XimenaPaulina Posted December 17, 2011 Posted December 17, 2011 People should also consider "Internet-level" tact. Having a thick skin is advisable, but so is being careful what you say to people. It does work both ways. I'm a bit with Hinckly in that I think you ought to treat people on the internet the same way you would in person. Just because you're interacting via computer and through text on a screen, doesn't mean there aren't real people on the other end. I think one should differentiate "member treatment" within the game and outside the game. I'd take myself as an example, I called/"joked about" the player/characters The Riddler (Gotham) and Siegmund (Isla Paradisa) stupid within the context of the respective games. But have you seen me throw out the same insulting words to both EB members sok117 and smittyfan outside the game thread? NO - because there is a clear difference between playing the game and treating others outside the game. Both are Internet/online/computer activities, but "Internet tact" is imperative only in the latter's case. Within an online game it's one's prerogative on how he/she will conduct handle himself/herself, and if the situation calls for it, you could use any valid and legal tactic (as long as it is not cheating) to your advantage, like what def did. If I may give a real-life example, it's equivalent to trash-talking in sports. I give and receive my own fair share of trash-talk in ballgames, and what I learned is that the moment you let these harsh insulting words affect you you're bound to lose the game. But if you remain calm and cool, and "let your game do the talking", then the trash-talk will backfire to your opponent. Remember the goal of the trashtalker is to get under your skin, and if you get annoyed then you let him win, if not then he loses - simple as that. That's what K-Girl did when the Fantabulous Kresmo was pressuring her in BB2. 2. Watching people’s forum behavior – I realize that not posting right after reading or being involved elsewhere on the forums can be a scum tactic in order to wait for more information to come up, but this is again something that is outside of the game world. It’s really not any different for someone to go off an read something in the historic themes forum as it is for them to go off and read on a sports, news, or video site elsewhere on the internet. People should not have to abandon the other things they like doing in order to not look like scum in a mafia game, and that's not the same as not being committed to the game. Def may have put his whole life on hold for this game, but it doesn't mean everyone else needs to, as long as they're still participating. I guess this comment is specifically pointed at me when I questioned Rumble Strike not responding to my PM right away. You weren't aware of the nature of my crucial and important question to him, and him not responding right away simply put suspicion on him. If he was innocent he could've answered right away, but the long gap between reading it and responding really made me suspect him. And it turns out I was right since I read in their scum writeboard that he indeed "asked for advice from his teammates" on how shall he respond to that crucial PM. If he was just simply reading other threads, leading his quests, etc. then I would've understand, but ultimately I was right about my suspicion on him.
Hinckley Posted December 17, 2011 Posted December 17, 2011 If I may give a real-life example, it's equivalent to trash-talking in sports. I give and receive my own fair share of trash-talk in ballgames, and what I learned is that the moment you let these harsh insulting words affect you you're bound to lose the game. But if you remain calm and cool, and "let your game do the talking", then the trash-talk will backfire to your opponent. Remember the goal of the trashtalker is to get under your skin, and if you get annoyed then you let him win, if not then he loses - simple as that. That's what K-Girl did when the Fantabulous Kresmo was pressuring her in BB2. In a ball-game, you know who's on your team and who isn't and trash-talking is therefore clear. Since you don't know if the person you're "game-insulting" is on your side or not, you take the risk of actually hurting their feelings. I think I understand the difference as you've just described it and I think we see way too much of the inappropriate type in EB mafia games. I'm not saying it's you and won't say anyone in particular, but I think it's worth everyone keeping in mind. I can't think of a game in recent memory where someone hasn't had their feelings hurt. We should be responsible for what we say. Post-justification is fine, but thinking of all the implications first is the best way to go, I think. Insulting intelligence as a game tactic? Interesting theory. I'm not sure I'll try it in the future. I've definitely gotten frustrated with players in the past and questioned their intelligence out of frustration with having to repeat information or game rules. Sok and Pie come to mind as guys I haven't been the nicest too. In both cases, I spoke with them about what I thought was going too far and have done my best to change that behavior in games I've played since. I get as intense as anybody but I can't justify what I felt turned into personal attacks in the past (with sok and Pie, specifically). To really boil it down to simplest terms, I used to work for a children's theater company and we did anti-bullying assemblies at schools. What we taught the kids was appropriate teasing is where everyone is having fun and inappropriate teasing is where someone feels sad. The skills we taught focused on the kid who was sad and what he or she could do to handle such situations. We didn't focus on the person doing the teasing because most programs already do and the ones who really understand it will express remorse but just continue to do it. Bullies are excellent leaders and powerful manipulators. Am I still talking about this? I guess so. Pardon me for rambling. Oh, and when I was a kid, there were a bunch of kids who killed their friend while playing Dungeons & Dragons. But that was in character so it was all cool.
