have as good of an excuse and we need to get some actual wagons rolling instead of all this vote spread everywhere.

Post #483 by Niklor

I will not enable you to not read threads.

I agree that FFP doesn't need to get away with lurking, but we don't really need to worry about wagons when we still have over a week until deadline. 

Post #484 by Freddeh

Did something happen OTHER than what I said? Yes/No answer.

Post #485 by razorborne

ATTENTION ANYONE PLANNING TO SKIM THIS POST:

Apr 25, 2012 -- 12:48AM, Sleeping wrote:

Okay, let me start off by saying I was acting apathetically about the game because I wanted to add a different dynamic so I could see specifically how people would respond to it and thus gain more info. It was not because I did not want to contribute. I figured I'd have time to do so because I figured day ones probably last pretty long. I'll be contributing more now, hopefully. I have had the chance to digest this thread a few times.

theatog is extremely suspicious to me, I find it kinda funny that I random-voted him in the first place now. I will vote for him once again. I would give reasoning, but further into the thread other people basically said the things I would have said, and I don't really feel like saying the same things over again, I hope that isn't taken as not contributing.
Vote: theatog

Can't say I feel strongly about anyone else, but there are a couple people I am fairly suspecious of and a couple people who I get a fair town vibe from. I would like to hear more from PeregrineV though. Also, as razorborne said, Pdr_Br's posts are definitely worth reading in full if you've merely been skimming posts. Though I don't mean to imply that either Pdr_Br or razorborne are town.



THIS IS A LURKER BANDWAGON. THAT IS ALL.

Apr 25, 2012 -- 9:54AM, theatog wrote:

Apr 25, 2012 -- 6:29AM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

Apr 25, 2012 -- 1:31AM, theatog wrote:

I actually work hardest day 1 where pure player interaction gives me the drive for hunt rather having actual information that would skew discussion.


 

I'm beginning to have aneurysms reading your posts.

ಠ_ಠ


 

Apr 25, 2012 -- 8:30AM, Niklor wrote:


This. You said it and we all went WTF? Explain why information skews discussion.


 
Skew - make biased. i'm using the word right, right?

information "directs" discussion. 


I think this goes beyond word choice. if I'm reading what you said correctly (feel free to correct me if I'm not) you are defining "actual information" as "role results". I think that's a major issue here, with many players: the game isn't about your role. hell, off the top of my head I've forgotten what mine is. because I really don't need to know during the day. when night rolls around I'll check if I have an ability, and if I do I'll use it. but right now is right now, and right now we have plenty of information. use it.

Apr 25, 2012 -- 12:45PM, PeregrineV wrote:

Just finished page 5. Based on changes from "normal", Niklor and Silly are scum.





Apr 25, 2012 -- 5:10PM, Niklor wrote:

Apr 25, 2012 -- 4:57PM, Ahlyis wrote:

Apr 25, 2012 -- 4:47PM, Niklor wrote:

The ongoing argument is over whether something is harmful to the town.


Not really.

The ongoing argument is over what constitutes whether something is harmful to the town or not.

You guys aren't arguing over a specific example, you are arguing over the general concept.  That's an argument which is completely pointless as far as this game is concerned.  And an argument over a specific example is easily resolved by simply stating your opinions on the matter. WHY each of you does or doesn't feel the action is harmful to the town doesn't belong in this thread.  All that's needed is clarity over how each of you feels so that the rest of your actions can be understood in that light.

You guys are way beyond simply trying to understand where each of you is coming from and are into the realm of trying to change each other's views.  Pointless. Take it elsewhere and stop spamming up the thread with it.

On a related note, this is VERY similar to the type of junk that was in the quote towers earlier and why I only bothered to skim them. I saw nothing in them particularly relevant to the actual game and felt no need to read the "theological" debate, as it were.




If you want me to discuss something else, explain to me why I shouldn't try to deter Theatog from play in a manner I think hinders the town. Without just calling spam because you think I shouldn't. Explain to me in clear cut reasons why it is bad for me to allow Theatog to play in a way that ignores questions directed at him for some sort of tactical reason.

Basically, you call it a theological debate. I call it an attempt to curb antitown behavior.

Also, there was nothing...absolutely nothing...that was important in what's been said since you last posted aside from an issue of semantics in a debate you think is spamming up the thread? 



amen.

 

Post #486 by razorborne

my response to Pere got cut off for some reason. it was this: 4.bp.blogspot.com/-7NhLy-ZGVCA/TcpuY9u_r...

Post #487 by Rubik

Vote Count


Niklor - 2 (Ahlyis, FFP)
theatog - 3 (Silly, Pdr_Br, Sleeping)
FFP - 3 (PK, Niklor, Freddeh)
Sleeping - 1 (Razorborne)
Silly - 2 (Theatog)
Not Voting - 2 (PeregrineV, ShadowFyre)



 

Post #488 by razorborne

do we have a set deadline yet?

 

Post #489 by shadowfyre77

Apr 24, 2012 -- 7:59PM, Niklor wrote:

Maybe I need to begin to take the time to multiquote. This is frankly starting to look a little bit ridiculous even to me.



this 

Post #490 by Rubik

Deadline

May 4th, 12:03 PM | PST
May 4th, 3:03 PM | EST

Time Remaining

~8 days, 17 hours, 31 minutes.

Post #491 by theatog

"e author=58325628 post=519027751]

Basically, you call it a theological debate. I call it an attempt to curb antitown behavior.

Also, there was nothing...absolutely nothing...that was important in what's been said since you last posted aside from an issue of semantics in a debate you think is spamming up the thread?[/quote]


"Curbbing antitown behavior" is not wrong. But if it doesn't contribute to moving game forward, it should be done in moderation, which is not the case here. 

Yes everyone should read the thread. Yes everyone should post contents. But at the end of the day, what comes down to is 

WHAT IS EXPECTED of an average player to commit to a game like this. 

I was told to visit the thread once a day. 
How much time to spend during that one time would depend on the person. Probably involve around reading 10-20 posts? (given everyone would visit once a day and 12 players each say roughly 1 thing)
How much time spent reading also depends on the reading speed of the person. (I will volunteer myself as clearly one of the bad and slow reader. It just so happens I have extra time to make up for it.)

And lets face the fact, Niklor you are clearly over the curve. Heck i even consider myself slightly over the curve for checking the thread more than 5 times a day.

I understand that underaverage activities is what hurting Px2 the most. But the answer to that is clearly not overaverage activities from a handful of players. I guess what i'm trying to say is, neither too much or too little is PRO TOWN. As oppose to Raz and Niklor's preaching - "must respond to everything". (Note i'm not preaching the opposite.)

Reading takes time and energy. And when you see 30 posts overnight EVERYday, it's discouraging to catch up. You can't blame the individual just because he can't commit MORE THAN average time to a game.

I honestly hope this is not a scum strategy. IF it is, this behavior is just as equally bad with the players who say they clearly don't spend enough time to play the game. 

I don't want to debate about this topic. All I ask is that people who over commit to please be considerate so that Freddeh, a clearly active and constructive player, can play his normal game and not be turned into FFP. 

Post #492 by ProphetKing

You post a lot.

Reading, am going to post a summarized thing instead of a PbPa. That will only make things worse. 

Post #493 by Niklor

I AM ON VACATION

I think I'm supposed to announce that or something. Means I won't be at my laptop checking on the threads as frequently. Will still try to be as annoying as hell to everyone who can't read the thread.

SF, don't just say "This" and nothing else. It makes you lurker-ish and makes me want to throttle you everytime you do it.

While an indepth look at every post would be appreciated, it's understandably one of the most time consuming thing as you must read all the posts and make responses to them. So if you can summarize the thread fairly accurately for yourself, hurray. Just promise you aren't going to make a summary and not post again for days.

I'll be back proper next Tuesday, so you can thank whatever you want that I will be posting less until then, Theatog, and Freddeh can not become what FFP is.

I probably do have more time to waste on this game this most people. Doesn't necessarily excuse the fact that people can't keep up with me.

There might have been something else I meant to say, but I think I forgot. Will probably remember next time I come back.

Again, very sorry about vacation and less activity I expect it will mean. 

Post #494 by shadowfyre77

Apr 25, 2012 -- 6:29AM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

Apr 25, 2012 -- 1:31AM, theatog wrote:

I actually work hardest day 1 where pure player interaction gives me the drive for hunt rather having actual information that would skew discussion.




I'm beginning to have aneurysms reading your posts.

ಠ_ಠ



wait how does this even make sense, jw

Post #495 by shadowfyre77

Apr 25, 2012 -- 5:35PM, Freddeh wrote:

Did something happen OTHER than what I said? Yes/No answer.



what did you say?

if this is an obvious post blame it on me being virtually blind really bad at finding things (same thing, right?)

also my eyes have gone slightly blurry from walls of text. it being late doesn't help 

Post #496 by shadowfyre77

Apr 25, 2012 -- 9:57PM, Niklor wrote:


SF, don't just say "This" and nothing else. It makes you lurker-ish and makes me want to throttle you everytime you do it. 



sorry i was going to make a post after that but then homework ><

anyways just reading these couple of pages.....

@niklor: don't worry about it, everyone needs vacations and stuff. or something.

so there's a couple of people who i don't even know what, mainly because they haven't posted anything meaningful recently enough for me to remember. 
This is PK (who's going to post stuff later, amirite?), Ahylis, sleeping, FFP, and pere, but knowning me i probably forgot someone

um...

Apr 24, 2012 -- 7:41PM, Niklor wrote:


Apr 24, 2012 -- 7:03PM, shadowfyre77 wrote:

currently:
sleeping hasn't shown up for a while
derp derp derp
has pere posted actual stuff or am i just blind
currently most inclined to vote atog
what PK
niklor: posts feel very transparent, leaning towards town right now


 

Sleeping is there I'm sure, just not saying anything as he thinks it is a good strategy to do so.
Peregrine hasn't posted much, but I don't think he has the read most of the thread.
Why do you feel inclined to vote for Theatog?
What about PK?
I think that's a wise way to lean, though you shouldn't be so quick to think of me as town or scum on D1.



nothing much about PK, i put that there mainly to point out that i have no idea what to think of him
that applied to other people as well, but for whatever reason i just put down PK.

Post #497 by Feroz-s_Familiar_Pheldy

Apr 25, 2012 -- 7:07PM, theatog wrote:



Reading takes time and energy. And when you see 30 posts overnight EVERYday, it's discouraging to catch up. You can't blame the individual just because he can't commit MORE THAN average time to a game.

I honestly hope this is not a scum strategy. IF it is, this behavior is just as equally bad with the players who say they clearly don't spend enough time to play the game. 

I don't want to debate about this topic. All I ask is that people who over commit to please be considerate so that Freddeh, a clearly active and constructive player, can play his normal game and not be turned into FFP. 



amen again.

Apr 25, 2012 -- 9:57PM, Niklor wrote:

I AM ON VACATION

I think I'm supposed to announce that or something. Means I won't be at my laptop checking on the threads as frequently. Will still try to be as annoying as hell to everyone who can't read the thread.



it is thanks to you that I can't read it. I come here several times a day and everytime I see screen after screen of textwalls with your (ugly) face attached to it.

Post #498 by Pdr_Br

Apr 24, 2012 -- 7:10PM, theatog wrote:

Apr 24, 2012 -- 6:50PM, razorborne wrote:

this sort of attitude is exactly what's wrong with Px2 right now. the idea that things will work out or they won't so it's not your job to put any effort toward getting the outcome you desire is an attitude more suited for the craps table than a mafia game. content doesn't come out of nowhere. you need to make it. and you do that by making cases, by looking for evidence, by pushing at cracks until everything comes tumbling down, not just from day 1, but from post 1. that's your job. if you don't like it, don't play.




WOW lol. How did me willingly decide not to defend myself turns into "I don't want to play". 

Tbh, I agree with most things you say. But I don't see myself possessing this "attitude" you talk of. So I play different than you; how does it warrant this attack?  Just because I don't argue against my case, doesn't mean there isn't a case already posted. Me deciding to  defend myself  or not doesn't make the case go away. I like to see how people weight in on my wagon versus actions I take throughout this day one.  What is so wrong about it?

And further more, it doesn't stop other people from finding cases on other people. In fact, even in the "worst" (in quotation, by extend of your logic) case scenario where every everyone just post a case and do no rebuttal, the game will still work perfectly.  




From this post the only thing I can comprehend from your "silence" stance is that defending yourself or not won't make your case go away but how can people weight your actions against your case whne your actions are that for you the case is non important.

You say that your atitude doesn't stop people from finding more cases and I ask you why should people find more cases when the case on you doesn't merit your attention. Doesn't mean it's a good case has you have already said so, so there is actually a good reason to lynch even if your not scum?

In the situation where everybody makes cases and nobody responds to them, then how do you think we would choose the best case? The case that has the best points or the case that is better explained?

Post #499 by Pdr_Br

Apr 25, 2012 -- 9:48AM, theatog wrote:

Apr 25, 2012 -- 2:44AM, Pdr_Br wrote:

Atog if you feel that the case on you by Silly is bogus then shows why it is instead of just waving it aside.

Also accusing other people of doing what you have been doing is hypocritical and doesn't help your defence only hinders it.


On the contrary. I think silly's case is understandable. unlike sleeping, who just wagon.

And What I meant was that I'm not actually doing "what i'm have been doing" but he is instead.




If you feel that Sleeping is only voting for bandwagon reasons why not vote him? Or FoS him if you think that Silly is more scummy then Sleeping?

Post #500 by theatog

Pdr, your first post implies that one can only vote by case and further more, one can only choose "best case basing on rebuttal". I don't believe mafia is nothing but a case pageant

ok, in case i'm not clear. I don't mean to be a jerk. when i say "rebuttal", i mean a strictly 1 on 1 interaction. there are other kinds of interactions. everyone can still talk about cases about other people. and in fact i believe those are the content most useful.  

On a differet note. I am seeing the trend here. Why do people keep oversimplifying things and taking things out of context?  

@second post. because 
-day is still long.
-I said multiple times I like my vote on silly for the time being. but I'm not oppose to the idea of switching vote. 
-town bandwagons too. 
- Silly said he hates FoS : P lol

Post #501 by Niklor

Apr 25, 2012 -- 11:13PM, shadowfyre77 wrote:

Apr 25, 2012 -- 5:35PM, Freddeh wrote:

Did something happen OTHER than what I said? Yes/No answer.



what did you say?

if this is an obvious post blame it on me being virtually blind really bad at finding things (same thing, right?)

also my eyes have gone slightly blurry from walls of text. it being late doesn't help 




Apr 25, 2012 -- 5:32PM, Freddeh wrote:

So I've been skimming the thread, but every time I wake up it seems like theres 30 new posts. Someone want to summarize the last couple pages for me, because all it really looks like is tog/ahlyis and Nik bickering about general mafia theory. With a little bit of going after FFP for lurking.

Unvote;Vote: FFP

I still think PK has been TOO lurky despite his business (especially since I thought he liked to argue mafia theory ), but FFP doesn't have as good of an excuse and we need to get some actual wagons rolling instead of all this vote spread everywhere.




I believe that is what Freddeh is referring to.

Post #502 by Niklor

Apr 25, 2012 -- 11:19PM, shadowfyre77 wrote:

@niklor: don't worry about it, everyone needs vacations and stuff. or something.




My vacation so far was help my sister give pizza to highschoolers and then drive her back here. Essentially, my vacation is see younger sister in high school musical and maybe celebrate birthday if time permits. Still, fun times. Plus I get to see my doggies. They are so cute.

Apr 25, 2012 -- 11:19PM, shadowfyre77 wrote:

so there's a couple of people who i don't even know what, mainly because they haven't posted anything meaningful recently enough for me to remember. 
This is PK (who's going to post stuff later, amirite?), Ahylis, sleeping, FFP, and pere, but knowning me i probably forgot someone




Peregrine appears to be trying to catch up at a rate that seems to indicate he never will.

Ahlyis is commenting, just on very little.

Sleeping & FFP are very much lurking. PK is lurking, but keeps promising content.

Apr 25, 2012 -- 11:40PM, Feroz-s_Familiar_Pheldy wrote:

Apr 25, 2012 -- 9:57PM, Niklor wrote:

I AM ON VACATION

I think I'm supposed to announce that or something. Means I won't be at my laptop checking on the threads as frequently. Will still try to be as annoying as hell to everyone who can't read the thread.



it is thanks to you that I can't read it. I come here several times a day and everytime I see screen after screen of textwalls with your (ugly) face attached to it.




I'm not apologizing.

Post #503 by Freddeh

I'm not going to read back until you answer my question Nik. The longer you don't answer the question, the more I think my analysis was right and thus don't NEED to read back more in-depth.

Post #504 by Niklor

Apr 26, 2012 -- 1:08PM, Freddeh wrote:

I'm not going to read back until you answer my question Nik. The longer you don't answer the question, the more I think my analysis was right and thus don't NEED to read back more in-depth.




I'm not going to read back for you and tell you every single thing that was said. That's why the posts are there. For you to do it.

Post #505 by Freddeh

I asked you a yes/no question. I know you read it because you QUOTED IT BACK TO SOMEONE. I read back, it was just more of a skim and I just wanted to make sure I didn't miss anything. If I didn't miss anything then I'm caught up and thus don't really need to read back more in-depth.

Post #506 by Niklor

Apr 26, 2012 -- 1:24PM, Freddeh wrote:

I asked you a yes/no question. I know you read it because you QUOTED IT BACK TO SOMEONE. I read back, it was just more of a skim and I just wanted to make sure I didn't miss anything. If I didn't miss anything then I'm caught up and thus don't really need to read back more in-depth.




Even if I did make you a summary, that wouldn't mean anything. You would still need to read the posts yourself if you wanted to be sure I was giving you an accurate summary. 

Post #507 by Freddeh

...Are you actually being serious right now? I feel like you're trolling me.

Post #508 by Niklor

I feel it's odd you have the time to argue this point and don't have the time to read those pages yourself.

I am serious. 

Post #509 by Freddeh

Because typing quick one-paragraph responses is similar amounts of time as reading 2-3ish pages worth of back-and-forth.

Heres how this conversation went: Me: 'Yes or No, did I miss anything other than what I mentioned?' You: 'I don't want to summarize everything up for you.' Me: But I asked you a Yes or No question. You: 'I don't want to summarize everything up for you.' Me: *Facepalm*

Post #510 by Niklor

I take about as much time to type up a reply as it does for me to read 3-5 decently sized posts.

I would have to reread the pages in question to be entirely sure if that is an accurate, if short and undetailed, assessment. I could do it, but I don't see why you couldn't do it and so "Why not do it?" 

Post #511 by Freddeh

Because roughly half of the posts are your own? So I'd assume you were actually paying attention when you made them? You could have just said this the FIRST time around instead of us going around in circles.

Post #512 by Niklor

I thought it was implied that I don't have a memory that remembers everything I say word for word. Forgive me for not stating it previously.

Post #513 by Ahlyis

Apr 26, 2012 -- 2:47PM, Freddeh wrote:

Because roughly half of the posts are your own? So I'd assume you were actually paying attention when you made them? You could have just said this the FIRST time around instead of us going around in circles.


Agreed.

Niklor, you could've avoided this entire convo by simply saying you didn't remember and/or weren't sure what he would consider important or not.

Post #514 by Freddeh

In addition, if it wasn't important enough for you to remember your own argument/discussion was even about, why is it important that I go back and read through it?

Post #515 by Sleeping

Niklor]Sleeping & FFP are very much lurking. PK is lurking, but keeps promising content.




Do you actually have a legitimate reason for distinguishing between "FPP & I" and "PK"? A promise of content is still not content, and furthermore I have made the same promise. Singling out PK just seems a little off wrote:

Post #516 by Sleeping

Ignore the above post.


 author=58325628]Sleeping & FFP are very much lurking. PK is lurking, but keeps promising content.




Do you actually have a legitimate reason for distinguishing between "FPP & I" and "PK"? A promise of content is still not content, and furthermore I have made the same promise. Singling out PK just seems a little off to me. 

Post #517 by Sleeping

How da do quote blocks work on this site? I should just go back to colored text.

——————————————————————————————

Niklor:
Sleeping & FFP are very much lurking. PK is lurking, but keeps promising content.

Do you actually have a legitimate reason for distinguishing between "FPP & I" and "PK"? A promise of content is still not content, and furthermore I have made the same promise. Singling out PK just seems a little off to me. 

Post #518 by ProphetKing

Silly Flagon
"OH YES LETS FOS PEOPLE. I LOVE FINGERING."

A+

PDR/The Atog, #68

Agreeing with PDR as to: why not just vote instead of FoS? 

Silly #69

In terms of lynching yes, but your intent is still clear and carried over even if a lynch is not possible.

Razor #81

I'm the "victim" here and I feel this is trying to make something out of nothing. I don't see Silly's actions as maligant.

Fred #85

Again, I don't feel this.

Niklor #86

I generally agree with Niklor. 

Freddeh #102

"@PK, it wasn't a super serious accusation, and my reasonings for voting him are because of something not even related."

OK. Also I don't really reaction troll.

Razor #116

"slip cases are always awful. always. every time."

I'm not going to say "everytime," because rarely someone will post information they could only know if they were scum, but often cases based on "oh he slipped his alignment" are in fact dumb.

"he idea of saving a lynch for a rainy doesn't work because there is no rain in mafia"

That's rather clever.

"also, you're ignoring the fact that silly used the functionally equivalent "I've got my eye on you" bit, twice. why is declaring your suspicions without voting okay when he does it?"

Moderately interesting point.

Razor #119

I'll second this idea, although at #119 I am not in favor of pushing a lurker lynch.

Ahl #121

'I tend to play reactively when everyone is playing all at once. I probably play most proactively if I care about the game, usually meaning I'm scum because I usually care more about the game as scum, though not always.'

"Nice preemptive deflection attempt.

"Vote:  Niklor"

Niklor foot, to mouth, past the brain and back out the skull.

"Depends on the type of slip.  Slip cases are NOT always bad. PK slipped in Touhou 3 and claimed a role ON the list he was given instead of a role NOT on the list he had.  It was definitely a slip and it was definitely NOT an awful case brought against him in that game."

That's more like being "blatantly caught in a lie the town should punish you for," but sure.

Razor #124

OK but we don't have a chronic lurker victim to put down for his sins.

Freddeh #127

"Furthering my point on PK: You bringing up that you would use a dayvig actually IS the same as saying you would like to dayvig, because of the sheer fact that it hadn't been brought up."

Again, this just is nonsense by fiat: read the declarative statement, and then realize it isn't true.

And again, I do not need "white knighted." Beyond that what Niklor is "advocating for" with me is rather obvious and to take the "slip" seriously is very much making a molehill out of a molecule.

Niklor #128

"but saying they referenced themselves as separate from the town is not. "

I actually disagree with this, given that statements like "the town should" imply some level of otherness and I frequently use in every game.

Niklor #136

"Do you see this word Freddeh: Shoot. That is the word. Can you see it? Yes? Good. Now can we agree that that word is not Dayvig? Because if you are arguing otherwise, apparently PGOs actually dayvig people."

lol

I am liking the content of Niklor's posting so far. 

"You seem to confuse overdefensive with being an active participant to an ongoing discussion."

A+

Razor #137

""OH SO YOU'RE NOT PART OF THE TOWN WHAT ARE YOU THEN MAFIA? DOUBLE MAFIA?"

This game is amusing. 

Post #519 by ProphetKing

Sleeping #145 

Read: new player who doesn't have a firm grip on the game yet, using a truism that holds relatively true for real life.

Don't disagree with the pressure to get content out of him though.

...

I really do not care about a lot of the content Razor and Niklor are "overposting" about lurker lynches.

...

Sleeping #155

Again, going to go with misapprehension of the game's work than cunning strategy to surprise lurk screw us all.


Niklor #156

"I don't recall hypocrisy in and of itself being scummy."

I was going to call you out for this during the conversation with Razor, but I thought about it some more and there is a natural "hypocrisy" humans exert with self-biases and placing reasons of "you're a jerk if you do something mean, if I did it I had a bad day so I'm not bad," etc. 

I'm not sure I'd go as far to say as I don't care about hypocrisy, but I can't get overly worked up about Silly either.

