Messages

76

Forum Games / Re: Suicide Squad Mafia, Day Three: Spoon of the Wratherisms!

« on: July 09, 2008, 06:56:53 PM »

JR:
http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25339#msg25339

Well, he talks about how he'll refute my case. I... guess he tries, but I wasn't too convinced even before the massive e-penis part.

JR is also mistaken on the purpose of responding. I cannot lynch alone, so even if I am not convinced, other people might be if he presents viable counter-arguments. I'm not seeing any unvotes, so I figure I'm not the only one who's not buying his defense.

http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25341#msg25341

But I'm not willing to give up the fight anymore.

http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25434#msg25434
One vote for JR later, merely the fourth out of seven necessary, and when Laggy actually votes Bardiche and not JR:

Mrf. Okay, I'm not going to try to defend myself. I think my fate is sealed as of now and I think it's fine by now.

Now, it's true that 4 votes are more threatening than 3 votes. But, uh, what's up with such a sudden change of heart? And it totally looks familiar, so I get the feeling JR's trying to do what worked the day before. Please don't let him get away with it twice, guys.


QR:
http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25368#msg25368
First, my post to you was totally not long, certainly not by my standards. Just needed to point that out. On quoting people, I... don't actually know how to edit in the name. I just manually type the quote/unquote bbcode. I also have no idea how to make certain words linkable to avoid dumping all the long links amidst the text. If anyone knows how to do either of those, let me know.

I'm not sure where you're getting that I am saying your poking at me is *gaspevil*.

I didn't say that. If, by chance, my words could have been construed to mean that (please back it up with quote, if so), then it was not what I meant. What I said was that other players jumped at me when I named you as someone I would look at. To have such a reaction to another player whom they had no right to trust filled me with instant suspicion for reasons I hope are obvious.

C - I am not disputing the fact that Snow looks the scummiest so far (hence my vote), but as he has as much as admitted that he's not going to be able to change anyone's mind with his sudden loss of suicidal tendancies, where exactly is the harm in not Quick Lynching him and instead opening up discussion?  We're barely a day into the new Day and it's a little early for KILLLLLLL HIIIIIM.  Right now the only ones that helps is scum who get to have a day phase where we don't get much new input but they get to go ahead and make another kill.

I think Rat said it best, so yeah, go read the first section of his post on this (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25427#msg25427).

Anyway, JR's flip will surely implicate further scum. Depending on what exactly he lied about, it could cast a shadow on some of the players here. By catching one of the scum red-handed, we'll get the whole team by association. Plus, suffer scum to live, etc, he already evaded it once.

1 - If I'm reading your analysis of my Day 1 views on Tom correctly, you don't find anything hideously scummy there so I don't thing there's anything to respond to in that regard.

5 - Why would I look forward to Tom's post?  Because while I don't think he's any more or less likely to be right than anyone else, he is the ONLY one of you bunch whose words I can trust are exactly what he thinks.  He may be wrong, but he has NO reason to lie or mislead.  I weigh what he says with my own anaylsis and thoughts, but I do like having a voice that gives an honest thought.  Everyone here pushes for a lynch off an agenda.  For some, that agenda is to help town, for some it's to survive and for others it's to kill the townies.  I have no way of knowing who has what agenda except Tom here.  Doesn't mean I believe his anaylsis more than others, just means I believe he means what he says.

These two should really go together. While yes, you were less instrumental in Tom's lynch than I remembered (but still key enough), you expressed a view that you don't trust him, that he lies, etc. All in all, a pretty low opinion of his mafia skills and truthfulness. Now, I can see how him being a zombie with one post per day could change some people's minds about that, but I just don't see you do it. You truly think Tom has no agenda? Tom, who is famous for his OMGUS implosions? For all I know Tom could now suddenly see me as scummy for saying all this, and you're looking forward to more of that? I just have a hard time buying this.

I'm... as satisfied as I can be with your acknowledgment of 2 and explanation for 4, though, and I suppose 3 could've been a misreading of mine. I'm willing to accept that, barring evidence to the contrary.


DHE:
http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25431#msg25431

An essential oneliner to apologize for not posting. Ie lurking. This is not the first time and 'oh noez walls of text' is not an excuse (especially with no Meeple posts to wade through). Even saying 'Corwin is mean and posts a lot, I'll comment on other people and ignore him for the next year' would have looked better to me because then you would at least be participating and getting out there and letting us see your thoughts and stuff.

I am slowly growing more and more suspicious of you.

And since people are apparently using my post sizes as excuses for lurking/not reading them, I'll endeavor to spread out my opinions across several posts. Laggy/Andrew/Bardiche post will happen tonight/early tomorrow my time. (And I forgot about Strago until Laggy's latest post called him out, so yes, suspicion there; dispel it with delicious participation.)

77

Forum Games / Re: Suicide Squad Mafia, Day Three: Spoon of the Wratherisms!

« on: July 09, 2008, 05:42:42 PM »

Was too busy at work, today, to even catch up fully (and how sad is that, there are like ten posts or something total in twenty-four hours). And then for some reason I couldn't connect to the forum while continuing to receive post confirmations by email.

Anyway, just a note here to say I'm still alive, and will post with actual thoughts within a few hours.

78

Forum Games / Re: Suicide Squad Mafia, Day Three: Spoon of the Wratherisms!

« on: July 08, 2008, 07:07:44 PM »

QR! Hi!

Since when did 'lynching a third party' start equating 'mislynch', Cor?  A mislynch, correct me if I'm wrong, is when we lynch a townie thinking they're scum.  Lynching a TP is actually *gasp* almost as good as lynching scum (and some would argue that there IS no difference).  And necessary to do in the long haul anyway.  What are your reasonings for thinking a TP lynch is a mislynch?

http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25307#msg25307

General caution to everyone to treat yesterday as a mislynch for analysis purposes.

I do agree with this sentiment, at least, as must be apparent.

Proper context, etc.

For those of you who actually wonder why and can't be bothered to get said context, I'll provide it here along with another reason: a survivor is one of the less harmful TP roles; in this particular case, we even had Meeple post his list of suspects and his reasoning. I happen to believe he was being sincere and trying to help town in that pre-death post, and not spiteful as has been suggested. I believe this further suggests he was trying to survive alongside us, at least to the endgame, which clearly made him a viable target for scum. And speaking of scum, the most important reason this should be treated as a mislynch: scum likely wouldn't know about Meeple (barring investigations, etc), and would therefore see him as not-them. Getting TP lynched in most cases is hardly something that gives town cred; in some cases, it even moves the weights in the direction of scumminess.

Now, to the point. Does being what I consider prominent on both lynch trains make you SCUM? No. Does it warrant a second look from me? I feel so. Do the reactions suggesting that you being scum is beyond the pale worry me? Yes, and warrant that look even more, given we shouldn't trust each other too much without damn good reasons.

