Mini 1390: Game Over

[Radelle]

VOTE: Toxictaipan

For randomly voting when he could have put down a more serious vote when questioning Cheery Dog.

[Radelle]

^Fake. Overdoing it.

I didn't realize I could over-do a one sentence serious vote.

Oh do tell me more.

That's no the only plausible explanation. You may have not actually wanted to place your vote there (with possibly both of you being scum), however you were called out for it and then you did.
I'm not a mindreader so I don't know if it was just forgetful or deliberate. I'm currently going with deliberate with a forgetful backup plan.
I realise you will probably argue this back at me, but I still won't know if it is true or not.

You say this like it's just an example of a plausible scenario, but I'm getting the impression by you saying you think it's deliberate that you actually think this. So, am I right that you actually think Abaddon is my scum buddy or why else do you think he was being deliberate by not voting me?

There is absolutely no plausible motivation, scum or Town, for me or anyone to do what you're suggesting. Therefore, you're either scum or an idiot.

So which is he? Idiot or scum? Why can't he be both? This conclusion doesn't make sense.

[Radelle]

@Toxic

, no comments on anything else going on?

You seemed to take at least a minor issue with Cheery not participating in RVS. Did you think that was scummy?

[Radelle]

@Toxic

:

No issue, it was just a question meant to jump-start discussion. Choosing not to participate in RVS isn't scummy, in my opinion, and a simple question like that doesn't require a pressure vote. Putting a serious vote on me because of that is being a little overcritical.

We need to get out of RVS at some stage, and the best way to do that is to put pressure votes and add onto bandwagons. How do you suggest we get out of RVS otherwise?

Nah, I have a better idea. Let's see who's actually paying attention and making a genuine effort at scum hunting here.

Asking an essentially yes or no question doesn't weed out the people who are paying attention or not.

You made the vote. Explain it.

@Tommy

:

This appears to be some sort of logical pedantry about and/or vs either/or. I can't see what Radelle hopes to get out of it.

I wanted a definitive read since he was slowly creeping his way to a scum read on Cheery without actually directly stating so. He makes the distinction that Cheery can't be both scum or an idiot (which doesn't make sense), but notice how he doesn't make the distinction of Cheery being a

Village Idiot

. That read was leaving itself open.

Because your first post gave me a spooky feeling.

This just feels like you're trying to cleverly not say scummy.

Having said that, your response to my questions went some way towards making up for it.

How did his responses make it up for you? What is your current read on Jason now?

@Parama

:

Now is the point where you realize this is subjective, take it to MD after the game, realize Radelle was trying to push this as a legit reason on page 1, and then change your mind about Abaddon, mmk?

I think it's pretty clear that I haven't been

trying

to push the reasoning for my vote on Toxic as being legit. Preeeeettttttyyy sure I am actually pushing it as a legit reason.

@Sable

:

This is answering Radelle's post 15 in reference to post 11

The actual discussion, to my mind, starts in posts 16 and 17, where Parama and Abaddon start their little tiff. So there’s really no contradiction at all in Taipan’s position, since they were referring to one post made before discussion really started and one made after.

I don't know what you're trying to do here. I believe Parama was pointing out how Toxic was being similarly "overcritical" of IdiotKing's RVS vote by seriously voting him for it.

[Radelle]

Abaddon, Cheery has been in (and is in)

severa

l games on this site, many of them completed. He isn't "new" anything.

[Radelle]

@Jason

:

You have no comments on my post/vote Radelle?

I am going to be straight-up. I already essentially answered the idiot vs scum question and the other question I both really didn't understand or care for. I didn't think it was worth responding to. I never implied that it could have been scummy. I'm asking if Toxic

did

find it scummy since he asked him. Several could have questioned Cheery but they didn't, which seems to me that Toxic did take a minor issue with it compared to the other players who didn't care to question Cheery.

You're also leaning town to me given your later conversations after your vote for me.

@Toxic

:

You do realize it is essentially my question to Cheery Dog that got us out of RVS, right? Until then, no one really made a serious effort at turning this into an actual discussion instead of a series of pointless random votes (aside from Cheery Dog questioning Parama's random vote, but Parama's answer didn't help move the game into a meaningful discussion).

My question for Cheery Dog didn't require a pressure vote, period. In fact, putting a pressure vote on Cheery Dog in addition to asking that question leaves it up for interpretation that I may actually find it scummy to not participate in RVS, which I don't. I was intentionally trying to avoid confusion there. All I wanted to know was whether he was planning to participate in RVS or not, and if he was, what he was waiting for.

