EPTOn April 18 2011 06:17 Shcoleosis wrote:
Correction: I'm not reading YOUR long-winded analysis. I'm pretty embarrassed for you because you're wasting your time. A lot of it.
Show nested quote +
On April 18 2011 06:15 VarpuliS wrote:
Forumite, you think I'm mafia when we've got scum posting shit like this? And you said I was giving up on the game? I do think that Shcoleosis is mafia. Why don't we lynch her?
It seems to me that she knows that I'm town, saw my defense, and realized that it might work. So she parroted it.
Even if she isn't mafia --which I doubt-- She's not even reading the analysis people are posting. I don't want somebody like that on my team come LYLO.
This bullshit about me being mafia because i'm the most pro-town player in this game is ridiculous. If I were scum, why would I provide all these tools for the town to use? Why would i make so many posts for people to analyze? Compare me to Shcoleosis.
I ask you all now to be honest.
Who seems more scummy?
On April 18 2011 06:05 Shcoleosis wrote:
tl;dr
Looks like you spent a lot of time and energy doing that...maybe a little TOO much time and energy. I wish I had the willpower to do something like that.
Anyway, I've absolutely nothing to say about that...mainly because I didn't read it. If you think I'm mafia, go ahead and lynch me, baby. Another townie down, another one to go.
On April 18 2011 02:52 VarpuliS wrote:
First things first, I'm going to quote my original analysis. Her early posts have been analysed once, I see no need to go over them again.
+ Show Spoiler [Previous analysis] +
and we now pick up with the next post she writes:
This is a bad defense. It's filled with fluff, states the obvious (first bolded line), makes excuses (second bolded line), and calls everybody else paranoid (third bolded line).
The actual defense is: "I changed my mind a little, and then decided to agree with you all because if I disagreed, I would stand out as scum."
According to this post, disagreeing with the town/not sheeping= scum To me, this is just as scummy as her previous posts. It promotes sheeping and makes lame excuses.
Next, she attempts to divert the suspicion to Zorkmid, with this post:
My responses are in red. This post would be a valid defense, except that most of the evidence cited is false. Lying and bending the truth are not the actions of townies looking to identify scum. they are the actions of scum trying to raise suspicion on a townie.
Moving on.
Shcoleosis now get into an argument with Zorkmid, with each accusing the other of being scum.
Here, Shcoleosis calls Zorkmid's suspicion of sandroba an attempt to bandwagon him, and accuses Zorkmid of bandwagoning her even though he had been suspicious of her previously. Again, misinterpreting evidence to further her goals: This is scummy behavior, and still not a good defense.
In her final real post of the debate (people start to notice the lurkers at this point, and a bandwagon starts on Senj)
Once again, mistruths are abound. Two people is not a lot of accusations. The argument here seems... forced. The italicised part at the end has no content. It's just filler. Still not a good argument in my book.
This next post is in response to eternalmisfit's post regarding the argument between Shcoleosis and Zorkmid.
This post confuses me. Of course everybody would defend themselves when accused. You're defense just isn't very good. I don't follow the logic behind the bolded part. Could that be explained please?
This next post is a pretty clear scumtell to me.
The bolded part is the scummiest line I've seen all game. Here, she says "this is why I think Zorkmid's scum" but declines to lynch him, due to the possibility that he could be town. TO me, this indicates a scum who knows that Zorkmid is town, and also knows that if Zorkmid gets lynched, she'll be next. She votes for Senj to avoid pressure and keep the suspicion away from her, because she doesn't want to defend her position. This is a scumtell if ever there was one, and isn't helping her "I'm not scum, Zorkmid is" argument.
This brings us to the last post to be analyzed.
I like how this post states the obvious, pretends to be insightful explains why she won't be adding to the analysis, calls the person suspicious of her scum, and agrees with everybody about who's suspicious, with Zorkmid tacked on. This is not strong town behavior, but it is clever scum behavior.
The only remaining post is a challenge to explain why I'm suspicious of her. Consider it answered.
Shcoleosis
First things first, I'm going to quote my original analysis. Her early posts have been analysed once, I see no need to go over them again.
+ Show Spoiler [Previous analysis] +
On April 16 2011 08:05 VarpuliS wrote:
...And as promised, here is my analysis of Shcoleosis' posts.
First post is a response to Eternalmisfit's suggestion to pressure lurkers
This bolded line is not scummy, it's just stupid. Mafia doesn't kill by talking, they kill by pm'ing GMarshal at night. Mafia needs to avoid drawing attention to itself to prevent themselves from getting lynched. This post in general is pretty worthless, ending with a line that is... strange.