My own vote today is that of the two people I found most scummy yesterday, one still lives.  And no one has really surpassed that level of scum on my meter yet (although Cor's attitude of fanatical lynch is slowly getting there. I think Snow looks suspicious, too, but frankly the overzealous attitude is actually making me re-think the decision rather than cement it because tunnel vision training is usually where we go wrong as town).  So, for now, ##Vote Snow.

Fanatical? I was clearly not emphasizing the level of JR's scumminess enough yesterday. Okay, I've accepted that, and he survived. If he's truthful about his role, that means scum had use of that power role one more night. I honestly don't know what else I can do. So if I look a little bad as a result but we get the scum, it's fine by me.


Moving on to a glance through QR's posts:

http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24406#msg24406

QR votes Tom, putting him to 3 votes. Delta swiftly follows, pretty much cementing it. Huh. I recalled it the other way around, with QR being the fourth vote. Aha! There was an unvote along the way. Well, it does lessen my suspicions to a degree, but she still placed Tom ahead of everyone else.

http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24468#msg24468

She's going after Tom and convincing others as, yes, I was. Tom lying day 1 before didn't help there.  >_<

http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24503#msg24503

The first consolidation of suspects post. I discovered what grates at me -- this time, the third suspect feels artificially inserted. It is as if QR has decided just two wouldn't be enough, and is suggesting a third, just picking at random from the weaker targets while mentioning herself she doesn't feel particularly convicted ("I have a harder time seeing that one, but I'd hear arguments about it. "). This feels off about her, to me, and finally I can put it in words.

http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24667#msg24667

Day 2 stuff, now. QR mentions not feeling bad that Delta the player is gone (ditto, really) and pleased that OK is gone. I find it puzzling that she both thinks his flip isn't surprising and at the same is surprised someone would target him. Why? If you thought he was trying to get himself lynched to win, why couldn't someone else? Someone with a night phase role?

http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24810#msg24810
http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24862#msg24862

Promises thoughts and delivers on it to a point. She only really covers five players, and not to a very great detail. Bardiche worries QR. I haven't seen her return to it yet during day 3. Are you planning on it?

http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25034#msg25034

The second consolidation post. Nothing actually questionable about the subject matter, but the last line makes me pause.

Also, I am looking forward to Tom's post for the Day.  I think there are a lot of things being brought up that I would like to see what he has to say on the matters.

Having reread your day 1 thoughts on Tom, it strains my disbelief that you were truly interested in Tom's insight.

http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25082#msg25082

The 'past-LAL' post. I don't really want to get into an argument over playstyles again, so I'll just let it go. Seeing lurking as a condition below regular scumtells in importance is kinda wrong (given how many scum statistically lurk), but we could leave that debate for after the game.

And I've pretty much caught up on QR's posts. Before I give my tl;dr summary, I would like to hear from QR on the matters I've raised.

79

Forum Games / Re: Suicide Squad Mafia, Day Three: Spoon of the Wratherisms!

« on: July 08, 2008, 11:19:32 AM »

Fine. Was I over the line? Yes. Was it because the moment you posted you attacked me and my playing style while injecting emotions into the game? Yes. I'll avoid it in the future if you could manage to keep your private life out of this as well.

Day 1, QR made the Tom train prominent and gave it momentum. Day 2... what does a mod error have anything to do with it?

80

Forum Games / Re: Suicide Squad Mafia, Day Three: Spoon of the Wratherisms!

« on: July 08, 2008, 10:37:43 AM »

Re: Tai's second post:
Yeah, whatever. Look, man, I'm not putting together a case after the fact. I am placing arguments from late day 2 (past my bedtime) and early day 3 that support my day 2 case of JR being scummy. As said case was obviously not enough to convince people not myself to lynch JR day 2, and he continued to act scummy afterwards, said further arguments were posted. I don't dismiss everyone's abilities, I just question everyone's judgement late day 2. Some people voted Meeple with the intention of having the day just end already, and I question that. It's what I'd call a momentary slip in judgement, not massive fail as a human being or mafia player, and I think you're inventing reasons to enrage yourself there. Finally, what exactly SHOULD I do in response to eyeing and gut feels? I've already explained why I feel it necessary to defend myself from such accusations, and it's pretty much the accuser that needs to explain their feelings clearly and frame them into argument, not me who should just bend over and take it silently. You lecturing me on politeness just takes the cake, though.

I'll address what feels relevant from your defense of JR/attack on me (done as part of making a case on JR, to boot, as Tai says in the opening paragraph).

1) Post referenced, he said he would address playstyle issues "at a later moment". The same post, while something is being typed, likely constitues a "later moment" to not only the writer, but also most readers.

It reads as dropping them in lieu of discussing more productive things. Apparently, only I show utter arrogance and disregard for the combined abilities of others by informing them how they should think.

Counter: http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25000#msg25000

Indeed, you were not voting for him! You were voting for Snow, as you are today. The OMGUS relevance is also worth note. However, the post I reference above is a rather scathing note on what Meeple had been doing, though apparently you had another reason for throwing that analysis of Meeple out there, that of people saying they'd do things and not do so. While vaguely fair, aren't you supposed to be hunting scum, and not just pointing out things that annoy you? Oh, but...

This is a counter... how? I did not want to go into that after a simple Meeple section in a post that grouped those who promised analysis, which took a look at whether they delivered on it. Meeple kept on hounding me with demands to show exactly where he did not deliver. I finally decided to make such a post to prove it to him and to anyone who might be taken in by his denials.

Case in point, and not the only time Meeple asked: "Also, Cor, you still haven't answered my question.  You claimed I haven't made good on what I claimed I would.  Care to, you know, point out specific examples?" (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24895#msg24895) So I did point out those specific examples.

I also noted the following at the beginning of the Meeple section in the post you reference, Tai: "I suppose that if nothing else, this pushes Meeple a bit towards 'town that makes me headdesk' rather than 'scum flailing'. I suppose I'll have to watch and see."

While I am hunting scum first and foremost, I cannot ignore people who ask me for explanations. Letting those thing stand would muddy the waters and open the floor to attacks on me on the grounds of being evasive. I clearly had no reason to be evasive, as my points re: Meeple were sound and legit. They just weren't enough for a vote, nor did I call for one on him.

"While vaguely fair". This had to be quoted specifically. Niceties aside, is this a grudging compliment, there, or do you actually have issues with the way I presented what I had?

From the post I linked above. So by this, Meeple had a pretense to be hiding under! (One that everyone else had kinda been saying as "Shorten the damn posts Meeple", but hey, another small note). Oh, but wait...

You know it (and me) better. I clearly referred to content. Content is not post size. I likewise called on Meeple to condense his posts better to reduce post size. You are trying to look for contradictions where none exist.