Your question didn't get us out of RVS, which is evident by the fact that RVS was still going by the time I made my serious vote on you. Do you really think that that RVS would have been naturally over because of your question if I hadn't seriously voted for you? If your qualification for ending RVS is the person doing something that goes into serious discussion, then no, your little question at CheeryDog didn't help as the responses directly to the question afterward didn't help move the game forward into a meaningful discussion.

The rest of this makes it clear that you're worried by how the town interprets your votes, which looks like self-conscious scum. You're also over-thinking why you didn't vote way too hard.

Main difference between you and me being that you seriously voted for me because I failed to arbitrarily vote for Cheery Dog simply because I posed a non-accusatory question, and I seriously voted for Idiotking for perpetuating the RVS after it was over and done with. Even in your argument against me you say we need to get out of RVS at some stage.

Sooo... I don't see how that's at all comparable.

I was clarifying what Parama probably meant to another player. Why are you taking this up with me like I made the comparison?

[Radelle]

Our friend Parama is posting in every other thread but here. Where are you?~

You didn't actually present any kind of cogent case for her to engage with. I read it as barely better than an RVS vote. Perhaps you should improve your position before issuing a challenge for refutation.

Oh Abaddon, you scummy person you. Attacking me

and

essentially defending me? I don't know what to say.

@Toxic

, why wait for Parama?

[Radelle]

@Toxic

, I'm not going to get into a wall war with you in post 84 over mainly pointless questions and other things brought up which make more sense when you consider our conversation as a whole. Especially the part about who gets credit for getting out of RVS. Love the attitude though.

What specifically did you get from the reactions of players as of now? What are your thoughts on Abaddon and Parama?

@Abaddon

:

Radelle, I don't need to be unfair to find you scummy. Attacks on scum that are just plain bad only give you ways to worm your way out of it by calling foul.

You're still scummy, but I won't abide no-logic attacks just because they're aimed in the right direction. That's hypocrisy of the worst sort, and I won't put up with that.

You have a very unique way of looking scummy as hell when you're calling everyone idiots and generally being a jerk, but when you calm down and explain things I really want to agree with you. Problem here is, I think it's more probable that a town Abaddon would be more aggressively going after me

while

calling out others.

UNVOTE:
VOTE: Abaddon

[Radelle]

@Sable

: Is English your main language?

[Radelle]

Strawman argument.

I think you can do better than that.

@Toxic

: Yes.

[Radelle]

It's like Parama forgot the game, because he's been definitely actively posting around the forums but not here.

[Radelle]

Why Abaddon is scum

In post 121 he puts me down as his top scum read, but his play thus far indicates otherwise. For a top scum read, he has barely pursued me or done anything about it. In fact, for the most part, he's been rather reactionary in his case against me. I've made several posts so far, most lengthy, and the only things he has said in response are:

VOTE: Toxictaipan

For randomly voting when he could have put down a more serious vote when questioning Cheery Dog.

^Fake. Overdoing it.

and

Strawman argument.

(followed by an explanation).

That's it. At this point, it's difficult to tell

why

exactly he still felt I was scum and was voting me.

In post 121 he finally gives a more in-depth explanation:

Radelle - Strong, strong gut response to her early vote on Toxic and clumsy defense of it. Creates strawman arguments against her biggest opponents, and goes out of her way to cast others in questionable lights.

Ignoring gut reaction, let's look at the rest.

1.

Creates strawman arguments against her biggest opponents

Opponents, indicating plural. If this is so, he certainly hasn't been calling me out on it in any consistent manner. He only does it once

when I vote for him

, which also goes on to showcase his reactionary nature towards me.

The strawman argument itself is also arguable.

2.

Goes out of her way to cast others in questionable lights

This is the first time

he has ever brought this up

and with no evidence to boot. This is a man who has no problem calling out CheeryDog for his opportunitism, or just about anyone else in this thread for that matter. But for his top scum read whom he has been voting for and accusing of doing what is stated above? Nada.

As well, pointing out to people that my Toxic vote was indeed serious isn't exactly a "clumsy defense" or a defense at all. Otherwise, I barely talked or pushed the matter of my vote except to further pressure Toxic wherein we started to get into a roundabout argument over getting out of RVS.

Abaddon's case on me is bunk.

