Meeko, you aren’t playing at a ‘higher level,’ in fact I’m not even sure what you mean by that.
You’re not even playing the game.
Why in fucks name would you waste your time asking the Mah what his contingency plan is for the board going down. Who cares? We’ll deal with it when it happens.
I’m going to follow suit from above.
(and put my vote where it was pre-meeko)
unvote meeko
vote Booze
Sub out Meeko
Errr, ‘the Mah’ should just be ‘mah’ I started to write ‘the mod’ and changed it mid way though.
Oh, yeah, I’m not sure if Maha is willing to sub out a player for reasons not having to do with inactivity, but I agree:
Sub out Meeko
Actually, I should ask directly:
Mahaloth, are you willing to involuntarily sub someone out for reasons not related to inactivity?
I will take your word for it. I have only played four games prior to this. It is possible that what I am seeing as a pattern just happens to be a coincidence. I have only seen one case of an actual PIS, and that turned out to be a minor town power role. I have seen three other apparent PIS’s and they all turned out to be town and not actually PIS’s.
Just going to read along here, and comment as I go.
Seems like mostly typical first-day blah blah, with a side of “don’t edit!”, until post #157, by Tom Scud, which really kicked things off. Here’s the post, in its entirety:
Boozy and NAF both vote for Tom, on the reasoning that, hey, it’s early, and how does Tom know if there even are Scum power roles, let alone that they are supernatural? OK, so is this reasonable reasoning? I argue that, yes, it is. It may not be definitive, but it’s reasonable. Not every game has had Scum power roles at all (on the other hand, the only game that I know of that Tom himself has played did have Scum power roles); Tom’s casual reference to their existence in this game might suggest that he knows they exist. And frankly, NAF and Boozy are doing what I’d basically expect all of us to do in that spot: apply pressure on potential weak points, and see if they crack.
But then we get two really weird posts, and I dislike both:
First, at #164, Freudian Slit:
(Bleached). Wait, what? “Way too eager to lynch?” Boozy placed the first vote on Tom Scud. The very first one. If placing the first vote on a player in response to a suspicion constitutes “eager to lynch,” what kind of behavior would NOT constitute excessive eagerness to lynch? Not voting ever, at all? Also, this seems inconsistently applied. JoeyP placed a second vote on Alka Seltzer earlier, for editing a quote tag, but Freudian didn’t seem so quick to characterize him as “eager to lynch.”
Speaking of JoeyP, at #166 he also votes Boozahol, thusly
(Bleached). I can’t really parse #2 that well – I think it’s just JoeyP thinking out loud. But then there’s number 1. Boozahol justified his vote literally two posts after making it. He clearly wasn’t doing what Joey suggests he was doing here.
Freudian follows up shortly thereafter, with:
This is a pretty big mischaracterization of the situation. Again, I don’t think that Tom’s post was necessarily indicative of PIS, but it certainly might have been. Scum do slip. In Cecilvania, I made a post on Day 1 in which I referenced the exact number of mislynches the Town had, which of course required me to know the number of Scum in the game (Which I did; I was the Alpha Wolf). I bullshitted it off as a typo, but the Town (wisely) pressured me and forced me into a fake claim. Lynching Tom on the basis of nothing but a possible slip is bad play, but giving him a few votes and applying a bit of pressure is not the same as lynching. Freudian seems to be ignoring this distinction, and broadening and dismissing the arguments rather out-of-hand here. I am not sure exactly how she does want us to play, if the answer is not “look for what is suspicious and vote accordingly.”
At #183, CatinaSuit (hi, Cat! Long time no play!) votes Tom, making him the third vote, for basically the same reasons. JoeyP, playing Sir Galahad for Tom Scud once again, says:
Some responses:
No one so far has voted for Tom Scud for “suggesting ideas.” They’re voting for him because he made a bald statement of fact (referencing “the scum power roles”) that he couldn’t have made with certainty unless he were scum.
The last sentence is disingenuous, and it feels like JoeyP and Freudian are pushing the same line right now: “oh, woe and misery, how can anyone possibly contribute if our contributions are actually going to be read and analyzed and have consequences?” That’s how the game works, folks. There are Scum out there. There are lots of ways to find them. Looking for slips and pressuring them to see if there’s other evidence floating around, that’s one of them.
Just overall, it seems to me like JoeyP is mounting a pretty enthusiastic defense of Tom Scud here. JoeyP seems pretty confident that the “slip” isn’t a slip, you know? Moving on, but more on this to come.