So it's pretty much "hey, I consider this behavior scummy, but he just makes me headdesk". Right. Your main point is noted, but I can't say that I don't see this post as an advance on Meeple. Thusly, I can see him grouping you into that set, especially since you were the one his supposed anger, truthful or not, was pointed towards.

This is a deliberate misreading or misrepresenting of my words, take your pick. In my posts prior to the one you quote from, I considered Meeple a suspect and said as much. This post (the one you quote, made later) said that my suspicion of Meeple remained, but had lessened as a result of his more recent posts/behavior. So it's not that he makes me headdesk for acting scummy. It's that the less scummy he acts as we get to the end of day 2, the more I want to headdesk as he looks better on the town/scum scale (but worse on the 'good play' scale).

Okay, handling the first part of the post... wow, that's either a horrible misread or a blatant twist of the words. "Unwanted ROLES[/i]". As in "SCUM AND THIRD PARTY." Not as in "I KNOW SHALE IS THIS" but "I KNOW UNWANTED ROLES LURK, SO LET US STAB THIS LURKER."

Continuing on, so it's completely unimaginable there's, you know. OTHER ROLES out there, Cor? Sheesh. Rat was blocked, there was a kill missing. Congrats. WE DON'T KNOW WHAT IN HELL CAUSED IT. You, drawing the line from Snow to Rat and pointing madly at it? If anything that draws a line between you (You know rat's scum and that the kill was blocked by someone, and that Rat was the one out!) and Rat (scum killer, natch, assuming this little paranoid scenario.) As it is, I'm still ambivalent on the Rat but this makes you stick out like a sore thumb.

There is indeed a horrible misread. On your part.

But I don't mind explaining it. Let's say you're town and a roleblocker (everything JR claims, and I don't believe). Fine. Let's then proceed to say that you find someone to be the likeliest scum in the game. He worries you enough to have you land your vote on him twice, across days. (I've done this with JR, myself!)

And you don't roleblock him? Even as you cite the strong possibility of Shale having a role?

So our Town JR thinks Shale is likeliest scum, is worried Shale might have a role, and his reaction is... to block someone else. Please, please, please tell me how that computes.

Or JR is, you know, scum. And is worried about Shale's presumed role, which he or his teammates could've found out. I won't speculate, but I see the possibilities.

1) Certainly he should be suspicious, but there's also the noted-above fact; other roles. Remember, they might be out there. Should be basic.

2) You are right in pointing out that Snow seems to have been completely oblivious to the Night 1 results, assuming we were told everything. I think it's a fair assumption, mind, and thus I'm not calling you out on that. It's definitely something to keep in mind overall.

I believe I've addressed the former above.

And as for the latter, I don't see a point to Cid lying. As matter of fact, we could go ahead and ask him to make a mod post. Are flip posts fully truthful? [y/n/can't say]

81

Forum Games / Re: Suicide Squad Mafia, Day Three: Spoon of the Wratherisms!

« on: July 08, 2008, 10:23:52 AM »

More DHE: http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25277#msg25277

-Yay, voting Rat! Too bad it's only a 50% roleblocker, since that's probably the best use I can think of for a town roleblocker really. (Trying to nail the scum killer in a game with a potential Vig seems really pointless.) This doesn't, of course, confirm Snow as town, but I hope he continues to report his Roleblock targets, since that helps. I can't say I've forgotten Snow's actions yesterday, for one, though I haven't yet seriously thought about top lynch candidates yet.

O-kay. Let me say the problem I see with this.

Roleblocker is neutral at best. Even if you believe Rat and think this proves Snow's role, why do you trust him? Despite the obligatory 'this doesn't confirm Snow' thing, you're doing exactly that, and it's extremely puzzling. I would be ecstatic to live in a world where JR and Rat were townies happily working together towards building a scum-free utopia, but that's total bullshit because JR is very scummy. Why are you taking this particular view?


QR and criticism on me giving her a look. Several things QR has done rub me the wrong way. Yes, culling targets is no sign of scummines, Excal. However, in both cases, she has come after considerable time has been spent without decisive action (which you noticed yourself) and her actions ended up sealing the fate of the lynch. Attribute that to luck or accident if you wish, but I won't because QR is a very good mafia player and so I'm wary of someone like her doing it twice in a row without any guarantee that she's doing it for the good of town.

I'm not entirely sure there's a way to talk to Tai without getting WAHLOOKATME attitude right back, but here goes anyway. How does me finding Tom scummy and working to get him lynched (a mistake, we all know now with the powers of HINDSIGHT) contradict in any way QR also being instrumental in that? You talk about large slips and misreads and what not, but I just don't see how that works.

Could I be wrong? Yes. But seeing the strong opinions I got here just for mentioning the possibility only made me more determined to take a second look.


Shale.
http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25287#msg25287

I agree with him on... pretty much both JR and on his clarification to QR.

http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25273#msg25273

I've managed to muddy the waters for myself, too (lovely), since I've put the scum in a damned good position to attack me by simple application of Lynch All Lurkers, and I can't argue that it isn't a valid argument. In fact, looking over the posts I missed yesterday, QR's comment that "I think we're past LAL" looks very off to me. Scum lurk when they can get away with it. Just look at my play in the anonymous game. Now, I know you're not scum defending a scumbuddy here, which makes me unsure of exactly why scum would argue that way, but it still feels off, and I'd still love to hear the thinking behind it.

This is a troubling passage for the following reasons. Shale admits he was lurking by any reasonable definition, and then goes on to say scum tend to lurk. And brings himself as an example (from another game, right). Then, he says the phrase I've boldened out, and my only question is 'how'?

After this, and taking his extreme lurking into consideration, Shale is now my suspect #2.

General caution to everyone to treat yesterday as a mislynch for analysis purposes.

I do agree with this sentiment, at least, as must be apparent.

Another thing that jumps at me is that Shale mentioned Bardiche as one of the people of interest to him, but we've heard nothing on Bardiche from him yet. Did he change his mind? Is he working on a post to address that? Mystery. Noteworthy because I believe his day 2 criticism of Bardiche were justified, and not following up on them is strange.


The Rat section is pretty small, I'm afraid. While I can feel something off about him (specifically, I don't believe Rat was being entirely truthful with us), I don't actually see any slips on his part, and his participation, while on the scarcer side than I'm used to from him, is sufficient content-wise. He also doesn't merely go for the conventional targets. Even though he made the third lurker vote in several minutes for Shale, I can't blame him because Shale is pretty damn suspicious even without lurking. If JR flips as I expect him to, there would be more here.


And Tai posts again, I'll deal with it in a separate one.

82

Forum Games / Re: Suicide Squad Mafia, Day Three: Spoon of the Wratherisms!

« on: July 08, 2008, 07:22:42 AM »

Jesus fucking Christ! How the hell did this come to pass? "Oh, that ploy never works. Those who try it are always quickly lynched and end up town!"