XimenaPaulina Posted December 17, 2011 Posted December 17, 2011 In both cases, I spoke with them about what I thought was going too far and have done my best to change that behavior in games I've played since. I get as intense as anybody but I can't justify what I felt turned into personal attacks in the past (with sok and Pie, specifically). I think that's what's important if there were hurt feelings within the game, is that the instigator should at least make amends with his/her "victim" and make it clear that it wasn't personal and it's all part of the game. In Isla Paradisa, I apologized to smittyfan, the same with sok and Scorpiox in this game. I believe def did the same way too with Nightshroud, Scorpiox, et al. This way, hopefully there will be no hard feelings/grudges in case the involved parties meet again in future games. I also do take note of what I've been doing wrong in the games I've playing, and to hopefully never do it again. Every game is a learning experience for me. Oh, and when I was a kid, there were a bunch of kids who killed their friend while playing Dungeons & Dragons. But that was in character so it was all cool. Fortunately, we're all adults here, and we're expected to have the maturity to know the difference between playing in character and taking it too far outside the game.
Fugazi Posted December 17, 2011 Posted December 17, 2011 I think one should differentiate "member treatment" within the game and outside the game. (snip) Within an online game it's one's prerogative on how he/she will conduct handle himself/herself, and if the situation calls for it, you could use any valid and legal tactic (as long as it is not cheating) to your advantage, like what def did. Just throwing in my 2 cents worth. In few words, I don't agree that Internet tact should be tossed when playing a Mafia game. Old-timers can afford to verbally wrestle with each other quite a bit more, because they know their mates and they know they won't be taken too seriously. But fiercefully attacking or intimidating new players reflects badly on the player, on the game and on EB as a whole. It probably puts off a few newbies from jumping on board as well. I'm not trying to argue that it isn't a valid tactic, but it must be used with care and discernment. I know I have a thick skin, but how will I know the same about people I never have played with? Hey, I don't want those people to avoid me in the future because I've been abusive to them in a game. Winning at any cost sometimes spoils the fun.
def Posted December 17, 2011 Posted December 17, 2011 Just throwing in my 2 cents worth. In few words, I don't agree that Internet tact should be tossed when playing a Mafia game. Old-timers can afford to verbally wrestle with each other quite a bit more, because they know their mates and they know they won't be taken too seriously. But fiercefully attacking or intimidating new players reflects badly on the player, on the game and on EB as a whole. It probably puts off a few newbies from jumping on board as well. I'm not trying to argue that it isn't a valid tactic, but it must be used with care and discernment. I know I have a think skin, but how will I know the same about people I never have played with? Hey, I don't want those people to avoid me in the future because I've been abusive to them in a game. Winning at any cost sometimes spoils the fun. I think it's fair to say, that it can be intimidating to new players. I chatted with a few players, both in PM and in thread, and both are important to sincerely (privately) and humbly (publicly) make sure things are good. I fully hope the three scum I bullied around, Nightshroud, Rumblestrike, and scorpiox go out of the way to get their revenge on me in a future game. I'm more confident that Pie, Flitwick, and Brickdoctor will play in the future. Actually, only a few games back, I considered Pie a sort of sensitive type, but now he's pretty rough and tumble in the games It all depends on the type of thing said though. I think I wrote somewhere already that it shouldn't be personal. I spent a fair amount of time calling the scum babies, and making dirty diaper jokes. I had no clear idea who the scum were, so it really wasn't aimed at anyone in particular. Just generic insults to unite the town against our mortal enemies I think in that case, it really is the friendly kind of trash talk. What I'm going to curtail in the future is teasing the scum after I declare them scum, since that starts to turn into more personal sounding stuff... and to an extent it is, since I'm tailoring it to them That's what I'm going keep my eye out for next time. And not getting mad at Oky
Fugazi Posted December 17, 2011 Posted December 17, 2011 I should add that I didn't intend to point fingers at anyone in the current game specifically, as I had in mind worse examples of unwarranted language from previous games.