...

Most of the content Niklor is posting is actually good. 

...

Silly #161

"New policy. For this game at least, I am going to be rude and abrasive. Expect plenty of calling people bad names. I guess you could call it testing out a playstyle. Or maybe it's because I like roleplaying in mafia."

If I was thinking of who would be more apt to roleplay a rude and abrasive person in mafia, I would think of a thug. 


"I cleared this up with everyone important before hand. I PMed SJT, he told me he was fine with me being a hard ass if Rubik was fine with it. I chatted up Rubik on IRC and he said he was fine with it as long as Rag was fine with it. And Rag said he had no problems."

I didn't hear about it, QQ.

Don't cause any disruptive game problems and I don't really care. 

Silly #164

"In my opinion, PK saying that implies something along the lines of "oh hai Freddeh. You've done the first thing in the game to trigger my scumdar"

Yup.

Niklot #169

"I'm not saying I want to ignore lurkers. I don't want to focus on them to the exclusion of active participants in the game though."

Yup.

Silly #176

"PK teach me how to come across as aloof and arrogant without trying please. I really need to learn this to get in character."


I'll hold a seminar later.

...

Silly, why be rude to new player who is obviously confused as to how the game works? 

Silly #195

"Bro, in my opinion, you should never try to lynch someone you think is town. Even if they are useless, retarded, and don't post at all. At the very worst, they're a warm body that protects against the mafia."

Yar. I dislike Razor going, "Well if we kill him and he's town, he was worthless." Poor use of resources - people are time in mafia.

"MODS: IS JESTER A POSSIBLE ROLE IN THIS GAME, OR IS IT FORBIDDEN BY THE RULES?"

What's more likely: new player misunderstands the game or has a cunning ploy to suicide and win?


...

Niklor #203

"I will tell anyone I want how to play. Don't try to silence me with you free will."

Aggressive.

...

Silly

"Also, I'm beating you at postwhoring."

QQ

...

I find myself enjoying Sleeping as an indivudal.

Razor #233

Good way of saying it.

Freddeh #236

You oddly seem to have a problem with me and then repeatedly avoid voting me for a weaker wagon.

I am beginning to wonder if you are attempting to frame me.

Silly #244

"I'm a big fan of pushing wagons.

Unvote Niklor."

Yup, that was a pretty easy push off. 

Silly #270

"I don't know if this is a good thing or a bad thing, but Niklor seems very overzealous in trying to defend other people before they get a chance to post.

"I personally view it as slightly negative, but what's your opinion on that?"

Slightly negative given his post about his playstyle.

...

The Atog is doing weird things with his votes, voting Fred than Niklor.

...

The Atog #296

"My gut tells me that he's scum with a fun ability?

"Who did I miss?

"Unvote. Confirm vote silly until further notice." 



This seems really baseless.

#297 FFP

"http://community.wizards.com/paranoia/go/thread/view/76625/29067123/Mini_Pony_Mafia&post_num=297#518898741"

good start, not enough

#317 Niklor

"Shadowfyre, do you actually plan on going back those couple pages and getting those reads? "

Yar, Shadow is rather silent.

#3???

" So Nik is off the table today for me."

Odd to say - things changes, still early in the game.

"Off-topic: I find it rather curious that FFP is getting most of the heat when Ahlyis and Pere are doing virtually the same things."

It's about intent, Mr. Fred.

#323 Fred

"Hm, guess who else is trying to lurk his way out of suspicion.

"Vote: PK"

Right, because I can't defend myself accusations.

...

Atog wut are you doing

...

tl;dr is fine because it's like why you write a summary at the beginning and end of a essay, to convey your points clearly



 

 



 



 


Post #520 by theatog

PK. unrelated question.

Is there an easy way to do what you do, or are you linking post by link manually on every #number?

Post #521 by razorborne

PK: since you're not using quote boxes, I believe some of those quoted votes might count as real votes. just FYI.

 

Post #522 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 26, 2012 -- 5:56PM, razorborne wrote:

PK: since you're not using quote boxes, I believe some of those quoted votes might count as real votes. just FYI.

 



None of them are in color, so I don't think they should count, right?

Post #523 by ProphetKing

Manual, but it doesn't take a long time to do it.

Right click the number, copy over text.

And I'll unvote when I finish and make my final vote, so no worries, but thanks for the warning Razor. 

Post #524 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 26, 2012 -- 4:31PM, ProphetKing wrote:

Silly, why be rude to new player who is obviously confused as to how the game works?




> New policy. For this game at least, I am going to be rude and abrasive. Expect plenty of calling people bad names. I guess you could call it testing out a playstyle. Or maybe it's because I like roleplaying in mafia.

Also, I guess you interpreted that as a breadcrumb. I wasn't actually breadcrumbing. I'm not roleplaying my role (I don't think anyone is that rude in #pony, at least when I've been there), I'm just pretending to be somebody I'm not and seeing if I can stay in character.

Post #525 by shadowfyre77

Apr 26, 2012 -- 6:27PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

Apr 26, 2012 -- 4:31PM, ProphetKing wrote:

Silly, why be rude to new player who is obviously confused as to how the game works?




> New policy. For this game at least, I am going to be rude and abrasive. Expect plenty of calling people bad names. I guess you could call it testing out a playstyle. Or maybe it's because I like roleplaying in mafia.

Also, I guess you interpreted that as a breadcrumb. I wasn't actually breadcrumbing. I'm not roleplaying my role (I don't think anyone is that rude in #pony, at least when I've been there), I'm just pretending to be somebody I'm not and seeing if I can stay in character.



i don't think it's working

Post #526 by razorborne

Apr 26, 2012 -- 3:11PM, Sleeping wrote:

How da do quote blocks work on this site? I should just go back to colored text.

——————————————————————————————

Niklor:
Sleeping & FFP are very much lurking. PK is lurking, but keeps promising content.

Do you actually have a legitimate reason for distinguishing between "FPP & I" and "PK"? A promise of content is still not content, and furthermore I have made the same promise. Singling out PK just seems a little off to me. 


this is a good question. it could just be that people have played with PK and know that he usually contributes, whereas FFP never does and no one has seen you do so, but it's certainly an odd line to draw.

Apr 26, 2012 -- 3:34PM, ProphetKing wrote:

Razor #124


OK but we don't have a chronic lurker victim to put down for his sins.


at that point, no. but we do now.

Apr 26, 2012 -- 4:31PM, ProphetKing wrote:

Sleeping #155

Post #527 by Niklor

Apr 26, 2012 -- 2:57PM, Freddeh wrote:

In addition, if it wasn't important enough for you to remember your own argument/discussion was even about, why is it important that I go back and read through it?




Apr 26, 2012 -- 2:55PM, Ahlyis wrote:

Apr 26, 2012 -- 2:47PM, Freddeh wrote:

Because roughly half of the posts are your own? So I'd assume you were actually paying attention when you made them? You could have just said this the FIRST time around instead of us going around in circles.


Agreed.

Niklor, you could've avoided this entire convo by simply saying you didn't remember and/or weren't sure what he would consider important or not.




I generally remember my stance in an argument as opposed to the exact words I used. I know there were posts made that were not just me arguing with other players. Eventually, I will probably have to read back and figure out what I make of today and then I will know they were there.

Again, I thought it was implied I don't recall everything going on. If I could remember everything that happens accurately at every single moment, I wouldn't hasten to respond to these posts as I read them. Otherwise, I wouldn't remember the stance I took on an issue later. Also, I'm not necessarily accurate with order. I might be able to sit here without looking back and recall everything I have argued to a certain degree, mostly whether I was opposed to it or not, but if you ask me when I argued what or when what was said it gets jumbled up a bit until I do a reread. 

Post #528 by Niklor

Apr 26, 2012 -- 3:11PM, Sleeping wrote:

How da do quote blocks work on this site? I should just go back to colored text.

——————————————————————————————

Niklor:
Sleeping & FFP are very much lurking. PK is lurking, but keeps promising content.

Do you actually have a legitimate reason for distinguishing between "FPP & I" and "PK"? A promise of content is still not content, and furthermore I have made the same promise. Singling out PK just seems a little off to me. 




I hit the quote button and then type things out beneath it.

PK's history suggests he will post content in games. Also, at this point he has. Makes this rather moot. You can argue something about me being able to reason that out as being scumbuddies with PK or something if you want. At least you'd be posting about something.

FFP has a history of lurking and is likely to lurk because of it. You have stated you're lurking essentially and are not actively contributing to the discussion most of the time. And as for content, SF has already passed you in my mind in actually contributing. Essentially, I view you and FFP at the same level and PK on a different one.

Post #529 by Ragnarokio

Vote Count

Niklor - 2 (Ahlyis, FFP)
theatog - 3 (Silly, Pdr_Br, Sleeping)
FFP - 3 (PK, Niklor, Freddeh)
Sleeping - 1 (Razorborne)
Silly - 2 (Theatog)
Not Voting - 2 (PeregrineV, ShadowFyre)


Deadline: ~7 days, 9 hours

Post Count (not completely accurate)

Niklor - 136
Silly - 95
Freddeh - 41
Theatog - 35
Razorborne - 31
PK - 28
Ahlyis - 20
Shadowfyre - 13
Pdr_Br - 13
Sleeping - 10
FFP - 7
Peregrine - 4

Prodding...

Niklor in 72 hours
Razorborne in 72 hours
Shadowfyre in 71 hours
Silly in 68 hours
PK in 68 hours
Theatog in 67 hours
Sleeping in 65 hours
Freddeh in 65 hours
Ahlyis in 65 hours
Pdr in 52 hours
FFP in 49 hours
Peregrine in 38 hours

Post #530 by ProphetKing

I don't bother with quote blocks, simply

Player Name

quote tags and words


 

Also: I took a break to review a game and send 200 PMs. The rest of my comments on recent play will go up tomorrow.

Things'll be more steady and consistent now. Thanks for your patience during the renovations. 

Post #531 by Niklor

Apr 26, 2012 -- 3:34PM, ProphetKing wrote:

Niklor #86


I generally agree with Niklor.




I find that to be true of myself as well. Niklor and I are often in agreement.

Apr 26, 2012 -- 3:34PM, ProphetKing wrote:

Ahl #121

'I tend to play reactively when everyone is playing all at once. I probably play most proactively if I care about the game, usually meaning I'm scum because I usually care more about the game as scum, though not always.'

"Nice preemptive deflection attempt.

"Vote:  Niklor"

Niklor foot, to mouth, past the brain and back out the skull.




It's not my fault I don't always notice my feet.

Apr 26, 2012 -- 3:34PM, ProphetKing wrote:

Razor #124

OK but we don't have a chronic lurker victim to put down for his sins.




We have FFP.

Apr 26, 2012 -- 3:34PM, ProphetKing wrote:

Niklor #128

"but saying they referenced themselves as separate from the town is not. "

I actually disagree with this, given that statements like "the town should" imply some level of otherness and I frequently use in every game.




To each his own.

Post #532 by ProphetKing

I've expressed that view on hypocrisy before, Niklor.

Post #533 by Niklor

Apr 26, 2012 -- 10:14PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 26, 2012 -- 3:11PM, Sleeping wrote:

How da do quote blocks work on this site? I should just go back to colored text.

——————————————————————————————

Niklor:
Sleeping & FFP are very much lurking. PK is lurking, but keeps promising content.

Do you actually have a legitimate reason for distinguishing between "FPP & I" and "PK"? A promise of content is still not content, and furthermore I have made the same promise. Singling out PK just seems a little off to me. 


this is a good question. it could just be that people have played with PK and know that he usually contributes, whereas FFP never does and no one has seen you do so, but it's certainly an odd line to draw.




Again, I don't view PK ultimately as the type to lurk so when he promises content I expect it to be delivered. Still, it's an interesting line of thought if you want to pursue it though it ultimately comes down to me being scum. Still, fresh topic to talk about.




Apr 26, 2012 -- 10:14PM, razorborne wrote:

a lot of great stuff in that post, these are just the things I felt required response/comment. anyone who doesn't read it is bad at this game.






This. Very much this.

Post #534 by Niklor

Apr 26, 2012 -- 10:45PM, ProphetKing wrote:

I've expressed that view on hypocrisy before, Niklor.




That was actually something I never read.

And now I feel sheepish about not reading it given how I am attacking those who aren't. 

Post #535 by ProphetKing

I don't really care if you read that entire giant block of text, it's only tangentially related as evidence that I didn't pull that opinion out of my ass on the fly.

Nor do I expect you to have read everything that's existed ever. 

Post #536 by theatog

"Tangentially" is such a PK word. Everytime i see him use it, it makes me smile. it's like his signature. 

Sorry i'm brainfried after a ton hours of magic. Will reread tmr. But I'm glad the constant ticking post count that looks like 20th century human population growth has died down a bit.

Post #537 by theatog

You know what. Just in case there's nothing new to read. I'd like to bring someone else to the town's attention.

Silly strike me as a very clever individual. One thing that really stands out is that he pulls off completely random acts that don't feel dumb. I consider myself to be a very difficult guy to entertain and silly can do just that - he does something unexpected and silly and make me smile with mere forum posts.

What strike me odd in this game is, he seemed excited, posted a lot, but yet almost none of his post in this game employed his usual wit. That's the first sign that ticked me off. Of course this could be nothing, or it could just as well possibly be something outside of this game that causes the change. 

So I swap my vote a few times. and decided to vote on Silly based on the above (yes I don't disagree that it's pretty baseless). Immediately that triggers a (imo) omgus vote and case. Funny thing is that, given his constant presense, there was no case on me vote flinging until I land on him. And I am fairly certain there was a bit of time frame between my vote on nik before moving onto him. (the time frame was my speculation of his lesser-witted half-hearted spams)

His case can be pretty much summarized as "theatog vote with no reasons and he keeps swapping  vote". And honestly I don't mean to downplay it and I would say it's a pretty good day one case. But His case is completely valid even before I move my vote to him. So to me, the fact that the case didn't appear before I voted for him makes it feel like OMGUS.

So now I'd like to give a few thoughts on the current wagons:

Niklor - 2 (Ahlyis, FFP)
theatog - 3 (Silly, Pdr_Br, Sleeping)
FFP - 3 (PK, Niklor, Freddeh)


PK, Fred and nik all expressed individual discontent towards FFP's activity level and attitude. 
Ahlyis and FFP on the other hand is more or less of a please spam less vote. Again I don't see strong association between the two.

Then came Pdr and Sleeping who bandwagon on the first "okay" day one case they can see. They have no personal attachments to the vote. Both, after voting and brainlessly nodding to silly's case go back to their slumber. Basing on that Sleeping is a bit more thoughtful in his late posts, i'd go ahead and 

Unvote. Vote PDR

Pdr, tell us why you are so lurky and what do you think of the current state of the game?
sticking yourself right in the middle of post count is also so suspiciuos : P Show
Niklor - 136
Silly - 95
Freddeh - 41
Theatog - 35
Razorborne - 31
PK - 28
Ahlyis - 20
Shadowfyre - 13
Pdr_Br - 13 <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Sleeping - 10
FFP - 7
Peregrine - 4

Post #538 by Rubik

Vote Count


Niklor - 2 (Ahlyis, FFP)
theatog - 3 (Silly, Pdr_Br, Sleeping)
FFP - 3 (PK, Niklor, Freddeh)
Sleeping - 1 (Razorborne)
Pdr_Br - 2 (Theatog)
Not Voting - 2 (PeregrineV, ShadowFyre)



 

Post #539 by Pdr_Br

Are you accusing me of posting in order to not get prodded, i.e., active lurking? I'm trying to post at least once per day or more depending if something interesting poped up in thread, so eventually I don't respond to everything that happens.

But wasn't you who post this:

Apr 25, 2012 -- 7:07PM, theatog wrote:


"Curbbing antitown behavior" is not wrong. But if it doesn't contribute to moving game forward, it should be done in moderation, which is not the case here. 

Yes everyone should read the thread. Yes everyone should post contents. But at the end of the day, what comes down to is 

WHAT IS EXPECTED of an average player to commit to a game like this. 

I was told to visit the thread once a day. 
How much time to spend during that one time would depend on the person. Probably involve around reading 10-20 posts? (given everyone would visit once a day and 12 players each say roughly 1 thing)
How much time spent reading also depends on the reading speed of the person. (I will volunteer myself as clearly one of the bad and slow reader. It just so happens I have extra time to make up for it.)

And lets face the fact, Niklor you are clearly over the curve. Heck i even consider myself slightly over the curve for checking the thread more than 5 times a day.

I understand that underaverage activities is what hurting Px2 the most. But the answer to that is clearly not overaverage activities from a handful of players. I guess what i'm trying to say is, neither too much or too little is PRO TOWN. As oppose to Raz and Niklor's preaching - "must respond to everything". (Note i'm not preaching the opposite.)

Reading takes time and energy. And when you see 30 posts overnight EVERYday, it's discouraging to catch up. You can't blame the individual just because he can't commit MORE THAN average time to a game.

I honestly hope this is not a scum strategy. IF it is, this behavior is just as equally bad with the players who say they clearly don't spend enough time to play the game. 

I don't want to debate about this topic. All I ask is that people who over commit to please be considerate so that Freddeh, a clearly active and constructive player, can play his normal game and not be turned into FFP. 




I'm also trying to post at least once per day so why do you say I'm lurking?

Apr 26, 2012 -- 9:23AM, theatog wrote:

Pdr, your first post implies that one can only vote by case and further more, one can only choose "best case basing on rebuttal". I don't believe mafia is nothing but a case pageant

ok, in case i'm not clear. I don't mean to be a jerk. when i say "rebuttal", i mean a strictly 1 on 1 interaction. there are other kinds of interactions. everyone can still talk about cases about other people. and in fact i believe those are the content most useful.  

On a differet note. I am seeing the trend here. Why do people keep oversimplifying things and taking things out of context?



Mafia is a game of interactions it is when people make questions and respond to events that we can gauge relations when people start dieing or to analyse if one is town or not. 1 on 1 interactions are important it's due to this type of interactions that we can check for white-knighting and for when scum votes for scum, it also allows to see how players see other players.

If people don't interact then this becomes a game of individuals not a game of groups where one groups try find itself and the other tries to eliminate the first. Basically it's relations and interactions that allow us to speculate people's alignments.

Apr 26, 2012 -- 9:23AM, theatog wrote:

@second post. because 

  1. -day is still long.
  2. -I said multiple times I like my vote on silly for the time being. but I'm not oppose to the idea of switching vote. 
  3. -town bandwagons too. 
  4. - Silly said he hates FoS : P lol


  1. Which means you can vote for other people;
  2. So why not FoS Sleeping instead of unvoting Silly;
  3. So are saying that Sleeping is town? Is that your read on him? If yes what makes you think he is town?
  4. Yes but Silly is not Theatog so it doesn't aplly.

Just to see if I got your case on me right:
  • You say that I'm suspicious because I'm voting for you since I agreed with Silly's case on you;
  • I have posted a total of 13 posts (now 14).

Is there anything else that I miss?


As for when you talk of the first day 1 case you do remember my comments on FFP's case on Niklor, right? It can't be that hard to find since I have only 14 posts in this game.

Post #540 by Silly_Dragons

PK is usually the one to postwhore threads like these (at least when I played a few months ago), but to be completely fair, all the stuff that we've been doing with the boards has taken a ton of time.

Post #541 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 27, 2012 -- 1:45AM, theatog wrote:

You know what. Just in case there's nothing new to read. I'd like to bring someone else to the town's attention.

Silly strike me as a very clever individual. One thing that really stands out is that he pulls off completely random acts that don't feel dumb. I consider myself to be a very difficult guy to entertain and silly can do just that - he does something unexpected and silly and make me smile with mere forum posts.

What strike me odd in this game is, he seemed excited, posted a lot, but yet almost none of his post in this game employed his usual wit. That's the first sign that ticked me off. Of course this could be nothing, or it could just as well possibly be something outside of this game that causes the change.



I don't know if I should be glad that you like my posts, or sad that you don't find them witty this game.


Post #542 by Niklor

Apr 27, 2012 -- 1:45AM, theatog wrote:

You know what. Just in case there's nothing new to read. I'd like to bring someone else to the town's attention.

Silly strike me as a very clever individual. One thing that really stands out is that he pulls off completely random acts that don't feel dumb. I consider myself to be a very difficult guy to entertain and silly can do just that - he does something unexpected and silly and make me smile with mere forum posts.




Silly certainly is silly.

Apr 27, 2012 -- 1:45AM, theatog wrote:

What strike me odd in this game is, he seemed excited, posted a lot, but yet almost none of his post in this game employed his usual wit. That's the first sign that ticked me off. Of course this could be nothing, or it could just as well possibly be something outside of this game that causes the change.




I found Silly to be more witty earlier in the game before day really got going. Could be related to the above average activity level of this game. Not sure if it's something I would vote for.

Apr 27, 2012 -- 1:45AM, theatog wrote:

So I swap my vote a few times. and decided to vote on Silly based on the above (yes I don't disagree that it's pretty baseless). Immediately that triggers a (imo) omgus vote and case. Funny thing is that, given his constant presense, there was no case on me vote flinging until I land on him. And I am fairly certain there was a bit of time frame between my vote on nik before moving onto him. (the time frame was my speculation of his lesser-witted half-hearted spams)[/qute]

Well, to be fair he was trying to out post whore me, not just be witty. At the same time, the case had only one solid point in my mind and, as we've explored your opinions on gut votes throughout part of today, I'm less than sure of that one point now.

Apr 27, 2012 -- 1:45AM, theatog wrote:

His case can be pretty much summarized as "theatog vote with no reasons and he keeps swapping  vote". And honestly I don't mean to downplay it and I would say it's a pretty good day one case. But His case is completely valid even before I move my vote to him. So to me, the fact that the case didn't appear before I voted for him makes it feel like OMGUS.




That is indeed a possibility.

Apr 27, 2012 -- 1:45AM, theatog wrote:

PK, Fred and nik all expressed individual discontent towards FFP's activity level and attitude. 
Ahlyis and FFP on the other hand is more or less of a please spam less vote. Again I don't see strong association between the two.




Ahlyis is on my case about pre-emptively deflecting, not stop spamming.

Apr 27, 2012 -- 1:45AM, theatog wrote:

Then came Pdr and Sleeping who bandwagon on the first "okay" day one case they can see. They have no personal attachments to the vote. Both, after voting and brainlessly nodding to silly's case go back to their slumber. Basing on that Sleeping is a bit more thoughtful in his late posts, i'd go ahead and 

Unvote. Vote PDR




Sleeping is thoughtfully trying to lurk, which is both amusing and troubling. Pdr was previously jut having trouble keeping pace, though I haven't seen as much as I might have expected after he caught up. I should read back and recall why he voted for you.

Post #543 by Niklor

Apr 27, 2012 -- 2:39AM, Pdr_Br wrote:

Are you accusing me of posting in order to not get prodded, i.e., active lurking? I'm trying to post at least once per day or more depending if something interesting poped up in thread, so eventually I don't respond to everything that happens.




Wait, you don't want to respond to everything that happens? Why?

Apr 27, 2012 -- 2:39AM, Pdr_Br wrote:

Mafia is a game of interactions it is when people make questions and respond to events that we can gauge relations when people start dieing or to analyse if one is town or not. 1 on 1 interactions are important it's due to this type of interactions that we can check for white-knighting and for when scum votes for scum, it also allows to see how players see other players.

If people don't interact then this becomes a game of individuals not a game of groups where one groups try find itself and the other tries to eliminate the first. Basically it's relations and interactions that allow us to speculate people's alignments.




Interactions between multiple individuals essentially. It doesn't necessarily just have to be between two.

Post #544 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 27, 2012 -- 8:29AM, Niklor wrote:



I found Silly to be more witty earlier in the game before day really got going. Could be related to the above average activity level of this game. Not sure if it's something I would vote for.



I blame the fact that I've had to do a lot of damn mafia related writing over the past few days, so it's harder to think of good jokes.

Between stuff on the notice board, the faq, and my mafia game, the amount of words I've written is easily:



(I checked, and it's more like 14k)

Post #545 by Niklor

That also happens to be my post count. So wonderful to be able to say that.

