Tregit: there's literally nothing you posted that I especially like. At the risk of sounding horribly biased, everything you said can be given a scummy slant.
Quote from Tregit in post #645 »
I'll buy that he is a God from Mindy Klasky's books. That site seems obscure enough that I doubt he'd find it while looking for false claims. However there are half a dozen scummy looking Gods on the list, and he pretty much had free reign over which one he'd claim.
I agree with Puzzle though, rather than tell us more about your character at the moment, I'd prefer some attempt at defense.
What's interesting here is the way you seem to assume that he might be a God from those books but still false-claiming. As though he might have been a scummier sounding God from the same series, and decided to false-claim, but still stay within the same series. Why would he do that exactly? As long as he's he's false-claiming anyway.
A scum from that series would very likely assume that there would be town(s) from that series in the game also. So false claiming is still a risk. Why pick your actual series in that case?
Quote from Tregit in post #655 »
As to the Abso wagon, he's not in the top of my scum suspects, but he's certainly playing rather scummily, and if he doesn't defend himself soon, I probably will be adding my vote to his wagon.
Here we have the scummy threat to vote later unless satisfied. Even though he's "not in the top" of your scum suspects. Who were those again? Are you saying you'd vote him over someone else you think more likely to be scum? Or just that if he didn't defend himself better, that would cause him to become your top suspect?
Quote from Tregit in post #661 »
I supose it's worth asking if anyone found another reference to Fen anywhere, or if anyone has read the Glasswright series. Doubtful, and even if one has, it may not help us at all; still, might be interesting.
CC- The difference being that Chuck's was smoldering for a while, but with nothing new. A new attack once people had become a bit restless may have been all that was needed. It's possible that the same thing would have resulted on chuck had Puzzle's post density/scum density index pointed there instead. I'm not saying the speed differences aren't relevant, just that the confunding details are such that it's difficult to impossible to judge how they're relevant. If absolutionis satisfies our curiosity, chuck is certainly a decent place to look. Hopefully his promise to now post more frequently will pan out.
The first part of this post is meaningless. Not of any use whatsoever, despite your attempt to sound helpful. I don't understand what you are saying in the second part.
Quote from Tregit in post #664 »
Hmm, that changes things. Not exactly sure how yet, but still...
Really? Think about it for a minute. Why did you post this anyway?
Quote from Tregit in post #671 »
Bad MD! No fishing!
If Abso is the doc, and can't disuade us from lynching by argument, he'll claim. You shouldn't put words in his mouth. He or someone else might confirm or deny that, which would be info we DON'T need.
BTW, try to find Fen on Google w/ out typing Fen or "God of Mercy", I suspect it will take a while.
I dislike the condescending tone here. Also, you keep using the plural "we" and "us" in your posts. Lilke you are trying to bury yourself in amongst townies for all your actions.
Quote from Tregit in post #686 »
MD- make no mistake, that wagon has nothing to do with an outside grudge, and everything to do with a very scummy play.
That said, I actually think this is somewhat excusable by the newb defense. Granted even the most unexpericend at mafia would realize that as scum they want to figure out who the doc is. At the same time, MD may not have realized that this would potentially bring out a claim that doesn't need to come out, or may have honestly believed that "god of mercy" must be doc.
Just as food for thought: God of Protection, God of Healing, God of Resurection, etc. And that's without going outside of the standard defenition of doctor.
EWP: The harm is that Abso might say either yeah, I'm the doc, or no I'm not the doc. This is info we don't want the mafia to have. If doc, he might be able to get out of this without claiming (though that looked rather unlikely before you posted). If not the doc, (and not lynched today) it tells the scum a bit more about where to look for power roles. Even more so if Abso says "I'm not the doc I'm xxx." Worst would be if the real (inexperienced) doc says "I doubt abso is the doc 'cause then there would be 2." Or such. Basically, the town wants to protect the power roles at all costs, fishing erodes this protection and is bad.
More talking down to MD. And a bit too much stating of the obvious.
Quote from Tregit in post #715 »
Silicon, I challenge you to name a single pantheon containing only scummy Gods. I seriously doubt they're out there, thus scum already know a Pantheon that was included in the game from which they can pull their false claim (if needed). Even if they didn't think they could false claim from their pantheon, all scum need to do is wait for a single lynch (or claim) and they know included pantheons.
I would absolutly love to have a scum say "I know Zeus is in this game and town" when zeus is their scum buddy, or there scum buddy is planning to claim zeus. Why? Because this gives us 2 for one scum if the SK or vig kills either. BTW, scum hardly need my pantheon prodding to false claim masons.
As far as generating discussion (primarily about me), it's something I try in every game. I also end up being the primary band wagon at some point day 1, but haven't ever been lynched. (Though one time I caused my "brother" to be lynced because people wanted to kill me.)
This post doesn't make any sense. Maybe I'm not understanding. Are you saying you think the scum are more or less likely to be falseclaiming?
Quote from Tergit in post #722 »
Even if he does come back vanilla, I don't know that that definitvely clears him. More than anything I'd love to hear analysis from him. Who does he find scummy. Why particularily. (If it's because they're on his wagon, what differentiates them from others on the wagon.) What sort of faulty arguments particularily does he see Puzzle using, etc.
I really don't like this one. Before we know what Cyan will say, you are dismissing it and appear to be trying to keep the lynch on regardless of result.
Quote from Tregit in post #730 »
That said, we know nothing about Cyan's ability except that it will say whether or not Abso is vanilla, it won't even show alignment. At this point, Cyan's certainty is all the info I want from him.
You just said it wouldn't prove anything. Why do you even care about Cyan's certainty?
Quote from Tregit in post #741 »
Note how abso avoids answering questions, or providing a defense instead choosing to rely on Cyan to clear him. This is exactly what I don't want.
Abso, start providing content, analysis and defense or I will vote you in 24 hours.
Again with the threats to vote if not satisfied. I'm not going to say I haven't seen towns do that, but I've seen scums do it more.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Quote from Bateleur »
Ambush Krotiq makes me laugh so much. I keep rereading the card and it keeps not having Flash. In what sense is this an ambush again? I just have visions of this huge Krotiq poorly concealed in some bushes, feeling slightly sad that his carefully planned ambushes never seem to work.
I'm not sure why people are so quick to assume that the scum would not have any vanilla players. This is not to take anything away from Absolutionis, just another observation. However, given that people seem to be willing to give him a chance (or at least, they assume he's not a threat) I would be very happy with a Treigit lynch.
Again, you know the main points against Treigit and could have adressed them as well. But that can wait for my case for his scummery.
I, for one, am waiting with bated breath.
Do tell.:unibrow:
Quote from !Chucklez! »
Damn, I never realized you guys were missing out on the awesome feature over there. Just shows you in thread form all posts by anyone you specify in order. It's super convenient, but I only realize this now that I don't have it. :-(
W – 33, L – 19, Broke Games - 9
Calvin & Hobbs Mafia, Mafia MVP
X-Men Mafia Town MVP
Simpson's Mafia - best use of character
Mtgnews Mafia Mafia - Town Madman
Mythos Mafia: the Dunwich Massacre Town MVP
English Literature Mafia Town MVP
Best Role-Playing Sin City Mafia
Werewolf Mafia - Mafia MVP
Doctor Mafia - Mafia MVP
Mafia: Escape from the Cylons - Town MVP
Lost Mafia - Co SK Winner with Kops
Random Mafia 3 - Town MVP
I'm not exactly thrilled by abso's anaylsis. The fact that we have parts of what he claimed confirmed helps a bit.
@cyan: You have said twice now that you doubt there are any vanilla mafia members. Do you have some specific reason that you're willing to share for doubting vanilla mafioso?
I think I only said that once, not that it really matters. I just find it unlikely. From the games that I've participated in/read through, Vanilla mafia only tend to occur in Minis and Newb Mafia. In particular, considering that DM's last game had no Vanilla roles at all(though we know that Abso is Vanilla in this one), I find it unlikely that he would create Vanilla mafioso.
Also, a game this size probably has 5-6 Mafioso and an SK, or 5 Mafia, 1 SK, 1 Cult. That leaves room for 20ish townies, most of which are going to have abilities. In a game that size, the mafia basically all have to have abilities of some sort of the game to have any sort of balance...as we can all agree that DM knows what he's doing, logically, I think that it stands to reason that all of the mafia will have an ability of some sort. Honestly, I'm pretty surprised that the first person that got called out was a Vanilla Townie, which is why I chose to use my ability to verify this(I thought that he was just lying to cover for an ability that would condemn him).
Outguessing the mod is never a game that should be played. But, I tend to agree with Cyan here. Unvote, vote: arimnaes. I still don't believe Treigit is the right lynch for today.
I think I only said that once, not that it really matters. I just find it unlikely. From the games that I've participated in/read through, Vanilla mafia only tend to occur in Minis and Newb Mafia. In particular, considering that DM's last game had no Vanilla roles at all(though we know that Abso is Vanilla in this one), I find it unlikely that he would create Vanilla mafioso.
Also, a game this size probably has 5-6 Mafioso and an SK, or 5 Mafia, 1 SK, 1 Cult. That leaves room for 20ish townies, most of which are going to have abilities. In a game that size, the mafia basically all have to have abilities of some sort of the game to have any sort of balance...as we can all agree that DM knows what he's doing, logically, I think that it stands to reason that all of the mafia will have an ability of some sort. Honestly, I'm pretty surprised that the first person that got called out was a Vanilla Townie, which is why I chose to use my ability to verify this(I thought that he was just lying to cover for an ability that would condemn him).
If you'd spent much time designing games, you'd find it's hard to give general abilities (ie mafia roleblock) to each of the scum in the game after you have more than four. In that context, it's perfectly reasonable to have a vanilla mafioso, purely for making the mafia large enough to be capable. Seinfeld had one, for example.
Between Axel's analysis of Treigit's recent posts, and Cyan's reasoning for why he things vanilla status clears Abso, I feel rather comfortable taking the second of the two options I was considering last post (i.e. the one I didn't take last time). Unvote, Vote Treigit
I've been thinking that Treigit is scum for quite some time, and some of the stuff Axel pointed out just keeps pushing him that way.
On the Abso front, I'm still not completely convinced that he's town, but Cyan's explantation does give him some more points toward townie in my book. I mean seriously. Even if there is 1 vanilla scum, what's the likelihood that we hit that one guy out of the 27 with the Abso wagon? (It's higher than 1/27 because we ignored really townie-looking people, but still.)
So basically,
@Abso: Keep talking!
But I'm happy pushing Treigit for now.
I'm not sure why, but the vibe I'm getting from Cyan says to me that he and Abso are scum together and Cyan manufactured an ability to "clear" him. Even if Cyan does in fact have an ability that can tell us whether Abso is vanilla, and even if Cyan is telling the truth about the results, that in no way means that Abso is town. The existence of vanilla mafia would either mean that the mafia group is somewhat larger than normal, there is some other anti-town faction out there, or that there are also vanilla townies. All of those reasons could be the reason for vanilla mafia members as balance for the scum. FoS Cyan
I notice that Abso gives his thoughts on 12 players, and with varying degrees of certainty calls 5 of them scum. He also listed most of the people on his wagon, except krashbot, MMoD, and myself. According to his list, at least 3 of the people on his wagon are scum. Right now I'm simply inclined to think that he's desperately trying to cast suspicion on his attackers. Vote stands.
EBWODP: D'oh, must remember to read all the pages before posting. I'm still not sure that Abso is cleared, even with two people confirming parts of his story. Granted, it would be too much to hope for that 2 scum came out to defend their buddy by confirming his claim, but it's hard for me to reconcile Abso's actions with his supposed townieness.
However, Axelrod's PBPA of Treigit's recent posts is fairly damning. I have remained suspect of Treigit ever since he catapulted himself into the spotlight, and his recent actions do indeed seem to be the actions of a scum trying to force a mislynch.
"Flesh so fine, so fine to tear, to gash the skin; skin to strip, to plait, so nice to plait the strips, so nice, so red the drops that fall; blood so red, so red, so sweet; sweet screams, pretty screams, singing screams, scream your song, sing your screams…” - The Eye of the World - Robert Jordan
He also listed most of the people on his wagon, except krashbot, MMoD, and myself. According to his list, at least 3 of the people on his wagon are scum. Right now I'm simply inclined to think that he's desperately trying to cast suspicion on his attackers. Vote stands.
Let's imagine for a moment that I'm town (I'm not saying I'm not, I'm simply saying cast out all suspicion for the sake of the scenario), and Puzzle is leading a quickly gathering bandwagon against me.
Wouldn't it make a lot of sense for scum to join in on this bandwagon at varying times in order to strengthen it to force a mislynch?
Note that I'm not seeing scum in people voting on me in order to get the blame off of myself or even for revenge of sorts. I genuinely see them as scum, partially for their actions.
Is there something wrong with pointing out that 3 out of 8 people voting for me might be scum?
Now, on the subject of Tregit, I'm leaning more and more scum. I see CropCircles and Puzzle as both heavy scum.
I noticed, back on the Tregit bandwagon, both of these players did not join in at all. Seeing as how CropCircles was so quick to join the bandwagon against me, I find it surprising that he didn't try and take out Tregit the bandwagon before. And Puzzle didn't assault him with his near-trademarked barrage.
In any case, I believe there are bigger scum to kill, but Tregit is looking worse in my eyes, for reasons mostly attributed to others' actions around him.
A couple of random posts to begin, commenting on chaos of thread, enttry post.
#189: Patronises Treigit for pressuring him for content. Votes MD for defensiveness, and patronises. Kids around with treigit on Christian God.
#272: Attacks puzzles unvote of MD; considers ideas Puzzle put forward as damning, suggests that a newb worried about five votes wouldn't so easily put another player at the same - therefore intent to kill.
#289: claims as joke post but put scum light on Chucklez as displaying a guilty conscience.
#349: Starts by saying 'one outraged post [not] enough to cry scum over' then approves of Kenji's vote anyway. Inserts a lot of scummy sentiment into a post of bluesoul's that can be read as quite innocent. Votes bluesoul on that basis.
#389: Defense of Puzzle w/ qualification - 'not entirely sure why'. Comments negatively (using sarcasm rather than explanation) on example 'sparrow gives.
Strawman: Attacks 'sparrow's case by refuting with irrelevant reasoning; argues better to lynch any scum than no scum - 'sparrows comment was that it is better to lynch experienced scum before inexperienced. The two are disconnected, and therefore the argument is misrepresentative - essentially it makes it seem as though 'sparrow is trying to keep scum in the game when that is clearly not his (overt) intent. Then runs away from this aspersion - 'isn't enough to vote for you either'.
#395: reasserts suspicion of 'sparrows argument, suggests 'pigeons should also find him (AH) scummy if he disagree's with his argument - essentially telling cp how to think.
#398: Defends stance on Puzzle/MD, and further encourages vote on himself, forcing confrontation. condescending finish - bit muddled hard to follow (mostly cause its late).
---Carrion accuses AH of Stawmanning---
#423: AH responds to strawman accusation by further arguing irrelevant point. Talks 'absolutes' and 'possibilities' but adds nothing useful to discussion and then backs away from argument.
#448:supports CropCircles case against carrion (which was fair), drops bluesoul vote while still maintaining interest in bluesoul. Swift change a little opportunistic (and retaliatory?)
#456:Accepts cp's defensce returns to voting bluesoul.
#492: Tries to make blusoul look scummy by asserting he's using some form of logical fallacy (barning is not a logical fallacy by the way). Further no logical fallacy is present in the quoted text - actually comments on interaction between kops and Treigit.
#496: banter w/ Puzzle
#502:more banter. accuses Machin of lurking being out of character (therefore scummy?) but suggests better targets than lurkers (bluesoul). No further elaboration on Vote.
#522: FoS Machin Shin for previous post. seems to be joining a FoS bandwagon. Ensures his suspicion is noted but acheives nothing more with this post. Attempt to make MS look scummy?
#538: supports Treigit claim but continues bluesoul vote. Has as yet failed to comment on Treigit at all.
#545:Calls Treigit suspicious for first time (though implied in call for claim), but thinks bluesoul more suspicious. Proposes vote only after claim fails to 'allay... suspicions'. Does not explain why bluesoul is scummier. Claims need to be sure of scumminess to vote Treigit.
As Azrael pointed out this is a cop out - it provides AH with the opportunity to attack treigit without really committing to it. Further provides no reason why bluesoul is the better target.
Also suggests lurking is done by both town and mafia, and brings little suspicion. Then asks Puzzle who to wagon.
#550: Refers reason to vote bluesoul to his original complaint. No new evidence to suggest bluesoul better target than any other.
#571: Misinterprets Azrael as encouraing him to vote someone else - rather Azrael argued that AH should be concentrating his attention on a single player he thought scummiest (bluesoul at the time) and not encourage too many wagons. Instead AH votes Ab****ionis using Azrael's post as evidence Azrael was encouraging him to vote that way. Very misrepresentative.
#579:Asserts Puzzle will have no problem with speed of wagon cos he's in control of it. Claims Abso reaction what was expected from scum. Uses 'we' as if trying to prove he is town. Also put words in the towns mouth, asserting own view as towns.
#585: Confirms 'we' = town. Asks Puzzle why he would allow people to suspect they were in choots. Note that only the town possibilities are mentioned - seems to intentionally avoid possibility of mafia partnership.Another attempt to seem townie?
#604:Provides negative speculation on Azrael's vote restriction, suggesting cult. Provides disclaimer. Expresses interest in Krash, CP and CC but votes Chucklez for lurking. Claims 'town could use my vote there' again overemphasising his supposed town intent.
#627: Unvotes Chucklez based on promised voting improvement. Attacks Machin Shin for 'always trying to throw suspicion on somone' then returns to voting absolutionis because its the 'most productive'. Is that really a reason to vote someone? Productive how?
#629 & 648: wants abso to claim, then calls name claim dodgy. provides no reasons.
#681:Follows many others in accusing MMoD, bluesoul, Xyre and MD of being scummy - no explanation (prob apparent from thread). Again uses 'we' as if he spoke for the whole town saying he was unsatisfied with Absolutionis' claim, pushes for ability.
#684: Explains inclusion of MMoD in his little scummy list.
#718: Barns Axelrod's reasons for voting Absolutionis. Pretty consistent of his play in general.
#724: Expresses disapproval of emphasis on individuality in mafia - OK to follow till somones wrong. Another cop out - people who continually barn are nearly as bad as lurkers (if not worse) as they essentially lurk in plain sight and allow mafia to do so too. Justify's vote if Abso is rush lynched as OK as it will help catch scum: knowingly lynching townies is scummy - that it will help lynch mafia is not a reason to do it. Lynch the mafia in the first place.
#738: Disputes aurorasparrows argument against previous post ('following is OK') because 'he wants to'. Attacks assertion that it is annoying - this is a strawman argument. Annoying hwere is merely an adjective attached to the real point - that following as he does risks supporting mafia. Further it can aid in hding mafia by allowing others to similarly follow.
