Oh My God You Suck
Say Squidio votes for me, saying that he thinks that I’m a T-1000. In response to this, I vote for Squidio. My vote would be what we call an OMGUS vote. It’s a retaliatory vote with no good reasoning behind it.
LOL - well I’ve heard that before - but NEVER online 
Oh, and don’t feel hesitant to ask questions about anything you don’t understand. There’s definitely a steep learning curve to the game.
OK I’m assuming this means you think I’m smudging you. Perhaps I worded it badly because I have no thoughts about you one way or the other. I actually think you were telling the truth about your previous role though obviously your being truthful about that has no significant bearing on where your allegiances lie now which coincidentally goes the same for everyone else in the game including myself.
I was trying to show why I was suspicious of Sach. I still am to a certain extent but it’s pretty mild which is why I haven’t voted yet.
[[oog and not that it’s relevant but I’m not a he and I have the stretch marks to prove it oog]]
I do hope, we don’t have to go that far to prove our gender
Hey, Total Lost, while Rysto’s explanation of OMGUS is indeed accurate, there’s nothing like seeing one in action. Observe.
NAF says this:
This is a terrible smudge, NAF, and if I may coin a phrase: you are definitely a Better Player Than That. It is Day One, and at the time of my vote for NBC it didn’t even qualify as the middle of Day One.
My justification for voting for NBC may be found in post #260.
I’d like to emphasize again that NBC’s post contained direct internal contradictions, used in support of a smudge against sachertorte. If a direct, internal contradiction in a post used to smudge and not vote for another player doesn’t qualify as “vote-worthy” in the first 24 hours of a Day One in which we must all vote for three people and, we have generally agreed, we ought to do so early…
What does?
Seriously. If the flat-out contradiction in NBC’s post to which I refer at #260 isn’t adequate by your standards to earn a vote, what would be? Bearing in mind that my vote doesn’t auto-lynch anybody.
(Incidentally, NBC followed up by completely mischaracterizing my attack on his reasoning as a defense of sachertorte, something you yourself watched me do in Cecilvania to get sach lynched. This reinforced my comfort with my early vote).
Why? You don’t get to just say that and abandon it. Again, it’s Day One. The third vote in a chain is basically a glorified FoS, but with a bit of bite. Do you really expect everyone to have rock-solid evidence underlying all three of their votes here on Day One? Are you prepared to apply the same standard to your own reasoning when you vote?
Is it your contention that I think things through when I am Town, but not when I am Scum? If not, then the above is a complete non-sequitor.
This (which is re: Almost Human) doesn’t even make sense. Shaky reasoning isn’t a tell, but using shaky reasoning is? But here’s the biggest thing of all:
The above post by Almost Human, in which she smudges sachertorte on what you call shaky reasoning, is the “biggest ping you’ve had.” But your second ping is me, voting for (not smudging) NBC on account of his smudging sachertorte on what I call shaky reasoning. Other than the fact that I backed my argument with a vote and you didn’t, we both did the same thing, but you smudged me for doing it. And NBC’s argument against sach was way more poorly reasoned (again, featuring a shiny contradiction) than Almost Human’s.
Agreed. It’s very difficult to figure out the permutations.
So here’s the thing. I’m just going to vote for you. In a normal game, you’d get a strong FoS with my vote staying on NBC, and a lesser FoS for peeker. Instead, I get to do this:
unvote all
- Vote NBC
- Vote NAF
- Vote peeker
(And that, Total Lost, is how an OMGUS looks in Mafia. Except it’s not always or even often a scum tell. We’re all narcissists, a little bit, and seeing our own names naturally draws our attention. A reciprocal vote is no scummier than any other vote, IMO; it’s the reasoning behind the vote that always matters most.
Oh, that’s right. You also threw in an OMGUS, for something that you’ve said won’t help us -now-, but you’ve agreed might help us -later- (which is far more important).
Well, I am kind of caught up, but feel like I could sure use a reread. Either you people need to stop posting so damn much or else I need to take a leave of absence from work to focus on the really important things in life, like family, community service, and catching scum.