This is the first scumtell I can see. She basically says "don't listen to me, i'm new." Townies need to talk and be listened to, not ignored because this is their first game. Only mafia and blues benefit from being ignored, so unless he roleclaims, lets assume scum.
Second post comes a little bit later. the post reads:
This is a post which blends in. It says practically nothing, but appears to be a contribution. Blending in is not something a townie needs to do. +1 scum level.
Finally, we've got lucky number 3:
Here, Shcoleosis basically says: "you seem to disagree with me... fine, you're right!" Agreeing with everybody else is something that two kinds of players do:
-unhelpful townies -because they're just being sheep
-mafia -because they're trying to blend in
I don't want either in my town come lategame.
Based off of this analysis, I'd like to start putting some pressure on Shcoleosis. Until a better target surfaces or she comes up with some good posts later on, I'll put my vote on her.
## Vote Shcoleosis
...And as promised, here is my analysis of Shcoleosis' posts.
First post is a response to Eternalmisfit's suggestion to pressure lurkers
Show nested quote +
On April 15 2011 11:17 Shcoleosis wrote:
Yeah, that seem logical. We don't want to kill innocent townies, though...It's the mafia we want gone! I highly doubt any mafia would be lurking or inactive when they have chances to kill. But who am I to say...I'm still learning :/
On April 15 2011 11:12 Eternalmisfit wrote:
Btw I think we should lynch people who are inactive or lurking the boards as it is more likely that they are trying to stay under and radar and avoid suspicion on themselves by barely posting at all.
Btw I think we should lynch people who are inactive or lurking the boards as it is more likely that they are trying to stay under and radar and avoid suspicion on themselves by barely posting at all.
Yeah, that seem logical. We don't want to kill innocent townies, though...It's the mafia we want gone! I highly doubt any mafia would be lurking or inactive when they have chances to kill. But who am I to say...I'm still learning :/
This bolded line is not scummy, it's just stupid. Mafia doesn't kill by talking, they kill by pm'ing GMarshal at night. Mafia needs to avoid drawing attention to itself to prevent themselves from getting lynched. This post in general is pretty worthless, ending with a line that is... strange.
This is the first scumtell I can see. She basically says "don't listen to me, i'm new." Townies need to talk and be listened to, not ignored because this is their first game. Only mafia and blues benefit from being ignored, so unless he roleclaims, lets assume scum.
Second post comes a little bit later. the post reads:
Show nested quote +
On April 15 2011 11:41 Shcoleosis wrote:
I'm sure getting rid of the inactive would make the lynching process easier, but I can't help but question the idea of getting rid of people unnecessarily. I'm thinking about it more, and I'm realizing that there's a chance the one we lynch is scum and there's also a chance that he or she might not be scum....no way to tell right now. Hopefully we'll get lucky.
I'm sure getting rid of the inactive would make the lynching process easier, but I can't help but question the idea of getting rid of people unnecessarily. I'm thinking about it more, and I'm realizing that there's a chance the one we lynch is scum and there's also a chance that he or she might not be scum....no way to tell right now. Hopefully we'll get lucky.
This is a post which blends in. It says practically nothing, but appears to be a contribution. Blending in is not something a townie needs to do. +1 scum level.
Finally, we've got lucky number 3:
Show nested quote +
On April 15 2011 13:01 Shcoleosis wrote:
Not trying to protect the inactive. I guess I just didn't really understand your logic well. But, hey, if it takes lynching the inactive to get rid of the scum, LET'S DO THIS! Lol
On April 15 2011 12:40 Zorkmid wrote:
Why are you trying to protect inactives? Either they're not helping to scumhunt, or they are mafia. Let's hang em all !
On April 15 2011 11:41 Shcoleosis wrote:
I'm sure getting rid of the inactive would make the lynching process easier, but I can't help but question the idea of getting rid of people unnecessarily. I'm thinking about it more, and I'm realizing that there's a chance the one we lynch is scum and there's also a chance that he or she might not be scum....no way to tell right now. Hopefully we'll get lucky.
I'm sure getting rid of the inactive would make the lynching process easier, but I can't help but question the idea of getting rid of people unnecessarily. I'm thinking about it more, and I'm realizing that there's a chance the one we lynch is scum and there's also a chance that he or she might not be scum....no way to tell right now. Hopefully we'll get lucky.