def Posted December 17, 2011 Posted December 17, 2011 I should add that I didn't intend to point fingers at anyone in the current game specifically, as I had in mind worse examples of unwarranted language from previous games. No worries from me, I'm just thinking out loud
Rumble Strike Posted December 17, 2011 Posted December 17, 2011 I think that last bit you said is the criux of the matter for me, def. I know we have settled it privately and publicly and that we are totally cool, but your "best go to Mafia School" comment just as I am going to be voted off, well as you know I found that a bit more personal than the usual rattling/Scum baiting, which I do acknowledge as a somewhat valid tactic. So what you said you would try to rein in, I would agree with.
def Posted December 17, 2011 Posted December 17, 2011 I think that last bit you said is the criux of the matter for me, def. I know we have settled it privately and publicly and that we are totally cool, but your "best go to Mafia School" comment just as I am going to be voted off, well as you know I found that a bit more personal than the usual rattling/Scum baiting, which I do acknowledge as a somewhat valid tactic. So what you said you would try to rein in, I would agree with. Again, I'm sorry. In retrospect, I can see why that was a biting remark, but at the time it wasn't meant to be anything more than a razzberry If someone said it to me, I'd just grit my teeth and yell bastard at my screen, but I wouldn't take it to heart. But, I've played at least 20 games, so it's easier to put in perspective. I understand why it was a nasty thing to say to someone playing their first full game. I'm sorry.
Hinckley Posted December 17, 2011 Posted December 17, 2011 Fortunately, we're all adults here, and we're expected to have the maturity to know the difference between playing in character and taking it too far outside the game. We want to all be adults, but despite our guidelines there are some kids here. We should definitely be careful not to intimidate them too much. And I'm not saying anybody is going to go murder anyone. I'm saying gaming justification is a slippery slope. Anyway, great points you made above the one I quoted. This is turning out to be a nice discussion. Just throwing in my 2 cents worth. In few words, I don't agree that Internet tact should be tossed when playing a Mafia game. Old-timers can afford to verbally wrestle with each other quite a bit more, because they know their mates and they know they won't be taken too seriously. But fiercefully attacking or intimidating new players reflects badly on the player, on the game and on EB as a whole. It probably puts off a few newbies from jumping on board as well. I'm not trying to argue that it isn't a valid tactic, but it must be used with care and discernment. I know I have a thick skin, but how will I know the same about people I never have played with? Hey, I don't want those people to avoid me in the future because I've been abusive to them in a game. Winning at any cost sometimes spoils the fun. This brings up a really good point that I brought up during Prison Riot! I, personally, feel I need to remember that "mates" part and not let things get to me so much. But even my "mates" have gone out of their way in recent games and gone beyond verbal wrestling. That's why I bring this up, mostly. I've been a little surprised by some of the veteran's behavior and I think some of the vets should consider analyzing their own behavior. Like I said, maybe I'm just too sensitive and God knows I've been a dick in the past, but it does help to check in and make sure our Mafia community is positive and welcoming...until we start oinking. I spent a fair amount of time calling the scum babies, and making dirty diaper jokes. Insulting generic Scum is a definite and clear tactic. Suggesting they are undercover babies is something really easy to laugh at, even for the Scum. There's definitely a difference and what you describe there is, without a doubt, a fair tactic. That's just my opinion, anyway.
