Mafia: Simpletown

The Game Room
521

[Quote=BlasterMaster]
This is a OMGUS vote through and through.
[/quote]

Only if by “through and through” you mean “not at all”, which I’m fairly certain is not the case. I think it’s scummy that you refuse to specify how you arrived at your “power role written all over her” conclusion. I gave my reasons for that in the same post in which I voted for you. If your read on Koldanar was the only thing I felt was amiss, I would’ve voted for you when you first stated that. Your refusal to elaborate on the power role issue is my chief complaint, hence top billing in my vote post. I would hardly call my reasoning OMGUS. I don’t give a poop if you vote for Koldanar or not. Your actions as a whole have made you suspicious to me, not our “difference of opinion and strategy”.

522

Where is everyone? Not a peep heard from peeker, pedescripe or fluiddruid in two days or more.

I’m worried that this mini-train on Blam and, to a lesser extent, MtS is a case of lynch the loud. There’s been a bit of history along those lines in games on this board that I’ve read, where the town lynches the people talking and scum skate by simply by not posting much. With only a few people posting at the moment and all the early vote leaders in that situation, I’m a little worried.

I would like to point out that after regularly posting and tossing around votes and suspicions, peekercpa hasn’t posted much since the day began. This strikes me as scum being told to tone it down by fellow scum overNight, since that was their first chance to communicate. Am I the only one feeling this at all? Any thoughts?

523

[QUOTE=Nanook of the North Shore]
Where is everyone? Not a peep heard from peeker, pedescripe or fluiddruid in two days or more.
[/QUOTE]

LURKERS! MODKILL THE LURKERS! :stuck_out_tongue:

[QUOTE=Nanook of the North Shore]
I would like to point out that after regularly posting and tossing around votes and suspicions, peekercpa hasn’t posted much since the day began. This strikes me as scum being told to tone it down by fellow scum overNight, since that was their first chance to communicate. Am I the only one feeling this at all? Any thoughts?
[/QUOTE]

Peekercpa has done a 180. It is very odd IMO.

524

[QUOTE=bufftabby]
Only if by “through and through” you mean “not at all”, which I’m fairly certain is not the case. I think it’s scummy that you refuse to specify how you arrived at your “power role written all over her” conclusion.
[/QUOTE]

This is downright disingenuous of you. I didn’t refuse, I said it was pointless and that it’s not worth my time (at least a couple hours of rereading, probably more) to make a point that probably wouldn’t be agreed with anyway.

And AGAIN, you asbolutely ignore my main point, that I want to know if we, as a town, agree that she was killed because they had a read or if she was killed for some other reason. You have not addressed this, and if you continue this baseless attack against me without addressing that, I will take it as a deliberate, and therefore, scummy dodge of the question. That is the ENTIRE reason I mentioned my read in the first place, and instead of actually addressing the issue at hand, you’re busy trying to paint me as scummy for mentioning something that’s not even directly relevant.

And if it WERE scummy for me to “refuse” to answer it, what’s my motivation? Why is it scummy to not provide specific fights to back up my generalization of her behavior. Do you disagree with my generalization? If you do, then we have a valid point to debate, if you don’t, then there’s no point in going back and researching something to prove it, when you already agree. Whether or not YOU or Shadow Facts specifically make the leap from that generalization to newbie power role… that’s either a point where you’d think those are tells or not. You have not addressed this either. If continue your attack against me without address this question either, I will take it as a deliberate, and therefore scummy, dodge of that question.

You keep harping on that, but you fail to acknowledge why it’s relevant, and if so, why it’s scum motivated, whether or not you disagree with my generalizations of her behavior. If, after laying all that out, you want to seriously discuss why my generalizations were false or why, with them true, it can’t possibly lead to the read I got, then that’s a fair discussion.

And as for my “actions as a whole” the only stuff you’ve mentioned is stuff that is, at worst, a difference of opinion. And, just now you say you don’t give a poop if I vote for Koldanar or not, but just a few posts ago, you asserted that my reasoning was manufactured… so which way is it? You can’t have it both ways.

