|
Constant vote jumping?
Voting 3 players in a 15 hour span is called constant vote jumping. Right.
I am reasonably sure because Zebezt has scum motivation for posting how he does. I voted laguerta cause lying is bad, but upon reading his filter, I feel that he is newbie town/null.
|
On January 14 2013 12:41 Acid~ wrote:Show nested quote +On January 14 2013 11:27 Mocsta wrote:On January 14 2013 08:16 Acid~ wrote:
(1)
To answer the question about Policy-lynching lurkers: As far as I'm concerned you are all guilty until proven innocent and anything you don't say will be used against you, so you better start talking.
(2)
@Mocsta:
You say you want to foster a positive town atmosphere, but you instantly lash out at anyone showing signs of aggression, which is an essential town trait.
(3)
It is you who hindered discussion on day 1, by drowning inquisitive players in walls of text containing little to no substance.
(4)
A few posts after agreeing with zare/omni about the need to build strong cases and making attacks based on rationality, you goad Oats into an OMGUS vote, with no other claim than "other people agree with me that you're fostering a bad town atmosphere".
(5)
What I want from you: quotes from Oatsmaster showing how he intimidated people into not posting, since this is your claim. OR admit that you were biased against Oats and a victim of confirmation bias
Acid, I welcome your contributions. I know you posted at the 11th hour, but the thoughts and motivations read genuine and original. Town should welcome these type of posts in particular from low post count participants. I am going to address the items you raised. (1) Agree with this completely. Everyone needs to prove with their actions they are innocent. Actions speak louder than words. At the same time, this sentiment has already been shared (myself included) so whilst I value the stance, we will see if your actions reflect your stance overtime. (2) Instantly lash out? My posts to Oatsmaster and Sn0_Man were written very respectfully. I think you are jumping to an unfounded conclusion. If I may remind you: + Show Spoiler [Calling out overt aggression] +On January 12 2013 16:38 Mocsta wrote:Show nested quote +On January 12 2013 14:22 Sn0_Man wrote:
I'm not denying, discussion is good/important and if nobody starts it scum autowin. However, if a scum can get control of town fast, they almost instawin. As a gambit, it seems fair since people like you are jumping in to defend him pretty fast.
... @Sn0_ManI appreciate the sense of energy you are giving back to this thread, and I certainly do not want to deter that; town needs this energy. BUT.. you are almost sounding "paranoid" - I know this, because after my last game, many assumed I was "paranoid". I think we both want the same thing, a town environment where people can voice their opinion and join together for the scum hunt. When you say "it seems fair since people like you are jumping in to defend him pretty fast"; that alienates participants from wanting to contribute. You are actually creating an environment scum can thrive in with that attitude - even though I doubt that is your intention. I ask that you please think about the above. On January 13 2013 07:18 Mocsta wrote:
EBWOP
On January 13 2013 07:14 Mocsta wrote:
Wow. Thats it over the night shift.
Oats u sound like sno_man.
perhaps the aggresion u 2 have shown is why there is a lack of discussion.
I think u should read what i posted to him.
My questions are ice breakers and i have not a genuine comment from
*YOU*
to stimulate town conversation. In fact. You are deterring conversation.
@oatsmaster
Why should i NOT treat is the outcome of your agressive posts [stopping fluid and positive town conversation] as scummy motivations
Personally, I do not know how that is lashing out? I think its being respectful. Yeah, yeah, yeah... I don't care how respectfully it's presented, the fact is that you only pointed fingers at people after they started pointing fingers at you, you did this with both Sn0_Man and Oats, now you're doing it with me. Show nested quote +If you want a reminder of the posts I responded to here you go + Show Spoiler [Aggressive Posts] +On January 12 2013 14:04 Sn0_Man wrote:
Mocsta
2) How do you think scum would try to get influence with us?
From what I have seen in my 2 games, it depends on the person. Some have lurked hardcore, some have given minimal contributions.
If we have a solid town atmosphere, and people can share opinions freely, I am sure we can reduce the influence!
2) With posts just like your one aboveOn January 13 2013 00:52 Oatsmaster wrote:
Mocsta stop being useless and repeating what other people have already said.
On January 13 2013 00:55 Oatsmaster wrote:Show nested quote +On January 12 2013 13:09 Mocsta wrote:
Hi All.