Brickdoctor Posted December 17, 2011 Posted December 17, 2011 I don't think it was the insulting that bothered the Scum so much as the fact that def was using insults with what appeared to be little fact behind them - and the Townies believed his insults anyways. He would tell us to stop whining or throwing tantrums when we were pretty sure we weren't, but the Townies acted as if we really did just because def said so, and then took that as solid evidence against us.
XimenaPaulina Posted December 17, 2011 Posted December 17, 2011 We want to all be adults, but despite our guidelines there are some kids here. We should definitely be careful not to intimidate them too much. Yeah, I guess I'm just trying to convince myself that all of us should be adults where in fact there are indeed some kids here. So I agree it would be best to tone down on the intimidation as I wouldn't want to leave a poor kid scarred for life because of a couple of harsh words thrown at him in an online game. To be honest, I've always felt bad moments after making someone else feel bad, so if I had the chance I would take back those words. It's just sometimes it's hard to control what you're saying/posting when you're in the heat of the moment, even if part of it is just meant to tease or joke. I'm happy to have had this discussion since it's sort of a reality-check, and gives me the chance to re-assess my behavior as a mafia player.
TheBoyWonder Posted December 17, 2011 Posted December 17, 2011 I was worried when Oky said I could be the Vigilante. I knew at that time he was the Criminal Blocker, but I wanted to scream: ' Why would you try to unmask the Criminal Vigilante?'. If we hadn't got rid of Deadshot, I would of been dead that night probably. Thanks for letting me play. I did not let the 'sheep' claims get under my skin. I did kill some scumbags- Ra's (Targeted twice, first time got reborn, second time I couldn't kill him. My choice on that kill) andVentriloquist (chosen by Def)! By the way, K-nut, sorry about that. you just seemed best choice at the time.
Hinckley Posted December 17, 2011 Posted December 17, 2011 I don't think it was the insulting that bothered the Scum so much as the fact that def was using insults with what appeared to be little fact behind them - and the Townies believed his insults anyways. He would tell us to stop whining or throwing tantrums when we were pretty sure we weren't, but the Townies acted as if we really did just because def said so, and then took that as solid evidence against us. I think this is a good example of how to bring something up after a game has conclude. It gives everybody the chance to check in with how they play. What's nice about how Brickdoctor presented it is that he's expressing how he experienced it, not really blaming anyone for anything. He seems well adjusted to the results and it's an opening to a civil discussion about a specific behavior. This is a great idea to "de-brief" this way in a game conclusion. Everyone can look at what's being pointed out and take from it what they will for the next game... Yeah, I guess I'm just trying to convince myself that all of us should be adults where in fact there are indeed some kids here. So I agree it would be best to tone down on the intimidation as I wouldn't want to leave a poor kid scarred for life because of a couple of harsh words thrown at him in an online game. To be honest, I've always felt bad moments after making someone else feel bad, so if I had the chance I would take back those words. It's just sometimes it's hard to control what you're saying/posting when you're in the heat of the moment, even if part of it is just meant to tease or joke. I'm happy to have had this discussion since it's sort of a reality-check, and gives me the chance to re-assess my behavior as a mafia player. I agree. This is definitely a positive discussion to have. Not to mention, there may not be kids in some of the games, but some of us, myself included, have been know to act like children. I try to take ownership and learn from it when I can. It helps to have someone point it out to me, though, in case I do commit whatever childish behavior again.