525

[QUOTE=Nanook of the North Shore]
Where is everyone? Not a peep heard from peeker, pedescripe or fluiddruid in two days or more.

I’m worried that this mini-train on Blam and, to a lesser extent, MtS is a case of lynch the loud. There’s been a bit of history along those lines in games on this board that I’ve read, where the town lynches the people talking and scum skate by simply by not posting much. With only a few people posting at the moment and all the early vote leaders in that situation, I’m a little worried.

I would like to point out that after regularly posting and tossing around votes and suspicions, peekercpa hasn’t posted much since the day began. This strikes me as scum being told to tone it down by fellow scum overNight, since that was their first chance to communicate. Am I the only one feeling this at all? Any thoughts?
[/QUOTE]

I also noticed how it’s been very quiet. Not only does it make me worried that someone might get replaced by the mod but I’m also suspicious of those who are absent.

Your thing about peekercpa possibly being told to tone it down seems possible if not likely when you consider that he said this during Day 1:

[QUOTE=peekercpa]
Oh and BTW on this aggressive perception that some have commented on:

If I ever get a chance to play Pebble Beach there is no way in hell that I would play from the “members” tees. I am going to the tips and gripping and ripping.

Same for this game. Grip and Rip.
[/QUOTE]

Where’s the grip and rip?

526

[QUOTE=Nanook of the North Shore]
I’m worried that this mini-train on Blam and, to a lesser extent, MtS is a case of lynch the loud.
[/QUOTE]

Really? I have exactly one vote against me, how is that a train, even a mini-train, in any sense of the word? And how is Mad anything less than a train, when he’s the leading vote getter? This sort of statement seems, to me, to be an example of perfect knowledge.

If you disagree with those voting for either of us, why not counter the arguments and put one forth for the one that you think is the most scummy?

527

[QUOTE=Blaster Master]
Really? I have exactly one vote against me, how is that a train, even a mini-train, in any sense of the word? And how is Mad anything less than a train, when he’s the leading vote getter? This sort of statement seems, to me, to be an example of perfect knowledge.

If you disagree with those voting for either of us, why not counter the arguments and put one forth for the one that you think is the most scummy?
[/QUOTE]

I’m pretty sure she meant that she attributes MtS’s train less to him being loud and more to other behaviour.

528

NETA: And mini-train could mean the suspicion you’ve recently recieved from me, buff and Shadow.

529

[QUOTE=Blaster Master]
Really? I have exactly one vote against me, how is that a train, even a mini-train, in any sense of the word? And how is Mad anything less than a train, when he’s the leading vote getter? This sort of statement seems, to me, to be an example of perfect knowledge.
[/quote]

I didn’t mean that he was less of a train than you, I meant more that he was posting less than you and therefore was less of a case of lynch the loud. And you may only have one vote on you, but up until now most of the discussion today has centered around you. I don’t know if you or Mad are scum, or not scum. I’m just getting a vibe of lynch the loud, which has occurred in past games.

I haven’t decided what I think of the arguments against you other than the sneaking suspicion I outlined above. And I did put forth who I felt was most scummy, voted for him, and had a follow up outlining more reasons for it. What more do you want?

530

[QUOTE=bufftabby.

The bit about Koldanar gloating seems manufactured. It’s pretty standard for players to lament when things go shitty for town; what’s so different about his post? “Nothing” would be my answer. His post doesn’t ping me, no many how times I read it. I think he stated it a bit differently, giving an opportunistic scum the chance to twist his words into some sort of faux scumtell.

[/QUOTE]

Ah, even though his vote is on me I have to beg to differ with you here. While I find that particular bit of his logic faulty, I don’t see how his actions are anything but town oriented right now. Faulty logic does not equal scum at all. Right now, Blaster is on my short short list of no suspicion, and that combined with his experience means I see him as a great asset for us. This isn’t enough to vote for you, but definitely consider this an FOS.