I don’t quite get the Sarah Connor thing, it seems to me like this is a Miller-like role that actually is weaker than vanilla town. After Day 3 her powers are much more likely to hurt town than scum, and even if she is a really skilled player, it’s unlikely that she is going to be able to read people well enough in the first two days to very effectively help Town. So either it just sucks to be her, or else there is some special quirk we don’t know about, and my guess is the latter. Maybe she does have some investigative power and is not just influencing votes blindly? In any case, I don’t think it’s a good idea to lynch her; presumably if she has no quirk and is going to become a liability on Day 3, she will take the loophole the Mod has offered and commit suicide by Mod, thus sparing us a wasted lynch.
I have a few pings but want to do more reviewing before putting myself on the record. More to follow later today or tomorrow.
OK. Let’s say I missed the crux of your argument against NBC. Show it to me again because I am a tad dense toDay and my workload isn’t light enough right now for me to take a second look.
In other words, re-phrase your case.
This is actually a fair point against NBC. And had you brought it up earlier…well I still would have mentioned your post, but I would have mentioned your good point too.
I don’t want to vote yet because not enough has happened and I don’t feel that voting and then revoting and then revoting like I usually do will do anything but muddy the waters. I want to be able to vote once MAYBE twice and feel that those are votes I am going to stick with. If people keep voting and moving their votes come Day 3 or 4 the vote record will be so muddy it will be hard to tell anything (I believe, though I am willing to be shown the error in my judgment.)
Sorry, let me rephrase. You tend to weigh both sides of an argument when you are town. You tend to only present the side that supports your point of view when you are scum. You do it well but you have also gained the credit that people frequently follow your lead without thinking. Cecilvania is a good example of that. I think Apocolypse was too.
Let me go back and see if I can’t explain myself more fully in another post. This is one of those posts that screamed scum to me but that I don’t really know how to back up, but as I said at the top of my post I am trying.
Put it in the same collumn as Pedescribe, Dio/Boozy, and Shadow’s behavior in Conspiracy. It’s just the read I got and clearly I can’t explaine why. I will give it another shot in a little bit.
But here’s the biggest thing of all:
This is another point where I failied to make myself clear. If your case against NBC is the only thing I find suspicious (and if you restate I might not anymore, but go with me for a minute) I won’t be voting for you. At all. All I am doing is laying my cards on the table, which is something everyone in this game should be doing. People did things that made me go hmmm, and so I mentioned them. Phrasing timing and tone have as much to do with what makes me think someone is suspicious as anything else. Maybe it is because I have watched as many games as I have played in, but I trust my gut. The only problem is no one accepts “my gut tells me I am right” (nor should they). So I am trying to explain what is giving me gut reactions…and clearly doing a poor job of it. You may remember me making a similar complaint in Conspiracy 2.
Ok, new post to try and better explain why I didn’t like AH’s post. But I don’t want to get sucked into a vortex of yelling about AH. If I felt strongly enough about anyone that I mentioned in my post I would have voted. I don’t feel that strongly, and there is a lot of Day left and a lot of people who aren’t talking.
Ok, back to AH.
Let me see if I can state this better than I did before.
Her
post strikes me as the type of thing that scum, who are relatively new and don’t have anything real to talk about would point out. It has a hint of plausability as an argument, but at the end of the Day is more noise and suspicion than anything. If phrased correctly it would probably get people looking at sach a little more sideways than they might otherwise have. This is why I called it a classic smudge. There isn’t really any “there” there, but then again she isn’t really presenting a case either, just raising doubts. The only reason for this sort of attack is if you are scum.
Let me break it down so you can see what I am seeing. And let me once again say that I don’t think this is enough for a vote, which is why I didn’t go into this before. But story called me out on being weak and, well, I am a narcisist too.
Starts with a nice obvious statement that everyone can agree with.
Put’s words into sach’s mouth. Scummy words.
Lays a little scum on me too so as to distance herself from her opening statement and seem to be looking at both sides of the issue. But it’s really a non sequiter.
Two questions that imply that the only reason that sach could possibly have the opinion he has is if her were scum. She doesn’t come out and say it though as that would be dangerous. This is safe, she lets the reader come to their own conclusion.
Follows it up with a bit of self deprication to soften the blow of anything that might have hit too hard and made her seems too suspicious. Giving the whole post a falsely “friendly” tone.
DOES THIS MEAN SHE IS SCUM?
Nope. This could just be how she posts, how she thinks, or she could be reacting to a gut response and indulging in some confirmation bias and letting it color the tone of her post. I don’t know her well enough yet to make judgement beyod her having one post that is, in my eyes, very scummy. But with 5 real life days left in the Day I don’t think it is enough to vote on, so I didn’t. There isn’t a whole lot of anything in most peoples posts yet. But I am working on pointing this kind of stuff out and breaking down my thought process. So I am pointing it out and breaking down my thought process.