Post #546 by Ahlyis

Apr 26, 2012 -- 10:23PM, Niklor wrote:

Apr 26, 2012 -- 2:57PM, Freddeh wrote:

In addition, if it wasn't important enough for you to remember your own argument/discussion was even about, why is it important that I go back and read through it?




Apr 26, 2012 -- 2:55PM, Ahlyis wrote:

Apr 26, 2012 -- 2:47PM, Freddeh wrote:

Because roughly half of the posts are your own? So I'd assume you were actually paying attention when you made them? You could have just said this the FIRST time around instead of us going around in circles.


Agreed.

Niklor, you could've avoided this entire convo by simply saying you didn't remember and/or weren't sure what he would consider important or not.




I generally remember my stance in an argument as opposed to the exact words I used. I know there were posts made that were not just me arguing with other players. Eventually, I will probably have to read back and figure out what I make of today and then I will know they were there.

Again, I thought it was implied I don't recall everything going on. If I could remember everything that happens accurately at every single moment, I wouldn't hasten to respond to these posts as I read them. Otherwise, I wouldn't remember the stance I took on an issue later. Also, I'm not necessarily accurate with order. I might be able to sit here without looking back and recall everything I have argued to a certain degree, mostly whether I was opposed to it or not, but if you ask me when I argued what or when what was said it gets jumbled up a bit until I do a reread. 


Congratulations on completely missing the point! lol

Post #547 by ProphetKing

Imagine if everyone responded to everything and unreadable and echo chamber would be.

High content is good, but eventually you lose your audience if you overpump everything. 

Post #548 by razorborne

Apr 27, 2012 -- 9:59AM, Ahlyis wrote:

Apr 26, 2012 -- 10:23PM, Niklor wrote:

Apr 26, 2012 -- 2:57PM, Freddeh wrote:

In addition, if it wasn't important enough for you to remember your own argument/discussion was even about, why is it important that I go back and read through it?




Apr 26, 2012 -- 2:55PM, Ahlyis wrote:

Apr 26, 2012 -- 2:47PM, Freddeh wrote:

Because roughly half of the posts are your own? So I'd assume you were actually paying attention when you made them? You could have just said this the FIRST time around instead of us going around in circles.


Agreed.

Niklor, you could've avoided this entire convo by simply saying you didn't remember and/or weren't sure what he would consider important or not.




I generally remember my stance in an argument as opposed to the exact words I used. I know there were posts made that were not just me arguing with other players. Eventually, I will probably have to read back and figure out what I make of today and then I will know they were there.

Again, I thought it was implied I don't recall everything going on. If I could remember everything that happens accurately at every single moment, I wouldn't hasten to respond to these posts as I read them. Otherwise, I wouldn't remember the stance I took on an issue later. Also, I'm not necessarily accurate with order. I might be able to sit here without looking back and recall everything I have argued to a certain degree, mostly whether I was opposed to it or not, but if you ask me when I argued what or when what was said it gets jumbled up a bit until I do a reread. 


Congratulations on completely missing the point! lol



congratulations on contributing in a meaningful manner.

 

Post #549 by Ahlyis

Apr 27, 2012 -- 11:42AM, razorborne wrote:

congratulations on contributing in a meaningful manner.

 


Thanks.  Glad I could help.

Post #550 by Pdr_Br


Apr 27, 2012 -- 2:39AM, Pdr_Br wrote:


Are you accusing me of posting in order to not get prodded, i.e., active lurking? I'm trying to post at least once per day or more depending if something interesting popped up in thread, so eventually I don't respond to everything that happens.






Wait, you don't want to respond to everything that happens? Why?




What I meant is that I will try to respond to what I find important and there has been a lot of things here that I didn't felt were important like the long debates about semantics. That is what I wanted to say. That is the reason why I didn't posted all of the things I read when I did the pages recap a while back.

Post #551 by ProphetKing

Silly Dragons has posted 114 times.

I've posted 41 times. (A lot for a "lurker.") 

Peregrine only has 6 posts. QQ.

Hehehe... 

Post #552 by ProphetKing

Posting this in all ongoing games, so people are aware of it: Index Thread (Search and Count Individual Posts). 

Post #553 by theatog

Hey PV. Here to make your seventh post? I prayed to god last night and he promised me you would.

Post #554 by Niklor

Apr 27, 2012 -- 9:59AM, Ahlyis wrote:

Congratulations on completely missing the point! lol




And what was your point?

Post #555 by Niklor

Apr 27, 2012 -- 11:00AM, ProphetKing wrote:

Imagine if everyone responded to everything and unreadable and echo chamber would be.

High content is good, but eventually you lose your audience if you overpump everything. 




Sounds beautiful and I don't share your pessism about what it would become.

Post #556 by Niklor

Apr 27, 2012 -- 11:57AM, Pdr_Br wrote:

What I meant is that I will try to respond to what I find important and there has been a lot of things here that I didn't felt were important like the long debates about semantics. That is what I wanted to say. That is the reason why I didn't posted all of the things I read when I did the pages recap a while back.




While the semantics issue may or may not be important, knowing what was said and how it was said can be vital later in the game, so I'm afraid I disagree with the strategy of not commenting on them because the issue being debated isn't one you personally find important.

Post #557 by Ahlyis

Apr 27, 2012 -- 3:40PM, Niklor wrote:

Apr 27, 2012 -- 9:59AM, Ahlyis wrote:

Congratulations on completely missing the point! lol




And what was your point?


That this whole worthless debate could have been avoided if you'd simply said you didn't remember or didn't know what he would consider important.

Had you said something as simple as either of those, this thread could have been saved 20 or so essentially useless posts (yes, including this one).

Post #558 by Niklor

Apr 27, 2012 -- 3:55PM, Ahlyis wrote:

Apr 27, 2012 -- 3:40PM, Niklor wrote:

Apr 27, 2012 -- 9:59AM, Ahlyis wrote:

Congratulations on completely missing the point! lol




And what was your point?


That this whole worthless debate could have been avoided if you'd simply said you didn't remember or didn't know what he would consider important.

Had you said something as simple as either of those, this thread could have been saved 20 or so essentially useless posts (yes, including this one).




I did see the point and I addressed it. I thought it was implied that I didn't remember exact posts. I'm sorry to dissapoint you on that front, but my memory is finite and I don't remember every post, not even my own. Yes, had I said it maybe Freddeh would never have addressed it, but I don't remember anyone else stepping forward to volunteer a yes or no to his question either.

Also, stop saying posts are useless just because they don't conclude whether someone is scum or town. It's more data for people to look back on later, which will be helpful in some fashion to look for contradictions in what me and players who are likewise responding to me have said.

Post #559 by Ahlyis

Apr 27, 2012 -- 4:04PM, Niklor wrote:

Also, stop saying posts are useless just because they don't conclude whether someone is scum or town. It's more data for people to look back on later, which will be helpful in some fashion to look for contradictions in what me and players who are likewise responding to me have said.


I'm calling posts useless because they are long winded debates about general theory/belief and have NOTHING to do with the actual game.

I don't care whether a post says anything about someone's alignment. I care whether posts in an ongoing debate actually beling in this thread or not. If they're about general Mafia theory, they don't belong here. No, I can't stop you from continuing them here anyway, but I can keep saying that they're useless in this thread for the purpose of this game.

Post #560 by Niklor

If a post says anything about someone's alignment, I don't see why you say it has nothing to do with the actual game.

Post #561 by razorborne

Apr 27, 2012 -- 10:17PM, Niklor wrote:

If a post says anything about someone's alignment, I don't see why you say it has nothing to do with the actual game.



that's not what he said.

 

Post #562 by Feroz-s_Familiar_Pheldy

afaik charismatic roles are more often town than scum
we shouldn't lynch theatog
/discuss

Post #563 by Pdr_Br

Apr 27, 2012 -- 11:29PM, Feroz-s_Familiar_Pheldy wrote:

afaik charismatic roles are more often town than scum
we shouldn't lynch theatog
/discuss




So who should we lynch instead?

Post #564 by Niklor

Apr 27, 2012 -- 11:02PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 27, 2012 -- 10:17PM, Niklor wrote:

If a post says anything about someone's alignment, I don't see why you say it has nothing to do with the actual game.



that's not what he said.

 




What he said was two statements. I combined them into what I see as the logical truth because even if no one else's posts reveal anything about them, I somehow doubt I am unable to avoid letting it slip in at some point, especially as my posts fall farther and farther behind me into more and more obscured memory.

Post #565 by Niklor

Apr 27, 2012 -- 11:29PM, Feroz-s_Familiar_Pheldy wrote:

afaik charismatic roles are more often town than scum
we shouldn't lynch theatog
/discuss




Theatog is not lurking so regardless of whether or not he is deemed to be the best lynch, he isn't.

Is the only reason you think we shouldn't lynch Theatog based on the fact he is a known charismatic or do you believe the case against him is bad?

BTW, why should I unvote you as you are clearly still being the best at lurking?

Post #566 by theatog

Apr 27, 2012 -- 11:29PM, Feroz-s_Familiar_Pheldy wrote:

afaik charismatic roles are more often town than scum
we shouldn't lynch theatog
/discuss




So who should we lynch instead?




People who bandwagon on the somewhat-valid (for day 1 standard) but nowhere-near-good case. 

I would also put silly under the microscope. But apparently he and I are not in the best terms (as in I have been accusing of him not playing normally) in this game so far so it's probably not my position to say much about him. after the early 300 post-frenzy period, he seems to have reverted to usual silly again. But whether or not the reason that happened is because of me calling that out is also still somewhat suspicious to me.

Sleeping votes, abeit some wifom involved, seems too bad even to be a newbie vote. he obvious lurks. he's obviously not really trying in terms of voting and scumhunt. But I am no longer sure how much "leeway" we should give him as for him being new.

Then there's pdr. I'm ok with his response after I voted for him. I also reread most of his post, thanks to PK's amazing tool. And he doesn't sound particular scummy.

And no. i just realize this is directed to FFP.  I'm not answering for FFP. FFP do your own answerings.

Post #567 by Niklor

FFP should answer questions directed at him, though I find it a strange that you are the one advocating he answer, Theatog.

The newbie card is issued to terrible players who are new. Sleeping, though what he is doing is clearly going to annoy people as they are forced to force him to contribute or lynch him, is not playing terribly. He is choosing to lurk, though since we seem to be able to force content from him I'd rather lynch FFP before him.

For most of you, I can just look up your recent posts. I'm not saying PK's tool isn't useful, just that there exists a poor substitute for it in place that functions decently most of the time.

If Silly intentionally changed up how he is playing, he probably needs to be lynched. Town can worry about being lynched, but if he is called out on his playstyle and then changes it, it seems suspicious to me because scum worry about the pressure on them and doing something just to take pressure off of you should be seen as such. Not refuting accussations and the like, but actually getting called out for something and then changing it later.

I'm not sure what you're talking about however. I haven't noticed Silly playing in a manner that was abnormal for him. Also, it seems more like you'd rather not put Silly under the microscope and are making excuses that justify that position. Why does it matter what you think of each other? Put him under the microscope and tell us what you think.

Post #568 by Silly_Dragons

Sorry for not being really active.

I spent almost all of yesterday afterschool putting finishing touches on the mafia game I am hosting. Today I spent like 9 hours playing Avacyn Restored. And tomorrow I will not be at home.

So I'm probably going to spend tonight getting my mafia game up and running, and either tomorrow night or monday reading this thread.

Post #569 by PeregrineV

Prodded with a stick.

Sorry to be less active than usual, just have a lot of non-mafia right now.

Also, in advance will be out-of-town all next weekend. 

Post #570 by Feroz-s_Familiar_Pheldy

geez, it has been less than 24 hours since my last post, give me some time to respond.

Apr 28, 2012 -- 2:41AM, Pdr_Br wrote:

Apr 27, 2012 -- 11:29PM, Feroz-s_Familiar_Pheldy wrote:

afaik charismatic roles are more often town than scum
we shouldn't lynch theatog
/discuss




So who should we lynch instead?



Niklor obvobvobv

Apr 28, 2012 -- 8:42AM, Niklor wrote:

Apr 27, 2012 -- 11:29PM, Feroz-s_Familiar_Pheldy wrote:

afaik charismatic roles are more often town than scum
we shouldn't lynch theatog
/discuss




Theatog is not lurking so regardless of whether or not he is deemed to be the best lynch, he isn't.

Is the only reason you think we shouldn't lynch Theatog based on the fact he is a known charismatic or do you believe the case against him is bad?

BTW, why should I unvote you as you are clearly still being the best at lurking?



first, I'm unaware of any "case" against theatog.
I act based on the fact that he is currently IN THE VOTING LEAD AND ABOUT TO GET LYNCHED
@ BTW: am not

Post #571 by razorborne

Apr 28, 2012 -- 10:12PM, Feroz-s_Familiar_Pheldy wrote:

first, I'm unaware of any "case" against theatog.



that's only because you aren't reading the thread.

 

Post #572 by Feroz-s_Familiar_Pheldy

Apr 28, 2012 -- 10:33PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 28, 2012 -- 10:12PM, Feroz-s_Familiar_Pheldy wrote:

first, I'm unaware of any "case" against theatog.



that's only because you aren't reading the thread.

 



I've read parts of it, but I got nightmares from niklors avatar picture.
I try to keep up to date from now on though.
and I'll tortue myself now by searching for this "theatog"-case

Post #573 by Ragnarokio

Vote Count

Niklor - 2 (Ahlyis, FFP)
theatog - 3 (Silly, Pdr_Br, Sleeping)
FFP - 3 (PK, Niklor, Freddeh)
Sleeping - 1 (Razorborne)
Pdr_Br - 2 (Theatog)
Not Voting - 2 (PeregrineV, ShadowFyre)


Deadline: ~5 days, 1 hour

Post Count (not completely accurate)

Niklor - 136
Silly - 95
Freddeh - 41
Theatog - 35
Razorborne - 31
PK - 28
Ahlyis - 20
Shadowfyre - 13
Pdr_Br - 13
Sleeping - 10
FFP - 7
Peregrine - 4

Prodding...

FFP in 64 hours
Razorborne in 62 hours
Peregrine in 62 hours
Silly in 59 hours
Niklor in 55 hours
Theatog in 55 hours
Pdr in 42 hours
Ahlyis in 36 hours
PK in 35 hours
Shadowfyre in 15 hours
Sleeping in 9 hours
Freddeh in 9 hours

Post #574 by Ahlyis

Are we back to playing musical avatars?  Or is there some other reason Rag stole Silly's avatar?

As for this game, Niklor is a bad lynch if you want to lynch a lurker.  I still think he is a good lynch if you want to lynch scum though.

Post #575 by Niklor

Apr 28, 2012 -- 9:51PM, PeregrineV wrote:

Prodded with a stick.

Sorry to be less active than usual, just have a lot of non-mafia right now.

Also, in advance will be out-of-town all next weekend. 




So ask to replace out if you don't have the time to play. 

Post #576 by Niklor

Apr 28, 2012 -- 10:12PM, Feroz-s_Familiar_Pheldy wrote:

Apr 28, 2012 -- 8:42AM, Niklor wrote:

Apr 27, 2012 -- 11:29PM, Feroz-s_Familiar_Pheldy wrote:

afaik charismatic roles are more often town than scum
we shouldn't lynch theatog
/discuss




Theatog is not lurking so regardless of whether or not he is deemed to be the best lynch, he isn't.

Is the only reason you think we shouldn't lynch Theatog based on the fact he is a known charismatic or do you believe the case against him is bad?

BTW, why should I unvote you as you are clearly still being the best at lurking?



first, I'm unaware of any "case" against theatog.
I act based on the fact that he is currently IN THE VOTING LEAD AND ABOUT TO GET LYNCHED
@ BTW: am not




The case was made by Silly a while back.

Saying you think we shouldn't lynch someone because they are in the lead to get lynched is not a reason. Do you think we shouldn't lynch Theatog because he is a charismatic and just because of that?

If you keep responding like this, no you're not.

Unvote; Vote: Sleeping 

Post #577 by Niklor

Apr 29, 2012 -- 12:29AM, Feroz-s_Familiar_Pheldy wrote:

Apr 28, 2012 -- 10:33PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 28, 2012 -- 10:12PM, Feroz-s_Familiar_Pheldy wrote:

first, I'm unaware of any "case" against theatog.



that's only because you aren't reading the thread.

 



I've read parts of it, but I got nightmares from niklors avatar picture.
I try to keep up to date from now on though.
and I'll tortue myself now by searching for this "theatog"-case




You should read Nerf-This the Webcomic. My avatar becomes less scary and more humorous at that point.

Again, the case was made by Silly. 

Post #578 by Niklor

Apr 29, 2012 -- 10:08AM, Ahlyis wrote:

Are we back to playing musical avatars?  Or is there some other reason Rag stole Silly's avatar?

As for this game, Niklor is a bad lynch if you want to lynch a lurker.  I still think he is a good lynch if you want to lynch scum though.




I must respectfully disagree with you on your second point. You are spot on in the fact that I am not a good lurker lynch though.

Wasn't Rag using a different Haruhi Suzumiya avatar? 

Post #579 by shadowfyre77

rag now has the same avatar as silly has/had whatever and made me confused

also @ffp why are we to lynch niklor? 

Post #580 by Freddeh

Note to Mod/Players: I'm going to be out of town from this Thursday til Monday, I should have varying levels of internet access on my laptop, but I won't be active over that weekend. Fortunately it should be night so yeah.

Also, I agree with Nik in that PV should probably ask to be replaced, he doesn't have time for more than one game right now.

This game needs more bandwagon and less people at 2-3 votes apiece.

Post #581 by Rubik

Apr 29, 2012 -- 2:02PM, Freddeh wrote:

Note to Mod/Players: I'm going to be out of town from this Thursday til Monday, I should have varying levels of internet access on my laptop, but I won't be active over that weekend. Fortunately it should be night so yeah.


Noted.

Post #582 by Feroz-s_Familiar_Pheldy

Apr 29, 2012 -- 11:16AM, Niklor wrote:



The case was made by Silly a while back.

Saying you think we shouldn't lynch someone because they are in the lead to get lynched is not a reason. Do you think we shouldn't lynch Theatog because he is a charismatic and just because of that?



this isn't the sole reason why we shouldn't lynch theatog. I think theatog has good reasoning, especially in his assessment of you. i think the case on him is bullshit (found it in the meantime). silly basically accuses him of switching his targets too often and not remain coherent in his voting habits. other people (like you) have also thrown around feces at almost everyone, just not backed up by actual votes and I for myself only count the vote that remains at the end of day (especially in early game, in lylo, the case is different)

Apr 29, 2012 -- 1:36PM, shadowfyre77 wrote:

rag now has the same avatar as silly has/had whatever and made me confused

also @ffp why are we to lynch niklor? 



because he is using the perfect ploy to get super town-pants while hindering the town in their scum-hunting by spamming the thread into unreadability

Post #583 by theatog

Apr 29, 2012 -- 2:02PM, Freddeh wrote:

Note to Mod/Players: I'm going to be out of town from this Thursday til Monday, I should have varying levels of internet access on my laptop, but I won't be active over that weekend. Fortunately it should be night so yeah.

Also, I agree with Nik in that PV should probably ask to be replaced, he doesn't have time for more than one game right now.

This game needs more bandwagon and less people at 2-3 votes apiece.


Actually given the activity level in this thread. the lack of big wagon to me speaks scum in is the pool. Although It IS generally true for every 4 players, there's one scum on average.

Sorry i'm not saying anything too much useful.

I support the lynch of Niklor and Sleeping.

Niklor for similar reason FFP stated. Also imo, if Silly is playing scum silly (extra less-than-par (intellectual-wise) activities), then I see the interaction between Silly and Niklor very scummy. It's just gut feeling, you know when people are having fun, then on the side they laugh at the game in their own thread.

Sleeping for obvious bandwagon vote as I stated before. 

Really not a lot of meaning ful posts despite of the level of activities. Lots of "i'm coming back soon" or I will post later" from freddeh, PV, PK. Ahlyis pops sometimes, say something not very relevant, then treasure his niklor-vote.

Nik, Why are you voting for FFP? If it was attitude/ activity level issues, I think he's picking up. 

Post #584 by Feroz-s_Familiar_Pheldy

Apr 29, 2012 -- 2:34PM, theatog wrote:


Nik, Why are you voting for FFP? If it was attitude/ activity level issues, I think he's picking up. 



he already changed his vote away from me  and unto sleeping

Post #585 by razorborne

Apr 29, 2012 -- 2:14PM, Feroz-s_Familiar_Pheldy wrote:

because he is using the perfect ploy to get super town-pants while hindering the town in their scum-hunting by spamming the thread into unreadability



I'm at school 9 hours a day, study, maintain a social life, and work on my band, and I have no issue keeping up with the thread's activity levels. it's not unreadable, you just don't like reading.

 

Post #586 by Niklor

Apr 29, 2012 -- 2:14PM, Feroz-s_Familiar_Pheldy wrote:

Apr 29, 2012 -- 11:16AM, Niklor wrote:



The case was made by Silly a while back.

Saying you think we shouldn't lynch someone because they are in the lead to get lynched is not a reason. Do you think we shouldn't lynch Theatog because he is a charismatic and just because of that?



this isn't the sole reason why we shouldn't lynch theatog. I think theatog has good reasoning, especially in his assessment of you. i think the case on him is bullshit (found it in the meantime). silly basically accuses him of switching his targets too often and not remain coherent in his voting habits. other people (like you) have also thrown around feces at almost everyone, just not backed up by actual votes and I for myself only count the vote that remains at the end of day (especially in early game, in lylo, the case is different)




You're right. Every single time I accuse anyone of anything no matter what it is I should throw my vote after it. Alternatively, maybe I could just vote and then keep my vote unless something that is more lynch worthy then that appears.

On your reasons for advocating people not to lynch Theatog, Silly's case was weaksauce. However, the fact you agree with points he has made makes you not want to lynch him has more to do with pushing your own agenda. That is how it seems to me. You could just say that you don't want to lynch Theatog because you want to lynch me.

Apr 29, 2012 -- 2:14PM, Feroz-s_Familiar_Pheldy wrote:

Apr 29, 2012 -- 1:36PM, shadowfyre77 wrote:

rag now has the same avatar as silly has/had whatever and made me confused

also @ffp why are we to lynch niklor? 



because he is using the perfect ploy to get super town-pants while hindering the town in their scum-hunting by spamming the thread into unreadability




The thread is hardly unreadable.

Neither is how I'm playing a ploy. 

Post #587 by Niklor

Apr 29, 2012 -- 2:34PM, theatog wrote:

Actually given the activity level in this thread. the lack of big wagon to me speaks scum in is the pool. Although It IS generally true for every 4 players, there's one scum on average.




It depends on which four players. Could be that scum don't want to tip their hand by working in agreement.

Apr 29, 2012 -- 2:34PM, theatog wrote:

I support the lynch of Niklor and Sleeping.

Niklor for similar reason FFP stated. Also imo, if Silly is playing scum silly (extra less-than-par (intellectual-wise) activities), then I see the interaction between Silly and Niklor very scummy. It's just gut feeling, you know when people are having fun, then on the side they laugh at the game in their own thread.




I should make it a point to always play this way then, just to annoy the crap out of people who can't read.

I'm not saying scum can't have fun, just that the correlation that players having fun means they are having a private laugh at something else is one of the stupidest things I've heard of late. Especially since if you aren't playing to have fun why are you playing?

Apr 29, 2012 -- 2:34PM, theatog wrote:

Sleeping for obvious bandwagon vote as I stated before.




You're completely fine with him lurking?

Apr 29, 2012 -- 2:34PM, theatog wrote:

Really not a lot of meaning ful posts despite of the level of activities. Lots of "i'm coming back soon" or I will post later" from freddeh, PV, PK. Ahlyis pops sometimes, say something not very relevant, then treasure his niklor-vote.

Nik, Why are you voting for FFP? If it was attitude/ activity level issues, I think he's picking up. 




As FFP has already addressed, I am not presently.

Post #588 by theatog

I am having fun, exactly when I try to pick apart the psychology underneath the interactions of fellow players. I have to loosely state anything I find true myself just so some other people, who call me baseless, can stomach the idea easier. : D

In that sense, Finding a good way to word things is also fun for me. 