And BlaM, could you re-read my first post again please? Try to understand what motivated that posting; I’ll fully answer any question you have of course tonight.

531

Fair enough point on the usage of mini-train…

As for discussion centering around me, you’re absolutely right, and I find it disconcerting because it’s a massive diversion from what I feel is a useful way to find scum, which is to analyze why Queen may have been killed. I’m being accused of being scummy, not for my actions, but for my opinion on a couple of things, and the fact that people want me to go back and find posts that support my generalization without even stating whether or not they agree or disagree with my generalization.

Seriously, does anyone really dispute that she seemed to be looking for a lot of advice, or that she seemed timid about garnering suspicion?

532

Thinking about this some more, your last post feels more and more scummy to me. I know you don’t take notes, and that you are pretty active in the other game, so it’s possible you missed what I outlined prior. But I also reiterated my suspicion against the person I voted for in the post you quoted. This makes me think you’re scum trying to start up a bandwagon on me. Perhaps trying to deflect suspicion from peeker while also bandwagoning a townie? I’m not willing to switch my vote at this point, since I don’t 100% trust my instincts on this one and don’t want to fall into an OMGUS trap, but it’s something I’m going to consider.

533

[QUOTE=Koldanar]
And BlaM, could you re-read my first post again please? Try to understand what motivated that posting; I’ll fully answer any question you have of course tonight.
[/QUOTE]

Sorry, I’ve been… distracted, I’ll re-read your posts today.

534

[QUOTE=Blaster Master]
Fair enough point on the usage of mini-train…

As for discussion centering around me, you’re absolutely right, and I find it disconcerting because it’s a massive diversion from what I feel is a useful way to find scum, which is to analyze why Queen may have been killed. I’m being accused of being scummy, not for my actions, but for my opinion on a couple of things, and the fact that people want me to go back and find posts that support my generalization without even stating whether or not they agree or disagree with my generalization.

Seriously, does anyone really dispute that she seemed to be looking for a lot of advice, or that she seemed timid about garnering suspicion?
[/QUOTE]

Not at all. In fact, when I was rereading over the thread when preparing my first post and my original vote for peeker, I realized that I had picked something up from her too. If you look at post 219, page 5, I said the follow.

Looking back with 20/20 hindsight, obviously what I picked up on was a power role trying not to get attention. If I could pick up on it in my first game ever, then I don’t doubt for a second that scum could too.

535

[QUOTE=Nanook of the North Shore]
Thinking about this some more, your last post feels more and more scummy to me. I know you don’t take notes, and that you are pretty active in the other game, so it’s possible you missed what I outlined prior. But I also reiterated my suspicion against the person I voted for in the post you quoted. This makes me think you’re scum trying to start up a bandwagon on me. Perhaps trying to deflect suspicion from peeker while also bandwagoning a townie? I’m not willing to switch my vote at this point, since I don’t 100% trust my instincts on this one and don’t want to fall into an OMGUS trap, but it’s something I’m going to consider.
[/QUOTE]

What I found suspicious was that you seemed to be generalizing my single vote as a train, and I found the use of mini-train to describe either the single vote on me, or the several votes on Mad as a mini-train. As I’ve said before, I like to point these things out as I see them, and I’m reasonably satisfied with what Ice Cream Man said, that I’m willing to leave it at that.

And really, this “perhaps” is awfully complicated. What good would it do to deflect suspicion from peeker, if he’s even scum in the first place, if it puts on me, if I’m scum as well? That entire point is circular, because you’re suposing I’d be scum because I’m scum defending other scum. And you also have to realize that this whole distraction was not something I want at all. I was trying to spark discussion by putting out a few questions, and those questions STILL haven’t been addressed by ANYONE, and people are, instead, trying to get me to provide evidence for an opinion they haven’t even expressed with which they actually agree or not. All I’ve gotten was that they didn’t get a read that she may have been a power role, but no confirmation, one way or the other, on whether my generalizations, on which I based the read, make sense to anyone or not.

