Open 177 (Monks and Masons) - Game Over.

[hewitt]

Alright so first things first the argument between farside and Scien is not something I'm really paying all that much attention to because when an argument like this springs up so early in the game I feel like it's very likely it could just be a town vs. town argument. While I don't think either of them are overly pro-town I just don't think either side has enough merit to receive my support. I do dislike the voters on farside though, I think that's playing pretty damn opportunistically and they're just jumping for who they believe to be the easiest target.

[hewitt]

What do you want me to do Wulfy? Take a side when both sides have crappy arguments? Do you want me to back the one I feel is the least crappy and attack the one that I think is the most?

[hewitt]

I agree with the statement that I'm one of the worst offenders in the not contributing department right now. I've become a little bit disengaged with the game due to the back and forths that I really don't care about at all. I've already answered two out of three of your questions but just for contents sake I'll re-answer them and then hopefully somebody can answer back to me so I'll actually have something to go off this game.

1. I don't care about the arguments against Scien at all and I actually think they're a little ridiculous. The whole comment that started the argument at the beginning of the game about him pushing a weak case without actually pushing it bullshit is pretty stupid and bleak in my opinion. Everything that's resulted from there is just horse poop and no I do not suspect Scien for being scum based on those merits.

2. farside I think has been pretty articulate in her opinions, definitely smart and knows what to do to make herself look like the better one in the argument.

3. Probably farside for pushing this case way too far and reaching way too hard.

[hewitt]

Yeah earlier I thought players were simply attacking farside to seek out the easiest target. You asked me who I thought the scummiest player was and that's farside but I really don't find her anything lynch-worthy. Over and over again in games I've stated I vote to lynch so until there's really something that I think is truly scummy I just don't vote.

[hewitt]

Gimme a couple of minutes and I'll try to salvage something. Honestly I've been checking in a lot and there's been absolutely nothing I found compelling to comment on so I just haven't.

[hewitt]

a very weak reason for a vote was better than a completely random vote.

Well I came across this and I completely disagree with that, I would prefer a completely random vote to a weak vote. Coming up with weak cases on players gives way for opportunistic players to fabricate even bigger weak cases. In my opinion if you're making a case and it's weak don't even bother it's stupid.

Fuzzy's continuing deflections and lack of scumhunting are again noted.

I see this phrase a lot on here and I think it's pretty ridiculous anytime somebody uses the "lack of scumhunting" argument. It's a pretty weak attack on somebody that really can't be defended. To me it's like a schoolyard bully tactic more than anything.

I think I said so in reply to farside's accusations of me pushing for a lynch over a weak argument, or maybe accusations by hewitt for being opportunistic, or both. I said it in defence of myself, basically, to explain that this vote is not, per se, "pushing for a lynch".

That's a pretty silly statement. Any vote on a player, regardless of intention, is pushing farther and farther towards a lynch because you can't control other players' actions and a pile-on isn't unheard of. Any vote on any player is always a push for a lynch.

Although I think that the Scien/farside argument is pointless, it's like a circle if you think about it. I'll tell you why...later today.

...I don't think any of us need to be explained to how the Scien/farside argument is circular.

[hewitt]

Weak arguments are fine, arguments are whatever. I'm talking about pushing weak cases and weak votes, pushing those really don't ever end up very well for the town.

I still think the lack of scumhunting phrase is pretty carelessly thrown out and honestly would you rather have somebody going off on false, not thought out trails then just shutting up and waiting until they find something that they can contribute to the conversation?

[hewitt]

I disagree. "Pushing for a lynch" means not only voting, but also actively advocating that you believe a certain person should, in fact, be lynched, and that it's the good and smart thing to do. It's not the same as voting.
It's a theory thing, though, regarding what implications and underlining meanings votes have or haven't.

I'll just have to agree to disagree because you can't control the resulting ripple affects of your vote and just because one player says their vote is not pushing for a lynch could be a complete and total lie. When you can't trust that any other player (except for the ones you're on a team with) is telling the truth with their votes every vote is a push for lynch to me.

[hewitt]

So I guess I want to ask a few questions to the above:
EB? What's your current views on Hewitt and Maemuki?
Hewitt? Whats your current views on EB?
Maemuki. Whats your current views on EB?

First off I'd like to say I love how you're kind of setting us up to be pitted against each other in our responses, little bit manipulative there.

Anyways the thing that bothers me the most about ElectricBadger is his insistence about the lurkers. I feel like it's really fake and that the whole anti-lurker/lynch the lurker strategy could very possibly be a scum ploy to get us to lynch lurker town.

I love you guys, who love me? <3 ~ Hayl

[hewitt]

Hewitt post 167: This makes no sense. If you find me the scummiest player you should be voting for me at this point. There is no reason to withhold a vote. If a player is the scummies you find why are they not lynch worthy? Do you see anything that fuzzy has done that you would consider scum hunting?

I vote when I feel like I've got a good, accurate assessment that voted player is scum. You probably should've picked up on that during all the theory talk regarding "vote to lynch". And no I do not see fuzzy doing anything that I would consider helpful to me.

[hewitt]

The only reason I'd lynch lurkers is if they are intentionally doing so: deliberately posting here only enough not to be booted and not posting anything with content. Do you feel such actions are pro-town, or a scum tell? What effect do you think these players will have on endgame and potential LYLO situations? How do you suggest we address those situations?

I don't think the lurkers are acting pro-town at all by not contributing but I don't really think it's a scumtell in D1. I'm much more focused about today and lynching scum today than any potential LYLO situation because we're not even close to being ready for that yet.

My goal today is to seek out who I feel is most likely to be scum based mainly on who I believe is manipulating the rest of the town.

[hewitt]

So, you're saying you are always afraid to have a vote trail on you? I think that for the purposes of allowing players to do vote analysis in the late game that voting who you find to be scummiest (without lynching unless they fit the reason you described above) is a good thing and gives a nice, simple read of your train of thought. Hm... that is more null though. I guess a better question is how scummy do you think farside is then? What exactly pushed her in that direction so that the rest of the town can have that to view? If you wish to keep it personal, be my guess, but I fail to see how starting discussion in this manner would be detrimental.