It's just a bunch of statements with no water to hold them up. This looks like scum settling into an early vote and doing nothing about it while skating

looking like

he's actually doing something.

His reactionary nature isn't just with me. Look at his ISO. He barely actively engages with people in the thread in a scum hunting manner except mostly when they engage him first.

[Radelle]

I'm straight-up having problems exactly understanding Sable. Especially in post 109. At first I thought there was a language barrier, but I guess that isn't it. Also, I feel like the discussion and votes between Sable and Delta is just a bunch of "noise." I can't get a good read out of either of them.

@IdiotiKing

:

I can never tell these things. I don't really pay attention to RVS.

To clarify, what exactly couldn't you tell? When RVS has ended?

@Tommy

: I follow your case, and I agree with a lot of your points, especially 2 and 4 which hits me as being the scummiest. But I'm having difficulty actually calling that slot scum due to his lack of response to criticism put on him. I'll need to see more from the person replacing him.

@Cheery

:

I am finding it odd that parama couldn't catch up 3 pages - smells faintly of caught scum

He had only two votes before yours. What are you talking about?

[Radelle]

Hey Toxic, I know you have a hard-on for Abaddon, but try to save it for after the game when everyone has flipped, all right?

Why would I only use posts from before post 97? I didn't realize that scum just stopped being scum after a vote. Siilly me. Except, not only does that

not

make sense, if you had actually cared for what I wrote, you'd see it's beside the point. I'm clearly addressing his entire play this game. Yes, my vote was mainly based on a meta prospect coupled any way by him not pursing me in an aggressive manner (or any manner really). There lacks a point in what exactly you were trying to achieve in bringing that up.

How about you actually respond to what I said instead of trying to insinuate whatever you're trying to insinuate here?

Also, if evidence is your thing, what's your opinion of Abaddon's case where he doesn't bring much if any, which I point out?

[Radelle]

Also, what do you think of Sable's latest post?

[Radelle]

@Cheery

:

He had only two votes before yours. What are you talking about?

Tommy's case on him was a few posts up from it.
(and I had thought that there were 3 votes on him for some reason, but that doesn't actually matter)

If what he's saying is true (I see no reason to believe he's lying), I doubt he read through the thread to even realize what exactly was happening up until the point he outed.

[Radelle]

@Toxic

:

Because you should have enough reasoning for your vote initially, or don't you? Scum don't stop being scummy after a vote, but you've yet to provide the base reasoning for your vote in the first place. It's hard to add to what isn't there. Meta reads are cool and all, but their mostly useless as evidence to people who don't have those same meta reads. I don't buy much into meta, so convince me otherwise.

I already explained my vote. Several times. I even went on to provide a case on why I believe Abaddon is scum. Just because you don't like the reasons, doesn't mean they don't exist. You want to see why I believe Abaddon is scummy not based on meta? Let me redirect you to post 131.

Yes, you're clearly addressing his entire play this game. The fishy part, though, is that you're only just now bringing it up. Seems to me that if you really had that much of an issue with him, it would have been more apparent earlier. You mentioned him very, very little until your vote and even when you did mention him, you didn't act suspicious of him. And now, BOOM! His entire player this game is scummy. To me, it looks more like you're trying to shift focus onto Abaddon since my wagon didn't take off how you hopped it would.

You say if I really thought he was scum, my "issue" with him would be apparent earlier. If I didn't feel Abaddon was really scum until he wrote post 72, how could I have indicated he was scum any earlier than

my

very

next series of posts

? Your arguments aren't making sense.

I also don't like how you make it like my vote seemed sudden. It's clear in post 81 I called him scummy for both essentially defending me while attacking me (with his vote). He responds in post 82 confirming he still thinks I'm scummy. I end my conversation with you because I feel like it's going nowhere, then I vote for Abaddon in post 97 due to previous reasons and insert that as town I think he'd be aggressively pursing me

while

having that conversation with Jason. Nothing here is sudden. Explain how that is scummy.

You just fail to answer me here:

Also, if evidence is your thing, what's your opinion of Abaddon's case where he doesn't bring much if any, which I point out?

If I had to take a guess, I'd say Abaddon found your reasoning for voting me scummy, and your play thus far hasn't been redeeming enough to warrant him changing his mind. Nothing for him to outright attack, but nothing for him to change his read, either.

Now you're just trying to justify

why

he may not have brought evidence on his behalf.