Argues its OK to be reactive - ignoring the fact that to find scum the town must proactively search for them. The town won't reveal themselves, and staying reactive will only benefit the mafia. It's a lazy way to play and dangerous for the town to do so.
Further asserts following is OK. To an extent I agree - because often you will just agree with someone, and you have no more to add. But it is apparent from this PBPA that AH has added little in the way of originality to this game, and where he has (ie with bluesoul) he has not really contributed more than a single idea and a vote. Again such play is tantamount to lurking.
#756:Conitnues support for Absolutionis lynch. Claims vanilla confirmation means little (true) and new contribution to the game had no effect on his view due to its timing. Also unimpressed by its content. What was wrong with the timing and content?
----------------------------
My problems with AH:
1. Tries way too hard to appear town - all the 'we', the whole 'are you trying to imply we're masons' thing, his general I can't be mafia attitude.
2. Tries to pass of his motives as the towns - again 'we'
3. Barns other players regularly, incl. Puzzle, Azrael, and Axelrod. Barning is bad for two reasons, the first is described above concerning following, the second is because it is often used by mafia to hide behind more prominent players (see Cyan w/Puzzle in Star Trek).
4. expresses few individual views/original thought - flying under the radar
5. avoids responsibility for own actions: tried to make treigit look scummy while avoiding voting him; attempted to force Azrael to take responsibility for his vote
6. original thought he has expressed, like trying to wagon bluesoul, has displayed little to no reasoning (took one single post an ran with it) and made no attempt to advance it
7. Uses scummy techniques to discredit other players eg strawman and being patronising
8. Contradicts himself - claims won't vote treigit without good reason to believe he is scum, but fails to provide more substantive reason that bluesoul could be scum.
Vote Abandon Hope
--------------------------------
I am going to go back over the case against Absolutionis next. Shouldn't take too long since he's been so lurky. At this point I wouldn't say he isn't scum, but I don't think his gameplay thus far is scummy enough to lynch him - especially considering the speed of the wagon. I'll go over it tomorrow anyway.
I'll also look at Treigit if I can because he is obviously garnering attention again. Similarly with Absolutionis, nothing has stuck out to me that would make me want to lynch him, but a reread is definitely in order.
If someone summarised the cases against them then it would save a lot of time for the people who have replaced. If not I'll try and get to it sometime tomorrow but no promises (the above took me about three hours - its now 4:30am).
Tregit: there's literally nothing you posted that I especially like. At the risk of sounding horribly biased, everything you said can be given a scummy slant.
What's interesting here is the way you seem to assume that he might be a God from those books but still false-claiming. As though he might have been a scummier sounding God from the same series, and decided to false-claim, but still stay within the same series. Why would he do that exactly? As long as he's he's false-claiming anyway.
A scum from that series would very likely assume that there would be town(s) from that series in the game also. So false claiming is still a risk. Why pick your actual series in that case?
Firstly, I don't know that even as scum he's false claiming. However what I said is that that page is sufficently obscure that one wouldn't find it while searching for gods. If I got assigned one of these gods, I wouldn't automatically make the assumption that there were more in the game. However, even If he did make that assumption, (and is scum,) I would take the 1/66 chance of picking a god that someone else had than go to a more known pantheon and hope to get lucky there.
Here we have the scummy threat to vote later unless satisfied. Even though he's "not in the top" of your scum suspects. Who were those again? Are you saying you'd vote him over someone else you think more likely to be scum? Or just that if he didn't defend himself better, that would cause him to become your top suspect?
My top scum are MD and Arimnaes. There are other people (including Absolutionis) whom I consider scummy. Yes, I would vote someone who I consider less scummy than MD or Arimnaes (so long as I still consider that person possible scum) as the town doesn't share my opnion on either of them.
The first part of this post is meaningless. Not of any use whatsoever, despite your attempt to sound helpful. I don't understand what you are saying in the second part.
The first part of my post is mostly, but not entierly unecessary. If some one had read the Glasswright series and Fen is somehow considered evil in that world, Abso would have some explaining to do. I find each of those very unlikely, but if they're both true it could be helpful. No harm in asking.
The second part was to CC who saw the speed differences in Abso's and Chuck's wagon as incriminating to Chuck. I was explaining why I thought the two wagon speeds could be different with out either (or with both) being scum.
Really? Think about it for a minute. Why did you post this anyway?
I still don't know what it means, I probably should have posted nothing here, but wanted to respond to the revelation
I dislike the condescending tone here. Also, you keep using the plural "we" and "us" in your posts. Lilke you are trying to bury yourself in amongst townies for all your actions.
Sorry for condenscending. (Why exactly do you dislike this?) Substitute "the town" for all instances of we or us in my posts, but really what does this mean, even if I'm scum you don't expect me to admit to it do you?
More talking down to MD. And a bit too much stating of the obvious.
Stating the obvious yes, but in a direct response to MD asking "What's fishing, and why is it bad." Aparently the obvious needed to be stated.
This post doesn't make any sense. Maybe I'm not understanding. Are you saying you think the scum are more or less likely to be falseclaiming?
What I'm saying is that there are many games in which the scum could claim there actual roles, (take Trek Mafia, and HS as examples) I have no idea whether or not that is such a game. However if the scum do have to false claim, presumably they already have ~5 pantheons they know are in the game (this is before MD and Abso claimed).
I really don't like this one. Before we know what Cyan will say, you are dismissing it and appear to be trying to keep the lynch on regardless of result.
If I were trying to keep the lynch on, I'd probably be voting. I'm trying to keep the pressure on. Abso has yet to make a single post with any sort of content. And I suspected (correctly) that if Abso is vanilla he'd take this as an excuse to not provide any. Further, I don't know that this Definitevly clears him. Are you claiming that it does?
You just said it wouldn't prove anything. Why do you even care about Cyan's certainty?
Because it would suck if Cyan came back saying Abso was lying (if abso was telling the truth). First we'd lynch abso on false premises, then if Abso came up town we'd lynch Cyan for lying. I always like to know the certainty our investigator has.
Again with the threats to vote if not satisfied. I'm not going to say I haven't seen towns do that, but I've seen scums do it more.
Abso still hadn't posted anything of content, that's much of what this bandwagon was built on. I wanted him to know that the pressure hadn't abated. My post and others posting similar sentiment caused him to post analysis. (Which others are now analysisng)
Ambush Krotiq makes me laugh so much. I keep rereading the card and it keeps not having Flash. In what sense is this an ambush again? I just have visions of this huge Krotiq poorly concealed in some bushes, feeling slightly sad that his carefully planned ambushes never seem to work.
*sigh* I'm not upset that we're taking a long time, because we're more likely to find scum, but sometimes I wish we could just pick somebody and lynch 'em.
Treigit's defense of himself seems satisfactory, but the fact that he's now had to fend off two potential wagons sticks in my mind. For now I'll
Unvote, downgrade to FoS:Treigit. I'm reluctant to simply hop on another wagon, so for now I'll FoS: Abandon Hope and wait for a reply to Passdog's case.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Flesh so fine, so fine to tear, to gash the skin; skin to strip, to plait, so nice to plait the strips, so nice, so red the drops that fall; blood so red, so red, so sweet; sweet screams, pretty screams, singing screams, scream your song, sing your screams…” - The Eye of the World - Robert Jordan
I'm not sure why, but the vibe I'm getting from Cyan says to me that he and Abso are scum together and Cyan manufactured an ability to "clear" him. Even if Cyan does in fact have an ability that can tell us whether Abso is vanilla, and even if Cyan is telling the truth about the results, that in no way means that Abso is town. The existence of vanilla mafia would either mean that the mafia group is somewhat larger than normal, there is some other anti-town faction out there, or that there are also vanilla townies. All of those reasons could be the reason for vanilla mafia members as balance for the scum. FoS Cyan
It's WIFOM, but, I would never put myself out there like that for another scum buddy, because it ties our fates together too much. Honestly, I thought that(and hoped that) Abso was lying, which is why I used my ability to check this.
I notice that Abso gives his thoughts on 12 players, and with varying degrees of certainty calls 5 of them scum. He also listed most of the people on his wagon, except krashbot, MMoD, and myself. According to his list, at least 3 of the people on his wagon are scum. Right now I'm simply inclined to think that he's desperately trying to cast suspicion on his attackers. Vote stands.
What I find interesting is that, IMO, the 3 people that he didn't give any thoughts on are among the most likely to be scum.
I'm not really satisfied with some of Treigit's answers, so, I'm going to leave my vote where it is for now. In particular, I think that using terms like 'we' and 'us' and even 'the town' is something that scums do more than townies, because they want to appear to be part of the town. When you are part of the town, you know it, and don't have the desire to provide assurances of such.
#349: Starts by saying 'one outraged post [not] enough to cry scum over' then approves of Kenji's vote anyway. Inserts a lot of scummy sentiment into a post of bluesoul's that can be read as quite innocent. Votes bluesoul on that basis.
Here for example. You claim the scummy sentiment is my insertion, where I find bluesoul's statement to indicate a mafia perspective.
Quote from passdog »
#389: Defense of Puzzle w/ qualification - 'not entirely sure why'. Comments negatively (using sarcasm rather than explanation) on example 'sparrow gives.
Strawman: Attacks 'sparrow's case by refuting with irrelevant reasoning; argues better to lynch any scum than no scum - 'sparrows comment was that it is better to lynch experienced scum before inexperienced. The two are disconnected, and therefore the argument is misrepresentative - essentially it makes it seem as though 'sparrow is trying to keep scum in the game when that is clearly not his (overt) intent. Then runs away from this aspersion - 'isn't enough to vote for you either'.
And here. I don't find the two disconected at all. In the search for experienced scum early in the game, mistakes are more likely to happen. It's dangerous. But if you didn't believe me the first time...
Quote from Passdog »
#395: reasserts suspicion of 'sparrows argument, suggests 'pigeons should also find him (AH) scummy if he disagree's with his argument - essentially telling cp how to think.
If you say so.
Quote from Passdog »
#423: AH responds to strawman accusation by further arguing irrelevant point. Talks 'absolutes' and 'possibilities' but adds nothing useful to discussion and then backs away from argument.
If I hadn't backed away from what I saw as an irrelevant argument, that would be your acusation here. I defended myself and moved on.
Quote from Passdog »
#448:supports CropCircles case against carrion (which was fair), drops bluesoul vote while still maintaining interest in bluesoul. Swift change a little opportunistic (and retaliatory?)
A good case and I followed it. Coincidence that it came after CP attacked me.
Quote from passdog »
#492: Tries to make blusoul look scummy by asserting he's using some form of logical fallacy (barning is not a logical fallacy by the way). Further no logical fallacy is present in the quoted text - actually comments on interaction between kops and Treigit.
Yeah, barning isn't what I was trying to think of. I gave up trying to scratch that mental itch. I admit I was looking for more evidence against bluesoul. I was convinced he was scum, but I needed to convince others.
Quote from Passdog »
#502:more banter. accuses Machin of lurking being out of character (therefore scummy?) but suggests better targets than lurkers (bluesoul). No further elaboration on Vote.
nope, just out of character.
Quote from Passdog »
#522: FoS Machin Shin for previous post. seems to be joining a FoS bandwagon. Ensures his suspicion is noted but acheives nothing more with this post. Attempt to make MS look scummy?
Again with the machin shin thing. I didn't need to make Machin Shin look scummy there, he did fine on his own. FOS is an attempt to draw attention to another's scumminess. Used as intended.
Quote from Passdog »
#545:Calls Treigit suspicious for first time (though implied in call for claim), but thinks bluesoul more suspicious. Proposes vote only after claim fails to 'allay... suspicions'. Does not explain why bluesoul is scummier. Claims need to be sure of scumminess to vote Treigit.
Yeah, I'm not going to vote for someone who I'm not convinced is scum. That's why I didn't vote him when he refused to claim.
Quote from Passdog »
#571: Misinterprets Azrael as encouraing him to vote someone else - rather Azrael argued that AH should be concentrating his attention on a single player he thought scummiest (bluesoul at the time) and not encourage too many wagons. Instead AH votes Ab****ionis using Azrael's post as evidence Azrael was encouraging him to vote that way. Very misrepresentative.
Looking back, it seems I did misunderstand the intent, however I am happy with my actions. A single vote on Bluesoul wasn't doing anything, and abso was developing scum tells. Why not use my vote where it can do good? That's what I thought Az was getting at.
Quote from Passdog »
#627: Unvotes Chucklez based on promised voting improvement. Attacks Machin Shin for 'always trying to throw suspicion on somone' then returns to voting absolutionis because its the 'most productive'. Is that really a reason to vote someone? Productive how?
Yes it is. Productive in that it produced an extremely scummy individual.
Quote from Passdog »
#629 & 648: wants abso to claim, then calls name claim dodgy. provides no reasons.
It was dodgy. He dodged the intent of the requested claim. I thought it was obvious
Quote from Passdog »
#724: Expresses disapproval of emphasis on individuality in mafia - OK to follow till somones wrong. Another cop out - people who continually barn are nearly as bad as lurkers (if not worse) as they essentially lurk in plain sight and allow mafia to do so too. Justify's vote if Abso is rush lynched as OK as it will help catch scum: knowingly lynching townies is scummy - that it will help lynch mafia is not a reason to do it. Lynch the mafia in the first place.
If you don't agree with me, I cant change your mind. As to the abso rush lynch thing, I wasn't planning to lynch him immediatly, nor was I planning on knowingly lynching a townie. I don't think abso's town. And I consider a mislynch fair exchange for the number of rushers it would out.
Quote from Passdog »
#738: Disputes aurorasparrows argument against previous post ('following is OK') because 'he wants to'. Attacks assertion that it is annoying - this is a strawman argument. Annoying hwere is merely an adjective attached to the real point - that following as he does risks supporting mafia. Further it can aid in hding mafia by allowing others to similarly follow.
Argues its OK to be reactive - ignoring the fact that to find scum the town must proactively search for them. The town won't reveal themselves, and staying reactive will only benefit the mafia. It's a lazy way to play and dangerous for the town to do so.
Further asserts following is OK. To an extent I agree - because often you will just agree with someone, and you have no more to add. But it is apparent from this PBPA that AH has added little in the way of originality to this game, and where he has (ie with bluesoul) he has not really contributed more than a single idea and a vote. Again such play is tantamount to lurking.
Um, actually that was an apology for annoying people, and less of an attack. It is subjective whether one is annoyed, and that was my only 'point.' Also I didn't embrace reactivitly exclusively. Stuff happens, people react. I agree for the need to be proactive, but once someone proacts, then others must react. This is a non issue. As to that last bit, I'll repeat. If there are alot of good ideas, it is valid to follow alot. This is a case of plain disagreement.
Quote from passdog »
#756:Conitnues support for Absolutionis lynch. Claims vanilla confirmation means little (true) and new contribution to the game had no effect on his view due to its timing. Also unimpressed by its content. What was wrong with the timing and content?
He only invested himself once he felt himself unlikely to be lynched. Not how a townie should play. The content was a rant against those who accused him.
Quote from Passdog »
My problems with AH:
1. Tries way too hard to appear town - all the 'we', the whole 'are you trying to imply we're masons' thing, his general I can't be mafia attitude.
2. Tries to pass of his motives as the towns - again 'we'
You're taking a pronoun as evidence of a mafia mentality. I can accept that as valid logic, and all I can do is assure you it doesn't mean what you think it means. When I said I was doing something for the good of the town, it was because it was in opposition to my personal desire (vote bluesoul usually) and I wanted to point that out.
Quote from Passdog »
3. Barns other players regularly, incl. Puzzle, Azrael, and Axelrod. Barning is bad for two reasons, the first is described above concerning following, the second is because it is often used by mafia to hide behind more prominent players (see Cyan w/Puzzle in Star Trek).
4. expresses few individual views/original thought - flying under the radar
5. avoids responsibility for own actions: tried to make treigit look scummy while avoiding voting him; attempted to force Azrael to take responsibility for his vote
These are connected. If you don't agree with my opinon of following, I can't change your mind. I've already argued this point. Like I said, I misunderstood that Az quote to be encouraging action.
Quote from Passdog »
6. original thought he has expressed, like trying to wagon bluesoul, has displayed little to no reasoning (took one single post an ran with it) and made no attempt to advance it
If you didn't like my first argument against bluesoul, making it again won't change things. I found what I believe is insight into bluesoul's attitude toward the game. I'm sorry you didn't.
Quote from Passdog »
7. Uses scummy techniques to discredit other players eg strawman and being patronising
I didn't see my comments that way at the time, and in most cases, I still don't.
Quote from Passdog »
8. Contradicts himself - claims won't vote treigit without good reason to believe he is scum, but fails to provide more substantive reason that bluesoul could be scum.
I obviously value different tells to a different degree.
Quote from Passdog »
(the above took me about three hours - its now 4:30am).
I'm honored. Thank you for doing this pbpa. I have learned more about myself(not sarcasm).
Wow, that defense had a lot of, "Well, you can think that and I can't change your mind, but I think something different." There were a couple lines in there (like the defense against the "we" thing) that sounded like they were definitely coming from a scum's perspective in there.
Honestly, it was less Passdog's PBPA than the crummy/scummy defense (that just reenforced a few of Passdog's points) that makes me think A_H is scum right now. Unvote, Vote: Abandon Hope
I think Treigit's defense is perfectly reasonable, but it bothers me how many things he's had to defend this game. Granted he has successfully defended most to all of them, but there have still been a few too many for my liking. Treigit is definitely still in the top 2-3 on my scum list (along with A_H).
Cyan- Please, show me a single post where I used "We", "Us", or "The Town," and the sentiment I expressed wasn't in the towns best interest (assuming standard roles and Info). Then find a single post where one of those pronouns was used, and tell me what I should have used instead without making the sentence overtly complex.
Also are there anyother answers you're not satisfied with? (That's one, you said several.) Which ones, and why aren't you satisfied with them?
(Note, I'm posting this before reading AH's response, or Analysisng P-Dog's PBPA much, so I don't know atm how I stand on that.)
Here for example. You claim the scummy sentiment is my insertion, where I find bluesoul's statement to indicate a mafia perspective.
That post of bluesoul's can be read in more than one way, including in an innocent fashion, I find it odd that you have placed so much emphasis on the scummy reading where there has been (or at least you have presented) no other tells argued against bluesoul. You have argued for his lynch yet ignored players like Krashbot who have had more issues raised against them, or publicly discarded others like Treigit without providing the reasons you think they are less scummy.
This part of the problem with following - you present opinions without backup for those opinions, and expect people to know your thoughts because you are mimicing everyone else. You avoid responsibility by allowing others to make the big calls. Later you'll be able to say - 'but so and so started it'.
Quote from Abandon Hope »
And here. I don't find the two disconected at all. In the search for experienced scum early in the game, mistakes are more likely to happen. It's dangerous. But if you didn't believe me the first time...
They are disconnected - you argue a separate point, and by doing so you have provided a distraction from the real issue. 'sparrow argued that it was better to lynch experienced mafia than inexperienced - you argued that its better to lynch mafia than townies. 'sparrows argument in no way denies yours yet you raise it anyway; in fact it is an expression of basic town philosophy, and your referral to it seems as though you are trying to make 'sparrow appear scummy by being anti town.