---------------------------------------------------------

About the sleeping issue. Yes, I have more problem with him bandwagoning than lurking


As you've said earlier as well, he chose to lurk and explained his lurking. But bandwagoning is a completely different story. Like he piss on all of the "urban legends" (around here) just for fun -> 1) he threw a vote on someone else's case with no new jurisdiction of his own, 2) he voted the "third" on wagon, and 3) he mentioned his joke vote when he voted. 

Most player I know around here would somewhat tiptoe about these somewhat sensitive areas. But no, he goes right there and also parades the fact that he's also lurking. The only reason I think i'm not voting for him yet is that that just way too text-book-scum.

in fact, I think we need a more serious wagon right about now : D 
Unvote, Vote: Nik
I promise there are some methods to my seemingly craziness.

Post #589 by razorborne

Apr 29, 2012 -- 6:54PM, theatog wrote:

As you've said earlier as well, he chose to lurk and explained his lurking. But bandwagoning is a completely different story. Like he piss on all of the "urban legends" (around here) just for fun -> 1) he threw a vote on someone else's case with no new jurisdiction of his own, 2) he voted the "third" on wagon, and 3) he mentioned his joke vote when he voted. 

Most player I know around here would somewhat tiptoe about these somewhat sensitive areas. But no, he goes right there and also parades the fact that he's also lurking. The only reason I think i'm not voting for him yet is that that just way too text-book-scum.





Post #590 by Niklor

Apr 29, 2012 -- 6:54PM, theatog wrote:

About the sleeping issue. Yes, I have more problem with him bandwagoning than lurking




You're not concerned about lurkers?

Apr 29, 2012 -- 6:54PM, theatog wrote:

in fact, I think we need a more serious wagon right about now : D 
Unvote, Vote: Nik
I promise there are some methods to my seemingly craziness.




So if you think Sleeping is a case of textbook scum, why am I the one you vote for?

Also, as you seem to agree with FFP, I don't see why you call your own methods mad. I think bandwagoning on me based on FFP's reasoning, which I believe is the reason you find me suspicious (correct me if I'm wrong), is a little off though. While I find it hard for someone to call being an above active member in terms of posting scum, I find it even harder to imagine someone bandwagoning based on that. 

Post #591 by Sleeping

Sorry I wasn't posting, prerelease weekend (these are Magic forums after all) along with some family & friend things were keeping me busy.


I want to call into question razorborne.

His vote on me has persisted the entire game if I recall correctly. But the vote feels detached, like he's off arguing about whether it is a good idea to lynch lurkers and other nonsense (it almost feels like he is contributing and not contributing at the same time.) I must ask, why me? There are people in this game who have posted less than me, and people who haven't even voted even though we approach the last five "days" of day one. I feel like he attacked me in the first place just because I'm a safe target, nobody was going to tell him that it was a lousy vote because I said things that sounded obviously stupid and scummy. His vendetta against lurkers (which is justified) gave him an additional safety net since I was lurking at the time after all. I feel like he kept his vote because changing it would simply make it seem like he was trying to go after an easy target and it was unsucessful so he went on to try something else, rather than legitimately believing me to be mafia.

What really bothers me about razorborne though is he is going around crowning other posts saying that they contain wise information, probably hoping some of the feeling of allignment of ProphetKing and pd_r will rub off on him. I did the same thing hoping someone would bite and point out what a stupid behavior it was, and razorborne jumped on my post and dismissed the whole thing by refering to my theatog vote as a lurker bandwagon vote (which is a fair assumption to make, it just felt though as if he were trying to get people to dismiss my post in whole.) It does not need to be pointed out that certain posts are good or certain players have good things to say, if people are reading the thread (as they should be) they will see them anyways, and people should be left to come to their own conclusions on the validity of the words in such posts. Making claims like (paraphrasing here) "If you don't pay attention to this post you really aren't playing correctly." just makes it seem like you are trying to piggy back on somebody else's glory.

unvote
vote: razorborne 

Post #592 by Rubik

Vote Count


Niklor - 4 (Ahlyis, FFP, Theatog)
theatog - 2 (Silly, Pdr_Br)
FFP - 2 (PK, Freddeh)
Sleeping - 2 (Razorborne, Niklor)
razorborne - 1 (Sleeping)
Not Voting - 2 (PeregrineV, ShadowFyre)

Post #593 by razorborne

Apr 29, 2012 -- 7:25PM, Sleeping wrote:

There are people in this game who have posted less than me, and people who haven't even voted even though we approach the last five "days" of day one.


like who? Pere? that's pretty much the only person who's as non-participatory, and he's almost inactive. even FFP's doing better than you right now. and five days is a lot of time. people should be voting, but more importantly they should be contributing. and on the list of people who need to do more of that, you can't deny you're pretty close to the top. 

Apr 29, 2012 -- 7:25PM, Sleeping wrote:

razorborne jumped on my post and dismissed the whole thing by refering to my theatog vote as a lurker bandwagon vote (which is a fair assumption to make, it just felt though as if he were trying to get people to dismiss my post in whole.)


it's not an assumption, it's a fact. you were lurking, and you bandwagoned. 

Apr 29, 2012 -- 7:25PM, Sleeping wrote:

It does not need to be pointed out that certain posts are good or certain players have good things to say, if people are reading the thread (as they should be) they will see them anyways, and people should be left to come to their own conclusions on the validity of the words in such posts. Making claims like (paraphrasing here) "If you don't pay attention to this post you really aren't playing correctly." just makes it seem like you are trying to piggy back on somebody else's glory.


you'd think so, but multiple players this game have made it very clear they are not interested in actually reading the thread, so pointing out which things they absolutely need to read, especially since those posts tend to be long, and long posts are like kryptonite to bad players.

Post #594 by Pdr_Br

Posting to say that I won't have the time to comment on things today and possible tomorrow so I'll certainly only post Wednesday.

Post #595 by Ahlyis

Apr 29, 2012 -- 8:18PM, razorborne wrote:

multiple players this game have made it very clear they are not interested in actually reading the thread


Are you lumping me into that group?

That's a serious question btw.

Post #596 by Niklor

Apr 29, 2012 -- 7:25PM, Sleeping wrote:

I want to call into question razorborne.

His vote on me has persisted the entire game if I recall correctly. But the vote feels detached, like he's off arguing about whether it is a good idea to lynch lurkers and other nonsense (it almost feels like he is contributing and not contributing at the same time.) I must ask, why me? There are people in this game who have posted less than me, and people who haven't even voted even though we approach the last five "days" of day one. I feel like he attacked me in the first place just because I'm a safe target, nobody was going to tell him that it was a lousy vote because I said things that sounded obviously stupid and scummy. His vendetta against lurkers (which is justified) gave him an additional safety net since I was lurking at the time after all. I feel like he kept his vote because changing it would simply make it seem like he was trying to go after an easy target and it was unsucessful so he went on to try something else, rather than legitimately believing me to be mafia.




And if lurker lynching was about catching scum and not preventing everyone, scum included, from lurker, that would matter. I'm not saying Razorborne isn't attacking lurkers because he is scum, as it's certainly a possibility, but the point of a policy lynch is to get rid of a problem from all games by making it a lynchable offense to do so. So, we need to lynch a lurker.

Apr 29, 2012 -- 7:25PM, Sleeping wrote:

What really bothers me about razorborne though is he is going around crowning other posts saying that they contain wise information, probably hoping some of the feeling of allignment of ProphetKing and pd_r will rub off on him. I did the same thing hoping someone would bite and point out what a stupid behavior it was, and razorborne jumped on my post and dismissed the whole thing by refering to my theatog vote as a lurker bandwagon vote (which is a fair assumption to make, it just felt though as if he were trying to get people to dismiss my post in whole.) It does not need to be pointed out that certain posts are good or certain players have good things to say, if people are reading the thread (as they should be) they will see them anyways, and people should be left to come to their own conclusions on the validity of the words in such posts. Making claims like (paraphrasing here) "If you don't pay attention to this post you really aren't playing correctly." just makes it seem like you are trying to piggy back on somebody else's glory.




May I be so bold as to mention how insightful this insight is?

Not sure of the validity of it. People like to agree with others, so that may be all of what Razor is doing. However you do make an excellent point against his actions and you certainly have moved out of lurkerdom for the moment.

Unvote; Vote SF 

Post #597 by Ahlyis

Apr 30, 2012 -- 10:28AM, Niklor wrote:

May I be so bold as to mention how insightful this insight is?

Not sure of the validity of it. People like to agree with others, so that may be all of what Razor is doing. However you do make an excellent point against his actions and you certainly have moved out of lurkerdom for the moment.


Seconded.  That was actually a very good post by Sleeping.

Post #598 by Niklor

Apr 29, 2012 -- 8:18PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 29, 2012 -- 7:25PM, Sleeping wrote:

There are people in this game who have posted less than me, and people who haven't even voted even though we approach the last five "days" of day one.


like who? Pere? that's pretty much the only person who's as non-participatory, and he's almost inactive. even FFP's doing better than you right now. and five days is a lot of time. people should be voting, but more importantly they should be contributing. and on the list of people who need to do more of that, you can't deny you're pretty close to the top.




I do enjoy it when he makes a post, though.

Apr 29, 2012 -- 8:18PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 29, 2012 -- 7:25PM, Sleeping wrote:

razorborne jumped on my post and dismissed the whole thing by refering to my theatog vote as a lurker bandwagon vote (which is a fair assumption to make, it just felt though as if he were trying to get people to dismiss my post in whole.)


it's not an assumption, it's a fact. you were lurking, and you bandwagoned.




Bandwagoning, despite beliefs, is not a sin.

However, Sleeping was/is lurking and did bandwagon onto Theatog, albeit it in a manner that didn't move his vote.

Apr 29, 2012 -- 8:18PM, razorborne wrote:

Apr 29, 2012 -- 7:25PM, Sleeping wrote:

It does not need to be pointed out that certain posts are good or certain players have good things to say, if people are reading the thread (as they should be) they will see them anyways, and people should be left to come to their own conclusions on the validity of the words in such posts. Making claims like (paraphrasing here) "If you don't pay attention to this post you really aren't playing correctly." just makes it seem like you are trying to piggy back on somebody else's glory.


you'd think so, but multiple players this game have made it very clear they are not interested in actually reading the thread, so pointing out which things they absolutely need to read, especially since those posts tend to be long, and long posts are like kryptonite to bad players.




I feel a little like arguing against that for some reason, mostly because you are calling people bad players. Unfortunately, I agree that it is playing poorly to not read the thread in its entirety. Still, too much slander in calling anyone a bad player.

Also, stop coddling them. 

Post #599 by Niklor

Apr 30, 2012 -- 9:56AM, Ahlyis wrote:

Apr 29, 2012 -- 8:18PM, razorborne wrote:

multiple players this game have made it very clear they are not interested in actually reading the thread


Are you lumping me into that group?

That's a serious question btw.




I would.

Don't know about Razor. 

Post #600 by Ahlyis

Apr 30, 2012 -- 10:35AM, Niklor wrote:

Apr 30, 2012 -- 9:56AM, Ahlyis wrote:

Apr 29, 2012 -- 8:18PM, razorborne wrote:

multiple players this game have made it very clear they are not interested in actually reading the thread


Are you lumping me into that group?

That's a serious question btw.




I would.

Don't know about Razor. 


Yeah well, I'm already voting for you anyway.

Post #601 by Silly_Dragons

Alright, I finally have a good chunk of time to dedicate to this game again.

Lets see what I missed (if I missed anything else, feel free to bring stuff to my attention, and I'll give my comments or whatever). Seperate thoughts will be prefaced with a bullet point, in case you really have to skim or whatever.

  • PK starts posting again, although he is sort of taking a back seat and is not dominating and comanding the discussion.
  • Atog sort of responds to my vote on him in a reasonable manner. (post 537, seen below)

Apr 27, 2012 -- 1:45AM, theatog wrote:

You know what. Just in case there's nothing new to read. I'd like to bring someone else to the town's attention.

Silly strike me as a very clever individual. One thing that really stands out is that he pulls off completely random acts that don't feel dumb. I consider myself to be a very difficult guy to entertain and silly can do just that - he does something unexpected and silly and make me smile with mere forum posts.

What strike me odd in this game is, he seemed excited, posted a lot, but yet almost none of his post in this game employed his usual wit. That's the first sign that ticked me off. Of course this could be nothing, or it could just as well possibly be something outside of this game that causes the change.

So I swap my vote a few times. and decided to vote on Silly based on the above (yes I don't disagree that it's pretty baseless). Immediately that triggers a (imo) omgus vote and case. Funny thing is that, given his constant presense, there was no case on me vote flinging until I land on him. And I am fairly certain there was a bit of time frame between my vote on nik before moving onto him. (the time frame was my speculation of his lesser-witted half-hearted spams)




To respond to this, I would point out that I did question your behavior beforehand (see posts around 240-300). For instance, I pointed out your weird "I'm pushing Niklor's wagon" followed by "immediately unvote" in post 244. I question everybody's behavior when I see it, if I find fault with it.

However, I normally let those things pass and bring them up later if I feel they are relevant. And then you just happened to go and do like fifty billion things that were backed by questionable reasoning at best. At that point, I sort of felt like I had enough evidence to go "Hey you. What you're doing isn't cool man.", and call you out on it. You of course did seriously respond to my post in quite a while, which sort of provided more justification to my cause, at least in my eyes, because what good townie doesn't talk about cases? Mokusatsu is a mafia tactic.

  • Atog jumps to PDR. I don't really know what to currently make of this. I guess it's something I have to note for later.
  • More irrelevant banter between Niklor and Ahlyis. Nothing important happened there, right?
  • FFP points out that charismatic is generally town. Imo, that hasn't been true in quite a long time. In the games that I've played, charismatic roles have generally been divided pretty evenly between town and mafia. Saying that his role as charismatic basically makes him town is not a valid statement, at least when taken alone. For example, whenever somebody brings up "outguess the mod" arguments like these, I remember one of the games that ran when I was still new here. The game I'm referencing is Zoolander Mafia, where Zoolander was mafia aligned charismatic. He was acting super scummy (like, super super scummy), but nobody lynched him because he was the main character and a charismatic so he was obviously town right? He wasn't, and town lost horribly because of it.


Apr 28, 2012 -- 3:07PM, theatog wrote:


I would also put silly under the microscope. But apparently he and I are not in the best terms (as in I have been accusing of him not playing normally) in this game so far so it's probably not my position to say much about him. after the early 300 post-frenzy period, he seems to have reverted to usual silly again. But whether or not the reason that happened is because of me calling that out is also still somewhat suspicious to me.




I think I've stated this already, but my activity generally depends on how busy I am. When I have nothing to do, I get bored and post a lot, and when I am busy I don't post very much. Like last weekend I literally had no time between homework, extracurriculars, and the Avacyn Restored prerelease. I just had a lot of free time before, because I didn't have any school work or other commitments.

This post is getting kind of long. More stuff coming in the next post.

Post #602 by Silly_Dragons

Apr 28, 2012 -- 10:12PM, Feroz-s_Familiar_Pheldy wrote:

geez, it has been less than 24 hours since my last post, give me some time to respond.

Apr 28, 2012 -- 2:41AM, Pdr_Br wrote:

Apr 27, 2012 -- 11:29PM, Feroz-s_Familiar_Pheldy wrote:

afaik charismatic roles are more often town than scum
we shouldn't lynch theatog
/discuss




So who should we lynch instead?



Niklor obvobvobv




Some more elaboration on this point would be nice if you haven't done so already. (As of writing this post I haven't read any of the other posts after this)

Apr 28, 2012 -- 10:12PM, Feroz-s_Familiar_Pheldy wrote:


Apr 28, 2012 -- 8:42AM, Niklor wrote:

Apr 27, 2012 -- 11:29PM, Feroz-s_Familiar_Pheldy wrote:

afaik charismatic roles are more often town than scum
we shouldn't lynch theatog
/discuss




Theatog is not lurking so regardless of whether or not he is deemed to be the best lynch, he isn't.

Is the only reason you think we shouldn't lynch Theatog based on the fact he is a known charismatic or do you believe the case against him is bad?

BTW, why should I unvote you as you are clearly still being the best at lurking?



first, I'm unaware of any "case" against theatog.
I act based on the fact that he is currently IN THE VOTING LEAD AND ABOUT TO GET LYNCHED
@ BTW: am not



I posted a case a while back about atog. Also, "in the voting lead and about to be lynched" is a really big stretch, considering he was only at 3 votes and we still have like an entire week to discuss before the deadline.

Apr 29, 2012 -- 10:08AM, Ahlyis wrote:

Are we back to playing musical avatars?  Or is there some other reason Rag stole Silly's avatar?



I changed back to Haruhi because it's relevant to the flavor of the game I'm running. I presume that Rag did the same, since he's my BuM, though it really bothers me as well.

  • Niklor wagon being developed due to spamming the thread too much? I think I'm reading this right. I do agree that Niklor is being too caught up in every little debate, even those that don't need to be debated and are pointless to the game, but I don't see it as something that would by itself constitute as lynchworthy. (Also, atog is serious about the wagon this time!)
  • I do agree with Razor's post in 589. Atog's previous post is basically all WIFOM.

More later.

Post #603 by Silly_Dragons

  • Sleeping brings a case on Razor. I've read it, but I'll wait here for the responses to develop a bit further before I pass any judgment. (This statement is partially addressed to Niklor. If one player is accusing another player or asking him a question, a lot of the time its better to let the two people talk for a bit instead of cutting in and talking about everything. This isn't new btw, there are plenty of instances early D1 where you lept to somebody's defense even before they responded. You don't need to talk about everything right away. Just hit the key points when they are relevant.)
  • As far as the subject of lurkers goes, most players are at least making some effort to contribute. Sleeping just made his case, FFP is posting. And I guess (maybe?) you could say that SF is trying? Though his posts have been largely incoherent to me.
  • Niklor and Ahl posts that don't really say that much, and then page 15 (40 ppp) ends.

I think that covers about everything that I've missed. Once again, if I somehow neglected something, bring it up please.

Post #604 by Silly_Dragons

As far as lurkers go btw, another Rag post with his helpful post count thing would be really useful.

Or if somebody else has PK's tool installed, can they do a post count and post it?

Post #605 by Ragnarokio

Vote Count


Niklor - 4 (Ahlyis, FFP, Theatog)
theatog - 2 (Silly, Pdr_Br)
FFP - 2 (PK, Freddeh)
Sleeping - 2 (Razorborne, Niklor)
razorborne - 1 (Sleeping)
Not Voting - 2 (PeregrineV, ShadowFyre)


Deadline: ~3 days, 19 hours

Post Count (not completely accurate)

Niklor - 161
Silly - 103
Freddeh - 42
Theatog - 41
Razorborne - 37
PK - 34
Ahlyis - 28
Shadowfyre - 14
Pdr_Br - 17
Sleeping - 11
FFP - 13
Peregrine - 5

Prodding...

Silly in 71 hours
Ahlyis in 67 hours
Niklor in 67 hours
Pdr_Br in 60  hours
Razorborne in 53 hours
Sleeping in 52 hours
Theatog in 52 hours
FFP in 48 hours
Freddeh in 48 hours
Shadowfyre in 47 hours
Peregrine in 32 hours
PK in 5 hours

Post #606 by ProphetKing

Post #607 by Silly_Dragons

PK your links go to C://Users/Dennis/Downloads.

As in, they lead to somewhere on your computer that we can't access. I'm not sure if that was intentional or not.

Post #608 by ProphetKing

Nah, the link copying was incidental to just the count.

 

Post #609 by razorborne

Apr 30, 2012 -- 9:56AM, Ahlyis wrote:

Apr 29, 2012 -- 8:18PM, razorborne wrote:

multiple players this game have made it very clear they are not interested in actually reading the thread


Are you lumping me into that group?

That's a serious question btw.



not really. I mean, I'm not psychic so I don't know how much you're actually reading but the impression I got from you was that you were reading everything except a couple specific things.

 

Post #610 by razorborne

also, Pere seems pretty much inactive.

 

Post #611 by Feroz-s_Familiar_Pheldy

Apr 30, 2012 -- 2:20PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

Spoiler: Show

Apr 28, 2012 -- 10:12PM, Feroz-s_Familiar_Pheldy wrote:

geez, it has been less than 24 hours since my last post, give me some time to respond.

Apr 28, 2012 -- 2:41AM, Pdr_Br wrote:

Apr 27, 2012 -- 11:29PM, Feroz-s_Familiar_Pheldy wrote:

afaik charismatic roles are more often town than scum
we shouldn't lynch theatog
/discuss




So who should we lynch instead?



Niklor obvobvobv




Some more elaboration on this point would be nice if you haven't done so already. (As of writing this post I haven't read any of the other posts after this)



read again. I have done so both before and after that post.

Spoiler: Show


Apr 28, 2012 -- 10:12PM, Feroz-s_Familiar_Pheldy wrote:


Apr 28, 2012 -- 8:42AM, Niklor wrote:

Apr 27, 2012 -- 11:29PM, Feroz-s_Familiar_Pheldy wrote:

afaik charismatic roles are more often town than scum
we shouldn't lynch theatog
/discuss




Theatog is not lurking so regardless of whether or not he is deemed to be the best lynch, he isn't.

Is the only reason you think we shouldn't lynch Theatog based on the fact he is a known charismatic or do you believe the case against him is bad?

BTW, why should I unvote you as you are clearly still being the best at lurking?



first, I'm unaware of any "case" against theatog.
I act based on the fact that he is currently IN THE VOTING LEAD AND ABOUT TO GET LYNCHED
@ BTW: am not



I posted a case a while back about atog. Also, "in the voting lead and about to be lynched" is a really big stretch, considering he was only at 3 votes and we still have like an entire week to discuss before the deadline.



yes, but I've seen games where a player had several votes on himself, claimed cop a week before the deadline and still got lynched, because the people voting for him in the first place didn't bother to follow the course of the game anymore and did nothing to avoid the lynching of the cop. sure there would have been ample time to act and adapt, but they didn't.

Post #612 by Ahlyis

May 1, 2012 -- 4:22AM, Feroz-s_Familiar_Pheldy wrote:

I posted a case a while back about atog. Also, "in the voting lead and about to be lynched" is a really big stretch, considering he was only at 3 votes and we still have like an entire week to discuss before the deadline.



yes, but I've seen games where a player had several votes on himself, claimed cop a week before the deadline and still got lynched, because the people voting for him in the first place didn't bother to follow the course of the game anymore and did nothing to avoid the lynching of the cop. sure there would have been ample time to act and adapt, but they didn't.


Just because something happened once doesn't make it the default action. Claiming he was "in the voting lead and about to be lynched" because in one other game someone got lynched a week after claiming cop... um... that makes logical sense to you?

Post #613 by Feroz-s_Familiar_Pheldy

ummm....yes.

that was the most blatant example, but I have already often witnessed games remaining in some kind of stasis from mid-day till end. often, discussion just dies down, and votes don't change anymore and then a lynch happens that doesn't have to exist.
theatog was in the lead - not by much in concur - but in the lead nevertheless.
I wanted to change that status and therefore brought up an additional point that might sway people's opinion about theatog, because I think that theatog is town and don't want to see him lynched today.

Post #614 by Silly_Dragons

May 1, 2012 -- 10:02AM, Feroz-s_Familiar_Pheldy wrote:

ummm....yes.

that was the most blatant example, but I have already often witnessed games remaining in some kind of stasis from mid-day till end. often, discussion just dies down, and votes don't change anymore and then a lynch happens that doesn't have to exist.
theatog was in the lead - not by much in concur - but in the lead nevertheless.
I wanted to change that status and therefore brought up an additional point that might sway people's opinion about theatog, because I think that theatog is town and don't want to see him lynched today.



If he really was in danger of dying, he could have just voted someone else with two votes on them to save himself or something.

Post #615 by Niklor

Vacation is over. Just thought I mention that.

Post #616 by Niklor

Apr 30, 2012 -- 2:07PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:


  • PK starts posting again, although he is sort of taking a back seat and is not dominating and comanding the discussion.


And also not posting of late.

