Tamamono Posted July 7, 2012 Posted July 7, 2012 I'm not going to lie, I really don't find anything scummy in Gordon's behavior. He's been, as Ensign Falcon says, a bit of a dick and super pushy, but pushiness is a big towntell. While he may not be as assertive as usual, I don't remember him actually being that assertive in the training simulation - and his behavior is almost identical. The only thing that bothers me about him is how he's flipped on darkdragon since the simulation. Why would he do that? She's been playing pretty much the same. I don't think it's enough to warrant a vote, though. I don't actually have a set FoS yet, but gun-to-my-head, my vote would be Allison Williams for taking the middle road and being semi-useless as of now. However, it's early days yet, and I'm open to more options.
Peanuts Posted July 7, 2012 Posted July 7, 2012 [attorney]I think that's called Ad Hominem, Mr. Carrot. And although your ranting defense is nice, it sems somewhat different from your gameplay style in the simulator. I think, in the simulator, you would have called out Mr. LongLegs, AND accused him of being scum. But here, you seem to be content to just call him a "megablok".[/attorney] WHile it isn't enough to call him out as being scum, I think Scuba's defense has enough holes to be decidely different from the way I remeber him playing in the simulator. I agree with Lt. Commander Gordon, this statement seems fishy to me. It basically is a just metagaming, and not even good metagaming. And what do you mean by holes? A) If there are holes in the defense, don't just say there are holes, but point them out. B) How are there supposed to be holes when there isn't a solid accusation?
Scubacarrot Posted July 7, 2012 Posted July 7, 2012 The only thing that bothers me about him is how he's flipped on darkdragon since the simulation. Why would he do that? She's been playing pretty much the same. I don't think it's enough to warrant a vote, though. How have I flipped? I don't see it..?
Brickdoctor Posted July 7, 2012 Posted July 7, 2012 Okay, let me see if I got this right: Gordon is accusing Mandel for accusing Gordon for accusing Francis of being a sheep. I don't really think there's anything behind any of those accusations anymore. Gordon's accusing Francis of being a sheep is really the only sort of accusation that can be thrown around at that time of Day. Based on my own experience accusing sheep, I personally do not agree with focusing on the sheep, because it usually ends with the accusing Townies being frustrated, annoyed, and distracted, but I don't find it suspicious. All the other accusations seem to be just Gordon and Mandel going back and forth.
Palathadric Posted July 7, 2012 Posted July 7, 2012 Let's take a look at someone who needs rooting out, like Science Officer Lieutenant Michael McAndrews. Perhaps he'd like to explain why he felt he should start private communication even though it was not even Day One yet. Why did he feel it was already time to trust someone or did he want me to start trusting him from the beginning? Because Ensign Toby Rockford did it in the training programme we went through, so he thought he, as scum, could get people to trust him early on. Unfortunately, he is not the Toby Rockford of the training programme, nor the Brian Pewter of reality! Really, Tammo, you must remember that there are certain things only I can get away with.
Waterbrick Down Posted July 7, 2012 Posted July 7, 2012 [attorney]I think that's called Ad Hominem, Mr. Carrot. And although your ranting defense is nice, it sems somewhat different from your gameplay style in the simulator. I think, in the simulator, you would have called out Mr. LongLegs, AND accused him of being scum. But here, you seem to be content to just call him a "megablok".[/attorney] WHile it isn't enough to call him out as being scum, I think Scuba's defense has enough holes to be decidely different from the way I remeber him playing in the simulator. You're ging to want a Piano Forte. Just a piano would be too quite on this big ship. [/musichumor] If I may continue on this point, you claim there are differences in Commander Gordon's style yet you then go on to make a hypothesis that if we were still in the simulator Commander Gordon would have acted differently then he is now. You're entire conjecture is based upon an event that never took place, which to me is grasping for straws. You top this off by a non-commital "I think he's scum, but I don't want to say it" attitude which leaves a sour taste in my mouth. However I don't think any of this is actually damning and while Commander Gordon believes you to be a scum trying to lead a bandwagon against him, my reading is more of a townie who would rather not be accused of inactivity and is trying to follow up on someone elses accusation with a half-baked opinion of their own, this while not helpful is neither particularly scummy. The fact is, nothing in today's major discussion has tripped my scum readers which leads me to believe as is always the case on the first day, that the scum (or at least 1 or 2 of them) are flying under the radar. I remember full well how in the training simulator 2 of the scum barely said a single thing during the entire first day and no one called them out on it. That being said my FoS is pointed at Lieutenant Jones (Masked Builder) who has merely given the expected first day response "Blah, blah, blah, the captain's dead...", isn't there anything else you could have commented on during this time? What about Chief Burbank, or Lieutenant Hornby, nothing from you two esteemed officers? Ah Chief Burbank, I see we were speaking at the same time, thank you for joining us.