Quote from Abandon Hope »
If you say so.
This isn't a response to my point. By telling cp that he should vote you then you are trying to impose a position on him he was not prepared to commit to, putting words into his mouth. The argument at the time did not require 'pigeons to suspect both of you,; your assertion that it did seems to be an attempt to discredit the case without actually arguing against it.
I'm not sure if the 'No true scotsman' fallacy applies here, but to me your're essentially saying: 'Nobody who truly voted that way wouldn't find me suspicious as well' - another fallacy.
Quote from Abandon Hope »
If I hadn't backed away from what I saw as an irrelevant argument, that would be your acusation here. I defended myself and moved on.
But you continued to push the argument - you didn't appear to find the argument irrelevant, but only that your final post resolved the issue. By running away after justifying yourself you don't deny its relevance; you display a disinclination to argue a point you were failing to win people over on.
Quote from Abandon Hope »
A good case and I followed it. Coincidence that it came after CP attacked me.
I agree the case presented was fair. What is relevant here is that you used the opportunity to switch votes but continue to make another player look suspicious. You are essentially dodging responsibility in two ways: because you are yet again following rather than contributing; and, you continue to cast bluesoul in a negative light despite other targets existing.
Quote from Abandon Hope »
Yeah, barning isn't what I was trying to think of. I gave up trying to scratch that mental itch. I admit I was looking for more evidence against bluesoul. I was convinced he was scum, but I needed to convince others.
This appears to be an admission that you were trying to cast additional suspicion on a player without actual evidence of scumminess. A townie should avoid asserting undue suspicion on any player for fear that they are scum.
Quote from Abandon Hope »
nope, just out of character.
That's easy to say now. The point is that you cast aspersions on Machin Shin with that post that indicate scum, yet again attempt to disconnect yourself from those aspersion. It seems like a subtle attempt to push/encourage a wagon without being on it - yet again vopiding repsonsibility.
Quote from Abandon Hope »
Again with the machin shin thing. I didn't need to make Machin Shin look scummy there, he did fine on his own. FOS is an attempt to draw attention to another's scumminess. Used as intended.
This post in fairness has one positive from you - by FoSing him you are finally on record as suspecting him - except that you are doing so after at least two others have made that point. Yet again you merely follow suit rather than post new content.
Quote from Abandon Hope »
Yeah, I'm not going to vote for someone who I'm not convinced is scum. That's why I didn't vote him when he refused to claim.
Explain to me how you could be convinced bluesoul is scum. That is where the contradiction lies. You imply that Treigit deserves his wagon yet again avoid the responsibility of joining it. But further you express a lack of confidence in his scumminess but can be sure of bluesouls, despite a larger case having been made against the former.
Aother issue arises from this post. If you are not confident of Treigit's scumminess then why should he claim? Shouldn't you be advocating bluesoul claim/defend himself? It seems that you are uing the opportunity to garner a claim without being connected to the result . Thiis is fishing for a claim from someone you think is more likely town than others - another thing a townie should avoid is unnecessarily exposing town players.
Quote from Abandon Hope »
Looking back, it seems I did misunderstand the intent, however I am happy with my actions. A single vote on Bluesoul wasn't doing anything, and abso was developing scum tells. Why not use my vote where it can do good? That's what I thought Az was getting at.
I don't dispute your reason for changing your vote - in fact I support it as I disagree with the reasoning behind your vote on bluesoul. What I take issue with is your attempt to credit Azrael with the responsibility of your change.
Quote from Abandon Hope »
Yes it is. Productive in that it produced an extremely scummy individual.
OK. Please explain why you think Absolutionis was extremely scummy at that point, and why he deserved greater attention than someone else you had expressed suspicion for; like bluesoul or MachinShin.
Quote from Abandon Hope »
It was dodgy. He dodged the intent of the requested claim. I thought it was obvious
Don't you think it is always safer to nameclaim first? I'm of the opinio that naming claiming first givesthe town the opportunity to reassess their attack before revealling potentially damaging information - like power roles. Of course if you are mafia that is probably your intent.
Quote from Abandon Hope »
If you don't agree with me, I cant change your mind. As to the abso rush lynch thing, I wasn't planning to lynch him immediatly, nor was I planning on knowingly lynching a townie. I don't think abso's town. And I consider a mislynch fair exchange for the number of rushers it would out.
Yes you can change my mind - I am open to your view if you provide a reason to agree with it.
The problem with your 'rush lynch' reasoning is that at this stage of the game it is as likely to be impatient townies doing the lynchig as scum - especially when your argument provies the next 'x' voters the opportunity to use the same excuse - 'its OK if he's twnie because the rest of the rush lynchers will be under scrutiny later and we can bag scum'.
Quote from Abandon Hope »
Um, actually that was an apology for annoying people, and less of an attack. It is subjective whether one is annoyed, and that was my only 'point.'
Your apology is a bit back handed - 'sorry you don't like it, but I'm gonna do it anyay'.
You again skip the point. Merely by raising the issue you bring to attention an illegitimate factor in 'sparrows post, and discredit his entire point by calling the annoyance subjective; you make the issue raised personal which should not be a real factor in mafia, and ignores the real thrust of the argument against you..
Quote from Abandon Hope »
Also I didn't embrace reactivitly exclusively. Stuff happens, people react. I agree for the need to be proactive, but once someone proacts, then others must react. This is a non issue. As to that last bit, I'll repeat. If there are alot of good ideas, it is valid to follow alot. This is a case of plain disagreement.
You have failed to address the core issue.Yes reacting and following can be justified; the issue is not that you have done it, but that you have done it consistently and as a result hide behind the opinions of other players rather than committing to your own.
Quote from Abandon Hope »
He only invested himself once he felt himself unlikely to be lynched. Not how a townie should play. The content was a rant against those who accused him.
OK. Is it fair to say then that you disagree then with the majority of his assessments?
Quote from Abandon Hope »
You're taking a pronoun as evidence of a mafia mentality. I can accept that as valid logic, and all I can do is assure you it doesn't mean what you think it means. When I said I was doing something for the good of the town, it was because it was in opposition to my personal desire (vote bluesoul usually) and I wanted to point that out.
Reasonable explanation, but WIFOM. Could be what you say, could be what I suspect.
Quote from Abandon Hope »
These are connected. If you don't agree with my opinon of following, I can't change your mind. I've already argued this point. Like I said, I misunderstood that Az quote to be encouraging action.
Already addressed above.
Quote from Abandon Hope »
If you didn't like my first argument against bluesoul, making it again won't change things. I found what I believe is insight into bluesoul's attitude toward the game. I'm sorry you didn't.
The argument against bluesoul is but one example of where you lack credibility - your argument against cp and your 'following is OK' argument are examples.
Again you have strawmanned here, by attacking the example rather than addressing the crux; those original thoughts you have expressed have been ill reasoned and poorly supported.
Quote from Abandon Hope »
I didn't see my comments that way at the time, and in most cases, I still don't.
Please provide examples of how they aren't - particularly the strawman arguments (the patrinising is less relevent had harder to prove on both our parts).
Quote from Abandon Hope »
I obviously value different tells to a different degree.
Seriously... can you expect me to accept that bluesoul has hadthe strongest case made against him?
Quote from Abandon Hope »
I'm honored. Thank you for doing this pbpa. I have learned more about myself(not sarcasm).
Pleasure - thanks for a respectful response.
--------------------------------
Treigits response to Axelrod seems legit. I won't support that wagon at this stage.
---------------------------------
Krashbot: what about AH's reply post is scummy?
I noticed a few things, and have mentioned them, but nothing that I would vote him on without having done the PBPA. Yet you clearly suggest that his response is scummier than the points raised against him.
Just wanted to say that I'm here- and I've been working on setting up Newbie 9 along with getting surprise tickets to a Reds game today (Club seats for free- talk about awesome). As usual, I do most of my posting from work, anyhow, so I'll read through what I've missed this weekend and post tomorrow.
First off (as I mentioned before), there were a couple lines that just sounded like they were coming from a scum's perspective. However, the main evidence lies in the fact that he really didn't answer most of the points, but rather just put out a pile of "well, this is how I think and this is how you think. They're different, so what?" Or, he just sits there and explains something only sort-of relevant and draws attention away from the main issue.
Those were my main points.
Quote from Passdog »
Yet you clearly suggest that his response is scummier than the points raised against him.
Rereading it, I know what you mean. However, it was actually more of the fact that his responses were just doing the same things you had voted him for doing, even after you had pointed them out and thrown them in his face.
After your PBPA, I was considering voting for him, but I wasn't completely convinced and wanted to see what he had to say for himself. Had he explained his actions and given a legit response without just continuing strawman-like tactics and whatnot, I may not have voted for him. The main reason behind my vote was the stuff above in conjunction with the fact that you had basically just told him that he looked scummy because of it.
@DYH: Free tickets to a baseball game? I want some!
So Passdog makes a decent case against AH. AH's resonse does little to make me think he's either more or less scum. However, in looking at the case I noticed a few of MS's posts. They look really quite bad. I'm going to read more on MS, and see if this is a recurring pattern.
It is a recurring pattern, it was very prevelant when we were discussing uhh..Absolutionis(hard to remember at this point, we've taken hard looks at alot of people now), and immediately afterwards as well.
They are disconnected - you argue a separate point, and by doing so you have provided a distraction from the real issue. 'sparrow argued that it was better to lynch experienced mafia than inexperienced - you argued that its better to lynch mafia than townies. 'sparrows argument in no way denies yours yet you raise it anyway; in fact it is an expression of basic town philosophy, and your referral to it seems as though you are trying to make 'sparrow appear scummy by being anti town.
They're conected. Sparrow saying he's looking to lynch experienced scum makes me worry that in his zeal to lynch experienced scum, we'll end up with a mislynch. So I argued against attempting to find experienced scum when we have already very scummy newer players.
Quote from Passdog »
This isn't a response to my point. By telling cp that he should vote you then you are trying to impose a position on him he was not prepared to commit to, putting words into his mouth. The argument at the time did not require 'pigeons to suspect both of you,; your assertion that it did seems to be an attempt to discredit the case without actually arguing against it.
Forcing people to commit is a good thing. Soft opinions are bad. I have little patience reiterating myself. I wasn't going to, and if he found my position scummy, he should have done something about it.
Quote from Passdog »
But you continued to push the argument - you didn't appear to find the argument irrelevant, but only that your final post resolved the issue. By running away after justifying yourself you don't deny its relevance; you display a disinclination to argue a point you were failing to win people over on.
There wouldn't have been an argument if someone didn't find it relevant. "If you don't like it vote for me" is designed to resolve the issue, however. It's not my job to change the way people think. So I wanted to stop bothering with it unless CP really felt that my thought process made me scum. My suggestion to vote for me was a way to push the issue to one of those extremes.
Quote from Passdog »
I agree the case presented was fair. What is relevant here is that you used the opportunity to switch votes but continue to make another player look suspicious. You are essentially dodging responsibility in two ways: because you are yet again following rather than contributing; and, you continue to cast bluesoul in a negative light despite other targets existing.
It is my job to try and bring those I find suspicious to a lynch. I'm not going to abandon one person because another person has been presented.
Quote from Passdog »
This appears to be an admission that you were trying to cast additional suspicion on a player without actual evidence of scumminess. A townie should avoid asserting undue suspicion on any player for fear that they are scum.
Would it help if I said I realized this was mistake? On the otherhand I believed and still believe suspicion is due on bluesoul.
Quote from Passdog »
That's easy to say now. The point is that you cast aspersions on Machin Shin with that post that indicate scum, yet again attempt to disconnect yourself from those aspersion. It seems like a subtle attempt to push/encourage a wagon without being on it - yet again vopiding repsonsibility.
This post in fairness has one positive from you - by FoSing him you are finally on record as suspecting him - except that you are doing so after at least two others have made that point. Yet again you merely follow suit rather than post new content.
It may seem like I was casting suspicion, but I wasn't in the first post. I really don't have anything more to say about this.
Quote from Passdog »
Explain to me how you could be convinced bluesoul is scum. That is where the contradiction lies. You imply that Treigit deserves his wagon yet again avoid the responsibility of joining it. But further you express a lack of confidence in his scumminess but can be sure of bluesouls, despite a larger case having been made against the former.
A larger case doesn't mean a better case. About bluesoul vs Treigit? Should I expect scum to flaunt their errors, or should I expect scum to fail rarely? That's how I can be convinced. Further more, it is dificult to defend oneself in mafia while remaining true to your opinions. If carried out successfully even a townie may seem scummy. Treigit has been maintaining the validity of his mistakes admirably under pressure. It seems like a townie performance.
Quote from Passdog »
Aother issue arises from this post. If you are not confident of Treigit's scumminess then why should he claim? Shouldn't you be advocating bluesoul claim/defend himself? It seems that you are uing the opportunity to garner a claim without being connected to the result . Thiis is fishing for a claim from someone you think is more likely town than others - another thing a townie should avoid is unnecessarily exposing town players.
You know as well as I, that a claim without pressure is mocked. So that's why not advocate bluesoul. Why pressure treigit to claim, without vote? Because regardless of my current opinion of him, the mistakes at the begining were still mistakes. He has thinks to answer for. Further, with a role we can determine whether his actions fit a mindset for his role. But I won't move toward lynching him. It's asking nicely.
Quote from Passdog »
OK. Please explain why you think Absolutionis was extremely scummy at that point, and why he deserved greater attention than someone else you had expressed suspicion for; like bluesoul or MachinShin.
I think it was a lurker hunt at that point, but after that happened Abso refused to defend himself, or answer questions. He ignored some points entirely. I think that's what bothered me the most.
Quote from Passdog »
Don't you think it is always safer to nameclaim first? I'm of the opinio that naming claiming first givesthe town the opportunity to reassess their attack before revealling potentially damaging information - like power roles. Of course if you are mafia that is probably your intent.
If a name gives away a power role to the town, it gave it to the mafia too. I'm of the opinion that a name is relativly worthless without an ability, especially when there are such a wealth of falseclaims available among deities.
Quote from Passdog »
Yes you can change my mind - I am open to your view if you provide a reason to agree with it.
Cool. But I don't see a reason to change your mind, usually. Sure I'll try and convince you I'm town, but most opinions are less important. You're an inteligent person, you believe the way you do for a reason, and I don't care to challange that with out a good reason to.
Quote from Passdog »
The problem with your 'rush lynch' reasoning is that at this stage of the game it is as likely to be impatient townies doing the lynchig as scum - especially when your argument provies the next 'x' voters the opportunity to use the same excuse - 'its OK if he's twnie because the rest of the rush lynchers will be under scrutiny later and we can bag scum'.
You have a point here. Perhaps I had too much faith that rushers would definitly be scum. At that point, and still to a degree, I could only imagine mafia pushing a paused bandwagon over the top. And shouldn't it be the place of those already on the wagon to maintain pressure?
Quote from Passdog »
Your apology is a bit back handed - 'sorry you don't like it, but I'm gonna do it anyay'.
You again skip the point. Merely by raising the issue you bring to attention an illegitimate factor in 'sparrows post, and discredit his entire point by calling the annoyance subjective; you make the issue raised personal which should not be a real factor in mafia, and ignores the real thrust of the argument against you..
Annoyance is subjective. It's a personal feeling. So if things got personal, there is where it began. I'd hoped to resolve that by pointing out that the complaint was not universal, apologizing, and preparing sparrow for the continuation of my behavior.
Quote from Passdog »
You have failed to address the core issue.Yes reacting and following can be justified; the issue is not that you have done it, but that you have done it consistently and as a result hide behind the opinions of other players rather than committing to your own.
All I can say here is that I take full responsibility for the opinions I have expressed even in agreement.
Quote from Passdog »
OK. Is it fair to say then that you disagree then with the majority of his (absolutionis) assessments?
Yes.
Quote from Passdog »
The argument against bluesoul is but one example of where you lack credibility - your argument against cp and your 'following is OK' argument are examples.
Again you have strawmanned here, by attacking the example rather than addressing the crux; those original thoughts you have expressed have been ill reasoned and poorly supported.
Please provide examples of how they aren't - particularly the strawman arguments (the patrinising is less relevent had harder to prove on both our parts).
Ok, so you didn't like my postion of following, whatever the issue was with CP, and bluesoul. Could you please point out the specific straw men in these positions you wish me to adress? (I think I covered how I see Sparrows opinion on experienced scum to be connected to scum vs mafia above)
Quote from Passdog »
Seriously... can you expect me to accept that bluesoul has hadthe strongest case made against him?
No. I would say Absolutionis has had the strongest case made against him. Doesn't change how I feel from my own observations. Yes it is my responsiblity then to create a stronger case for how I feel. I don't think I can do that. Should I be convinced then that absolutionis is more likely mafia then bluesoul? Probably. But I'm not. Doesn't matter much, because I'll still cooperate with a lynch if it's someone I think is scum.
Quote from Passdog »
Pleasure - thanks for a respectful response.
You're welcome.
@Krash: Does accepting ireconcilable differences of opinion really make me scum? I don't believe so unless those differences of opinion would lead to a bad situation.
Trust me, I am not oblivious to A_H's blithely attacking me. I'm simply ignoring him until such a point where he presents a logical case against me, which I will respond to, as I've already done today. Until then, let the evidence speak for itself; I've refrained from voting him since, well, it would be sheer, unadulterated OMGUS. Not that it's a bad thing, but we're past the time for OMGUS being a valid reason for a vote. We have the A_H wagon which is, again, gaining votes at dizzying speed. The Treigit wagon is somewhat stalled, but is much more thought-out.
Still convinced Treigit's the better play, but should a wagon gain more votes I may just have to hop on so we can actually go to a night, for better or for worse. I don't want anyone else dropping out of the game due to it just being too much to process. (As it stands, I believe the mod is in need of three replacements for this exact reason.)
Ninja post-preview EDIT: That does it.
Quote from A_H »
On the otherhand I believed and still believe suspicion is due on bluesoul.
Then make a case.
Quote from A_H »
A larger case doesn't mean a better case. About bluesoul vs Treigit? Should I expect scum to flaunt their errors, or should I expect scum to fail rarely? That's how I can be convinced. Further more, it is dificult to defend oneself in mafia while remaining true to your opinions. If carried out successfully even a townie may seem scummy. Treigit has been maintaining the validity of his mistakes admirably under pressure. It seems like a townie performance.
Your defense of Treigit is noted.
Quote from A_H »
You know as well as I, that a claim without pressure is mocked. So that's why not advocate bluesoul.
Also because you've failed to make a case.
Quote from A_H »
Why pressure treigit to claim, without vote? Because regardless of my current opinion of him, the mistakes at the begining were still mistakes.
Really? Because he doesn't seem to think so.
Quote from A_H »
Further, with a role we can determine whether his actions fit a mindset for his role. But I won't move toward lynching him. It's asking nicely.
Sup fishing?
