Print

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

[Dsell]

He's done something that's really indefensible, which gives everyone on the wagon the excuse to say, "Well he did X, so lynching him seemed like the right choice!" And what do you say to that? It's the kind of thing scum just doesn't do Day 1 precisely because it's the kind of thing that gets people lynched.

Ack I fixed my wording in the last sentence above.

[Galzria]

I don't like any of the lynches particularly. I have had some scum reads, but most of them I've been subsequently talked out of.

All my reasons for the first three votes (on Watno, ehunt, and eHalc) are totally findable by searching through my posts.

eHalc, like I said, was a matter of a lot of little scumreads throughout the day.

ehunt was trying to be controlling at the start of the day and then backed off.

Watno was because of one thing that happened, and now I can't remember what it was, but it seemed scumslippy at the time.

Now as for Morgrim7. He's not totally standard Morgrim7 from where I'm sitting. I'm getting a scumread. And he's a good D1 lynch for someone with no good candidates anyway, because the worst case scenario is we get rid of Morgrim. Who is not exactly a huge asset.

If you had no idea who was scum, who would you rather lynch: Morgrim7 or Grujah?

Can't really defend against "lots of little scumreads" without examples.  But OK.

I don't think ehunt was being controlling.  He was opinionated and lecture-y.  Meh.

Watno -- uhh... OK...

Morgrim -- he wasn't standard from the start, in that he sounded more coherent, and I mentioned it early in the game.  Apparently he was like that in MIX too (or some other game).  But he's still Mogrim-ish overall, and thus unreadable IMO.  Seriously, can you elaborate on what scumread you have?  You are being super ambiguous about it.

If I had no idea who was scum, it would depend on the other players.  If neither player looked scummy to me but some people had made cases on both, I would rather lynch Grujah -- more info.  To be clear, this is predicated on me hypothetically being forced to choose between two players without a read on either.  If there was absolutely nothing else to go on, then yeah, Morgrim, simply because he is far less helpful that Grujah could be.

But real games don't occur in a vacuum, so that scenario does not come up.

Grujah has been just about as helpful as Morgrim, which is to say not helpful at all.  He has since given an excuse, and that's fair, but it doesn't make sense why he wouldn't have spoken up earlier that he would have spotty internet and not much time.  That is something I would expect town-Gruj to do.  I can imagine scum-Gruj in the same scenario willing to remain silent while others argue with each other.

You cannot seriously think this is good scumplay from Grujah. If he was scum shying away from conversation he would have come back here so fast when there was much heat on him. And there has been for quite a while now.

He posted at one point on the 19th, then didn't post for two days until the 21st. What made him post? I voted for him. Know how long it took him to respond? 3 posts.

He went MIA after that too. Had just two votes on him in a town where everything was spread around and 2 votes could hardly be seen as a threat. He didn't post for 3 days. What made him post? Yuma voted for him putting him at 3 votes. Know how long it took him to respond? 3 posts.

So yes, actually, he has done exactly what you claim he would do as scum.

[Dsell]

I don't like any of the lynches particularly. I have had some scum reads, but most of them I've been subsequently talked out of.

All my reasons for the first three votes (on Watno, ehunt, and eHalc) are totally findable by searching through my posts.

eHalc, like I said, was a matter of a lot of little scumreads throughout the day.

ehunt was trying to be controlling at the start of the day and then backed off.

Watno was because of one thing that happened, and now I can't remember what it was, but it seemed scumslippy at the time.

Now as for Morgrim7. He's not totally standard Morgrim7 from where I'm sitting. I'm getting a scumread. And he's a good D1 lynch for someone with no good candidates anyway, because the worst case scenario is we get rid of Morgrim. Who is not exactly a huge asset.

If you had no idea who was scum, who would you rather lynch: Morgrim7 or Grujah?

Can't really defend against "lots of little scumreads" without examples.  But OK.

I don't think ehunt was being controlling.  He was opinionated and lecture-y.  Meh.

Watno -- uhh... OK...

Morgrim -- he wasn't standard from the start, in that he sounded more coherent, and I mentioned it early in the game.  Apparently he was like that in MIX too (or some other game).  But he's still Mogrim-ish overall, and thus unreadable IMO.  Seriously, can you elaborate on what scumread you have?  You are being super ambiguous about it.

If I had no idea who was scum, it would depend on the other players.  If neither player looked scummy to me but some people had made cases on both, I would rather lynch Grujah -- more info.  To be clear, this is predicated on me hypothetically being forced to choose between two players without a read on either.  If there was absolutely nothing else to go on, then yeah, Morgrim, simply because he is far less helpful that Grujah could be.

But real games don't occur in a vacuum, so that scenario does not come up.

Grujah has been just about as helpful as Morgrim, which is to say not helpful at all.  He has since given an excuse, and that's fair, but it doesn't make sense why he wouldn't have spoken up earlier that he would have spotty internet and not much time.  That is something I would expect town-Gruj to do.  I can imagine scum-Gruj in the same scenario willing to remain silent while others argue with each other.

You cannot seriously think this is good scumplay from Grujah. If he was scum shying away from conversation he would have come back here so fast when there was much heat on him. And there has been for quite a while now.

