Straight off the bat, Trake has been pushy, aggressive, throwing lots of votes around. Not traditional scum behaviour, but it has been seen before.
Trake, on 22 October 2013 - 01:36 PM, said:
Vote Lock
For complaining about the lack of votes but being too much a coward to make a vote himself. Trying to get others to take the forefront is typical scum play.
His voting has also been a bit all over the place. There is a tendency to change fairly quickly, especially on day one:
Trake, on 22 October 2013 - 01:57 PM, said:
He does respond fairly helpfully to questions, and tends to share his views and thought processes:
Trake, on 22 October 2013 - 03:55 PM, said:
Jalan, on 22 October 2013 - 03:48 PM, said:
Ultama, on 22 October 2013 - 03:27 PM, said:
My post was aimed at Trake, not you. Your bit is already done, whatever it was. But I want clarification of Trake's rational beause I don't understand what he is seeing.
edit: xpost with Trake himself!
Ultama votes Togg on a flimsy rational. It's been a slow start with almost no proper interaction at that point, so it's a pretty typical place to drop a signal. He possibly doesn't want to be the first vote.
I'm just not sure why he'd drop a vote that looks like a signal as town, for "very little". He makes it sound above like he was trying to kickstart the game? Why then choose the least active player? Sure, trying to prompt activity is good, but since almost no one had properly contributed at that stage, he had much better options in that sense, that don't leave him looking like he could be signalling, which is something innos wouldn't want to do.
Not afraid to make cases. The one below is for Monok, but he also makes cases on the connection between Hanas and Fanderay, and against Lock.
Trake, on 22 October 2013 - 11:44 PM, said:
Monok Ochem, on 22 October 2013 - 04:32 PM, said:
Trake/Ultama are having fun tempted to put a vote on one of them because no one better in site so far
Day 1 signalling does happen but people try to be you know subtle about it what that really wasnt
Off for a bit now but will be back before night
At the time I pointed out how middle of the road it was, but since no one decided to take me up on actually discussing it, let's go into a bit more detail.
How does he start? Well, some game speculation. Or rather, inviting other people to speculate about the game. The only vague attempt at speculation he himself offers he immediately dismisses. Not only that, where other people were speculating about GUI, he goes further, onto other characters. It seems like vague bait to get people discussing roles etc. Also worth noting is the basic comprehension failure - bernard is mentioned as an antagonist, not a protagonist.
He gives no opinion whatsoever on me and Ultama, except we're "fun", and apparently he'd be happy to vote either. Could he be more middle of the road (read it in Chandler's voice). And what reason would he have for voting, if he had?
Then, onto discussing the issue of signalling. And again, he falls right in the middle. Agrees that it happens (obvious), but isn't convinced that this is a case of signalling, people try to be subtle and that wasn't...While I disagree with this point (that we should disregard obvious signals for being too obvious), the point is more how utterly uncommitted his view is in either direction.
And then he leaves, but, helpfully, will be back before night, which is really ideal for scum since it means they can hop onto a train "for a lynch" - someone else pointed out how useless this is I think.
And then he pops back up:
Monok Ochem, on 22 October 2013 - 10:53 PM, said:
I dont see a killer leaving their first post this late that strikes of raising too many questions
Low posting or hiding in a high posting style yes not no posting
Ultama looks like our only other choice at the moment
Vote Ultama
In time to tell us that Ultama is our only choice so he's voting there.
Again, comprehension seems slightly lacking - it's a short thread dude, I've already pointed out the thing about modkill several times so why are you asking what benefit I see in lynching there. But then, the next line is basically a rehash of part of my discussion with Ultama.
He then votes Ultama, for being the only option. His train only has 2 votes more than anyone else, and I'm not sure this convinces me...I never like people being presented as the "only" option. Within 25 minutes he's from 2 votes to 4, in a piece of convenient timing from Ghennan, but at least Ghennan justifies his vote based on Ultama's behaviour.
So below, Trake indicates that he is uncomfortable with people blindly following his vote. I find this interesting, because I feel there would be less concern over this if Trake were scum. Particularly because if he were scum then the people following his vote could potentially be connected to him, so he would be less likely to draw attention to those people.
Trake, on 24 October 2013 - 12:02 PM, said:
I will also be around to vote.
It is not wishy washy not to want to let people get away with hopping on a train with the excuse of simple momentum, or not to want to create an illusion that we only have one choice when that is not that case. It is common sense.
This accusation of erraticism is getting tiring (and is utterly hypocritical, may I add). I have been playing like this all game. Being wishy washy and simply not being tunnel visioned are different things. Making several different assertions and putting pressure in several different places is one thing. Being middle of the road, non committal and vague on every assertion you make is another.
Trake, on 24 October 2013 - 12:50 PM, said:
Shit, we're not meant to comment on people's votes now?
Of the two people following my vote, one follows it despite having not mentioned Fanderay as particularly suspicious and just parrots me, the other doesn't seem to have seen much in my initial reasoning having piled on a bunch of weak justification that seems like they're straining to get anything to stick.
You can't see how that might make someone hesitant?
You even say the fact that Grasp, who you don't trust, is voting Cast puts you off it, but I'm not allowed the same feeling when two people pile on? You complain about me building myself up but seem to expect me implicitly to trust you?
In regards to Hanas, I was actually satisfied with his reaction, it's a reasonable explanation, and he didn't over react or anything...
His responses to cases and questions seem pretty well-thought-out. He obviously puts time into thinking about his responses, and again, has no problem with sharing his thought processes.
Trake, on 29 October 2013 - 12:07 AM, said:
Ghennan, on 28 October 2013 - 10:45 PM, said:
My first thought on this was that Fanderay also said he'd return on day one and then didn't, which I didn't like. But that doesn't mean he doesn't have a point, and I didn't like you doing it either.
I also feeling you're simplifying the point he does have, particularly by saying that day two is just OMGUS. Drive by voting and leaving restricts train options, and gets a vote down without looking like being really dead set on the lynch and having to commit to arguing for it. It's pretty noticeable when it happens twice in a row.
I also think that connecting Fanderay to Ultama as a symp is somewhat unnecessary. I'm not saying it's impossible, or even particularly unlikely. But at the same time, it hardly has to be the case for Fanderay to hop on Grasp. It makes sense just as a self-preservation vote. While it could be more, looking for scum in actions that do make sense is a bit of a labyrinth.