Still, it was the scummiest thing I had seen posted to that point for the reasons stated in this post.
Regarding the storyteller/Rysto thing that seems to have petered out but still has some lingering chatter…
I think I’m on the same page as storyteller, with the addendum that NAF also fits the bill as a potential “was scum and is still scum because his original role had a quirk.” But let me be clear, I’m not saying that because NAF and Rysto were non-vanilla scum pre-reset that they are necessarily scum right now. Only that the probability that one of them is scum is slightly higher than for the general population. It really isn’t something to lynch them for (and would a sucky reason to do so at this time), but something I plan to keep in mind as the game develops. Essentially, IF there is a scum quirk, then Rysto and NAF have higher likelihood of being scum.
Since I have the same thoughts as storyteller, I obviously don’t think his jumping on Rysto is necessarily scummy. To some extent, in the vacuum of lack of information, lynching Rysto isn’t necessarily a bad idea. Unsporting and sucky for Rysto, but there is a logical reason for doing so. (Same with NAF).
Ok, I’m mainly posting because I don’t want to be one of those lurkers that I keep complaining about. Unfortunately I haven’t seen anything yet that pings me and my mass claim has gotten a universally bad reaction, which just proves that it’s a bad idea and doesn’t show any scumminess.
As for the debates that are going on right now I think that so far there are reasonable excuses for why things were posted they were. I think the weakest is NBC because of the internal inconsistencies. I have a tendency to look had at Cookies and Sach but I think that is because they are doing the most posting and so there is a greater chance for a slip then people that are laying low.
On a side note I’m wondering how to lynch lurkers using the borda count and I am thinking about using my second and third votes for that purpose. Let me know if you have any idea about the effectiveness of the idea.
Why just those two, and not the three other players who were pre reset scum?
The other three as well, but NAF and Rysto slightly moreso as they were not the “vanilla” scum. That’s not to say that vanilla scum can’t have a quirk (though that doesn’t really seem vanilla to me), but that the probability of the Jester or the T-1000 having a quirk is higher than vanilla scum having a quirk.
It’s a matter of magnitude.
I disagree, but it’s totally metagamey. The other roles are already pretty cool, but Vanilla is… well, Vanilla. I just don’t think you can assign more suspicion to them than the other three, if you’re going to use that as an argument. Obviously, YMMV*.
YMMV = Your Mileage May Vary
I’m going to have to bow out–for some reason ever since the board upgraded I’ve had a really hard time getting pages to load. Hopefully this post works. Sorry guys.
Ah but my friend that is not how it works. I removed my vote from Rysto because his explanation is plausible.
I still think Sach is thge scummiest of the lot. But am only going to vote when I have a full slate as stated previously.
I always think of story and Blam as scum. Sorry fellers but you are just too slippery for me.
Od proposes a mass role claim and it gets shot down. Blam does the same thing and nada is said. At least this far in the thread. Something is carp like.
Everyone likes to say what you said, in theory, but in practice it is never followed through on.
I’ve given a reason for everything I have done. Crappy perchance but none the less an attempt based on the unknowns of day one.
Meh, another two cents.
And since this is devolving into the greybeards type of discussion.
My opinion, so don’t have some sort of strokish/heart attack event.
When would you suggest that a townie power role claim to attempt to avoid a lynch?
Pay very close attention to the answer to this question as well as the corresponding vote shifts - if any. Because the lack of a vote shift has as much imformation as an actual switch. Scum want town to do their job for them via a mis lynch.
And the prescence, or lack thereof, of any vote you may or may not have does not preclude or exclude your inclusion in the following question. Just trying to get a better feel for the land.
sach, blam, story, Naf, mhaye, rysto and cookies. How bout it lady and fellers.
Shoot at least I do the honorable thing by directing it personally.
A town power role should claim when there is plenty of time to discuss an alternate lynch candidate, and/or when the loss of their role would be a grave blow to the town. In other words, we wouldn’t want a lesser role to claim, then have a massive vote shift to a more powerful role. That question seems pretty cut and dry, to me (perhaps that’s why I wasn’t on the list of those asked? ;))
At least he’s got me, whom he has consistently labeled as “scum”… 