Yeah, better update that scoreboard, there, cause JR just pulled a fast one and ESCAPED HIS RIGHTFUL LYNCHING.

Okay. Okay. I can't get tunnel vision, I can't get tunnel vision, I have to at least look at other people in case they are FAR SCUMMIER than the SCUMMY JR.

First, though, thoughts on Meeple's flip. Well, then. I recall musing that one of the Meeple/Shale pair flipping as scum would be informative. With Meeple's flip, I can at least now dismiss such a link as accidental. And what irony, too. While I was blasting the more passive and feel-good players for playing like survivors and not as town, I had no idea we had an actual survivor in our midst.

Okay. Moving on.

DHE: http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25083#msg25083

People as active and aggressive as you deserve a good look. They can be very helpful as town, but as scum... well, I don't need to finish that thought."

Actually, I would request you to finish that thought. "If scum is talkative, this is bad for town because..." of what, exactly? Since town now has that much more to analyze and poke holes in, as scum inevitably lies due to having more knowledge than they have any right to?

I'm not sure if we have a difference of playstyle opinion, here, or a sinister attempt at making participation of the more active part 'suspect', thus plotting the course for easier lurking and taking things easy.

Regardless, don't get too defensive about it. You have no requirement to defend yourself from "I'm going to pay attention to you!" If anything, you should welcome it, it means you are participating in the game, and, if you are town, you should have no problem defending yourself from any ACTUAL concerns if looks turn them up.

Yes BUT we all know that saying "I'm paying attention to you" is pretty much a form of FoS and if people say that about you and get lynched and suddenly flip as townies people start to believe there's something actually there! And that's total bullshit unless those people looking at you with such an analyzing eye actually had anything to say about you.

Like with promising content after some event in the game and not delivering afterwards, this is the lazy, shortcut way to claiming credit for participating.

Am I taking this a bit too far and too personally? Maybe. But geez, what else do I do when people invoke gut and eyeing? Just sit there and take it and let it fester until someone starts quoting it the next day as if it were gospel cause I haven't challenged any of it at the time? It's a damned if you do and if you don't case.

Bardiche: http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25088#msg25088

I grouped the two of them together because QR said, explicitly, that we should narrow down the list of suspects and... IDK, but to me, Corwin really seems to be sniping people and being generally rather aggressive in play. Being aggressive is a good way of shifting points on people that make some ambiguous statements, thus clearing the stage for aggression on a few choice targets and allowing QR to close the train by getting the town to eventually zone in on two. Obviously you can disagree with this, but that's why I put the link between the two of them.

Two problems with this paragraph. First of all, the two are not the same. Actively narrowing down the field and the potential possibility of it somehow happening while playing aggressively, that is. In fact, if you had an actual example rather than a vague hypothetical, you would have brought it up, I'm certain.

The second one rises from the criticism of an aggressive play. By which I don't mean playstyle which is mean and nasty to people and gliding into personal lines; I'm talking about not letting go of so-called 'minor' slips and investigating every damn lead we get our hands on. I believe in that one, and saying it is easily used for misdirection and thus suggesting this playstyle's use should be discouraged is something I disagree with, yes.


JR. My main suspect. Need it restating that I don't believe him?

http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25127#msg25127

In this post, JR opens with saying he wants to move past playstyle issues, only to revisit them in paragraph 3 as his defense.

You also contradict your own post (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25017#msg25017) where you tried to build a weird case on me, by admitting in the newer post that it was OMGUS all along.

There's also your unhealthy obsession with me.

Now, for Meeple, I... still don't see it the way Corwin or others do.

Um. You did realize, at the time, that I was not voting Meeple nor have I been advocating a vote on Meeple that day? In fact, why I was arguing with Meeple and demanding him to explain certain things, I haven't been actually pushing for his lynch. Other people were, however, and yet you call the lynch mob 'Corwin and friends'. I find it troubling, especially given the previous point of you admitting to OMGUSing me.

And then you happened to voice suspicions on Andrew and Rat... and voted Shale.

Hum. Huuuum. And your reasoning for this?

But this is just food for thought. I guess that I'll just go with what seems more immediately worrying now. Since unwanted roles have managed to get under the radar for excess lurking time and again, and I think his absence has reached the point of insufferable by now...

Glance at the boldened text. Shale has an 'unwanted role', which you claim is worrying to you enough to warrant a vote. You claimed partial roleblocker. How could you be possibly know anything about Shale's role to worry about him more than the people you yourself suggest as 'food for thought' for looking scummy to you, or Meeple, who was acting weird (yes, he was!) and the town's main target at the time?

http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25251#msg25251

Your first day 3 post lands a second vote on Shale within 8 minutes of Laggy's! It's Shale, again! Even though you claim to have roleblocked Rat (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25259#msg25259), whom you said you considered having a scummy role (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg25269#msg25269), and the night phase only listed one kill instead of two.

Let us consider this in silent contemplation.

You have every reason to believe, if you have the power you've claimed and have done what you said you had, that you had a direct effect on the night phase, and yet you don't even mention it and go...

Whatever brought down two night kills in a row last night seems to not have attacked this time, at least, but I have no idea what does this say as of now (since OK or delta may have been the extraneous killer? I dunno).

Okay, let's go look at the flips!

http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24654#msg24654

Deltaflyer2k8--The Thinker, AKA Cliff Carmichael (Town Messenger)--was killed overnight!

OblivionKnight--Deadshot, AKA Floyd Lawton (Self-aligned Jester)--was killed overnight!

JESTER. MESSENGER. I don't see serial killer or vigilante or anything remotely plausible here. How could you possibly miss this?

By only paying passing attention to the game. By coasting. Which is what scum do.

Screw this, how can you find someone scummier?

##Vote: JR

I'm at work, etc, next post will cover Shale (who seems to have reemerged, I'll need to read thoroughly to see if I buy the absense excuse), Rat (there seems to be something connecting him to JR, or more like JR trying to connect himself to him, it's weird) and QR because she's pretty much been central in making two lynches that mislynched in a row take place.

83

Forum Games / Re: Suicide Squad Mafia, Day Two: Pobody's Nerfect (In Louisiana)

« on: July 06, 2008, 06:14:47 PM »

Yeah, gotta say I agree with Excal on that one. In fact, that much should be clear from my own posts on the subject, but here it is again.

On the subject of... me. Guys, seriously, what is this crap? "Corwin is being himself and I am SUSPICIOUS." I'm sorry, what would you have me do, lurk or be out of character? This is to JR, mostly, but it seems he's not the only one who cites stuff like gut feelings about some offness. Mafia doesn't actually work that way; you use gut, sure, but to decide between several lynch candidates or to follow up on a hunch (by studying a given person's posts or hounding them with questions). Seriously, how do you expect me to defend myself from this? With pepto?