Quote from A_H »
I think it was a lurker hunt at that point, but after that happened Abso refused to defend himself, or answer questions. He ignored some points entirely. I think that's what bothered me the most.
So I'm your "Plan B" attack, eh? Wagon away and if you can't get people to follow your lead you come back to me.
Quote from A_H »
You have a point here. Perhaps I had too much faith that rushers would definitly be scum. At that point, and still to a degree, I could only imagine mafia pushing a paused bandwagon over the top. And shouldn't it be the place of those already on the wagon to maintain pressure?
Allow me to stop my attack for a second and give you my spin on this, since it's fairly interesting. Consider what we have of Day 1; it's been going on for over a month, and nearly 800 posts as of the time of this writing. At this point I think we have town players and scum players that wouldn't mind getting today over with. Given the receptiveness of the town in general to anything in the way of a case on a player, and the torrent of votes that has followed, I'd say it's more than scum players doing it. As for those on the wagon maintaining pressure...that's a bit cruel of a thing to ask someone to do. Granted there is usually someone that spearheads a wagon and makes the clearest case against the person in question. However, many of the votes are simply the result that the voter believes the spearhead might just be on to something. Should everyone on a wagon maintain the pressure of their wagon? Quite possibly; it would make for very interesting games. However, all too frequently it's just not the case.
Quote from A_H »
Yes it is my responsiblity then to create a stronger case for how I feel. I don't think I can do that.
They're conected. Sparrow saying he's looking to lynch experienced scum makes me worry that in his zeal to lynch experienced scum, we'll end up with a mislynch. So I argued against attempting to find experienced scum when we have already very scummy newer players.
Alright that makes sense; there goes one strawman.
Forcing people to commit is a good thing. Soft opinions are bad. I have little patience reiterating myself. I wasn't going to, and if he found my position scummy, he should have done something about it.
I agree that forcing people to commit is positive; much of what I have been doing is forcing you to do so, without the opportunity to mask your decisions behind the actions of others.
The difference is that you forced carrionpigeons to a position that was Catch-22. Either he votes you, looking retaliatory and as though he hadn't really thought out his whole attack; or he chooses not to attack you, reducing the validity of his current case by seemingly agreeing with your 'No true scotsmen' fallacy. You limit his ability to further his current position, in fact discouraging him from making honest commitments.
Other than this factor your explanation regarding this exchange seems reasonable.
It is my job to try and bring those I find suspicious to a lynch. I'm not going to abandon one person because another person has been presented.
OK
Would it help if I said I realized this was mistake? On the otherhand I believed and still believe suspicion is due on bluesoul.
It helps a little - but it doesn't wipe the slate clean on the issue.
It may seem like I was casting suspicion, but I wasn't in the first post. I really don't have anything more to say about this.
Yet suspicioon was cast.
A larger case doesn't mean a better case. About bluesoul vs Treigit? Should I expect scum to flaunt their errors, or should I expect scum to fail rarely? That's how I can be convinced. Further more, it is dificult to defend oneself in mafia while remaining true to your opinions. If carried out successfully even a townie may seem scummy. Treigit has been maintaining the validity of his mistakes admirably under pressure. It seems like a townie performance.
This is the first time you've really acknowledge your view of Treigit as town; previously you've noted that he had done enough scummy things to deserve attention - you were playing both sides of the fence.
You know as well as I, that a claim without pressure is mocked. So that's why not advocate bluesoul. Why pressure treigit to claim, without vote? Because regardless of my current opinion of him, the mistakes at the begining were still mistakes. He has thinks to answer for. Further, with a role we can determine whether his actions fit a mindset for his role. But I won't move toward lynching him. It's asking nicely.
And again you seem to play both sides - if you think he is town isn't it safer to protect his role? If you thought they were mistakes, why continue to encourage the focus on him?
You appear to be justifying everyone's stance here - playing it safe, so you don't put any noses out of joint.
I think it was a lurker hunt at that point, but after that happened Abso refused to defend himself, or answer questions. He ignored some points entirely. I think that's what bothered me the most.
I was not asking how it 'would' be productive, but how it was productive at the time you switched votes. If it was merely a lurker hunt at that point and he had barely responded than it hadn't really been productive had it? Unless by productive you meant that the wagon had accelerated relatively quickly...
If a name gives away a power role to the town, it gave it to the mafia too. I'm of the opinion that a name is relativly worthless without an ability, especially when there are such a wealth of falseclaims available among deities.
I disagree, especially in a game like this one, where the roles come from various affiliations and the likelihood of a claim existing can be confirmed by other players from the same Pantheon/affiliation, as has already been seen. While that in no way clears a player, it does add truth to his claim and allows us to better determine if we wish to continue pursuing an ability or not, rather than blindly fishing regadless of consequences.
For instance - what if Absolutionis had been the doc? We'd be up **** creek now wouldn't we?
Cool. But I don't see a reason to change your mind, usually. Sure I'll try and convince you I'm town, but most opinions are less important. You're an inteligent person, you believe the way you do for a reason, and I don't care to challange that with out a good reason to.
You need to change my mind on this one if you want to decrease my suspicion; part of why I suspect you is your attempt to justify your attempts to let others do the walking for you - if you can truly justify why you were following now you would alleviate some suspicion.
You have a point here. Perhaps I had too much faith that rushers would definitly be scum. At that point, and still to a degree, I could only imagine mafia pushing a paused bandwagon over the top. And shouldn't it be the place of those already on the wagon to maintain pressure?
But you weren't already on the wagon - you revoted Absolutionis, after three others had also added votes - you didn't seem to be maintaining pressure, you seemed to be topping him up.
Annoyance is subjective. It's a personal feeling. So if things got personal, there is where it began. I'd hoped to resolve that by pointing out that the complaint was not universal, apologizing, and preparing sparrow for the continuation of my behavior.
Yet again you ignore the thrust of this point - yes annoyance is subjective, but yor mention of that fact can be seen as a premptive strike against 'sparrows othe points, one that had no actual validity - a strawman. The fact that you couched it in an apology makes little difference. You apologised and then said you'd continue the same way; that lacks sincerity.
All I can say here is that I take full responsibility for the opinions I have expressed even in agreement.
Yes, you have - but only because I forced it on you.
Speaking of forcing a commitment you have said that you disagree with Absolutionis' assessment of various players: which do agree/disagree and why?
Ok, so you didn't like my postion of following, whatever the issue was with CP, and bluesoul. Could you please point out the specific straw men in these positions you wish me to adress? (I think I covered how I see Sparrows opinion on experienced scum to be connected to scum vs mafia above)
I think you misunderstand the point. The strawmen weren't in those positions in particular. The reason for the confusion is because I was pointing out that your argument was a strawman - you addressed the bluesoul issues rather than the point I was making in general - that your own arguments lacked reason and support. The bluesoul case is just one of those examples - carrion and following were two others.
No. I would say Absolutionis has had the strongest case made against him. Doesn't change how I feel from my own observations. Yes it is my responsiblity then to create a stronger case for how I feel. I don't think I can do that. Should I be convinced then that absolutionis is more likely mafia then bluesoul? Probably. But I'm not. Doesn't matter much, because I'll still cooperate with a lynch if it's someone I think is scum.
Thats a cop out. If you can't make a case why continue to attack unreasonably? Cooperating with other lynches, at the expense of your preferred one, appears opportunistic to n extent.
In fairness though if I thought I could get nowhere attacking a player I thought was scum, then I would attack someone else too - I just wouldn't be letting everyone know I thought he was scum for risk of tainting him were I wrong.
The difference is that you forced carrionpigeons to a position that was Catch-22. Either he votes you, looking retaliatory and as though he hadn't really thought out his whole attack; or he chooses not to attack you, reducing the validity of his current case by seemingly agreeing with your 'No true scotsmen' fallacy. You limit his ability to further his current position, in fact discouraging him from making honest commitments.
It seems there was quite alot to consider for CP at that point. I still think he should have decided it vote worthy or left it alone, but perhaps forcing that choice had unintended conscequences.
Quote from Passdog »
This is the first time you've really acknowledge your view of Treigit as town; previously you've noted that he had done enough scummy things to deserve attention - you were playing both sides of the fence.
I should have been more specific. I am unsure on the case of Treigit. Since the pressure, he's seemed town, but there was a reason for pressure in the first place.
Quote from Passdog »
And again you seem to play both sides - if you think he is town isn't it safer to protect his role? If you thought they were mistakes, why continue to encourage the focus on him?
You appear to be justifying everyone's stance here - playing it safe, so you don't put any noses out of joint.
See above. I wasn't sure it was a mistake to have Treigit claim.
Quote from Passdog »
You need to change my mind on this one if you want to decrease my suspicion; part of why I suspect you is your attempt to justify your attempts to let others do the walking for you - if you can truly justify why you were following now you would alleviate some suspicion.
There is not always something new to be had. We are playing with a number of intelligent people, many with good ideas. I am not ashamed to follow those who espouse intelligent plans. Nor am I particularly worried about how this tendancy makes me look. Following isn't what I should need to justify. It's the actions I followed, and ideas I agreed with that require justification.
Quote from Passdog »
But you weren't already on the wagon - you revoted Absolutionis, after three others had also added votes - you didn't seem to be maintaining pressure, you seemed to be topping him up.
So I wasn't. I had forgotten about leaving that wagon to force Chucklez to post. I came back to what remained an attractive wagon on likely scum.
Quote from Passdog »
Yet again you ignore the thrust of this point - yes annoyance is subjective, but yor mention of that fact can be seen as a premptive strike against 'sparrows othe points, one that had no actual validity - a strawman. The fact that you couched it in an apology makes little difference. You apologised and then said you'd continue the same way; that lacks sincerity.
Yes it does. I do not care about sparrows feelings enough to put myself in the difficult situation of attempting to remain largely individual in a game of group mentality. I am not sorry enough for that, but I do wish to be polite, both in my apology, and my attention to every point he brought against me.
Quote from Passdog »
Speaking of forcing a commitment you have said that you disagree with Absolutionis' assessment of various players: which do agree/disagree and why?
I was hoping you'd ask me to elaborate. The hunted rarely have time to voice their opinion. Absolutionis asessment of Treigit as 'maybe scum?' even as a question seems spot on. His analysis of Puzzle also seems good, so I would agree that Puzzle is likely mafia. The others I generally disagree with though in varying degrees of both certitude and fact. I find his opinion of CropCircles as scum to farthest from my own. These of course are general feelings, I do not have examples for why at hand.
Well, I'd agree with Cyan that someone turning up as vanilla makes it less likely for them to be mafia under normal circumstances. Checking whether Draygn has a history of using vanilla scum might also be a good idea; I seem to vaguely recall that he hasn't in the past.
Beyond that, I haven't seen closely enough to form any strong opinions on the recent developments. There are still too many trees in this forest.
Vote Azrael.
Quote from Absolutionis »
Azrael = His inability to vote for anyone but himself makes me assume his ability must be moderately powerful considering his relative powerlessness in the voting process. I have an assumption that his true ability lies in something happening when he votes someone other than himself. A vigillante perhaps?
Still here, finally able to post again. I have had internet access for about 30 minutes every other day for a little while, which is why I've only been able to post in about one thread at a time. I will get the thread read again, and there will be content forthcoming on probably wednesday. My access will be back to normal by the end of this week.
After seeing the back and forth exchanges of A_H and Passdog, I keep getting the feeling that A_H is incredibly slimy, and he keeps trying to slip and slide around the arguments against him. I suspect more and more that he is scum. Vote Abandon_Hope
Quote from Puzzle »
What did A_S say that may be construed as clearing him ?
I realize you asked this of Axelrod, but A_S said that he is also from the same pantheon that Abso claimed, thus lending at least some credibility to the claim itself.
Quote from Kenji »
I was just wondering, does anyone know of a sort of mythology wikki? I've got a feeling such a site could be useful with this game.
Didn't you read the first page? The Lord our MOD said that he pulled things from all over the web, not just Wikipedia.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Flesh so fine, so fine to tear, to gash the skin; skin to strip, to plait, so nice to plait the strips, so nice, so red the drops that fall; blood so red, so red, so sweet; sweet screams, pretty screams, singing screams, scream your song, sing your screams…” - The Eye of the World - Robert Jordan
What did A_S say that may be construed as clearing him ?
I don't think I ever said that anyone was "clear." I said that 2 different people had now come forward with info that supports the 2 different parts of Abso.'s claim, both of which were parts that he might have been fibbing about if he were mafia. (1) Glasswirght Series - which is kind of obscure, and a possibility for a false claim (this would only likely have been the case if the mafia were comprised of really scummy sounding Gods, which I think is actually less likely). (2) Vanilla - which cuts both ways, but a mafia with a scummy ability or an ability that likely duplicates someone in the town wouldn't want to claim it and might very well claim vanilla. He apparently didn't do that. In as much as you think there won't be vanilla mafia, it makes him look that much better. I, however, would not be at all surprised if there were vanilla mafia to go along with vanilla townies.
Abso. could still be mafia. Fact is, since we know there are at least 2 people from the Glasswright series in this game, there is probably a good chance that there's a mafia in the Glasswright series (this is playing the Mod. a bit, but it seems like something I would do.)
So, I'm not calling him clear, I'm just looking at other people at the moment.
@ Axelrod :
- To take a page from your book, what do you think of the speed at which this wagon disbanded just by the announcement that Abso is vanilla ?
- Would you mind describing what happened with Cyan on day 1 of ST Mafia, for those who were not playing ?
1. I haven't look at the speed at which the wagon disbanded. There might be something there, but it also seems that all the wagons in this game disband pretty quickly. No one wants to pull the trigger. Which I get, but it makes for very dragged out days.
2. Why don't you describe it? What is this anyway, you want me to make an argument for you? Or are you just subtly reminding me? Believe me, the lessons from Star Trek are firmly in my mind. You certainly won't see me "clearing" too many people based just on the fact that they voted for a mafia--even voting early and often.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Quote from Bateleur »
Ambush Krotiq makes me laugh so much. I keep rereading the card and it keeps not having Flash. In what sense is this an ambush again? I just have visions of this huge Krotiq poorly concealed in some bushes, feeling slightly sad that his carefully planned ambushes never seem to work.
These are the things I see as scummy from Treigit.
Post 13:
[spoiler]
Quote from Treigit »
About Time this game got started.
I think this Time around I will random vote.
Vote Kenji
Though I am somewhat tempted to vote kops for posting 3 Times already and voting Grim on simul posting charges despite Grim's lack of post.
[/spoiler]
Right of the bat I got a bad feeling from him. He starts right off by taking something this simply way to seriously. To me it comes off as being overzealous to appear helpful to the Town.
Post 29:
[spoiler]
Quote from Treigit »
Kokusho, I agree 100% Az is generally the paragon of reason and constructive posts. Especially D1. It has to be a voting restriction.
Lets see, who else is in this game?
* Treigit Tirelessly shaves three sides off of his lucky d30, rolls it, ignores the result and points randomly at the screen.
Vote Leilani
[/spoiler]
Barns Koko and Az in the same post, then “points out” the post restriction.
Then for some reason re-random votes. Nothing particularly bad about that, just starts the pattern of odd behavior.
#44:
[spoiler]
Quote from Treigit »
I'd say that it's a statistical proof by now, Kenji, if town will be mod confirmed.
No confirmation=evil scum.
Vote Kenji (Which I was already doing)
[/spoiler]
Joke, followed by another ‘random’ vote. Also, he wasn’t already voting Kenji, he was still voting for his second random Leilani.
What I get from this post is a continuation of the odd behavior that got me looking at him already.
#58:
[spoiler]
Quote from Treigit »
Ok, I'll bite. We may be barking up the wrong tree, but you can't make an ommlette without breaking some eggs. And other such metaphors
Vote Azrael
(ALthough my logic on Kenji is flawless and definetly worth lynching him over later)
Lets see what game you're playing.
[/spoiler]
Indirectly barns Kenji by following his vote on Az, when he could have easily waited for Az’s response before voting.
#62:
[spoiler]
Quote from Treigit »
My last post being composed entirely before the three preceding posts, I might be inclined to change my mind, but, no. Too early for changing of minds.
Also, wanted to say:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Puzzle
Quote:
Originally Posted by [B
Axelrod][/b]
Babyjesus! I wondered if you were secretly posting over here.
X
That is not helpful.
(Seriously, this made me laugh.)
[/spoiler]
Barns Puzzle.
At this point it begins to look bad how much time he spends doing so to various people.
#68
[spoiler]
Quote from Treigit »
Vote Grimclaw
For making the only post this entire game that did not progress the state of the game!
Hey my vote's not going to mean anything until I leave it in one place long enough for a vote count, huh.
I promise, anyday now, (and definetly by day 3) I'll try doing something productive with my vote,
[/spoiler]
“The only post this entire game that did not progress the state of the game”? Incredibly aggressive statement about absolute bull****. This was still in the complete random “Hey, hows it going?” stage of the game.
#81
[spoiler][/quote=Treigit]It looks like we're still missing Absolutionis and Magician of Thought (I think that's all)
Blue, I frown upon such methods of random vote generating (and random FoS's too?). Sure Determine it through a die roll, tell us you determined it through a die roll, but don't actually show us such. It removes the ability for you to be hinting at actual suspicions/investigations, and doesn't allow us to speculate that you were distancing yourself from Puzzle when he inevitably comes up scum (you thought I hadn't caught your blatant tell?).
All of my random votes, as much as I assure you they're random still contribute to the game state, your posts on the other hand contribute nothing.[/quote][/spoiler]
Continues to take the Random stage of the game far to seriously. This is also the start of a large argument he has over his “theory” of random voting. The whole thing is ridiculous, as the base of it is him saying “If random votes are really random, we can’t use them as evidence later”. If you take random votes that seriously I think you should be rethinking the way you analyze posts.
#103:
[spoiler]
Quote from Treigit »
Not reading anything into it, I was just saying that it's impossible to read anything into it. Thus, it, unlike other "random votes, is entierly pointless, as opposed to mostly pointless.
Also Leilani I suspect your comment was directed, or atleast inspired by me. I don't think there's anything wrong with not "random" voting. In fact it's probably best if not everyone does it. I just think it's fun to throw my votes around, and have recently come to the understanding that "random" votes do serve a purpose. (And that RANDOM votes don't.)
Unvote
From now on my votes will have at least some actual meaning behind them.
Crap Logic Alert! I don't actually see Puzzle as making a particular effort to advance the game, but if he is, how is that in anyway vote worthy. It shows more than anything a desire to play the game, but if I had to give it an alliegance, I'd call it pro-town.
[/spoiler]
First more jibberish about random and RANDOM voting.
Then indicates that he was done random voting and that everything before this had been a joke, despite being rather forceful in telling Grimclaw earlier that he wad the Only one to not advance the game, which apparently was vote-worthy.
Then defends Puzzle after Krashbot stated he felt (as I do) that Puzzle was being a little too forceful.
#111:
[spoiler]Link[/spoiler]
Minor backpedal on the importance of the Random thing, but still insists on it.
Barns AS who is voting Krash (who made the comment about Puzzle), then votes for Krash himself.