Tamamono Posted July 7, 2012 Posted July 7, 2012 How have I flipped? I don't see it..? In the training simulation you were willing to brush darkdragon off as noobish, but here you think she's scummy.
Fugazi Posted July 7, 2012 Posted July 7, 2012 Because Ensign Toby Rockford did it in the training programme we went through, so he thought he, as scum, could get people to trust him early on. Unfortunately, he is not the Toby Rockford of the training programme, nor the Brian Pewter of reality! Really, Tammo, you must remember that there are certain things only I can get away with. I'm not sure I understand your point... Are you actually suspecting McAndrews or are you randomly picking at people like you did with Hornby earlier today? It would help if your intentions were made clear.
Scubacarrot Posted July 7, 2012 Posted July 7, 2012 In the training simulation you were willing to brush darkdragon off as noobish, but here you think she's scummy. Where have I said that??
Rufus Posted July 7, 2012 Posted July 7, 2012 Because Ensign Toby Rockford did it in the training programme we went through, so he thought he, as scum, could get people to trust him early on. Unfortunately, he is not the Toby Rockford of the training programme, nor the Brian Pewter of reality! Really, Tammo, you must remember that there are certain things only I can get away with. Randomly contacting people before the start of day one to accuse them of being scum because of their hairstyle is neither helpful nor does it inspire trust. Maybe you're scum. If you did it in the training as town, what better way to appear town in this reality? Simply based on the quoted statement, and with the lack of anything better to go on, I'll call you out on this. Vote: Brian Pewter (Palathadric)
Palathadric Posted July 7, 2012 Posted July 7, 2012 It's your hair, Scumbag. See, even you agree with me on this point. I've already let him know that he's the most obvious lynch-candidate. Let's lynch'm! Mr. McAndrews has got to be scum because he PMed all the "bigshots" and he didn't PM me...and he said he liked me. Why do I get the feeling that I'm quoting someone here.
Dannylonglegs Posted July 7, 2012 Posted July 7, 2012 What. The. HELL. This is a lot more like the you I remember. Your first response to my accusation was much more passive than this. Let me answer your points. NOW you are wasting everyone's time. I change the subject? read my words back and see: There was nothing more to comment on, your whole first point is complete megablocks. I am not defending myself, because there is nothing to defend myself from, you did not bring in new points, and I responded and destroyed your previous points! I can NOT believe there are people saying your point is "fair", or something along those lines, it relies on just as many if's than the fact that I could be a space overlord from Mars that is here to give us all presents. Let's go back and reread that, shall we? Your logic fails. Was I trying to get him lynched? I don't think so. And look at you, mr. I-know-players-by-playing-a-quarter-of-a-game. Now, I would like to say something edgey like: Thanks for wasting my time, but I think at this point even half-logic like this is better than no discussion at all. Back to something useful: I know it's far fetched and can without a shadow of a doubt be described by what squeemish people call Metagaming, but hear me out. This case is obviously different than the virtual reality training, but there are some paralells to point out, I'm sure. What I propose is that we spill whatever useful info we had in the training session, and see if we can deduce something helpful. I'm partly interested to hear about the number of scum and things like that. I can say I was the town blocker in the virtual reality training. You tell me my "logic fails", give me a veiled complement ("but I think at this point even half-logic like this is better than no discussion at all"), then you ask us all to give out information from the simulation which has no bearing in this game, but is also A. only really useful to the scum, and B. the "the number of scum and things like that" are very easily determined from actually paying attention to what happened during the simulation and after it. I am "usually" more on the attack? What the hell is that supposed to mean? Who am I supposed to attack? You? Why? In the combat simulator I was on the attack when I