Meeko votes for Boozahol. Tom Scud offers a plausible explanation, and votes for NAF (and I am interested in the fact that both of Tom’s erstwhile defenders, Freudian and JoeyP, have focused their counterattacks mostly on Boozahol and not on NAF or CiaS). Why not? NAF’s vote was the second, the one that actually made Tom’s wagon more than a Day One one-off; CiaS’ vote actually put Tom in some modest danger. Why are Joey and Freudian going after Boozy so exclusively so far?
Splitting this into multiple posts for readability… part 2 coming up.
Request sub out Meeko, I don’t think he is really participating.
Unfortunately I’m going away for a long weekend this evening, so will have limited access. I’ll try my best to check in tomorrow.
Booze didn’t justify his vote two posts later. Two posts later Ed came in and defended Booze. Two totally different things.
Nope, two posts (and 6 minutes) after his vote for Tom, Boozahol said this:
It was several posts later that special ed attacked your vote for Boozahol (is what you mean by defence?).
I did note that pedescibe defended Boozahol with this:
Which I found odd, why assume or invent reasons for players actions? Better to wait for a player to explain themself, and then decide if their explanation is reasonable.
I sure hope Story can get the second part of his post out in less than 24 hours.
OK, then beginneth the saga of Meeko.
At #217, special ed pokes the bear a little, in response to Meeko’s post regarding Boozy which is not really all that incoherent. Meeko was basically just saying that Boozy didn’t give reasons for voting, which makes him like Meeko, and Meeko’s opinion is that a game can handle only one Meeko. Oh, god, I speak Meeko.
Anyway, pedescribe pokes the bear some more at #219.
Boozy offers a defense at #223 (I think he refers to himself as a “pretty girl” in the process, so that’s cool). Reasonable response to what I think is an overblown “case” against him carried by two suspicious people (Joey and Freudian) and Meeko. At #226, Freudian reiterates her distaste for Boozy’s vote, but again not referencing or even acknowledging the concurring votes from NAF or CiaS.
NAF votes Freudian at #228/#229, citing… er… most of what I’ve said in this and the previous post, but more succinctly. He asks: “why do you want people to be afraid of voting?” I guess that’s the question, right? I mean, Freudian’s vote for Boozy is as much a “vote to lynch,” as much reflective of an “eagerness to lynch,” as Boozy’s for Tom. You vote for what you find suspicious, and you see where it leads.
At #233, Freudian again:
And I respond: AUUUUUUGGHGGGHHH. Boozahol’s vote is, in and of itself, also trying to put out an idea: that Tom might be Scum. Since Boozy’s vote can’t hang Tom on its own, and gets color-coded so it’s easily seen, what the hell? Why are Tom’s ideas sacrosanct and need to be protected, but when Boozy offers an idea he gets your vote, but hey, we shouldn’t vote for people for putting out ideas, and BLEEEEARRGGGGHHHAUUUUGGGGHHH. vote Freudian Slit
Moving on.
You are again mischaracterizing. If I say, right now: “The Scum might have a one-shot extra kill, because X, Y, and Z,” no one will “jump on me.” If I say, “I wonder when the Scum will use their one-shot extra kill,” everyone will. Do you see the difference?
-> Now, to something else. More Meeko. special ed continues to poke at Meeko, and Nanook sort of joins the fray at #239.
AllWaker votes Freudian at #248.
At #249, Meeko offers a relatively simple and straightforward answer to special ed’s questions, then shortly thereafter unvotes Boozy. This Meeko thing is over now, right? Especially when, at #271, he makes the following perfectly reasonable post:
(Bleached) Hey, I HATE lynch-the-lurker as a strategy, but it’s not a far out strategy, right? Been used by many players, Town and Scum, over the years we’ve all been playing together.
But folks continue to prod Meeko: hey, we can’t understand you. How can we help you understand us? My question: why is this still going on? Meeko calmed, made multiple understandable posts and an understandable vote; why are we still pretending like we don’t understand him?
Meanwhile, two votes for Oredigger (on grounds that he has not taken a firm stand, which is a case I would seriously consider if Freudian and subsequently, JoeyP were not so high on my list due to their behavior surrounding the Tom Scud/Boozy thing).
Meeko’s #290 is, again, completely comprehensible to me. Am I going nuts? He doesn’t mean to say in the strictest sense that there are no Scum; he is speaking figuratively, I think. Like, “it’s Day One, we know nothing, for all we know there are no Scum, so it’s hard to place a well-reasoned vote.” Only he says it in Meeko. But it’s not that hard to understand, for Pete’s sake.
