- I’ve been busier these days, so sorry if I don’t make as many posts in a game thread as I usually do. I haven’t posted as much in recent past games either.
- Not much to say. I’m voting for who I think is most suspicious and gave the reasons why.
But it’s a lazy, drop-in drop-out vote. I think you are scum who is just trying to slide by quietly on Day One with a quick vote and duck-out.
This Pleonast thing is just incredibly exhausting. I’ve tried twice to go through the whole thread but there’s so much back and forth about Pleo and from Pleo and surrounding Pleo that it’s hard to tease out anything not related to him.
Disagreements on substance aside, Pleonast is hugely wrong on one key point. Pleonast, your are responsible for the play of others, in a game sense. You may not think it’s good or reasonable that you keep getting lynched (usually mislynched) over issues like this, but it keeps happening and at some point, I would think, you would adjust your strategy accordingly. Your approach has never worked to the advantage of your team. Not ever. Part of good play of a Townie is not getting mislynched. Mislynches are how the Scum win. Townies should want to prevent mislynches, including their own. Obviously, Scum don’t want to be lynched. By continually taking an approach that guarantees your lynch within the first two Days, you hurt your team whatever it turns out to be.
And of course, I disagree entirely on substance.
But how do we handle this? If we ignore it, it gives Pleonast a free pass to do nearly anything. But the whole thing is a null tell.
Honestly, sach it should be clear by now that it’s not going to stop, ever. This is how Pleonast will play forever, and nothing will change it. So while I sympathize with your sentiment here, it’s not going to help.
It looks like Pleonast is going to be our Day One lynch. I’m going to try, one more time, to extract something useful from the rest of the Day. But this is frustrating.
Your vote bothers me, too, honestly. I acknowledge that Wolverine failed to properly understand the implications of the mechanic. I agree that his explanation was oddly worded.
But - it’s the same thing as when people were on me during Hotel of Heroes - I have to ask: why is that Scummy? A player misunderstands a game mechanic and gives a badly worded follow-up explanation - what about that represents an underlying Scum motivation, mindset, or information?
He’ll get his Tomorrow, especially after the lackadasical way he (non-)responded to you and I.
Personally, I’m seeing adequate anti-town-ness in Pleo’s insistence that we let him play his silly counter-productive games to be comfortable with the lynch.
Hrm. You said this, explicitly:
…I think, that in some ways, this passaage is indeed talking about “how Scummy Pleo seems.” That you eventually settled on “not Scummy enough to warrant a vote” doesn’t change the fact that the substance of your post was reflecting on the relative Scumminess of his actions.
In fact, this whole passage raises my eyebrow quite a bit. You don’t just disagree with Pleo’s actions/positions, you go so far as to call (one of) them “leaning scummy.” But then you wave it away via a thought process that I don’t really understand. So if you think Action X is Scummy but the player who commits Action X just says, “I disagree, it’s not Scummy,” that’s sufficient to make the whole thing qualify as “just as a difference of opinion?” The whole thing seems like a having-cake-eating-cake thing: well, Pleo’s wrong about everything, and leaning Scummy about certain things, but I won’t vote for him, because he disagrees with me so that makes “leaning Scummy” not matter anymore?
For the moment, I am going to vote GuiriEnEspana. I want to look a fourth time at the Mahaloth-Wolverine thing and see how it played out, and I will consider switching my vote to Mahaloth dependong on the outcome.
The only other thing that I noticed was what Guiri pointed out (I have #152 in my notes, but Guiri says 151. Close enough for government work). To expand: I bring this up as a continuation on the likelihood of someone bringing up knowledge they shouldn’t have as a scum tell (commonly referred to as Perfect Information Syndrome or PIS). Anyway…
Ha. It is #152
Here Astral asks Zeriel how he knows the statement comes from a Townie, as he should not know Astral’s alignment.
When last we visited this theory, I think it was still working. Obviously, as the theory becomes more known it should become less effective, but I’m especially curious about what happened after…
Zeriel responds:
As far as I can tell, Astral did not respond on this point.
Astral Rejection, are you satisfied with Zeriel’s response?
I am reasonably satisfied with the response, for now. In the absence of anything else to build a case upon, I’m not willing to cast a vote. Zeriel’s explanation seems fine. Fundamentally, she (he?) was saying that what I did was town-style foolishness, not that she (he?) truly believed I was town. I just floated my question out to gauge her (his?) response.
Sach, could you explain your theory again? Is it that “PIS is a Scum Tell” or that “Scum are more likely to try to build a case on PIS” (which I think is one of Drain’s pet theories)? Are you indicating that you’re suspicious of Astral (for bringing up PIS) or Zeriel (for possible PIS)?
Catching up, and I stand corrected.
Still, why point out just guiri?
So no opinion whatsoever? None of the cases seem forced; no one’s overreacting or stretching a point; no opinion or observations on any of it?
But you are responsible for your own.
Even under the assumption that you are Town, I absolutely hate the statement that lynching you is ‘bad play.’ On a non-game level I also find it condescending. Frankly, that attitude makes me want to lynch Pleonast more. He is essentially saying that because we can’t tell WTF is going on in his head that we are bad players. In my opinion the number one job of Town is to not give reasons to get lynched. We typically say that our job is to find scum, but really, avoiding lynch and not confusing the town by jumping up and down waving your arms screaming “Lynch Me!” should be on every town player’s mind. If any one of us acts in a bizarre and unexplainable way, then that’s an easy mislynch for scum.