He posted at one point on the 19th, then didn't post for two days until the 21st. What made him post? I voted for him. Know how long it took him to respond? 3 posts.

He went MIA after that too. Had just two votes on him in a town where everything was spread around and 2 votes could hardly be seen as a threat. He didn't post for 3 days. What made him post? Yuma voted for him putting him at 3 votes. Know how long it took him to respond? 3 posts.

So yes, actually, he has done exactly what you claim he would do as scum.

K I need to reread.

[eHalcyon]

Vote: Morgrim because we need a reason to talk more before the soft deadline and because I think it's a bit more likely to hit scum. You'll note that this is a change from my 1st, 2nd, and 3rd scummiest list, where I had Grujah listed as 3rd. I just don't agree with that anymore. Grujah is seeming townier, and while he doesn't strike me as really, really obvtown, he does strike me as the completely usual Day 1 lynch...which nearly always winds up hitting a townie.

What is your profile of the usual day 1 lynch?  Grujah doesn't seem like that to me.

He fits the profile because he's done something that nobody likes. In some games, it's a scumslip or mistaken phrasing, in some games it's lying, in this game it's being almost totally silent. It's the kind of thing that scum isn't going to do day one because it's just a mistake they just don't need to make, and they'll monitor their posts more closely to make sure they don't.

He's done something that's really indefensible, which gives everyone on the wagon the excuse to say, "Well he did X, so lynching him seemed like the right choice!" And what do you say to that? It's the kind of thing scum just doesn't (or hasn't) done Day 1 precisely because it's the kind of thing that gets people lynched.

So you're arguing that it's OK to be totally silent?  That it's OK to lie?

If we don't lynch based on things that seem scummy, what do we lynch on?  "Well he did X" is ALWAYS an available excuse.  Should we never lynch then, since any valid reason for lynching also becomes an excuse if the lynchee flips town?

IMO, "he did X" is a good reason for people to vote for someone.  It requires taking a stance.  "Voting for him will give us info on others" is a way to avoid taking a stance, and a way to avoid any fallout if it's a mislynch, which is far better for scum.  It's different from voting "because he did X".

My profile for "usual day 1 lynch" is "player who fudges some wording, which is subsequently exaggerated as a scumslip".  Grujah hasn't done that.

PPE: I didn't realize that he had done that twice -- just saw it the most recent time.  Looks even better to me now.

[ftl]

Vote: Grujah . I didn't realize that about the timing of his posts, that's pretty bad.

[Dsell]

Vote: Morgrim because we need a reason to talk more before the soft deadline and because I think it's a bit more likely to hit scum. You'll note that this is a change from my 1st, 2nd, and 3rd scummiest list, where I had Grujah listed as 3rd. I just don't agree with that anymore. Grujah is seeming townier, and while he doesn't strike me as really, really obvtown, he does strike me as the completely usual Day 1 lynch...which nearly always winds up hitting a townie.

What is your profile of the usual day 1 lynch?  Grujah doesn't seem like that to me.

He fits the profile because he's done something that nobody likes. In some games, it's a scumslip or mistaken phrasing, in some games it's lying, in this game it's being almost totally silent. It's the kind of thing that scum isn't going to do day one because it's just a mistake they just don't need to make, and they'll monitor their posts more closely to make sure they don't.

He's done something that's really indefensible, which gives everyone on the wagon the excuse to say, "Well he did X, so lynching him seemed like the right choice!" And what do you say to that? It's the kind of thing scum just doesn't (or hasn't) done Day 1 precisely because it's the kind of thing that gets people lynched.

So you're arguing that it's OK to be totally silent?  That it's OK to lie?

If we don't lynch based on things that seem scummy, what do we lynch on?  "Well he did X" is ALWAYS an available excuse.  Should we never lynch then, since any valid reason for lynching also becomes an excuse if the lynchee flips town?

IMO, "he did X" is a good reason for people to vote for someone.  It requires taking a stance.  "Voting for him will give us info on others" is a way to avoid taking a stance, and a way to avoid any fallout if it's a mislynch, which is far better for scum.  It's different from voting "because he did X".

My profile for "usual day 1 lynch" is "player who fudges some wording, which is subsequently exaggerated as a scumslip".  Grujah hasn't done that.

PPE: I didn't realize that he had done that twice -- just saw it the most recent time.  Looks even better to me now.

Well, it just comes down to whether we want to punish bad behavior or if we want to lynch the mafia. One is better for the meta, one is better for town in the current game. And actually, I'm not totally sure what the right answer is. Maybe it IS ok to use the Day 1 lynch to punish people for anti-town behavior. All I'm saying is that it hasn't worked in the past, which leads me to believe that he may not be our best choice for lynching scum today. I believe that our best chance for lynching scum requires an eye for much more subtle play. Still rereading though, those timings are indeed interesting to me.

[Galzria]

It actually took Grujah 7 posts to respond to Yuma's vote with an OMGUS vote after having been absent 3 days (the 22nd - 25th). It was 3 posts to respond to me after a 2 day absence however (19th - 21st). I made the mistake of unvoting right away at that time, and he almost immediately disappeared again.