sok117 Posted December 17, 2011 Posted December 17, 2011 I think a little mudslinging here and there is a good thing for a mafia game. Like in this game, it gives people chances to gauge their oponents reactions and decided whether or not they can be trusted or not. However, if you find youself deeplinking pictures to add to your insults, I think you've gone to far. I know I've taken a lot of heat for some of the games I've played. Mostly it's because I don't like being a sheep, so I try to come to my own conclousions that may not be what the majority of players are working towards. This most always makes me look either "scum" or "dumb", which looking at it now, I can fully understand. I'm also a little bit to stuborn, and thats not just the online Sok117, but the real one as well. A lot of the time I look at peoples cases from different angles, I find one thats semi plausible, and I attack it until I make myself look super scummy. For these reasons I'm always getting called dumb in these games, either by other players or myself. I think though, that if you want to play these games, you have to bring a lot of things to the table. You need to be active, you need to be thick-skinned, you need to be objective, and you need to be smart. I'm still working towards all of the above, but as long as I'm still having fun, it's still an enjoyable experience for me.
def Posted December 17, 2011 Posted December 17, 2011 I don't think it was the insulting that bothered the Scum so much as the fact that def was using insults with what appeared to be little fact behind them - and the Townies believed his insults anyways. He would tell us to stop whining or throwing tantrums when we were pretty sure we weren't, but the Townies acted as if we really did just because def said so, and then took that as solid evidence against us. Really though, I read it on your Writeboard, and didn't get that. There were tantrums. Any of the scum who got angry at "the sheep" were pulling tantrums, in my opinion. Rather than create a devious, lying defense, they just insulted the whole of town and said it was because everyone was following me. But they weren't. I was in PM conversations with all of them. And the scum played that angle too hard, the reason being that you were all dwelling on it together, seemingly from day one. Like, with the lynching of Pie, it wasn't because people followed me, as much as Pie liked to make fairly grotesque cock-sucking analogies. I gave reasons he was scummy, and the other lynch target claimed to be the investigator. I was not being a dictator and having town follow me. But that was the narrative scum had constructed in their heads. And I think it got worse as days went on. In your writeboard, it was written that I was suspicious of the scum for no reason, just lucky, etc, and I wasn't. I was pooling info. So, the scum attitude in thread and in PMs just made them look guiltier to me. Scorpiox's being offended, which was entirely based on the way I was treating his scummates, and not players in general, was most definitely a tantrum, and worse than Pie's. About the whiny comment, and I'll address the metagaming comment from the Writeboard with it; Flitwick accused me of metagaming in thread. My immediate thought was this 1) It's not metagaming to see someone's name reading the thread but not posting 2) If I never hear another complaint about metagaming on EB again in my life, it'll be too soon. I find metagaming complaints (or whines, shall we say) entirely weak. For example, before the game had started, all the scum had decided they had to kill Kiel and I. That is class A metagaming, targeting me for something I haven't done in game before it even starts. In light of this, Flitwick's attempted call out of me metagaming is incredibly hypocritical. Anyway, when I started calling him a whiny baby, it was because of that comment. When I called him a metagamer, it was a nonsensical callback to that comment. The day ended shortly after that, but if there was a call to explain it, I would have. It infuriated Scorpiox though, so I scored a point there With all the scum, except you Brickdoctor, they all called the town sheep, to a greater or lesser degree, to justify their lynch. I do think that's a tantrum of sorts. At the very least, they've thrown reason out the window and given up. There were tantrums, to be sure. I know I've taken a lot of heat for some of the games I've played. Mostly it's because I don't like being a sheep, so I try to come to my own conclousions that may not be what the majority of players are working towards. This most always makes me look either "scum" or "dumb", which looking at it now, I can fully understand. I'm also a little bit to stuborn, and thats not just the online Sok117, but the real one as well. A lot of the time I look at peoples cases from different angles, I find one thats semi plausible, and I attack it until I make myself look super scummy. For these reasons I'm always getting called dumb in these games, either by other players or myself. I didn't see the case against you on day one. The scum or dumb mantra is much more meant for players who misconstrue fundamentals. Like, day one, I make a case for placing votes and trying to gauge reactions. Scorpiox, either genuinely or scummily, completely misrepresented it, and did so repeatedly. He then went on to say, if we select ten people to lynch, we have a 10% chance of catching scum That makes zero sense. If six of the ten people were scum, we'd have a 60% chance. At that point, my only reaction is that either he's trying to make day one more confusing, or he doesn't understand mafia games well. And, to be fair, in my earlier days, I would trot out unsound theories as a scum on the basis that I'm "dumb" as an excuse to vote poorly. I can't get away with it now. I don't think your being suspicious of the wrong people is dumb behavior. Nobody is going to have a 100% scum hunting track record. I think your play in the game was fine. You were put in the hotseat day one, and you revealed your role, as you should have. You survived and that allowed Kiel and Tammo to copy your ability. So, things worked out well for town, and your death wasn't in vain.
