No to mention that many of us have been asking BlaM about strategy, so naturally he’s going to discuss it even more than if we didn’t ask.
Ok I guess I wasn’t clear. I understand the logic that you are using and it makes sense to me but I also see that you are essentially using one data point to make a pattern. In reality I think you have 3, his voting for anyrose, his unvote for anyrose and subsequent vote for RyJae. I agree with the results that you’re getting but I think caution should be used relying on them based on the information that yielded those results. You know I think I just found where we are miscommunicating. You are able to looking into an action and make correlations based on seeing previous similar actions. I see, for example, his backpedaling more as trying to get away from an unfavorable opinion that may end up as a lynching and since I have no other actions of his to modify my thinking about how he behaves I think vaguely scummy. I’m guessing here but you’ve seen scum do something similar in the past and are able to correlate this behavior as scum like. So I see a WAG and you see carefully thought-out but I don’t disagree with the conclusion so I haven’t argued the result just the process.
Uh…that should be “not to mention” not “no to mention”.
Could somebody name a game for me where Blaster Master was scum? I haven’t read most of them and would like to take a look. I mean, the fact is, long, helpful strategy posts do inspire trust. I’m inclined, by instinct, to say that it’s a null tell, just because the kind of person who runs up distribution graphs for how people vote in a message board game is probably gonna do that regardless of his role. 
I’m not going to vote for Thing Fish at this point because I want to have more discussion on this and I don’t want to end up with a bandwagon, but I do think he’s being awfully squirrelly, particularly for the first day. I can’t think of many reasons to start out posting a lot AND be weird and evasive.
I don’t think “don’t defend yourself” is necessarily scummy - you could take it as somebody muddying the waters but you could also take it as good advice, that especially early in the game you won’t be ABLE to defend yourself, especially by getting emotional about it. I mean, yeah, you know you’re town, but you can’t prove it, throwing suspicion on your accusers just looks like OMGUS until people have a voting record and have said enough to have something to go on, etc., so you should just do your job as a townie and tell people who you think is scum and why. On the other hand, convincing newbie townies not to defend themselves in the other sense is certainly not pro-Town.
The current off-board game had him as such (which should finish up today) but I don’t know how indicative that particular game would be of his scummitude; in that one he had to clean up after a rather interesting sub situation.
Well, FTR… for SDMB games I was the Vigilante in the M2 game (my first game), Scum in M3, I Modded the Sekham game, I was a Witch (pro-town power role) in the Conspiracy game, a Beat Cop turned Scum in the Recruitment game, and I was Town in the Simpletown game.
For off-board games, I was Town in the Pirates game, Scum in the Asylum game, Town in the Firefly game, and Scum in the Batman game.
That’s all the games I can remember playing off the top of my head.
Fair enough, but votes are cheap, so it doens’t hurt anything to put a vote out there either. And I do keep seeing this sort of sentiment (I think you’re the third now). What do you all want to discuss? Do you want to discuss more about Thing Fish, about other people, about strategy… just saying you want more discussion is pretty vague.
I don’t think it’s necessarily scum either, but I do think there’s greater scum motivation for that sort of implication than town motivation. Unless we catch someone read handed, get a Detective’s reading, or something else similar, we’ll seldom be able to have 100% certainty about someone’s scumminess. We can’t set an outrageously high bar for what is and isn’t scummy on Day One, because there’s not a lot to go on, and we gain a lot of information relative to the potential loss. On future Days, the bar will naturally be higher, because the gain is less. This should be expected.
Well, to be honest, it does sort of depend on how you look at it. In that game, none of us were really in a normal situation, because it was a unique set-up. Of course, I had a raw deal (damn you zuma, RoOsh, and Diomedes!), but I DID employ a lot of scum tactics that may still be worth reading for anyone willing to read through that game, which would probably be on the painful side.
For that matter, my scumminess in the Recruitment game was much the same flavor, as I was drawn into a rough situation and a LOT of bad luck. But I did use a few standard scum tactics like railroading, and a whole lot of muddying of the water.