[eHalcyon]

Well, it just comes down to whether we want to punish bad behavior or if we want to lynch the mafia. One is better for the meta, one is better for town in the current game. And actually, I'm not totally sure what the right answer is. Maybe it IS ok to use the Day 1 lynch to punish people for anti-town behavior. All I'm saying is that it hasn't worked in the past, which leads me to believe that he may not be our best choice for lynching scum today. I believe that our best chance for lynching scum requires an eye for much more subtle play. Still rereading though, those timings are indeed interesting to me.

"Subtle" is a fuzzy line though, and I think it walks dangerously close to lynching someone for good town play.  The thing about this -- if it's subtle, you probably won't catch it.  And if you do catch it, was it really all that subtle?

[Dsell]

Well, it just comes down to whether we want to punish bad behavior or if we want to lynch the mafia. One is better for the meta, one is better for town in the current game. And actually, I'm not totally sure what the right answer is. Maybe it IS ok to use the Day 1 lynch to punish people for anti-town behavior. All I'm saying is that it hasn't worked in the past, which leads me to believe that he may not be our best choice for lynching scum today. I believe that our best chance for lynching scum requires an eye for much more subtle play. Still rereading though, those timings are indeed interesting to me.

"Subtle" is a fuzzy line though, and I think it walks dangerously close to lynching someone for good town play.  The thing about this -- if it's subtle, you probably won't catch it.  And if you do catch it, was it really all that subtle?

I mean, yeah. This is basically true. There's no sure way of catching scum, of course. But it's beginning to look to me like our typical way of doing things on day 1 is a sure way to not catch scum. The fact that we almost got ftl in BMV gives me hope that it can be done, though.

And I see what you mean about the fuzzy line. I don't want to lynch townGalz, he's a huge asset for the town. But there are other good players too, and scumGalz is extremely dangerous to the town. Essentially, I'd rather lynch Morgrim because I think he's less likely to be a huge loss to the town (no offense morg!), but I think that he's also a bit less likely to turn up scum. So it's just a matter of what you pursue in a day 1 lynch.

[jotheonah]

OK, Galz has got me convinced too. Vote: Grujah. That's L-2, buddy.

[Dsell]

Alright, after a reread of his posts, I'm warming up to a Grujah lynch. I'm going to leave my vote on Morgrim until tomorrow, though, to foster discussion and make sure that Grujah isn't hammered before we can discuss everything.

[Axxle]

Intent to hammer Grujah.  Claim buddy.

[Axxle]

Intent to hammer Grujah.  Claim buddy.

[eHalcyon]

Essentially, I'd rather lynch Morgrim because I think he's less likely to be a huge loss to the town (no offense morg!), but I think that he's also a bit less likely to turn up scum. So it's just a matter of what you pursue in a day 1 lynch.

Vote: Morgrim because we need a reason to talk more before the soft deadline and because I think it's a bit more likely to hit scum.

?

[Dsell]

Essentially, I'd rather lynch Morgrim because I think he's less likely to be a huge loss to the town (no offense morg!), but I think that he's also a bit less likely to turn up scum. So it's just a matter of what you pursue in a day 1 lynch.

Vote: Morgrim because we need a reason to talk more before the soft deadline and because I think it's a bit more likely to hit scum.

?

First quote: Morgrim is less of a loss to the town than Galz (assuming they're both town). However, I believe that Galz is more likely scum.

Second quote: I think Morgrim is more likely scum than Grujah (not sure I still stand by that after the reread, though).

[eHalcyon]

OK then.

[Grujah]

Intent to hammer Grujah.  Claim buddy.

Not going to claim, PR nor VT. As I said multiple times in prior games, I only support claims claim that are in interest of the town, in one way or other (Mostly with ability to prove something, yourself or an other guy), and forced claims I find the worst. Here, I see no use except creating a "do I believe him or not" situation, which leads to nothing.
If I hypothetically had powers, only thing I could prove is that I had those powers (by applying them, rolecop or whatever) - which I don't see how it says anything about my alignment - especially as I would be forced to use those powers in a towny way/how town orders me to.

So no, no claim for you.

I did bredcrumb my role as always, through a bit sloppy and with an error, so if you really wanna know go on and analyze my early posts.

[Grujah]

Also, I'm not you buddy, guy.

[Axxle]

Can I hammer? Can I hammer? Pleeeeaaaaaassse!

[Eevee]

I don't mind a hammer. I also don't have my vote on Gruj just to be a part of the lynch.

[Axxle]

Yaaaay!
Vote: Grujah

[Grujah]

Town JoaT, btw.

[Eevee]

Town JoaT, btw.

Excellent job not claiming.

[Eevee]

People seem to think it's somehow the wagon's fault if they get lynched as town. NO IT'S NOT! "See I was right and you were wrong" is not what should go on after you get lynched as a townie, NO. I find Grujah's horrible defense very anti-town and this line of thinking has to stop. The worst thing you can do as town day1 is getting yourself lynched, even more so if you are a power role. Boo Grujah boo!

[Morgrim7]

You guys didn't lynch me?