dc apparently wants to be able to comment on game play but finds that anyone else that does it is leading scum to some type of inside track, near as i can tell.
dc has played a lot.
mhaye does what he does at his own pace. sometimes quick sometimes slow. he is a motherfucker if he is not on your side.
he reminds me of a coffee drinking santo. 'cause i can totally see him mouthing off about “i can go faster and i can go harder but no way can i go deeper”. sorry santo, get better.
Hrm. Speaking of people who are a pain in the ass when they aren’t on your side. Where’s story? He said he’d come back with analysis. Not trying to imply anything, it’s just hard to avoid doing housework when the game gets into lulls.
I have gone back and reviewed the play of Red Skeezix, DarkSide, and Diggit.
I don’t really see much to ping my scumdar coming from Red. There are some things I disagree with him on (I think peeker counterclaiming was the right move), but he overall makes decent arguments, backs up his actions, and has corrected himself when he misunderstood something or made an error. The one thing that did seem weird to me was his reason for finding Freudian suspicious on Day 1. He thought her trusting peeker after he counterclaimed was suspicious. This was about the only thing that did not add to my suspicions of Freudian yesterDay. What non-town player is going to counterclaim in that situation and for what purpose? I realize no one is confirmed until they are dead, but I think trusting peeker in that instance was reasonable.
As for DarkSide, I found her Day 1 play more scummy seeming than her Day 2 play. She throws out an early vote on pede for really slim reasons. Then she doesn’t comment a whole lot about what is going on during the day relative to the number of times she posted. She mostly just defended herself, but not all that well in my opinion, just saying things like (paraphrasing) “a lot of Day 1 votes have had a lot less reason behind them”. Then when pede claims, she changes her vote to a total nonparticipant. I am not really against policy voting, but I think there were several better places to park a vote than on someone who at that point seemed almost certain not to show up. I find her Day 2 play much less suspicious. She is addressing issues coming up in the game more consistently, defended herself against Skeezix more substantively, and just seems more involved in the game. I know she is not a newbie, so I don’t think she really needed scum coaching, but I do wonder why the seeming difference in play between the two Days. I find her more suspicious than some players, but definitely not enough to remove my vote from Freudian.
Diggit pinged me when he suggested we stop talking about certain strategy in post 592. This is what caused me to decide to add him to the list of players I was checking out. I have to say I think the votes against him are well deserved. He seems to want to stifle relevant discussion (as opposed to peeker who just wanted to stifle irrelevant discussion), He is against using Towns one sure source of getting more information (even saying our advantage was in numbers, not information) which is the death of players. I don’t think I have played with Diggit, but peeker says he is very experienced. Yet, even with this experience, he votes peeker Day 1, only giving the reason that he is suspicious without saying why and calling him near incomprehensible. I will agree that peeker is not the clearest player around, but he has been nowhere near incomprehensible this game. I am not changin my vote from Freudian yet. I want to go back and look at her before I do, but there is a good chance I may switch to Diggit.
I’m just not going to apologize for getting lucky with pede. Luck can certainly be a variable in this game, but his post about Tom ping’d me and I went with my hunch. Your choice of paraphrasing evidence of my allegedly scummy lack of substantive participation is also questionable. The post you are trying to remember was quite early (post #192 to be specific) and shortly after my initial vote for pede. Between there and the Dusk post (#454) I do have substantive posts, and I even explain why I’m choosing not to participate in some of the discussions that I felt were a waste of time and full of more snark than substance. Also, I think if you look at some other players you will find that, low and behold, your subjective opinion of their participation level and substance will also vary from Day to Day as much as mine apparently has.
At least we are in relative agreement on Diggit. I’m willing to let his Day 1 stuff with respect to peeker slide as just being wrong on Day 1. But the comment about not giving scum any ideas strikes me as the sort of thing that a Townie might think probably decide not say, and that a scum player might say without thinking.
NETA: That last line should read - “But the comment about not giving scum any ideas strikes me as the sort of thing that a Townie might think but probably decide not say, and that a scum player might say without thinking.”
NETA: :smack: I mean “But the comment about not giving scum any ideas strikes me as the sort of thing that a Townie might think but probably decide not to say, and that a scum player might say without thinking.”
I once read that taking a long break from Poker helps your game. I can’t help but wonder if Mafia is much the same way.
My God Peeker, I understand you 100% here. :eek: I snipped a good bit of this post. However, what I left is enough. You won me over based on this selection alone.