#133:
[spoiler]
Quote from Treigit »
MD- (Hmm, that might get confusing, I'll have to start spelling out our Mod's name) You want the day to end now? Don't get me wrong, I don't want to have meaningless posts indefinitely, (Though I suspect there is more meaning in some posts than may be immediately apparent.) but I'm in no hurry to end the day. I think there's a decent chance we could catch scum with today's lynch. (The last few games on this site seem to have done so.)
Now time for a bit of setup spec. What Pantheons do we think might be represented? I'd bet on Greek/Roman (not necessarily both though), Norse, Egyptian, and at least one God from MtG (most likely Kamigawa: O-Kagachi or a Myojin). Any others that you think are a given?
Yes I know this is dangerously close to Fishing. I'd suggest that you not mention your own Pantheon, unless you expected it going into this game.
[/spoiler]
His comments to MD (aside from making too much of Mds comment) seem like more desperation to appear Town friendly.
Then of course we get to the infamous Pantheon Plan. We’ve already been over several times why this is so bad. Admitting you are fishing doesn’t stop it from being fishing.
#142:
[spoiler]
Quote from Treigit »
Those I'm most suspcious of:
Magician of Thought- We're now what 3 rl days in and still no posts?
MD- Early defensiveness, Posting vote counts (helpful, but free, and while requested probably not vital this early), Plus the last 3 or 4 posts feel weird
Krashbot- You've yet to explain how Puzzle trying to move the game forward is scummy
[/spoiler]
Cites posting a vote count as scummy behavior. This is just more of him making mountains out of molehills in what feels to me like an attempt to find someone, anyone to be the Town focus, as long as it isn’t him.
Then he continues to attack Krash, and puts words in his mouth.
#162:
[spoiler]
Quote from Treigit »
But... Krash, thank you for acknowledging that your vote on Puzzle was based on bad logic. That part was never in question. Despite the fact that you no longer find it logical, I'd like to know what logic you had at the time. How did it ever occur to you that advancing the game was a scummy action?
Vote Krashbot
Awaiting your reply.
Also, to add to my uber scummy setup spec:
1 Don't claim if you're in one of those pantheons. Don't claim if you aren't
2 I forgot Hindi, they're probably here too.
3 Does anyone think we'll see the Judeo Christian God? More than one incarnation? (God, Jesus, Holy Ghost, Allah, Yahweh) This would be hilarious, but also more offensive than the inclusion of gods from other active religions. Anyone know how religious Draygn is, or how loathe to offend?
4 DYH, the point is for people who may come from different backgrounds to pitch in such that we have a better idea of what to expect, it's also a chance for anyone with non-role related setup knowledge ("You are X, you've always had a grudge against Y, but you'll put that aside," "Those Mayan gods seem weird to you but..." or that sort of thing) to speak up , either as "Well I bet Set is here" or "Hey that reminds me, my PM mentioned Qtzylquatcl" (Wow, I can't spell that at all)
[/spoiler]
Even after Krash backs off, Tregit still strawman’s him.
Then he continues the (as he said) uber-scummy speculation, even urging people to post info from their Pms!
#172:
[spoiler]
Quote from Treigit »
Can't resist... scummy too powerful... must...
Vote MD
(Though I would still like to hear from Krash)
Wow, where do I start? Self Voting, hinting at powerrole at less than half a lynch, Wishing the scum a GG.
The sad thing is I think there's a chance MD's telling the truth, but just so scummy that the game can't make any progress while he's (I'm making a generally fair gender assumtion here) around.
If you are town, then you should start trying to persuade us of such, preferably without claiming your role. But if you do feel the need to claim, do it out right, being vague about your role always seems scummy. Also saying you don't/won't/aren't lying doesn't help at all. On the off chance that it is true, I suggest you change this attitude before future games
Getting yourself lynched intentionally hurts the town, even if you don't care about that sort of thing, we do and Mods might.
EWP: Yay, a response from Krash. Just to clarify, you would think it scummy if anyone did any action which stated or otherwise attempted to change the game from random, non accumlating votes to attempts to find/lynch scum?
[/spoiler]
Here he seems to absolutely love the prospect of having a wagon supported by the Town against someone acting as MD was. Despite expressing doubts about Mds alignment, he still claims that we “can’t get anything done” if MD is around! Seems to me that Treigit was just happy to finally have found a lynch target, and was looking finish the Day as quickly as possible with an MD lynch.
His comments to Krash are simply ridiculous. A blatant strawman of the highest caliber.
#202:
[spoiler]Link[/spoiler]
I’m not even sure what he meant to accomplish with this post. I think it was meant to be a response to DYH’s claim that there was enough to discuss without resorting to setup spec, but all it really managed to do was make me wonder what his point was.
#244:
[spoiler]
First he generally continues to support his Pantheon plan, insisting that no one would be dumb enough to let info slip. I find that simply to naive to be simply a bad assumption, it flies in the face of conventional knowledge, and I think it is pretty clearly over the line into scummy.
Quote from Treigit »
That's (Idle Speculation) exactly what I'm going for. Look at any flavor based mafia game on this site (with the ironic exception of Drawn Together where as scum I was beaten to the speculation punch.) I like to get conversations started, and while we were moving out of the random voting stage, I wanted more to discuss than the benifits of Random Lynches.
Hides behind the same excuse both he and Puzzle use that if it creates discussion it is automatically good. This is IMO perhaps not scummy, but definitely a faulty assumption.
Quote from Treighit »
Quote from DYH »
People go through days in mafia games with suspicion on them, not being cleared, nor lynched all the time. Oftentimes because there are other things worthy of discussing, too.
Which I mentioned in my post. "Or having additional information come to light"
Here he completely misinterprets DYH’s comment, in essence pseudo-strawmaning him, or perhaps just trying to make his own post look better.
Then there is this interaction:
Quote from Treigit about MD »
As long as he's viewed as such, there are only three logical ways that the game can progress. Lynching him, clearing him, or having additional information come to light.
Quote from DYH »
You seem to be deflecting here. (Why look at me- we need to deal with MD_?)
Quote from Treigit »
You attack me for voting/discussing DYH, yet when I defend my post, I'm Deflecting?
Treigit fails entirely to address DYH’s concerns and instead simply whines about how DYH ‘attacks me for anything I do’.
Once again in the face of reasonable comments about him Treigit claims only vague jibberish is being thrown at him. This is a diversionary tactic he uses a lot to not have to really engage in any real defense.
After that he once again hides behind the “it made discussion so it’s good” defense.[/spoiler]
#[URL="http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showpost.php?p=1210315&postcount=407"]407: Either strawmans of just doesn’t address DYHs comments, then goes back to trying to deflect to MD. It is the comment at the end that particularly made me uncomfortable and reaffirmed my thoughts that he wanted very much for the MD lynch to end the day.
#412:
[spoiler]
Quote from treigit »
My post 244 explains my "Pantheon Plan" rather well. Responses? (And I disagree with the term "plan," that implies setting out a specific plan of action. You'll note I never told anyone to do anything.
[/spoiler]
First tries to shift the nature of his Pantheon post by saying it wasn’t a “plan” and therefore wasn’t as scummy as it sounds. Then by claiming he never “told” anyone to do anything, which is a pretty weak defense since he clearly invited them to.
#419:
[spoiler]
Quote from Treigit »
I asked anyone (NOT everyone) if there was another group they took as a given goign into this game. I specifaically suggested some actions that people NOT take. When I made the original post I hadn't expected anyone to be stupid enough to come out and say "I'm not in any of the mentioned pantheons." Especially given that I cautioned people not to give away revealing information.
"I'd suggest that you not mention your own Pantheon, unless you expected it going into this game."
Once again he is engaging in a (minor) strawman. DYH was talking about info slip, and here Treigit defends against something else by saying ‘but I didn’t tell people to claim’, which was not the issue.
Quote from Treigit »
I doubt any info is going to be revealed that helps scum. However, infrequent posters, with a direct question to answer (or to vocally refuse to answer) may get in and post where they have difficulty coming in and saying "No one really looks that scummy to me now, kbye."And no, I wasn't all that happy about the way the day was moving at that particular point.
Both denies the probability of info slip again, and hides behind the “Anything bringing discussion is auto-good” defense.
Quote from Treigit »
Quote from DYH »
No, defending your post is one thing, which you were doing in regards to my comparison of your play here regarding MD_ to mine as scum in WD2 with Azrael. You then proceded to save yourself from committing another fallacy (false dilemma) with your discussion on MD_ by tossing in the third option "additional information coming to light" along with clearing or lynching. (It did, btw, he claimed his god.) It looks very much like you just want him out of the way because his posts annoy you- the overdramatic 'this game can't go on like this!'. That's just not a very townie action. You'd defended your post, but you made sure to push back at MD_ in it, that's the deflection to which I'm referring. "Oh, ok, well here's my defense, now let's do something about this MD_ character."
First of all, I'd consider his claiming to be closer to the clearing category, than the additional information. Anything that directly applies to MD pushes in one of those two directions. Things relating to entierly new cases are what I had in mind with "additional information." IE Given that player X is most scummy we'll either lynch player X, find a compelling reason why we shouldn't lynch player X, or lynch player Y who is suddenly significantly more scummy. If that doesn't seem like your ideal game plan, then I'd love to play games against you.
Here he pushes, for the second time, the view that there are [B]only![/B] three ways for discussion to go. This seems to me to be just more of him wishing the Town had simply lynched MD and been done with it, and him indirectly criticizing everyone who got off the wagon for not following this play strategy.[/spoiler]
#432
[spoiler]
Quote from Treigit »
I consider it fishing when someone says "Hey XXX do you have role related reasons to think that?" Or, "So cop(who hasn't claimed yet), did you investigate XXX last night?"
[spoiler]
Here he tries to explain away why his Pantheon post was not fishing, and why his earlier comments that he didn’t consider it fishing weren’t a WIFOM situation. However what he posted here as an example of ‘real fishing’ is so downright ridiculous that I can’t believe he had the gall to post it.
#434:
[spoiler]
Quote from Treigit in responce to Blue saying he thought Treigit was the Lynch today »
And yet the same post in which you said that you'd give MD a day pass (346), you placed a vote on Kenji. It looks like there are multiple people you're still considering, and that none of them are MD.
[/spoiler]
More aggressive pushing of the MD wagon, as well as deflection.
You're right, that would have been an excellent question, if I was precognisant. Would you like to suggest some open ended questions based on the state of the thread at the time?
Once again suggests that his Pantheon plan was the only option for discussion.
Quote from Treigit »
In which Puzzle asked specific players (Everyone) for specific information (the third letter of their names). Which is very different than: "So does anyone have any thoughts on what they expect to see in this game."
While his statement is true, “So does anyone have any thoughts on what they expect to see in this game” is [B]not[/B] what he posted. What he did post left far more possibility for slipped info.
Defends “random vote” theory yet again.
More deflection, this time to Loran.[/spoiler]
#455:
[spoiler]
Quote from Treigit »
I wanted (and continue to want frankly) people to reveal info in their PMs that in no way reveals who they are or what their power is.
[/spoiler]
Downright scummy. There is no way you can not see the value in withholding this kind of information.
#464:
[spoiler]
Quote from Treigit »
My example would have been masons if: The player knew who Zeus was, and was able to communicate with them. I'm talking more about the type of info that seemed to be floating around at the begining of Star Trek (I didn't follow the whole thing, so I don't know what portion of these were later revealed to be lies.) Such as Az knowing that Odo was in the game and town. And I believe there was one other bit that was known. If the mod included free info in PMs he sent to you, you have no reason to suspect that you'll be getting more of it, you think this info will be lost after your death, and you can't percieve of a situation in which scum might be trapped by withholding the info, then yeah, I'd say one should consider sharing it with the town.
[/spoiler]
Continues to support outing information at non-essential times.
#548:
[spoiler]
Quote from Treigit »
It would be irresponsible of me to claim at this point despite the votes on me (9 at the moment I believe), because many of those not voting me have said they find me to be town. Furthermore, those that have found me such include many of the games better analyists. Therefore, despite what Axel says, I see little reason to suspect that my vote count will continue to grow.
[/spoiler]
Wow, I hope someday I can refuse to claim on the grounds that ‘there are players who think I’m Town’. @_@
Axelrod also makes some good points in post 760.
That’s about it. It’s a ton and more than enough to make Treigit my #1 target for today.
Now, reading through what I missed while making this, I see that for the second time Treigit’s wagon is being abandoned for a new one. While I have not yet read the case against AH, and admittedly have gotten scummy vibes from him myself, I find this highly suspect.
I would be very happy at this point with a Treigit lynch today. [b]Vote:Treigit[/b]
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"There is no royal road to science, and only those who do not dread the fatiguing climb
of its steep paths have a chance of gaining its luminous summits"
-Karl Heinrich Marx Cube
- #13 to #68 : your use of "barning" is fairly liberal to say the least, and I don't think Treigit was taking anything seriously there. Sarcasm, much ?
Maybe it is, but he sure likes to stroke certain people's egos. Also, I don't see it as sarcasm, it comes across as taking things to seriously to me.
Quote from Puzzle »
- #81 to #111 : Treigit's point is that random votes are not always random. For example, cops with a night 0 scum result often prefer to remain hidden a bit more and just "random" vote their target. Giving everyone the certitude that one's vote is random hurts this process. Treigit has been clear and right about that. He didn't attack BlueSoul either for it, just frowned.
I am well aware of what his point is. My problem with it is that he makes far to big a deal out of it, with little to no reason.
Quote from Puzzle »
- #133 : "desperation to look townish" is a bit of an overstatement at the very least. How unlikely is it for a townie to say that ?
IDK, but regardless of who's saying it it'd be overacting which I find generaly scummy.
Quote from Puzzle »
- Pantheon plan : we've already been over this. By clearly telling others not to give personal info, he made the risk of screw-up minimal and imo not higher than what could happen on a boring day.
Believe that if you will, but all his "disclaimers" just look plainly like a weak cover for fishing to me.
Quote from Puzzle »
- #142 : putting words in Krashbot's mouth : I don't think he was. Krashbot clearly said I was scummy for being too pushy.
Yes, for being too pushy. Not for "Moving the game foreward", which is what Treigit said.
Quote from Puzzle »
- #162 : "Then he continues the (as he said) uber-scummy speculation, even urging people to post info from their Pms!". Personal role-related info ? Harmful info ? No, his example was to allow, for example, masons to confirm partially one another post mortem. Oh, and what do you make of his first point "1 Don't claim if you're in one of those pantheons. Don't claim if you aren't" ?
I hardly see how, even in that example, it is necessary.
More lame covering for fishing mostly.
Quote from Puzzle »
- #172 : scummy indeed for the way he attacks MD. However, his question to Krashbot, although stingy, is on the mark. Krashbot was attacking me for pulling the day out of the random phase too fast to his taste.
Yes, because "any action that which stated or otherwise attempted to change the game from random, non accumlating votes to attempts to find/lynch scum" is totally the same as "too fast for his taste". I'm amazed you would defend that.
Quote from Puzzle »
- #455 : "Downright scummy. There is no way you can not see the value in withholding this kind of information.". And there is no way you cannot see the value in leaving crumbs behind : if one of two masons die, leaving the Pantheon of his partner behind may help clearing him later. How can it harm ? Give me an example.
If said mason is dead, we already know his Pantheon, and I think it is fair to assume that masons will be of the same one.
Just because we may not be able to think of a way something can hurt now, doesn't mean it can't. It only means we can't think of how right now. But of course, you knew that I wouldn't be able to when you asked.
Quote from Puzzle »
You really want his blood today, don't you ? You found proofs of scumminess in each and every single post he made.
You sure like defending him, don't you? Uhm, no...I didn't. I skipped a lot of posts where I felt there was nothing of note.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"There is no royal road to science, and only those who do not dread the fatiguing climb
of its steep paths have a chance of gaining its luminous summits"
-Karl Heinrich Marx Cube
That + the speed at which the wagon took up too (with scums boarding without remorse, which is something I am ready to accept mcuh better now) + the speed at which it went down just because someone confirmed he was vanilla and that his Pantheon was represented on someone else. His analysis of the game is mostly an OMGUS, based mainly on me being scum, leaving very little to exploit if he goes bust. Outside of this OMGUS, it only shows more of an interest in knowing Az's ability than alignment, which is a scum trait. His scummy behaviour from the start is left ignored by most people, on the account of "oh, he lurked but now that he talks, we can leave him alone then".
I'd add his wagon-boarding on Treigit, after he said but I'm pretty much alone here.
You learn something new every day.
I often wondered why OMGUS voting was considered especially scummy, emotional outbursts that usually accompany it aside, but you outlined a major factor why right here. I guess if I'd thought about it for a minute it makes sense, but it doesn't leave much of a trail connecting him to anyone else. It furthermore explains the point why you were so anxious to have Abso discuss his opinions on other players. A townie point for Puzzle, here, I think.
Chuck, I don't have a whole lot of time now, but there are a few things I'd like to adress: You bring up all of these early tells that make me obviously scum that you've been suspcious of the whole time. Why then was I not included in "anybody and everybody" who'd tripped your scumdar (5 people total) in your post 325?
So in your extensive reading, did you fail to read post 347? It explains all my posts up to 81.
407 similarily explains my posts 103-162. Where specifically did I fail to address any of DYH's points?
I'm afraid I'll have to adress further posts later. First: Vote Chuck
not because I think those attacking me are scum, but beause it appears you're ignoring my posts which are inconvient for you, reading far to much into what were obviously light posts. And claiming to have always felt one way while previous posts suggest other wise.
Now everyone is turning on Pass and AH's argument? I'm on 40 posts/page, and you've added at least one new page since I turned up last. Yeesh. Unvote MD for upkeep purposes. I need to reread.
Re: my previous point about the likelihoor of there being a scum in the GlassWright Series. I have been thinking some more, bear with me:
What if everyone were to say right now if they were or were not a God from that Series? Everyone would have to do it for this to mean anything. If there's a scum in that Series then the situation would be (A) the scum admits he is part of that Series, and has to deal with being connected to a much smaller sub-set of townies; (B) the scum lies and says he's NOT from that series, in the hope we lynch everyone who says they ARE in the series looking for him. This has the benefit of forcing the scum to lie, and presuambly he would later have to falseclaim.
Immediately, I am confronted with the accusation/issue that this is similar to what Tregit was saying earlier about people claiming their Pantheon. If this is a good idea for the GlassWright Series, why shouldn't everyone do it? There's probably a scum in the "Greek" Mythology Gods too. What about "Norse?" Why shouldn't we all say right now?
That's a valid point. But for some reason it seems different to me when we are talking about the GlassWright Series because (1) it's obscure and (2) 2 people have already said they are from there. How many more could there be? I'll surprise no one by saying right now I'm not a God from that Series.
I'd kind of like everyone to do just that one claim. The list of Gods from that series is long, and I certainly don't want anyone to Name claim. No one is going to be "exposed" as a power role.
I just like information. The more I have, the better I do. If I got that tidbit (how many Gods from the GlassWright series are in the game--or at least, how many claims are there--I know it would help later. Possibly sooner than later, but possibly not. I don't think it would hurt, however.