536

[QUOTE=Nanook of the North Shore]
Not at all. In fact, when I was rereading over the thread when preparing my first post and my original vote for peeker, I realized that I had picked something up from her too. If you look at post 219, page 5, I said the follow.

Looking back with 20/20 hindsight, obviously what I picked up on was a power role trying not to get attention. If I could pick up on it in my first game ever, then I don’t doubt for a second that scum could too.
[/QUOTE]

That’s the point, as I said, I originally couldn’t discern if she was scum or a power role, but she was clearly not Vanilla. What we have to realize is that, while we can’t easily discern the difference between the two, the scum know she’s not fellow scum, so she’s obviously a power role.

537

[QUOTE=Blaster Master]
It’s fishy simply because, as I often say IRL, “It doesn’t matter WHY, only THAT…”. That is, it doesn’t matter why I had a read, I may have picked up on different things than the scum did, and even so, knowing why they picked up her doesn’t help us found out WHO picked up on her. What matters is that, whoever DID pick it up picked it up, and so we can draw useful conclusions toward figuring out how. If we figure out how, we get a peek at how the scum are operating, and a clue on how to find them.
[/QUOTE]

I hope you’ll forgive me, but I found this to be confusing. It sounds like you are saying that knowing how you got a read is pointless, but knowing how scum got a read could be helpful. Did I understand you correctly?

[QUOTE=Blaster Master]
This could be a fairly innocent question, and maybe I’m misreading the motive here, but this just doesn’t seem like a productive line of discussion.
[/QUOTE]

It depends on your point of view, of course. Assume for a moment that I am Town, and further assume that I don’t know what you are. Do my questions make sense to you in that light?

[QUOTE=Blaster Master]
The point that I’m trying to get after is, do you or do you not agree that the scum probably targetted her because they had a read? If they did it because they read her as a power role, then we have some useful information. If they did it for some other reason besides that, we have some useful information. If we can’t tell the difference, then we don’t gain any useful information from her death. All that matters is IF they had a read on her, not how they got it.
[/QUOTE]

I don’t know if they had a read on her or not. I didn’t get such a read on her. You did, and you made it seem fairly self-evident. If I knew what you picked up on, maybe I could evaluate if it was likely that scum picked up on it also (i.e. if it really was as obvious as you made it out to be), and we could go from there.

[QUOTE=Blaster Master]
This is fair enough, and I thought I ellaborated more on it than that. Either way, in the interest of full disclosure, I don’t take notes for this game in any way shape or form. I tried it a couple times and it simply confuses the game. I sort of keep a running idea of where I put people in my head, and I adjust that perception with each post. When I see something that sticks out, I point it out immediately so I don’t have to point it out later. And, if they get over the edge, I’ll be able to reference my earlier reasoning, and maybe do a bit of research then, but I don’t have to actually keep notes.

As such, I had a read on her, and I had an impression of her style, so the only way I could point out specific posts that gave me that impression would be to go back and reread the thread so I can read her posts in context. This is not a small undertaking and, for a point I feel is ultimately not useful in finding scum, doesn’t seem to be a good use of my time.
[/QUOTE]

OK. As I said, you’re not obligated.

[QUOTE=Blaster Master]
I used it in a completely different context, it was clear that I was using it in the context that she may have been scum. I had a strong read on her as not being vanilla townie, so I was suspicious that she may be scum. I never had “suspicion” that she was a power role. This reads to me like post hoc justification of a smudge to me.
[/QUOTE]

Using the word “suspicion” was not a smudge attempt. You used it in the post I quoted, so I followed suit. It’s really that simple. So what if you had suspicion she was a power role - does that automatically mean you’re scummy? No. Suspicion is neutral. Why are you so defensive about it?

538

[QUOTE=Blaster Master]
I’m being accused of being scummy, not for my actions, but for my opinion on a couple of things, and the fact that people want me to go back and find posts that support my generalization without even stating whether or not they agree or disagree with my generalization.
[/QUOTE]

Please note that I have not accused you of being scummy. **Bufftabby’s **subsequent actions have no bearing on the discussion you and I are having, IMO.

