Print

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

[Toaster]

Not posting on the weekend would be the Shakeragian thing to do!

Flabort:

Well, let's say I tried to cheat the system, such as Toaster's "The role that wins KYOSN". How would Wuba or TolyK react?

Here's a suggestion.


Cheeetar:

4) Because the scum is a team. If somebody scummy thinks you make a lot of sense, maybe they have a reason other than their conviction in your logic to agree with you?

How do you know the scum is a team?  With it a proclaimed semi-bastard and Wuba involved, all bets are off as far as I'm concerned.

I'm not anti-town. As far as I can see, I have some crazy outsider wincon, and asking TolyK he literally said I wouldn't know how to play to win until the end of Day 3. So, y'know. If I'm a godfather role, I might have screwed myself?

More importantly, are you pro-town?  Why should I not shoot you right now, Cheeetar?


Shakerag:

Toaster:

Oh, but you are my Shakerag.  I created you!

Is that a fact?

Yes!  Not in context of this game, at least.  But I gave you your nerd cred.


Varee:  Three people have claimed "Not Shakerag."   How do you reconcile this with your claim there are 13 Shakerags?  By any chance did your info say "There are 13 people with Shakeragian roles" or "There are 13 Shakeragian roles in the game" and you just inferred it to "13 Shakerags?"

[flabort]

flabort: What do the role suggestions you have received tell you about the people who suggested them, and what do you think of the suggestions?

So far I have not recieved suggestions from over half the players, including Shakerag, GayArchaea, Varee, Tiruin, Jim Groovester, Persus13, 4maskwolf, Mastahcheese, or Superblackcat; these players either suspect a trap, haven't read my request that everyone give a suggestion, or just don't want anything else because their roles are already perfect. This is a null tell for all of them, meaning it doesn't affect my reads yet.

Cheeetar is definitely trying to game the system with his suggestion. He's more or less aware that the role has to affect me first, and his suggestion would make me lose trying to create it. It lets me know that he definitely suspects something, but that he's willing to bite. He has enough daring to try it, and enough self-preservation to give me something that can't possibly go wrong for him. It suggests he might be a third-party, but is overall a neutral tell.

Jack A T He is clearly concerned about the secondary wincons, and his suggestion would make the game slightly more traditional. It's also very specific, and my ability to create roles does not lend itself to something so specific (It literally has the words "but not too specific" in it). He is afraid of killing members of the town with it, which is why he specified non-lethally, he's afraid of it's owner being killed reinstating the wincons, which is why he specified weather or not it's owner is alive, and permanently. Really, it's a case of paranoia; this kind of paranoia comes from not wanting to be caught, which leads me to believe he may be anti-town. He's also trying to game the system really hard, with so many clauses in the role name. Jack A T.

Toaster has the least specific role, but most game-the-system style. It suggests that he's not taking my request seriously, which is not indicative of him at all. However, it is a suggestion, and there are two worse ones. Null tell.

Vector wants to be a cop. This may be an anti-town wanting to look like town, but I think it's more indicative that Vector may be town-aligned. Her(?) later revision is an indication that she has a town or neutral read on me; meaning, she trusts me more than Toaster does. It also indicates that she is somewhat creative and can't stand being bland; I think this means if she does make a scum slip, it will be easy to see, and I don't see any yet. I trust that she is town aligned.

TheDarkStar is like an actual kid at Christmas, an innocent tot asking for the latest robotic dinosaur toy. I have no clue what his suggested role might yield, and though a kill may be likely, that's not necessarily the case. I think this is more town than anti-town.


I seem to be short on stimulating conversation.

Shakerag How come your answers are so short? What are your reads so far?

Mastahcheese, SuperBlackCat If I were to gift either of you the role "Nine Lives", how would you react? If I were to give you "Cat o' Nine Tails", how would you react?

Jim Groovester How come you are arguing about whether or not being a Shakerag is to be anti-town or not? Is it because you are neither a Shakerag nor a Town? Can you say that your alignment is pro-town (whichever side town may be), though?

Everyone else What do you think about the accusation by Jim Groovester that TheDarkStar might only be pretending to scum hunt? Is it indicative of Jim's motives, or is it a well founded accusation?