Obviously with the day behind us, and with some of us not playing in day 1, it is all to easy to use hindsight here. That aside, I can only wonder what you are thinking about, stating that Peeker’s counter claim reeks here. As I just stated, I understand Peekers line completely. I get the feeling that you still think it was a gamble for Peeker to do what he did. We got the sk, I don’t think there could have been a better pay-off. We may not understand what or why Peeker does, but when he does, I am fairly certain he knows and accepts the consequence.
Skeez remains stubborn on a fact that, frankly, reminds me of myself. … In a world where I understand Peeker 100%, and can glimpse the view point that other players [not playing in this game] have had against me, it is all too much.
To be honest, before reviewing the thread I considered voting Peeker simply because he was Peeker. Then, once I reviewed the thread, and saw the entire vig claim situation that Peeker chose to engage, I must move off that position.
Skeez has not moved [greatly] from the position given.
We have the sk dead. Peeker put a target on his back in doing so, but we have a payoff. Actions being louder than words, I must question why Skeez is where he is.
Vote Red Skeezik
Peeker’s logic is correct. He saw a liar and moved to act on it as soon as he could. Again, I don’t know if the planets are aligned tonight, or what, but I am hearing Peeker loud and clear.
In the face of that, I wonder what Skeez is up to.
Welcome to the game Meeko. Please bear in mind that excessive posting makes the game no fun for a lot of the players.
I give it a little more credence than I normally would because the case was made by a now confirmed townie. (Peeker may well be wrong, but at least I don’t need to worry about his motives. His confirmation is a boon for town, I spent a disproportionate amount of time worrying about his alignment in the last game).
Which is a theory that doesn’t hold up, as peeker would have been certain to die and we’d then have wondered why he did it.
Thanks for the clarification of your current position on Cookies.
Fair enough.
I agree that FS is playing anti-town, but unfortunately a lot of anti-town play is not scum motivated. Scum have a lot of options for exploiting anti-town play, the most common being using them as a safe place to park a vote.
I think FS is more likely to be town than scum, but her play gives us a problem. Town have to treat anti-town play as suspicious, or scum have free rein to play scummily. The SK lynch was a good result, but the downside is it gave us little information, as both town and scum had reasons to vote him. I’m not opposed to an FS lynch today, but I don’t think it will give us much info either. Even if she does flip scum, “bus FS” seems an obvious scum strategy.
I tend to use anti-town play as a tie-breaker, my threshold for voting someone is lower if I don’t think they are helping town.
Post #527, and the fact I’d used it as supporting point in my case against MentalGuy.
No, it was the possible backpedalling that got my attention.
Be more specific please, why are you having problems with this when I explained my reasons in #590?
He had mentioned that he wouldn’t be posting this week.
On an unrelated matter, I’ve been re-reading the last 50 or so posts…
I found Alka’s questions a novel approach and regret not giving him a better read on me from my response. It was interesting to see him do a 180 on his case against Mental Guy but at least followed it up with an unvote.
I’m unsure about Diggit’s request to stop “scum” strategy talk - it’s certainly suspicious that he said this shortly after his own strategy post. I’d like to see his response the the latest votes on him.
I agree that MHaye’s reasoning for his vote on Diggit is a little weird but I think I can see what he means (about the advantage of losing a few townies in exchange for additional info on votes, behaviors) but I don’t agree that it’s good to accelerate the death rate blindly.
I appreciate Freudian’s admission that she was wrong to FOS people for unvoting after the first Vig claim (#576). While I admit my vote on her is 1 part OMGUS to 2 parts suspicion, I still feel more strongly about her than anyone else at the moment.
Mahaloth’s vote on Meeko is a little strange, especially as the reason he voted rin in the first place was “I do think rin has done very little other than stir the pot and back off to watch”. Surely by getting a sub, Rin’s inaction is partially excused?
I’ve been a bit uncomfortable with my Freudian vote, and various people have put my discomfort into words lately: she seems to be skimming and acting defensive, but still seems more to me like a Townie playing a poor game than a Scum.
For which reason, I’m going to shift my vote (following my earlier “pings”):
@Meeko
A distillation of the argument you are making against me: “I am voting for skeezix because I agree with peeker’s choice to counterclaim and he does not and he won’t change his mind.”
Well it’s nice of you to come join this game, but I don’t see the merits of the argument that because I disagree with peeker’s decision that it means that I am scum.
Also, Meeko, if you snuggle Peeker any harder then you will probably end up pregnant.
Based on this (the whole no information thing), and the Vig shouldn’t do anything strategy…it’s sounding like DC is scum who’s afraid of getting targeted by Vig and who’s afraid of us coming up with strategy.
For that reason, and the reason that I really really don’t want to die,
**
Vote Diggit**