DHE, specifically. I don't believe I was narrowing down our field of lynch candidates. In fact, I did not even speak out for (or against) it as yet. It is troubling to see you group me with QR who is doing this. Before you go give people long, hard looks, what's up with that, man?

On JR. I think he looks the scummiest, his play is sloppy, and yet he went into self-destruct and recovered so swiftly and completely I don't believe it holds any water.

On some others. Andrew. He has been on the lurkerish side, the way I consider Strago. And Shale has been even less prominent, and while having things that actually bother me about him. So why am I not doing my traditional lurker hunt? Yes, going after lurkers is a way to win the game, and we should do that. HOWEVER, 4th of July weekend and all that. I would feel better if we delayed to day 3 with that, to gain a more accurate picture of actual lurkers. Also, JR. Did I mention I think he's been acting incredibly scummy and we should lynch him?

On Excal, Laggy and QR. Neutral read. Decent enough participation. Tom's words on QR are troubling, but other than watching there's not much to do here. Bardiche's participation is equally satisfying, and he is making every effort to be supportive and helpful. I don't think it's too much, either, and a way of buttering us up.

On Ashdla. I don't know. Didn't have a good opinion originally, and... nothing actually changed there. Ditto with Meeple, except my bad opinion of him started later, and recently moved up slightly, as documented.

That leaves Tai and Rat, who... really need to participate more. Rat has a decent presence, sure, but his claimed lack of a vote means he should make up for it with content to be of use and help us, y'know, win.

84

Forum Games / Re: Suicide Squad Mafia, Day Two: Pobody's Nerfect (In Louisiana)

« on: July 05, 2008, 06:42:40 PM »

I don't get it. Now JR's defending Meeple and Shale? On the grounds of the almighty gut, which somehow blames me in a convoluted manner I haven't really understood? The entire second paragraph is unclear to me. Is JR saying Meeple and Shale are accusing each other? And that I'm somehow fanning it?

I'm not really sure how I'm supposed to be goading Shale. I have legitimate questions for him and I'm not the only one. I'm asking those, in the hopes that he could answer them to my satisfaction. While I have repeated my arguments on Meeple and Shale's cases, that was due to a request for clarification, mostly from Meeple and Shale themselves. I don't feel I'm particularly pushing for their lynch. That is because...

...I am pushing for yours. And have ever since I saw your day 2 posts. That hasn't changed. You acted like you were giving up, garnered enough sympathy to get a vote removed off you, and then moved on to, yes, OMGUS me because it doesn't look like much of anything else. I think I'm pretty comfortable with where my vote is, yeah.

85

Forum Games / Re: Suicide Squad Mafia, Day Two: Pobody's Nerfect (In Louisiana)

« on: July 05, 2008, 03:16:49 PM »

Tai:

Well, I've covered what I thought of your comments on JR. I don't really get what you mean by avoiding assisted suicide by lynch due to spite, but if you mean that I prefer not to vote people who prefer not to play and would like to see them replaced/modkilled, that would be a yes. On JR's specific case here, I would have to say that if he's giving up wholesale that the latter should happen. If he is NOT, then the case on him is still valid BUT he could always try to work his way through our concerns by providing analysis on other players and generally being useful.

I believed that the likeliest possibility was of Tom lying about something, if you'll go over my posts. It just didn't mean much with regards to his alignment, and he seemed scummy enough to push the lynch ahead. And as with Meeple, I see no way to play if we excuse scummy play with 'oh well they're always like this'. Need I remind you that Tom played as scum as well? If you give him a free pass, how exactly do you intend to catch him? Hope for a cop? It's a social game, we hunt down scumtells. In fact, you did the same with your vote on Meeple today.

On our goals. This strays a bit from the original context, but I wish to further my point there, Tai. There are several detriments to victory, and uncooperative townies can be an impediment to winning. I agree, yes. But if you think someone is a failure of a townie, you can ignore them or go for a replacement/modkill. If you think someone is scum, however, you don't suffer scum to live. The two cases are not the same. We can still win with the rest of the townies working together against scum, but if we start pruning town too much we are playing straight into scum's hands. First and foremost, find and kill scum. Always. That's it. Far, far below it is 'in extreme situations it might sometimes be acceptable to prune town from particularly dangerous and distracting elements'. Only the former actually directly and without fail brings about the town win.


Meeple:

Here (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24988#msg24988) he defends his actions by telling us he thought what would seem less scummy and doing it. It's true that our job as town is to avoid getting other townies occupied with false positives on us and not letting scum exploit them... but our number one goal is still to HUNT SCUM. Seriously, does it need repeating? Do people still forget it as the play the game like a survivor and not like a townie? I suppose that if nothing else, this pushes Meeple a bit towards 'town that makes me headdesk' rather than 'scum flailing'. I suppose I'll have to watch and see.

Okay, back to your request for an explanation.

http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24895#msg24895

Also, Cor, you still haven't answered my question.  You claimed I haven't made good on what I claimed I would.  Care to, you know, point out specific examples? Simple taking a post, and saying "Meeple didn't do what he claimed later!" doesn't help.  I looked at the specific post and saw something that I did actually follow up on.  Maybe not in the way you wanted, but I did.

http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24662#msg24662

Anyway, gonna need to go over and analyze things.  No clue where to start...well, ok, starting with those who interacted with any of the 3 role flips would be a start, but...yeah, this is going to take some time.

That's page 8. Meeple's next post is on page 9. (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24756#msg24756) It covers Andrew; specifically, it says:

I've been looking at Andrew's posts after what Ashdla said, and well...I dunno.

I believe that to be a reference to the post Ashdla made just before Meeple's. As such, Meeple has moved on past the specific analysis he promised on page 8.

Said post also includes a defense from/attack on Ciato, thoughts on OK, and a blurb on Tom and Shale. I believe, however, as this quote from the same post shows, that those are Meeple's general feelings from the game and day 2 stuff.

I'll need to look over Shale's posts, to see if I actually find something off about him.

He clearly isn't going back to look over what was posted, but promising he would, just as on page 8.

http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24795#msg24795

This is another Meeple post on page 9. He references Bard and Rat, but the post is really about Ciato. It is supported with quotes so Meeple went back to look those over, at least.

No further Meeple posts occur until my own: http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24829#msg24829

Now, I'll recap why anyone should actually care about all this. Do I think that people who don't comb day 1 posts are scum? Well, no, I never said that. Do I think that focusing on a given person while being general at most regarding others is scummy? Well, it certainly isn't helpful to town, but that's a whole new issue.

The issue I brought up was that some people find it easy to make promises of detailed analysis after a given reveal, and then don't deliver. This might allow them to coast and both gain cred as they are there on the scene and act all businesslike with their intent to investigate thoroughly, while not actually forcing them to own up to their own words and invest time and effort in said analysis. And that is something you are likely to see a scum do. Scum lurk, but they must also have the pretense of a presence. This is one of the ways to gain it.

