Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[eHalcyon]

Vote: eHalcyon

So you're telling me you don't find Morgrim frustrating?

Nah, I'm telling you I find you scummy. You OMGUS'd me and disguised it as a non-OMGUS vote. And just now you did the same thing to Morgrim7. But whatever your stated reasons, you keep voting for everyone who expresses suspicion at you.

You're rabidly attacking the idea that we should just lynch the popular wagons. Why? Because you're trying to head off the lynch landing on you, and fighting it now is easier and more townie-looking than fighting it when you're at L-Whatever.

Morgrim is actually making some sense to me this game.

Where did I OMGUS you?

And did you read the large post I made on the previous page?  My thoughts on Morgrim are not OMGUS.

If I am lynched, how will your reads change when I flip town?

Morgrim continues to make no sense.  Jumping on popular wagons because they are popular is horrible.

[jotheonah]

Vote: eHalcyon

So you're telling me you don't find Morgrim frustrating?

Nah, I'm telling you I find you scummy. You OMGUS'd me and disguised it as a non-OMGUS vote. And just now you did the same thing to Morgrim7. But whatever your stated reasons, you keep voting for everyone who expresses suspicion at you.

You're rabidly attacking the idea that we should just lynch the popular wagons. Why? Because you're trying to head off the lynch landing on you, and fighting it now is easier and more townie-looking than fighting it when you're at L-Whatever.

Morgrim is actually making some sense to me this game.

Where did I OMGUS you?

And did you read the large post I made on the previous page?  My thoughts on Morgrim are not OMGUS.

If I am lynched, how will your reads change when I flip town?

Morgrim continues to make no sense.  Jumping on popular wagons because they are popular is horrible.

Ok, looking back, you did not OMGUS me. Sorry about that.

Morgrim is looking for a viable lynch, a compromise lynch. That's a fine thing to do when you're 50 pages into a thread on Day 1 and there are no significant wagons. It's even a necessary thing to do.

I'm really tired of Day 1.

But even if Morgrim's case is terrible, your response to it still reads scummy to me. I'm not always good at articulating my reads, but that doesn't mean I'm not confident in them. With you eHalc, it's just that several times now I've had the experience "Huh, that's a little scummy" in reference to the timing and content of your posts, and I think those are adding up for me.

I'm not sure what I'll get out of it if you flip town. Since 10 more people will have had to vote for you by then, I'm sure some of them will be scummy.

[eHalcyon]

Vote: eHalcyon

So you're telling me you don't find Morgrim frustrating?

Nah, I'm telling you I find you scummy. You OMGUS'd me and disguised it as a non-OMGUS vote. And just now you did the same thing to Morgrim7. But whatever your stated reasons, you keep voting for everyone who expresses suspicion at you.

You're rabidly attacking the idea that we should just lynch the popular wagons. Why? Because you're trying to head off the lynch landing on you, and fighting it now is easier and more townie-looking than fighting it when you're at L-Whatever.

Morgrim is actually making some sense to me this game.

Whoa, I just read this more closely and it looks even worse.

1. I haven't voted for you, nor for Morgrim, so what "disguised vote" are you talking about?
2. You say I keep voting for people who suspected me.  What?  I have voted like once in this game.  What in the world are you talking about?
3. The one time I voted, I voted for you, jo.  And then you OMGUS'd me (not with an actual vote, but you called me scummy for it).
4. I haven't attacked the idea of lynching popular wagons.  I have attacked the idea of lynching purely for informational purposes, specifically info based on early wagons.

What the heck, jo?

[eHalcyon]

Morgrim is looking for a viable lynch, a compromise lynch. That's a fine thing to do when you're 50 pages into a thread on Day 1 and there are no significant wagons. It's even a necessary thing to do.

Um, did you read Morgrim's earlier post where he basically said "I'm willing to lynch pretty much anyone, even though I think many of these people are town"?