could, and that has not changed, BARELY a third of a day has passed. Has it occured to you that it's possible there has not been anything I felt the need to press the attack on? See above where I respond again to your post. It's passive and it seems to be avoiding conflict by changing the subject to that metagaming stuff, which might make you seem useful without actually being useful. And what the hell is your third point supposed to mean, her behaviour in the combat simulator was not scummish, but noobish, if you want to use such words. What I quoted however, is something completely different. I don't know if you have noticed, but the discussion about hair can be in no way be considered serious, along with the whole "clues in pictures" thing, and with the way Rockford said it, it was enough for my statement, don't you think? Absolutely, it's rather obviously a joke or confusion (the latter in this case), but as you yourself told me during the simulation, "she's new." I understand that it was not an accusation, but a hint here and there can push things into motion which later you can easily deny. Now, if you want an argument, and not me responding to megablocks, do your freaking best. I don't know why you are being an megablock, that's the only reason I can think of for your behaviour, really. You have zero clues, everything you say is completely situational and with as many if's to fill a freaking mooncrater. Your second point is MORE megablocks with the point you added: "he'd have noticed how quick and unsubstantuated my argument was, and suspect I was scum for making that argument and 'trying to get rid of a potentially dangerous Townie." WHAT KIND OF megablocks IS THIS? I don't know if you have noticed, but "he is accusing me, so he must be scum" is the biggest megablocks to ever come up in every game. I think you are being an idiot, not scum. Sorry, I'm not trying to be a megablock, and it's nothing personal, I just think that your behavior today has been very scummy. There are no clues on the first day, apart from those we can garner from behavior analysis. You've used "he is accusing me, so he must be scum" before to some extent, and I expected you to say something along the lines of what I said earlier. Instead of even thinking that I could be scum for targeting you though, you just change the subject. The last sentence said, if you were an idiot, I figure you would have seen the light when I called your megablocks. Now with your blind insistance... I hate to say it, but you know what it is starting to look like? That you are either pissed for catching your scum buddy in the simulator, or you believe me to be too dangerous to let live this time. Stop making up fake points, as well, it is not cute. There it is. I very well may be an idiot, mate, I'll give you that. I also very well may been blinded by the light (knowledge into the workings of the game...of life) of playing scum, however, idiot that I am, I haven't yet seen your light, and while this post here is very convincing, your next post isn't. I never carry any grudges, only friendly competitiveness. I have no hard feelings for you being awesome at your job during the simulation. I see no reason to wait, we can unvote all we want, anyway, and there is enough time. I'm going to vote for Ensign Campbell, he has conviniently not read half my statement, and is (to me) quite obviously trying to form a bandwagon on me. He sees, with someone else, holes that don't exist. (repeated) Newsflash! How can you "know" someone's playstyle by a quarter of a game? Answer, you can't. I think there is a decent chance Campbell jumped on this oppertunity, unable to see how ridiculous the claim is, and misjudging Falcon, who is a veteran on this sort of thing, that he is supporting Mandel's accusation, while the truth is I hurt Falcon's feelings, which is why he will vote for me. Vote: Ensign Campbell (Dakar A) This is what makes me continue to suspect you even after that rant. Do you honestly think that Campbell's behavior has been scummy, or is this you looking for a noob to vote off again? I'm calling you out on this. The only thing that bothers me about him is how he's flipped on darkdragon since the simulation. Why would he do that? She's been playing pretty much the same. I don't think it's enough to warrant a vote, though. That's what really tops it off for me. The scummy cherry on the chocolate ice cream.