What the fuck are you talking about with being afraid of a vote trail? That's quite possibly one of the biggest twisting of my words I've seen in a while. I made it clear that I cast my vote with the intent to lynch because that's when I deem it appropriate.

farside worries me a little bit because I think she's very smart and knows the game through and through and can talk her way out of any situation. Everything she says makes me a little nervous.

[hewitt]

Waiting until it's critical to have a read on them is kind of the problem, though. The first couple days are important later, when we can read their comments towards known townies and scum.

Combined with your other comments, "manipulating the rest of town" sounds suspiciously like "voting and investigating". Could you explain the difference?

I'm not sure at all what you're insinuating but with manipulating the rest of town I'm talking about making and pushing weak cases on players then sitting back and letting others do the dirty work for them. Sort of like the puppet master.

[hewitt]

1) I noticed a worrying thing about hewitt. He's acting very cautiously, he says he doesn't want to vote until he's certain that someone should be lynched. All the while he says he feels there's nothing to comment on and that the farside/scien discussion hurt the game. He must have realised that good discussion and strong arguments won't just come out of the underbrush singing songs. They need to be made. If he's town, then it's in his best interest to try to get better arguments. Yet he's not doing such an effort. Fine, he's reluctant to use his vote for that end (although it could've been useful, I think) - but how about asking questions? He says he finds farside scummiest, but he doesn't question her, he doesn't try to push her, pin her down, anything of the sort, to get better arguments. He's not really pressing anyone else either. He seems content enough sitting in the corner.

I'm not acting cautiously at all. I'm acting like I always do meaning I vote when I feel like I've got a good read on a player who I believe is scum. I really don't think there's anything to comment on and I'm really not feeling this game at all. Mainly because I think the discussions that are going on are uninteresting, boring, and pointless. I'm not just going to throw out random arguments to cause drama, I don't think that'd be very helpful ODDin.

Vote: fuzzyman

Yes I have good reasoning and if you think hard enough you should be able to come to the conclusion as to why yourself. But in the chance that it could be used against me by scum I will withhold it for the moment.

[hewitt]

ODDin I know that any discussions that I would attempt to bring up at this point would be unhelpful and a distraction because I have nothing solid or worthy to comment about. And I did vote...right above you.

[hewitt]

Hewitt's vote on Fuzzy and reasoning just looks opportunistic

My vote on Fuzzy isn't opportunistic at all. It's actually the most original and makes the most sense out of all votes on him right now, considering I'm a town Mason with him and although he's confirmed not Mafia I'm pretty damn sure he's a Werewolf.

@Hewitt - why are you concerned that you'll be mistaken for scum if you post? If your town, isn't it more likely that you'll have a chance to prove yourself and avoid a mislynch later?

...what the fuck are you talking about? Concerned that I'll be mistaken for scum if I post? Where are you getting that crap? I said, pretty clearly, that I'm not going to start arguments or discussions that are distracting and unhelpful to the town. Personally, it would benefit me because we would be talking about what I want to talk about but it would be retarded because it would only create unnecessary problems and lead to a something not so good.

[hewitt]

Hewitt's vote on Fuzzy and reasoning just looks opportunistic

My vote on Fuzzy isn't opportunistic at all. It's actually the most original and makes the most sense out of all votes on him right now, considering I'm a town Mason with him and although he's confirmed not Mafia I'm pretty damn sure he's a Werewolf.

@Hewitt - why are you concerned that you'll be mistaken for scum if you post? If your town, isn't it more likely that you'll have a chance to prove yourself and avoid a mislynch later?

...what the fuck are you talking about? Concerned that I'll be mistaken for scum if I post? Where are you getting that crap? I said, pretty clearly, that I'm not going to start arguments or discussions that are distracting and unhelpful to the town. Personally, it would benefit me because we would be talking about what I want to talk about but it would be retarded because it would only create unnecessary problems and lead to a something not so good. Has absolutely NOTHING to do with me being afraid as being seen as scum. That was just stupid.

[hewitt]

...what the fuck are you talking about? Concerned that I'll be mistaken for scum if I post? Where are you getting that crap?

You stated they would be used against you by scum.

But in the chance that it could be used against me by scum I will withhold it for the moment.

Why would having reasons behind your vote be misused by scum?

I'm not going to start arguments or discussions that are distracting and unhelpful to the town. Personally, it would benefit me because we would be talking about what I want to talk about

Comments about lack of good reads and overblown minor tells seem to be a theme of the game, so not sure what investigation you're worried about distracting us from.

You said that I was afraid I would be mistaken for scum if I post. I thought you were referring to my lack of posting not for withholding my reasoning (which I'm not anymore). And it's not that there's a good discussion that I'm afraid I would distract from I just had nothing substantial to add.

We did not get a chance to talk pre-game. I don't really have particular reasoning to believe that Fuzzyman is scum but I'm getting nothing out of anybody else and since there's a theme in this game that one Mason is town and the other is scum and I know I'm town I have a 50% chance (I think) that he's werewolf. It had nothing to do with anybody pointing out my weak play I'm just insanely bored and there's nothing better to go on.

[hewitt]

In my opinion that info (said Mason is definitely not Mafia or Werewolf) is very relevant and in at least one of those cases that means that the other Mason is the other scum faction.

Since I was told that Fuzzyman is not Mafia I think it's very likely he's a Werewolf.

[hewitt]

I think it might be correct in assuming that just because one Mason flips scum does not mean the other is confirmed town.

[hewitt]

Unvote

Clearly my vote was faulty reasoning and I realize that now and since I don't feel comfortable claiming anybody to be scum I'm just going to unvote.

[hewitt]

Hewitt, nothing changing, who will your vote be on at deadline?

At this point it could very well be on nobody.

[hewitt]

I doubt though that I will be voting nobody come deadline.

[hewitt]

*Sighs* Okay well I reread the entire game and it actually was a lot more interesting than it was when I was just stopping in and checking new posts. It might've helped that I actually read through all the little walls of text. From about the quarter point of the game until up to a little after halfway I had the feeling that I was going to be voting Electric Badger after I was finished. I kept getting the sense that all he was doing was stirring the pot but not in a way that I feel to be pro-town.

My read is that Scien's first post indicates he understood the case was weak/vague/what-have-you, which is why he didn't pursue it. Farside, other than not specifically stating it was weak what did he say that indicated to you he believed it was a strong case?