I didn't exactly single out Meeple for this. Also, I find it curious that the two people who did this were Shale and Meeple, given Meeple's strong defense of Shale. It is important circumstantial evidence to keep in mind should one of them flip as scum.

86

Forum Games / Re: Suicide Squad Mafia, Day Two: Pobody's Nerfect (In Louisiana)

« on: July 05, 2008, 10:06:24 AM »

-JR: I'll be characteristically blunt, myself, and repeat what I said to Delta day 1: I don't want to waste a vote on someone who can't be bothered to play. Please bow out if that's your intent. Vote remains on you in case it's a lame trick to try and garner sympathy without an actual defense and skirt on by.

-Tai's post with his 'it's okay to be emo in mafia' attitude made me cry.

-Meeple! Fine. I believed I was concise enough, you obviously disagree. Even though this also makes me cry, I will go over the relevant posts again and give you specific quotes/links to underline what I meant. And I can't help but be slightly mean and mention that if even you are having trouble finding the promise I'm claiming you didn't deliver on, it might be a good idea to follow Rat/Ciato/me/other people and try to spend a bit more time thinning your posts down.  >_>

Anyway, the Meeple response and some thoughts on Tai later today. Given our timezones, you guys are probably asleep for the most part anyhow and don't really care about the slight delay.

87

Forum Games / Re: Suicide Squad Mafia, Day Two: Pobody's Nerfect (In Louisiana)

« on: July 04, 2008, 07:46:52 PM »

Picture/appropriate picture tag get. Hope that helps and all that.

Ashdla: Let me put it a different way. Do you have people whom you find more suspicious than others? Do you have people whom have acted strange and you would like to see explain themselves over it? Those are just two broad examples for when I believe one should use their vote even though no prime suspect is in appearance. It is somewhat disconcerting that the guy who claims he has no voting power (and that votecount pretty much confirmed that) has been more vocal with whom he would like to vote for using the FoS format than players who don't have such issues.

Quite simply, if you don't do it, who would? And if you, assured of your alignment, don't promote your cases, are you taking on faith the words of someone whose allegiance you are not certain of? Scum have trouble making cases on people, because they know without the shadow of a doubt that they're lying through their teeth. It's not by accident that too-passive play straying into lurker territory content-wise and abstinence from voting to create a voting record are considered scum tells. It is my belief that by acting this way, someone would be either scum or is allowing scum to lay low the same way by providing them with a buffer.

88

Forum Games / Re: Suicide Squad Mafia, Day Two: Pobody's Nerfect (In Louisiana)

« on: July 04, 2008, 06:13:22 PM »

Saying you don't agree does not constitute debunking.

I have utter disbelief for what I'm seeing in your posts. People shouldn't judge others for acting scummy, if they did it before. Or if it's something 'minor'. Or if you think what they said meant a different thing than myself or others you disagree with.

Huh? What's up with that, Meeple?

It really annoys that you take certain things as utmost proof of your case. You bold out a part of Laggy's post, for example, and instantly I am proven wrong. How? How is Laggy's opinion overriding my own with such ease that my entire case suddenly doesn't fly and crumble?

Your strong defense of Shale reads bizarre to me. You seem to dedicate more effort to it than to actual offense or even your own defense.

You are also taking issues with my belief that people should use their votes, to pressure if they have to, instead of sitting on them?

And finally, I've done exactly what I said I would. Some people haven't, which I took note of. You dismiss it out of hand and attack me; whatever. Everything is laid out clearly in my previous posts, which I'd suggest to reread to understand my intentions. For someone who attacked me for misreading and misrepresenting Shale, you're certainly guilty of it yourself.

89

Forum Games / Re: Suicide Squad Mafia, Day Two: Pobody's Nerfect (In Louisiana)

« on: July 04, 2008, 02:40:03 PM »

Looking back to the beginning of day 2 and onwards, some thirty plus hours prior to this: Shale (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24655#msg24655), Meeple (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24662#msg24662), Excal (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24678#msg24678) and Ashdla (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24681#msg24681) pretty much promise to analyze day 1 stuff/voting records. DHE follows up later with a promise of his own (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24714#msg24714).

Of those, it is interesting to see who actually delivered, and who thought they got away with the promise of future content voiding the need for said content to come.

Excal posts about JR with a clear reference to day 1 postage, culminating with a prodding vote to have JR talk more and explain himself.

Ashdla also posts about the other players; as an aside, while the information presented is helpful, I tend to be more suspicious of large analysis posts that don't actually draw any conclusions -- if you yourself don't think anyone as suspicious enough to warrant even a prodding vote, or a vote to encourage explanations for things you find strange, just how helpful can the information truly be? It makes me doubt its usefulness.

Meeple's comments don't actually do what he promised, as he seems to be focusing on day 2 discussions instead. On top of this undelivered promise, his actual content is not too informative. Looking back at things after the flips to justify his stance is easy (and it would have been even easier for him to manufacture this evidence of 'being right from the start' if he is scum and knew the players being discussed weren't).

There's also: http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24756#msg24756

"Next off...Ciato's obssessed with my posting style it seems.  Um, ok, you know how I am, you know I tend to do this EVERY GAME I'M IN, and you're holding it against me...now?" followed up with

"No, I'm not saying this excuses my actions."

Well. Yes you are. That's exactly what you're doing, and I boggle at the defense of 'I make large posts with little content all the time and it's the way I play, you can't call me out on this scummy playing method that conceals my true thoughts and obfuscates them.'

"What I'm saying is you know very well you have to have more of a basis than "He's posting large posts with little content!"  Laggy noted that, but at the same time, he basically stated it says nothing one way or another."

Ciato has to have more than that? At the beginning of the game, no less? Really?

I also don't believe using another player's thoughts on playstyle is a viable defense. I'm saying I agree with Ciato on this, so what does it mean? Are we in a democracy, where we now outvote Laggy's opinion?

All in all, not a very favorable view of Meeple, here. His later vote on her here (http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24795#msg24795) reeks of a delayed OMGUS; or a preemptive one, if he feels her points against him will result in a vote eventually. In that post, Meeple also defends Shale by claiming I misrepresented Shale's comments, where he meant 'attackers' and not 'voters'. Fair enough. However, my argument was based on Shale's apparent hypocrisy of seeking out people... let's say 'attacking' Tom & Co. while himself saying he found Tom the most suspicious and would've supported the lynch. It baffles how Shale is saying he's going to go after people who thought along the same lines he did (because it's such an obvious sign of scumminess), and Meeple buys this wholesale. A note to Laggy: it is this superposition that troubles, not Shale saying he'll look over 'attackers' or Shale saying Tom looked the scummiest. I just don't see how a townie could go 'This guy seemed very scummy to me, but all of you who were vocal about it are scrutinized for suspicion of being scum'. What. So that raises doubts about Shale's towniness, as far as I'm concerned.