Why are you trying to protect inactives? Either they're not helping to scumhunt, or they are mafia. Let's hang em all !
Not trying to protect the inactive. I guess I just didn't really understand your logic well. But, hey, if it takes lynching the inactive to get rid of the scum, LET'S DO THIS! Lol
Here, Shcoleosis basically says: "you seem to disagree with me... fine, you're right!" Agreeing with everybody else is something that two kinds of players do:
-unhelpful townies -because they're just being sheep
-mafia -because they're trying to blend in
I don't want either in my town come lategame.
Based off of this analysis, I'd like to start putting some pressure on Shcoleosis. Until a better target surfaces or she comes up with some good posts later on, I'll put my vote on her.
## Vote Shcoleosis
and we now pick up with the next post she writes:
On April 16 2011 08:55 Shcoleosis wrote:
Whoa, what? I leave for a few hours and I come back to everyone against me? The last thing I'm trying to do is be falsely accused of something I'm obviously not. I was looking at things from a different point of view in order to help all of us find out who is mafia scum. Then, after I thought about it, I changed my mind a little because I started to see the point. Since I am new to this game, I am trying my best to give my point of view and understand without everyone being paranoid of me. Think of it this way, though, if I were mafia scum, why would I want to disagree with you all? That would make it blatantly obvious that I am scum!
Whoa, what? I leave for a few hours and I come back to everyone against me? The last thing I'm trying to do is be falsely accused of something I'm obviously not. I was looking at things from a different point of view in order to help all of us find out who is mafia scum. Then, after I thought about it, I changed my mind a little because I started to see the point. Since I am new to this game, I am trying my best to give my point of view and understand without everyone being paranoid of me. Think of it this way, though, if I were mafia scum, why would I want to disagree with you all? That would make it blatantly obvious that I am scum!
This is a bad defense. It's filled with fluff, states the obvious (first bolded line), makes excuses (second bolded line), and calls everybody else paranoid (third bolded line).
The actual defense is: "I changed my mind a little, and then decided to agree with you all because if I disagreed, I would stand out as scum."
According to this post, disagreeing with the town/not sheeping= scum To me, this is just as scummy as her previous posts. It promotes sheeping and makes lame excuses.
Next, she attempts to divert the suspicion to Zorkmid, with this post:
On April 16 2011 09:51 Shcoleosis wrote:
After reading this thread entirely, here's what I think on the matter:
In my opinion, one of the first to accuse is usually the guilty one. The first to accuse you was sandroba, not Zorkmid. Automatically everyone’s opinions are immediately placed under suspicion as the game progresses. That being the case, a mafia member wouldn’t express his opinions as eagerly as he would if he were agreeing with someone else’s. He would, however, be quick to blame, because doing so would divert attention away from himself. I disagree. Mafia would be trying to blend in, by agreeing with the majority and not being conspicuous.
Zorkmid came up with the idea of lynching inactives and lurkers. no, he actually didn't. the first to post in support of lynching inactives was Eternalmisfit That would work out greatly to his advantage if he were part of the mafia since it is more of an opportunity to blend, right? except that he's been extraordinarily active and vocal about his opinions The more we accuse those of having a different opinion, the less of a suspect he seems to be. I am not the first to disagree with him. I am not the first to be accused because I disagreed with him. Notice how Zorkmid says he “will also be on anyone that jumps on Misfit’s argument about his Zorkmind person.” Why so defensive, Zorkmid? It's called a joke. people were misspelling his name Perhaps he is afraid of everyone discovering how he is desperately trying to divert attention away from himself. He’s doing a great job of it. I had my suspicions about him early on because he's not only quick to agree with the majority, but he is also quick to blame. I didn't quote any other of his posts, but to me, he acts quite suspicious in most of them.
After reading this thread entirely, here's what I think on the matter:
In my opinion, one of the first to accuse is usually the guilty one. The first to accuse you was sandroba, not Zorkmid. Automatically everyone’s opinions are immediately placed under suspicion as the game progresses. That being the case, a mafia member wouldn’t express his opinions as eagerly as he would if he were agreeing with someone else’s. He would, however, be quick to blame, because doing so would divert attention away from himself. I disagree. Mafia would be trying to blend in, by agreeing with the majority and not being conspicuous.
On April 15 2011 20:53 Zorkmid wrote:
My FoS is on Shcoleosis as well for the same reasons, and will also be on anyone that jumps on Misfit's argument about this Zorkmind person.