PPE: Thank you, Toaster. A clearly wonderful example of how Wuba can interpret everything creatively. Now, why are you threatening Cheeetar for not knowing if he's anti-town when I can see multiple other players in the same situation, and what are your reads on each other player?

[Shakerag]

flabort: What do the role suggestions you have received tell you about the people who suggested them, and what do you think of the suggestions?

So far I have not recieved suggestions from over half the players, including Shakerag, GayArchaea, Varee, Tiruin, Jim Groovester, Persus13, 4maskwolf, Mastahcheese, or Superblackcat; these players either suspect a trap, haven't read my request that everyone give a suggestion, or just don't want anything else because their roles are already perfect. This is a null tell for all of them, meaning it doesn't affect my reads yet.

Or just don't GAF and/or hate "ask everyone" questions. 

Shakerag How come your answers are so short? What are your reads so far?

Because work.  My reads are that everyone is playing about how I'd expect for D1. 


Vector:
What odds do you give to there being a cult in this game?

[flabort]

flabort: What do the role suggestions you have received tell you about the people who suggested them, and what do you think of the suggestions?

So far I have not recieved suggestions from over half the players, including Shakerag, GayArchaea, Varee, Tiruin, Jim Groovester, Persus13, 4maskwolf, Mastahcheese, or Superblackcat; these players either suspect a trap, haven't read my request that everyone give a suggestion, or just don't want anything else because their roles are already perfect. This is a null tell for all of them, meaning it doesn't affect my reads yet.

Or just don't GAF and/or hate "ask everyone" questions. 

Actually, yeah, that too. Thank you, Shakerag Prime, I wanted to say something along those lines but couldn't remember it.

[4maskwolf]

Flabort:

flabort: What do the role suggestions you have received tell you about the people who suggested them, and what do you think of the suggestions?

So far I have not recieved suggestions from over half the players, including Shakerag, GayArchaea, Varee, Tiruin, Jim Groovester, Persus13, 4maskwolf, Mastahcheese, or Superblackcat; these players either suspect a trap, haven't read my request that everyone give a suggestion, or just don't want anything else because their roles are already perfect. This is a null tell for all of them, meaning it doesn't affect my reads yet.

Beware Greek's bearing gifts... Or anyone in a game of mafia bearing gifts, for that matter.  I'll pass.

Everyone else What do you think about the accusation by Jim Groovester that TheDarkStar might only be pretending to scum hunt?

Eh?  I'll need to take another look at it to be sure, but the un-FOS by TDS is just... what?

Everyone else Is it indicative of Jim's motives, or is it a well founded accusation?

Indicative of Jim's motives... are you implying lyncher?  Regardless, I don't see anything in his statement that sets off any alarm bells, but I'll take another look.

Mastahcheese: You of all people should know the dangers of giving out daykills.  There's a reason Toaster is current king of the mafia.  If you suspect Toaster, you really think it is the best idea to gambit by giving him a weapon to destroy the town?

Jim Groovester: Reasonable enough, I suppose.  On the other hand, if he were to balk about killing the highest voted target, that would be a sign he was allied with that person and we could just lynch Toaster.

Toaster:

I'm not anti-town. As far as I can see, I have some crazy outsider wincon, and asking TolyK he literally said I wouldn't know how to play to win until the end of Day 3. So, y'know. If I'm a godfather role, I might have screwed myself?

More importantly, are you pro-town?  Why should I not shoot you right now, Cheeetar?

I'd really rather you not.  Partly due to my great distaste for third-party hating, but also because he didn't have to claim his alignment.  He could have kept his mouth shut.  While I suppose he could be a scum-aligned third-party doing a gambit (betting that we don't lynch him now so that he's in the clear later), I don't take third-partyness to be major enough for an automatic lynch.  Particularly when he could be town-sided.  Granted, it's your daykill and you can do what you want with it.

[4maskwolf]

Okay, I read back through what was there.

