So with the usual day 1 policy talk.

Lurker lynching: I assume lurking won't be an issue this game (GM stated in OP he would be blacklisting lurking activity)

Lying lynching: Everyone is vanilla, so dunno how much this actually applies either.

So looks like its pure traditional scum hunting.

##Vote: Oatsmaster
I almost got you to concede last game as scum; perhaps this vote is the finishing touch required for you to concede this game!

Oatsmaster

United States16628 Posts

February 06 2013 02:07 GMT

#189

Anyway, im free for the next 5 hours, so will anybody other than Mocsta and VE show up?

VE: Plan is still in action

What. I dont like secrets. Tell me more.

VisceraEyes

United States21171 Posts

February 06 2013 02:07 GMT

#190

Oh that was yamato. Yeah, that dude's got the stones.

You were referring to the "SUPER SECRET" plan we concocted pregame then...the *winkwink* HYPER MODE SCUMHUNTING *nudgenudge* plan. I get ya.

Mocsta

Australia9388 Posts

February 06 2013 02:08 GMT

#191

Already on it VE:

Im disturbed Oats had a problem with the Day 1 post. BioSC clearly said it would be a phone post.
Oats is looking for an easy way to contribute, without contributing.

Vote stands

Oatsmaster

United States16628 Posts

February 06 2013 02:09 GMT

#192

People still might lurk, you never know.

Gonna ignore that stupidass vote cause
1. If I dont mention it. Im crazy
2. If I care about it, Im scum.
SO NON ALIGNMENT INDICATIVE POST RIGHT HERE.

Mocsta

Australia9388 Posts

February 06 2013 02:09 GMT

#193

But.. your right.. i need to put vote where mouth is:
##Unvote
##Vote: Mocsta
For Mayor!

//spam over now
##Unvote

Oatsmaster

United States16628 Posts

February 06 2013 02:12 GMT

#194

For Mayor meaning that you get to stand in front of all the people with a cool chain around your neck, and an escape route right underneath you?
Right.
That Mayor. I approve.

Mocsta

Australia9388 Posts

February 06 2013 02:18 GMT

#195

If i have to explain the joke to you, i see two situations

#1 - You aren't reading the thread. Considering its less than one page old. This means you dont care and are most likely too involved with discussions in the scum qt !!!

OR

#2 - Your wit is as useful as a football bat. This means you are not of use and are most likely to be involved with discussions in the scum qt !!!

##Vote: Oatsmaster

Oatsmaster

United States16628 Posts

February 06 2013 02:21 GMT

#196

Mocsta, you might break the voting tallies!!!

Also, a football bat is useful.
You can run around smacking people with it. And beating up scum. SCUM.

Mocsta

Australia9388 Posts

February 06 2013 02:27 GMT

#197

Trolling over
##Unvote
Working on a real post to prompt some discussion.

Gimme 5min.

Mocsta

Australia9388 Posts

February 06 2013 02:41 GMT

#198

My musings on the setup + nomination mechanic

Overall, I think the analysis of possible motives will be of much more significance than other games - for both town trying to hunt scum, and for scum trying to blend in. The nomination mechanic in particular is interesting and I see several avenues scum may wish to explore.

With the nomination scum might:

nominate three scummy looking town,
nominate a mix of scummy looking town with a townie looking scum
nominate the towniest players to force elimination of a big threat to scum
Or even
nominate three scum to try and clear suspicion off the two survivors.

As such there is a lot of WIFOM potention in that scum may mix one scum in with the nomination to lower the likelihood that town can use 'process of elimination' to find scum. But to accomplish this, at least a couple of scum are going to have to put a lot of effort into looking at least "leaning townie" if not townier than that.

I see the best path forward for town, as to play and eliminate the first option (scummy looking town). One way to to this is to pressure the least active Day 1 peeople, to establish a high standard of activity all around (quality and quantity). The harder scum have to try in order to look "average", the more likely it is that they will mess up somewhere.

Obviously most games start with this intent, but I think this game is where it is more pertinent than ever to maintain quality posts and solid play.

How do I plan to act for this game:
I am going to be open and transparent in my play. I will be as forthcoming as I can with my scumreads and thoughts at any point in the game. I expect that my actions and motives will speak louder than my words.

@All
What do you think of the above. Do you it is wise to to reduce the chance of scum looking town as a counter to the nomination mechanic?

Oatsmaster

United States16628 Posts

February 06 2013 02:46 GMT

#199

Basically standerd talk.

I am going to be open and transparent in my play. I will be as forthcoming as I can with my scumreads and thoughts at any point in the game. I expect that my actions and motives will speak louder than my words.

Who doesnt say this? Like lol whats the point of writing this.

As a counterarguement,
I say we lynch the scummiest person available to us.
Who cares who scum sent up? How do we lynch scum in a normal game? Because they are scummy right?

Mocsta

Australia9388 Posts

February 06 2013 02:53 GMT

#200

On February 06 2013 11:46 Oatsmaster wrote:
Basically standerd talk.

Show nested quote +

Well people like you have a tendency/history to be viewed as scummy when town; does that mean we should automatically vote for you?

I think not.

If I was to vote for you, it would be because I see scum motives in your actions enough times to have built a case;
OR
because your on the nomination table and I see you as either the most likely to be scum, or in the case all three candidates are town reads for me - because I deem you to be the least useful for a town victory.