However, I do agree that his choice of a random vote rather than pursuing a weak case is questionable and anti-town. Scien comes across as deliberately obtuse in avoiding addressing that issue:

What is the townie benefit of aggressively pushing a weak case?

...rather than RVS? I think it's obvious. So why did you choose as you did, Scien?

Even though he's posting his opinion in the argument it's so neutral that neither side can attack him for it. However, he then goes on to provoke a response from Scien that will clearly result in an attack on Scien from farside.

Hmm.

Later in the game, yes, pushing hard on weak evidence is a scum tell. As a first post, having ANY evidence is great - the goal is to get out of RVS as soon as possible. Refusing to put pressure on other players out of fear of being attacked comes across as very anti-town: it reflects the scum motive of being more concerned about staying alive than finding villains.

I'll have to ponder this. Either a bad play as over-conservative town or a tipped hand as a villain. For the moment I like my vote as it is until I hear an explanation from Nik.

Then just sits back and gets himself out of the argument.

In my last game town lost to a trio of lurker-scum. Another game we were both involved in is now over 5 months long because of lurkers and inactives. So I'm getting kind of touchy about the subject and starting to lean towards the Lynch All Lurkers mentality.

Also, my vote on Maemuki wasn't serious, provided no pressure so was unproductive, and although her wagon wasn't in much danger of an accidental lynch I didn't feel comfortable letting my vote sit there when I logged off.

Nikanor was the first person on the list that hadn't yet posted (and the first one period) and I didn't see any other appealing wagon. So it was a little arbitrary (in selection) and a lot policy (as to why).

I just feel like this was all very fake. Very fake reasoning and an easy way out. Look here, this last game I was screwed by lurkers so in this game I'm not going to let that happen. You don't carry over previous games into the next one and the little emotional appeal with being touchy over lurkers just feels fake to me.

Other examples of stirring the pot then backing himself out.

Why does it seem that everybody is justifying everything with, "It doesn't matter since you were nowhere close to lynch"? A vote is a signifier of intent to lynch.

Are you saying we shouldn't vote at all until we're positive who is scum? What's your opinion on the use of a vote for pressure?

What's your take on Nikanor? Farside? Scien?

I see you posted several times elsewhere yesterday. Why not here?

first comment: Basically it's day 1. Not many talked so far. You had a RVS vote but change to a vote on someone who had not said a word that day.
I do not understand why you would change from a RVS to a non talker so early in the game.

Isn't this - voting for a weak reason rather than a random one - exactly what you've been attacking Scien for NOT doing?

I've mentioned my reasons for the switch, but to specify even more:

I agreed with this at first - farside is too experienced to be so stressed by a minor issue on the first day. However, some background research revealed a rather...frustrating-ish...argument with some...interesting fellows...in the Open Queue, where she mods (it's removed now). I'm forming doubts about farside, but I'm inclined to dismiss this particular tell.

Lurker lynching is typically scum driven hence my questioning of your vote. Although after you had a point you made on Nikor. I still want to ask why the change of heart from RVS to lurker voting.
Now that is more clear as to a deffinate is more of a what changed your mind but looking in whole at your reasoning is not my questioning.

Again, not trying to lynch a lurker, trying to send a message I won't tolerate it. If you feel that's scummy, fair 'nuff. I need to re-read if that motivation coincides with your questions.

What changed my mind was simply that I didn't want to leave my vote on Maemuki when I logged off (it wasn't accomplishing anything and the wagon was large - and seemed destined to get larger - for RVS). I didn't see any non-random reasons to vote those posting, so I went after someone not. I still can't quite fathom how the switch wasn't acceptably justified when my preceding vote was for a cookie.

Do you know scien to be innocent? Are you saying that my reasons forl attacking scien lacked merit?

He currently reads to me as town who made a bad play out of fear of risking himself. I think your reasoning had merit - I mentioned that before - but was the opposite of your comments to me, and this self-conflict is what I'm questioning. I think your investigation into Scien was out of proportion to the read, but that may have just been your way of forcing the game out of RVS. I also didn't agree with any of your insistence that he didn't initially find it a weak argument and I'm not sure why you kept forcing that issue.

But then Fuzzyman started posting. And by God I'm almost completely baffled at his choice of words, what order he decides to put them in, etc. Everything he says just feels so off-color and not anything resembling pro-town. Here’s some posts of his that don’t sit right with me at all for various reasons.

First he starts the game by posting questions and comments that are not even close to being informative.

Why does it seem that everybody is justifying everything with, "It doesn't matter since you were nowhere close to lynch"? A vote is a signifier of intent to lynch.

I agree with ODDin that the Farside/Scien skirmish was a lot about nothing. Nikanor has my empathy for being attacked for lurking.

What would you have done in farside's shoes?

(Fuzzyman) Joins with Nik in blowing a vote out of proportion

Where? Farside's vote? When I said the argument was a lot about nothing, I meant it referring to # of pages, words, etc., not the severity of the accusations, which was indeed little.

playing up the victim card

Only so far as my post could be considered buddying with Nikanor. Having empathy isn't a plea for sympathy.

excuses his own silence at the same time

I've not dismissed any shots at my inactivity. What are you talking about?

attempts to stifle a townie's only weapon

I have no interest in this; I only want for it to be used wisely.

and excuses mislynching on principle.

No, I said that my principle dictated that one should only vote for those whom they would be comfortable lynching.

FoS are, as a whole, entirely pointless.

Yeah. No intention to lynch means no pressure. Asking questions is better.

Is there anybody out there that disagrees with this?

Okay would you go out and ask if anybody disagrees with that statement? That doesn’t even make sense to me it’s not even relevant to the game it’s a theory argument and a complete distraction. I don’t understand why any town player would try to start that type of argument.

unvote; Vote Fuzzyman

I haven't been satisfied with your additions to discussion.

Satisfied with Yami's?

What’s with the deflection? Not only does Fuzzyman not answer the question but he goes and deflects it onto a player who can’t really defend themselves because clearly they’re lurking.

I feel that the Scien point I brought up in 168 was the most important one that you haven't answered. That's why I mentioned it. And to be quite honest, I feel somewhat inclined to go ahead and vote you if you don't care to do so.

So you’re going to vote someone for not answering your question? That is not a valid reason to vote somebody at all.