I'm ambivalent over the whole TDS thing right now, having re-read some of the relevant sections.  This is how it goes down from my view (obviously I'm paraphrasing heavily):

Spoiler: My Breakdown of the events (click to show/hide)

Jim: This is a dumb scum gambit, not a dumb town gambit.  *votes mastahcheese*
TDS: Erm... can you explain that a little more.
Cheese: Yeah, I'd like an explanation too.  Also, if I gave you a gun you'd shoot me, so why do you think I'd give you a gun?
Cheeetar: How do you not understand it, TDS?  Also, your questioning is similar to mastahcheese's (Editor's Note One).  Why do you think it would be a town gambit?
TDS: Cheeetar, why are you defending Jim (Editor's Note Two).  Why are you questioning only me?  Why am I responsible for what Cheese posts (Editor's Note Three)? *explains question to Jim*
Cheeetar: mastahcheese is suspicious, yes.  It's suspicious he parroted you so shortly afterwards (Editor's Note Four).
Jim: *explains his logic*
TDS: *talks to Cheeetar* Jim: I get your logic now, but why aren't you questioning Cheese about it (Editor's Note Five)?

It's not a complete summary of what was said, but I picked out the things I wanted to focus on.
Cheeetar: If you look through my write-up, you'll notice I left "Editor's Note" marks in various places.  How is TDS responsible for what mastahcheese says, as you claim at Note One.  You say at Note Four a couple of things about it being suspicious that he parroted him soon after: can two people not ask the same question?  Why should Cheese have to write out a question a previous player asked?  And why does TDS asking what is (from my point of view) a legitimate question make him responsible for the person under attack wanting the same clarification?  What TDS says at Note Three is perfectly valid, in my opinion.

TDS: Why do you think that Cheeetar is defending Jim, as you say at Note Two?  Also, what makes you think that Jim wasn't questioning mastahcheese, which you say at Note Five?

[TolyK]

Everyone else What do you think about the accusation by Jim Groovester that TheDarkStar might only be pretending to scum hunt? Is it indicative of Jim's motives, or is it a well founded accusation?

I think they're splendid. Marvelous. Genius. Intricate and amusing.

You were talking about the accusation? Oh, I can't say anything about that, really.

[Cheeetar]

Shakerag: To what extent do you think the opposite will be true- people wary to accuse or investigate you because of the preconceived notion that in a game called KYOSN it would be too obvious to kill Shakerag?

Spoiler: Toaster (click to show/hide)

Cheeetar:

4) Because the scum is a team. If somebody scummy thinks you make a lot of sense, maybe they have a reason other than their conviction in your logic to agree with you?

How do you know the scum is a team?  With it a proclaimed semi-bastard and Wuba involved, all bets are off as far as I'm concerned.

I'm falling back on regular scumhunting in the absence of other clues. I'd rather work off what's most likely than assume crazy conditions and use those to excuse suspicious activity.

I'm not anti-town. As far as I can see, I have some crazy outsider wincon, and asking TolyK he literally said I wouldn't know how to play to win until the end of Day 3. So, y'know. If I'm a godfather role, I might have screwed myself?

More importantly, are you pro-town?  Why should I not shoot you right now, Cheeetar?

I don't have an explicit town win condition ("You win when all members of the mafia faction are dead."), no. I don't know what I am, but I'm certain enough that I'm not malignant to town to be upfront with my weird wincon stuff. Don't shoot me because I hope you can see that I'm attempting to hunt scum.

Spoiler: 4maskwolf (click to show/hide)

Okay, I read back through what was there.

I'm ambivalent over the whole TDS thing right now, having re-read some of the relevant sections.  This is how it goes down from my view (obviously I'm paraphrasing heavily):

My Breakdown of the events
Jim: This is a dumb scum gambit, not a dumb town gambit.  *votes mastahcheese*
TDS: Erm... can you explain that a little more.
Cheese: Yeah, I'd like an explanation too.  Also, if I gave you a gun you'd shoot me, so why do you think I'd give you a gun?
Cheeetar: How do you not understand it, TDS?  Also, your questioning is similar to mastahcheese's (Editor's Note One).  Why do you think it would be a town gambit?
TDS: Cheeetar, why are you defending Jim (Editor's Note Two).  Why are you questioning only me?  Why am I responsible for what Cheese posts (Editor's Note Three)? *explains question to Jim*
Cheeetar: mastahcheese is suspicious, yes.  It's suspicious he parroted you so shortly afterwards (Editor's Note Four).
Jim: *explains his logic*
TDS: *talks to Cheeetar* Jim: I get your logic now, but why aren't you questioning Cheese about it (Editor's Note Five)?