My FoS is on Shcoleosis as well for the same reasons, and will also be on anyone that jumps on Misfit's argument about this Zorkmind person.
On April 15 2011 20:06 Eternalmisfit wrote:
Also, I think the way Zorkmind is subtly derailing the discussion by talking about less fun in this mafia thread makes me wonder if has a hidden motive.
Also, I think the way Zorkmind is subtly derailing the discussion by talking about less fun in this mafia thread makes me wonder if has a hidden motive.
Zorkmid came up with the idea of lynching inactives and lurkers. no, he actually didn't. the first to post in support of lynching inactives was Eternalmisfit That would work out greatly to his advantage if he were part of the mafia since it is more of an opportunity to blend, right? except that he's been extraordinarily active and vocal about his opinions The more we accuse those of having a different opinion, the less of a suspect he seems to be. I am not the first to disagree with him. I am not the first to be accused because I disagreed with him. Notice how Zorkmid says he “will also be on anyone that jumps on Misfit’s argument about his Zorkmind person.” Why so defensive, Zorkmid? It's called a joke. people were misspelling his name Perhaps he is afraid of everyone discovering how he is desperately trying to divert attention away from himself. He’s doing a great job of it. I had my suspicions about him early on because he's not only quick to agree with the majority, but he is also quick to blame. I didn't quote any other of his posts, but to me, he acts quite suspicious in most of them.
My responses are in red. This post would be a valid defense, except that most of the evidence cited is false. Lying and bending the truth are not the actions of townies looking to identify scum. they are the actions of scum trying to raise suspicion on a townie.
Moving on.
Shcoleosis now get into an argument with Zorkmid, with each accusing the other of being scum.
On April 16 2011 10:12 Shcoleosis wrote:
"If I were a mafia, I'd be looking for the first opportunity to form a bandwagon against a known townie." Uh, Zorkmid, isn't that exactly what you're doing? Wait, isn't that also what you did to Sandroba?? Take a look at the pattern you're creating.
Exhibit A.
On April 16 2011 10:03 Zorkmid wrote:
I've just learned that you should always beware of the person that is the first to agree with a scum read. If I were a mafia I'd be looking for the first opportunity to form a bandwagon against a known townie.
Misfit was the first to point the finger at me, and I wanted everyone to wait and watch for the second
Question for you Scheleosis......what's your plan to survive tomorrow? I'd say your only bet is to claim blue.
##Vote Scheleosis
On April 16 2011 09:51 Shcoleosis wrote:
After reading this thread entirely, here's what I think on the matter:
In my opinion, one of the first to accuse is usually the guilty one. Automatically everyone’s opinions are immediately placed under suspicion as the game progresses. That being the case, a mafia member wouldn’t express his opinions as eagerly as he would if he were agreeing with someone else’s. He would, however, be quick to blame, because doing so would divert attention away from himself.
Zorkmid came up with the idea of lynching inactives and lurkers. That would work out greatly to his advantage if he were part of the mafia since it is more of an opportunity to blend, right? The more we accuse those of having a different opinion, the less of a suspect he seems to be. I am not the first to disagree with him. I am not the first to be accused because I disagreed with him. Notice how Zorkmid says he “will also be on anyone that jumps on Misfit’s argument about his Zorkmind person.” Why so defensive, Zorkmid? Perhaps he is afraid of everyone discovering how he is desperately trying to divert attention away from himself. He’s doing a great job of it. I had my suspicions about him early on because he's not only quick to agree with the majority, but he is also quick to blame. I didn't quote any other of his posts, but to me, he acts quite suspicious in most of them.
After reading this thread entirely, here's what I think on the matter:
In my opinion, one of the first to accuse is usually the guilty one. Automatically everyone’s opinions are immediately placed under suspicion as the game progresses. That being the case, a mafia member wouldn’t express his opinions as eagerly as he would if he were agreeing with someone else’s. He would, however, be quick to blame, because doing so would divert attention away from himself.
On April 15 2011 20:53 Zorkmid wrote:
My FoS is on Shcoleosis as well for the same reasons, and will also be on anyone that jumps on Misfit's argument about this Zorkmind person.
My FoS is on Shcoleosis as well for the same reasons, and will also be on anyone that jumps on Misfit's argument about this Zorkmind person.
On April 15 2011 20:06 Eternalmisfit wrote:
Also, I think the way Zorkmind is subtly derailing the discussion by talking about less fun in this mafia thread makes me wonder if has a hidden motive.