[jotheonah]

Morgrim is looking for a viable lynch, a compromise lynch. That's a fine thing to do when you're 50 pages into a thread on Day 1 and there are no significant wagons. It's even a necessary thing to do.

Um, did you read Morgrim's earlier post where he basically said "I'm willing to lynch pretty much anyone, even though I think many of these people are town"?

I think he meant it as in "willing to lynch them if that's what it takes to avoid no lynch." Which is not that radical a thing. A lynch is better than a No Lynch and an actual majority is looking unlikely right now.

And yes, I WAS remembering some things wrong. It's a very big thread.

[ibgtennis]

I will post votes. But first, part II of my list!

13. Cayvie - nothing from this game gives me a particularly strong read. I don't think her vote/unvote on O or her softclaim look particularly scummy though.
14. Shraeye - I am now getting a townread from shraeye. He's not afraid to get his opinions out there, he's not trying to hide at all. Not a sure thing or anything, but I think him a poor day one lynch.
15. Cuzz - lurking a bit, but that's normal for him as far as I can tell. I could easily see him being scum.
16. Yuma - did he come up with this soft deadline idea? That's a helpful kind of thinking. I'd just as soon keep him around.
17. igbtennis - bad vibes. reminds me way too much of scum me. says a lot of little things so he looks like he's paying attention, but no in depth analysis. he is new, and busy, but he could also easily be scum.
18. TheMunch - his exchange with Watno made both of them look kinda bad, but him worse I think. He does a lot of talking about his reasons for voting in the abstract, as if he's afraid to restate them in case he makes an inconsistency. Slight scum vibe.
19. Morgrim7 - Morgrim7. Playing kind of sane this game, but also lurky. Who the heck knows with this guy.
20. EHalcyon - I don't agree with Volt's case at all, but he is being a mite defensive about it. I don't want to lynch him though.
21. Watno - I'd like to know why you were grilling TheMunch so hard. As scummy as he looks, you look a bit fishy coming out of that exchange to, and his accusations toward you have some merit.
22. Galzria - I can never read Galz accurately. Must run in the family.
23. Captain_Frisk -  Lurking, and lots of IIoA (post counts relative to average? really?) looks scummy, his lynching idea seemed ill-thought out. His contributions to the town lynch plan work in his favor, but I still think he's likely scum.
24. ehunt - not much of a read, despite how active he's been. I don't see O's point. I don't want to lynch him D1.
25. ashersky - lurky and unmemorable. I'd lynch him if consensus were leaning that way, but I don't think it is.

That being said, my top candidate is still Grujah.

2nd vote - Captain_Frisk
3rd vote - Insomniac
4th vote - TheMunch (just in case.)

i do say a lot of little things to make it look like i'm paying attention, but i would say they have *medium* depth, maybe? but i don't wanna get lynched for lurking, so i do my best. i really just don't have reads right now. maybe it's because i'm bad/new, or maybe it's because i haven't committed enough?

and @ftl...i don't know why i'm the posterboy for lurking. I was V/LA for the first stage weekend of the game (after which there were many pages of posts), V/lA this weekend, and have nothing to say about the substantial posts regarding previous games. that's some straight bull.

so, votes as of now Vote: ftl for some hypocritical lurker scumminess as of now. trying to deflect his old identity elsewhere

2nd: young nick: he's had enough time to contribute something and has barely done anything. his exclamation points seem like fake-friendly and awkwardly forced.

3rd votes...eHunt for seeming way too defensive, although, to be fair, i'd do that if i were town-eHunt with the annoying wagon he faced. so i'm 50/50 on this, but like someonelse said (insomniac?), there would be good informational value from his lynch, and all things being equal that might prove fruitful

[jotheonah]

I'll Unvote for now, but I still get a vibe off eHalc.

I'll vote: Galzria.

[TheMunch]

I'll Unvote for now, but I still get a vibe off eHalc.

I'll vote: Galzria.