Bob Posted July 7, 2012 Author Posted July 7, 2012 Vote Tally: Ensign Campbell / Dakar A : 1 (Scubacarrot) Ensign Pewter / Palathadric : 1 (Rufus)
Fugazi Posted July 7, 2012 Posted July 7, 2012 Mr. McAndrews has got to be scum because he PMed all the "bigshots" and he didn't PM me...and he said he liked me. Why do I get the feeling that I'm quoting someone here. Well he didn't PM me now though he PMed me during the simulation, but I don't know if it's relevant. That's what really tops it off for me. The scummy cherry on the chocolate ice cream. Then why are you not voting if you're so sure of yourself? Are you waiting for someone else to break the ice and take responsibility for this accusation?
Hinckley Posted July 7, 2012 Posted July 7, 2012 Okay. I am the dick now. That's fine. Have YOU actually said anything useful yet? There is enough chatting about haircuts (you should not say anything in that regard, really, yours is terrible) and other nonsense, the slight hint of seriousness when you raised suspicion over something trivial: namely the timepoint when someone send you a PM. Which you disregarded when it was explained right away. Can I ask what your actual problem with that thing was in the first place? And not seeing the point of made up accusations and pointless jokes that aren't funny is not being a dick. If the jokes were funny, maybe. But they are not. Just saying. You calling people out on being a dick, however... Hey, what did I do?
Shadows Posted July 7, 2012 Posted July 7, 2012 What about Chief Burbank, or Lieutenant Hornby, nothing from you two esteemed officers? Much like in the simulator, I've got nothing, though this time I could use some kind of hair conditioner or something. Seriously, what is it with this mess? As for the matter at hand, if someone can present an even slightly compelling case, I'll be inclined to go with it. The closest so far is the whole early messaging thing, which does look a little odd to me, especially since I didn't get one. Though if I was a loyalist sending messages, I might not have sent me one either, so that's less suspicious. Then again, I wouldn't have sent one to some of the ones who did get one, or anyone for that matter, so it's back to being suspicious again. I will wait and see.
Scubacarrot Posted July 7, 2012 Posted July 7, 2012 Hey, what did I do? Call me a jerk, a dick, you haven't responded to my question... Need I go on? This is a lot more like the you I remember. Your first response to my accusation was much more passive than this. Let me answer your points. Let's go back and reread that, shall we? You tell me my "logic fails", give me a veiled complement ("but I think at this point even half-logic like this is better than no discussion at all"), then you ask us all to give out information from the simulation which has no bearing in this game, but is also A. only really useful to the scum, and B. the "the number of scum and things like that" are very easily determined from actually paying attention to what happened during the simulation and after it. I have been hearing anything from 4 to 7, I don't think such information is only useful to the scum, why would I have said it then? Also, it was not a compliment. So this point is wrong. Next. See above where I respond again to your post. It's passive and it seems to be avoiding conflict by changing the subject to that metagaming stuff, which might make you seem useful without actually being useful. And you are saying your whole accusing of me is not metagaming? Don't make me laugh. And no, I don't think I have the need to be considered "useful". Play makes useful, talk not. Figure it out for yourself... Absolutely, it's rather obviously a joke or confusion (the latter in this case), but as you yourself told me during the simulation, "she's new." I understand that it was not an accusation, but a hint here and there can push things into motion which later you can easily deny. You are reading too much into it because that's what you want. Sorry, I'm not trying to be a megablock, and it's nothing personal, I just think that your behavior today has been very scummy. There are no clues on the first day, apart from those we can garner from behavior analysis. You've used "he is accusing me, so he must be scum" before to some extent, and I expected you to say something along the lines of what I said earlier. Instead of even thinking that I could be scum for targeting you though, you just change the subject. Where have I used that? I have been calling it stupid in every game , I think. No, I would never say something like that, it's pointless. And I considered it over, so I went over to do something useful. Obviously your expectations were wrong. There it is. I very well may be an idiot, mate, I'll give you that. I also very well may been blinded by the light (knowledge into the workings of the game...of life) of playing scum, however, idiot that I am, I haven't yet seen your light, and while this post here is very convincing, your next post isn't. I never carry any grudges, only friendly competitiveness. I have no hard feelings for you being awesome at your job during the simulation. There is not much I can respond to in this. I can say Thank You for the last bit though. Heh. This is what makes me continue to suspect you even after that rant. Do you honestly think that Campbell's behavior has been scummy, or is this you looking for a noob to vote off again? I'm calling you out on this. You don't? Yes I do, I have explained why, you might want to read it, it's good . And what does "looking for a noob to vote off again" mean?? Also, why respond to all points if it is not convenient? That's what really tops it off for me. The scummy cherry on the chocolate ice cream. It's not true though. If you had read more you would have seen that. Also, I expected a vote, come on, don't be shy, I can take it. Come on man, I don't want to respond to the same stuff over and over again, come with something better, or cut your losses and back off. I realize you don't want to seem scummy by suddenly backing off, but there you go.