Or you know, what storyteller said.
I’ve reformulated my decision on whether or not we should lynch Pleonast as a question of whether or not I want to push for another claim from the unclaimed pool. Lynching Pleonast has the nice little side-effect of entering Night with no extant claims.
On the other hand, lynching someone else will lead to at least one more claim, possibly more, which I view as a negative.
Obviously, if Pleonast is Town, we’d prefer to not lynch him, but since we have no clue what Pleonast is, and frankly, the low signal to irrationality ratio makes an assessment of him in the future unlikely… I’m running out of downsides to killing him.
Here’s one: the major downside to killing Pleonast if he is Town is that the lynch will be largely uncontested, which hurts Town.
You’ll notice that I’m not actually voting for Pleonast yet.
Since there is some last minute analyses going on, I’d rather not make for a runaway bandwagon.
Holy Crap! the Day ends today? as in in 5 hours? How did that happen?
That can’t be right:
cut and paste for timestamps:
" #91
02-21-2011, 03:03 PM
Red Skeezix
Member
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Clifton Park, NY
Posts: 928
Oh, it’s time!
Day 1 begins now and ends 7pm ET on Febuary 24.
http://timeanddate.com/counters/cust...&sec=00&p0=179
Let the game begin!"
Uh, 21 + 4 = 25 not 24.
If the Day really is ending in 5 hours, I’ll put my vote on Pleonast now and be done with it. Otherwise, I’d like to see what else can be dug up.
Guiri’s post commenting on Astral
What’s also puzzling is that I feel as if I haven’t really been contributing much. I did not participate in the game mechanics talk. I made no comment on the sleeper claiming issue at all. I’ve only commented on the motivation behind Pleo’s claim, a very little on the self-preservation thing, and made observations on Zeriel, septimus, and Astral.
It’s not my theory. It’s Drain Bead’s. It has worked well in the past, though I think its utility is dated now. The theory is scum are more likely to point to a misstatement that implies knowledge about a player’s alignment that he doesn’t actually know. This kind of suspicion/voting is very attractive to scum as it is ‘solid’ and easily defensible when that player turns up Town.
On Astral-Zeriel, I am suspicious of Astral because she was essentially accusing Zeriel of being scum without coming right out and saying it. I find this suspicious. We used to call this ‘smudging’ but I don’t like the word as smuding others is kind of the point of the game. What I do find interesting is the passive-aggressive way Astra went about it. Along with the fact that it is wrapped in a PIS situation I thought I might as well pursue it and see what happened.
I’m not particularly impressed with Astral’s response.
I pointed out every single player among the subset of players who had not yet voted as of Red’s last vote count. Guiri was not singled out. I did decide that, of that group, Guiri struck me as second-scummiest… what exactly is your objection to that? It’s a gut feeling I got from her posts, coupled with my belief that she was laying low. It’s also pretty much what everybody is doing right now. I read her posts, and they seemed a bit off to me. So I posted my suspicions.
The main problem I have with this response is if you recognized that Zeriel was saying ‘town-style’ instead of ‘town’ why make your passive aggressive accusation at all? Why would it even occur to you to do so?
oh yeah
vote Astral
I’ll not bother commenting on the other parts of your post other than to say I disagree.
But this quoted part has a false dichotomy. There are middle grounds between lynching Pleo and letting Pleo do whatever they want. For example, looking to see if I do what I say. Or, if you want to meta-game, looking to see if my tactics are consistent across games. Or, the old stand-by of looking at my cases and votes. You know, what players typically do to make judgements about other players.
You’re quoting my opinion.
I find it condescending that you keep complaining you “can’t tell WTF is going on in his head” when the mass of my posts this is game is me explaining what I’m thinking. If you think I’m lying, lynch me for that. If you think my reasons are stupid, lynch me for that if you must. But stop saying I’m not telling you when that’s exactly what I’ve been doing.
If you want to play the game trying to avoid being lynched, that’s your prerogative. I’m playing the game to find scum.
This is not passive-aggressive. I asked a direct question of Zeriel. I asked to gauge her response, because it could indeed have been a slip. However, I was satisfied with the response (and here I’m noting its tone, content, and delivery). If she had posted something overly defensive, it might have been worth following up on. For instance, exactly how I’ve called out Guiri for her overly-defensive response. If I had posted and said “that’s just townie Sachertorte making a mistake,” you wouldn’t be curious about how I was so sure?
P.S. This seems to come up every game. I’m still a dude. 
It doesn’t matter if you do what you say. What you say you are going to do is anti-Town.
It doesn’t matter that you’ve played anti-Town before, as Town. I cannot distinguish between the way you play as Town and the way you play as Scum, because the two approaches are equally bad for Town and helpful to Scum.
Well, that’d be great. You going to make any of those at any point?
Just as soon as you demonstrate why these two things are mutually exclusive - or how your approach toDay has done anything to “find Scum” - then I will accept this as a valid comment on the playstyles of others. One can avoid getting lynched while looking for Scum.