Brickdoctor Posted December 17, 2011 Posted December 17, 2011 In regards to the kid issue, the rules of EB state that there may be some content on the site that may not be appropriate for kids. I know that that doesn't refer to taunting in mafia games, but the rules do state that immature kid members will not be tolerated. If a kid joins the site, plays in a mafia game, and can't take a taunt in that game maturely, then he shouldn't be a member of the site. Which is not to say that that gives other members the right to insult someone else, because, even in a mafia game, courtesy should be afforded to all members, but I don't think anyone should worry about insulting a kid who won't take the insult calmly and maturely.
def Posted December 17, 2011 Posted December 17, 2011 In regards to the kid issue, the rules of EB state that there may be some content on the site that may not be appropriate for kids. I know that that doesn't refer to taunting in mafia games, but the rules do state that immature kid members will not be tolerated. If a kid joins the site, plays in a mafia game, and can't take a taunt in that game maturely, then he shouldn't be a member of the site. Which is not to say that that gives other members the right to insult someone else, because, even in a mafia game, courtesy should be afforded to all members, but I don't think anyone should worry about insulting a kid who won't take the insult calmly and maturely. I worried about that though. I'm fine if somebody tries to rattle me in a game now, but when I was 17, I wouldn't have been able to take it graciously and maturely. Nothing wrong with being sensitive to the real life situations of others. I think it goes beyond the "mature" content idea.
Brickdoctor Posted December 17, 2011 Posted December 17, 2011 With all the scum, except you Brickdoctor, they all called the town sheep, to a greater or lesser degree, to justify their lynch. I do think that's a tantrum of sorts. At the very least, they've thrown reason out the window and given up. There were tantrums, to be sure. I did call some people sheep, though. Just not the Town other than you as a whole. You reap what you sow, though, so if the Town is going to insult the Scum, they should expect to be insulted back. Though I agree with you that answering insults with insults is a tantrum of sorts. I worried about that though. I'm fine if somebody tries to rattle me in a game now, but when I was 17, I wouldn't have been able to take it graciously and maturely. Nothing wrong with being sensitive to the real life situations of others. I think it goes beyond the "mature" content idea. Well, that's kind of what I'm saying. I'm not saying you shouldn't worry about it, because you should. I'm just saying that if you don't, I wouldn't be surprised and I wouldn't complain about it.
Nightshroud99 Posted December 17, 2011 Posted December 17, 2011 Truthfully, as a newbish player, I didn't like the name calling. But now it doesn't bother me. I recognize it's a game tactic and I respect that; heck it's a damn good tectic because def got three scum with it! Before the game I hadn't communicated with def, so my first impression was exactly what I wrote on the writeboard (which wasn't nice lol). However I was wrong, and for that I apologize def. I look forward to playing with you again in the future and someday beating you.