Arg. It's starting to seem like I'm not allowed to agree with others, lest I be accused of buddying. It happens every game. I guess that I'm not allowed to use the same excuse for my inactivity that others are using, that others are doing it worse, or that'll be buddying too.

I think that there was a consistent tendecy in farside during her debate with Scien to answer only parts of things directed at her. Instances of this include her only responding to the last paragraph of post 139, and picking just the last two sentences of 146 to give immediate response to.

When you acknowledge that someone has made comments regarding you, which farside does when she responds to at least a portion of a post, but only respond to parts of it, trying to keep attention away from the others, it is scummy.

I bet that since I'm leading in votes right now, this'll be an OMGUS, too.

Vote: farside22

That is SUCH an appeal to emotion it’s absolutely ridiculous. “I’m not allowed to agree with others, lest I be accused of buddying. It happens every game. I guess that I’m not allowed to use the same excuse for my inactivity that others are using”. I hopefully don’t even have to explain how gross of an appeal to emotion that is.

Or maybe it can be more buddying with ODDin, because he's incidentally voting for her too.

No town person would say shit like this. It’s beating somebody else to an argument that they would have against you and it’s WAY too over-defensive. Defending yourself from possibly forthcoming attacks is not something a town player does. It’s what scum does to cover their bases.

If you claim that I'm going AtE, what emotion is it I'm appealing to?

…Joking right?

Then allow me to expand that question to everybody:

Who is your deadline vote?

NO town player would ask that question.

The question would be “Who is your deadline vote and why?”

Vote: Fuzzyman

[hewitt]

And there was a question in there that was supposed to read- Okay WHY would you go out and ask if anybody disagrees with that statement?

Forgot the word why apparently in the original post.

[hewitt]

RE: Fuzzyman (without getting into a stupid quote war)

You're correct in assuming that my gut is not a fan of you at all but you're incorrect in assuming that I used informative as a synonym for helpful. I don't quite care if you're being "helpful" in the transitioning out of a RVS but I do want to see answers that give us insight on you as a player instead of just throwing out questions with no substance.

The quote about everybody saying it's okay to vote without the intent to lynch is a statement I agree with but the way you worded it and the way you didn't go to any lengths to explain why that is your position bothers me. And as for the quote that you say you were answering somebody's question I obviously realized that. It's the way you didn't, again, go to any lengths as to why and just instead pretty much carbon copy spit out what everybody else had been saying. That and you giving Nikanor sympathy for lurking bothers me a lot, I don't understand what you mean by giving them your sympathy.

Your so called criticism of Yank's criticism of farside's criticism of Scien (God what a mouthful) isn't even criticism. It's just a stupid, pointless question that doesn't help anything.

And clearly I understand what defending yourself is but my main problem is with the way you did it. It's all just crappy answers that don't even really defend yourself properly.

Your question asking if anybody disagreed was not relevant at all and shouldn't have even be asked. No town player asks questions like that without 1) clearly answering it themselves and 2) providing an opposition to one side of the argument. You just asked it to stir up pointless arguments.

Clearly, not being satisfied with your additions to discussions is not a reference to lurking but is more or less one of the reasons why I'm voting you. It's because your "additions" to discussion are often pointless, unhelpful, distracting, not informative, and frivolous.

You don't vote somebody for not properly answering your question because CLEARLY that is not an adequate scumtell. More like an excuse to vote someone.

Your appeal to emotion was that we were unfairly accusing you of buddying and you whined feeling as if whatever you post is just going to be accused of buddying. Clear appeal to emotion and you defending yourself before an attack is also a sort of appeal to emotion. Like, you're not allowed to attack me on this and here's why...

And for the last response you apparently misunderstood. I get why you would ask but the point is a town player would ask for WHY before WHO because that is the most important thing in this game. And the excuse that you assume players would post their reasoning why is totally fake.

[hewitt]

And I hate myself a little more because hewitt's argument against EB is really good. I also find the RBT argument too contrived and based on theory rather than alignment indicative reasons.

Unvote; Vote EB

I know doesn't it suck that I've decided to actually start playing the game? In my opinion Electric Badger is definitely the most manipulative player in this game. The stirring the pot and then sitting back and letting others bicker and take the heat really bothers me and it's pretty scummy.

[hewitt]

I think that the EB jump-on-jump-off argument is good too, but the fact remains, we are some fourteen hours off of a deadline and the only people that have a shot at getting lynched are myself and Rice. Take your pick.

(Rice is at L-1, by the way. Just for anybody that didn't notice.)

I HATE it when players turn impending deadlines into well it's either A or B take your pick. That is SO effing scummy.

[hewitt]

ODDin, just an FYI, she (Mae) has bad time issues with some of us...

And don't make excuses for other players, not cool.

[hewitt]

You wanna try and kill EB in this time?

If I wanted to lynch Electric Badger then I'd be voting him no matter if he's the leading bandwagon or the second leading bandwagon or whatever. Clearly, you should be voting the person you want lynched the most no matter the situation.

[hewitt]

Okay we've got

Myself
Nikanor
Electric Badger
Xofelf
Canada
farside
Scien
Maemuki
ODDin

I believe that's everybody anyways. Sooo we're stuck in a really crappy position and I'm going to be rereading everything tonight and I'll check back in with my assessment later.

[hewitt]

Okay so as of right now I'm definitely still retaining all my previous thoughts on Electric Badger from Day 1. Right now he's my #1 scum suspect, I think he played a really manipulative game yesterday and it would not surprise me at all if he was scum.

I found Scien asking for someone to hammer at the end on RBT was incredibly scummy, especially looking in hindsight as he flipped town. I never really understood the wagon on him to begin with I thought it was pretty damn crappy and forced.

I also don't like Maemuki. It's the subtle little way he bounces around and around in his posts and never really comments on anything descriptively enough to be any help.

[hewitt]

Ya, horribly scummy to beg for a lynch with only 8 minutes to spare. It would be much more pro-town to just sit back and let a no-lynch happen.

As for a crappy, forced wagon, er ok. Kind of typical for day 1 to follow weak cases, since you typically can't form strong cases yet. She did seem to have something against M/Ms, and she did lead with a suggestion to mass-claim. Not Kosher.

It's not the fact that it was begging for a no lynch it was the fact that you were begging for a lynch on a crappy ass case. I think it was clear that she did it to start conversation which is a tactic that a lot of players do to start convo.