This reminds me of Random I when I was looking for the 4th fan. I recall that Az (the actual 4th fan, and scum) lied, but CropCircles pulled a cute gambit which had the effect of making everyone who did claim fan look much better. No promises of any gambits this time, I was just remembering.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Quote from Bateleur »
Ambush Krotiq makes me laugh so much. I keep rereading the card and it keeps not having Flash. In what sense is this an ambush again? I just have visions of this huge Krotiq poorly concealed in some bushes, feeling slightly sad that his carefully planned ambushes never seem to work.
Pantheon claiming seems fairly useless. Considering the number of civilizations, each with their own mythology, and DM's claim that he pulled the roles off the entire internet, you'd be hard-pressed to get any useful information from pantheon claiming. Even looking at mainstream religions and their pantheons, there are still likely enough pantheons that will nullify practical application. Perhaps claiming fictional or real-world pantheons might narrow it down more effectively, but I still don't see much of a point.
Considering the sheer number of potential resources for DM, I don't think a scum will have a hard time coming up with a safe claim and ducking out from Axel's GlassWright probing. I'll say I'm not from it, though. No harm there.
Well, at the very least it might put the mafia into a slight dilemma. Or not. There's really no way to tell yet. I wouldn't suggest it, however, if I thought there could be negative reprecussions.
Remember (another lesson from Trek), info. sharing is not ALL bad.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Quote from Bateleur »
Ambush Krotiq makes me laugh so much. I keep rereading the card and it keeps not having Flash. In what sense is this an ambush again? I just have visions of this huge Krotiq poorly concealed in some bushes, feeling slightly sad that his carefully planned ambushes never seem to work.
Hmm, I can't see any real problems w/ Axel's plan. I could get behind it. However, I'm not yet revealing whether or not my god is from the glasswright books till we have more input.
I personally think that a vanilla scum is at least as likely as a townie. If we want to go there, mods who avoid vanillas do so most of the time to keep their players interested through doing things at night. In this respect, a vanilla mafioso is more likely than a vanilla townie : the mafioso has things to do at night.
I disagree in theory. a mod who wants to avoid vanillas generally responds by giving the town many abilities, because the town has the most vanilla roles (and are more boring). To compensate for the inbalance, I would expect almost all the scum to have abilities of some sort.
We must not overlook the possibility Abso is some sort of trickster god or godfather.
I attribute the wagon disbanding to the fact that it was built on very shaky foundations, so when some reverse momentum occured it just fell apart.
Axelrod: I don't like your plan. I see no reasonable benefit from it, and it can cause unnecessary complication and confusion.
Not to mention that you might be mafia and get bonus powers for killing Glasswright gods.
I'm going to ask that I be replaced...I'm just not able to follow this game as much and its really hard to catchup.
Sorry guys.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Mafia MVP Harry Potter Mafia!
Logical Reasoning is dead; Long Live Stupidity
Quote from Seppel »
I love Joboman, Poggy, Niv, and Vezok, because, while they may not be the best players, they still try to win. Having fun is the most important thing to a game, but I've learned that if you don't try to win, then you're ruining everyone else's fun.
We must not overlook the possibility Abso is some sort of trickster god or godfather.
Axelrod: I don't like your plan. I see no reasonable benefit from it, and it can cause unnecessary complication and confusion.
Not to mention that you might be mafia and get bonus powers for killing Glasswright gods.
I enjoy random speculatory tainting of people as much as the next guy.
unvote, FOS aurorasparrow, with intent to read and consider if that needs to go further.
I don't see why claiming to be from Glasswright (whatever that is) gives either Abso or AS a free pass, but I wasn't a fan of the Abso wagon anyway.
If AS doesn't prove worthy of examination on a re-read, I think I'll push for a claim from Treigit. I don't really understand why that hasn't occurred already; he's continually scummy, and either he's scum or he's a distraction we need to clear.
Upon further thought, I disagree with Axel's plan. It has the pontential of setting up a false dichotomy. Axel says that if there are exactly two roles from Glasswright, that one of them must be scum. I don't think this follows at all. While it's likely (to me at least) that scum are from the same pantheons as the town, there are enough potential pantheons that I don't at all know that we can make that kind of assumption. If we do make that assumption, and are incorrect, we stand to mislynch 2 days in a row, and be no closer to catching scum for it.
I don't know if Axel had thought of it, (I certainly overlooked this possibility initailly) but he's experienced enough that he should have. Therefor FoS Axelrod.
EBWODP: Reread Axel's propsal. My objection is still the same, but I just want to note that he doesn't use the certainty that I attributed to him in my last post. My bad.
What's interesting here is the way you seem to assume that he might be a God from those books but still false-claiming. As though he might have been a scummier sounding God from the same series, and decided to false-claim, but still stay within the same series. Why would he do that exactly? As long as he's he's false-claiming anyway.
A scum from that series would very likely assume that there would be town(s) from that series in the game also. So false claiming is still a risk. Why pick your actual series in that case?
Here we have the scummy threat to vote later unless satisfied. Even though he's "not in the top" of your scum suspects. Who were those again? Are you saying you'd vote him over someone else you think more likely to be scum? Or just that if he didn't defend himself better, that would cause him to become your top suspect?
The first part of this post is meaningless. Not of any use whatsoever, despite your attempt to sound helpful. I don't understand what you are saying in the second part.
Really? Think about it for a minute. Why did you post this anyway?
I dislike the condescending tone here. Also, you keep using the plural "we" and "us" in your posts. Lilke you are trying to bury yourself in amongst townies for all your actions.
More talking down to MD. And a bit too much stating of the obvious.
This post doesn't make any sense. Maybe I'm not understanding. Are you saying you think the scum are more or less likely to be falseclaiming?
I really don't like this one. Before we know what Cyan will say, you are dismissing it and appear to be trying to keep the lynch on regardless of result.
You just said it wouldn't prove anything. Why do you even care about Cyan's certainty?
Again with the threats to vote if not satisfied. I'm not going to say I haven't seen towns do that, but I've seen scums do it more.
Battle Royale Mafia
(Come see who won!)
Unvote, Vote Treigit
I, for one, am waiting with bated breath.
Do tell.:unibrow:
Lovely weather we are having, isn't it?
VOTE:!Chucklez!
vote:Kops723
vote:Loran16
vote:Kenji
vote:Arimnaes
vote:Treigit
vote:Absolutionis
vote:Machin Shin
vote:bluesoul
vote:Mystery meat of doom
vote:Xyre
Vote:RafaelK
vote:Mosschop
vote:Passdog
vote:Abandon Hope
vote:Carrion pigeons
vote:silicon
MD
Cyan
aurorasparrow
Disrupt Your Hymn
Axelrod
Puzzle
CropCircles
Azrael
Krashbot101
Hawkeye7
Calvin & Hobbs Mafia, Mafia MVP
X-Men Mafia Town MVP
Simpson's Mafia - best use of character
Mtgnews Mafia Mafia - Town Madman
Mythos Mafia: the Dunwich Massacre Town MVP
English Literature Mafia Town MVP
Best Role-Playing Sin City Mafia
Werewolf Mafia - Mafia MVP
Doctor Mafia - Mafia MVP
Mafia: Escape from the Cylons - Town MVP
Lost Mafia - Co SK Winner with Kops
Random Mafia 3 - Town MVP
@cyan: You have said twice now that you doubt there are any vanilla mafia members. Do you have some specific reason that you're willing to share for doubting vanilla mafioso?
Also, a game this size probably has 5-6 Mafioso and an SK, or 5 Mafia, 1 SK, 1 Cult. That leaves room for 20ish townies, most of which are going to have abilities. In a game that size, the mafia basically all have to have abilities of some sort of the game to have any sort of balance...as we can all agree that DM knows what he's doing, logically, I think that it stands to reason that all of the mafia will have an ability of some sort. Honestly, I'm pretty surprised that the first person that got called out was a Vanilla Townie, which is why I chose to use my ability to verify this(I thought that he was just lying to cover for an ability that would condemn him).
If you'd spent much time designing games, you'd find it's hard to give general abilities (ie mafia roleblock) to each of the scum in the game after you have more than four. In that context, it's perfectly reasonable to have a vanilla mafioso, purely for making the mafia large enough to be capable. Seinfeld had one, for example.
Experiments Series: #5 (Courtly Intrigue Mafia) | #4 (Drunken Tracker) | #3 (Big Red Button) - coming soon | #2 (Pope Mafia) | #1 (Iso's Inflammable Mafia)
Mini Games: MTGS Mafia Redux II (Invitational, Evil Mirror Universe) | Unreal City
Old Games (bad): The Greenwood Affair | Blood Moon Mafia
Unvote, Vote Treigit
I've been thinking that Treigit is scum for quite some time, and some of the stuff Axel pointed out just keeps pushing him that way.
On the Abso front, I'm still not completely convinced that he's town, but Cyan's explantation does give him some more points toward townie in my book. I mean seriously. Even if there is 1 vanilla scum, what's the likelihood that we hit that one guy out of the 27 with the Abso wagon? (It's higher than 1/27 because we ignored really townie-looking people, but still.)
So basically,
@Abso: Keep talking!
But I'm happy pushing Treigit for now.
Winner of the Weekly Signature & Avatar Contest Weeks 51, 59, 78, & 118.
I don't care if I was framed for murder if I only got a warning I would let it go.
I notice that Abso gives his thoughts on 12 players, and with varying degrees of certainty calls 5 of them scum. He also listed most of the people on his wagon, except krashbot, MMoD, and myself. According to his list, at least 3 of the people on his wagon are scum. Right now I'm simply inclined to think that he's desperately trying to cast suspicion on his attackers. Vote stands.
EBWODP: D'oh, must remember to read all the pages before posting. I'm still not sure that Abso is cleared, even with two people confirming parts of his story. Granted, it would be too much to hope for that 2 scum came out to defend their buddy by confirming his claim, but it's hard for me to reconcile Abso's actions with his supposed townieness.
However, Axelrod's PBPA of Treigit's recent posts is fairly damning. I have remained suspect of Treigit ever since he catapulted himself into the spotlight, and his recent actions do indeed seem to be the actions of a scum trying to force a mislynch.
Unvote, Vote Treigit
Let's imagine for a moment that I'm town (I'm not saying I'm not, I'm simply saying cast out all suspicion for the sake of the scenario), and Puzzle is leading a quickly gathering bandwagon against me.
Wouldn't it make a lot of sense for scum to join in on this bandwagon at varying times in order to strengthen it to force a mislynch?
Note that I'm not seeing scum in people voting on me in order to get the blame off of myself or even for revenge of sorts. I genuinely see them as scum, partially for their actions.
Is there something wrong with pointing out that 3 out of 8 people voting for me might be scum?
Now, on the subject of Tregit, I'm leaning more and more scum. I see CropCircles and Puzzle as both heavy scum.
I noticed, back on the Tregit bandwagon, both of these players did not join in at all. Seeing as how CropCircles was so quick to join the bandwagon against me, I find it surprising that he didn't try and take out Tregit the bandwagon before. And Puzzle didn't assault him with his near-trademarked barrage.
In any case, I believe there are bigger scum to kill, but Tregit is looking worse in my eyes, for reasons mostly attributed to others' actions around him.
vote: Tregit
A couple of random posts to begin, commenting on chaos of thread, enttry post.
#189: Patronises Treigit for pressuring him for content. Votes MD for defensiveness, and patronises. Kids around with treigit on Christian God.
#272: Attacks puzzles unvote of MD; considers ideas Puzzle put forward as damning, suggests that a newb worried about five votes wouldn't so easily put another player at the same - therefore intent to kill.
#289: claims as joke post but put scum light on Chucklez as displaying a guilty conscience.
#349: Starts by saying 'one outraged post [not] enough to cry scum over' then approves of Kenji's vote anyway. Inserts a lot of scummy sentiment into a post of bluesoul's that can be read as quite innocent. Votes bluesoul on that basis.
#389: Defense of Puzzle w/ qualification - 'not entirely sure why'. Comments negatively (using sarcasm rather than explanation) on example 'sparrow gives.
Strawman: Attacks 'sparrow's case by refuting with irrelevant reasoning; argues better to lynch any scum than no scum - 'sparrows comment was that it is better to lynch experienced scum before inexperienced. The two are disconnected, and therefore the argument is misrepresentative - essentially it makes it seem as though 'sparrow is trying to keep scum in the game when that is clearly not his (overt) intent. Then runs away from this aspersion - 'isn't enough to vote for you either'.
#395: reasserts suspicion of 'sparrows argument, suggests 'pigeons should also find him (AH) scummy if he disagree's with his argument - essentially telling cp how to think.
#398: Defends stance on Puzzle/MD, and further encourages vote on himself, forcing confrontation. condescending finish - bit muddled hard to follow (mostly cause its late).
---Carrion accuses AH of Stawmanning---
#423: AH responds to strawman accusation by further arguing irrelevant point. Talks 'absolutes' and 'possibilities' but adds nothing useful to discussion and then backs away from argument.
#448:supports CropCircles case against carrion (which was fair), drops bluesoul vote while still maintaining interest in bluesoul. Swift change a little opportunistic (and retaliatory?)
#456:Accepts cp's defensce returns to voting bluesoul.
#492: Tries to make blusoul look scummy by asserting he's using some form of logical fallacy (barning is not a logical fallacy by the way). Further no logical fallacy is present in the quoted text - actually comments on interaction between kops and Treigit.
#496: banter w/ Puzzle
#502:more banter. accuses Machin of lurking being out of character (therefore scummy?) but suggests better targets than lurkers (bluesoul). No further elaboration on Vote.
#522: FoS Machin Shin for previous post. seems to be joining a FoS bandwagon. Ensures his suspicion is noted but acheives nothing more with this post. Attempt to make MS look scummy?
#538: supports Treigit claim but continues bluesoul vote. Has as yet failed to comment on Treigit at all.
#545:Calls Treigit suspicious for first time (though implied in call for claim), but thinks bluesoul more suspicious. Proposes vote only after claim fails to 'allay... suspicions'. Does not explain why bluesoul is scummier. Claims need to be sure of scumminess to vote Treigit.
As Azrael pointed out this is a cop out - it provides AH with the opportunity to attack treigit without really committing to it. Further provides no reason why bluesoul is the better target.
Also suggests lurking is done by both town and mafia, and brings little suspicion. Then asks Puzzle who to wagon.
#550: Refers reason to vote bluesoul to his original complaint. No new evidence to suggest bluesoul better target than any other.
#571: Misinterprets Azrael as encouraing him to vote someone else - rather Azrael argued that AH should be concentrating his attention on a single player he thought scummiest (bluesoul at the time) and not encourage too many wagons. Instead AH votes Ab****ionis using Azrael's post as evidence Azrael was encouraging him to vote that way. Very misrepresentative.
#579:Asserts Puzzle will have no problem with speed of wagon cos he's in control of it. Claims Abso reaction what was expected from scum. Uses 'we' as if trying to prove he is town. Also put words in the towns mouth, asserting own view as towns.
#585: Confirms 'we' = town. Asks Puzzle why he would allow people to suspect they were in choots. Note that only the town possibilities are mentioned - seems to intentionally avoid possibility of mafia partnership.Another attempt to seem townie?
#604: Provides negative speculation on Azrael's vote restriction, suggesting cult. Provides disclaimer. Expresses interest in Krash, CP and CC but votes Chucklez for lurking. Claims 'town could use my vote there' again overemphasising his supposed town intent.
#627: Unvotes Chucklez based on promised voting improvement. Attacks Machin Shin for 'always trying to throw suspicion on somone' then returns to voting absolutionis because its the 'most productive'. Is that really a reason to vote someone? Productive how?
#629 & 648: wants abso to claim, then calls name claim dodgy. provides no reasons.
#681:Follows many others in accusing MMoD, bluesoul, Xyre and MD of being scummy - no explanation (prob apparent from thread). Again uses 'we' as if he spoke for the whole town saying he was unsatisfied with Absolutionis' claim, pushes for ability.
#684: Explains inclusion of MMoD in his little scummy list.
#718: Barns Axelrod's reasons for voting Absolutionis. Pretty consistent of his play in general.
#724: Expresses disapproval of emphasis on individuality in mafia - OK to follow till somones wrong. Another cop out - people who continually barn are nearly as bad as lurkers (if not worse) as they essentially lurk in plain sight and allow mafia to do so too. Justify's vote if Abso is rush lynched as OK as it will help catch scum: knowingly lynching townies is scummy - that it will help lynch mafia is not a reason to do it. Lynch the mafia in the first place.
#738: Disputes aurorasparrows argument against previous post ('following is OK') because 'he wants to'. Attacks assertion that it is annoying - this is a strawman argument. Annoying hwere is merely an adjective attached to the real point - that following as he does risks supporting mafia. Further it can aid in hding mafia by allowing others to similarly follow.
Argues its OK to be reactive - ignoring the fact that to find scum the town must proactively search for them. The town won't reveal themselves, and staying reactive will only benefit the mafia. It's a lazy way to play and dangerous for the town to do so.
Further asserts following is OK. To an extent I agree - because often you will just agree with someone, and you have no more to add. But it is apparent from this PBPA that AH has added little in the way of originality to this game, and where he has (ie with bluesoul) he has not really contributed more than a single idea and a vote. Again such play is tantamount to lurking.
#756:Conitnues support for Absolutionis lynch. Claims vanilla confirmation means little (true) and new contribution to the game had no effect on his view due to its timing. Also unimpressed by its content. What was wrong with the timing and content?
----------------------------
My problems with AH:
1. Tries way too hard to appear town - all the 'we', the whole 'are you trying to imply we're masons' thing, his general I can't be mafia attitude.
2. Tries to pass of his motives as the towns - again 'we'
3. Barns other players regularly, incl. Puzzle, Azrael, and Axelrod. Barning is bad for two reasons, the first is described above concerning following, the second is because it is often used by mafia to hide behind more prominent players (see Cyan w/Puzzle in Star Trek).
4. expresses few individual views/original thought - flying under the radar
5. avoids responsibility for own actions: tried to make treigit look scummy while avoiding voting him; attempted to force Azrael to take responsibility for his vote
6. original thought he has expressed, like trying to wagon bluesoul, has displayed little to no reasoning (took one single post an ran with it) and made no attempt to advance it
7. Uses scummy techniques to discredit other players eg strawman and being patronising
8. Contradicts himself - claims won't vote treigit without good reason to believe he is scum, but fails to provide more substantive reason that bluesoul could be scum.
Vote Abandon Hope
--------------------------------
I am going to go back over the case against Absolutionis next. Shouldn't take too long since he's been so lurky. At this point I wouldn't say he isn't scum, but I don't think his gameplay thus far is scummy enough to lynch him - especially considering the speed of the wagon. I'll go over it tomorrow anyway.
I'll also look at Treigit if I can because he is obviously garnering attention again. Similarly with Absolutionis, nothing has stuck out to me that would make me want to lynch him, but a reread is definitely in order.