539

[QUOTE=Blaster Master]
And really, this “perhaps” is awfully complicated. What good would it do to deflect suspicion from peeker, if he’s even scum in the first place, if it puts on me, if I’m scum as well? That entire point is circular, because you’re suposing I’d be scum because I’m scum defending other scum.
[/QUOTE]

No you’re right, and this is why I didn’t want to swap votes. Motivation right? Thinking it through, it just doesn’t make sense. Lets assume that you are scum and what I said was correct. You succeed in bandwagoning me. I come up town. Whats the most likely next thing that would happen? People would look back and see this whole interaction and string you up, probably followed closely by peeker. That would be a terrible trade for scum. I hereby withdraw my previous suspicion. I’m still not ready to declare you town, but I think peekercpa is a far better candidate for the time being.

540

[QUOTE=ShadowFacts]
I hope you’ll forgive me, but I found this to be confusing. It sounds like you are saying that knowing how you got a read is pointless, but knowing how scum got a read could be helpful. Did I understand you correctly?
[/QUOTE]

This looks like a failure to communicate effectively on my part. I have a tendency to use some words with a slightly different meaning than people are use to, and it gets me in trouble a lot. I guess this explains why my ex never understood when I would say that… :frowning:

Anyway, this is not what I meant to convey at all. What does seem apparent to me, and it’s something I’m still seeking opinions on, is that Queen was killed because they had a power role read on her. They may have gotten this read through the same way I did, maybe they picked up something else, maybe one of them is a numerologist and divined it from the enumerated value of the characters in her user name. The point is, if they got a read on her, we really have no way of knowing how they got it, so supposing on how they got it doesn’t really lead us anywhere, because we’re just supposing.

However, what we can try to reason out is the motivation behind her death. Was she killed because they had a read on her as a power role or for some other reason? If we can determine the motivation behind the kill, we can gain information about the scum. However, there aren’t useful motivations behind reads; the only motivation behind reads, for scum, is to try to figure out who has what roles, so knowing that they’re looking for them isn’t useful. It IS useful to know the motivation behind a kill, because there are varying motivations behind kills. This is specifically why I’m asking if people think she was killed because of a read or for some other reason. I’ve also already explained why I’ve eliminated the other possibilities. I mentioned my read, specifically, because I felt that if I had a read, it seemed reasonable to assume that the scum probably did as well

So… it doesn’t matter WHY they had a read on her, if they did; what matters is THAT they had a read on her, if they did. I hope that clears it up.

Again, a miscommunication on my part. What bugs me is the curiousity about why I had a read on her. I don’t see how my read on her has any relevance at all. I could just as easily be town or scum, and still had a read on her in either case. I could just as easily be either with a read, and she’s still dead either because of a read or for some other reason. So I’m simply failing to see how this delving into my reasoning for a read is leading us, in any way, toward deciding if I’m scum or not, and why Queen is dead.

My point was, I had a couple generalizations about her behavior, and I’d thought I’d ellaborated more than I had, but apparently not. I’ve ellaborated a little more, and Nanook even found a place where he postulated something similar. So, let me try to clarify it:

Do you agree with my generalizations about her behavior, being that she was looking for a lot of advice, and very cautious with her words and garnering suspicion? Even if you don’t agree with it, do you see how I could reach those generalizations? Even if you don’t see how I could reach those generalizations, do you see how I would think she may, more likely than not, be something other than a Vanilla Town role given that I’ve made those generalizations?

I felt like you were deliberately using that word, but in light of this, I can see how one might confuse the context of suspicion whether she’s scum or a power role and suspicion of a power role. I was simply wary because it could be a way to smudge me by implying I may have thought our late Doctor was scum. However, with the clarification that suspicion is not necessarily suspicion of scumminess, and an admission on my part that the context may not have appeared different to you, I’m willing to concede that point.