It's not a complete summary of what was said, but I picked out the things I wanted to focus on.
Cheeetar: If you look through my write-up, you'll notice I left "Editor's Note" marks in various places.  How is TDS responsible for what mastahcheese says, as you claim at Note One.  You say at Note Four a couple of things about it being suspicious that he parroted him soon after: can two people not ask the same question?  Why should Cheese have to write out a question a previous player asked?  And why does TDS asking what is (from my point of view) a legitimate question make him responsible for the person under attack wanting the same clarification?  What TDS says at Note Three is perfectly valid, in my opinion.

1) He's not- the synchronicity of it implicates TDS, and I noted it, but I never asked TDS to explain it. There are some things that seem scummy that you can't defend yourself from. It's unfortunate for them if they're town, but that's no excuse for me to not notice peculiarities like that.
4) They can, but within the context it was suspicious.

My thrust at TDS wasn't based merely on that suspiciousness- you'll note I asked him a question (specifically the one he still hasn't answered about why he thinks free daykills is just as or more likely to be a town gambit.) I didn't vote him for it, in any occasion. Upon explaining himself, his suspicion grew in my eyes, and it garnered him a vote.

[4maskwolf]

4) They can, but within the context it was suspicious.

Oh?  Explain, because I'm not seeing it.  Yes, the scum might be able to coordinate, I've heard that argument, but the natural reaction of scum players is to disassociate themselves from each other, to not be seen as colluding.  While it is certainly possible that a mastahcheese/TheDarkStar scumteam could set up something like that, it seems unlikely to me on day one.

As a point of fact, most of cheese's questioning in the post following the one in question was actually directed at Jim's desire for a kill, and not towards Jim's accusation.  How is that, to use your words, "suspiciously parallel" to asking for clarification on a claim that a gambit was a scum gambit?  If by "suspiciously parallel" you mean "mastahcheese backed up the question", then I suppose yes, but that's not the way your post was phrased.  From my view, that's like implicating me because the following statements are similar:

Toaster:

More importantly, are you pro-town?  Why should I not shoot you right now, Cheeetar?

I'd really rather you not.  Partly due to my great distaste for third-party hating, but also because he didn't have to claim his alignment.  He could have kept his mouth shut.  While I suppose he could be a scum-aligned third-party doing a gambit (betting that we don't lynch him now so that he's in the clear later), I don't take third-partyness to be major enough for an automatic lynch.  Particularly when he could be town-sided.  Granted, it's your daykill and you can do what you want with it.

More importantly, are you pro-town?  Why should I not shoot you right now, Cheeetar?

I don't have an explicit town win condition ("You win when all members of the mafia faction are dead."), no. I don't know what I am, but I'm certain enough that I'm not malignant to town to be upfront with my weird wincon stuff. Don't shoot me because I hope you can see that I'm attempting to hunt scum.

I'm just not seeing anything but a house of straw here, please enlighten me.

[mastahcheese]

mastahcheese: Who, aside from Toaster, do you think is scummy?  What, in your eyes, have you contributed to the effort to hunt scum?

Aside from Toaster? Not really sure.
Still trying to figure out what "scum" even is, so I'm looking for if people are trying to hide something.
As what I've contributed, not as much as I've wanted too.
Apparantly people don't make plans as much as I thought to give anything other than "lol, I have no plans", and I haven't worked up the effort to ask something else.

mastahcheese:

What the fuck are you talking about?

Don't question my logic, Jim.

And why shouldn't he?

That particular bit was a joke, as I had already answered his above questions that you snipped out.
I took him saying "what the fuck are you talking about?" as less of a serious question, and more of an expressed thought.

Mastahcheese, SuperBlackCat If I were to gift either of you the role "Nine Lives", how would you react? If I were to give you "Cat o' Nine Tails", how would you react? 

If I got Nine Lives, I'd be estatic, because it's basically what won the game for me that one time.
I don't remember what Cat o' Nine Tails did, though. It sounds violent, though, and we can always use more violence in mafia games.