Also, I think the way Zorkmind is subtly derailing the discussion by talking about less fun in this mafia thread makes me wonder if has a hidden motive.
Zorkmid came up with the idea of lynching inactives and lurkers. That would work out greatly to his advantage if he were part of the mafia since it is more of an opportunity to blend, right? The more we accuse those of having a different opinion, the less of a suspect he seems to be. I am not the first to disagree with him. I am not the first to be accused because I disagreed with him. Notice how Zorkmid says he “will also be on anyone that jumps on Misfit’s argument about his Zorkmind person.” Why so defensive, Zorkmid? Perhaps he is afraid of everyone discovering how he is desperately trying to divert attention away from himself. He’s doing a great job of it. I had my suspicions about him early on because he's not only quick to agree with the majority, but he is also quick to blame. I didn't quote any other of his posts, but to me, he acts quite suspicious in most of them.
I've just learned that you should always beware of the person that is the first to agree with a scum read. If I were a mafia I'd be looking for the first opportunity to form a bandwagon against a known townie.
Misfit was the first to point the finger at me, and I wanted everyone to wait and watch for the second
Question for you Scheleosis......what's your plan to survive tomorrow? I'd say your only bet is to claim blue.
##Vote Scheleosis
"If I were a mafia, I'd be looking for the first opportunity to form a bandwagon against a known townie." Uh, Zorkmid, isn't that exactly what you're doing? Wait, isn't that also what you did to Sandroba?? Take a look at the pattern you're creating.
On April 15 2011 23:50 Zorkmid wrote:
Because of your slip, I no longer suspect Scholesis.
FoS sandroba
Why explain why your town play is bad and then cite a guide you read that explained it was bad?
Because of your slip, I no longer suspect Scholesis.
FoS sandroba
Why explain why your town play is bad and then cite a guide you read that explained it was bad?
Exhibit A.
Here, Shcoleosis calls Zorkmid's suspicion of sandroba an attempt to bandwagon him, and accuses Zorkmid of bandwagoning her even though he had been suspicious of her previously. Again, misinterpreting evidence to further her goals: This is scummy behavior, and still not a good defense.
In her final real post of the debate (people start to notice the lurkers at this point, and a bandwagon starts on Senj)
On April 16 2011 10:19 Shcoleosis wrote:
I've noticed something else about you. You're fickle in your accusations. One minute you're accusing someone of this, and the next you're accusing someone of that. You keep looking for someone to blame. Misfit ..was never among those Zorkmid was suspicous of, Sandroba, Shcoleosis....who is next, Zorkmid? The only reason you are sticking by your argument is because everyone is on your side. You quickly shifted the blame to the next person when you found that no one was backing up your accusation. Actually, he changed his opinion based off of new evidenceLucky for you, you are not the only one suspicious of me. I guarantee you that is the only reason you are sticking by your vote against me. If no one backed you up on this, you would have immediately blamed the next person. To me, that screams nothing but scum....a scum desperately trying to fit in.
On April 16 2011 10:15 Zorkmid wrote:
There's a difference between explaining why bad play is bad, and explaining why good play is good.
On April 16 2011 10:12 Shcoleosis wrote:
"If I were a mafia, I'd be looking for the first opportunity to form a bandwagon against a known townie." Uh, Zorkmid, isn't that exactly what you're doing? Wait, isn't that also what you did to Sandroba?? Take a look at the pattern you're creating.
Exhibit A.
On April 16 2011 10:03 Zorkmid wrote:
I've just learned that you should always beware of the person that is the first to agree with a scum read. If I were a mafia I'd be looking for the first opportunity to form a bandwagon against a known townie.
Misfit was the first to point the finger at me, and I wanted everyone to wait and watch for the second
Question for you Scheleosis......what's your plan to survive tomorrow? I'd say your only bet is to claim blue.
##Vote Scheleosis
On April 16 2011 09:51 Shcoleosis wrote:
After reading this thread entirely, here's what I think on the matter:
In my opinion, one of the first to accuse is usually the guilty one. Automatically everyone’s opinions are immediately placed under suspicion as the game progresses. That being the case, a mafia member wouldn’t express his opinions as eagerly as he would if he were agreeing with someone else’s. He would, however, be quick to blame, because doing so would divert attention away from himself.