Which is why I’m weirded out by special ed voting to lynch Meeko, at #291. Meeko, of course, counter votes, and we’re off to the races. Nanook votes Meeko, again for being a distraction. Meeko points out that he is an easy bandwagon – and he is – and that Scum like bandwagons – which they do – and JoeyP replies with “that’s just stupid,” at #313. Joey P then votes for Meeko. Am I fucking losing my mind here?
JoeyP presses Meeko to explain his vote for Ed, promising to move his vote back to Boozy if Meeko does. So Meeko DOES, at #323. He believes that Ed is Scum, trying to provoke Meeko because Ed knows that if he can provoke Meeko, Meeko will serve as an easy Day One bandwagon.
Zeriel calls for a modkill of Meeko, which I will address presently in a separate post.
True to his word, JoeyP unvotes Meeko, and calls for him to be subbed out.
Tom Scud does the same.
And we’re caught up. Summary to come.
CAS’s vote got me to go back and look over NAF
NAF’s first in game post is in #133 he agrees that editing is bad but disagrees about how the vig should handle his role. In #142 he clarifies his position on vig actions and admits that people can disagree with him. #163 is where things get interesting with his vote for Tom his entire reasoning was that he agreed with Boozy. #211 leads NAF to agree with Tom’s vote for him for a me too vote but he doesn’t elaborate on any reasons. #228 NAF says that no one is looking scummier then Tom but he is voting to gain information and then votes for FS saying that she knows Boozy isn’t being anti-town but is pretending other wise. NAF uses his next two posts to comment on coming back and rereading the thread in the future. He then votes for me but he has all kinds of wonderful conditions saying the FS has still been scummy and he will gladly jump onto her bandwagon if it gains speed. The reason for voting for me is that I’m finding it hard to move my vote around on Day 1.
NAF seems very sure that each person he votes for is horribly scum but when not enough people join him in the accusations he jumps off the wagon but states that he will get back on it if other people pick up the case. I don’t mind the vote early vote often mentality, I think it adds noise but it’s not horrible, but I don’t like how he is not sticking with any of his cases beyond a single post but has stated his willingness to rejoin every case if other people want to. He is setting up a great case to vote for everyone while being able to deny responsibility when they come up town.
With all of that in mind I’m going to [color=blue]Vote NAF
let me try that again
Vote NAF
And I’m an idiot, sorry for the multiple posts
Unvote
Vote NAF
First and foremost, regarding Meeko:
[out of game]
WHAT THE HELL? Really? We’re asking for modkills now, of players who haven’t broken the rules and are participating? What kind of crap is that? The day we start booting people from these games because we don’t like their playstyle is the day I, at least, stop playing in these games. Fuck that. If you all decide you don’t like long posts, will I be voted off the island, too?
That’s a crappy and a cliquey way to play - and it’s anti-Town, too.
[color=purple]I am strongly against modkilled or subbing any player who has followed the rules and is participating.
[/quote]
[/out of game]
In game, I am suspcious of Freudian Slit and JoeyP, obviously. I think there’s Scum somewhere in the Boozy/NAF/Tom Scud/CiaS quartet, too, but figuring out where is going to require a bit more information.
An important point you’re missing here is that when asked to justify his lurker vote, Meeko said this:
I consider that to be a very anti-town reason for a vote.
Then vote to lynch him. Why not vote to lynch him if you think that?
Yeah, that…or, I put the possibility I thought would be more likely up front, because I watched part of town’s loss in LOST (gleefully at the time, mind you) be due to winding up Meeko and watching what randomness he unleashed on town and I honestly think we’d be better off losing the mislynch.
My FIRST reaction was to ask for whichever the mod thought appropriate.
But whatever you need to do to justify your OMGUS is fine with me.
I’m actually vaguely suspicious of Special Ed for that exact reason–he’s winding **Meeko **up.
Because anti-town play isn’t the same as scummy play, I don’t have a real read on him. We could lynch him, but I dislike policy lynches. They don’t yield much information, as they give scum a free bandwagon.
To say that I am not in a good mood right now would be an understatement.
I am aware that people do not want me to play mafia, and they are making their point known, but actually NOT playing Mafia.
**
IF I WERE TO SUB OUT, YOU WOULD ALL UNVOTE ME / MY REPLACEMENT. WHY NOT JUST UNVOTE ME NOW, AND MOVE ON?
TALK ABOUT BEING FICKLE. ANTI-TOWN IF I EVER SAW IT.
**