I didn't ask you what you thought Abaddon was thinking. I'm asking you, that taking into consideration that you want me to compile a specific set of evidence, within a specific frame of time to justify my vote, what are your OWN opinions on the fact that he doesn't bring much if anything to the table when he makes his case against me?

[Radelle]

The fact that you're attacking the fact that

I made that case

instead of

the actual content

in it is scummy as hell. As well as your lack of commentary on it.

I don't know if there is some scum defense going on or what.

[Radelle]

@Toxic

: Except, my timing makes perfect sense. He defended me, I pointed out how that was scummy, he responded indicating I was still a scum read, then I proceed to vote for that reason and also with the realization that he hasn't been pursing me much whatsoever. Afterwards, he continues this behavior and makes a case which doesn't check out. I make a case against him and realize while looking through his ISO that he's been reactive towards people and passive towards his top scum read. There is nothing that difficult to comprehend here.

If this was some 20 page thread where I suddenly changed reads out of nowhere, your timing argument

may

have some merit. But I have a feeling that no matter what I say, you'd take an issue with it.

Toxic, you've barely placed any suspicion on me except you seem a little irrationally upset when I question you. No where have you indicated whatsoever that I am a scum read or scummy. Even when you vote for me you don't call me scum, just that you're "worried." How exactly

am

I scum Toxic? You said earlier you believe I changed votes to Abaddon because my vote on you wasn't gaining traction. If I wanted to be on a bandwagon that would gain traction, it doesn't make sense to then jump onto the bandwagon of one of town's biggest town read. Parama and Sable would have been safer bets if that were my motivation and I didn't want to draw attention to myself.

I'm sure you have other reasons, though.

[Radelle]

@Jacob

: A few things.

1) When you make your notes, are they for yourself or others?
2) Could you link to the game where you used the spreadsheets and got lynched?
3) I don't know if you've realized, but your vote is on Abaddon. Do you mean to have it on Cheery?

@Tommy

:

I think Abaddon and Radelle are town, and that Radelle is caught up in an angry OMGUS campaign. I could have sworn I caught Radelle sheeping me a while back, and I don't think he/she would do that as scum. But I didn't make a note and I can't find it now, so we'll have to call my position on Radelle a gut read. At deadline, I'd rather kill Radelle than nobody.

I haven't ever sheeped you this game.

Also, in no sense of the word is the conversation and votes between Abaddon, Toxic, and I some sort of OMGUS campaign in any sense of that word or what has actually taken place in this thread. The thing that strikes me here, is you saying you would rather kill me than nobody at deadline. You're already assuming that your BW and case on Parama won't fly, but you seem more sure that the badonwagon on me will.

Why is that? Who are some other scum reads?

[Radelle]

I've seen a town Cheery before and he was equally as worthless as I'm seeing here.

[Radelle]

Been busy. Going to catch-up in a tad.

[Radelle]

Alt or newbie, Sherlock?

[Radelle]

@Tommy

:

I don't have any other strong scum reads. I'm flip-flopping on you a bit - toxictaipan is right that your vote came out of nowhere, and I'm uncomfortable about clearing you on the basis of a vague memory of you having sheeped me. I'd be happy with a lynch on Cheery Dog or Idiotking because they haven't given us enough substance. _Sherlock_ might end up in that category too, but we'll give him a chance. I might be persuaded to vote for Sable Tip.

You should be uncomfortable, because I never sheeped you.

It's also kinda hard to say my vote came suddenly when every batch of posts I made I was addressing Abaddon, and not in a townie manner either. First on my vote, then on the idiot vs scum dealio (which I said he was leaving that read open), proceeded by saying how Cheery isn't new anything, followed by the eventual conversation that lead me to actually vote for him.

You'd be happy with a lynch on Cheery Dog or IdiotKing because they haven't given us enough substance. What are your thoughts about the substance they've already given?

Thoughts on Jacob.

@Absta

: The game hasn't completed yet, to be honest. I did have a quick random gander at Cheery's meta in completed game Open 437 and he seems a lot more active throughout most of the game there, actually. I'm going to backtrack a bit and say his meta is a toss-up for me.

@Toxic

: That's a lotta words trying to explain that you had actually called me scummy

at some point

.

Waiting on that explanation of how scum-me would be motivated to hop onto a bandwagon of someone most see as town while other bandwagons would better suit my scum motivations. Also, if you really thought I was doing this, I would expect you to have mentioned it then, instead of as some point to try and throw at me when trying to argue on Abaddon's behalf.