As for a suggestion for a gifted power, I honestly don't know what to suggest, which is why I didn't suggest one.
I wouldn't say my role is perfect, but the main things I would want are things that I already have.
I think a cop would be nice, as long as it provides results that actually mean shit.

Mastahcheese: You of all people should know the dangers of giving out daykills.  There's a reason Toaster is current king of the mafia.  If you suspect Toaster, you really think it is the best idea to gambit by giving him a weapon to destroy the town?

Of course I think it's the best idea.
Toaster knows better than anyone the power of a daykill, because of my own stupidity. Which is exactly why I'm not making the same mistake twice.
The real question is this: if I'm so dangerous, being capable of handing out daykills like candy on Halloween, why hasn't Toaster done everyone a favor and shoot me already?
Unless of course, having an increase in random deaths benifits him somehow, or if he's hoping for more guns.
It is, after all, a one-shot weapon.

But here's some more booze to spike the wine with first.

Granted, it's your daykill and you can do what you want with it.

Why are you acting so afraid of him?
You're soundly awfully submissive.
Do you fear Toaster now?

[4maskwolf]

Granted, it's your daykill and you can do what you want with it.

Why are you acting so afraid of him?
You're soundly awfully submissive.
Do you fear Toaster now?

Erm... afraid?

You're saying I am submissive when everything I said to him before that line was telling him what to do with his daykill?

I have no fear of Toaster, I was acknowledging a truth: it IS his daykill, and he CAN do what he wants with it.  It was actually supposed to be an implied threat: it's his kill to use as he sees fit, but he better damn well know he'll be called to task for it.

[webadict]

Everyone else What do you think about the accusation by Jim Groovester that TheDarkStar might only be pretending to scum hunt? Is it indicative of Jim's motives, or is it a well founded accusation?

I don't know. You didn't post any places where this might be the case. How can I judge that without seeing it?!

[Jim Groovester]

Jim Groovester How come you are arguing about whether or not being a Shakerag is to be anti-town or not? Is it because you are neither a Shakerag nor a Town? Can you say that your alignment is pro-town (whichever side town may be), though?

I wasn't aware I was making these arguments. To my recollection I have not made any statement about whether I think being a Shakerag is town or anti-town.

I have the town win condition. Don't you?

Mastahcheese: You of all people should know the dangers of giving out daykills.  There's a reason Toaster is current king of the mafia.  If you suspect Toaster, you really think it is the best idea to gambit by giving him a weapon to destroy the town?

Of course I think it's the best idea.
Toaster knows better than anyone the power of a daykill, because of my own stupidity. Which is exactly why I'm not making the same mistake twice.
The real question is this: if I'm so dangerous, being capable of handing out daykills like candy on Halloween, why hasn't Toaster done everyone a favor and shoot me already?
Unless of course, having an increase in random deaths benifits him somehow, or if he's hoping for more guns.
It is, after all, a one-shot weapon.

This is an admirable attempt but it's still too silly to be taken seriously.

Yeah, Toaster's the dangerous one, not the guy handing out daykills.

Good one, buddy.

You also haven't answered my questions.

[mastahcheese]

I wasn't trying to say that Toaster is the dangerous one.
I was actually pointing out how he has someone dangerous in front of him, and the means to dispatch said dangerous person.
But then again, then he wouldn't have the means to dispatch a perhaps more dangerous person.
Take that as you will.

As for your attempts to pester me.

Could you be lazier?

Easily.

Have you no response to my points about how bad your gambit is? Or a response or defense of your own?

Perhaps the gambit does look bad, but the fact is that my beef is with Toaster, not you.
And no, I don't intend to defend myself. At least not with words, yet.
I'll explain later. Maybe.

[Superblackcat]

Flabort: By all means please do. I am very happy to be more catty. . I'm not sure what either role does, so if you could expound on that, that would be helpful.

Jack AT: I would think that it is incorrect enough to hinder town. Since I have the ability, I use my best judgement. (Pretty shitty, but w.e) and follow the train of thought I believe is right. I wouldn't remove the vote of someone just making a point I guess. But I would remove the direct competitor, especially if I believe that he is not scum, as opposed to just believing the guy I'm voting is scum.

I will re-read for comprehension tomorrow during Veterans Day. I am unable to read so much in the time I have now.