Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[makeinu]

Makeinu: He hasn't posted anything meaningful, hasn't posted since day 1, and was on yesterday without making a post here, but instead in other games:

-snip-

I'm for just replacing him now and being done with it honestly. And  despite not being on the replacement list yet, a full week of inactivity on Mafia is not being 'active.'

I don't care that he's off posting actively in other areas of the forum. And he's still 'active' enough that he's not due for replacement yet, according to the game mod:

Is there a point at which you'll forcibly replace somebody for inactivity, and has Sinlessmoon reached it yet?

Yes, there is a point where I'll forcibly replace someone. No, he's not there quite yet. But if we reach Monday and he hasn't posted yet I'll have to replace him.

So, that's enough for me to be convinced that, barring a better target, he needs to go. Because he's 'active' enough to stay in despite not posting since day one, not posting anything constructive even then, and yet?

Only way I can read that is that he's got a night role, and barring a forthcoming useful report from him, I have to assume that's a scum role.

No I am not an 'uninformed noob'.

I didn't say you are an "uninformed noob", I said you were acting one. If it's not an act, then get up to speed. If it is an act, then get up to speed. I still have suspicions of Max White, and those didn't ebb completely just because you stepped into his role.

We'll get a role flip lynching Sinlessmoon, and an end to the "what the fuck is he" uncertainty.

[Persus13]

Persus:
Will we actually get any information for lynching Sinless?

His role flip, yeah. And it will stop me looking over my shoulder at him while scumhunting, and stop scum from attacking an easy target. If he's scum, great, if he's town, it's not as good cause we're one step closer to defeat, but there's less doubt about him being scum lurking his way to victory.

[Jim Groovester]

Jim:
Scum list thus far, and reasons why. Also, who do you think killing would give the most information.

No, go reread all my posts from Day 2.

Also, killing scum would give the most information.

[Superblackcat]

Obviously, but who, as of now, do you think killing would give you the most information. Or do you know who scum is?

Also, your list have not changed in the slightest?

[Mephansteras]

The Whiteboard
Jim Groovester: RangerCado
Sinlessmoon: Jim Groovester, makeinu, Persus13


Day ends ~5PM Pacific Monday

[RangerCado]

Okay, two things from me now. First, EXTEND. If you guys are gonna do this, i'm fighting it because your all being incredibly stupid.

Secondly, Jim, Persus13, makeinu. Of the three of you, only Jim is scumhunting, and hes still leaving his vote on Sinless. Makeinu is pressing BlackCat, sure, but all of you have yet to do any full scum hunting today! Your all focusing on offing the most inactive player right now who I believe should have already been put on the replacement list, and aren't doing anything else.

Makeinu, you said that I would now see how you scum hunt by quoting my post about PMing. Is this to say that you are hunting via PMs, or is that an excuse to throw people off the trail?

I think Sinlessmoon needs to either be replaced or lynched. Until either of these happens or he becomes very active, scum will have an easy target, and town will be plagued by questions about whether he's scum and lurking his way to victory. While I'd rather lynch scum suspects, we'll gain more information from sinlessmoon's death or replacement.

Why would scum lynch someone if they were inactive? It leaves us with dead weight for the whole day, so lynching him while not doing any other scumhunting is stupid.

And whoevers defence it was (I believe it was makeinu's) that said they didn't have another target, try LOOKING for one! Odds are one of you is a dopp, and I just have to hope someone else sees what i'm seeing, because this is ridiculous! And if it turns out that your all truly townies, then your being lazy townies are of no help to the town.

[Persus13]

Okay, two things from me now. First, EXTEND. If you guys are gonna do this, i'm fighting it because you're all being incredibly stupid.

I made the case that Sinlessmoon is dead weight to town and should either be lynched or replaced. You have yet to prove me wrong and have actually agreed with me. How am I being stupid?

All of you have yet to do any full scum hunting today! Your all focusing on offing the most inactive player right now who I believe should have already been put on the replacement list, and aren't doing anything else.

Look and tell me how many people have posted recently. There's you, me, makeinu, Jim, and SBC. I have a target I want to scumhunt, and I've mentioned people I think are scummy before. But they aren't posting either. If I ask someone questions and they don't respond, how can I scumhunt them? I don't have strong scummy feelings about anyone who is posting (although I just got some on you), and my main target, who I VOTED, has yet to respond. I have tried to scumhunt, but they haven't responded to me, and I'm getting annoyed by dead weight.