I already addressed most of your points numerous times and you slowly try to twist the conversation into something else. It's becoming absolutely ridiculous, especially now by trying to morph me into some attacker. Also, questioning someone as well as pointing out how something seems scummy is not an "attack."

[Radelle]

@Jacob

: You have yet to answer the following:

@Jacob: A few things.

1) When you make your notes, are they for yourself or others?
2) Could you link to the game where you used the spreadsheets and got lynched?

Do you have a nonedited version of your spreadsheet somewhere? You used to have comments on more recent things. You had addressed some points between Toxic and I further. You had stuff like, "Toxic refuted comments nothing much here", etc I got a 6 rating for something recent I said too. I like seeing my cell being green.

[Radelle]

Going to get back to this later day with something that isn't pointless arguing. I agree with the Delta = prob town bit. Will explain better later.

[Radelle]

I don't really still have time to reply, but I'll say what I can.

The only point I'll concede on Toxic on was that he said scummy. I guess what I was trying to drive home (not reading back what I wrote), is that I haven't really gotten the feel that I was scum at all from Toxic until I made a post explaining how I found Abaddon scummy and how I think he is scum sitting on a vote and not doing much else. Toxic's replies directly afterwards seem to be focusing more on defending against what I said about Abaddon instead of saying how I myself am scum for it. This is apparent in post 135 regarding his feelings regarding the conflict between wanting me to provide evidence (which I did) vs Abaddon having none. His reply in post 139 was not answering the question, but instead answering on his behalf and essentially just trying to defend him again.

The only

potentially

valid point Toxic has tried to push has been this notion that scum-me jumped ship to go over to Abaddon's wagon because his wasn't going anywhere. Not only was this idea not brought up at any point between my vote for Abaddon and my post explaining why I think Abaddon is scum, but if my pure scum-motivation was to just jump ship to hop onto a more viable wagon, it wouldn't make sense to jump ship onto one of town's
more townie reads vs the more viable Sable and Parama bandwagons.

I've slowly been turned into some sort of aggressor in the conversation between Toxic and I, when it's Toxic who first tried to attack me directly in post 134 and not my case. From this point on, it's been me mainly addressing

his

attacks and explaining my thought process. His whole conversation with me has been ridiculous, from saying I should have presented a case for why Abaddon was scummy with my base vote (I did along with some things leading up to it), meta reads are useless and I should present more than that (which I did in my "why is Abaddon is scum" post, and I explain how things lead up to that post), and that I should provide evidence against Abaddon (but

only

within a certain time frame, and only I have to, Abaddon's evidence is just "there"). Just look at our responses. Even when I point out how I did everything he has been trying to accuse me of, it either doesn't matter or he tries to point something else to direct the conversation to.

Scum aren't scum due to scummy posts though. Everyone makes scummy posts, what you have to keep in mind is

why did someone makes a post and what purpose did they hope to achieve

. I really don't know what Toxic is hoping to achieve. It's obvious with his first attack against my case on Abaddon that his purpose was to try and defend Abaddon through discrediting my vote and why I thought he was scummy - but

why

. This could be scum defending scum, scum trying to gain town credit from defending town, or town trying hard to defend a town read. I honestly can't tell. Some people are just horrible arguers, and I think he feels he has some sort of "catch" on me and is trying to damnedest to reel me in with anything he can throw at it. I've actually been holding onto a town read of Toxic because I don't think scum would go so out of their way to push a lynch on someone they know is town only to probably take the downfall for it the next day.

What purpose did I hope to achieve when I made a serious vote on Toxic page 1? To get out of RVS because it sucks, and I got a somewhat scummy vibe out of Toxic at the beginning so I rolled with it. It wasn't supposed to be some MASTERFUL

REALLY SERIOUS

case on Toxic, and I don't know how anyone would reasonably expect it to be so when just basing things off RVS. I moved off of Toxic because I thought his attitude for asking a stupidly simple question was townie and his responses were null so I moved on.

I'm just done the arguing though. I'm not going to vote Toxic today so I'm not going to bother arguing anymore. Arguing between two others in wall posts are anti-town: barely anyone reads them and there are more than one scum in the game anyhow. I've been slowly trying to die the walls down but there has been no relent.

I plan to give reads late late tonight or tomorrow and respond to a few then. I'm just out of steam.