def Posted December 17, 2011 Posted December 17, 2011 I did call some people sheep, though. Just not the Town other than you as a whole. You reap what you sow, though, so if the Town is going to insult the Scum, they should expect to be insulted back. Though I agree with you that answering insults with insults is a tantrum of sorts. Well, you called them sheep in a different way, simply for being quiet in thread. But it wasn't part of your "defense". I'm not offended by the sheep, and there's no problem for the town to be insulted as a whole. Whatever problem there is is because it's really bad gameplay. It doesn't replace a defense. Using Pie's example, rather than make a fair argument, false claim, or better suggestion, he just insulted the town. There's no problem of hurt feelings, just bad gameplay. (sorry Pie ) And, not to criticize without offering up alternatives, let's reimagine day one, with Pie on the chopping block, replacing sok. His strategy: we should lynch the investigator, and everyone is cocksuckers. Nobody was going to shift their vote for that. Instead, he could have played up the "roles are connected to abilities" angle, which scum had figured out. He could have claimed to be a thief, then suggested, perhaps, Killer Croc (already with a vote or two). Plausibly, giving away some of his role could have bought him a day, drastically altering the course of the game. But the moment he leaned on the reasoning that everyone was sheep, I think he'd lost the game. So, it's not the feelings of town that are hurt, it's a question of good play. If anything, scum should have been joining in, calling the scum whiny babies. It would have made great camouflage.
Brickdoctor Posted December 17, 2011 Posted December 17, 2011 If anything, scum should have been joining in, calling the scum whiny babies. It would have made great camouflage. In retrospect, yes. I can't speak for the other Scum, but I didn't do it because I felt that courtesy shouldn't be sacrificed for the sake of winning a game.
CMP Posted December 17, 2011 Posted December 17, 2011 And, not to criticize without offering up alternatives, let's reimagine day one, with Pie on the chopping block, replacing sok. His strategy: we should lynch the investigator, and everyone is cocksuckers. Nobody was going to shift their vote for that. Instead, he could have played up the "roles are connected to abilities" angle, which scum had figured out. He could have claimed to be a thief, then suggested, perhaps, Killer Croc (already with a vote or two). Plausibly, giving away some of his role could have bought him a day, drastically altering the course of the game. Why do you think I contacted the leader of the town to do just that? I didn't vote for Killer Croc because I believe it would've been obvious I was thrashing to vote for the person with the most number of votes other than me.
def Posted December 17, 2011 Posted December 17, 2011 In retrospect, yes. I can't speak for the other Scum, but I didn't do it because I felt that courtesy shouldn't be sacrificed for the sake of winning a game. You were already calling town sheep, so it's not like you were being overly courteous to begin with Why do you think I contacted the leader of the town to do just that? I didn't vote for Killer Croc because I believe it would've been obvious I was thrashing to vote for the person with the most number of votes other than me. I had no interest in saving you. I was just interested in saving the investigator. And whether you like it or not, I wasn't a leader of town, I was simply logical with my points, in this case, it's better to lynch Catwoman than the investigator. Saying that you couldn't organize a lynch on Croc is defeatist thinking. I was quite sure I couldn't get the lynch on you, and had no expectation to save sok, but I tried it anyway, and see how that turned out? At no point did I consider saving you. I gave you some friendly advice, to be nice, but I wasn't going to argue for you in thread. You needed to do that yourself.
CMP Posted December 17, 2011 Posted December 17, 2011 I had no interest in saving you. I was just interested in saving the investigator. And whether you like it or not, I wasn't a leader of town, I was simply logical with my points, in this case, it's better to lynch Catwoman than the investigator. Saying that you couldn't organize a lynch on Croc is defeatist thinking. I was quite sure I couldn't get the lynch on you, and had no expectation to save sok, but I tried it anyway, and see how that turned out? At no point did I consider saving you. I gave you some friendly advice, to be nice, but I wasn't going to argue for you in thread. You needed to do that yourself. I figured that out about an hour after I PM'd you, yes. At that point I had garnered so many votes, and there was little time left in the day. I doubted that I could save myself in that time. A Day One bandwagon is the hardest to overturn because everyone's already so cozy with their votes in and there's nothing to base a counter accusation on. I based this on the only other time I'd survived nearly being lynched - Werewolf. I half-suspected it wasn't going to work simply because most people don't play the same, but it was worth a try. It wasn't only that it'd be difficult to do so - I didn't want to because accusing the second most likely to person to be lynched seems scummy to me. I suppose at that point it was worth a shot, in hindsight.
Recommended Posts