I'll take over for you joth, Vote: eHalc. I'm still getting a vibe from watno, who has been quiet for a while now.  I dont want to just jump on eHalc just cause hes being the most active but every time he posts something I get a little more suspicious of his intentions.  I have started feeling this way ever since he was against (and is still against, he just reiterated it) the idea of gaining information from lynches.  I dont like people that are against gaining information that is helpful to town.

[eHalcyon]

Morgrim is looking for a viable lynch, a compromise lynch. That's a fine thing to do when you're 50 pages into a thread on Day 1 and there are no significant wagons. It's even a necessary thing to do.

Um, did you read Morgrim's earlier post where he basically said "I'm willing to lynch pretty much anyone, even though I think many of these people are town"?

I think he meant it as in "willing to lynch them if that's what it takes to avoid no lynch." Which is not that radical a thing. A lynch is better than a No Lynch and an actual majority is looking unlikely right now.

And yes, I WAS remembering some things wrong. It's a very big thread.

Morgrim posted that 4 days ago.  Deadline wasn't pressing.  Being willing to lynch just about everyone isn't helpful.

If he wants to adopt a more helpful meta, he could be more active and actually make some cases.  The whole game he's pretty much just sheeped others suspicions.  I have to give him the Morgrim pass but I don't have to like it.

[eHalcyon]

I'll Unvote for now, but I still get a vibe off eHalc.

I'll vote: Galzria.

I'll take over for you joth, Vote: eHalc. I'm still getting a vibe from watno, who has been quiet for a while now.  I dont want to just jump on eHalc just cause hes being the most active but every time he posts something I get a little more suspicious of his intentions.  I have started feeling this way ever since he was against (and is still against, he just reiterated it) the idea of gaining information from lynches.  I dont like people that are against gaining information that is helpful to town.

I thought we cleared up your misunderstanding of my position.  Either you've forgotten, or you really are trying to twist my words.

[ehunt]

I'll Unvote for now, but I still get a vibe off eHalc.

I'll vote: Galzria.

I'll take over for you joth, Vote: eHalc. I'm still getting a vibe from watno, who has been quiet for a while now.  I dont want to just jump on eHalc just cause hes being the most active but every time he posts something I get a little more suspicious of his intentions.  I have started feeling this way ever since he was against (and is still against, he just reiterated it) the idea of gaining information from lynches.  I dont like people that are against gaining information that is helpful to town.

please quote a post where ehalc says "I don't like getting information from lynches."

I think ehalc (correctly) joined me in calling out insomniac for voting on the basis of how informative a wagon will be, which is a scummy rationale since it allows you to commit without committing. Nobody is saying "information is bad." We are just trying to hold people accountable for their votes instead of letting them make excuses for lynching townies like "I wanted information."

[ehunt]

when people vote, you have to make them post their rationale so that you have something concrete to hold them against post-flip. This is not anti-town behavior. It's planning day two ahead, starting on day one.

Information is good, but you don't get any information out of a wagon where everybody is justifying their vote based on the information. (You can imagine an extreme example. Everyone just picks a player at random and types vote: [pickplayername] (for information) until a majority occurs. How much do you think you learn in that scenario?)

[eHalcyon]

For what feels like the millionth time, here is my position.  I'll try to be detailed this time so I can just link back to this post if it comes up again.


1. The important thing for day 1 is to get information.

2. The best information we get is the day 1 lynch:
2a. Who voted for the lynchee and why?
2b. Who did NOT vote for the lynchee, and why?

3. The "why?" is very important.
3a. "Because it would be informational" is a non-position, like a vote that tries to have a built in excuse.  "I voted because it would be informational, so please don't think I am scummy for lynching a townie!  It was informational!"
3b. Those early wagons that you think would be informational are less so than what we would get from the actual lynch otherwise.
3c. "Any lynch is better than no lynch" is similarly unhelpful.  If you are willing to lynch anyone, you are once again taking a non-position.




If people vote "for information", they better not expect that to hold up as an excuse if their target flips town.

[eHalcyon]

tl;dr -- I advocate lynching people who you think look scummy, and giving actual reasons for why you think that.  The lynch wagon that comes out at the end will be informative by definition.