Did you ever try to stop the crappy and forced wagon? If so, please reference it...if not, please explain why.

Also, please explain why Scien's vote was scummy and yours on Fuzzy wasn't, as both suspects flipped town.

Did I not argue for cases on other players? And going back and overdefending my D1 play is a move that can be painted as scummy by other players so don't blame me for not listening to your suggestion thanks. And come on, don't be stupid with that last inquiry.

[hewitt]

As I said before... the case on her was better than you are pretending. And even if it wasn't, I would have been pushing for a lynch with eight minutes left before deadline. Info is king.

I also don't hold that she was just trying to 'start conversation' with her game entry views. I think she believed them. Her actions in later game supports this. Namely voting for someone that claimed unsolicited.

Here, lets stop this and start something new:

I would beg for her lynch again, even knowing that she was townie. With eight minutes to spare, and with the wagon being an either or at day end, it is important to have a lynch due to the info it brings to town, and I thought her probable scum due to voting patterns and claimed views.

No it wasn't Scien I'm not fucking retarded and I know when a case is crap. Especially when you're looking at who started it I mean come on, that's ridiculous. And I really don't care if you would lynch her again because you can't, so that really doesn't matter at all.

Your main antagonists yesterday were Wulfy, Fuzzy and me. Particularly from my point of view, not a really great track record. You countered some investigations - my comments on the scien/farside debate drew particular notice - but I see no comments about the content of the RBT case being scummy.

So if you're saying the truth and you felt the RBT case wasn't a good one, you allowed a townie to die without trying to step in - which IMO is far worse than lynching a townie based on a decent, if erroneous, case. If you're lying, the attack is pure hypocrisy and equally scummy.

This is also the second time you've mentioned that you don't want to post for fear of being seen as scummy. Ironically, that's exactly what it comes across as.

What are you trying to prove with the "not a really great track record" ElectricBadger? Because nobody really ever says that unless they're scum looking to discredit a player so nobody will listen to them. Smooth. To be honest I was real distracted during D1 and not contributing as much as I could've been but I'm over that shit now.

That second paragraph is completely stupid. Allowing a townie to die? What the fuck is that supposed to mean? As if I'm supposed to know that RBT was a townie and to step in and save her? That's complete crap. So far you're pushing real crap here Badger.

And don't be retarded and twist my words. I said

And going back and overdefending my D1 play is a move that can be painted as scummy by other players so don't blame me for not listening to your suggestion thanks.

because what you were asking me to do was stupid and was a trap that I'm not going to fall into. Your manipulative play isn't going to just slide past me bud.

[hewitt]

What are you trying to prove with the "not a really great track record" ElectricBadger?

I was pointing out that your calling Scien scummy for pushing a mislynch is hypocrisy.

Whoa whoa. I was not calling Scien scummy for pushing a mislynch that is a vulgar misrepresentation of the truth. I was attacking him for pulling a crappy case, pushing a mislynch? What the fuck does that mean? Why would I be attacking him for pushing a mislynch?

Why didn't you point this out? You didn't need to know RBT was town or scum. However - particularly in this game - that doesn't mean too much. Instead, you let the wagon roll and now you're setting up the people on it for a lynch. That's scum.

I wasn't there so much near the end of the lynch period and if I had been I probably would've said something then instead of just pushing who I wanted to be lynched.

[hewitt]

That actually wasn't my case on Fuzzyman, Maemuki, my reasoning to push for his lynch was not that.

[hewitt]

You wanna try and kill EB in this time?

If I wanted to lynch Electric Badger then I'd be voting him no matter if he's the leading bandwagon or the second leading bandwagon or whatever. Clearly, you should be voting the person you want lynched the most no matter the situation.

I think that the EB jump-on-jump-off argument is good too, but the fact remains, we are some fourteen hours off of a deadline and the only people that have a shot at getting lynched are myself and Rice. Take your pick.

(Rice is at L-1, by the way. Just for anybody that didn't notice.)

I HATE it when players turn impending deadlines into well it's either A or B take your pick. That is SO effing scummy.

RE: Fuzzyman (without getting into a stupid quote war)

You're correct in assuming that my gut is not a fan of you at all but you're incorrect in assuming that I used informative as a synonym for helpful. I don't quite care if you're being "helpful" in the transitioning out of a RVS but I do want to see answers that give us insight on you as a player instead of just throwing out questions with no substance.

The quote about everybody saying it's okay to vote without the intent to lynch is a statement I agree with but the way you worded it and the way you didn't go to any lengths to explain why that is your position bothers me. And as for the quote that you say you were answering somebody's question I obviously realized that. It's the way you didn't, again, go to any lengths as to why and just instead pretty much carbon copy spit out what everybody else had been saying. That and you giving Nikanor sympathy for lurking bothers me a lot, I don't understand what you mean by giving them your sympathy.

Your so called criticism of Yank's criticism of farside's criticism of Scien (God what a mouthful) isn't even criticism. It's just a stupid, pointless question that doesn't help anything.

And clearly I understand what defending yourself is but my main problem is with the way you did it. It's all just crappy answers that don't even really defend yourself properly.

Your question asking if anybody disagreed was not relevant at all and shouldn't have even be asked. No town player asks questions like that without 1) clearly answering it themselves and 2) providing an opposition to one side of the argument. You just asked it to stir up pointless arguments.

Clearly, not being satisfied with your additions to discussions is not a reference to lurking but is more or less one of the reasons why I'm voting you. It's because your "additions" to discussion are often pointless, unhelpful, distracting, not informative, and frivolous.

You don't vote somebody for not properly answering your question because CLEARLY that is not an adequate scumtell. More like an excuse to vote someone.

Your appeal to emotion was that we were unfairly accusing you of buddying and you whined feeling as if whatever you post is just going to be accused of buddying. Clear appeal to emotion and you defending yourself before an attack is also a sort of appeal to emotion. Like, you're not allowed to attack me on this and here's why...

And for the last response you apparently misunderstood. I get why you would ask but the point is a town player would ask for WHY before WHO because that is the most important thing in this game. And the excuse that you assume players would post their reasoning why is totally fake.

But then Fuzzyman started posting. And by God I'm almost completely baffled at his choice of words, what order he decides to put them in, etc. Everything he says just feels so off-color and not anything resembling pro-town. Here’s some posts of his that don’t sit right with me at all for various reasons.