If someone summarised the cases against them then it would save a lot of time for the people who have replaced. If not I'll try and get to it sometime tomorrow but no promises (the above took me about three hours - its now 4:30am).
Chucklez (1)- Hawkeye7
abandon hope (1)- passdog
absolutionis (5)- Puzzle, aurorasparrow, Abandon Hope, CropCircles, MD
arimnaes (1)- MMoD
Azrael (1)- Azrael
CropCircles (1)- Mosschop
krashbot (3)- arimnaes, rafaelk, treigit
MD (1)- xyre
Puzzle (1)- carrion pigeons
Treigit (8)- loran16, bluesoul, axelrod, cyan, kenji, krashbot, machin shin, absolutionis
Not Voting (5)- kops723, silicon, DYH, chucklez
Firstly, I don't know that even as scum he's false claiming. However what I said is that that page is sufficently obscure that one wouldn't find it while searching for gods. If I got assigned one of these gods, I wouldn't automatically make the assumption that there were more in the game. However, even If he did make that assumption, (and is scum,) I would take the 1/66 chance of picking a god that someone else had than go to a more known pantheon and hope to get lucky there.
My top scum are MD and Arimnaes. There are other people (including Absolutionis) whom I consider scummy. Yes, I would vote someone who I consider less scummy than MD or Arimnaes (so long as I still consider that person possible scum) as the town doesn't share my opnion on either of them.
The first part of my post is mostly, but not entierly unecessary. If some one had read the Glasswright series and Fen is somehow considered evil in that world, Abso would have some explaining to do. I find each of those very unlikely, but if they're both true it could be helpful. No harm in asking.
The second part was to CC who saw the speed differences in Abso's and Chuck's wagon as incriminating to Chuck. I was explaining why I thought the two wagon speeds could be different with out either (or with both) being scum.
I still don't know what it means, I probably should have posted nothing here, but wanted to respond to the revelation
Sorry for condenscending. (Why exactly do you dislike this?) Substitute "the town" for all instances of we or us in my posts, but really what does this mean, even if I'm scum you don't expect me to admit to it do you?
Stating the obvious yes, but in a direct response to MD asking "What's fishing, and why is it bad." Aparently the obvious needed to be stated.
What I'm saying is that there are many games in which the scum could claim there actual roles, (take Trek Mafia, and HS as examples) I have no idea whether or not that is such a game. However if the scum do have to false claim, presumably they already have ~5 pantheons they know are in the game (this is before MD and Abso claimed).
If I were trying to keep the lynch on, I'd probably be voting. I'm trying to keep the pressure on. Abso has yet to make a single post with any sort of content. And I suspected (correctly) that if Abso is vanilla he'd take this as an excuse to not provide any. Further, I don't know that this Definitevly clears him. Are you claiming that it does?
Because it would suck if Cyan came back saying Abso was lying (if abso was telling the truth). First we'd lynch abso on false premises, then if Abso came up town we'd lynch Cyan for lying. I always like to know the certainty our investigator has.
Abso still hadn't posted anything of content, that's much of what this bandwagon was built on. I wanted him to know that the pressure hadn't abated. My post and others posting similar sentiment caused him to post analysis. (Which others are now analysisng)
Now I believe it's time to barn Passdog.
Unvote;
Vote: Abandon Hope
Treigit's defense of himself seems satisfactory, but the fact that he's now had to fend off two potential wagons sticks in my mind. For now I'll
Unvote,
downgrade to FoS:Treigit. I'm reluctant to simply hop on another wagon, so for now I'll FoS: Abandon Hope and wait for a reply to Passdog's case.
4th place at CCC&G Pro Tour
Chances of bad hands (<2 or >4 land):
21: 28.9%
22: 27.5%
23: 26.3%
24: 25.5%
25: 25.1%
26: 25.3%
It's WIFOM, but, I would never put myself out there like that for another scum buddy, because it ties our fates together too much. Honestly, I thought that(and hoped that) Abso was lying, which is why I used my ability to check this.
What I find interesting is that, IMO, the 3 people that he didn't give any thoughts on are among the most likely to be scum.
I'm not really satisfied with some of Treigit's answers, so, I'm going to leave my vote where it is for now. In particular, I think that using terms like 'we' and 'us' and even 'the town' is something that scums do more than townies, because they want to appear to be part of the town. When you are part of the town, you know it, and don't have the desire to provide assurances of such.
Here for example. You claim the scummy sentiment is my insertion, where I find bluesoul's statement to indicate a mafia perspective.
And here. I don't find the two disconected at all. In the search for experienced scum early in the game, mistakes are more likely to happen. It's dangerous. But if you didn't believe me the first time...
If you say so. If I hadn't backed away from what I saw as an irrelevant argument, that would be your acusation here. I defended myself and moved on. A good case and I followed it. Coincidence that it came after CP attacked me. Yeah, barning isn't what I was trying to think of. I gave up trying to scratch that mental itch. I admit I was looking for more evidence against bluesoul. I was convinced he was scum, but I needed to convince others. nope, just out of character. Again with the machin shin thing. I didn't need to make Machin Shin look scummy there, he did fine on his own. FOS is an attempt to draw attention to another's scumminess. Used as intended. Yeah, I'm not going to vote for someone who I'm not convinced is scum. That's why I didn't vote him when he refused to claim. Looking back, it seems I did misunderstand the intent, however I am happy with my actions. A single vote on Bluesoul wasn't doing anything, and abso was developing scum tells. Why not use my vote where it can do good? That's what I thought Az was getting at. Yes it is. Productive in that it produced an extremely scummy individual. It was dodgy. He dodged the intent of the requested claim. I thought it was obvious If you don't agree with me, I cant change your mind. As to the abso rush lynch thing, I wasn't planning to lynch him immediatly, nor was I planning on knowingly lynching a townie. I don't think abso's town. And I consider a mislynch fair exchange for the number of rushers it would out. Um, actually that was an apology for annoying people, and less of an attack. It is subjective whether one is annoyed, and that was my only 'point.' Also I didn't embrace reactivitly exclusively. Stuff happens, people react. I agree for the need to be proactive, but once someone proacts, then others must react. This is a non issue. As to that last bit, I'll repeat. If there are alot of good ideas, it is valid to follow alot. This is a case of plain disagreement. He only invested himself once he felt himself unlikely to be lynched. Not how a townie should play. The content was a rant against those who accused him.
You're taking a pronoun as evidence of a mafia mentality. I can accept that as valid logic, and all I can do is assure you it doesn't mean what you think it means. When I said I was doing something for the good of the town, it was because it was in opposition to my personal desire (vote bluesoul usually) and I wanted to point that out. These are connected. If you don't agree with my opinon of following, I can't change your mind. I've already argued this point. Like I said, I misunderstood that Az quote to be encouraging action. If you didn't like my first argument against bluesoul, making it again won't change things. I found what I believe is insight into bluesoul's attitude toward the game. I'm sorry you didn't. I didn't see my comments that way at the time, and in most cases, I still don't. I obviously value different tells to a different degree. I'm honored. Thank you for doing this pbpa. I have learned more about myself(not sarcasm).
Honestly, it was less Passdog's PBPA than the crummy/scummy defense (that just reenforced a few of Passdog's points) that makes me think A_H is scum right now.
Unvote, Vote: Abandon Hope
I think Treigit's defense is perfectly reasonable, but it bothers me how many things he's had to defend this game. Granted he has successfully defended most to all of them, but there have still been a few too many for my liking. Treigit is definitely still in the top 2-3 on my scum list (along with A_H).
Winner of the Weekly Signature & Avatar Contest Weeks 51, 59, 78, & 118.
I don't care if I was framed for murder if I only got a warning I would let it go.
Unvote, Vote Abandon Hope
Also are there anyother answers you're not satisfied with? (That's one, you said several.) Which ones, and why aren't you satisfied with them?
(Note, I'm posting this before reading AH's response, or Analysisng P-Dog's PBPA much, so I don't know atm how I stand on that.)
That post of bluesoul's can be read in more than one way, including in an innocent fashion, I find it odd that you have placed so much emphasis on the scummy reading where there has been (or at least you have presented) no other tells argued against bluesoul. You have argued for his lynch yet ignored players like Krashbot who have had more issues raised against them, or publicly discarded others like Treigit without providing the reasons you think they are less scummy.
This part of the problem with following - you present opinions without backup for those opinions, and expect people to know your thoughts because you are mimicing everyone else. You avoid responsibility by allowing others to make the big calls. Later you'll be able to say - 'but so and so started it'.
They are disconnected - you argue a separate point, and by doing so you have provided a distraction from the real issue. 'sparrow argued that it was better to lynch experienced mafia than inexperienced - you argued that its better to lynch mafia than townies. 'sparrows argument in no way denies yours yet you raise it anyway; in fact it is an expression of basic town philosophy, and your referral to it seems as though you are trying to make 'sparrow appear scummy by being anti town.
This isn't a response to my point. By telling cp that he should vote you then you are trying to impose a position on him he was not prepared to commit to, putting words into his mouth. The argument at the time did not require 'pigeons to suspect both of you,; your assertion that it did seems to be an attempt to discredit the case without actually arguing against it.
I'm not sure if the 'No true scotsman' fallacy applies here, but to me your're essentially saying: 'Nobody who truly voted that way wouldn't find me suspicious as well' - another fallacy.
But you continued to push the argument - you didn't appear to find the argument irrelevant, but only that your final post resolved the issue. By running away after justifying yourself you don't deny its relevance; you display a disinclination to argue a point you were failing to win people over on.
I agree the case presented was fair. What is relevant here is that you used the opportunity to switch votes but continue to make another player look suspicious. You are essentially dodging responsibility in two ways: because you are yet again following rather than contributing; and, you continue to cast bluesoul in a negative light despite other targets existing.
This appears to be an admission that you were trying to cast additional suspicion on a player without actual evidence of scumminess. A townie should avoid asserting undue suspicion on any player for fear that they are scum.
That's easy to say now. The point is that you cast aspersions on Machin Shin with that post that indicate scum, yet again attempt to disconnect yourself from those aspersion. It seems like a subtle attempt to push/encourage a wagon without being on it - yet again vopiding repsonsibility.
This post in fairness has one positive from you - by FoSing him you are finally on record as suspecting him - except that you are doing so after at least two others have made that point. Yet again you merely follow suit rather than post new content.
Explain to me how you could be convinced bluesoul is scum. That is where the contradiction lies. You imply that Treigit deserves his wagon yet again avoid the responsibility of joining it. But further you express a lack of confidence in his scumminess but can be sure of bluesouls, despite a larger case having been made against the former.
Aother issue arises from this post. If you are not confident of Treigit's scumminess then why should he claim? Shouldn't you be advocating bluesoul claim/defend himself? It seems that you are uing the opportunity to garner a claim without being connected to the result . Thiis is fishing for a claim from someone you think is more likely town than others - another thing a townie should avoid is unnecessarily exposing town players.
I don't dispute your reason for changing your vote - in fact I support it as I disagree with the reasoning behind your vote on bluesoul. What I take issue with is your attempt to credit Azrael with the responsibility of your change.
OK. Please explain why you think Absolutionis was extremely scummy at that point, and why he deserved greater attention than someone else you had expressed suspicion for; like bluesoul or MachinShin.
Don't you think it is always safer to nameclaim first? I'm of the opinio that naming claiming first givesthe town the opportunity to reassess their attack before revealling potentially damaging information - like power roles. Of course if you are mafia that is probably your intent.
Yes you can change my mind - I am open to your view if you provide a reason to agree with it.
The problem with your 'rush lynch' reasoning is that at this stage of the game it is as likely to be impatient townies doing the lynchig as scum - especially when your argument provies the next 'x' voters the opportunity to use the same excuse - 'its OK if he's twnie because the rest of the rush lynchers will be under scrutiny later and we can bag scum'.
Your apology is a bit back handed - 'sorry you don't like it, but I'm gonna do it anyay'.
You again skip the point. Merely by raising the issue you bring to attention an illegitimate factor in 'sparrows post, and discredit his entire point by calling the annoyance subjective; you make the issue raised personal which should not be a real factor in mafia, and ignores the real thrust of the argument against you..
You have failed to address the core issue.Yes reacting and following can be justified; the issue is not that you have done it, but that you have done it consistently and as a result hide behind the opinions of other players rather than committing to your own.
OK. Is it fair to say then that you disagree then with the majority of his assessments?
Reasonable explanation, but WIFOM. Could be what you say, could be what I suspect.
Already addressed above.
The argument against bluesoul is but one example of where you lack credibility - your argument against cp and your 'following is OK' argument are examples.
Again you have strawmanned here, by attacking the example rather than addressing the crux; those original thoughts you have expressed have been ill reasoned and poorly supported.
Please provide examples of how they aren't - particularly the strawman arguments (the patrinising is less relevent had harder to prove on both our parts).
Seriously... can you expect me to accept that bluesoul has hadthe strongest case made against him?
Pleasure - thanks for a respectful response.
--------------------------------
Treigits response to Axelrod seems legit. I won't support that wagon at this stage.
---------------------------------
Krashbot: what about AH's reply post is scummy?
I noticed a few things, and have mentioned them, but nothing that I would vote him on without having done the PBPA. Yet you clearly suggest that his response is scummier than the points raised against him.
V/LA: 3/21-3/24 & 3/27-3/29
Those were my main points.
Rereading it, I know what you mean. However, it was actually more of the fact that his responses were just doing the same things you had voted him for doing, even after you had pointed them out and thrown them in his face.
After your PBPA, I was considering voting for him, but I wasn't completely convinced and wanted to see what he had to say for himself. Had he explained his actions and given a legit response without just continuing strawman-like tactics and whatnot, I may not have voted for him. The main reason behind my vote was the stuff above in conjunction with the fact that you had basically just told him that he looked scummy because of it.
@DYH: Free tickets to a baseball game? I want some!
Winner of the Weekly Signature & Avatar Contest Weeks 51, 59, 78, & 118.
I don't care if I was framed for murder if I only got a warning I would let it go.
There wouldn't have been an argument if someone didn't find it relevant. "If you don't like it vote for me" is designed to resolve the issue, however. It's not my job to change the way people think. So I wanted to stop bothering with it unless CP really felt that my thought process made me scum. My suggestion to vote for me was a way to push the issue to one of those extremes.
It is my job to try and bring those I find suspicious to a lynch. I'm not going to abandon one person because another person has been presented. Would it help if I said I realized this was mistake? On the otherhand I believed and still believe suspicion is due on bluesoul. It may seem like I was casting suspicion, but I wasn't in the first post. I really don't have anything more to say about this. A larger case doesn't mean a better case. About bluesoul vs Treigit? Should I expect scum to flaunt their errors, or should I expect scum to fail rarely? That's how I can be convinced. Further more, it is dificult to defend oneself in mafia while remaining true to your opinions. If carried out successfully even a townie may seem scummy. Treigit has been maintaining the validity of his mistakes admirably under pressure. It seems like a townie performance.
You know as well as I, that a claim without pressure is mocked. So that's why not advocate bluesoul. Why pressure treigit to claim, without vote? Because regardless of my current opinion of him, the mistakes at the begining were still mistakes. He has thinks to answer for. Further, with a role we can determine whether his actions fit a mindset for his role. But I won't move toward lynching him. It's asking nicely.
I think it was a lurker hunt at that point, but after that happened Abso refused to defend himself, or answer questions. He ignored some points entirely. I think that's what bothered me the most. If a name gives away a power role to the town, it gave it to the mafia too. I'm of the opinion that a name is relativly worthless without an ability, especially when there are such a wealth of falseclaims available among deities.
Cool. But I don't see a reason to change your mind, usually. Sure I'll try and convince you I'm town, but most opinions are less important. You're an inteligent person, you believe the way you do for a reason, and I don't care to challange that with out a good reason to.
You have a point here. Perhaps I had too much faith that rushers would definitly be scum. At that point, and still to a degree, I could only imagine mafia pushing a paused bandwagon over the top. And shouldn't it be the place of those already on the wagon to maintain pressure? Annoyance is subjective. It's a personal feeling. So if things got personal, there is where it began. I'd hoped to resolve that by pointing out that the complaint was not universal, apologizing, and preparing sparrow for the continuation of my behavior. All I can say here is that I take full responsibility for the opinions I have expressed even in agreement. Yes. Ok, so you didn't like my postion of following, whatever the issue was with CP, and bluesoul. Could you please point out the specific straw men in these positions you wish me to adress? (I think I covered how I see Sparrows opinion on experienced scum to be connected to scum vs mafia above)
No. I would say Absolutionis has had the strongest case made against him. Doesn't change how I feel from my own observations. Yes it is my responsiblity then to create a stronger case for how I feel. I don't think I can do that. Should I be convinced then that absolutionis is more likely mafia then bluesoul? Probably. But I'm not. Doesn't matter much, because I'll still cooperate with a lynch if it's someone I think is scum. You're welcome.
@Krash: Does accepting ireconcilable differences of opinion really make me scum? I don't believe so unless those differences of opinion would lead to a bad situation.
Still convinced Treigit's the better play, but should a wagon gain more votes I may just have to hop on so we can actually go to a night, for better or for worse. I don't want anyone else dropping out of the game due to it just being too much to process. (As it stands, I believe the mod is in need of three replacements for this exact reason.)
Ninja post-preview EDIT: That does it.
Then make a case.
Your defense of Treigit is noted.
Also because you've failed to make a case.
Really? Because he doesn't seem to think so.
Sup fishing?
So I'm your "Plan B" attack, eh? Wagon away and if you can't get people to follow your lead you come back to me.
Allow me to stop my attack for a second and give you my spin on this, since it's fairly interesting. Consider what we have of Day 1; it's been going on for over a month, and nearly 800 posts as of the time of this writing. At this point I think we have town players and scum players that wouldn't mind getting today over with. Given the receptiveness of the town in general to anything in the way of a case on a player, and the torrent of votes that has followed, I'd say it's more than scum players doing it. As for those on the wagon maintaining pressure...that's a bit cruel of a thing to ask someone to do. Granted there is usually someone that spearheads a wagon and makes the clearest case against the person in question. However, many of the votes are simply the result that the voter believes the spearhead might just be on to something. Should everyone on a wagon maintain the pressure of their wagon? Quite possibly; it would make for very interesting games. However, all too frequently it's just not the case.
Then drop it.
Battle Royale Mafia
(Come see who won!)
Alright that makes sense; there goes one strawman.
I agree that forcing people to commit is positive; much of what I have been doing is forcing you to do so, without the opportunity to mask your decisions behind the actions of others.
The difference is that you forced carrionpigeons to a position that was Catch-22. Either he votes you, looking retaliatory and as though he hadn't really thought out his whole attack; or he chooses not to attack you, reducing the validity of his current case by seemingly agreeing with your 'No true scotsmen' fallacy. You limit his ability to further his current position, in fact discouraging him from making honest commitments.
Other than this factor your explanation regarding this exchange seems reasonable.
OK
It helps a little - but it doesn't wipe the slate clean on the issue.
Yet suspicioon was cast.