Zorkmid came up with the idea of lynching inactives and lurkers. That would work out greatly to his advantage if he were part of the mafia since it is more of an opportunity to blend, right? The more we accuse those of having a different opinion, the less of a suspect he seems to be. I am not the first to disagree with him. I am not the first to be accused because I disagreed with him. Notice how Zorkmid says he “will also be on anyone that jumps on Misfit’s argument about his Zorkmind person.” Why so defensive, Zorkmid? Perhaps he is afraid of everyone discovering how he is desperately trying to divert attention away from himself. He’s doing a great job of it. I had my suspicions about him early on because he's not only quick to agree with the majority, but he is also quick to blame. I didn't quote any other of his posts, but to me, he acts quite suspicious in most of them.
After reading this thread entirely, here's what I think on the matter:
In my opinion, one of the first to accuse is usually the guilty one. Automatically everyone’s opinions are immediately placed under suspicion as the game progresses. That being the case, a mafia member wouldn’t express his opinions as eagerly as he would if he were agreeing with someone else’s. He would, however, be quick to blame, because doing so would divert attention away from himself.
On April 15 2011 20:53 Zorkmid wrote:
My FoS is on Shcoleosis as well for the same reasons, and will also be on anyone that jumps on Misfit's argument about this Zorkmind person.
[quote]
My FoS is on Shcoleosis as well for the same reasons, and will also be on anyone that jumps on Misfit's argument about this Zorkmind person.
[quote]
Zorkmid came up with the idea of lynching inactives and lurkers. That would work out greatly to his advantage if he were part of the mafia since it is more of an opportunity to blend, right? The more we accuse those of having a different opinion, the less of a suspect he seems to be. I am not the first to disagree with him. I am not the first to be accused because I disagreed with him. Notice how Zorkmid says he “will also be on anyone that jumps on Misfit’s argument about his Zorkmind person.” Why so defensive, Zorkmid? Perhaps he is afraid of everyone discovering how he is desperately trying to divert attention away from himself. He’s doing a great job of it. I had my suspicions about him early on because he's not only quick to agree with the majority, but he is also quick to blame. I didn't quote any other of his posts, but to me, he acts quite suspicious in most of them.
I've just learned that you should always beware of the person that is the first to agree with a scum read. If I were a mafia I'd be looking for the first opportunity to form a bandwagon against a known townie.
Misfit was the first to point the finger at me, and I wanted everyone to wait and watch for the second
Question for you Scheleosis......what's your plan to survive tomorrow? I'd say your only bet is to claim blue.
##Vote Scheleosis
"If I were a mafia, I'd be looking for the first opportunity to form a bandwagon against a known townie." Uh, Zorkmid, isn't that exactly what you're doing? Wait, isn't that also what you did to Sandroba?? Take a look at the pattern you're creating.
On April 15 2011 23:50 Zorkmid wrote:
Because of your slip, I no longer suspect Scholesis.
FoS sandroba
Why explain why your town play is bad and then cite a guide you read that explained it was bad?
Because of your slip, I no longer suspect Scholesis.
FoS sandroba
Why explain why your town play is bad and then cite a guide you read that explained it was bad?
Exhibit A.
There's a difference between explaining why bad play is bad, and explaining why good play is good.
I've noticed something else about you. You're fickle in your accusations. One minute you're accusing someone of this, and the next you're accusing someone of that. You keep looking for someone to blame. Misfit ..was never among those Zorkmid was suspicous of, Sandroba, Shcoleosis....who is next, Zorkmid? The only reason you are sticking by your argument is because everyone is on your side. You quickly shifted the blame to the next person when you found that no one was backing up your accusation. Actually, he changed his opinion based off of new evidenceLucky for you, you are not the only one suspicious of me. I guarantee you that is the only reason you are sticking by your vote against me. If no one backed you up on this, you would have immediately blamed the next person. To me, that screams nothing but scum....a scum desperately trying to fit in.
Once again, mistruths are abound. Two people is not a lot of accusations. The argument here seems... forced. The italicised part at the end has no content. It's just filler. Still not a good argument in my book.
This next post is in response to eternalmisfit's post regarding the argument between Shcoleosis and Zorkmid.
On April 16 2011 11:26 Shcoleosis wrote:
Eh, everyone's a critic. I don't see how anyone wouldn't defend himself if he's being accused of all the wrong things. Besides, I would think blending in would call for a concession. I'm withholding my vote until I see some more action.
On April 16 2011 10:59 Eternalmisfit wrote:
Just read the recent set of posts and Shcoleosis arguments. Although does she raise at least one point in her defense (i.e. she did not try to agree with what I was saying right away). Nevertheless, I am still a little suspicious of her trying to blend in (and then accusing Zorkmid of being mafia for the same reason).