[eHalcyon]

That includes me.  If you think I look scummy, please present an actual case.  I haven't seen one.

[yuma]

Morgrim always plays this way, in his own words from MIX this is why:

Why do I never have unique info to add? I let you guys do the hard thinking, and choose which case is better. But is someone really jumps out to me as scum, I'll vote for that person.

I agree that it is frustrating, but it certainly isn't unusual... and we have got some good dialoge/exchanges/voting and such. Much better than a quiet town. I'll do a reread of recent posts tomorrow and will evaluate my vote in context of recent posts and existing wagons.

[ehunt]

3rd votes...eHunt for seeming way too defensive, although, to be fair, i'd do that if i were town-eHunt with the annoying wagon he faced. so i'm 50/50 on this, but like someonelse said (insomniac?), there would be good informational value from his lynch, and all things being equal that might prove fruitful

i'm sorry, do you think it's a scumtell that i'm being defensive? Or are you "3rd-voting me" just for the information? If it's for the information, what information do you think you'll gain? Who will you vote for on my wagon after the flip? It's aggravating that you can get away with not posting all day then endorsing the lynch of somebody who's been paying close attention, because you'll "learn stuff" - without saying what you'll learn, who you'd suspect, etc. when that happens.

Look, being defensive and survivalist isn't a scumtell. All players want to live (unless you're the jester, I guess). When people make bad arguments against me, it's my job to point them out. Obviously I hope others will do it, but they have their own fish to fry. You even say yourself that the wagon on me is annoying. What does that mean? Are you committing to saying it's a BAD wagon, or are you just saying it's annoying?

I don't believe there is any case against me except "we gain information if ehunt dies because all those other people on the ehunt wagon... we'll learn about them."

[eHalcyon]

Morgrim always plays this way, in his own words from MIX this is why:

Why do I never have unique info to add? I let you guys do the hard thinking, and choose which case is better. But is someone really jumps out to me as scum, I'll vote for that person.

I agree that it is frustrating, but it certainly isn't unusual... and we have got some good dialoge/exchanges/voting and such. Much better than a quiet town. I'll do a reread of recent posts tomorrow and will evaluate my vote in context of recent posts and existing wagons.

I know.  That's why I said he would be a good target for vig or cop.  I think this will be true in every game, until Morgrim changes his style.

[TheMunch]

@eHalc, its point 3a that I have continually have had a problem with that you either dont understand or are dodging.  The fact that people vote for someone "for information" doesn't change the past.  I dont think anyone is actually proposing to look at the people who are willing to pull the trigger for information and say "you are scummy for killing town."  The people that are in question are the people that were either defending the lynchee or pushing for his death the first time the wagons came around, depending on what he flipped.  People pulling the trigger does not invalidate pages upon pages of discussion.

[ehunt]

@eHalc, its point 3a that I have continually have had a problem with that you either dont understand or are dodging.  The fact that people vote for someone "for information" doesn't change the past.  I dont think anyone is actually proposing to look at the people who are willing to pull the trigger for information and say "you are scummy for killing town."  The people that are in question are the people that were either defending the lynchee or pushing for his death the first time the wagons came around, depending on what he flipped.  People pulling the trigger does not invalidate pages upon pages of discussion.

so all the scum have to do to win in your framework is wait for a townie to vote for a townie and then join the wagon "for information."

you ignore that you are creating the perfect alibi for scum.

[ehunt]

tangent - i unvote since it appears that the "for information" fallacy is ascribed to by at least three people, not just insomniac. vote: grujah and now i dont have a secondary or a tertiary, but probably the information folks.

[Galzria]

Caught up.

Dsell's "case" on me is pretty ridiculous - he singled outone post to say "look, he hedged!", without bothering to reference any other posts that I've made where I've clearly stated my opinions on people (some of whom mentioned in that very post he quoted).