As a side-note, I don't attack you on the grammar front due to your ability to write "I'm" without fail.

DHE. Better late than never with that promised analysis, I suppose. Interesting, in that it contrasts with Ashdla's own large summary post by following it up with a vote. Mmm. I find the Meeple case viable, as I've covered myself above, but DHE's evidence feels a bit on the thin side. That it seems more of a prodding vote than an attempt to train Meeple does help.

"And since I know I have townie thoughts," -- yeah, that fragment in your post made me pause, the same way your lack of day 1 voting had, excuse/reason or not.

Shale. I'm of two minds on this. What I feel is suspicious about him has been amply documented. That we don't really get him to deliver on his promise is another strike against him. On the other hand, he does post thoughts on people. I actually prefer when people single out only a few of the players, clearly those that elicit the most controversy/thoughts from them, over megaposts covering everything (yes, I used to do those myself in some past games, but I've changed my mind on their usefulness since). And back again, I find it troubling he doesn't use his vote to prod people; if you have concerns, you tend to go after those that concern you and get them to respond to your satisfaction. That is achieved with a vote, which could later be withdrawn if you are satisfied with their answers, or kept there if you aren't. I don't like how you keep to the background by not doing this along with your analysis.

Summary for the tl;dr crowd: Meeple and Shale don't deliver, in what seems to be an attempt to have the cake and eat it, too. A cursory reading would show them participating and promising insightful analysis of what had occurred previously... and that simply does not happen. However, I have no doubt they would look better to a casual observer than myself, when I made no such promises during my absence. They also rub me the wrong way for reasons I detailed, mostly in this post. Ashdla needs to show more aggression and actually narrow the field down some. Opinion on my own vote remains unchanged: I still view JR as the scummiest around for his questionable tactics and suspect logic.

90

Forum Games / Re: Suicide Squad Mafia, Day Two: Pobody's Nerfect (In Louisiana)

« on: July 04, 2008, 09:53:09 AM »

Okay, then! At a read through the pages that accumulated, Bardiche claims an 'extra voting' power that is supposed to even out Rat's proven inability to vote, as we've seen with helpful votecounts both times. That doesn't mean they're town, of course, though I would certain hope scum wouldn't have doublevoters in this game. And then, JR takes issue with Bardiche.

This post was originally going to reflect my thoughts on the people I wanted to watch ( as stated in this post here: http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24687#msg24687 ), as well as note anything I thought worth of mentioning that hadn't been picked up by others. HOWEVER. I saw JR's posts and decided this would be about him. Why? Because I'm voting for him.

##Vote: JR

JR on Bardiche. I don't see a problem with his reveal, especially given that he has said only what would have become apparent soon enough, if he is being truthful, and would have ended up casting him under suspicion. We have not seen a full role claim from him, so JR's concerns there feel unwarranted.

But I do have many problems with the following:

JR's trying to cast suspicion on Bardiche's logic, while the only issue at hand here is apparent playstyle differences between the two of them. Rat happened to mention the other thing I felt was suspect about JR's drive here: oh noes LYLO scum tricks etcetc. It feels like a way to drive paranoia up, culminating in eliminating Bardiche 'for our own good' or so that he 'wouldn't be taken advantage of by scum'. He's also voting Strago for lurking, essentially, with a throwaway oneliner excuse, while keeping occupied full-time on Bardiche. That reads to me as an attempt to keep his hands clean there, while fanning the flames and hoping someone else would pick up the crusade for him. And that's... yeah, it looks pretty bad.

http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24792#msg24792
Rat: Jo'ou bothers me somewhat more, though, because his line of attack is originally based on how scum can exploit things, and not a far more potentially deadly concern, which is 'what if Bardiche is scum?'

http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24793#msg24793
JR in response: I need to shout out loud "HEY BARDY LOOKS SCUMMY" to make my perspective shown? If I find someone suspicious enough to raise my eyebrows, it's because I find the behavior detractive to town.
JR in response, redux: And, to me, both threats are equal in danger - i.e. they get us fucking killed and lose town the game.

First, he admits that he's casting Bardiche in a bad light in hopes of people taking notice without taking the proper responsibility for it. Second, he rewrites our goal from FINDING SCUM above all else to finding scum AND killing random people who might detract from town's win in some way, a nebulous definition we are not privy to. And hey, I wonder if arguing against it and against JR would label me as a dangerous person to town?

So that's the reason for my vote.

Incidentally, I think that Bardiche should just use a FoS (and unvote/only keep one as intention to vote) and end up hammering our choices if he happens to believe in the lynch train gathered. A bit more effort on his part (and on ours not to hammer before he had the chance, if he so wishes), but the rewards should be clear enough.


* Yesterday was filled with work (during which I posted, but sadly, the people I asked things of weren't all around to answer), then gaming which ate my concentration and followed by a company event. Posting drunk after all that seemed like a swell idea, but I ultimately decided to hold on that till I woke up. Just an explanation, not really trying to excuse a lack of participation here.

91

Forum Games / Re: Suicide Squad Mafia, Day Two: Pobody's Nerfect (In Louisiana)

« on: July 03, 2008, 08:18:48 AM »

Rat having no vote has no bearing on the amount of people still in the game.

Anyway, people are going 'must take look at interactions, more later'. I'll be actually sure to follow up on that and check whether the promised 'more' comes at some later time.

Myself, I think I'd like to examine those who didn't vote for whatever reason. http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24589#msg24589 for easy reference.

9. Elfboy
12. Shale
13. Jo'ou Ranbu

Okay. So we had three people who had not placed a vote at all, after all our deliberations?

Elfboy. Yeah, I'm thinking I would like to hear why you had no votes on the table when the day ended despite being reasonably active.

Shale. Here ( http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24655#msg24655 ) he cites RL as the reason, and then follows up with saying he would have voted for whom we now know to be a town player without hesitation. This is something I'd like to hear him explain.

At the same time, Shale is trying to direct attention towards the people who DID vote for either of the three targets of day 1. Presumably, it means Tom's voters, as Delta and OK had two votes between the two of them; the same Tom, whose innocence Shale now knows and says he would have gone for, but it was apparently suspicious to pursue while his claims were still very much in doubt.

JR. Lurking and not voting, too. Nice!

92

Forum Games / Re: Suicide Squad Mafia, Day One: The Foot Is Agame!

« on: July 02, 2008, 08:41:44 AM »

Delta:

I say that we vote for either me or ET.

Oh for the love of--

You people say mean and hurtful things! I'll be doing my passive-aggressive act to avoid actually contributing. I'm innocent, but I suppose you could go ahead and kill me anyway.

That pretty much sums up your play.

I was this close to voting you. But I won't do that. If you really don't want to play, bow out. I'm not going to waste our lynch on someone playing like that.