Apart from her, I do also have some suspicions on Zorkmid who seems to be too finger happy at pointing at others. But, it is hard to say whether this is his usual forum personality or whether he trying to parry away any attention. Sadly, since it is mostly new people here, it is hard to get a read on someone on the basis of posting habits.
Btw, just so that people don't fly under the radar, senj and elmizzit haven't posted anything of substance yet in this thread.
I am going to head to bed now and will read any new arguments made tonight before posting my initial vote tomorrow am.
Just read the recent set of posts and Shcoleosis arguments. Although does she raise at least one point in her defense (i.e. she did not try to agree with what I was saying right away). Nevertheless, I am still a little suspicious of her trying to blend in (and then accusing Zorkmid of being mafia for the same reason).
Apart from her, I do also have some suspicions on Zorkmid who seems to be too finger happy at pointing at others. But, it is hard to say whether this is his usual forum personality or whether he trying to parry away any attention. Sadly, since it is mostly new people here, it is hard to get a read on someone on the basis of posting habits.
Btw, just so that people don't fly under the radar, senj and elmizzit haven't posted anything of substance yet in this thread.
I am going to head to bed now and will read any new arguments made tonight before posting my initial vote tomorrow am.
Eh, everyone's a critic. I don't see how anyone wouldn't defend himself if he's being accused of all the wrong things. Besides, I would think blending in would call for a concession. I'm withholding my vote until I see some more action.
This post confuses me. Of course everybody would defend themselves when accused. You're defense just isn't very good. I don't follow the logic behind the bolded part. Could that be explained please?
This next post is a pretty clear scumtell to me.
On April 17 2011 01:44 Shcoleosis wrote:
Not going to be on much today--It's a Saturday and I've things to do. It looks like I'm about to get lynched, and over the weakest of false reasons. I think my previous posts indicate why I would vote for Zorkmid. However, if Zorkmid, much to my dismay, ends up being anything other than scum, the pressure's going to automatically be on me. I've already had to defend my position as townie once.
Basically I'm doing this to save my ass.
##Vote: Senj
Not going to be on much today--It's a Saturday and I've things to do. It looks like I'm about to get lynched, and over the weakest of false reasons. I think my previous posts indicate why I would vote for Zorkmid. However, if Zorkmid, much to my dismay, ends up being anything other than scum, the pressure's going to automatically be on me. I've already had to defend my position as townie once.
Basically I'm doing this to save my ass.
##Vote: Senj
The bolded part is the scummiest line I've seen all game. Here, she says "this is why I think Zorkmid's scum" but declines to lynch him, due to the possibility that he could be town. TO me, this indicates a scum who knows that Zorkmid is town, and also knows that if Zorkmid gets lynched, she'll be next. She votes for Senj to avoid pressure and keep the suspicion away from her, because she doesn't want to defend her position. This is a scumtell if ever there was one, and isn't helping her "I'm not scum, Zorkmid is" argument.
This brings us to the last post to be analyzed.
On April 18 2011 01:36 Shcoleosis wrote:
Regular town behavior can be interpreted as scummy behavior, and scummy behavior can be interpreted as town behavior. So far, I've seen most of you all basing your analysis off of what you assume to be town behavior or what you assume to be scum behavior. That's how this works, yes. We've got nothing to work with but our assumptions. your point? Weak assumptions are just going to get more green and blue people killed. If we want to catch and lynch the mafia, we have to think the way the mafia does. I mean, if you were part of the mafia, wouldn't you want to think like a townie in order to keep from being caught? WIFOM It's a suggestion, and hopefully it will bring us closer to who is and who isn't a townie. My analysis of everyone would probably look like a repeat, so I doubt that it's necessary for me to post. POST PLEASE! I agree that Varpilus definitely had the most thorough and seemingly accurate analysis. That still doesn't mean he couldn't be scum. OMGUS Just saying.
Right now, most of my suspicion is on Elmizzt, Sandroba, and Zorkmid.