Hinckley Posted July 7, 2012 Posted July 7, 2012 Call me a jerk, a dick, you haven't responded to my question... Need I go on? Sorry I called you a dick. It was only because you were being a dick. What question were you waiting for an answer on?
Scubacarrot Posted July 7, 2012 Posted July 7, 2012 Sorry I called you a dick. It was only because you were being a dick. What question were you waiting for an answer on? You quoted it in your last post.
Scouty Posted July 7, 2012 Posted July 7, 2012 I have been hearing anything from 4 to 7, I don't think such information is only useful to the scum, why would I have said it then? Also, it was not a compliment. So this point is wrong. Next. I don't know what you mean by "I have been hearing anything from 4 to 7" ( ), but you're right that sharing our information is not only useful to the scum. Town can benefit from knowing our weapons. However, it's clearly a bad idea because we can expect that we have what we've had in the past, give or take. Listing those out in the open really only serves to provide an exact list for the Purists to strike targets out and focus their attack plan, giving them more of an edge than without such a list. It's an in-conceived plan and it's either scummy or naïve. Just because it seems like you've been wanting it, I'll Vote: Second Officer Lieutenant Commander Andrew Gordon (Scubacarrot). I suspect I'll unvote you later on, since I'm not convinced if you're really a Purist, but we'll see.
Scubacarrot Posted July 7, 2012 Posted July 7, 2012 I don't know what you mean by "I have been hearing anything from 4 to 7" ( ), but you're right that sharing our information is not only useful to the scum. Town can benefit from knowing our weapons. However, it's clearly a bad idea because we can expect that we have what we've had in the past, give or take. Listing those out in the open really only serves to provide an exact list for the Purists to strike targets out and focus their attack plan, giving them more of an edge than without such a list. It's an in-conceived plan and it's either scummy or naïve. Just because it seems like you've been wanting it, I'll Vote: Second Officer Lieutenant Commander Andrew Gordon (Scubacarrot). I suspect I'll unvote you later on, since I'm not convinced if you're really a Purist, but we'll see. Seriously. You haven't read everything. Roles have been turned around, obviously. You really think we are facing the same thing as in the virtual reality? I don't think so. And with between 4 and 7 I mean the number of scum.
Hinckley Posted July 7, 2012 Posted July 7, 2012 You quoted it in your last post. The "Need I go on?" You're waiting on an answer for that? No, you needn't go on. Glad we cleared that up.