First he starts the game by posting questions and comments that are not even close to being informative.

Why does it seem that everybody is justifying everything with, "It doesn't matter since you were nowhere close to lynch"? A vote is a signifier of intent to lynch.

I agree with ODDin that the Farside/Scien skirmish was a lot about nothing. Nikanor has my empathy for being attacked for lurking.

What would you have done in farside's shoes?

(Fuzzyman) Joins with Nik in blowing a vote out of proportion

Where? Farside's vote? When I said the argument was a lot about nothing, I meant it referring to # of pages, words, etc., not the severity of the accusations, which was indeed little.

playing up the victim card

Only so far as my post could be considered buddying with Nikanor. Having empathy isn't a plea for sympathy.

excuses his own silence at the same time

I've not dismissed any shots at my inactivity. What are you talking about?

attempts to stifle a townie's only weapon

I have no interest in this; I only want for it to be used wisely.

and excuses mislynching on principle.

No, I said that my principle dictated that one should only vote for those whom they would be comfortable lynching.

FoS are, as a whole, entirely pointless.

Yeah. No intention to lynch means no pressure. Asking questions is better.

Is there anybody out there that disagrees with this?

Okay would you go out and ask if anybody disagrees with that statement? That doesn’t even make sense to me it’s not even relevant to the game it’s a theory argument and a complete distraction. I don’t understand why any town player would try to start that type of argument.

unvote; Vote Fuzzyman

I haven't been satisfied with your additions to discussion.

Satisfied with Yami's?

What’s with the deflection? Not only does Fuzzyman not answer the question but he goes and deflects it onto a player who can’t really defend themselves because clearly they’re lurking.

I feel that the Scien point I brought up in 168 was the most important one that you haven't answered. That's why I mentioned it. And to be quite honest, I feel somewhat inclined to go ahead and vote you if you don't care to do so.

So you’re going to vote someone for not answering your question? That is not a valid reason to vote somebody at all.

Arg. It's starting to seem like I'm not allowed to agree with others, lest I be accused of buddying. It happens every game. I guess that I'm not allowed to use the same excuse for my inactivity that others are using, that others are doing it worse, or that'll be buddying too.

I think that there was a consistent tendecy in farside during her debate with Scien to answer only parts of things directed at her. Instances of this include her only responding to the last paragraph of post 139, and picking just the last two sentences of 146 to give immediate response to.

When you acknowledge that someone has made comments regarding you, which farside does when she responds to at least a portion of a post, but only respond to parts of it, trying to keep attention away from the others, it is scummy.

I bet that since I'm leading in votes right now, this'll be an OMGUS, too.

Vote: farside22

That is SUCH an appeal to emotion it’s absolutely ridiculous. “I’m not allowed to agree with others, lest I be accused of buddying. It happens every game. I guess that I’m not allowed to use the same excuse for my inactivity that others are using”. I hopefully don’t even have to explain how gross of an appeal to emotion that is.

Or maybe it can be more buddying with ODDin, because he's incidentally voting for her too.

No town person would say shit like this. It’s beating somebody else to an argument that they would have against you and it’s WAY too over-defensive. Defending yourself from possibly forthcoming attacks is not something a town player does. It’s what scum does to cover their bases.

If you claim that I'm going AtE, what emotion is it I'm appealing to?

…Joking right?

Then allow me to expand that question to everybody:

Who is your deadline vote?

NO town player would ask that question.

The question would be “Who is your deadline vote and why?”

Vote: Fuzzyman

Just a couple of posts that you apparently missed Maemuki.

[hewitt]

Ok, maybe I didn't word the correct question (I did but you missed it). Why did you think that the RBT case was crap? Why didn't you even refer RBT's case? If you thought that the RBT case was crap, why didn't you say so? Sure, you pushed for Fuzzy's lynch - but you never tried to stop RBT's wagon, now did you? If you did - please point that out.

I never "thought" the RBT wagon was crap, I think it's crap. I don't care whether or not I was there to defend or speak out against it I never expect townies to push crap cases. And either way it's spun RBT was a crap wagon. I don't care whether it took me a read through to figure it out I never would've backed it to begin with because it was bullshit.

1) I didn't really have time to read hewitt's case on EB yesterday. It's pretty interesting, but IMHO a bit too dependant on interpretation. I can see his play as town play well enough. That being said, EB only responded to the farside/scien part of the accusations. There were also quotes regarding other posts byim, which he didn't address.

2) I think hewitt is trying too hard to show that EB is manipulative to day. He's blowing EB's posts out of proportion, EB's questions are mostly valid.

3) hewitt: as EB and Mae have already asked - why did you think RBT's case was crap? I don't remember anything from you yesterday saying that the case on RBT was crap in your opinion. If a case is crappy, you should say so.

I wasn't there so much near the end of the lynch period and if I had been I probably would've said something then instead of just pushing who I wanted to be lynched.

We can't know that, and you can't prove that - just like what you've said to Scien.

Sure, now you can say that you thought the case on RBT was crap. Yet yesterday you said nothing. Even if you answer the question and explain why you supposedly thought the case on RBt was crappy, we can't know whether you thought so or not. You basically avoided saying anything on RBT.

And for the record, I also didn't - and still don't - think that the case on RBT was crappy.

4) However, hewitt is attempting to avoid this by saying he doesn't want to be seen as scummy. Neat way to avoid answering a question. Basically, you answer to all questions by EB with "your questions are stupid and it's a trap". Well, perhaps I'm an idiot, but I would really want you to answer them.

EB's questions are not mostly valid who would ever ask those questions as a town player? You answer me that. And just like I said earlier there was no justifiable reason to lynch RBT and I personally was really surprised by the lynch. Yesterday I was not expecting RBT to be lynched and I really wasn't on enough to fully comprehend the situation. That's all WIFOM and blah blah but I really didn't think RBT was in any danger.

And no my answer to that question wasn't so that I wouldn't be seen as scummy it was because it was a dumb question that EB was trying to set me up with to be attacked and I'm not retarded and I'm not going to fall for that shit. I've been around way too long to be set up like that, that's fucking retarded.

