Print

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

[sudgy]

Just as a point of reference, I didn't lynch faust for the scumslip.

No... you lynched him for finding a scummy statement by you to be scummy. Not sure which is worse.

I lynched him for scummy statements he said after that.

[sudgy]

Just as a point of reference, I didn't lynch faust for the scumslip.

No... you lynched him for finding a scummy statement by you to be scummy. Not sure which is worse.

I lynched him for scummy statements he said after that.

And, as I've said multiple times before, my statement wasn't scummy.

[Voltaire]

Btw, I still think sudgy is more likely town.

[2.71828.....]

Voltaire, sure I am rocketing up your scum ladder, but is it because I am backing up people that you have targeted?  Well, let me support Robz some more.

First of all, Robz did NOT say "f--- you."  Rather, he listened to his own advice from the civility pledge and did this:

-- Voluntarily stepping away from the game for a few hours is the best way to prevent yourself from saying something you regret.

He then collected himself and wrote a very reasonable post that I hoped would help put us back on track and basically "get over" the yuma quicklynch knee-jerk reaction.  First impressions can be spot-on, but they can also have serious flaws.  While I am not ready to let yuma completely off, I think there are better candidates for the D2 lynch.

You have taken this as a move to manipulate emotions in order to discredit the IC.  You have done all the work to discredit yourself.  I am very uncomfortable with your little spar with yuma so far today.  It has basically been the only thing today so far (see the post count).  When I imagine an IC, I think of a neutral 3rd party who helps the town gather and process information and come to an informed decision on a lynch.  All you have done is propagate your rage-vote.

Now, I have done my best to remain as neutral as possible for as long as possible.  Consider the following:

Catching up.

So this is what I am getting

1.  Claiming doctor is helpful to the town right now

I think the doctor claiming plan may be a good idea. Will a scum team target the doctor over someone else? I don't think so, not even if they were sure that he would die. They're basically giving their opposing team a chance to gain an advantage over them (if scum A targets the doctor, they kill a known townie while scum B has the chance to hit one of them).

2.  Claiming doctor hurts the town later.

Remember, everyone, that if the Doctor claims and becomes IC, he is an IC who is guaranteed to die once one scumteam is dead.  This isn't a Role Madness game where there are other unknown power roles out there who can WIFOM scum at night about their kill.  Yes, I agree that the opposing scumteams create such a WIFOM and will probably mean a Doctor who claims now won't be nightkilled - for now.  But as soon as one scumteam is dead, that WIFOM disappears and nothing can bring it back.  And the Doctor is then dead... at just the time (lategame) when his Doctor protection would be most helpful.

I think 2.7 sums it up nicely.  Whether the doctor claims is the classic short-term gain vs. long-term gain debate.

An IC in this setup is certainly better than a Doctor. But why not have both? Doctor claims, becomes IC, everyone is good to go. I agree with all that, but I think it should happen D2. Town points to 2.7 for having a very open mind about Doctor claiming.

Even coming out as strongly I have against Archetype is still relatively flexible, so long as Archetype gives some satisfactory answers to questions such as

• why he jumped on the faust wagon (never explained). 
• Or why he included "more of him being a newbie" in this post

  Very concerned by 2.7's trying to get me lynched. Not neccerssarily because it's me he's trying to start a wagon on (but that does play a big part) but more of him being a newbie and doing something like this. What he said awhile ago about "Voting alongside the Doctor" certainly rubbed me the wrong way.
  
• Or his seemingly random vote for Robz.

The longer Archetype refuses to explain himself for things such as these, the more convinced I am of his scuminess.  However, if satisfactory answers emerge or another lynch seems better (which I don't really see right now)

[Gveoniz]

On things I think about is the toleration of my inactivity (form robz and 2.7?), I personally of course like to be tolerated and understand and appreciate your understandings. But comparing myself with archetype, who is considered (quite) scummy partially because of inactivity. I do have a concern (although there are reasons like "I have more actual content" and  "I am just a semi-newbie") that one may get some benefits that I cannot perceive yet.

It is possible that I just think a bit too much about this and mistreated your kindnesses, if that is the case, please accept my apology.

[Voltaire]

Voltaire, sure I am rocketing up your scum ladder, but is it because I am backing up people that you have targeted?  Well, let me support Robz some more.

First of all, Robz did NOT say "f--- you."  Rather, he listened to his own advice from the civility pledge and did this:

-- Voluntarily stepping away from the game for a few hours is the best way to prevent yourself from saying something you regret.