Apr 30, 2012 -- 2:07PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

  • More irrelevant banter between Niklor and Ahlyis. Nothing important happened there, right?


Not really, unfortunately.

Post #617 by Niklor

Apr 30, 2012 -- 2:33PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

  • Sleeping brings a case on Razor. I've read it, but I'll wait here for the responses to develop a bit further before I pass any judgment. (This statement is partially addressed to Niklor. If one player is accusing another player or asking him a question, a lot of the time its better to let the two people talk for a bit instead of cutting in and talking about everything. This isn't new btw, there are plenty of instances early D1 where you lept to somebody's defense even before they responded. You don't need to talk about everything right away. Just hit the key points when they are relevant.)


They should be online more.

Apr 30, 2012 -- 2:33PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

 

  • As far as the subject of lurkers goes, most players are at least making some effort to contribute. Sleeping just made his case, FFP is posting. And I guess (maybe?) you could say that SF is trying? Though his posts have been largely incoherent to me.


All of them are still having long moments of silence between there posts, though FFP has launched himself ahead of SF and Sleeping in terms of contributing IMO.

Post #618 by theatog

Apr 29, 2012 -- 7:10PM, Niklor wrote:

Apr 29, 2012 -- 6:54PM, theatog wrote:

About the sleeping issue. Yes, I have more problem with him bandwagoning than lurking




You're not concerned about lurkers?

Apr 29, 2012 -- 6:54PM, theatog wrote:

in fact, I think we need a more serious wagon right about now : D 
Unvote, Vote: Nik
I promise there are some methods to my seemingly craziness.




So if you think Sleeping is a case of textbook scum, why am I the one you vote for?

Also, as you seem to agree with FFP, I don't see why you call your own methods mad. I think bandwagoning on me based on FFP's reasoning, which I believe is the reason you find me suspicious (correct me if I'm wrong), is a little off though. While I find it hard for someone to call being an above active member in terms of posting scum, I find it even harder to imagine someone bandwagoning based on that. 


Hint. I didn't vote you because of FFP.

Post #619 by Niklor

May 1, 2012 -- 10:02AM, Feroz-s_Familiar_Pheldy wrote:

ummm....yes.

that was the most blatant example, but I have already often witnessed games remaining in some kind of stasis from mid-day till end. often, discussion just dies down, and votes don't change anymore and then a lynch happens that doesn't have to exist.
theatog was in the lead - not by much in concur - but in the lead nevertheless.
I wanted to change that status and therefore brought up an additional point that might sway people's opinion about theatog, because I think that theatog is town and don't want to see him lynched today.




While I somehow doubt this game will go into that kind of stasis, that is a valid point. Many games do go that way.

Post #620 by Niklor

May 1, 2012 -- 2:55PM, theatog wrote:

Apr 29, 2012 -- 7:10PM, Niklor wrote:

Apr 29, 2012 -- 6:54PM, theatog wrote:

About the sleeping issue. Yes, I have more problem with him bandwagoning than lurking




You're not concerned about lurkers?

Apr 29, 2012 -- 6:54PM, theatog wrote:

in fact, I think we need a more serious wagon right about now : D 
Unvote, Vote: Nik
I promise there are some methods to my seemingly craziness.




So if you think Sleeping is a case of textbook scum, why am I the one you vote for?

Also, as you seem to agree with FFP, I don't see why you call your own methods mad. I think bandwagoning on me based on FFP's reasoning, which I believe is the reason you find me suspicious (correct me if I'm wrong), is a little off though. While I find it hard for someone to call being an above active member in terms of posting scum, I find it even harder to imagine someone bandwagoning based on that. 


Hint. I didn't vote you because of FFP.




Is there some reason you don't just tell me the reason there and instead make me ask?

What is the reason then? 

Post #621 by theatog

I was hoping my vote would provoke a certain predictable (hopefully scummy) vote change.


But none as of now.

Particularly I'd like to mention:

Sleeping changing vote to Raz. 
- seems ok-towny. Although he have no pressure whatsoever to save himself despite he's been one of the hottest topic yet. Voting for a random person with justification seems ok. Or Is that a play for demonstration? I'd like Freddeh, Ahlyis, FFP and PK to comment on that. if possible.

Nik's vote should've been changed to SF at post #596.
But in the vote count he's voting for sleeping.
Nik, I guess I somewhat admire your policy lynch against lurkers. I would do the same if the game is highly inactive and I'm unhappy with the game flow. (Imo, roughly speaking I won't invoke lurker policy lynch unless the lurker pool size fits the entire scum team and more. Right now it isn't. But anyhow, that's just me.) But even if you decide to stick to lurker lynch, can you put forth a candidate who you would lynch based on reads or scumminess? say without voting for him. As far as I'm concerned, you seem to have a lot of opinion on a lot of things but no cases at all. That seems odd.

As I said, I'm gunning for Niklor or Sleeping lynch until more convincing evidence would show. Between the two, niklor is obviously more scummy at the moment. My vote will stay where it is.

Vote: Niklor



Also, PK is slowly decending back to lurkerville.... without "vacation excuses". Think there are quite some amount of constructive material to comment on. Load your guns PK!! XD

Post #622 by theatog

I thought there would be more to read lol. oh well. back to my House marathon. Never really a fan of it. I randomly got season 7 because i ran out of stuff to watch and now i'm hooked.

Post #623 by Ahlyis

May 1, 2012 -- 3:25PM, theatog wrote:

Sleeping changing vote to Raz. 
- seems ok-towny. Although he have no pressure whatsoever to save himself despite he's been one of the hottest topic yet. Voting for a random person with justification seems ok. Or Is that a play for demonstration? I'd like Freddeh, Ahlyis, FFP and PK to comment on that. if possible.


It's Day 1. I don't generally read too much into any voting shenanigans on Day 1.  A lot of different people have been known to do a lot of different "crazy" things on Day 1 to get discussion started. I'm not saying he did it to spur discussion. I'm just saying I don't see it as a tell of any kind at this point.

Post #624 by Niklor

Hadn't noticed that.

UNVOTE; VOTE:SF

Let's see if the mods can be bothered to note it this time.

Post #625 by Niklor

May 1, 2012 -- 3:25PM, theatog wrote:

Nik, I guess I somewhat admire your policy lynch against lurkers.




You admire this idiocy? If people would just stop lurking we wouldn't even have to perform this ritual lynch.

May 1, 2012 -- 3:25PM, theatog wrote:

I would do the same if the game is highly inactive and I'm unhappy with the game flow. (Imo, roughly speaking I won't invoke lurker policy lynch unless the lurker pool size fits the entire scum team and more. Right now it isn't. But anyhow, that's just me.) But even if you decide to stick to lurker lynch, can you put forth a candidate who you would lynch based on reads or scumminess? say without voting for him. As far as I'm concerned, you seem to have a lot of opinion on a lot of things but no cases at all. That seems odd.




Don't presently see a reason to try to connect the dots to try to make a case. If I did, it would distract from the lurker lynch. I will probably have a case on at least one person at some point tomorrow, after I reread the thread in its entirity, but for now I am happy to pursue the LaL route.

May 1, 2012 -- 3:25PM, theatog wrote:

As I said, I'm gunning for Niklor or Sleeping lynch until more convincing evidence would show. Between the two, niklor is obviously more scummy at the moment. My vote will stay where it is.

Vote: Niklor




Don't really understand the need to vote me as you already are.

May 1, 2012 -- 3:25PM, theatog wrote:

Also, PK is slowly decending back to lurkerville.... without "vacation excuses".



I've noticed that, but he has done more than SF.

Post #626 by Freddeh

May 1, 2012 -- 3:25PM, theatog wrote:

Sleeping changing vote to Raz. 
- seems ok-towny. Although he have no pressure whatsoever to save himself despite he's been one of the hottest topic yet. Voting for a random person with justification seems ok. Or Is that a play for demonstration? I'd like Freddeh, Ahlyis, FFP and PK to comment on that. if possible.



I like his reasoning behind it, and happen to agree with it, Razor is who I'm leaning towards as well right now. Actually, hes the only one that I feel is quite possibly scum right now, between what Sleeping mentioned and what I was talking about earlier in the day about him seeming detatched. He's gotten better, but only after I mentioned it, which is almost more suspicious. And with the day coming to a close, I feel hes a better choice than anyone right now, especially since no one is truly lurking right now from what I can tell. Other than PV, who seems to be inactive across the boards, and kinda PK, who is sticking to his 'I'm fixing Px2 thus I'm busy!' excuse.

Unvote;Vote: Razor


Nik's vote should've been changed to SF at post #596.
But in the vote count he's voting for sleeping.
Nik, I guess I somewhat admire your policy lynch against lurkers. I would do the same if the game is highly inactive and I'm unhappy with the game flow. (Imo, roughly speaking I won't invoke lurker policy lynch unless the lurker pool size fits the entire scum team and more. Right now it isn't. But anyhow, that's just me.) But even if you decide to stick to lurker lynch, can you put forth a candidate who you would lynch based on reads or scumminess? say without voting for him. As far as I'm concerned, you seem to have a lot of opinion on a lot of things but no cases at all. That seems odd.

As I said, I'm gunning for Niklor or Sleeping lynch until more convincing evidence would show. Between the two, niklor is obviously more scummy at the moment. My vote will stay where it is.

Vote: Niklor



This is a very shortsighted viewpoint of you atog...especially just after saying you thought sleeping made a towny move.

Post #627 by Rubik

Vote Count


Niklor - 4 (Ahlyis, FFP, Theatog)
theatog - 2 (Silly, Pdr_Br)
FFP - 1 (PK)
Sleeping - 1 (Razorborne)
razorborne - 2 (Sleeping, Freddeh)
ShadowFyre - 1 (Niklor)
Not Voting - 2 (PeregrineV, ShadowFyre)

Post #628 by Feroz-s_Familiar_Pheldy

I ask you to read this again (I know it is painful, but please bear with me)

Apr 29, 2012 -- 7:25PM, Sleeping wrote:

Spoiler: Show

Sorry I wasn't posting, prerelease weekend (these are Magic forums after all) along with some family & friend things were keeping me busy.


I want to call into question razorborne.

His vote on me has persisted the entire game if I recall correctly. But the vote feels detached, like he's off arguing about whether it is a good idea to lynch lurkers and other nonsense (it almost feels like he is contributing and not contributing at the same time.) I must ask, why me? There are people in this game who have posted less than me, and people who haven't even voted even though we approach the last five "days" of day one. I feel like he attacked me in the first place just because I'm a safe target, nobody was going to tell him that it was a lousy vote because I said things that sounded obviously stupid and scummy. His vendetta against lurkers (which is justified) gave him an additional safety net since I was lurking at the time after all. I feel like he kept his vote because changing it would simply make it seem like he was trying to go after an easy target and it was unsucessful so he went on to try something else, rather than legitimately believing me to be mafia.

What really bothers me about razorborne though is he is going around crowning other posts saying that they contain wise information, probably hoping some of the feeling of allignment of ProphetKing and pd_r will rub off on him. I did the same thing hoping someone would bite and point out what a stupid behavior it was, and razorborne jumped on my post and dismissed the whole thing by refering to my theatog vote as a lurker bandwagon vote (which is a fair assumption to make, it just felt though as if he were trying to get people to dismiss my post in whole.) It does not need to be pointed out that certain posts are good or certain players have good things to say, if people are reading the thread (as they should be) they will see them anyways, and people should be left to come to their own conclusions on the validity of the words in such posts. Making claims like (paraphrasing here) "If you don't pay attention to this post you really aren't playing correctly." just makes it seem like you are trying to piggy back on somebody else's glory.

unvote
vote: razorborne





...(it almost feels like he is contributing and not contributing at the same time.)...



that is the exact feeling I get, but not from razorborne, but from sleeping. at first he lurked, then he said that he'd post relevant stuff later and then he put forth this giant wall of text that tries to appear like a case but isn't, followed by a vote that is meaningless, while completely ignoring what is going on in the rest of the game.
I'd like to hear sleeping's opinion about the relevant topics of this game and not some minor nitpickings about a single player. imho he is only bringing forth this "case" against razor to dodge having to talk about his opinions of the game (niklor-stuff, theatog-stuff, ffp-stuff,....)

Post #629 by Feroz-s_Familiar_Pheldy

May 1, 2012 -- 5:47PM, Rubik wrote:



Not Voting - 2 (PeregrineV, ShadowFyre)



FoS Pere & SF
cast a vote and take a stand

Post #630 by razorborne

fairly certain Pere is inactive.

also, I'm glad I'm not the only one who feels that way about Sleeping.

 

Post #631 by Silly_Dragons

I am surprised by how active and opinionated that FFP is right now. It's a nice change of pace.

Post #632 by Feroz-s_Familiar_Pheldy

well, I am kinda up to date now and invested in the thread, so I thought, I'd rather stick with it to prevent myself from getting detached.
usually, it just takes the game nearing end-game to get me invested, but congrats, pressure apparently worked this time.

Post #633 by Niklor

I disagree on the no one is lurking front, so I find it odd Freddeh, who said he was going hard after lurkers, is so easily swayed onto others.

Sleeping is very much trying to lurk. He even has said as much. However, I find his small contributions greater than SF's, even though he seems to be lurking without such intent. Could be wrong of course.

Peregrine needs to replace out or catch up. With the end of the day drawing close, it's inexcusable that he still hasn't managed to do so.

I'll try to keep annoying you back FFP, with my long winded opinions.

Post #634 by Niklor

Should I claim now or wait until tomorrow? Please note I will probably only take answers that come in the next few hours. 

Post #635 by Feroz-s_Familiar_Pheldy

if you want to give people time to react to your claim, you should claim today.
please don't claim cop. ^^

Post #636 by Niklor

No problem there as I'm not one.

Post #637 by Pdr_Br

Since you are the lynch choice of today, I say that you should claim your role.

But that is what I would do, but why are you asking for our opinion? If you feel that your ability is important for town then just say it.

Post #638 by Niklor

I'd rather ask the town if they feel the same. On the offchance that someone says no for some reason mostly.

2/2 want it.

Post #639 by Freddeh

May 2, 2012 -- 12:31PM, Niklor wrote:

I disagree on the no one is lurking front, so I find it odd Freddeh, who said he was going hard after lurkers, is so easily swayed onto others.

Sleeping is very much trying to lurk. He even has said as much. However, I find his small contributions greater than SF's, even though he seems to be lurking without such intent. Could be wrong of course.

Peregrine needs to replace out or catch up. With the end of the day drawing close, it's inexcusable that he still hasn't managed to do so.

I'll try to keep annoying you back FFP, with my long winded opinions.




Easily swayed? He made an insightful post, which many people agreed was such, about someone I was ALREADY on the fence about, and thats being easily swayed? Not to mention theres not really anyone else that seems outright scummy, except for maybe tog, but hes starting to seem more along the lines of 'frustrated townie' to me.

SF is lurking less than hes ever lurked, so while you could still call it lurking, its massive amounts of activity for him, though a vote from him would be nice. Sleeping is newish to px2 so he gets a day 1 pass from me unless he does something outright scummy, which he hasn't, in fact quite the opposite if you look past his lurking.

You need to ask town if you should claim? Only you and your knowledge of your role should tell you if you should claim or not, so I'm inclined to abstain.

Post #640 by Niklor

Apr 18, 2012 -- 7:35PM, Freddeh wrote:

Your eyes don't scare me, lurkers lurking scare me. Not that its early enough for lurkers to lurk, but rawr. This is an advance warning, if you are lurking day 1, you WILL be gone after, hard, and fast. Also the new rules make it so you can't lurk, so your non-lurking posts BETTER BE GOOD.




What was this again?

I find this post to make your intentions clear and yet when it comes down to the deadline you want to lynch an active member who has been contributing. You can agree or disagree of the reasons why he is contributing and whether or not that makes him scum, but the bottom line is that I feel you're ignoring what you said about going after lurkers. You're excusing PK, SF, and Sleeping for lurking for a variety of reasons, but they are lurking and you aren't pursuing.

I don't care if we actually forced SF to play a bit more than he usually does. He's still lurking for the most part.

There is no reason to avoid giving an answer on this. The question is not whether I should claim, but whether I should claim today or tomorrow. 

Post #641 by Freddeh

Lol I knew that post would come back to haunt me. That was a half-joke (read it again if you don't believe me...) half-get scum to actually post. I've already explained my reasonings for not going after the 'lurkers' we have, other than PK, who I am also perfectly fine with a lynch on.

My problem with Razor is that he only actually contributed when I started pressuring him to do so, and once I stopped hes fallen back into snide comments about random dumb things ('I think Pere is inactive guyz!'), basically reading to me like 'hey look at me guys, i'm ACTIVE don't lynch me!'.

Post #642 by Ahlyis

May 2, 2012 -- 1:48PM, Niklor wrote:

There is no reason to avoid giving an answer on this. The question is not whether I should claim, but whether I should claim today or tomorrow. 


Oh.  I was going to say not to claim since we know you're scum and will just lie anyway.

But if the choice isn't whether to claim or not, but only when to claim, then I say earlier the better so there's less chance of people getting scared off your lynch by a last second claim, resulting in some random townie getting the lynch instead!

Post #643 by Ahlyis

EBWOP:  And if you are Town, then that should be your reasoning as well.  You're a solid candidate and are likely to get lynched at some point unless something else happens to clear you. Avoiding the lynch today by claiming late and giving scum a chance to swing to a random Townie while still having you as a good plan for tomorrow is NOT a good Townie play.  It would make sense for a Scum to do though.

Post #644 by Niklor

3 yes's with no opposed. Might as well claim.

Swordless, Town Aligned Doctor

And now assuming I survive today I'm a bit useless as I'm going to have to protect myself. 

Post #645 by Niklor

May 2, 2012 -- 3:09PM, Ahlyis wrote:

EBWOP:  And if you are Town, then that should be your reasoning as well.  You're a solid candidate and are likely to get lynched at some point unless something else happens to clear you. Avoiding the lynch today by claiming late and giving scum a chance to swing to a random Townie while still having you as a good plan for tomorrow is NOT a good Townie play.  It would make sense for a Scum to do though.




Yes, but I was more interested in hearing if anyone wanted me to claim tomorrow instead of today. I was probably going to claim regardless, even if everyone said I should wait until tomorrow. It's just more interesting to see if anyone is ready to oppose me claiming now.

Post #646 by Freddeh

Funny thing is I was thinking about saying only claim if you're not a doctor, but then thats like claiming doctor if you don't claim, so pointless to say.

Sadly, your claim has made me more apt to think that you ARE scum, because there is 0 reason to claim doctor, especially when you're only up what, 1 vote? Especially claiming that you can protect yourself, which essentially gives you an out to any way of proving your role and your towniness.

In summary: Doc claim terrible. I'm not voting you for it because I still am leaning towards you being town, but remember when I said that only holds if you were not being outright scummy? This comes very close to that in my eyes.

Post #647 by Silly_Dragons

...

That doc claim.

I don't even know what to think about it.

Post #648 by Niklor

May 2, 2012 -- 3:21PM, Freddeh wrote:

Sadly, your claim has made me more apt to think that you ARE scum, because there is 0 reason to claim doctor, especially when you're only up what, 1 vote? Especially claiming that you can protect yourself, which essentially gives you an out to any way of proving your role and your towniness.

In summary: Doc claim terrible. I'm not voting you for it because I still am leaning towards you being town, but remember when I said that only holds if you were not being outright scummy? This comes very close to that in my eyes.




Day is coming to a close Freddeh and I am in the lead. It doesn't matter that I'm only leading by one vote since that one vote will still get me lynched. Would you have me not claim instead? In general, there is no role, other than scum only roles, that I shouldn't claim when I am going to be lynched. Yes, my effectiveness as a doctor has been rendered less than effective, but my death would render it completely useless.

You are very strange on what you think is scummy. 

Post #649 by Niklor

May 2, 2012 -- 3:30PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

...

That doc claim.

I don't even know what to think about it.




Well, I'm either the doctor or I'm lying scum. Pick a side.

Post #650 by Ahlyis

Sorry, not buying it.  You get asked not to claim one power role (Cop), so you claim the other standard power role instead?

I really hope a real Doc, if we have one, doesn't feel compelled to counterclaim you. I'd hate to lose the real Doc on Day 1 to a Scum fishing attempt.

Confirm VOTE:  Niklor

Post #651 by Niklor

May 2, 2012 -- 3:31PM, Ahlyis wrote:

Sorry, not buying it.  You get asked not to claim one power role (Cop), so you claim the other standard power role instead?

I really hope a real Doc, if we have one, doesn't feel compelled to counterclaim you. I'd hate to lose the real Doc on Day 1 to a Scum fishing attempt.

Confirm VOTE:  Niklor




While it's possible there is another doc variant, I find it unlikely there is another doc as I am already one. As such, anyone else claiming a standard doc is welcomed, as they are probably scum. I'm 99% positive no one else will claim such.

That is my role Ahlyis. I find your tunnelvision amusing. 

Post #652 by Freddeh

May 2, 2012 -- 3:30PM, Niklor wrote:

Day is coming to a close Freddeh and I am in the lead. It doesn't matter that I'm only leading by one vote since that one vote will still get me lynched. Would you have me not claim instead? In general, there is no role, other than scum only roles, that I shouldn't claim when I am going to be lynched. Yes, my effectiveness as a doctor has been rendered less than effective, but my death would render it completely useless.

You are very strange on what you think is scummy. 




I disagree, there are certain roles that there are just no point in claiming. With those roles you should be working to prove your towniness by your play not by just outright claiming a role, and Doc is very much one of them. It is LESS distracting to town to just be lynched today as doctor if you can't do the above, than claim doctor and save yourself while being 1) practically useless unless you manage to get lucky with WIFOM games, and 2) distracting to town for longer.

Post #653 by Silly_Dragons

I hate doctor claims.

Post #654 by Silly_Dragons

But I do think it might be prudent to let Niklor live for a day (and maybe get a cop investigation if the cop wants to?) and pressure somebody else.

We can always go back to killing Niklor if the other path goes cold.

(NOTE: I have no idea how much time is left in D1. If there is like two days left or less, please ignore this post.)

Post #655 by Niklor

May 2, 2012 -- 3:40PM, Freddeh wrote:

I disagree, there are certain roles that there are just no point in claiming. With those roles you should be working to prove your towniness by your play not by just outright claiming a role, and Doc is very much one of them. It is LESS distracting to town to just be lynched today as doctor if you can't do the above, than claim doctor and save yourself while being 1) practically useless unless you manage to get lucky with WIFOM games, and 2) distracting to town for longer.




There is not a growning counterwagon to oppose mine, which means it's unlikely as it stands that I'm not going to be lynched anyway, especially since it only takes two more votes for me to be forced to hammer. Doctors generally do their best work with WIFOM games or so I've noticed, so while I've just painted a huge target on myself that ensures if I don't get lynched I will almost certainly be NKed, I may still be able to do some good. We'll see.

Your second point is hardly a point, unless you think every townie should do the same when day is nearing end and they are in the lead to be lynched. I somehow doubt I can argue votes off me while maintaining the same playstyle, which is important to me as changing a playstyle midgame is asking to be lynched anyway, since I don't think it's something town should be concerned over. Ahlyis doesn't seem interested in looking elsewhere and FFP and Theatog appear to be both voting me for how I am playing. 

Essentially, there was no reason not to claim my role. 

Post #656 by Niklor

May 2, 2012 -- 3:47PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

But I do think it might be prudent to let Niklor live for a day (and maybe get a cop investigation if the cop wants to?) and pressure somebody else.

We can always go back to killing Niklor if the other path goes cold.

(NOTE: I have no idea how much time is left in D1. If there is like two days left or less, please ignore this post.)




Are you fishing for the cop?

Also, yes. We have roughly two days left. 

Post #657 by Silly_Dragons

May 2, 2012 -- 3:53PM, Niklor wrote:

May 2, 2012 -- 3:47PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

But I do think it might be prudent to let Niklor live for a day (and maybe get a cop investigation if the cop wants to?) and pressure somebody else.

We can always go back to killing Niklor if the other path goes cold.

(NOTE: I have no idea how much time is left in D1. If there is like two days left or less, please ignore this post.)




Are you fishing for the cop?

Also, yes. We have roughly two days left. 