The one place I really failed in those two games is that I couldn’t get myself lynched as easily as I thought I could. Oh well…
But really, the one thing is, I DO try to change my playstyle somewhat from game to game. The last thing I want is for people to go “oh he’s playing like he did in such and such” because then it’s easy to discern my role. This is bad no matter what my role is as, even if I’m vanilla townie and that’s how it looks like I’m playing, it gives scum good reason not to target me. So, there you have it for whatever it’s worth.
I forgot - I’ve been playing elsewhere where reaching the number required to lynch means the day is over and that person is lynched - there’s no deadline. Votes aren’t cheap in that situation.
vote Thing Fish
I was unaware you were use to playing under those rules. I have played with those rules before, and I prefer this method instead. Either way, sorry for the confusion, but with this ruleset, votes are cheap.
This was what I was thinking as well. The only game that I’ve read played this way, the one with the corporate types on a mountain top, so I just assumed that was normal rules. Thanks for pointing out my error.
vote Thing Fish
I would hate to lose the time we have for discussion but since that is fixed I might as well get on the record with my suspicions. Any one else wondering if Thing will follow his own advice and accuse someone new to escape the noose?
No contributions as of yet today. The unholy trinity of month end finance calls, budget and audit reared their collective heads all at once. I normally can get on the internet at work for short periods during the day but not today. Does anyone even perform work while at work these days or do I just have an extremely old time (pre internet) boss? Back to catch up.
Vote Count
**peekercpa - 1 ** (fluiddruid)
**Koldanar - 1 ** (bufftabby)
**anyrose - 1 ** (twickster)
**RyJae - 1 ** (Thing Fish)
**fluiddruid - 1 ** (peekercpa)
**Oredigger77 - 2 ** (cckerberos, Hoopy Frood)
**Thing Fish - 6 ** (anyrose, Blaster Master, RyJae, The Unkempt One, Zsofia, Oredigger77)
Not Voting
Koldanar
No. [COLOR=DarkGreen]No one is allowed to discuss the game outside the thread during the day. The Mafia can only discuss privately during the night phase[/COLOR]
I do work at work (software engineer). I usually breeze by only a couple times a day at work to give my mind a rest from whatever it is I’m working on. It’s nice to give the brain a change-up on occasion.
Anyway the post counts as they stand right now:
Blaster Master–30
peekercpa–27
anyrose–23
Hoopy Frood–18
bufftabby–15
The Unkempt One–13
Zsofia–12
Thing Fish–10
cckerberos–8
Koldanar–8
Oredigger77–8
twickster–5
RyJae–5
fluiddruid–3
What concerns me right now is that twickster has disappeared. She also voted anyrose on a pseudo-random reason (she didn’t use random.org, but she used the shelbyville thing as the reason, so it’s not truly random) way back on Sunday, and she hasn’t changed that vote out. The last time she posted was yesterday morning. And Oredigger77 has begun to actively contribute to the discussion.
So…
**unvote Oredigger77
vote twickster**
twickster has requested replacement. I am looking for a sub now. At the moment, the deadline is still on Thursday at 5PM MDST… 48 hours…
Now, I’m not saying it’s necessarily scummy not to have voted yet at this point, but my vote will definitely be staying on Koldanar while he has no vote on the table.
I’ll be in class until this evening so unfortunately won’t be able to do any posting until then (it kind of sucks to be in such a different time zone from the rest of you.)
When I get back I plan to review what’s been said so far and change my random vote from Oredigger77 to someone more worthy.
And why is it such an issue to you that I don’t have a vote out yet? EVERY game I’ve played I tend to vote late on day one; I do want time for things to develop. At this time tomorrow, if nothing else has come up I am definitely putting my vote on the Fish , provided my confidence in his motivations doesn’t change. 75% is damn sure enough of a percent to vote on him.
Sure, right after I put my vote in.
I’m still keeping my vote where it is until the replacement chimes in a bit.
I just wanted to point out this post and the ones previous to it, if Thing Fish is indeed scum, this seems kind of like the thing I’d do if I were trying to shift suspicion away from my fellow scum.
Then why haven’t you placed a vote yet? Are you going to wait until you’re 100% sure? :dubious: My issue doesn’t really lie with your lack of a vote, but that certainly doesn’t alleviate any of my suspicions either. Like I said before, your question didn’t ring true to me; it seemed like a scummy technique to appear decidedly un-scummy.