[hewitt]

The OMG TENTACLES! Vote count

Hewitt - ElectricBadger
Scien - Farside22
Farside22 - Scien
ElectricBadger - Benmage

Not Voting: Nikanor, Hewitt, Maemuki, ODDin, XofElf

Lots of love
Haylxxx

I would like to apologize to everyone for my prolonged absence this is my favorite game right now so I actually feel bad for being off the site so long.

Thank you, I was being to think people hated it with all the replacements ~ Hayl

hewitt: EB asked the following: "Did you ever try to stop the crappy and forced wagon? If so, please reference it...if not, please explain why. "
This is the same thing that Mae asked, and later myself: why didn't you say the wagon on RBT was crappy if you thought so. I can't see what's so wrong about a town player asking that. Moreover, I find it strange that you don't say Mae and myself are scummy for asking the same thing.

I did not put much effort in stopping the RBT wagon. I honestly didn't think it was going to go anywhere and I did not foresee the lynch coming at all. I'm not really sure what you're referencing in that last statement.

Hewitt, I don't understand...if you think that the wagon was crap, why, why, for the love of everything that's good, why didn't you say so? Why?

And, if townies cannot mislynch or make crap cases - this game has just become much easier. *claps*

@ Ben, what do you think about more recent events - on this case, hewitt and RBT's wagon?

See above. Thank you for asking the EXACT same question as ODDin two posts later. And if you notice my number one suspicion is not to do with the RBT crap wagon. But I don't feel like people who push crap cases should just be given a free pass and be called out on it. I don't understand why it's OKAY to just push crap cases.

While you're at it - I'll need to reread hewitt on iso...he looks the prime candidate to be scum right now.

Moooost likely because I called you out. Nice non-existent case though.

Again, what makes it more likely in your mind that this was a scummy action, and not me switching my mind, as I was building a case on Fuzzy?

Why did you not follow the Fuzzy case then? It made so much more sense than the crap ass RBT case.

Whattt?? We have a claimed mason, and a fuzzy flip? Who?

...

I disagree with this Hew. I've seen games where you vote around a whole lot more than you have this game. Sure it can be wifom and you can say those votes you wanted to lynch in every incident. And right now i dont care to cipher through to see if this holds weight (yet). But your lack of votes is uncharacteristic...maybe you havent sunk your teeth into the game...we'll see.

Well yes lol but I was scum in that game keep in mind.

So...what? It's okay if he lies, as long as he does it to kill off people you want dead?

Go quote where I lied betch.

If indeed you guys are going to lynch me over this crap (and it is crap, you don't have points as much as you have possible motives with no backing), I urge you to take a good look around you. Oddin is not cleared by my flip. Farside isn't either. It is common from what I have seen to get into a 'Well she pushed that townie so hard... she wouldn't do that as scum'. You make sure you really believe that statement if you are going to let her slide for this.

This is just kind of whiny and annoying.

Isn't Hewitt's case against me, which you jumped aboard, based on the fact I commented on the farside/scien dispute?

Good attempt at lying but ultimately still a fail.

Also the only thing to note was Hewitt said "there is a theme in this game where one mason is scum and the other is town. I have a 50% to hit scum if I vote Fuzzy" [iso post #17]. Number one is wrong. Number 2, an interesting mistake to make. One that should be examined I think. If he truly believes that one of each team has to be scum here, he should be 100% sure his partner is scum. Why would he still think he had a 50/50 shot? Anyway, he eventually realized his logic was off. But the mistake above is still curious given his claimed thoughts on the game at the time.

This is fair I'm actually really not even sure myself what my line of thoughts were at that point. Certainly not proud of that moment.

I skimmed through the last couple of posts because it seems like more useless farside v. Scien arguments again.

Vote: ElectricBadger

I honestly cannot see any possible scenario where EB is not part of a scum faction.

[hewitt]

ODDin has definitely been looking more interesting in my eye's today more than D1 but I feel like it's most likely that ODDin has just flubbed up than EB. I would like a surefire scum lynch today and I feel that EB is most likely that lynch.

[hewitt]

Sorry, been dealing with a friend and their problems and i haven't been around much. Things are settled now, so real post later.
Now is time for school.

Is this person even in our game???

Yes, pay attention. ~ Hayl

[hewitt]

How much to lynch today? 5? With me being the 4th vote and L-1? Ok, fine. But that doesn't mean I wouldn't like to here Nik chime in on the events so far this day, or to actually hear a

real

defense from EB.

EB's definitely had a lot of time to gabber and he did but yeah he really hasn't posted a competent defense at all yet.

[hewitt]

I haven't seen a competent case against me, and lots of pointless gabbering is exactly the problem with the play so far. The puppetmaster charge is silly; I did what I could to disarm that argument and have since ignored it as much as possible. If I wanted to inspire it, I would have used my vote, not gone on a tangent with Nik. And no one has tried to say the far/scien debate would have died out without me (as it obviously didn't when I stopped posting) so the charge is baseless.

The lurker charge has more substance, but I've explained my reasoning and in any case there are way too many people not posting for it to be a real scum tell; and I believe some of my wagon has even agreed with my reasons (ie, farside, scien and benmage have spammed so much that trying to get points in edgewise is reasonably pointless until those disputes are done).

If there's some other persuasive evidence I'm not responding to, please repost it.

If you "haven't seen" a competent case against you you're either A) lying through your teeth or B) not reading the game. You can't just sit back say oh that's a weak case on me because it's not at all and you insisting that it is...just another example of you being fake.

[hewitt]

Yeah we need some more activity by the players who haven't posted much lately.

[hewitt]

Aside from the fact I disagree with several of your picks, Nik, I'm more than a little astonished that three of your four scum are only there by elimination or on the word of others. Not sure how you can have such solid town reads in a game where not a single scum has died, and yet you're apparently willing to carry out a fairly critical lynch without any of your own reasoning.

I completely agree with this. That analysis was totally lackluster and quite frankly, kind of scummy. It's completely unhelpful too. You're going off all our work basically.

[hewitt]

EB's list was pretty funny. farside we keep seeming to be on the same wavelengths lately. That's twice, I think, today that you've restated the same thing I've said.

[hewitt]

lol I just posted but I guess I'm doing it again.