He then collected himself and wrote a very reasonable post that I hoped would help put us back on track and basically "get over" the yuma quicklynch knee-jerk reaction.

An IC is not a third party. They are town.

[Voltaire]

Everyone I have stated I suspect has OMGUSed me. They can't vote for me because I'm the IC, but they've OMGUSed me.

What is going on I don't even.

[2.71828.....]

Voltaire, sure I am rocketing up your scum ladder, but is it because I am backing up people that you have targeted?  Well, let me support Robz some more.

First of all, Robz did NOT say "f--- you."  Rather, he listened to his own advice from the civility pledge and did this:

-- Voluntarily stepping away from the game for a few hours is the best way to prevent yourself from saying something you regret.

He then collected himself and wrote a very reasonable post that I hoped would help put us back on track and basically "get over" the yuma quicklynch knee-jerk reaction.

An IC is not a third party. They are town.

Yes, I did not mean to imply that I thought of you as anything less than town, but in regards to narrowing the lynch field, etc., etc. I view you in a 3rd party-esque role in that we can now say "4/9 are scum with one doctor in reserve not being counted."

[yuma]

Just as a point of reference, I didn't lynch faust for the scumslip.

No... you lynched him for finding a scummy statement by you to be scummy. Not sure which is worse.

I lynched him for scummy statements he said after that.

So you lynched him for how he explained his "slip"? That means that you lynched him for his "scumslip". because his explanations for the slip can only be scummy if you assume that his slip was actually a slip.

So.... you lynched him for his scumslip, you just don't want to admit to doing that...

[yuma]

Just as a point of reference, I didn't lynch faust for the scumslip.

No... you lynched him for finding a scummy statement by you to be scummy. Not sure which is worse.

I lynched him for scummy statements he said after that.

And, as I've said multiple times before, my statement wasn't scummy.

yes it was. You dont' get to chose whether or not your statement was scummy by calling it "controversial."

[yuma]

Btw, I still think sudgy is more likely town.

I agree, but I don't like how he is trying to distance himself away from lynching because of a scumslip now that this appears to be your area of focus.

[sudgy]

Just as a point of reference, I didn't lynch faust for the scumslip.

No... you lynched him for finding a scummy statement by you to be scummy. Not sure which is worse.

I lynched him for scummy statements he said after that.

So you lynched him for how he explained his "slip"? That means that you lynched him for his "scumslip". because his explanations for the slip can only be scummy if you assume that his slip was actually a slip.

So.... you lynched him for his scumslip, you just don't want to admit to doing that...

There was stuff between my plan and his scumslip.

[yuma]

There were two posts in between his vote on you and when he supposedly scumslipped with his "do not kill" statement. Please tell me which one of these you find scummy and is thus the reason you voted...

1.

NOT happy with the doc claim. He'll be killed as soon as we get our first correct lynch in. But you guys didn't even bother listening to me. I am again unhappy that I can't be around when the important discussions happen...

He could have been killed anyway. He's Voltaire, a player with a pretty good reputation. One team or the other might have shot him Night 1--now it's likely neither will.

Yeah, it probably turned out alright, but you didn't know that beforehand, did you?

2.

NOT happy with the doc claim. He'll be killed as soon as we get our first correct lynch in.

I don't understand what you are saying here.  Can you explain?

... this has me worried a little. I think an outed doctor will die as soon as one scum team has the upper hand. If it's two scum A/one scum B/town, scum B won't shoot the doctor, they need to hit scum A. Scum A can safely shoot the doctor, and that's good for them, because they don't want a reduced lynch pool at this point (and they don't have much incentive to shoot scum B because that would mean one NK less and thus a longer game).

I'm not so sure anymore that this doctor claim is really a good idea.

[Voltaire]

But it took awhile for someone to point out the scumslip. Voltgloss did it first, then people ignored it for a long time until someone pointed it out again (this is my memory, correct if wrong)

[yuma]

But it took awhile for someone to point out the scumslip. Voltgloss did it first, then people ignored it for a long time until someone pointed it out again (this is my memory, correct if wrong)

No... his very next post is in response to Gveo who points out the statement...

Voltaire - doc. Do not lynch, do not kill.

Why are you talking about "do not kill"?  Informing the other scum team not to kill him?

Err... I'm informing all scum teams not to kill him? They are all scumhunting in a way, so maybe they find reads lists helpful to find opposing scum. If I were scum, why would I want to inform the other scum team of anything? They would be a bigger threat to me than town.

[Voltaire]

Interesting. What am I thinking of. Huh.

[sudgy]

Here is me saying things about him being scummy other than the scumslip:

Can someone please explain the votes on faust?