Take eHunt for example. Yes, his early play was slightly off-putting. I really didn't think - even having stated his intent to post less prior to game start - that it was necessarily scum eHunt though. While it struck me as different than his play in other games, I also understand the strain that he went through in those games trying to fit rl in around it. So I thought he was suspicious, but not scummy. OMGHEDGE!

I've since come out point-blank and said that he reads town to me, and the wagon on him is terrible.

Shraeye was much more confrontational early in the day compared to M-IX, but in M-IX he never came under pressure and was dead by dawn D2. How anyone could make a case that he didn't appear like town Shraeye, I have no idea. Again though, I wasn't going to write off the reads of everyone else because I actually do my best NOT to tunnel - and hell, maybe I don't see it, but others do? Well then I'll keep that in mind.

((His play more recently has reminded me significantly of D1 M-IX, btw)).

---

I also think it's highly misleading to suggest that I've said nothing of value. I've championed the call to lynch lurkers, who are either scum or just really bad town. I've consistently gone after lurkers - while they were lurking - and moved on once they showed some signs of actually being useful. I voted ibg, O, Axxle, and Grujah - all on that front, and you could easily add Glooble and (now) Young_Nick to that list. All of them I would feel are completely acceptable lynches.

---

As for actual scumminess from active players, I stated exactly why I find eHal scummy. He's been over-the-top defensive against a case that ultimately bore no real weight. And while he was raising my eyebrows with comments made before Volt posted (things like "I can see a legitimate case on me"), it was really the defensiveness after Volt posted that I found scummy - because with the exception of Insomniac (and I can't even vouch for him), nobody was jumping up and down going "what a compelling case" - but eHal's defenses (and there were multiple) kept reading like he desperately wanted to head off a wagon before it began. He's gone so far as to use the ridiculous line of "what would you learn if you lynched me and I flipped town" - which reads to me like he's trying to scare people away from voting for him because "you won't learn anything". Bull. We'll learn that you're either scum or town, and we'll learn who got on a rolling wagon. We'll learn who started it, who drove it, who distances themselves from it, who was outspoken against it etc.

I've also stated that I found Munch to read consistently townie -frustrated townie- but townie to me. His "debate" with Watno (and to some extent eHal) was pretty clear to me, and the continued pressure by Watno over questions Munch had answered already seemed scummy. It was like he was trying his best to paint Munch as scum, even though all the answers Munch gave read town. That said, I wouldn't be surprised if the whole thing was town V town.

---

Lastly, Dsell, to clarify, the primary reason for your vote is:

"This Galzria looks like the town-meta Galzria..." (note: Not townie, but "town-meta", since scum-meta = townie) "... But Galzria himself stated that he knows his own meta's, so town-meta Galzria must actually be scum"?

I actually don't have much of a read on you one way or another, so no OMGUS accusations, but that's a terrible argument. I've played how many games now? My meta has been dead consistent through them all - and yes, I've tried to change at times and failed. Hence why you'll see my earlier post in this very game where I denounce the idea that looking at meta's (both in relation to Robz, and to this game as a whole) is useless. People can't just suddenly change who they are, or how they play - it inevitably comes through.

Oh, and I lol'ed irl at O "I'm down for a Galzria lynch in every game".

[eHalcyon]

@eHalc, its point 3a that I have continually have had a problem with that you either dont understand or are dodging.  The fact that people vote for someone "for information" doesn't change the past.  I dont think anyone is actually proposing to look at the people who are willing to pull the trigger for information and say "you are scummy for killing town."  The people that are in question are the people that were either defending the lynchee or pushing for his death the first time the wagons came around, depending on what he flipped.  People pulling the trigger does not invalidate pages upon pages of discussion.

The past you are talking about is less informative than the real wagon.  You are saying that the info is in wagons that came up early on day one.  Those are far less useful than the actual wagon that causes someone to lynch.  People that cause that lynch "for information" give themselves an excuse for their vote.  They do NOT defend NOR push for someone's death.  They say that it is "for information" and are therefore beyond any scrutiny.