From other games, it seems the best 3 questions to ask are:
1) Stance on Lurkers: i.e. Do you policy lynch?
2) How do you think scum would try to get influence with us?
3) [fluff] DONT BUY A POOL. I wasted all my time today with pools and hate it !
I won't be around for the next 6 to 8 hrs (DAMN POOL!)
Question 1. How does a yes/no question start discussion? Thats right, it doesnt. Question 2. How is that relevant in a game of Newbies where everyone is just trying to provide an answer that may not be accurate. Question 3. Please dont mention pool. Again. (3) How. My posts have plenty of substance. I have followed up my reads and tried to get others to contribute regularly. Where is your evidence to back up your assertion; this looks to me like flinging shit at the most active player Day 1.And how am I drowning out discussion. I am Active, I am Open, and my play is Transparent. My game is completely ab-lib, and Im doing this all whilst figuring this game out. Just because my filter is large does not prevent others from posters. I have been actively asking others to contribute, whilst giving my own input. This looks to me like trying to justify your own woeful activity this game. Remember, you are guilty till proven innocent. Well, your posts do have some substance, but not nearly enough for their size and number. We don't need to be privy to your every thought. A lot of times, you're repeating yourself or paraphrasing someone else, or just talking into the wind - saying we need to do this and that, should do this, but not doing it yourself. Show nested quote +
(4)
When did I GOAD Oatsmaster into OMGUS. Provide evidence to back this up. I call him out of line, and then his beviour did not change. I cast my suspicion on him, and gave benefit of the doubt.. it would be poor townie play to instantly vote, we need to question our reads. .. Since when did casting suspicion count as "goading a reaction" .. its all part of scumhunting and Oatsmaster is accountable for his own actions.
I agree we are all accountable for our own actions and Oastmaster, while hot-headed, did not do anything really scummy. His only "crime" was to call you out on a few points that I would have made myself, had I been there. The post where you give him the FoS is cleverly written, you know you are dealing with an emotional player and the way you worded your suspicion seems to me as designed to provoke a reaction. Show nested quote +(5) What is even the intention of this question. The fact is.. if people were intimidated they would not post. Oatsmaster himself identifies he is partially responsible the lack of a solid scum read (at the time).. On January 13 2013 20:59 Oatsmaster wrote:
The problem I have with Mocsta isnt that he is 'leading' town, Its that there are less than 12 hours left ( I like to repeat this) And no one has a solid scum read. And I dont think its my fault totally.
. I think if you interpret context at the time, the lack of scum read had to do with the minmal discussion (and you were a large culprit of the lack of contributions)
Hence; When I re-read your post I finish my impressions are as follows: You have come into the thread after lurking the entire first day, and have thrown shit around and posted with strong emotions. Regardless, I am still glad your are finally starting to do something, but, as I have broken down above, its not actually scum hunting. So far all I have seen are arguments that are wrong at best, and hypocritical at worst. Some of us would even suggest this is scummy behavior. I am going to watch you keenly over your next few posts and determine whether you are scum or null. What I am doing is the very definition of scum-hunting. 1. I am asking important questions from someone on whom I have doubts (you) in hopes that the discussion will reveal alignment. 2. I am actively campaigning for votes on my strongest scumread (Zebezt), who still has not answered my questions. There are no emotions here, just facts. Pray tell, exactly what should I be doing differently in order to expose scum? What you are doing, on the other hand, is pointing the finger at anyone who doesn't agree with you, which is emotional and the opposite of efficient scum-hunting. I haven't accused you. Yet.
All you keep saying is Im pointing fingers because you dont like that I found some posters overtly aggressive, and let them know that they may in fact be intimidating posters. Then, look at what your crux is; you are doing the EXACT same thing.
You dont like my post style and are calling me out on it.
Apparently you are fact, and I am not. As I said before, your arguments are wrong at best, and hypocritical at worst.
Look at how quick you were to admit there is substance behind my posts; regardless of whether you think every post is valid, I have managed to elicit responses from more people than you.
What have you done for town, other than sling shit over an active poster.
You then sling more shit, saying I worded my suspicion funnily. How about instead of slinging shit, you take my post and break it down. I re-read it, and I have no idea what you are talking about. Its clear, concise and rational. Again more hypocritical behaviour.