I specifically stated that if we end up killing somebody else, the cop should only investigate you if he deems it prudent. There could always be some silly role interaction that we're unaware of, so I'm usually not going to tell anyone how to use their role. I'm just saying a possibility.

Post #658 by Niklor

Vote: Razor

Blatant survival vote.

However, given the choice between Razor and Theatog, I feel more inclined to vote Razor. Razor agrees to much. Theatog is taking tougher paths to argue, which is not something necessary for scum to do. Scum likes to blend with the town though and it's easier to blend in when you agree. 

Post #659 by Niklor

May 2, 2012 -- 3:56PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

May 2, 2012 -- 3:53PM, Niklor wrote:

May 2, 2012 -- 3:47PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

But I do think it might be prudent to let Niklor live for a day (and maybe get a cop investigation if the cop wants to?) and pressure somebody else.

We can always go back to killing Niklor if the other path goes cold.

(NOTE: I have no idea how much time is left in D1. If there is like two days left or less, please ignore this post.)




Are you fishing for the cop?

Also, yes. We have roughly two days left. 



I specifically stated that if we end up killing somebody else, the cop should only investigate you if he deems it prudent. There could always be some silly role interaction that we're unaware of, so I'm usually not going to tell anyone how to use their role. I'm just saying a possibility.




Telling the cop who to investigate is dangerous. Mafia could easily have a watcher or disruptive role. In general, I'd rather we not tell an unknown cop what to do and let him work out what to do on his own. Such role interactions are possible, so suggesting to the cop what he should do is suspicious as scum would want to control who the cop investigates. 

Post #660 by Silly_Dragons

May 2, 2012 -- 4:03PM, Niklor wrote:

May 2, 2012 -- 3:56PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

May 2, 2012 -- 3:53PM, Niklor wrote:

May 2, 2012 -- 3:47PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

But I do think it might be prudent to let Niklor live for a day (and maybe get a cop investigation if the cop wants to?) and pressure somebody else.

We can always go back to killing Niklor if the other path goes cold.

(NOTE: I have no idea how much time is left in D1. If there is like two days left or less, please ignore this post.)




Are you fishing for the cop?

Also, yes. We have roughly two days left. 



I specifically stated that if we end up killing somebody else, the cop should only investigate you if he deems it prudent. There could always be some silly role interaction that we're unaware of, so I'm usually not going to tell anyone how to use their role. I'm just saying a possibility.




Telling the cop who to investigate is dangerous. Mafia could easily have a watcher or disruptive role. In general, I'd rather we not tell an unknown cop what to do and let him work out what to do on his own. Such role interactions are possible, so suggesting to the cop what he should do is suspicious as scum would want to control who the cop investigates. 



Do you not understand my post or are you just agreeing with me beause you feel the constant urge to post things?

Post #661 by Niklor

May 2, 2012 -- 4:10PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

May 2, 2012 -- 4:03PM, Niklor wrote:

May 2, 2012 -- 3:56PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

May 2, 2012 -- 3:53PM, Niklor wrote:

May 2, 2012 -- 3:47PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

But I do think it might be prudent to let Niklor live for a day (and maybe get a cop investigation if the cop wants to?) and pressure somebody else.

We can always go back to killing Niklor if the other path goes cold.

(NOTE: I have no idea how much time is left in D1. If there is like two days left or less, please ignore this post.)




Are you fishing for the cop?

Also, yes. We have roughly two days left. 



I specifically stated that if we end up killing somebody else, the cop should only investigate you if he deems it prudent. There could always be some silly role interaction that we're unaware of, so I'm usually not going to tell anyone how to use their role. I'm just saying a possibility.




Telling the cop who to investigate is dangerous. Mafia could easily have a watcher or disruptive role. In general, I'd rather we not tell an unknown cop what to do and let him work out what to do on his own. Such role interactions are possible, so suggesting to the cop what he should do is suspicious as scum would want to control who the cop investigates. 



Do you not understand my post or are you just agreeing with me beause you feel the constant urge to post things?




Pointing out something for the cop to do, even passively, is a suggestion. You suggested the cop should investigate me if I don't end up being lynched. I find that suspicious.

Post #662 by Silly_Dragons

May 2, 2012 -- 4:20PM, Niklor wrote:


Pointing out something for the cop to do, even passively, is a suggestion. You suggested the cop should investigate me if I don't end up being lynched. I find that suspicious.



Like how I also pointed out before that if we have a vig, that he might want to kill lurkers?

I find it odd that you didn't have a problem with me before, but do now.

Post #663 by Freddeh

Wait so you claimed BEFORE making your survival vote?

Also the point is: Mafia don't even have to play the WIFOM game with you now, you just made it so they can just ignore you, and while you could still get a lucky save (assuming you aren't lying), it is much more likely to be a distraction to town than anything else.

But thats just my opinion.

Post #664 by Ahlyis

May 2, 2012 -- 3:57PM, Niklor wrote:

Vote: Razor

Blatant survival vote.

However, given the choice between Razor and Theatog, I feel more inclined to vote Razor. Razor agrees to much. Theatog is taking tougher paths to argue, which is not something necessary for scum to do. Scum likes to blend with the town though and it's easier to blend in when you agree. 


I do somewhat agree with this.

I want to lynch Razor, and will continue to vote him.  But if there is a shift and people want to leave the "Doc" alive, I hope they'll shift to Razor.  If it comes down to a shift between Razor and another player, with Niklor no longer in danger, I'll switch my vote to Razor at that point.  Until such an event occurs though, I'll continue to push for Niklor's lynch.

Post #665 by Ahlyis

EBWOP:  That first sentence should say I want to lynch Niklor and will continue to vote him, not Razor.

Post #666 by Niklor

May 2, 2012 -- 4:52PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

May 2, 2012 -- 4:20PM, Niklor wrote:


Pointing out something for the cop to do, even passively, is a suggestion. You suggested the cop should investigate me if I don't end up being lynched. I find that suspicious.



Like how I also pointed out before that if we have a vig, that he might want to kill lurkers?

I find it odd that you didn't have a problem with me before, but do now.




Controlling a vig is different from controlling a cop IMO.

Post #667 by Niklor

May 2, 2012 -- 4:54PM, Freddeh wrote:

Wait so you claimed BEFORE making your survival vote?




Your point?

May 2, 2012 -- 4:54PM, Freddeh wrote:

Also the point is: Mafia don't even have to play the WIFOM game with you now, you just made it so they can just ignore you, and while you could still get a lucky save (assuming you aren't lying), it is much more likely to be a distraction to town than anything else.

But thats just my opinion.




How have I made it so the mafia can ignore me? You're saying I should lay down and be lynched because I find it unlikely that I can stop the lynch?

Post #668 by razorborne

what's the point in a doc claim? it's a completely unconfirmable role, so either we believe you or we don't. the only way it helps is if you get counterclaimed, which means that as scum useful because it can lure out the real doc, whereas as town you risk screwing the town if the game has two weak docs or something.

also, fun fact: the three vote leaders are all, as of Rag's last post count, within the top five posters. remember when I said exactly that would happen? because I did. no one pays attention to lurkers, and that's why they keep getting away with it.

 

Post #669 by Freddeh

Whos lurking though Razor? Sleeping doesn't post a lot, but when he does its usually a fairly large post, so I'd stretch in calling it lurking at least by todays standards (not posting other than a random vote once in a while). FFP has been more contributive lately, PK did a pbpa after some pressure, and he does have a solid number of posts, even if a lot of them were not so content-filled if I recall correctly (could be wrong), though he did barely escape the last prod, which is part of the reason I'm good with a lynch on him. SF has been posting a decent amount for his standards at least, and Pdr has been posting at least once most days, usually 2-3 times. Oh, and in your own words: 'I think Pere is inactive'

So against I ask, who would you go after that is actually lurking lurking?

Also only one of the top 3 posters have a vote, and then the next 4 are very closely clumped...and thats over half of the people in the game, so its hard to blanket '3 of top 5' when there are that many people that close in votecount.

Post #670 by Niklor

May 2, 2012 -- 10:31PM, razorborne wrote:

what's the point in a doc claim? it's a completely unconfirmable role, so either we believe you or we don't. the only way it helps is if you get counterclaimed, which means that as scum useful because it can lure out the real doc, whereas as town you risk screwing the town if the game has two weak docs or something.

also, fun fact: the three vote leaders are all, as of Rag's last post count, within the top five posters. remember when I said exactly that would happen? because I did. no one pays attention to lurkers, and that's why they keep getting away with it.

 




I'm not a weak doc though, so it seems odd that there would be another non-variant doc. Essentially, there shouldn't be a possible counterclaim if I'm the doc. If I'm actually lying scum, it is likely that I am looking to force someone to counterclaim, but I don't see how it's particularly harmful as town as their shouldn't be someone available to counterclaim me if I am the doctor, which I am.

I would vote for a lurker, but none of the lurker wagons are large enough for me to hope they will grow, especially since no one except you and me seems to be concerned with the lurkers.

Post #671 by Niklor

May 2, 2012 -- 10:48PM, Freddeh wrote:

Whos lurking though Razor? Sleeping doesn't post a lot, but when he does its usually a fairly large post, so I'd stretch in calling it lurking at least by todays standards (not posting other than a random vote once in a while). FFP has been more contributive lately, PK did a pbpa after some pressure, and he does have a solid number of posts, even if a lot of them were not so content-filled if I recall correctly (could be wrong), though he did barely escape the last prod, which is part of the reason I'm good with a lynch on him. SF has been posting a decent amount for his standards at least, and Pdr has been posting at least once most days, usually 2-3 times. Oh, and in your own words: 'I think Pere is inactive'

So against I ask, who would you go after that is actually lurking lurking?

Also only one of the top 3 posters have a vote, and then the next 4 are very closely clumped...and thats over half of the people in the game, so its hard to blanket '3 of top 5' when there are that many people that close in votecount.




Freddeh, it's not about whether or not they've posted content at some point so much as are they consistently posting content.

Sleeping, PK, and SF are all lurking.

Post #672 by razorborne

May 2, 2012 -- 10:48PM, Freddeh wrote:

Whos lurking though Razor? Sleeping doesn't post a lot, but when he does its usually a fairly large post, so I'd stretch in calling it lurking at least by todays standards (not posting other than a random vote once in a while). FFP has been more contributive lately, PK did a pbpa after some pressure, and he does have a solid number of posts, even if a lot of them were not so content-filled if I recall correctly (could be wrong), though he did barely escape the last prod, which is part of the reason I'm good with a lynch on him. SF has been posting a decent amount for his standards at least, and Pdr has been posting at least once most days, usually 2-3 times. Oh, and in your own words: 'I think Pere is inactive'/quote]
off the top of my head, we could go with the guy who both lurker bandwagoned and lurker OMGUS'd. we could vote for him.

 

Post #673 by PeregrineV

OK, I 've caught up with the thread. The bulk looks to be mafia theory, which makes me really wonder, since I think there is a total of ONE new player. Not only that, but people are arguing their sides in mafia theory, and not even as it relates to the game.

As for replacing out, this is the first game in since EVER that I couldn't get to at least daily. If we were ripe with eager beavers wanting in, I probably would of, just to be fair to everyone. Instead, I find my slef a little irritated, given this day one is 17 pages and I haven't had a chance to say crap, while the last two games of this size:
community.wizards.com/paranoia/go/thread...
and
community.wizards.com/paranoia/go/thread...(INVADERS_WIN)

Went 10 pages TOTAL and 19 pages TOTAL.
I felt like I was the only one talking in those. Now, not everyone here was in those games, but some of you were.

Instead of getting mad, though, I'll just say this.
Get over it.

Since I'm caught up now and can easily outread any future posts.

Vote Count

Niklor - 4 (Ahlyis, FFP, Theatog)
theatog - 2 (Silly, Pdr_Br)
FFP - 1 (PK)
Sleeping - 1 (Razorborne)
razorborne - 2 (Sleeping, Freddeh)
ShadowFyre - 1 (Niklor)
Not Voting - 2 (PeregrineV, ShadowFyre)



 I'd like a succint bullet case on Niklor, Atog and Razor from the people voting them. One of the thing I feel is missing from this thread is cases and reasons why people are voting for certain people, and why those reaons are indicative of scum.

Post #674 by Rubik

Vote Count


Niklor - 4 (Ahlyis, FFP, Theatog)
theatog - 2 (Silly, Pdr_Br)
FFP - 1 (PK)
Sleeping - 1 (Razorborne)
razorborne - 3 (Sleeping, Freddeh, Niklor)
Not Voting - 2 (PeregrineV, ShadowFyre)


 

Post #675 by Freddeh

You're not Razor, but ok I'll talk at you then.

Next thing to consider, if we bring those 3 up as lurking: Who is it most uncharacteristic for? Sleeping is relatively unknown, and its very characteristic for SF, however it is uncharacteristic for PK.

After that: When they did post, what did they contribute? Sleeping has had at least one decently insightful and contributive posts. SF, I don't even know. PK, decent contribution and a fairly lengthy pbpa, but nothing especially insightful that I can remember (I could be wrong here).

So why is Sleeping over either SF or PK? Because he admitted that he wanted to lurk earlier in the day? Which he kinda let up on anyway (even though he is kinda lurking still).

Post #676 by PeregrineV

May 3, 2012 -- 12:22AM, Freddeh wrote:

You're not Razor, but ok I'll talk at you then.

Next thing to consider, if we bring those 3 up as lurking: Who is it most uncharacteristic for? Sleeping is relatively unknown, and its very characteristic for SF, however it is uncharacteristic for PK.

After that: When they did post, what did they contribute? Sleeping has had at least one decently insightful and contributive posts. SF, I don't even know. PK, decent contribution and a fairly lengthy pbpa, but nothing especially insightful that I can remember (I could be wrong here).

So why is Sleeping over either SF or PK? Because he admitted that he wanted to lurk earlier in the day? Which he kinda let up on anyway (even though he is kinda lurking still).




The only one I'd classify as active lurking (or intentional lurking) would be PK. And it's not so much lurking as not scumhunting. Sleeping said he planned on keeping a low profile. He should be called to task for that, not for lukring. Shadow is practically a different person compared to most of his games. He's talking so much this game that, like Niklor, it's increased my scumfeel for him.

@Sleeping- Why are you on the Razor wagon? What do you think about the claims of Atog and Niklor? 

@Fereddeh- Why are you on the Razor wagon? What do you think about the claims of Atog and Niklor?  

Post #677 by ProphetKing

I am mildly intoxicated, let's go.

Post #678 by PeregrineV

lol--leave a message, I got to go to bed. But I'll be checking in from work for your top-quality drunkposts.

Post #679 by ProphetKing

I have never done this before but my initial reaction is to play like PK 2006 and be ruder than usual.

Post #680 by Freddeh

I started that previous post a while ago and forgot to finish it before going to work out sorry, that was pointed at Niklor.

@Razor: I assume you're talking about Sleeping, bandwagons are bandwagons, especially day 1, and that bandwagon was rather early on if I recall correctly, which isn't an overtly scummy action imo. I just saw what you meant as I was reading back, and your pointing out of it is probably more scummy than the action, as I mention below. As far as OMGUS, is it really an OMGUS if you have a good reasoning for the vote?

@PV: Quick Bullet points from what I remember on Razor case:
- Felt detatched and 'active lurky' early on, only stopped after I pointed it out.
- Sleeping talked about him 'crowning other posts saying they contain wise information' and such things (page 15 about halfway or a bit further down).
- 'Taking the easy way out' by agreeing with cases rather than trying to argue or such. (contributed by Nik along the same lines)
- And most recently, I'm getting a vibe that hes gently trying to push eyes off of himself by using lurkers primarily as a scapegoat. 'Hey, hey, look at them not me, i'm not lurking' (which, while true, is a bit of a misnomer especially based on his postcount because he has a lot of posts which are just quoted paragraphs that he is agreeing with. I'll grant that this is not all of them, but he does it far more than needed, and it piques my suspicion because of it.

Post #681 by Freddeh

May 3, 2012 -- 12:57AM, ProphetKing wrote:

I have never done this before but my initial reaction is to play like PK 2006 and be ruder than usual.




Should I go get a beer even though I should be studying right now? :P

Post #682 by Freddeh

May 3, 2012 -- 12:54AM, PeregrineV wrote:

The only one I'd classify as active lurking (or intentional lurking) would be PK. And it's not so much lurking as not scumhunting. Sleeping said he planned on keeping a low profile. He should be called to task for that, not for lukring. Shadow is practically a different person compared to most of his games. He's talking so much this game that, like Niklor, it's increased my scumfeel for him.

@Sleeping- Why are you on the Razor wagon? What do you think about the claims of Atog and Niklor? 

@Fereddeh- Why are you on the Razor wagon? What do you think about the claims of Atog and Niklor?  




I was responding based on who Niklor thought was lurking, not that I necessarily agreed, though if I were to pick 3 people for lurking it would probably be those 3, though I might put FFP in there instead of probably Sleeping despite his recent posts.

I answered the first question, and you'll have to specify which claims you are talking about, because they've both made a great number of claims this game lol.

Post #683 by ProphetKing

Silly's case on The Atog: http://community.wizards.com/paranoia/go/thread/view/76625/29067123/Standard_Pony_Mafia&post_num=325#518919613

I am in agreement with it but in disagreement with the pursual of it today given although I do find the  The Atog a fun player, he has odd mental leaps in his posting at time. He's in my "box" of people I want to gather large amounts of data on due to inexperience.

"And thank you for your OMGUS vote. You certainly did put a lot of effort in it to try to make it not look like one. It only makes me more certain of my vote. I want day one scumbloodHA-HA-HA-HA-HA"

OK what the hell is this the The Atog
S

Nilkor 4433210: http://community.wizards.com/paranoia/go/thread/view/76625/29067123/Standard_Pony_Mafia&post_num=331#518920039

I agree with Niklor thatSilly is overconfident his nailing of scum, although his case is factually merited

Most of Niklor's posting is good although he replies to much irrelevant garbage and thus hurts the thread as a whole

Freddeh, #333:

"n the table. But we have different interpretations of the pool of people we are looking through for scum. Yours is 'everyone in the game that I'm not sure are town'. Mine is 'people I'm trying to focus on'."

I feel this fair but you could havephrased it a lot better.

Niklor #337 
 

"Well, if you are scum you wouldn't have kept trying to buddy with me once called out for it. So I'm not sure what that proves."

Shake your WIFOM back and forth, shake your WIFOM back and forth. I don't have a problem with the WIFOM so much as it is definitve of a dfefinitveness

"I'm not going to alter how I played just because it gets me lynched and the idea that I am so malleable to be constantly affected by being lynched is insulting."

It works though and isn't an insult we try to do it with lurkers to pressure them. 

Silly" "TL;DR. That's only there for the blundering idiots who can't be bothered to read whole posts."

 lol

summaries are good because they capture your thoughts and reforce them to the audience

Niklor:

"I think PK is referring to the fact I self-hammer,"

yes



tl;dr homemade beer 

Post #684 by ProphetKing

May 3, 2012 -- 1:06AM, Freddeh wrote:

May 3, 2012 -- 12:57AM, ProphetKing wrote:

I have never done this before but my initial reaction is to play like PK 2006 and be ruder than usual.




Should I go get a beer even though I should be studying right now? :P


I will drunkenly argue with you if you would prefer like

Post #685 by ProphetKing

Freddeh #3546

"
BUT, Silly gets town points from me for actually making a TL;DR, instead of just letting his points get lost in mountains of post."

I do that all the time as scum this is onchoernet wrong

Freddeh:

"I'm talking about the meta in general. Namely that too many people believe that posting a lot == asking to get lynched, or at least questioned/jumped on a lot (usually over little things, but thats for another argument...). Which is simply NOT TRUE, but many recent games have been furthering that mindset to the point where it happens all the time."

It's actually the opposite given that people are more likely to blindly follow you of a clip a if you post more

...

people on Pxc2 are universally hard to read, Ahl's posts are always the same to me

...

Freddeh:

". I'm kinda at the point to where people don't even take info from past days much anymore anyway, so why does it matter if you get a little bit less info from lynching a lurker? >_> "

I hate this post
 

 

Post #686 by Freddeh

Eh I'll be up too late if I do that, and I have to drive way too far tomorrow. So I'll just enjoy the show while you try to coherently post summaries.

Post #687 by Freddeh

And here I go to get dragged in anyway...

May 3, 2012 -- 1:15AM, ProphetKing wrote:

Freddeh #3546

"

BUT, Silly gets town points from me for actually making a TL;DR, instead of just letting his points get lost in mountains of post."

I do that all the time as scum this is onchoernet wrong



Yeah, I actually just was thinking the same thing and changing my mind about this as I read back through the thread a bit.

Freddeh:

"I'm talking about the meta in general. Namely that too many people believe that posting a lot == asking to get lynched, or at least questioned/jumped on a lot (usually over little things, but thats for another argument...). Which is simply NOT TRUE, but many recent games have been furthering that mindset to the point where it happens all the time."

It's actually the opposite given that people are more likely to blindly follow you of a clip a if you post more



I think you're agreeing with me here? Though this idea sure isn't working out very well for Nik.

Freddeh:

". I'm kinda at the point to where people don't even take info from past days much anymore anyway, so why does it matter if you get a little bit less info from lynching a lurker? >_> "

I hate this post



Its true though, people ignore whats happened in previous days all too often, unless theres a specific big event that needs to be referenced. And even then those get forgotten from time to time.

Post #688 by ProphetKing

niklor is posting all the theory posts i sometimes post

he i slike the china of the px2 theory economy right now

Ahl:

"
A better question is why would you post that at all? "

Brain fart , no good reason regardless of alignment (niklor caring usually scum tick), still moderately revealing

...

PDR: o i am inactive let me blandly recap all the things that have ever haoppend w/o communtiery
ook i am here


,,,

Fredeeh:

"I'm on board the PK lynch at this point."

hey guys can we please lynch PK i'm going to suggest it withot comming ti a vote to make rsure its OK, please redeem my desires it be good
 

Post #689 by ProphetKing

You see I do agree with you there and I hate your post because it is sad and needs to be stamped instead of saying oh kulll the fred.

Post #690 by Freddeh

Day ends tomorrow and nader votes are bad. Given that was a couple days ago, but it was late enough that Nader votes were bad. Also, if you recall I had my vote on you for a long while today, so calling me out on that now is silly.

Post #691 by ProphetKing

"I thought the highest amount of work was basically done as of a couple days ago. Silly has been helping with that seemingly a lot as well and hes still been plenty active."

no

it's over now though, pretty much did sllte thing things

Nikrl: community.wizards.com/paranoia/go/thread...

I would agree with your general summary of lurkers and would kill SF if i wanted a lurker to die, but i'm not invested in the d1  lurker ynch.

 PDR:

"FFP returns after reading the thread and makes a huge post where he says that Niklor is the person to lynch because the way Niklor has been playing seems to much town so he cannot be scum and the way he responds to everything and everyone clutters the thread and makes him almost omnipresent which with the recent activity push had been going on on the forum seems like pro town.
|--> Whow, when FFP wants he plays like a boss. Brings up good points about Niklor that I haven't think about and it makes me see Niklor has a possible Day 1 viable lynch choice.
|--> Cookie jar for FFP"

I cannot agree with tis apprisal for ffps

Nikloe

"Yes, there lurking is a choice, which makes it hard for us to stop it other than by trying to lynch it out of them. And I sort of half expect PK to be intentionally lurking if he is scum to prove a point."

no this game just is failing to enage me

i don't relly prove points thayway anyway, 

"Maybe I need to begin to take the time to multiquote. This is frankly starting to look a little bit ridiculous even to me."

even when i crap up threads i try not to post lots of superflous crap

...

community.wizards.com/paranoia/go/thread...

disagree anti-town actions are not necessary scummy, injsted vering into the range of stupidty

 

Post #692 by ProphetKing

May 3, 2012 -- 1:31AM, Freddeh wrote:

Day ends tomorrow and nader votes are bad. Given that was a couple days ago, but it was late enough that Nader votes were bad. Also, if you recall I had my vote on you for a long while today, so calling me out on that now is silly.