I pull this out from your quote:

I dont think anyone is actually proposing to look at the people who are willing to pull the trigger for information and say "you are scummy for killing town."

This is exactly the reason why I am against it.  If you're not going to say "you're scummy for killing town" to someone who was "willing to pull the trigger for information", then that person was able to vote and kill a townie and get away with it.

[ibgtennis]

3rd votes...eHunt for seeming way too defensive, although, to be fair, i'd do that if i were town-eHunt with the annoying wagon he faced. so i'm 50/50 on this, but like someonelse said (insomniac?), there would be good informational value from his lynch, and all things being equal that might prove fruitful

i'm sorry, do you think it's a scumtell that i'm being defensive? Or are you "3rd-voting me" just for the information? If it's for the information, what information do you think you'll gain? Who will you vote for on my wagon after the flip? It's aggravating that you can get away with not posting all day then endorsing the lynch of somebody who's been paying close attention, because you'll "learn stuff" - without saying what you'll learn, who you'd suspect, etc. when that happens.

Look, being defensive and survivalist isn't a scumtell. All players want to live (unless you're the jester, I guess). When people make bad arguments against me, it's my job to point them out. Obviously I hope others will do it, but they have their own fish to fry. You even say yourself that the wagon on me is annoying. What does that mean? Are you committing to saying it's a BAD wagon, or are you just saying it's annoying?

I don't believe there is any case against me except "we gain information if ehunt dies because all those other people on the ehunt wagon... we'll learn about them."

This is exactly what I mean. You were a third choice. Hardly on my radar at this point, yet you still treat it like I voted you or something. That's being defensive, and unreasonably so. Annoyingly so, I might add. And yes, I know that being defensive isn't a scum tell. everyone is trying to survive. I acknowledged that I was 50-50, i.e., a coin flip, and that it's essentially a throw-in vote, and yet you are treating it like I am adamantly against you. Maybe I should rephrase "50/50" to reflect the actual odds.

also, I don't KNOW whether it's a bad wagon or not. I'm humble enough to say that. But i am acknowledging, that if you do end up being town, that yes, it would be annoying.

[Insomniac]

I'm still not comfortable with listing three people in order, I'll do it soon, but am posting my basic train of thought now so I'm not dropping a bombshell when I do vote: I am suspicious of Insomniac because of his super non-committing position on me from earlier today (today IRL) as well as his "well, voltgloss is a smart guy even if he didn't actually say a good case so there must be a good case somewhere" arg against ehalcyon. I am annoyed at Axxle for repeated bad arguments at me, but unlike the Insom-business, that isn't really a case in and of itself (but I'm going to review him). Other than that I think my whole wagon is town except Insomniac and possibly eevee, but I'm not likely to vote for eevee before either of those other two. In the Glooble-Grujah wars I sympathize with Glooble, which makes me want to vote for Grujah.  My view of basically everyone "new" is clouded and run-together and needs to be reviewed before I vote; in particular, I don't understand the Watno/Munch dispute at all. I am still suspicious of shraeye for his personality change from previous games, which I don't think has been addressed. I am a little suspicious of voltaire again but don't have a real case, I am unlikely to vote there. I am not suspicious of ehalc (see my previous post on this) but I'm willing to give voltgloss/sparky the benefit of the doubt on this instead of assuming voltgloss/sparky is scummy for pushing the case.

...You need to stop pushing people that argue with you, you have this tendancy to believe anybody that puts any pressure on anyone or argues with you at all must be scum, and your always wrong.

I'd like you to cite other examples of this "tendency" and where it wound up going wrong. For example, in the post you are quoting I say my wagon is town, except for you and possibly Axxle/Eevee. I don't believe I have this tendency at all (except when my wagon really is scum, e.g. MIX and MVI, no regrets from either of those games).

Haven't caught up yet wanted to respond to this though, Remember your post after M8 finished where you thought I was scum when I was arguing with theorel. Yea you were wrong there too.