If you want to aid the scum hunt, I suggest you start by removing the hypocrisy from your posts.
|
MOCSTA ARE YOU SURE THAT LAGUARTA IS SCUM?
|
On January 14 2013 12:54 glurio wrote:
It's stupid to lie as town, but the arguments (mafia doesnt defend, stupid newbie play) kinda swayed me. He might just be a bad town player.
##Unvote
##Vote: Mandalor
I'll go with my number one scum ready. He just got too emotional for my taste.
Also you look scummy to me oats.
I ACTUALLY agree here!
|
##unvote:la guerta
##vote: mandalor
|
Time's up! No more posting until the night post!
|
sorry had to rush the post out.. there was not enough distraction from la guerta.
must mean scum are happy for him.
mandalor was my big scum read from before, the only reason i swapped was the lie.
lets challenge la guerta for this information night 1.
|
On January 14 2013 12:58 Mocsta wrote:Show nested quote +On January 14 2013 12:41 Acid~ wrote:On January 14 2013 11:27 Mocsta wrote:On January 14 2013 08:16 Acid~ wrote:
(1)
To answer the question about Policy-lynching lurkers: As far as I'm concerned you are all guilty until proven innocent and anything you don't say will be used against you, so you better start talking.
(2)
@Mocsta:
You say you want to foster a positive town atmosphere, but you instantly lash out at anyone showing signs of aggression, which is an essential town trait.
(3)
It is you who hindered discussion on day 1, by drowning inquisitive players in walls of text containing little to no substance.
(4)
A few posts after agreeing with zare/omni about the need to build strong cases and making attacks based on rationality, you goad Oats into an OMGUS vote, with no other claim than "other people agree with me that you're fostering a bad town atmosphere".
(5)
What I want from you: quotes from Oatsmaster showing how he intimidated people into not posting, since this is your claim. OR admit that you were biased against Oats and a victim of confirmation bias
Acid, I welcome your contributions. I know you posted at the 11th hour, but the thoughts and motivations read genuine and original. Town should welcome these type of posts in particular from low post count participants. I am going to address the items you raised. (1) Agree with this completely. Everyone needs to prove with their actions they are innocent. Actions speak louder than words. At the same time, this sentiment has already been shared (myself included) so whilst I value the stance, we will see if your actions reflect your stance overtime. (2) Instantly lash out? My posts to Oatsmaster and Sn0_Man were written very respectfully. I think you are jumping to an unfounded conclusion. If I may remind you: + Show Spoiler [Calling out overt aggression] +On January 12 2013 16:38 Mocsta wrote:Show nested quote +On January 12 2013 14:22 Sn0_Man wrote:
I'm not denying, discussion is good/important and if nobody starts it scum autowin. However, if a scum can get control of town fast, they almost instawin. As a gambit, it seems fair since people like you are jumping in to defend him pretty fast.
... @Sn0_ManI appreciate the sense of energy you are giving back to this thread, and I certainly do not want to deter that; town needs this energy. BUT.. you are almost sounding "paranoid" - I know this, because after my last game, many assumed I was "paranoid". I think we both want the same thing, a town environment where people can voice their opinion and join together for the scum hunt. When you say "it seems fair since people like you are jumping in to defend him pretty fast"; that alienates participants from wanting to contribute. You are actually creating an environment scum can thrive in with that attitude - even though I doubt that is your intention. I ask that you please think about the above. On January 13 2013 07:18 Mocsta wrote:
EBWOP
On January 13 2013 07:14 Mocsta wrote:
Wow. Thats it over the night shift.
Oats u sound like sno_man.
perhaps the aggresion u 2 have shown is why there is a lack of discussion.
I think u should read what i posted to him.
My questions are ice breakers and i have not a genuine comment from
*YOU*
to stimulate town conversation. In fact. You are deterring conversation.
@oatsmaster
Why should i NOT treat is the outcome of your agressive posts [stopping fluid and positive town conversation] as scummy motivations
Personally, I do not know how that is lashing out? I think its being respectful. Yeah, yeah, yeah... I don't care how respectfully it's presented, the fact is that you only pointed fingers at people after they started pointing fingers at you, you did this with both Sn0_Man and Oats, now you're doing it with me. If you want a reminder of the posts I responded to here you go + Show Spoiler [Aggressive Posts] +On January 12 2013 14:04 Sn0_Man wrote:
Mocsta
2) How do you think scum would try to get influence with us?