[hewitt]

Unvote

As much as I want to lynch EB I recognize the importance of lynching scum today. If EB is a Monk then he's much less likely to be scum than other players simply because he can't be Mafia. That means EB/xofelf are the Monks and I am the remaining Masons. Both Masons ended up being town and out of EB/xofelf only one can be scum and I'm a little bit hesitant on pegging EB as the correct scum because I honestly thought they were both scum.

So I'm going to go back to who I think is the safe scum lynch.

Vote: ODDin

Get your ass back here.

[hewitt]

I think you've done your best to act exactly like EB has and even more to an extreme of attempting to slide under the radar today. I think you realized that players were not happy with your playstyle yesterday and you're attempting to compensate for that by being forgettable. You have not a single thing today and seem to concern yourself more with what other players think of other players than putting out your own thoughts.

[hewitt]

Yes it's possible that monk could be scum (I think based on what haylen was saying)
I don't think having someone who is your monk partner that is not around you should just walk away. If your town you should have asked for a replacement a long time ago or had your partner proded with a personal PM to the mod.

To me it's not so much is one of them scum it's more like which one of them is scum. And that's right just because they're not around is ABSOLUTELY not an excuse. Fuzzy and I only said like two things to each other the whole time.

[hewitt]

Urm, well, I still don't exactly understand the case against me, and you aren't really helping me here. With deadline close, it'd benefit everybody if you helped by giving me more time to discuss the case against me.

We don't have that kind of time and you need to make the time to not only defend yourself but raise points against other players to help us. There's no reason to keep you here if you're going to sit there and say wait wait I need to defend myself! If you have even a prayer of not being lynched you need to come out on the offensive with who you believe should be lynched and not just sit back on the defense. Because your defense isn't going to be good enough.

[hewitt]

This game did not grow like a mutated monster half the players aren't even posting much.

[hewitt]

ODDin who do you think is scum and why?

[hewitt]

hewitt: right now (that is, based on info from page 20 and earlier alone), you.
I've already said why I think you're scum earlier today. I think your reaction towards EB is blown out of proportion. I don't like the way you said how oh-so-terribly-wrong the wagon on RBT was - but you only remembered saying so today, when it's too late. I don't buy that you didn't realise she was in danger of being lynched. When you focused on the game and presented your huge case on fuzzy RBT was already in plenty danger of being lynched, and you should have noticed that on the reread.

This is pretty much stuff I can't defend myself from so I guess I'm okay with that.

[hewitt]

Also intrigued by the sudden exodus of votes from me after a claim I didn't expect much from; my guess is mafia trying to find werewolves rather than focusing on an already-weak town.

That was a stupid statement.

That is indeed a good point against EB.

Hew took my post out of context: I was not accusing him just because he'd suspected townies, but because he was attacking Scien for it despite having done it himself. Hew hypocritically pushed voting for townies as a case and then tried to pass off my pointing out his double standard as scummy.[/quote]

What're you jabbering about here? I in no way attacked Scien for pushing a case on a townie I attacked him for pushing a crappy case. Those are two completely different things and there you go again attempting to manipulate and twist around other players' words.

[hewitt]

Oh yes I also attacked you for that I almost forgot about that. I am clearly looking at others way more than I'm looking at you right now Scien.

[hewitt]

Um you've got a lot of facts inaccurate there ODDin. First of all I never stated that Scien started the wagon, I was making that comment talking about you and how unreliable of a source you are. If there were vote counts around the time RBT was going to be lynched I certainly didn't see much of them, I had no idea that RBT was at L-2 while Fuzzy was at L-4. Considering I don't find you, EB, and Scien to be reliable or credible town players I didn't think anybody would be stupid enough to follow you. And this...

Oh, and this is just beautiful:

I think that the EB jump-on-jump-off argument is good too, but the fact remains, we are some fourteen hours off of a deadline and the only people that have a shot at getting lynched are myself and Rice. Take your pick.

(Rice is at L-1, by the way. Just for anybody that didn't notice.)

I HATE it when players turn impending deadlines into well it's either A or B take your pick. That is SO effing scummy.

(emphasis mine)

However, we later have:

I wasn't there so much near the end of the lynch period and if I had been I probably would've said something then instead of just pushing who I wanted to be lynched.

And just like I said earlier there was no justifiable reason to lynch RBT and I personally was really surprised by the lynch. Yesterday I was not expecting RBT to be lynched and I really wasn't on enough to fully comprehend the situation. That's all WIFOM and blah blah but I really didn't think RBT was in any danger.

I did not put much effort in stopping the RBT wagon. I honestly didn't think it was going to go anywhere and I did not foresee the lynch coming at all.

doesn't make any sense.

Nice OMGUS.

[hewitt]

That was a stupid statement.

Solid defense. Explain?

I in no way attacked Scien for pushing a case on a townie

Oh?

I found Scien asking for someone to hammer at the end on RBT was incredibly scummy, especially looking in hindsight as he flipped town.

That seems clear to me.

Emphasis on the hammer EB. And I have nothing I have to explain to you because you didn't say anything worthwhile.

[hewitt]

Whatever you try to spin this as the fact still remains that I was surprised by RBT's lynch. End of story and you can try to spin it however way you want, but that's how it remains and that's how it is whether you like it or not.

[hewitt]

If you were surprised by the RBT lynch, it only means you tunneled Fuzzy to incredible levels of extremeness at the end of D1, managing to post without noticing anything around you whatsoever. Still scummy.

Can you read? I stated quite clearly that I was surprised because I didn't think anybody was going to be stupid enough to jump on that wagon.

[hewitt]

The Blink Vote count

ElectricBadger - Scien
Hewitt - ElectricBadger, ODDin
ODDin - Hewitt, Farside22, Benmage

Not Voting: Nikanor, Maemuki, ODDin, SaintKerrigan.

Lots of love
Haylxxx

Umm...mind explaining to me in brief why you consider Hewitt a mason?

I claimed it, I am it, no counter claim. Unless you want to counter claim =)

[hewitt]

My vote on Fuzzy isn't opportunistic at all. It's actually the most original and makes the most sense out of all votes on him right now, considering I'm a town Mason with him and although he's confirmed not Mafia I'm pretty damn sure he's a Werewolf.

[hewitt]

ODDin quit whining that was a perfectly acceptable move and Kerrigan most definitely dropped the ball.

[hewitt]

Okay I apologize I will actually do something tonight. I'm trying to finish a project, once I've completed that tonight I will read and catch up.