I think Sinlessmoon needs to either be replaced or lynched. Until either of these happens or he becomes very active, scum will have an easy target, and town will be plagued by questions about whether he's scum and lurking his way to victory. While I'd rather lynch scum suspects, we'll gain more information from sinlessmoon's death or replacement.

Why would scum lynch someone if they were inactive? It leaves us with dead weight for the whole day, so lynching him while not doing any other scumhunting is stupid.

Attacking Sinlessmoon for no activity is an easy way for to scum to look like they're scumhunting. They may not try to lynch him, but he's an easy target. More importantly, while I'm scumhunting, there is a big question mark over this guy's head. Sinlessmoon has shown no indication of posting. He has made no posts since 6 days ago, and if he's scum, he's going to lurk his way to victory unless he gets lynched or replaced.

Odds are one of you is a dopp, and I just have to hope someone else sees what i'm seeing, because this is ridiculous! And if it turns out that your all truly townies, then your being lazy townies are of no help to the town.

The probability of at least one of us being a dopp is 53%. So the odds don't quite say that. But my problem with that statement is that it contradicts your earlier statement that scum wouldn't try to lynch a lurker. But if what you say is true (and if one of my pet scum theories is true) that is what is happening.
And I'm not being a lazy townie, I'm being a townie annoyed by a lurker. If anyone is being a lazy townie, it's you for completely ignoring the lack of information we're getting about one player. A player who like all of us, starts out today with a 20% chance of being scum. By saying only that you want him replaced, of which there has been no indication of happening, and Sinlessmoon apparently doesn't seem to want to do, you seem to think he is 100% town. Why are you so against lynching a luker? Is it because he's your scumbuddy?

[Tiruin]

Okay, two things from me now. First, EXTEND. If you guys are gonna do this, i'm fighting it because your all being incredibly stupid.

Extend too. Holidays :S

[Toaster]

I agree with Ranger.   Sinless clearly isn't playing at this point.

Extend.


Hey Persus.  Why is your vote record so stinky?

You started out voting Max for tunneling- kind of a silly accusation for so early in the game.  You talked about him but didn't really put out much pressure after that.  When Max called for a replacement, you voted Sinlessmoon for his lurking until you realized so many other people were doing that; then you moved back to Max and that was pretty much it for you D1.

D2 you start out listing some suspects:

My suspects are Tiruin (Only voted Max yesterday), Imp (seems odd, scumhunting Toaster for A JOKE, which is much easier to make than a WOT analysis post, and friendliness), and you (scummy feeling, not sure why). Caz also seems suspicious to me but I have no clue where he is. How about you?

...except you don't actually vote any of them.  Additionally, I get the feeling you're trying to buddy me with your attack on Imp.

Heck, Imp even acknowledged my answering of these.  Why are you trying to be Imp's little helper monkey?

Because I was wondering if I should vote her.[...]

...You're wondering in public?

Well, more accurately where I placed my vote depended on how my question was answered.

Let's put it this way- how else would you have voted here?

You then move your vote off Imp and onto a nonplaying lurker who already had votes- *before* Imp addresses any of your concerns.  It's almost like you don't care about them (because they're totally fake.)

Persus:
Will we actually get any information for lynching Sinless?

His role flip, yeah. And it will stop me looking over my shoulder at him while scumhunting, and stop scum from attacking an easy target.

Oh the irony!  I bet you laughed when you wrote this.

I think Sinlessmoon needs to either be replaced or lynched. Until either of these happens or he becomes very active, scum will have an easy target, and town will be plagued by questions about whether he's scum and lurking his way to victory. While I'd rather lynch scum suspects, we'll gain more information from sinlessmoon's death or replacement.

Why would scum lynch someone if they were inactive? It leaves us with dead weight for the whole day, so lynching him while not doing any other scumhunting is stupid.

Attacking Sinlessmoon for no activity is an easy way for to scum to look like they're scumhunting.

Now I'm the one laughing!

So tell me, dopp, what did happen with your kill last night?

[RangerCado]

Persus13: ...And thats why I should reread my posts. I meant that scum would never night kill an inactive player. Scum lynching them makes sense because hey, as Jim said, safest vote in the world. You three are taking the easy way out too me, and you don't really have an excuse. If no one is answering your questions, put some pressure behind it and vote THEM! We have 2 extends available, and you three have decided to go kill someone who we have no information about. And if he isn't doing anything, being inactive as he is, then how would he lurk to victory? By all means, if you have no suspects at the end of both extends kill him. But right now, we can hunt active people instead of taking the easy way out as all scum would. And lastly, I do not see him as 100% town. I see him as a needless kill that a replacement might help the town IF he is town. If he isn't, then we can still lynch them when their replacement drops tells. Are you honestly telling me that your going to just kill him when we have about 4-5 RL days to do other things before deciding fully on this?