From what I have seen in my 2 games, it depends on the person. Some have lurked hardcore, some have given minimal contributions.
If we have a solid town atmosphere, and people can share opinions freely, I am sure we can reduce the influence!
2) With posts just like your one aboveOn January 13 2013 00:52 Oatsmaster wrote:
Mocsta stop being useless and repeating what other people have already said.
On January 13 2013 00:55 Oatsmaster wrote:Show nested quote +On January 12 2013 13:09 Mocsta wrote:
Hi All.
From other games, it seems the best 3 questions to ask are:
1) Stance on Lurkers: i.e. Do you policy lynch?
2) How do you think scum would try to get influence with us?
3) [fluff] DONT BUY A POOL. I wasted all my time today with pools and hate it !
I won't be around for the next 6 to 8 hrs (DAMN POOL!)
Question 1. How does a yes/no question start discussion? Thats right, it doesnt. Question 2. How is that relevant in a game of Newbies where everyone is just trying to provide an answer that may not be accurate. Question 3. Please dont mention pool. Again. (3) How. My posts have plenty of substance. I have followed up my reads and tried to get others to contribute regularly. Where is your evidence to back up your assertion; this looks to me like flinging shit at the most active player Day 1.And how am I drowning out discussion. I am Active, I am Open, and my play is Transparent. My game is completely ab-lib, and Im doing this all whilst figuring this game out. Just because my filter is large does not prevent others from posters. I have been actively asking others to contribute, whilst giving my own input. This looks to me like trying to justify your own woeful activity this game. Remember, you are guilty till proven innocent. Well, your posts do have some substance, but not nearly enough for their size and number. We don't need to be privy to your every thought. A lot of times, you're repeating yourself or paraphrasing someone else, or just talking into the wind - saying we need to do this and that, should do this, but not doing it yourself.
(4)
When did I GOAD Oatsmaster into OMGUS. Provide evidence to back this up. I call him out of line, and then his beviour did not change. I cast my suspicion on him, and gave benefit of the doubt.. it would be poor townie play to instantly vote, we need to question our reads. .. Since when did casting suspicion count as "goading a reaction" .. its all part of scumhunting and Oatsmaster is accountable for his own actions.
I agree we are all accountable for our own actions and Oastmaster, while hot-headed, did not do anything really scummy. His only "crime" was to call you out on a few points that I would have made myself, had I been there. The post where you give him the FoS is cleverly written, you know you are dealing with an emotional player and the way you worded your suspicion seems to me as designed to provoke a reaction. (5) What is even the intention of this question. The fact is.. if people were intimidated they would not post. Oatsmaster himself identifies he is partially responsible the lack of a solid scum read (at the time).. On January 13 2013 20:59 Oatsmaster wrote:
The problem I have with Mocsta isnt that he is 'leading' town, Its that there are less than 12 hours left ( I like to repeat this) And no one has a solid scum read. And I dont think its my fault totally.
. I think if you interpret context at the time, the lack of scum read had to do with the minmal discussion (and you were a large culprit of the lack of contributions)
Hence; When I re-read your post I finish my impressions are as follows: You have come into the thread after lurking the entire first day, and have thrown shit around and posted with strong emotions. Regardless, I am still glad your are finally starting to do something, but, as I have broken down above, its not actually scum hunting. So far all I have seen are arguments that are wrong at best, and hypocritical at worst. Some of us would even suggest this is scummy behavior. I am going to watch you keenly over your next few posts and determine whether you are scum or null. What I am doing is the very definition of scum-hunting. 1. I am asking important questions from someone on whom I have doubts (you) in hopes that the discussion will reveal alignment. 2. I am actively campaigning for votes on my strongest scumread (Zebezt), who still has not answered my questions. There are no emotions here, just facts. Pray tell, exactly what should I be doing differently in order to expose scum? What you are doing, on the other hand, is pointing the finger at anyone who doesn't agree with you, which is emotional and the opposite of efficient scum-hunting. I haven't accused you. Yet. All you keep saying is Im pointing fingers because you dont like that I found some posters overtly aggressive, and let them know that they may in fact be intimidating posters. Then, look at what your crux is; you are doing the EXACT same thing. You dont like my post style and are calling me out on it. Apparently you are fact, and I am not. As I said before, your arguments are wrong at best, and hypocritical at worst.Look at how quick you were to admit there is substance behind my posts; regardless of whether you think every post is valid, I have managed to elicit responses from more people than you. What have you done for town, other than sling shit over an active poster. You then sling more shit, saying I worded my suspicion funnily. How about instead of slinging shit, you take my post and break it down. I re-read it, and I have no idea what you are talking about. Its clear, concise and rational. Again more hypocritical behaviour. If you want to aid the scum hunt, I suggest you start by removing the hypocrisy from your posts.