On Tom and OK: I agree with Rat that OK's pretty much tied his fate to Tom. I also think they're having a bit too much fun with their roles/characters, and the rest of us suffer as a result.

I happen to think Tom is lying, somehow, about something. Maybe about everything. Every time before I thought he was lying in mafia I turned out to be right, so I'll trust my instincts (you guys don't have to, etc).

I don't think we should lynch OK. Tom is... weird and looks like he misstepped (whether as lying town or scum is a mystery, sadly, though I favor the latter option). OK... whatever he's doing, it's hard for me to see it as anything but intentional. He has to be aware of the consequences in light of what's happening with Tom. Therefore, I don't see his actions as 'slips' the same way I do with Tom, and would prefer not to lynch someone whose alignment we don't know and who asks to be lynched by openly referring to himself as scum repeatedly, in various forms.

I also find it weird how he both says Tom lies and that what Tom says will come to pass in two different posts, but I'm not sure what that suggests.

On Rat: I'll second that request for you to "un"-FoS to maintain a proper voting record to the best of your ability. Or just go ahead and use the voting format as you just did in that post you made. As your votes aren't counted but you're allowed to do this, that would give us a clear idea of whom you'd like to see hang.

On Ciato: Your contribution is lighter than I expected, I realize as I see another brief post. Day 1, etc, hope to see more from you to get a read on you.

On Shale: His contributions are reasonable, if sparse. (one more appeared as I was typing all this, so I hope it's a sign for things to come)

JR: Actually vote on someone? Using FoS on our two top lynch candidates is... not informative in the slightest.

QR: What actually makes you think there's role madness afoot? There has been literally no proof of it as yet. It reads to me as a convenient excuse to use later if your choice of a target ends up being town. Mind explaining why you said that?

Bardiche: "We can always opt for a Delta lynch later." -- that... rarely works in mafia. And even if it did, choosing someone with a day 1 case over information based on flips and further inference is foolish to the extreme, if not self-defeating. Why are you suggesting this?

93

Forum Games / Re: Suicide Squad Mafia, Day One: The Foot Is Agame!

« on: July 01, 2008, 06:00:20 PM »

Delta: I am a proponent of lynching people who don't bother to use proper capitalization, not to mention punctuation. Not actually having much to show for yourself either in volume or content will make your playing experience a short one, if I have anything to do about this, so do shape up.

(And Laggy posts the same thing, pretty much, as Tom did earlier. Goes to show it's quite noticeable.)

EvilTom: Option 1 of those I suggested doesn't look as harmless with your clarifications, but even in our worst case scenario, we get you to contribute and be essentially unkillable. We lose a vote on our side, then, true. But the same would happen with any mislynch day 1, as you yourself have acknowledged. Therefore, to have the insight of a confirmed townie as the game goes on and you can adjust your opinions based on recent developments (unlike, say, the words of dead confirmed townies pre-death), giving town a unique benefit.

Or you could be scum/third party/etc. Either way, I'm still comfortable with your lynch. I disagree with your case on Rat, since FoS allows for a record and I usually get a better hang on Rat's alignment after a couple of days anyway.

DHE: Uhh, what? That was so bizarre.



Enjoy.

Everyone not really participating: I'd like to see people contribute, pick a suspect, detail their case or lack of one, the works. Day 1 cases are often weak (there are notable exceptions; usually with Tom) but they do generate discussion.

94

Forum Games / Re: Suicide Squad Mafia, Day One: The Foot Is Agame!

« on: July 01, 2008, 01:39:12 PM »

Seems like we started, and I had the misfortune not to see it this morning, and then work got suddenly busy. And then the forum wouldn't load for me, what's up with that? So uncool.

http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24311#msg24311 -- Day one or not, I agree with the sentiment in that post. I'll totally keep it in mind, too, Ashdla.

Then, there's this post when he jumps on OK, who had just came under fire from Excal ( http://www.rpgdl.com/forums/index.php?topic=1398.msg24340#msg24340 ).

BUT OK is kinda worth the extra scrutiny, so it's hardly proof of scumminess, even for day 1. If anyone should get a vote, it's really Tom. Why?

Let's examine the scenarios I'm seeing here:

-Tom is entirely, 100% truthful! He's town, and town lynching him gives him superpowers beyond measure! (or doesn't harm him, thus proving his claims to a point, I'm not certain which is supposed to happen)

Okay. How is this a bad option, then?

-Tom is lying scum. Tom dies.

Ditto!

-Tom is lying town/TP/a muppet. Lynching Tom... eliminates a third party player, a lying town or a muppet.

It's hard, it really is, to see the cons of this approach.

##Vote: EvilTom

In the worst case scenario, my vote gets 'wasted', a possibility I don't personally believe in and which I can live with here.

95

Forum Games / Re: Suicide Squad mafia signups

« on: June 29, 2008, 06:43:10 AM »

Confirmed.

96

Forum Games / Re: Suicide Squad mafia signups

« on: June 22, 2008, 07:25:59 AM »

A belated hi back! Settling in, trying to adjust to my timezone, etcetc.

97

Forum Games / Re: Suicide Squad mafia signups

« on: June 19, 2008, 11:21:07 AM »

~

98

Forum Games / Re: Composer Battle Is Go! THE TREBLE CLEF IS YOUR DOOM!

« on: April 10, 2008, 08:51:29 PM »

Depends. Doctors actually can go for a key role the scum simply must kill, unlike bulletproof townies. Also, in my understanding of the two roles, doctor is active while BP is passive, and a watcher, say, should be able to spot a doctor in action while they'd notice nothing about BP.

And, finally, scum rolecop getting a BP townie wouldn't try to waste a kill on them. Scum rolecop getting a doc would go for them, barring anything even better. However, effectively, a doc that keeps on protecting himself would just get the scum to miss with their kill here.

99

Forum Games / Re: Composer Battle Is Go! THE TREBLE CLEF IS YOUR DOOM!

« on: April 10, 2008, 06:38:28 PM »

Yes, LAL. It's distilled irony that scum was fighting hardest of all to use LAL and have it convict two of his buddies. It really does work! Please listen to me next time I propose it!

I wonder how things would've gone with no kill this night. Probably an Alex lynch?

Night 1 I wasn't involved in (I wanted to roleblock Keeshi but it ended up being Shale, and I didn't really consider Rat to be the best target but not enough to argue the point after the fact). Night 2 Shale was to be killed (come on, who would blatantly go for a cop this way?) but he protected himself. Man, Cid. That and the weird cover names all scum got (but only like 2 of the town) almost cost us the game, but luckily no one cared to ask me my name, I guess.

100

Forum Games / Re: Composer Battle Is Go! THE TREBLE CLEF IS YOUR DOOM!

« on: April 10, 2008, 05:46:36 PM »

And guys? Modkills? Cheating? Not cool. Just saying.