[Tiruin]

Quickpost:
Persus: If I was a suspect deemed to be mentioned in public because of my vote yesterday, then what have you to say on quite anything else on me other than why I only voted once? What's your take on that?

All of you have yet to do any full scum hunting today! Your all focusing on offing the most inactive player right now who I believe should have already been put on the replacement list, and aren't doing anything else.

Look and tell me how many people have posted recently. There's you, me, makeinu, Jim, and SBC. I have a target I want to scumhunt, and I've mentioned people I think are scummy before. But they aren't posting either. If I ask someone questions and they don't respond, how can I scumhunt them? I don't have strong scummy feelings about anyone who is posting (although I just got some on you), and my main target, who I VOTED, has yet to respond. I have tried to scumhunt, but they haven't responded to me, and I'm getting annoyed by dead weight.[...]

...Really? You didn't ask me anything as far as I see.

Jim: Points on people missing questions, why don't you link them to said questions to preferably aid the process of communication?
At this point of time, given Sin's activity rating, what is your prediction of him and the current votes? As in, does he seem like a good 'bandwagon' to justify your vote on?
Ranger

Persus13: ...And thats why I should reread my posts. I meant that scum would never night kill an inactive player.

..Yeah they would. Where are you getting this assumption? Scum do kill inactive players--that was my priority in several games as scum/third-party before--to further the game and to keep the 'fun' rolling.

[Toaster]

I meant that scum would never night kill an inactive player.

This is totally untrue.  In Super 6 scum killed the guy needing replacement, and that's just one game back.

[RangerCado]

Tiruin & Toaster: Personal assumption really, it just doesn't seem like something to do unless you want WIFOM or chaos... which is what scum can thrive in a lot. I see your points there... Never mind that point then.

[makeinu]

Persus13: ...And thats why I should reread my posts. I meant that scum would never night kill an inactive player. Scum lynching them makes sense because hey, as Jim said, safest vote in the world. You three are taking the easy way out too me, and you don't really have an excuse.

I'd argue that there's the perfect excuse in the world, and I've already stated it.

To reiterate:

he's still 'active' enough that he's not due for replacement yet, according to the game mod:

Is there a point at which you'll forcibly replace somebody for inactivity, and has Sinlessmoon reached it yet?

Yes, there is a point where I'll forcibly replace someone. No, he's not there quite yet. But if we reach Monday and he hasn't posted yet I'll have to replace him.

So, that's enough for me to be convinced that, barring a better target, he needs to go. Because he's 'active' enough to stay in despite not posting since day one, not posting anything constructive even then, and yet?

Only way I can read that is that he's got a night role, and barring a forthcoming useful report from him, I have to assume that's a scum role.

He's been prodded, he's not offline away from the forums, he's IN FACT busily posting elsewhere in the forums but NOT HERE. That's the very definition of active lurking, and I have a HUGE problem with that.

So what makes Sinlessmoon NOT a good lynch target in your book, RangerCado? Imp? Tiruin?

EXTEND

Are you honestly telling me that your going to just kill him when we have about 4-5 RL days to do other things before deciding fully on this?

I'm honestly telling you that I see no reason yet to not vote for him.


[/quote]

Obviously, but who, as of now, do you think killing would give you the most information. Or do you know who scum is?

Also, your list have not changed in the slightest?

Seriously. This is the best you have.

Superblackcat, who do YOU think killing would give the most information? Or do YOU know who the scum are? Because I strongly suspect that you just might, and you're doing nothing to assuage my suspicions.


PPE: Can't even tell you how many times I've seen a lurker night-killed by the scum team. I'd cite examples, but they're not on this forum, obviously.

[RangerCado]

Makeinu: No, he's just plain lurking. Active lurking is appearing to be doing something IN thread to appear to be doing something. He is just plain lurking, as shown by the definition of it in every BM.

Lurking - Purposefully not posting, so that you have few or no posts that can be analyzed. Generally a good strategy for scum. However, has the danger of earning you prods, getting modkilled, or found out via Zathras' Lurkertracker. Lurking is different than simply being away or unavailable. A good way to tell if someone is lurking is to check their profile's last active time, and compare it to their last post.