Regular town behavior can be interpreted as scummy behavior, and scummy behavior can be interpreted as town behavior. So far, I've seen most of you all basing your analysis off of what you assume to be town behavior or what you assume to be scum behavior. That's how this works, yes. We've got nothing to work with but our assumptions. your point? Weak assumptions are just going to get more green and blue people killed. If we want to catch and lynch the mafia, we have to think the way the mafia does. I mean, if you were part of the mafia, wouldn't you want to think like a townie in order to keep from being caught? WIFOM It's a suggestion, and hopefully it will bring us closer to who is and who isn't a townie. My analysis of everyone would probably look like a repeat, so I doubt that it's necessary for me to post. POST PLEASE! I agree that Varpilus definitely had the most thorough and seemingly accurate analysis. That still doesn't mean he couldn't be scum. OMGUS Just saying.
Right now, most of my suspicion is on Elmizzt, Sandroba, and Zorkmid.
I like how this post states the obvious, pretends to be insightful explains why she won't be adding to the analysis, calls the person suspicious of her scum, and agrees with everybody about who's suspicious, with Zorkmid tacked on. This is not strong town behavior, but it is clever scum behavior.
The only remaining post is a challenge to explain why I'm suspicious of her. Consider it answered.
tl;dr
Looks like you spent a lot of time and energy doing that...maybe a little TOO much time and energy. I wish I had the willpower to do something like that.
Anyway, I've absolutely nothing to say about that...mainly because I didn't read it. If you think I'm mafia, go ahead and lynch me, baby. Another townie down, another one to go.
Forumite, you think I'm mafia when we've got scum posting shit like this? And you said I was giving up on the game? I do think that Shcoleosis is mafia. Why don't we lynch her?
It seems to me that she knows that I'm town, saw my defense, and realized that it might work. So she parroted it.
Even if she isn't mafia --which I doubt-- She's not even reading the analysis people are posting. I don't want somebody like that on my team come LYLO.
This bullshit about me being mafia because i'm the most pro-town player in this game is ridiculous. If I were scum, why would I provide all these tools for the town to use? Why would i make so many posts for people to analyze? Compare me to Shcoleosis.
- Sandroba and Zorkmid ask for my opinion. the result: + Show Spoiler [My analysis of every player in the game.] +On April 17 2011 23:53 VarpuliS wrote:
That monster post of mine was intended to summarize what other people are thinking. Because Zorkmid and Forumite asked me to, I'll make another list about what I think of everybody.
Forumite
I'm thinking that he's a townie at this point. He's been doing some nice analysis and promoting activity and discussion, which is good town play. Accusations against him have been groundless, so unless his posts get suspicious, I'm going to tentatively identify him as townie.
elmizzt FoS
I agree with your point Forumite: He's been lurking, his posts lack substance, and apart from his analysis of sandroba, which isn't very solid, he's contributed little to nothing. FoS elmizzt.Senj
sandroba
Not sure where this guy stands, to be honest. He's posted some pretty good analysis, promoted activity, all that good stuff, but he's also done some suspicious stuff, i.e. having a totally different response to a post when he though Shcoleosis said it to when he thought Zorkmid said it, diverting discussions, and being overly dismissive. Pending further evidence, I'll put him on my "neutral" list.
Zorkmid
I'm getting a town vibe from him. He's just too active and open to be mafia. If he doesn't get hit in the 1st or 2nd night I'd get suspicious though, because his activity paints a gigantic target on his chest.
Shcoleosis
I'm still pretty damn suspicious of Shcoleosis. She avoided a lynch day 1 because we killed the inactive, but day 2 she's a priority lynch for me. scummy behavior and possible connections to other players make her lynch worthwhile even if she's town, because if she's not mafia, chances are some of the people arguing with her are.
Eternalmisfit
Eternalmisfit's been doing strong analysis and has made some key observations, and has overall been quite pro-town.
Vain FoS
Vain has been semi-active. I'm a little bit suspicious of him because he joined the Shcoleosis bandwagon without giving a reason until prompted to. Bandwagoning for the sake of bandwagoning is not great town play, and his logic and reasoning just haven't clicked with me. FoS, but not a priority. - I ask for Shcoleosis' opinoin. The result: On April 18 2011 01:36 Shcoleosis wrote:
My analysis of everyone would probably look like a repeat, so I doubt that it's necessary for me to post.
I ask you all now to be honest.
Who seems more scummy?
Correction: I'm not reading YOUR long-winded analysis. I'm pretty embarrassed for you because you're wasting your time. A lot of it.
ninja'd while I wrote my last post. wow... just... wow. You seem less pro-town with every post you make. I hope others see this as well.
At this point you don't even have to be scum, I still think you'd make a nice lynch target.
)![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/2PhRr.png)
![[image loading]](http://i25.tinypic.com/xnuij4.png)
![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/cjwLl.png)