1. I don't recall
2. In retrospect it stil matters

Post #693 by ProphetKing

Sleeping:

"Okay, let me start off by saying I was acting apathetically about the game because I wanted to add a different dynamic so I could see specifically how people would respond to it and thus gain more info. It was not because I did not want to contribute. I figured I'd have time to do so because I figured day ones probably last pretty long. I'll be contributing more now, hopefully. I have had the chance to digest this thread a few times."

I am extremely skeptical of this, it sounds like a line you were fed even if i like the change in atttude

...

there needs to be once post on "is it if anti town" then no more posts to be made, jezz

.. 

Freddeh

community.wizards.com/paranoia/go/thread...

i am slow to trust your distrust of ffp

...

ig you are to announce vacation, give the date. makes life for mod easier

...


#540ish niklor is wasting people's time with this freddeh junk

...

The Atog:

""Tangentially" is such a PK word. Everytime i see him use it, it makes me smile. it's like his signature. "

Thanks

///

"

Sounds beautiful and I don't share your pessism about what it would become."

it's like when a sports team does bad off court, psychological and mental aptitude

i played game that had lile...4000 posts on d1. it was what oyu are describuing and the town became dysfunctional because too many thoughts possible cases of arguble merit, overload of data. like if i gave you a textbook that kept magically growing and told you fi gure out what is bad or something. it is very har and town tend to loses

...

"


afaik charismatic roles are more often town than scum
we shouldn't lynch theatog
/discuss"

in 12 player i am inclined to agree with you but leave the possibility of open given it could be temporary or conditional snd evaporate in lylo

...

i orget everything shadow ha ever done 

 




 

Post #694 by Feroz-s_Familiar_Pheldy

I don't buy the doc-claim.
mainly because I'm a very conservative mafia-games player.
docs shy the spotlight. exposing yourself as much as niklor did as town makes you ripe for mafia night kill.

imagine niklor were town. early on in the game, he showed an exaggerated ammount of activity, replying on everything in the thread multiple times, clogging up the thread into near-unreadability. (as peregrine has already pointed out, whole games have been shorter than our day1). if niklor were town, mafia would be afraid of him and try to get ridd of him as soon as possible. so this over-activeness could be a giant play of WIFOM, but - as I've said before - I'm a conservative mafia-games player and this kind of WIFOM doesn't work out and Niklor knows it.
if a cop claims, a doctor protects the cop. sure, the mafia will most likely not hit the cop, but the risk of losing the cop because the doc takes the off-chance to get lucky with his protect far outweights the benefit of said lucky off-chance protect. that is why a doc will protect the cop in said scenario.
now exposing yourself as doc is similar, but not quite as extreme as the above cop-scenario. but if you are a doc, you try not to expose yourself too much (while also avoiding to become a lurker). it is just basic mafia-game play. mafia 101 if you want to tell it so.

doc is also one of the easiest and safest roles for mafia to fakeclaim. if needed, they can even go no-hit during night to spend additional credibility (along with a tracker in the game a very nifty move). if a real doc counterclaims, all the better. town usually wants to keep the doc around, so that is additional incentive to keep him alive.

an outed shaky-doc is basically a big liability. he is basically unconfirmable. mafia might just keep him alive because the chances of an actual successful protection are very small, and then we have the same dilemma tomorrow again that we have right now.

the more day1 goes on, the more I'm confident that niklor is scum. not-lynching him will bite us in the back in one way or another during the remainder of this game.

tl,dr
nikors play during this whole game doesn't make sense as doc

Post #695 by Feroz-s_Familiar_Pheldy

PK, your posts are nigh-unreadable. it is very hard to tell which part of it is quote and what is your part in them. now I know that you can't edit them, but try better in the future. are you still drunk? perhaps it would be wise to become sober before resuming to post.

Post #696 by ProphetKing

"
What really bothers me about razorborne though is he is going around crowning other posts saying that they contain wise information, probably hoping some of the feeling of allignment of ProphetKing and pd_r will rub off on him. I did the same thing hoping someone would bite and point out what a stupid behavior it was, and razorborne jumped on my post and dismissed the whole thing by refering to my theatog vote as a lurker bandwagon vote (which is a fair assumption to make, i"

sleeping is an interesting poster i enjoy him, unique sjt like gambit "I AM ASECRET FOX"

...

Back seat drivers ate hthe worst, silly...

...

cool ffp is post

...
ta
"Voting for a random person with justification seems ok. Or Is that a play for demonstration?"

...what, English? I don't understand the problem you are posing. It is not problem.

...

"

Also, PK is slowly decending back to lurkerville.... without "vacation excuses". Think there are quite some amount of constructive material to comment on. Load your guns PK!! XD"

BANG BAGN

Greddeh:

"Other than PV, who seems to be inactive across the boards, and kinda PK, who is sticking to his 'I'm fixing Px2 thus I'm busy!' excuse."

no i'm good now

...

 
community.wizards.com/paranoia/go/thread...

i do not sagree conclusions basis none

...

Niklor:

"


Should I claim now or wait until tomorrow? Please note I will probably only take answers that come in the next few hours. "

why ask others if you shoudl claim, i do not like

"

Well, I'm either the doctor or I'm lying scum. Pick a side."

inclined to take the latter option

...

Minor decent point of Niklor on Silly cop poinintg...

...

Peregrine is back give him a pass.

...

OK that's done 


 

 





 

Post #697 by ProphetKing

May 3, 2012 -- 1:47AM, Feroz-s_Familiar_Pheldy wrote:

PK, your posts are nigh-unreadable. it is very hard to tell which part of it is quote and what is your part in them. now I know that you can't edit them, but try better in the future. are you still drunk? perhaps it would be wise to become sober before resuming to post.


OK, sure. Mostly to do because deadline and was behind.

I'm going to post some more thoughts which coherent and then I will resume later.

Post #698 by Rubik

Vote Count

Niklor - 4 (Ahlyis, FFP, Theatog)
theatog - 2 (Silly, Pdr_Br)
FFP - 1 (PK)
Sleeping - 1 (Razorborne)
razorborne - 3 (Sleeping, Freddeh, Niklor)
Not Voting - 2 (PeregrineV, ShadowFyre)



 

Post #699 by Freddeh

PK needs less nader voting, I assume its coming but a reminder anyway.

PV needs moar voting period, and ditto.
SF too.

Post #700 by ProphetKing

Doctor claims are claimed by scum more often than they are by actual doctors, according to study I read in like 2008. It's still a truism.

I actually like Niklor's bulk of posts and most of what he's brought to the game in terms of life but I do not like his post about his effort and what he does as scum. I'm not saying it's calculated, I'm saying it's not thinking straight to the post. Scum screw up *YOSHI*

Still the whole, "I am possibly going to protect myself" it's like a pre-built excuse to pardon his survival. That and doctors do not usually just self protect. So dctor who can just self protect, pretty good. Or its some crap with the WIFOM and fakery.

...

Flavor for swordless is p. good though, I'll grant that. Hrmm.

Right now we face a deadline, so if we abandon Niklor we'll probably hop on a crap wagon with like 3 people.

Post #701 by ProphetKing

May 3, 2012 -- 2:07AM, Freddeh wrote:

PK needs less nader voting, I assume its coming but a reminder anyway.

PV needs moar voting period, and ditto.
SF too.


It's coming I am can't do about decision, working on it as you.

Post #702 by ProphetKing

I can't support the Niklor lynch today, I want to go into D2 with Niklor;'s thinking and because it is often a self resolving problem the doctor claim, given mafia will often kill and thus no longer waste lynch. The flavor is also rocksolid, given swordless is a rel pony user.

Don't see a point in Sleeping, Atog, or FFP. Unvote: FFP TheAtog for why I said before, Sleeping due to inexperienced and coming on and FFP for try hard now. First two are in my box of analysis.

I would not have a problem with kill Freddeh but that isn't going to happen today. 

Razorborne wagon...big pile of meh. 

I actually think I;d like to ginto d2 with a lot of the same momentum and just take out Vote: ShadowFries. Roll the dice on activeish lurker lynch, your other choice could be Peregrine but I think he'll be good for it.

Around the deadline I'll attempt to split hairs between Razor and Niklor if I'm on, but I don't love either wagon.  

Post #703 by ProphetKing

Niklor - 4 (Ahlyis, FFP, Theatog)

Caregate and his claim.

theatog - 2 (Silly, Pdr_Br)

Logical blackholes.

Sleeping - 1 (Razorborne)

lurking

razorborne - 3 (Sleeping, Freddeh, Niklor)

For trying to ape credit.

I have to say I find the constinuties of the Niklor wagon kind of like, FFP/Ahl I do not find suspicious, The Atog basically makes it 4 with a 3 person case. 

Razorborne is the wagon I like less from the people grouping together on it, which is Freddeh/Sleeping/Niklor. 

If I had to flip a coin between Razor and Niklor, I'd shoot freddeh with a daykill then shoot Niklor, but I don't like the build of the Razor wagon given the context of their postings. I'll vote Niklor over Razor in a deadline crunch when I'm to be on.

Post #704 by Pdr_Br

Yesterday I got a feeling that Razor was defending Niklor so what is the best way to confirm if Razor was white knighting Niklor or simply defeding him? To lynch Niklor or to lynch Razor?

Post #705 by Feroz-s_Familiar_Pheldy

I have never participated in #pony-chat, but for me, role names are just meaningless. niklor can easily be scum and be swordless, or am I missing something?

Post #706 by ProphetKing

...to try and catch who is scum?

I mean you'd have to lynch Razor to answer the question, but the question is like, wtf...

Also rubik what is the eaxt time of the deadline please? 

Post #707 by ProphetKing

May 3, 2012 -- 2:22AM, Feroz-s_Familiar_Pheldy wrote:

I have never participated in #pony-chat, but for me, role names are just meaningless. niklor can easily be scum and be swordless, or am I missing something?


"Swordless," sword as a killing tool. Makes sense as a doc name.

Post #708 by Rubik

Vote Count

Niklor - 4 (Ahlyis, FFP, Theatog)
theatog - 2 (Silly, Pdr_Br)
ShadowFyre - 1 (PK)
Sleeping - 1 (Razorborne)
razorborne - 3 (Sleeping, Freddeh, Niklor)
Not Voting - 2 (PeregrineV, ShadowFyre)



Deadline


May 4th, 12:03 PM | PST
May 4th, 3:03 PM | EST


Time Remaining


~1 days, 9 hours, 36 minutes.

Post #709 by ProphetKing

Oh, that's a lot of time, we can still move to a new wagon during the day tomorrow with actuald ebate.

Post #710 by Pdr_Br

PK the names of the roles are based on the people that use the #Pony channel, which means that unless you know the people who post there correlating names to roles is useless and even that can fail if the Mod chose the roles independent of the names.

Post #711 by Freddeh

Think the deadline for EST is 3:03 if PST is 12:03...note to self set alarm.

Why u so bloodthirst against me PK?

Post #712 by Freddeh

Oh wait its past midnight I ARE GOOD AT TIMES.

Dammit not going to be around at the end of the day.

Post #713 by ProphetKing

May 3, 2012 -- 2:29AM, Pdr_Br wrote:

PK the names of the roles are based on the people that use the #Pony channel, which means that unless you know the people who post there correlating names to roles is useless and even that can fail if the Mod chose the roles independent of the names.


I find the correlation of swordless to being a doctor as a claim to be positive reflection in the light of Niklor. I am well aware of it is based on pony challen but what exactly you expect to role design? It makes sense and I am abide. The name itself is what it based off of - haven't you all seen stuff like, "Your name is orange, orange you glad to be vanilla?" Like that

@Frddh: I could ask you the same cestion.

Post #714 by ProphetKing

I incredibly regret not putting ""Your name is orange, orange you glad to be vanilla?"" in yoshi now

Post #715 by Freddeh

Because you were lurking? I at least gave a reason and have been fairly consistent with it throughout the day, you've only kinda sorta pointed out a couple things about me then said that you want to shoot me.

Post #716 by Silly_Dragons

Wha, how.

Why were there 50 posts at like 3 AM.

I'm currently in class, so I'll respond in a few hours.

Post #717 by Pdr_Br

Well it's because my role doesn't have a connection with my name, just that.

Post #718 by ProphetKing

Ahh, that's marginally better.

"
Well it's because my role doesn't have a connection with my name, just that."

Unless it's a blatant contradiction, like your name is "Friendly" and you're the vig, or your name is "Doctor" and youi're vanilla,  I'm not sure why your claim has relevance to Niklor's.

That said, I'm in favor of letting him live simply because he's a claimed doctor with three votes on him that have the majority because there's a charismatic there. The majority of town is not on board executing him - he hasn't a hit "unreedemable we must lynch him status". He is, quite possibly, a self resolving problem - leaving a pro town Niklor around suddenly seems like a horrible idea if some kind of cop or tracker claims.

 

Post #719 by ProphetKing

May 3, 2012 -- 2:34AM, Freddeh wrote:

Because you were lurking? I at least gave a reason and have been fairly consistent with it throughout the day, you've only kinda sorta pointed out a couple things about me then said that you want to shoot me.


I've said before why I dislike your posts, I feel all game you were overly aggressive against me while never pushing my case for the majority of the game with an actual vote. As I said before it looked as if you were trying to frame me. You appear to be instigating with me for virtually no reason, and have done so before the "lurking."

Post #720 by ProphetKing

Also me saying I wanted to shoot you happened at the dawn of the game a million posts ago before anything happened, don't post like I've never said anything of value against you since with "then you want to shoot me."

Post #721 by Niklor

There were some posts.

Before I respond to a lot of them I assume, Swordless is probably the doctor role flavorfully because his brother Marthy got server banned and he was fairly up in arms about it, giving him the power to prevent such.

Well, I probably would have given Swordless bulletproof instead, since he is more likely to get himself unbanned then unban others, but who am I to question the grand design.

Also, for most of you this means nothing. Swordless is swordless because speed running zelda without sword. 

Post #722 by Niklor

May 2, 2012 -- 11:28PM, PeregrineV wrote:

As for replacing out, this is the first game in since EVER that I couldn't get to at least daily. If we were ripe with eager beavers wanting in, I probably would of, just to be fair to everyone. Instead, I find my slef a little irritated, given this day one is 17 pages and I haven't had a chance to say crap, while the last two games of this size:
community.wizards.com/paranoia/go/thread...
and
community.wizards.com/paranoia/go/thread...(INVADERS_WIN)

Went 10 pages TOTAL and 19 pages TOTAL.
I felt like I was the only one talking in those. Now, not everyone here was in those games, but some of you were.

Instead of getting mad, though, I'll just say this.
Get over it.

Since I'm caught up now and can easily outread any future posts.




Are you telling yourself to get over it or us to get over it because suggesting you ask to be replaced out if you couldn't keep up was not an attack. It just seemed that if you honestly hadn't caught up yet, it was unlikely you would.

Regardless, glad to have you here now.

May 2, 2012 -- 11:28PM, PeregrineV wrote:

I'd like a succint bullet case on Niklor, Atog and Razor from the people voting them. One of the thing I feel is missing from this thread is cases and reasons why people are voting for certain people, and why those reaons are indicative of scum.




FFP thinks I'm scum because I'm being over-contributive to get town pants and generally drown town in pointless discussion. Ahlyis thinks I'm scum for an alledged pre-emptive deflection, at least I think that is still the primary reason. Theatog is similar to FFP's as far as I know, but he says it's not.

I'm voting Razor because I find him more suspicious than Atog and I'm trying to vote to survive. Much rather would lynch a lurker though.

May 3, 2012 -- 12:54AM, PeregrineV wrote:

The only one I'd classify as active lurking (or intentional lurking) would be PK. And it's not so much lurking as not scumhunting. Sleeping said he planned on keeping a low profile. He should be called to task for that, not for lukring. Shadow is practically a different person compared to most of his games. He's talking so much this game that, like Niklor, it's increased my scumfeel for him.




Define lurking.

Post #723 by Niklor

May 3, 2012 -- 1:09AM, ProphetKing wrote:

Nilkor 4433210: http://community.wizards.com/paranoia/go/thread/view/76625/29067123/Standard_Pony_Mafia&post_num=331#518920039


I agree with Niklor thatSilly is overconfident his nailing of scum, although his case is factually merited




Again, not seeing most of the case as well-formed or relevant.

May 3, 2012 -- 1:09AM, ProphetKing wrote:

Most of Niklor's posting is good although he replies to much irrelevant garbage and thus hurts the thread as a whole




Bleh

May 3, 2012 -- 1:09AM, ProphetKing wrote:

Niklor #337  

"Well, if you are scum you wouldn't have kept trying to buddy with me once called out for it. So I'm not sure what that proves."

Shake your WIFOM back and forth, shake your WIFOM back and forth. I don't have a problem with the WIFOM so much as it is definitve of a dfefinitveness




I have trouble separating how I think from WIFOM. Still doesn't make any sense for him to buddy with me if he is scum.

May 3, 2012 -- 1:09AM, ProphetKing wrote:

"I'm not going to alter how I played just because it gets me lynched and the idea that I am so malleable to be constantly affected by being lynched is insulting."

It works though and isn't an insult we try to do it with lurkers to pressure them.




We lynch lurkers to remove them from the game. I honestly don't see a lurker lynch eradicating lurkers eventually. They will keep appearing.

Also, it only works if I decide to change.

Post #724 by Niklor

May 3, 2012 -- 1:32AM, ProphetKing wrote:

Nikrl: community.wizards.com/paranoia/go/thread...

I would agree with your general summary of lurkers and would kill SF if i wanted a lurker to die, but i'm not invested in the d1  lurker ynch.




F*** you.

Post #725 by Niklor

May 3, 2012 -- 1:44AM, Feroz-s_Familiar_Pheldy wrote:

I don't buy the doc-claim.
mainly because I'm a very conservative mafia-games player.
docs shy the spotlight. exposing yourself as much as niklor did as town makes you ripe for mafia night kill.




I decided on how I was playing this game before I got my role. Unless the role is very different, I'm not going to let it directly affect how I play.

May 3, 2012 -- 1:44AM, Feroz-s_Familiar_Pheldy wrote:

the more day1 goes on, the more I'm confident that niklor is scum. not-lynching him will bite us in the back in one way or another during the remainder of this game.




Not scum.

May 3, 2012 -- 1:44AM, Feroz-s_Familiar_Pheldy wrote:

tl,dr
nikors play during this whole game doesn't make sense as doc




Makes fine sense to me.

Post #726 by Niklor

May 3, 2012 -- 1:59AM, ProphetKing wrote:

Niklor:


"


Should I claim now or wait until tomorrow? Please note I will probably only take answers that come in the next few hours. "

why ask others if you shoudl claim, i do not like




Already answered this.

May 3, 2012 -- 1:59AM, ProphetKing wrote:

Well, I'm either the doctor or I'm lying scum. Pick a side."


inclined to take the latter option




Why no vote then?


Post #727 by Niklor

May 3, 2012 -- 2:08AM, ProphetKing wrote:

Doctor claims are claimed by scum more often than they are by actual doctors, according to study I read in like 2008. It's still a truism.

I actually like Niklor's bulk of posts and most of what he's brought to the game in terms of life but I do not like his post about his effort and what he does as scum. I'm not saying it's calculated, I'm saying it's not thinking straight to the post. Scum screw up *YOSHI*

Still the whole, "I am possibly going to protect myself" it's like a pre-built excuse to pardon his survival. That and doctors do not usually just self protect. So dctor who can just self protect, pretty good. Or its some crap with the WIFOM and fakery.




It's one of those, yes.

May 3, 2012 -- 2:08AM, ProphetKing wrote:

Flavor for swordless is p. good though, I'll grant that. Hrmm.

Right now we face a deadline, so if we abandon Niklor we'll probably hop on a crap wagon with like 3 people.




I like how drunk PK thinks he understands the flavor.

Post #728 by Niklor

May 3, 2012 -- 2:15AM, ProphetKing wrote:

I can't support the Niklor lynch today, I want to go into D2 with Niklor;'s thinking and because it is often a self resolving problem the doctor claim, given mafia will often kill and thus no longer waste lynch. The flavor is also rocksolid, given swordless is a rel pony user.




So you're not going to vote me because if I am actually the Doctor, I'm probably dead. Thanks for the confidence.

You do know I sit in that chatroom on a regular basis. I could probably think of a handful of people who aren't probably in this game, but have been coming around long enough for me to fakeclaim as them, assuming mafia doesn't have fakeclaims.

May 3, 2012 -- 2:15AM, ProphetKing wrote:

I actually think I;d like to ginto d2 with a lot of the same momentum and just take out Vote: ShadowFries. Roll the dice on activeish lurker lynch, your other choice could be Peregrine but I think he'll be good for it.

Around the deadline I'll attempt to split hairs between Razor and Niklor if I'm on, but I don't love either wagon.  




I'd rather see the SF wagon.

Unvote; Vote: SF 

Post #729 by Niklor

May 3, 2012 -- 2:22AM, Feroz-s_Familiar_Pheldy wrote:

I have never participated in #pony-chat, but for me, role names are just meaningless. niklor can easily be scum and be swordless, or am I missing something?




You could probably take any person from #pony chat and cast them as either town or scum, so rolenames are essentially meaningless except as a means to counter each other in someone claims a rolename they have.

Post #730 by Niklor

May 3, 2012 -- 2:23AM, ProphetKing wrote:

May 3, 2012 -- 2:22AM, Feroz-s_Familiar_Pheldy wrote:

I have never participated in #pony-chat, but for me, role names are just meaningless. niklor can easily be scum and be swordless, or am I missing something?


"Swordless," sword as a killing tool. Makes sense as a doc name.




Post #731 by Niklor

May 3, 2012 -- 6:21AM, Pdr_Br wrote:

Well it's because my role doesn't have a connection with my name, just that.




You don't understand the connection more than likely. I'm sure there is one.

Post #732 by PeregrineV

May 3, 2012 -- 12:20PM, Niklor wrote:



FFP thinks I'm scum because I'm being over-contributive to get town pants and generally drown town in pointless discussion. Ahlyis thinks I'm scum for an alledged pre-emptive deflection, at least I think that is still the primary reason.




Nice of you to present the "cases" on you, but I wan tto hear fromt he voters themselves.

But, since you have your own version of the summary, what is your succint response to each charge?

I get the survival voting.

"Define lurking" sounds like an opening for a discussion on lurking. I've seen that in the first 500 posts, but would rather have it in a distinct mafia thoery thread after the game. Suffice to say that for all practical purposes in this game, it's like pornography.

Post #733 by Niklor

May 3, 2012 -- 12:46PM, PeregrineV wrote:

May 3, 2012 -- 12:20PM, Niklor wrote:



FFP thinks I'm scum because I'm being over-contributive to get town pants and generally drown town in pointless discussion. Ahlyis thinks I'm scum for an alledged pre-emptive deflection, at least I think that is still the primary reason.




Nice of you to present the "cases" on you, but I wan tto hear fromt he voters themselves.

But, since you have your own version of the summary, what is your succint response to each charge?

I get the survival voting.

"Define lurking" sounds like an opening for a discussion on lurking. I've seen that in the first 500 posts, but would rather have it in a distinct mafia thoery thread after the game. Suffice to say that for all practical purposes in this game, it's like pornography.




I'm playing in a very contributive manner because I decided to do so for this game. It has nothing to do with my alignment or role. If I was scum, I would be faking it of course, but I would still be trying to be contributive. Essentially, FFP is attacking my playstyle.

I think you saw me and Ahlyis arguing about the alleged pre-emptive deflection. It boils down to Ahlyis saying it is and me saying it isn't.

Mostly the same for Theatog as FFP, though I'm not 100% sure that that is his reason.

I mean I just want you to define lurking so I can understand why you don't think Sleeping or SF are lurking.