What Voltgloss said.  His reaction to my explanation also confirmed it a bit as Volt said as well.

So, first, the reason I think it's scummy to find me scummy for a controversial statement (not for some to react to it, as you said) is that controversial statements aren't scummy.  And, my vote on you solidified more from your reaction, which also seemed somewhat scummy.

I just reread faust, and not much sticks out (just doc talk, robz talk, and our "debacle", to use someone else's language ()).  I reread him in NMIV too, and he seemed to be trying to push discussion more there than here, which brings up his scumminess a bit.

Later in that post, I pointed out that it was maybe a scumslip (I was more thinking if he's scum, it might be one):

Also, there's this:

Voltaire - doc. Do not lynch, do not kill.

Why are you talking about "do not kill"?  Informing the other scum team not to kill him?

Err... I'm informing all scum teams not to kill him? They are all scumhunting in a way, so maybe they find reads lists helpful to find opposing scum. If I were scum, why would I want to inform the other scum team of anything? They would be a bigger threat to me than town.

When I first read it, something felt weird about it but I didn't worry about it.  Now that I think about it more, it -could- be him covering a scumslip.  I don't think so, but it almost looks like it.  The way he says things (like his "Err...") seem to be more clumsy, which would make it seem more genuine.

Voltaire, you were thinking right, we didn't really look much more at the "scumslip" until I mentioned it.  I was not expecting more people to join from the "scumslip".

[Robz888]

But it took awhile for someone to point out the scumslip. Voltgloss did it first, then people ignored it for a long time until someone pointed it out again (this is my memory, correct if wrong)

No... his very next post is in response to Gveo who points out the statement...

Voltaire - doc. Do not lynch, do not kill.

Why are you talking about "do not kill"?  Informing the other scum team not to kill him?

Err... I'm informing all scum teams not to kill him? They are all scumhunting in a way, so maybe they find reads lists helpful to find opposing scum. If I were scum, why would I want to inform the other scum team of anything? They would be a bigger threat to me than town.

Yeah, but I missed this exchange when I was re-reading it, and then brought it up again later when it got like re-mentioned.

[Robz888]

Also Robz did you answer this?

Robz, you said you think we'll find more scum off of faust's wagon (that'd be Jimmmmm, e, Gveo, and Eevee). Why?

Really I just meant, I know I'm on-wagon and town, Voltgloss is on-wagon and town, yuma is not actually a scum read for me... so a whole bunch of people there are just not screaming "scum" to me. I would have to look again to see who the other faust voters even are, though.

[yuma]

Ok... all I am saying is that there were two reasons faust was lynched.

1. the scumslip (and everything attached to it... his explanation for it and response to it. But those things are only scummy if you assume that it was in fact a scumslip.

2. his vote on sudgy for saying something scummy.

My issue with this whole thing is that sudgy is saying that he voted him for different reasons, but everything that was talked about, including everything he just posted above addresses one of those two things. Sudgy is saying he voted for sudgy, but not for the bad reasons that we are talking about. So then why did sudgy vote for faust? The only thing I noticed in the above post was "he seemed to be trying to push discussion more there than here, which brings up his scumminess a bit."

[Robz888]

Robz's big post

Robz, first, you can't say

My reaction to this is "Well f--- you."

and then

Alright, I feel better having said all that... and I really hope you don't take it personally, Voltaire. I really wouldn't want to like reverse things and end up having you feel unwelcome. I hope that's not the case.

and expect me to believe you. Town or scum, you intended for me to take that big post personally. I mean, you said f--- you! You really can't get more personal unless you use real-life details about me.

But it's ok! Because I think you made that post to further your win-con. Because here's the thing. You, as scum, try to discredit me. Like in M31, where you said I was looking for kindergarten-level scum play. That had, for those listening, identified like 4/5 of Robz's team or something (note I don't think the play was actually kindergarten, it was very good, I mean, his team won and Robz deserves the MVP he got for it. More importantly, he beat me!). So how does scum!Robz discredit an IC here? All he's really got is emotions. Like those above, which really can't be in the same sentence if they're to be believed.

Also, for everyone saying I used inflammatory language, I did! About the lynch! Yes, absolutely, I understand those of you who say "but innately that also means you're talking about the people voting for the lynch," but I know there is a difference. Like I said, town voted to lynch faust. There's only 4 scum. It took more than 4 scum to lynch faust. We know that town players voted for faust.

All of this would be simpler if yuma hadn't hammered faust. Now it's a confusing mess. You have to understand my frustration with yuma, if he is town. If he is scum, then he's made a high-risk, high-reward action that appears to be paying off for him right now.

