Dariush:I consider what Tolyk did scummy because he was pretty vocal that everything he said was 'just a guess', but then he directly and strongly contradicted his own words.
Where did he "directly and strongly" say the opposite of "it's just a guess?"
...Are you even reading the thread? Or are you just repeating the same questions over and over to imitate activity? Reply #173, second to last paragraph. I don't even want to bother with quotes, since you'll repeat the same question anyway.
Lazy as balls.
Pengo, you, me, Shake are rather inexperienced imo (compared to, say, Toaster, Think), though I probably should've included Deathsword. And Dariush because people tend to not like him for his character . I'm included among them because I realize I'm pretty crappy at (internet) mafia, since I like to think logically rather than analyze posts, and tend to be told "y u no scumhunt". And I don't like to put my vote in most places. I'm trying to work on this, of course, but that's the answers to your questions.
Now that I've done your work for you, I see nowhere in here where he's "directly and strongly" saying the opposite of "it's just a guess." In fact, his "imo" in there seems to confirm that he's not particularly adamant about these assertions.
So, this is bullshit and you won't explain why it's not bullshit. What do we call people who spew baseless bullshit,
Dariush?Accusation of being a lynch candidate. It is scummy for exactly the same reason describing someone as scum, but not voting them (or addressing them, for that matter) is.
I don't get it. How is asserting that someone's likely to get themselves lynched but not doing anything about it equivalent to stating that someone's probably scum and doing the same? What are they supposed to do about it?
For starters, his premise is wrong. I don't know where he got his information from, but I know that neither me, Shake nor Tiruin didn't get lynched on D1 for a pretty long time (for me it's around a year, minus RL5 where the town had a major case of idiotfuckassititis). He didn't support his opinions with any quotes, links or anything. And that is scummy, Johnny.
How's that scummy and not just wrong or out of date? You really wanted him to dig through recent games to see who'd been both lynched D1 recently and was in this game?
Toaster:Irony: Should Shakerag be lynched, then? If so, are you saying that barely-part-of-the-game Shakerag is a bigger threat than dodgy ZombieU? How sure are you ZombieU is scum?
I don't know. I guess I'm leaning towards not, especially since, strictly speaking, Shak doesn't have any incentive to help the scumteam win. I still say he's been anti-town, though, what with his "Four people voting me? I'm not scum, they're scum! That's why I've got votes on me, it's a conspiracy!!"
I'm less sure of ZU now than I was. His dodginess is starting to reach a consistency where I'm really less sure that he's nervous, dodgy scum than that he just doesn't know what the fuck is going on most of the time. I don't know if English isn't his primary language or his reading comprehension is crap or what, but he's moving out of "I don't want to answer that honestly because it might incriminate me" and into "I see a few keywords so I'm going to infer a meaning from context."
By the way, who are your current suspicions? Are you comfortable sitting on your penngo vote?
Shakerag:Interesting. I think I believe Shakerag, though his claim and playstyle have both made it pretty clear that he's a liability regardless.
How? I know survivors can be a liability to the town (or any other alignment, for that matter, I suppose) come end game, but I'm not a survivor. I don't win with anyone else, and I'm not planning on sticking around to the end game. ... Err, hold that last thought; I just thought of something I need to ask webadict.
See response to Toaster. Your scumpicks were entirely and exclusively people voting you, which I feel moves from "self-interested" to "maliciously defensive." I'll agree that your wincon doesn't seem especially anti-town, however.
Hapah:First: Valid or not, shouldn't those concerns be raised in a PM? I mean, even if you are upset about it, you don't gain anything by shaming the mod in the thread.
Second: Yes the votecount needs to be corrected, but still, no need to be so hostile about it.
Dar: I don't think he missed it, he just didn't count it because of the rule thingy he gave. I don't think the thread is the right place for this.
I think voting syntax and mod accountability are threadworthy issues. I also agree that Book and Dariush are being a bit hostile about it, but that's how Dariush rolls, I don't think Book means anything by it, and wuba's not in much of a position to complain about assholes.
zombie urist:IO: If that doesn't answer your question, then I probably misunderstood it and you should probably clarify it before we start going in circles again. I was never certain that was his plan. I never said that "doing Plan X would be a simple way to mislynch someone" implied. "thus he was trying to do Plan X." My line of thought went from "He looks like he is doing X" + "Doing X is scummy" -> "He is scummy"
Here, I will
draw you a fucking picture.Once upon a time there was a zombie that wanted to live. As part of this wanting to live, he went into elaborate detail regarding what makes good and bad RVS questions.
He also mentioned that regular scumhunting questions were different than RVS questions.
A passing owl noted that while he had gone into quite a bit of detail regarding what made RVS questions good, the only thing he said about regular scumhunting questions was that they were "different" from RVS ones! Curious at this disparity, the owl asked the zombie about non-RVS questions.
The zombie once again answered only that they were "different."
The owl is now suspicious and pissed off, and wants to know what about that question sounded like the zombie should parrot exactly what he already said earlier.