Post #734 by Ragnarokio

Vote Count

Niklor - 4 (Ahlyis, FFP, Theatog)
theatog - 2 (Silly, Pdr_Br)
ShadowFyre - 2 (PK, Niklor)
Sleeping - 1 (Razorborne)
razorborne - 2 (Sleeping, Freddeh)
Not Voting - 2 (PeregrineV, ShadowFyre) 


Deadline: ~23 hours

Post Count (not completely accurate)

Niklor - 200
Silly - 116
PK - 63
Freddeh - 60
Theatog - 44
Razorborne - 42
Ahlyis - 35
FFP - 24
Pdr_Br - 20
Shadowfyre - 14
Sleeping - 11
Peregrine - 10

Prodding... (Deadline will pass before most prods)

Niklor in 72 hours
Peregrine in 72 hours
PK in 69 hours
Pdr in 63 hours
Silly in 63 hours
Freddeh in 62 hours
FFP in 62 hours
Razorborne in 58 hours
Ahlyis in 52 hours
Theatog in 6 hours

Prodded:

Sleeping 0 hours ago
Shadowfyre 0 hours ago

Post #735 by Freddeh

May 3, 2012 -- 9:47AM, ProphetKing wrote:

May 3, 2012 -- 2:34AM, Freddeh wrote:

Because you were lurking? I at least gave a reason and have been fairly consistent with it throughout the day, you've only kinda sorta pointed out a couple things about me then said that you want to shoot me.


I've said before why I dislike your posts, I feel all game you were overly aggressive against me while never pushing my case for the majority of the game with an actual vote. As I said before it looked as if you were trying to frame me. You appear to be instigating with me for virtually no reason, and have done so before the "lurking."



Except I actually DID vote for you. For a large portion of the day. The only reason I'm not voting you now is because the day is about to end and I wasn't getting any support. Exactly the same reason you aren't voting for ME. (But you're the first one to vote for SF instead...)

Post #736 by theatog

ok. first off i'm 100 posts behind. right now at #661

I'm up to doc claim. 

I agree with silly. 
laid out a tiny thoughtmap: Show
A - (1)lynch / (0)no lynch
B - (1)town / (0)scum
C - (1)proc himself / (0)proc someone

ABC: Result
00-: bad for town. but lynch someone else can have more info
010: 50% chance dead doc. Scum needs to wifom or lose a nk
011: 50% confirm doc claim+scum lose NK. 50% someone else dies and no confirm to doc * I say 50-50 but i think the green option is more likely the logical scum play
10-: Ideal situation
11-: 100% dead doc



Unvote for now.
Just had a glimpse at the newest votecount. What has FFP been doing? Has he commented on the claim?

He went from semi-wagon to complying to pressure and keep track and now disappear again? I will finish reading first and I will probably push a wagon on either FFP or ahlyis.


I think Ahlyis is a good lynch unless he did something very towny. He commented on the issue and remain content of his vote on Nik. Imo, if you have other evidence to support Nik is scum OUTSIDE of his claim, then you should state your full case now. Otherwise, losing a doc, even if he's gimped, outweights the harm for town for lynching a potential scum. 

Post #737 by theatog

And GOD. it's 100 posts in 2 days because Nik is gunning for a Cop-leading discussion?

I'm freaking sure the cop will have a mind of his own and you walling for it doesn't help town. 

minus points for nik for keep doing the same day throughout the entire freaking day and not really help.

Even if I do agree with you that silly is suspicious for doing what he did, you don't have to say it over 20 posts. TBH, I am totally ok for lynching you just for such nonsense. But that would be the worst case scenario.

Post #738 by theatog

May 2, 2012 -- 10:31PM, razorborne wrote:

what's the point in a doc claim? it's a completely unconfirmable role, so either we believe you or we don't. the only way it helps is if you get counterclaimed, which means that as scum useful because it can lure out the real doc, whereas as town you risk screwing the town if the game has two weak docs or something.

also, fun fact: the three vote leaders are all, as of Rag's last post count, within the top five posters. remember when I said exactly that would happen? because I did. no one pays attention to lurkers, and that's why they keep getting away with it.

 


I agree completely to the lurker-getting away point of this post but that is very far from towny. That's just good play in general.

Freddeh makes an excellent point on raz for merely listing facts. 

Raz is playing Pro-meta rather than just pro-town imo. I don't think raz should be lynched today as he has done nothing too scummy either.

Overall, minus points for freddeh. I don't think Raz calls for that attack. You create this all-righteous stance out of this ok-valid point. I smell bad intent. Or I'm reading too much into it.

Post #739 by Freddeh

You've been voting Niklor for a while for similar reasons, I don't see how its bad for me but good for you. I also think Niklor is playing Pro-meta AND pro-town, so whats your point? Also you called it an excellent point, then gave me minus points for saying i made an all-righteous stance (not seeing this either...) out of an ok-valid point? Make up your mind is it Excellent or ok-valid?

So how is Raz playing Pro-meta by parroting others and staying in the middle of the pack as far as post-counts are concerned? With a lot of those posts being 1-liner nothing posts. I'll grant that he has had some decent posts mixed in there, but they didn't show up until someone mentioned it, and they've fallen back off as of late again as well.

Post #740 by theatog

"I'm mildly intoxicated" - PK
What an understatement. LOL


@Fred, sorry, I mentioned "excellent" coz' I didn't come to that point myself. Then I thought about it and conclude what I said later.


I am semi-panicking right now with little time left and 60+ more posts to go. With great power comes great responsibility. For the first time in my mafia-lifetime I think I have the power to lynch the player of my choice. And I am feeling that I have a very good chance (close to 40%) lynching scum. Based on the fact that there's a charismatic player and no long wagon formed. IMO, Scum, if played logically, needs to push wagon more aggresively to counteract charismatic vote. 

OR it's likely that most, if not all, people on the chopping block right now are town.

But then again logic is "assumed" to be playing by and nothing really preventing scum to do whatever else in a Day 1. So yea, 40%

Post #741 by theatog

Spoiler: Show

May 3, 2012 -- 1:44AM, Feroz-s_Familiar_Pheldy wrote:

I don't buy the doc-claim.
mainly because I'm a very conservative mafia-games player.
docs shy the spotlight. exposing yourself as much as niklor did as town makes you ripe for mafia night kill.

imagine niklor were town. early on in the game, he showed an exaggerated ammount of activity, replying on everything in the thread multiple times, clogging up the thread into near-unreadability. (as peregrine has already pointed out, whole games have been shorter than our day1). if niklor were town, mafia would be afraid of him and try to get ridd of him as soon as possible. so this over-activeness could be a giant play of WIFOM, but - as I've said before - I'm a conservative mafia-games player and this kind of WIFOM doesn't work out and Niklor knows it.
if a cop claims, a doctor protects the cop. sure, the mafia will most likely not hit the cop, but the risk of losing the cop because the doc takes the off-chance to get lucky with his protect far outweights the benefit of said lucky off-chance protect. that is why a doc will protect the cop in said scenario.
now exposing yourself as doc is similar, but not quite as extreme as the above cop-scenario. but if you are a doc, you try not to expose yourself too much (while also avoiding to become a lurker). it is just basic mafia-game play. mafia 101 if you want to tell it so.

doc is also one of the easiest and safest roles for mafia to fakeclaim. if needed, they can even go no-hit during night to spend additional credibility (along with a tracker in the game a very nifty move). if a real doc counterclaims, all the better. town usually wants to keep the doc around, so that is additional incentive to keep him alive.

an outed shaky-doc is basically a big liability. he is basically unconfirmable. mafia might just keep him alive because the chances of an actual successful protection are very small, and then we have the same dilemma tomorrow again that we have right now.

the more day1 goes on, the more I'm confident that niklor is scum. not-lynching him will bite us in the back in one way or another during the remainder of this game.

tl,dr
nikors play during this whole game doesn't make sense as doc




Hm.. Great post. 

What I get from this though is more of "Nik is probably a bad mafia player" rather than "Nik is scum". 


I have to say past experience with Nik makes me bias that Nik is potentially telling the truth. 
What is his history of being crafty? (<---Seriously need answers) TBH, if it was PK who claimed doc, I will have a complete different PoV. 

Post #742 by theatog

Heh. The game lights up when PK posts. even if it were a typohell.

My top lynch currently is Ahlyis and Freddeh.

Reason for lynching freddeh is somewhat simlar to PK. And I have mentioned before, he made attacks on players whose play is so far a nullread to me, and when the raz wagon just needed a bit more push.

Ahlyis for bad reasoning to take out Nik, basing on his claim.


And I don't get the SF wagon. Just because he's lurking? PK  really? Out of lurking and freddeh you picked lurking? I am completely dissatified with your choice : P

Post #743 by Niklor

May 3, 2012 -- 1:19PM, theatog wrote:

And GOD. it's 100 posts in 2 days because Nik is gunning for a Cop-leading discussion?

I'm freaking sure the cop will have a mind of his own and you walling for it doesn't help town. 

minus points for nik for keep doing the same day throughout the entire freaking day and not really help.

Even if I do agree with you that silly is suspicious for doing what he did, you don't have to say it over 20 posts. TBH, I am totally ok for lynching you just for such nonsense. But that would be the worst case scenario.




Well, it's not. Though I'm sure you've seen that by now.

Post #744 by theatog

May 3, 2012 -- 2:26PM, Niklor wrote:

May 3, 2012 -- 1:19PM, theatog wrote:

And GOD. it's 100 posts in 2 days because Nik is gunning for a Cop-leading discussion?

I'm freaking sure the cop will have a mind of his own and you walling for it doesn't help town. 

minus points for nik for keep doing the same day throughout the entire freaking day and not really help.

Even if I do agree with you that silly is suspicious for doing what he did, you don't have to say it over 20 posts. TBH, I am totally ok for lynching you just for such nonsense. But that would be the worst case scenario.




Well, it's not. Though I'm sure you've seen that by now.


Yup. I stand corrected.

What do you think of an Ahlyis or Freddeh lynch today?

Post #745 by Niklor

We need to lynch lurkers, Theatog. SF wagon is completely valid.

I am not a bad player because I refuse to allow my role to command my playstyle.

There was that game I was after Jedcaj, but was scum. Can't remember how that played out for me though. I replaced a cult leader in that game that PK got Mono to rat our his scumbuddies. That was fun.

Post #746 by Freddeh

May 3, 2012 -- 2:24PM, theatog wrote:

Heh. The game lights up when PK posts. even if it were a typohell.

My top lynch currently is Ahlyis and Freddeh.

Reason for lynching freddeh is somewhat simlar to PK. And I have mentioned before, he made attacks on players whose play is so far a nullread to me, and when the raz wagon just needed a bit more push.

Ahlyis for bad reasoning to take out Nik, basing on his claim.


And I don't get the SF wagon. Just because he's lurking? PK  really? Out of lurking and freddeh you picked lurking? I am completely dissatified with your choice : P




Your logic is pretty weak, I already explained why PK's reasoning is just wrong, and you made attacks on a player who I think is town, that doesn't automatically make anyone scum. You're basically going after me because I think Razor is scum, just because you aren't sure whether hes scum or town. Also, is it a wagon when there was just one person on it at the time?

And lets not mention how this is funny because you've been voting for someone all day who I, personally, thought was town, and then immidiately jump off of it when he claims doc.

Post #747 by Niklor

Ahlyis is tunnelvisioning on me over something he sees important. I don't find it scummy, just annoying.

Freddeh has said some odd things here and there, but I haven't got any scum vibes off him.

Of the two, I would rather see Freddeh lynched than Ahlyis because Freddeh has more opinions piled on top of him over what he has done.

BUT LURKERS! 

Post #748 by Niklor

May 3, 2012 -- 2:41PM, Freddeh wrote:

Your logic is pretty weak, I already explained why PK's reasoning is just wrong, and you made attacks on a player who I think is town, that doesn't automatically make anyone scum. You're basically going after me because I think Razor is scum, just because you aren't sure whether hes scum or town. Also, is it a wagon when there was just one person on it at the time?




You've explained why his reasoning doesn't make sense from your perspective. You have not refuted it.

Post #749 by ProphetKing

@Niklor

"I like how drunk PK thinks he understands the flavor."

An IRC chat about #ponies isn't something much you can do research on.

Apparently actual things have happened in the chatroom.

"So you're not going to vote me because if I am actually the Doctor, I'm probably dead. Thanks for the confidence."

Resource management, mang.

"You do know I sit in that chatroom on a regular basis. I could probably think of a handful of people who aren't probably in this game, but have been coming around long enough for me to fakeclaim as them, assuming mafia doesn't have fakeclaims." 

As for my vote, thinking continues while I post. Especially when I am mildly intoxicated. 

"You don't understand the connection more than likely. I'm sure there is one."
 
Eh.

Freddeh:

"Except I actually DID vote for you. For a large portion of the day. The only reason I'm not voting you now is because the day is about to end and I wasn't getting any support. Exactly the same reason you aren't voting for ME. (But you're the first one to vote for SF instead...)"
 
Sure, but now I'm restricted by time. Then you were not.

"
And I don't get the SF wagon. Just because he's lurking? PK  really? Out of lurking and freddeh you picked lurking? I am completely dissatified with your choice : P"

Oh, you like the Freddeh wagon? I'll leech off the charismatic.

Unvote: SF, Vote: Freddeh 


 

Post #750 by Freddeh

May 3, 2012 -- 2:44PM, Niklor wrote:

May 3, 2012 -- 2:41PM, Freddeh wrote:

Your logic is pretty weak, I already explained why PK's reasoning is just wrong, and you made attacks on a player who I think is town, that doesn't automatically make anyone scum. You're basically going after me because I think Razor is scum, just because you aren't sure whether hes scum or town. Also, is it a wagon when there was just one person on it at the time?




You've explained why his reasoning doesn't make sense from your perspective. You have not refuted it.



Him saying I didn't back up my accusations with a vote and me saying I did is not a refutation?

If I must be lynched for info then I accept it, and you'll even get some bonus info out of it, so don't squander it. You may call this defeatist but I'm about to leave town and I'll be on the road for most of tonight and tomorrow morning until deadline at least, and the way peoples thoughts are leaning is not looking great for me.

Post #751 by Ragnarokio

Vote Count

Niklor - 2 (Ahlyis, FFP)
theatog - 2 (Silly, Pdr_Br)
ShadowFyre - 1 (Niklor)
Sleeping - 1 (Razorborne)
razorborne - 2 (Sleeping, Freddeh)
Freddeh - 1 (PK)
Not Voting - 2 (PeregrineV, ShadowFyre) 


Deadline: ~21 hours

Post Count (not completely accurate)

Niklor - 204
Silly - 116
PK - 64
Freddeh - 64
Theatog - 51
Razorborne - 42
Ahlyis - 35
FFP - 24
Pdr_Br - 20
Shadowfyre - 14
Sleeping - 11
Peregrine - 10

Prodding... (Deadline will pass before most prods)

Freddeh in 72 hours
PK in 72 hours
Niklor in 72 hours
Theatog in 72 hours
Peregrine in 70 hours
Pdr in 61 hours
Silly in 61 hours
FFP in 60 hours
Razorborne in 56 hours
Ahlyis in 50 hours

Prodded:

Sleeping 2 hours ago
Shadowfyre 2 hours ago

Post #752 by ProphetKing

I'll call it alarmist personally Freddeh.

Post #753 by PeregrineV

@Rag or Rubik- Where is Atog in VC please.

Post #754 by Silly_Dragons

May 3, 2012 -- 1:44AM, Feroz-s_Familiar_Pheldy wrote:

I don't buy the doc-claim.
mainly because I'm a very conservative mafia-games player.
docs shy the spotlight. exposing yourself as much as niklor did as town makes you ripe for mafia night kill.

imagine niklor were town. early on in the game, he showed an exaggerated ammount of activity, replying on everything in the thread multiple times, clogging up the thread into near-unreadability. (as peregrine has already pointed out, whole games have been shorter than our day1). if niklor were town, mafia would be afraid of him and try to get ridd of him as soon as possible. so this over-activeness could be a giant play of WIFOM, but - as I've said before - I'm a conservative mafia-games player and this kind of WIFOM doesn't work out and Niklor knows it.
if a cop claims, a doctor protects the cop. sure, the mafia will most likely not hit the cop, but the risk of losing the cop because the doc takes the off-chance to get lucky with his protect far outweights the benefit of said lucky off-chance protect. that is why a doc will protect the cop in said scenario.
now exposing yourself as doc is similar, but not quite as extreme as the above cop-scenario. but if you are a doc, you try not to expose yourself too much (while also avoiding to become a lurker). it is just basic mafia-game play. mafia 101 if you want to tell it so.

doc is also one of the easiest and safest roles for mafia to fakeclaim. if needed, they can even go no-hit during night to spend additional credibility (along with a tracker in the game a very nifty move). if a real doc counterclaims, all the better. town usually wants to keep the doc around, so that is additional incentive to keep him alive.

an outed shaky-doc is basically a big liability. he is basically unconfirmable. mafia might just keep him alive because the chances of an actual successful protection are very small, and then we have the same dilemma tomorrow again that we have right now.

the more day1 goes on, the more I'm confident that niklor is scum. not-lynching him will bite us in the back in one way or another during the remainder of this game.

tl,dr
nikors play during this whole game doesn't make sense as doc



I'm inclined to agree with this. Doc is one of the easiest roles for scum to claim.

Post #755 by Rubik

Vote Count


Niklor - 2 (Ahlyis, FFP)
theatog - 2 (Silly, Pdr_Br)
ShadowFyre - 1 (Niklor)
Sleeping - 1 (Razorborne)
razorborne - 2 (Sleeping, Freddeh)
Freddeh - 1 (PK)
Not Voting - 3 (PeregrineV, ShadowFyre, theatog)
 

Post #756 by Silly_Dragons

I don't understand any of PK's drunk posts.

Also, I'm not buying the flavor thing with our roles. Seriously, everybody is based off of a random person in the chatroom.

For example, I will fully admit right now that my rolename is Yanmato (yanamoto? however you spell it). Does that in any way, shape, or form give you hints as to my role?

Post #757 by Silly_Dragons

So I finished reading the thread. I have no idea what to think.

Post #758 by Silly_Dragons

Alright guys, let me think aloud here for a second.

FFP's uncharacteristically long post speaks to my soul. It feels like exactly something that I would type. Like literally, almost word for word. And my gut is telling me to just ride the Niklor lynch out and see what he flips. However, my brain is disagreeing with my gut. It pains me to say that Niklor might not be the best lynch today.

If we lynch Niklor and he's mafia, that's fine and dandy, but he might not be mafia, and I do feel that other people might be deserving of getting lynched based on their actions more than Niklor.

Post #759 by Silly_Dragons

:/

Unvote.

Vote: SF

Post #760 by Silly_Dragons

For now, I think Shadow may be our best lynch. He did have some activity somewhere in the middle of the day, but honestly he hasn't really done anything, and has dropped into lurking again.

Also, based on the previous few posts, a Freddeh wagon may be developong. I need to look back and see if Freddeh is a good lynch or not. For now, I'm neutral towards him.

Post #761 by Rubik

Vote Count


Niklor - 2 (Ahlyis, FFP)
theatog - 1 (Pdr_Br)
ShadowFyre - 2 (Niklor, Silly)
Sleeping - 1 (Razorborne)
razorborne - 2 (Sleeping, Freddeh)
Freddeh - 1 (PK)
Not Voting - 3 (PeregrineV, ShadowFyre, theatog)

Post #762 by Niklor

May 3, 2012 -- 2:47PM, ProphetKing wrote:

@Niklor

"I like how drunk PK thinks he understands the flavor."

An IRC chat about #ponies isn't something much you can do research on.

Apparently actual things have happened in the chatroom.




You could go the IRC chat and question people not in this game about people in the chat. Not sure what you'll get from that though. We do not have a wiki, unfortunately.

May 3, 2012 -- 2:47PM, ProphetKing wrote:

"You do know I sit in that chatroom on a regular basis. I could probably think of a handful of people who aren't probably in this game, but have been coming around long enough for me to fakeclaim as them, assuming mafia doesn't have fakeclaims." 

As for my vote, thinking continues while I post. Especially when I am mildly intoxicated.




What is that even responding to in what I said?

May 3, 2012 -- 2:47PM, ProphetKing wrote:

"You don't understand the connection more than likely. I'm sure there is one."
 
Eh.




Eh yourself. 

May 3, 2012 -- 2:47PM, ProphetKing wrote:

"

And I don't get the SF wagon. Just because he's lurking? PK  really? Out of lurking and freddeh you picked lurking? I am completely dissatified with your choice : P"

Oh, you like the Freddeh wagon? I'll leech off the charismatic.

Unvote: SF, Vote: Freddeh 




Post #763 by Niklor

May 3, 2012 -- 3:02PM, Freddeh wrote:

May 3, 2012 -- 2:44PM, Niklor wrote:

May 3, 2012 -- 2:41PM, Freddeh wrote:

Your logic is pretty weak, I already explained why PK's reasoning is just wrong, and you made attacks on a player who I think is town, that doesn't automatically make anyone scum. You're basically going after me because I think Razor is scum, just because you aren't sure whether hes scum or town. Also, is it a wagon when there was just one person on it at the time?




You've explained why his reasoning doesn't make sense from your perspective. You have not refuted it.



Him saying I didn't back up my accusations with a vote and me saying I did is not a refutation?

If I must be lynched for info then I accept it, and you'll even get some bonus info out of it, so don't squander it. You may call this defeatist but I'm about to leave town and I'll be on the road for most of tonight and tomorrow morning until deadline at least, and the way peoples thoughts are leaning is not looking great for me.




Refuting to me means making the accussation invalid. You saying, "No I didn't" isn't making the accussation invalid.

I'd rather lynch lurkers, but you people can't get behind that. 

Post #764 by Niklor

May 3, 2012 -- 3:43PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

Also, I'm not buying the flavor thing with our roles. Seriously, everybody is based off of a random person in the chatroom.

For example, I will fully admit right now that my rolename is Yanmato (yanamoto? however you spell it). Does that in any way, shape, or form give you hints as to my role?




No, but it tells me you are portraying one of Rag's kin and that's mildly amusing.

Post #765 by Niklor

May 3, 2012 -- 3:54PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

Alright guys, let me think aloud here for a second.

FFP's uncharacteristically long post speaks to my soul. It feels like exactly something that I would type. Like literally, almost word for word. And my gut is telling me to just ride the Niklor lynch out and see what he flips. However, my brain is disagreeing with my gut. It pains me to say that Niklor might not be the best lynch today.

If we lynch Niklor and he's mafia, that's fine and dandy, but he might not be mafia, and I do feel that other people might be deserving of getting lynched based on their actions more than Niklor.




"If we lynch X and he's mafia, that's fine and dandy, but he might not be mafia."

How are things going for you, Captain Obvious? 

FFP's post is based on how he thinks doc should play. I think the doc, like everyone else in the town, should be trying to catch scum primarily, not worried about avoiding spotlights or getting lynched.

As for your gut versus your brain, unless there is strong evidence to the contrary, you should go with your gut. 

Post #766 by Niklor

May 3, 2012 -- 3:57PM, Silly_Dragons wrote:

For now, I think Shadow may be our best lynch. He did have some activity somewhere in the middle of the day, but honestly he hasn't really done anything, and has dropped into lurking again.

Also, based on the previous few posts, a Freddeh wagon may be developong. I need to look back and see if Freddeh is a good lynch or not. For now, I'm neutral towards him.




SF is a good lurker lynch.

I disagree that he is probably our best lynch.

Any opinion on lynching SF at this point is going to be driven mostly from the fact he is lurking, so unless he is lurking scum there isn't a lot of information to be gained from his lynch.

However, as a matter of policy, lurker lynching is good for the meta, so let's do it. 

Post #767 by ProphetKing

The laughing does not endear you to me.

I'll concede the flavor argument I made before is bad - I had a "grasp" of what the game was and too internalized how I thought things would work. It wasn't like that at apparently.

The IRC chat was a good suggestion, I didn't even think of that.

I also meant to reply to your question about lynching yourself. Not sure why that's there. 

Post #768 by Sleeping

>>>theatog
Sleeping changing vote to Raz.
- seems ok-towny. Although he have no pressure whatsoever to save himself despite he's been one of the hottest topic yet. Voting for a random person with justification seems ok. Or Is that a play for demonstration?


What do you mean by "random person with justification", do you mean that I picked somebody randomly and came up with justification afterward? I can assure you that isn't what happened, I have trouble enough finding justification to lynch anyone, forcing myself to look for a reason to lynch a particular person would be tough. I think trying to build visable partnerships with other people though is one of the bigger scumtells, and that's why I said something. Of course to quote Ragnarokio:


"common scumhunting method among new players is observing own hab