Like I said, I'll happily hunt for the rest of the scum with everyone else. I'd prefer we lynch yuma, of course, but let's not waste the day!

I also claim no perfect record. I have participated in bad mislynches. I have been manipulated by scum. I have been targeted by ICs. For anyone who doesn't like my play here, either try to improve it and help town win without telling me to fuck myself, or just wait until a future game when you get to be one. 

I'm really not trying to make it personal, I'm telling you the language you are using to condemn my play ticks me off, and I don't want to be ticked off.

And like, your reads are good man, no doubt, but you still have a mad case of IC-itis. I really hope you're thinking is correct, because no one is going to disagree with you when you insult them for doing so and chalk up their disagreement to "scum trying to discredit me."

[Voltaire]

I'm really not trying to make it personal, I'm telling you the language you are using to condemn my play ticks me off, and I don't want to be ticked off.

And like, your reads are good man, no doubt, but you still have a mad case of IC-itis. I really hope you're thinking is correct, because no one is going to disagree with you when you insult them for doing so and chalk up their disagreement to "scum trying to discredit me."

Well, sorry if I ticked you off, but not sorry for the reads I have. And please tell me where I have insulted anyone.

[sudgy]

Ok... all I am saying is that there were two reasons faust was lynched.

1. the scumslip (and everything attached to it... his explanation for it and response to it. But those things are only scummy if you assume that it was in fact a scumslip.

2. his vote on sudgy for saying something scummy.

My issue with this whole thing is that sudgy is saying that he voted him for different reasons, but everything that was talked about, including everything he just posted above addresses one of those two things. Sudgy is saying he voted for sudgy, but not for the bad reasons that we are talking about. So then why did sudgy vote for faust? The only thing I noticed in the above post was "he seemed to be trying to push discussion more there than here, which brings up his scumminess a bit."

My vote was originally for finding me scummy for the controversial statement, but his reaction to my vote made me think he was scum more.  Those reactions were the biggest thing.

[yuma]

Ok... all I am saying is that there were two reasons faust was lynched.

1. the scumslip (and everything attached to it... his explanation for it and response to it. But those things are only scummy if you assume that it was in fact a scumslip.

2. his vote on sudgy for saying something scummy.

My issue with this whole thing is that sudgy is saying that he voted him for different reasons, but everything that was talked about, including everything he just posted above addresses one of those two things. Sudgy is saying he voted for sudgy, but not for the bad reasons that we are talking about. So then why did sudgy vote for faust? The only thing I noticed in the above post was "he seemed to be trying to push discussion more there than here, which brings up his scumminess a bit."

My vote was originally for finding me scummy for the controversial statement, but his reaction to my vote made me think he was scum more.  Those reactions were the biggest thing.

Ok. But if you think his reactions are scummy then you must think that his voting for you is scummy. You can't have it the other way around.

That is to say, you can't say, "his vote on me was townie" but "his reaction to it was scummy." It doesn't work that way. So you did vote for him for the reasons I said, it is just that it appears you are putting a greater emphasis on the side elements, but just because they are on the side, doesn't mean they aren't part of the overall issue.

[sudgy]

Ok... all I am saying is that there were two reasons faust was lynched.

1. the scumslip (and everything attached to it... his explanation for it and response to it. But those things are only scummy if you assume that it was in fact a scumslip.

2. his vote on sudgy for saying something scummy.

My issue with this whole thing is that sudgy is saying that he voted him for different reasons, but everything that was talked about, including everything he just posted above addresses one of those two things. Sudgy is saying he voted for sudgy, but not for the bad reasons that we are talking about. So then why did sudgy vote for faust? The only thing I noticed in the above post was "he seemed to be trying to push discussion more there than here, which brings up his scumminess a bit."

My vote was originally for finding me scummy for the controversial statement, but his reaction to my vote made me think he was scum more.  Those reactions were the biggest thing.

Ok. But if you think his reactions are scummy then you must think that his voting for you is scummy. You can't have it the other way around.

That is to say, you can't say, "his vote on me was townie" but "his reaction to it was scummy." It doesn't work that way. So you did vote for him for the reasons I said, it is just that it appears you are putting a greater emphasis on the side elements, but just because they are on the side, doesn't mean they aren't part of the overall issue.

If he hadn't done those "side things" as you are calling them, I probably would have unvoted.  My initial reason for voting him was his voting me (when I was trying to get people to vote me), but the reason I kept the vote was what he said afterwards.