Dannylonglegs Posted July 7, 2012 Posted July 7, 2012 Then why are you not voting if you're so sure of yourself? Are you waiting for someone else to break the ice and take responsibility for this accusation? The problem is I'm not so sure at the moment. I think he's scum but at the same time, I'm worried that it's just as likely that I have tunnel vision, and I'm singling him out because his actions remind me of myself during the simulation. That being said, I was scum, and I know that scum can be very logical and very capable of concealing their affiliation by mimicking themselves from past games. In addition, I want to see if anyone agrees with me, which would indicate to me either that others have picked up on his scummyness, or that the scum are trying to use me to get a Townie Lynched. It doesn't seem like too many agree with me though, which could mean I am on the right track, and the scum are pushing in other directions to get the popular vote away from their team mate. Or that I'm dumb and have no valid argument. I have been hearing anything from 4 to 7, I don't think such information is only useful to the scum, why would I have said it then? Also, it was not a compliment. So this point is wrong. Next. What do you mean by 4 and 7? I do, and I told you, I think you brought it up to discretely change the subject and try to seem useful And you are saying your whole accusing of me is not metagaming? Don't make me laugh. And no, I don't think I have the need to be considered "useful". Play makes useful, talk not. Figure it out for yourself... It's not all metagaming. That's just the reason I locked on to you. You are reading too much into it because that's what you want. I very well might be. Where have I used that? I have been calling it stupid in every game , I think. No, I would never say something like that, it's pointless. And I considered it over, so I went over to do something useful. Obviously your expectations were wrong. I could have sworn you used that during the Holovid Jedi Temple Mafia, but it was likely combined with other suspicions, so it wasn't as simple as a retaliation vote. There is not much I can respond to in this. I can say Thank You for the last bit though. Heh. Well, there's not much I can say in response to this apart from, you're welcome. You were a clear Town-tell from the start and we were correctly worried that you'd become a huge problem for us. This time around though, I'm getting a different read from you (although it might have something to do with not being scum myself this time around. ) You don't? Yes I do, I have explained why, you might want to read it, it's good . And what does "looking for a noob to vote off again" mean?? Also, why respond to all points if it is not convenient? No, I don't his post really strikes me as nooby, especially since he's essential repeating what I told him of my suspicions towards you in private. He's behaving like a sheep and for the most part he's alone, so no, it doesn't strike me as scummy. And by "looking for a noob to vote off again" I'm referring to your initial comment where you pointed out "Awesomestar." You've made it a habit of only picking on those who are sheepy because of their relative newness to the game, and I don't think that's Townie behavior. It reminds me of myself during the simulation. It's not true though. If you had read more you would have seen that. Also, I expected a vote, come on, don't be shy, I can take it. Well, I think it is best, so yes, I will vote for you. Vote: Commander Andrew Gordon(Scubacarrot) Come on man, I don't want to respond to the same stuff over and over again, come with something better, or cut your losses and back off. I realize you don't want to seem scummy by suddenly backing off, but there you go. I'm not going to back off. If others want to vote for you, that's fine. I'd love to find out if I'm right. If no one joins me, I'm also pretty suspicious of Brian Pewter (Palathadric) who I think may be in league with you from some of the stuff he's said to me in private. His being in league with you in my mind depends on whether or not you are scum.
Dakar A Posted July 7, 2012 Posted July 7, 2012 If I may continue on this point, you claim there are differences in Commander Gordon's style yet you then go on to make a hypothesis that if we were still in the simulator Commander Gordon would have acted differently then he is now. You're entire conjecture is based upon an event that never took place, which to me is grasping for straws. You top this off by a non-commital "I think he's scum, but I don't want to say it" attitude which leaves a sour taste in my mouth. However I don't think any of this is actually damning and while Commander Gordon believes you to be a scum trying to lead a bandwagon against him, my reading is more of a townie who would rather not be accused of inactivity and is trying to follow up on someone elses accusation with a half-baked opinion of their own, this while not helpful is neither particularly scummy. Yes, it was a particularly grope-y statement, and the main (and really, only) big flaw in his defense was attacking the other argurer by calling them a "megablok". The simulator talk was based around metagaming, although it seemed especially relevant. The reason I was non-committal was that I didn't truly think he was scum, I was just looking for a defense from him. It seems to have come ( In it's own, angry way ), but as to his vote for me, he is acting the way I expected him to, by directly firing back at me for accusing him.
Scubacarrot Posted July 7, 2012 Posted July 7, 2012 The "Need I go on?" You're waiting on an answer for that? No, you needn't go on. Glad we cleared that up. At least you are less impossible to talk to than some other people here. Yes, it was a particularly grope-y statement, and the main (and really, only) big flaw in his defense was attacking the other argurer by calling them a "megablok". The simulator talk was based around metagaming, although it seemed especially relevant. The reason I was non-committal was that I didn't truly think he was scum, I was just looking for a defense from him. It seems to have come ( In it's own, angry way ), but as to his vote for me, he is acting the way I expected him to, by directly firing back at me for accusing him. Go read again, that's not why I voted for you, gogogogo.
Recommended Posts