This is the first time you've really acknowledge your view of Treigit as town; previously you've noted that he had done enough scummy things to deserve attention - you were playing both sides of the fence.
And again you seem to play both sides - if you think he is town isn't it safer to protect his role? If you thought they were mistakes, why continue to encourage the focus on him?
You appear to be justifying everyone's stance here - playing it safe, so you don't put any noses out of joint.
I was not asking how it 'would' be productive, but how it was productive at the time you switched votes. If it was merely a lurker hunt at that point and he had barely responded than it hadn't really been productive had it? Unless by productive you meant that the wagon had accelerated relatively quickly...
I disagree, especially in a game like this one, where the roles come from various affiliations and the likelihood of a claim existing can be confirmed by other players from the same Pantheon/affiliation, as has already been seen. While that in no way clears a player, it does add truth to his claim and allows us to better determine if we wish to continue pursuing an ability or not, rather than blindly fishing regadless of consequences.
For instance - what if Absolutionis had been the doc? We'd be up **** creek now wouldn't we?
You need to change my mind on this one if you want to decrease my suspicion; part of why I suspect you is your attempt to justify your attempts to let others do the walking for you - if you can truly justify why you were following now you would alleviate some suspicion.
But you weren't already on the wagon - you revoted Absolutionis, after three others had also added votes - you didn't seem to be maintaining pressure, you seemed to be topping him up.
Yet again you ignore the thrust of this point - yes annoyance is subjective, but yor mention of that fact can be seen as a premptive strike against 'sparrows othe points, one that had no actual validity - a strawman. The fact that you couched it in an apology makes little difference. You apologised and then said you'd continue the same way; that lacks sincerity.
Yes, you have - but only because I forced it on you.
Speaking of forcing a commitment you have said that you disagree with Absolutionis' assessment of various players: which do agree/disagree and why?
I think you misunderstand the point. The strawmen weren't in those positions in particular. The reason for the confusion is because I was pointing out that your argument was a strawman - you addressed the bluesoul issues rather than the point I was making in general - that your own arguments lacked reason and support. The bluesoul case is just one of those examples - carrion and following were two others.
Thats a cop out. If you can't make a case why continue to attack unreasonably? Cooperating with other lynches, at the expense of your preferred one, appears opportunistic to n extent.
In fairness though if I thought I could get nowhere attacking a player I thought was scum, then I would attack someone else too - I just wouldn't be letting everyone know I thought he was scum for risk of tainting him were I wrong.
Beyond that, I haven't seen closely enough to form any strong opinions on the recent developments. There are still too many trees in this forest.
Vote Azrael.
Curious about me, are we?
Vote Abandon_Hope
I realize you asked this of Axelrod, but A_S said that he is also from the same pantheon that Abso claimed, thus lending at least some credibility to the claim itself.
Didn't you read the first page? The Lord our MOD said that he pulled things from all over the web, not just Wikipedia.
I don't think I ever said that anyone was "clear." I said that 2 different people had now come forward with info that supports the 2 different parts of Abso.'s claim, both of which were parts that he might have been fibbing about if he were mafia. (1) Glasswirght Series - which is kind of obscure, and a possibility for a false claim (this would only likely have been the case if the mafia were comprised of really scummy sounding Gods, which I think is actually less likely). (2) Vanilla - which cuts both ways, but a mafia with a scummy ability or an ability that likely duplicates someone in the town wouldn't want to claim it and might very well claim vanilla. He apparently didn't do that. In as much as you think there won't be vanilla mafia, it makes him look that much better. I, however, would not be at all surprised if there were vanilla mafia to go along with vanilla townies.
Abso. could still be mafia. Fact is, since we know there are at least 2 people from the Glasswright series in this game, there is probably a good chance that there's a mafia in the Glasswright series (this is playing the Mod. a bit, but it seems like something I would do.)
So, I'm not calling him clear, I'm just looking at other people at the moment.
1. I haven't look at the speed at which the wagon disbanded. There might be something there, but it also seems that all the wagons in this game disband pretty quickly. No one wants to pull the trigger. Which I get, but it makes for very dragged out days.
2. Why don't you describe it? What is this anyway, you want me to make an argument for you? Or are you just subtly reminding me? Believe me, the lessons from Star Trek are firmly in my mind. You certainly won't see me "clearing" too many people based just on the fact that they voted for a mafia--even voting early and often.
Post 13:
[spoiler] [/spoiler]
Right of the bat I got a bad feeling from him. He starts right off by taking something this simply way to seriously. To me it comes off as being overzealous to appear helpful to the Town.
Post 29:
[spoiler] [/spoiler]
Barns Koko and Az in the same post, then “points out” the post restriction.
Then for some reason re-random votes. Nothing particularly bad about that, just starts the pattern of odd behavior.
#44:
[spoiler] [/spoiler]
Joke, followed by another ‘random’ vote. Also, he wasn’t already voting Kenji, he was still voting for his second random Leilani.
What I get from this post is a continuation of the odd behavior that got me looking at him already.
#58:
[spoiler] [/spoiler]
Indirectly barns Kenji by following his vote on Az, when he could have easily waited for Az’s response before voting.
#62:
[spoiler] [/spoiler]
Barns Puzzle.
At this point it begins to look bad how much time he spends doing so to various people.
#68
[spoiler] [/spoiler]
“The only post this entire game that did not progress the state of the game”? Incredibly aggressive statement about absolute bull****. This was still in the complete random “Hey, hows it going?” stage of the game.
#81
[spoiler][/quote=Treigit]It looks like we're still missing Absolutionis and Magician of Thought (I think that's all)
Blue, I frown upon such methods of random vote generating (and random FoS's too?). Sure Determine it through a die roll, tell us you determined it through a die roll, but don't actually show us such. It removes the ability for you to be hinting at actual suspicions/investigations, and doesn't allow us to speculate that you were distancing yourself from Puzzle when he inevitably comes up scum (you thought I hadn't caught your blatant tell?).
All of my random votes, as much as I assure you they're random still contribute to the game state, your posts on the other hand contribute nothing.[/quote][/spoiler]
Continues to take the Random stage of the game far to seriously. This is also the start of a large argument he has over his “theory” of random voting. The whole thing is ridiculous, as the base of it is him saying “If random votes are really random, we can’t use them as evidence later”. If you take random votes that seriously I think you should be rethinking the way you analyze posts.
#103:
[spoiler] [/spoiler]
First more jibberish about random and RANDOM voting.
Then indicates that he was done random voting and that everything before this had been a joke, despite being rather forceful in telling Grimclaw earlier that he wad the Only one to not advance the game, which apparently was vote-worthy.
Then defends Puzzle after Krashbot stated he felt (as I do) that Puzzle was being a little too forceful.
#111:
[spoiler]Link[/spoiler]
Minor backpedal on the importance of the Random thing, but still insists on it.
Barns AS who is voting Krash (who made the comment about Puzzle), then votes for Krash himself.
#133:
[spoiler] [/spoiler]
His comments to MD (aside from making too much of Mds comment) seem like more desperation to appear Town friendly.
Then of course we get to the infamous Pantheon Plan. We’ve already been over several times why this is so bad. Admitting you are fishing doesn’t stop it from being fishing.
#142:
[spoiler] [/spoiler]
Cites posting a vote count as scummy behavior. This is just more of him making mountains out of molehills in what feels to me like an attempt to find someone, anyone to be the Town focus, as long as it isn’t him.
Then he continues to attack Krash, and puts words in his mouth.
#162:
[spoiler] [/spoiler]
Even after Krash backs off, Tregit still strawman’s him.
Then he continues the (as he said) uber-scummy speculation, even urging people to post info from their Pms!
#172:
[spoiler] [/spoiler]
Here he seems to absolutely love the prospect of having a wagon supported by the Town against someone acting as MD was. Despite expressing doubts about Mds alignment, he still claims that we “can’t get anything done” if MD is around! Seems to me that Treigit was just happy to finally have found a lynch target, and was looking finish the Day as quickly as possible with an MD lynch.
His comments to Krash are simply ridiculous. A blatant strawman of the highest caliber.
#202:
[spoiler]Link[/spoiler]
I’m not even sure what he meant to accomplish with this post. I think it was meant to be a response to DYH’s claim that there was enough to discuss without resorting to setup spec, but all it really managed to do was make me wonder what his point was.
#244:
[spoiler]
First he generally continues to support his Pantheon plan, insisting that no one would be dumb enough to let info slip. I find that simply to naive to be simply a bad assumption, it flies in the face of conventional knowledge, and I think it is pretty clearly over the line into scummy.
Hides behind the same excuse both he and Puzzle use that if it creates discussion it is automatically good. This is IMO perhaps not scummy, but definitely a faulty assumption.
Here he completely misinterprets DYH’s comment, in essence pseudo-strawmaning him, or perhaps just trying to make his own post look better.
Then there is this interaction:
Treigit fails entirely to address DYH’s concerns and instead simply whines about how DYH ‘attacks me for anything I do’.
Once again in the face of reasonable comments about him Treigit claims only vague jibberish is being thrown at him. This is a diversionary tactic he uses a lot to not have to really engage in any real defense.
After that he once again hides behind the “it made discussion so it’s good” defense.[/spoiler]
#324:
[spoiler][/spoiler]
In this post he entirely ignores the fact that DYH had just in fact said he only knows of one reason to sub claim, and that it is scummy, and says “You are assuming that there is only one reason to breadcrumb/Sub claim.”
Of course the fact that he made a bad sub claim doesn’t help my thoughts on him either, for reasons DYH posted.
#[URL="http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showpost.php?p=1210315&postcount=407"]407: Either strawmans of just doesn’t address DYHs comments, then goes back to trying to deflect to MD. It is the comment at the end that particularly made me uncomfortable and reaffirmed my thoughts that he wanted very much for the MD lynch to end the day.
#412:
[spoiler] [/spoiler]
First tries to shift the nature of his Pantheon post by saying it wasn’t a “plan” and therefore wasn’t as scummy as it sounds. Then by claiming he never “told” anyone to do anything, which is a pretty weak defense since he clearly invited them to.
#419:
[spoiler] Once again he is engaging in a (minor) strawman. DYH was talking about info slip, and here Treigit defends against something else by saying ‘but I didn’t tell people to claim’, which was not the issue.
Both denies the probability of info slip again, and hides behind the “Anything bringing discussion is auto-good” defense.
Here he pushes, for the second time, the view that there are [B]only![/B] three ways for discussion to go. This seems to me to be just more of him wishing the Town had simply lynched MD and been done with it, and him indirectly criticizing everyone who got off the wagon for not following this play strategy.[/spoiler]
#432
[spoiler] [spoiler]
Here he tries to explain away why his Pantheon post was not fishing, and why his earlier comments that he didn’t consider it fishing weren’t a WIFOM situation. However what he posted here as an example of ‘real fishing’ is so downright ridiculous that I can’t believe he had the gall to post it.
#434:
[spoiler] [/spoiler]
More aggressive pushing of the MD wagon, as well as deflection.
#438:
[spoiler]
Once again suggests that his Pantheon plan was the only option for discussion.
While his statement is true, “So does anyone have any thoughts on what they expect to see in this game” is [B]not[/B] what he posted. What he did post left far more possibility for slipped info.
Defends “random vote” theory yet again.
More deflection, this time to Loran.[/spoiler]
#455:
[spoiler] [/spoiler]
Downright scummy. There is no way you can not see the value in withholding this kind of information.
#464:
[spoiler] [/spoiler]
Continues to support outing information at non-essential times.
#548:
[spoiler] [/spoiler]
Wow, I hope someday I can refuse to claim on the grounds that ‘there are players who think I’m Town’. @_@
Axelrod also makes some good points in post 760.
That’s about it. It’s a ton and more than enough to make Treigit my #1 target for today.
Now, reading through what I missed while making this, I see that for the second time Treigit’s wagon is being abandoned for a new one. While I have not yet read the case against AH, and admittedly have gotten scummy vibes from him myself, I find this highly suspect.
I would be very happy at this point with a Treigit lynch today. [b]Vote:Treigit[/b]
of its steep paths have a chance of gaining its luminous summits"
-Karl Heinrich Marx
Cube
@Kenji: Pantheon.org is a pretty good website for mainstream mythology information.
Conference calls coming up- I'll be back in a bit.
V/LA: 3/21-3/24 & 3/27-3/29
I am well aware of what his point is. My problem with it is that he makes far to big a deal out of it, with little to no reason.
IDK, but regardless of who's saying it it'd be overacting which I find generaly scummy.
Believe that if you will, but all his "disclaimers" just look plainly like a weak cover for fishing to me.
Yes, for being too pushy. Not for "Moving the game foreward", which is what Treigit said.
I hardly see how, even in that example, it is necessary.
More lame covering for fishing mostly.
Yes, because "any action that which stated or otherwise attempted to change the game from random, non accumlating votes to attempts to find/lynch scum" is totally the same as "too fast for his taste". I'm amazed you would defend that.
If said mason is dead, we already know his Pantheon, and I think it is fair to assume that masons will be of the same one.
Just because we may not be able to think of a way something can hurt now, doesn't mean it can't. It only means we can't think of how right now. But of course, you knew that I wouldn't be able to when you asked.
You sure like defending him, don't you? Uhm, no...I didn't. I skipped a lot of posts where I felt there was nothing of note.
of its steep paths have a chance of gaining its luminous summits"
-Karl Heinrich Marx
Cube
You learn something new every day.
I often wondered why OMGUS voting was considered especially scummy, emotional outbursts that usually accompany it aside, but you outlined a major factor why right here. I guess if I'd thought about it for a minute it makes sense, but it doesn't leave much of a trail connecting him to anyone else. It furthermore explains the point why you were so anxious to have Abso discuss his opinions on other players. A townie point for Puzzle, here, I think.
Vote: Absolutionis
V/LA: 3/21-3/24 & 3/27-3/29
So in your extensive reading, did you fail to read post 347? It explains all my posts up to 81.
407 similarily explains my posts 103-162. Where specifically did I fail to address any of DYH's points?
I'm afraid I'll have to adress further posts later. First:
Vote Chuck
not because I think those attacking me are scum, but beause it appears you're ignoring my posts which are inconvient for you, reading far to much into what were obviously light posts. And claiming to have always felt one way while previous posts suggest other wise.
Unvote MD for upkeep purposes. I need to reread.
Experiments Series: #5 (Courtly Intrigue Mafia) | #4 (Drunken Tracker) | #3 (Big Red Button) - coming soon | #2 (Pope Mafia) | #1 (Iso's Inflammable Mafia)
Mini Games: MTGS Mafia Redux II (Invitational, Evil Mirror Universe) | Unreal City
Old Games (bad): The Greenwood Affair | Blood Moon Mafia
What if everyone were to say right now if they were or were not a God from that Series? Everyone would have to do it for this to mean anything. If there's a scum in that Series then the situation would be (A) the scum admits he is part of that Series, and has to deal with being connected to a much smaller sub-set of townies; (B) the scum lies and says he's NOT from that series, in the hope we lynch everyone who says they ARE in the series looking for him. This has the benefit of forcing the scum to lie, and presuambly he would later have to falseclaim.
Immediately, I am confronted with the accusation/issue that this is similar to what Tregit was saying earlier about people claiming their Pantheon. If this is a good idea for the GlassWright Series, why shouldn't everyone do it? There's probably a scum in the "Greek" Mythology Gods too. What about "Norse?" Why shouldn't we all say right now?
That's a valid point. But for some reason it seems different to me when we are talking about the GlassWright Series because (1) it's obscure and (2) 2 people have already said they are from there. How many more could there be? I'll surprise no one by saying right now I'm not a God from that Series.
I'd kind of like everyone to do just that one claim. The list of Gods from that series is long, and I certainly don't want anyone to Name claim. No one is going to be "exposed" as a power role.
I just like information. The more I have, the better I do. If I got that tidbit (how many Gods from the GlassWright series are in the game--or at least, how many claims are there--I know it would help later. Possibly sooner than later, but possibly not. I don't think it would hurt, however.
This reminds me of Random I when I was looking for the 4th fan. I recall that Az (the actual 4th fan, and scum) lied, but CropCircles pulled a cute gambit which had the effect of making everyone who did claim fan look much better. No promises of any gambits this time, I was just remembering.
Considering the sheer number of potential resources for DM, I don't think a scum will have a hard time coming up with a safe claim and ducking out from Axel's GlassWright probing. I'll say I'm not from it, though. No harm there.
Experiments Series: #5 (Courtly Intrigue Mafia) | #4 (Drunken Tracker) | #3 (Big Red Button) - coming soon | #2 (Pope Mafia) | #1 (Iso's Inflammable Mafia)
Mini Games: MTGS Mafia Redux II (Invitational, Evil Mirror Universe) | Unreal City
Old Games (bad): The Greenwood Affair | Blood Moon Mafia
Remember (another lesson from Trek), info. sharing is not ALL bad.
Chucklez (2)- Hawkeye7, Treigit
Abandon Hope (5)- passdog, Axelrod, Krashbot, cyan, Machin Shin
Absolutionis (4)- Abandon Hope, CropCircles, MD, DYH
Arimnaes (1)- MMoD
Azrael (1)- Azrael
CropCircles (1)- Mosschop
Krashbot (3)- Arimanes, RafaelK, Puzzle
Puzzle (1)- carrion pigeons
Treigit (5)- loran16, bluesoul, Kenji, absolutionis, Chucklez
Not Voting (4)- kops723, silicon, aurorasparrow, Xyre
I disagree in theory. a mod who wants to avoid vanillas generally responds by giving the town many abilities, because the town has the most vanilla roles (and are more boring). To compensate for the inbalance, I would expect almost all the scum to have abilities of some sort.
We must not overlook the possibility Abso is some sort of trickster god or godfather.
I attribute the wagon disbanding to the fact that it was built on very shaky foundations, so when some reverse momentum occured it just fell apart.
Axelrod: I don't like your plan. I see no reasonable benefit from it, and it can cause unnecessary complication and confusion.
Not to mention that you might be mafia and get bonus powers for killing Glasswright gods.
4th place at CCC&G Pro Tour
Chances of bad hands (<2 or >4 land):
21: 28.9%
22: 27.5%
23: 26.3%
24: 25.5%
25: 25.1%
26: 25.3%
Sorry guys.
Logical Reasoning is dead; Long Live Stupidity
I enjoy random speculatory tainting of people as much as the next guy.
unvote, FOS aurorasparrow, with intent to read and consider if that needs to go further.
I don't see why claiming to be from Glasswright (whatever that is) gives either Abso or AS a free pass, but I wasn't a fan of the Abso wagon anyway.
If AS doesn't prove worthy of examination on a re-read, I think I'll push for a claim from Treigit. I don't really understand why that hasn't occurred already; he's continually scummy, and either he's scum or he's a distraction we need to clear.
I don't know if Axel had thought of it, (I certainly overlooked this possibility initailly) but he's experienced enough that he should have. Therefor FoS Axelrod.
EBWODP: Reread Axel's propsal. My objection is still the same, but I just want to note that he doesn't use the certainty that I attributed to him in my last post. My bad.