I'm not slinging any shit, I'm pressuring. This is town play, whether you like it or not.
This is just going around in circles and the perfect example for what I mean when I say your posts have too little substance for the space they take.
You'll have nothing more from me until you post something new that adds to the scumhunt/discussion.
|
Stop posting until the night post
|
After all the veggies found their way to the Town Kitchen, they immediately began debating over the significance of finding Larry's hairbrush at the scene of Bob's murder.
"I saw Larryboy lurking around my street last night! He was up to no good! He killed Bob!"
"Larryboy is a hero, he would never do such a thing!"
"Who the fuck is Larryboy? Is he Larry's alter ego? Why are us veggies talking about this?!? We live an absurd existence! Whose sick fantasy is all of this!?!?"
"Someone must have framed Larryboy! Mandalor did it, I swear!"
The angry mob of veggies brought Mandalor to the edge of the sink, and threw him in. Someone turned the faucet on, and Mandalor began slipping down the sink and into the drain. The garbage disposal was activated, and chunks of veggie began spewing out of the sink, covering all those who had come to watch!
+ Show Spoiler [Mandalor was lynched] +Mandalor, as Junior Asparagus the Vanilla Townie was lynched!
+ Show Spoiler [final vote count] +Final Vote Count!
Mandalor (3) - Trotske, glurio, Mocsta, Mocsta, OatsmasterLaguerta (2) - Mandalor, Shz, Mocsta, Zarepath, Oatsmaster, OmniEulogy, gluriozebezt (2) - Acid~, Oatsmaster Oatsmaster (2) - zarepath, OmniEuology, MocstaSn0_Man (1) - Zebezt, Trotske, MocstaMocsta (1) - Sn0_Man, Oatsmasterbringaniga (0) - shz, Oatsmaster, Mandalor, Laguertashz (0) - OmniEulogyAcid~ (0) - Zarepath, OmniEulogyNo-Lynch (1) - Laguerta
Mandalor was lynched!
Due to popular demand, the deadline is moving back 4 hours. The new deadline is 00:30 GMT (+00:00)! This goes into effect immediately.
Flavor is just flavor. We are now in the Night Cycle. There are 20 hours left until the start of Day 2. Make sure to pm any night actions to ALL hosts before the night is over! Deadline is at 00:00 GMT (+00:00)
|
|
|
|
|
well, although we lynched a townie(not good)
I think that it was a productive lynch and WE NEED to look back at it.
|
Look.. obviously I rode the train and hammered the vote.
Ask what you need to ask.
Im going to take a walk, and clear my thoughts, and will respond to your questions when I get back.
|
Spaghetticus is replacing bringaniga/kushm4sta, effective immediately.
|
Hi guys, glad to be playing as I missed the sign ups. I'm going to go get some food and drink and slog out some catching up. I'm an active player who loves theory and analysis, I believe there are plenty of people in here who can bring you up to date on my meta if need.
|
God damnit. Hi spag welcome to the game 
|
Mocsta has a LOT to answer for -- omgusing, over-defensiveness, and hammering Mandalor, who seemed especially not-scummy.
|
I suppose at this point we kinda wait and see who gets NK'd before we go too deep into analysis, but I'm with zare. I'll draw up more detailed arguments during the day period most likely.
|
ok im back.
(1)
As I said before.. I realise its easy to blame me for the hammer vote; I even developed a case against Mandalor.
So ask what you need to ask. Point what fingers you need to point.
Just remember Night 1 is 20 hrs (not 24hrs).
I do not want this action to cloud our ability to constructively look at the what happened Day 1.
(2)
@zarepath
If you doubt my intentions, please have the courtesy and address some questions to me.
You have identified 3 items that you think apply to me, can you please detail what the concerns are; and I will go about addressing them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
