Mini 1401 - Game over!

[Mephistopheles]

UNVOTE: Kthxbye

You're responses to Gorgon and I were reasonable, and I don't get a scumvibe from your page 2 posts.

I'm more interested in this now:

VOTE: Absta

Quite like the kthx wagon but Absta didn't vote me; it feels wrong.

This both supports the kthx wagon but contains a vote for reasoning that is, from my point of view, less "serious" than the reasoning for the kthx wagon. Establishes rationale for a future vote change while flinging a vote at another wagon to see if it sticks. Once again not the strongest case in the world, but this is page 2 and I like this vote better than Kthxbye.

VOTE: Slandaar

[Kthxbye]

@qwints: though I wouldn't be able to say it's normal, it is done on purpose. As for SiN voting for a reason that is hinted at, I just don't see it. What's the problem with explaining something others (you) seem to understand. How is that being helpful to those who don't get it at all. I still read it as scummy behavior.

[Huntress]

I'm liking the votes on Kthxbye. I can expand on that if necessary but I think most of it has already been said. Also suspicious of Conman for his rather late "random" vote.

Absta's post 44 gives me the impression that he's trying to slide his unvote by unnoticed.

Vote: kthxbye

[Kthxbye]

first post from huntress joins the largest bandwagon to blend in. eyes on you Huntress.

[absta101]

I think kthx is town. Vote hopping (a lot) isn't scummy and is more of a town tell tell to me. It indicates that the player doesn't care that much of what others think of him.
I also like his activity.

@Hunter - Explain that.
If I wanted to "slide my unvote unnoticed" why did I use the unvote tags instead of just the bold tags?
Why did I write so little in that post? Surely I'd talk more to further hide it?

Also, why would scum-absta try to hide that unvote?

[Huntress]

first post from huntress joins the largest bandwagon to blend in. eyes on you Huntress.

I think you'll find I'm not a blender inner. And you weren't the biggest wagon when I posted. Nor are you now (tied with absta on three votes each).


@ absta: It was the impression I got. As to why scum-absta would do it? He might not want people to notice he was slipping off his buddy's wagon before it got too late. I note you were quick to come in and defend Kthxbye. Why did you unvote at that point? Who do you think is scum?

[absta101]

Have you seen why my vote was on him?

I think you're scum. I'll reply properly later/tomorrow.

[Slandaar]

So you're saying I should just have asked you to explain your vote without supplying a potential answer myself? Maybe.

However, it would be pretty bold and pointless for you to just go ahead and answer 'yeah' if it isn't actually true that absta101 have some sort of history, since this is something that other players can potentially check for themselves. So it's not like I was throwing you a meaty bone there.

More a general statement of the way it is worded is bad (hence the X)

Your point is legit but its still unneeded and really only benefits the person questioned.

How is this relevant? The question reads badly ie forced.

@slandaar: so you like my wagon without saying why you like and/or agree with it and then you fluff your post with giving us some history we neither care about or want to hear about and furthermore try and push us back into rvs. Is there a reason that although you "like the kthx wagon" you chose not to vote on it? Scumtell alert...

Sin: I voted non random nananananananana
Fitz: OK I will play ball; what was the reason?
kthx: GOOD QUESTION FITZ!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1111

I don't remember any history lessons in this game, I expected Absta to vote me but he didn't, I find that less than town; he did not do what I expected town him to do, could I be wrong? yes, but weighing up the arguments I liked an Absta vote better.

@Slandaar

- Who have you played with before in this game?

About half the game, how is this relevant to anything?

[qwints]

So Huntress, you think that absta voted a scumbuddy in RVS and then got off the wagon to avoid an early kthxbye lynch?

In your scenario
absta random votes a scum buddy. (post 5)
Kthxbye jumps off the first 'wagon' (with 3 votes) to vote for the person voting his scum buddy [me] (post 15)
Kthxbye becomes the next wagon (4 votes by post 27)
absta unvotes, putting himself and kthxbye both at 3 votes.

I find it pretty had to believe scum is worried about getting lynched right now, but I could buy that they would be trying to get out from under the spot light without being too obvious about it. Both players seem scummy to me right now, but kthxbye's hyperactivity - the large number of votes + "hey guys, I'm scumhunting!" - is scummier.

UNVOTE: absta101
VOTE: Kthxbye

[Singer is Nachomamma]

Yeah, I don't like the mysterious.

You don't like it, okay. Why is it scummy?

If its important in some way, you either shouldn't have brought up that it wasn't rvs or you should let us know now.

Why is it pro-town to extend the RVS?

This both supports the kthx wagon but contains a vote for reasoning that is, from my point of view, less "serious" than the reasoning for the kthx wagon. Establishes rationale for a future vote change while flinging a vote at another wagon to see if it sticks. Once again not the strongest case in the world, but this is page 2 and I like this vote better than Kthxbye.

He was referring to past meta, which I think is a generally decent move in early game. Perhaps less serious than the kthx wagon, but certainly more substantial, and certainly a valid vote. Why do you disagree?

How is that being helpful to those who don't get it at all.

Presenting reads and explaining them means that people either agree with reasons, or disagree with them. Throwing out reads while withholding explanation until later still brings out those reactions when they are explained. Before that point, though, you get a whole host of reactions and the potential for some people to make themselves decently strong townreads in the way that they handle their responses.

I'm liking the votes on Kthxbye. I can expand on that if necessary but I think most of it has already been said. Also suspicious of Conman for his rather late "random" vote.

Absta's post 44 gives me the impression that he's trying to slide his unvote by unnoticed.

Vote: kthxbye

expand on it. it's necessary unless you don't mind looking scummy as fuck.

I think you're scum. I'll reply properly later/tomorrow.

why aren't you voting her?

kthxbye's hyperactivity - the large number of votes + "hey guys, I'm scumhunting!"

why are any of these things scummy?
hyperactivity is more of a playstyle point than anything, as is excessive votehopping.
the "hey guys, I'm scumhunting!" was a response to people accusing him of not scumhunting, which sort of seems like a logical defense to me.
also, why do you think he voted the first person to defend him as scum?

[qwints]

Hyperactivity is certainly can be a playstyle, which is why I looked over kthxbye's old games and asked him about it. The post that got him attacked for being overeager does seem scummy:

I have to say this is the most boring start to any game I've ever played in. How are we to hunt for scum when nobody posts...?

I think scum-kthxbye voted SiN because he saw something to attack that he thought might draw attention away from him.

[TheConman17]

Vote: Slandar

His voting pattern is suspicious an he seems to be one of the scum.

[Nobody Special]

What troubles you about his voting pattern?

[qwints]

Vote: Slandar

His voting pattern is suspicious an he seems to be one of the scum.

Yes, that horrible voting pattern of making an initial vote for reasons you tell other people. Very scummy.

WTF?

[Kthxbye]

@conman: have you even read the thread??

[Mephistopheles]

He was referring to past meta, which I think is a generally decent move in early game. Perhaps less serious than the kthx wagon, but certainly more substantial, and certainly a valid vote. Why do you disagree?

Unless my reading comprehension has disappeared, he hasn't explained anything about the past meta other than "absta didn't vote for me." I fail to see how that is a more valid vote than the kthx vote was at the time his post was made. I'll admit it was a weak point, as are 99% of points made within the first couple pages of a game, but it was at least based on some in-thread evidence that was explained, rather than vague meta reasons.

Why do you feel like the Kthxbye vote was not as substantial as Sladaar's vague meta statements?

[Kthxbye]

Meph: no thoughts on the voting patterns of slandaar?

As for the rest of this, there is too much lurking out there for my taste. We have Conman posting twice and apparently not reading the thread...like, at all. theace and havingfitz have posted twice and Saint with a whole 1 post.

For the time being though, I get the feeling that Conman's name is fitting for this game.

UNVOTE:

VOTE: TheConman17

[TheConman17]

Well kthxbye you seem rather quick to try and take votes of yourself and try to blame other people but I guess I haven't been reading much because I have been at a lacrosse tournament and am really just spamming but you do seem to have a past history with this forum and with the points mentioned above...

UNVOTE

VOTE: kthxbye

[qwints]

Conman, are you brand new to this site?

[Kthxbye]

Conman: please, by all means explain why you completely ignored the multiple posts about your comments on Slandaar and his "voting pattern" and also, what history with this forum do you refer to exactly? Last thing, if you could point out the specific "points mentioned above" that really led you to your vote on me, that would be great. Thanks in advance scum!

[Kthxbye]

Mod, vote count when you get a chance please.

[Kthxbye]

huntress, qwints, Conman, theaceofspades, Gorgon (5)

I believe this is the current wagon on myself. On one hand, Conman could be just an incompetent townie and doesn't care how scummy he comes off nor cares too much about the game. On the other, scum-him doesn't want my wagon going away so he instantly changes his mind about Slandaar's "scummy vote pattern" to a vote on a wagon he wants pushed.

[Gorgon]

Okay, from the posting history this is Conman's first game on this forum unless he's used another account before - and I am definitely getting a huge newbie vibe from him.

That said, his last vote reads like a pretty scummy OMGUS vote, so he gets my vote for that. Truth to tell though, I often find it harder to read newbies than more seasoned players as they can be pretty erratic and don't confirm with norms of Mafia behavior - but a scumtell is a scumtell.

Kthxbye's wagon is getting stale anyway as he's been pretty active and seems to perform well under the voting pressure he's been under. It seems likelier and likelier that his stated eagerness to scumhunt was pretty genuine indeed.

UNVOTE:

VOTE: TheConman17

[Gorgon]

Anyway, regarding SiN's supposed non-random vote, just saying that voting someone who hasn't written a word yet in the fourth player post in the game is non-random doesn't make it so. Unless you want to split hairs about what constitutes randomness. For instance, my own first vote was non-random in that I like the song

Ace of Spades

by Motörhead, and I quoted a line from it in my post. However, it certainly wasn't non-random in any meaningful game sense, and I don't see how SiN's could have been either.

But does it make him scummy to insist that it was and temporarily withhold the reason for it when asked about it? Not necessarily, although I question the value of this sort of gambit. They can easily create too much noise to be useful.

[havingfitz]

VOTE: Conman for the irrational rationale around both his Slandaar AND Kthxbye votes.