Newbie 1497 (Game Over)

[BlueBloodedToffee]

So, the main point from your post is a lack of follow up after weak reads.

These were the reads I posted;

UNVOTE:

OK, let's see what we got going on here.

I really, really don't like how quickly Thor jumped on the NM wagon. You seemed to be OK with an early D1 lynch, which is obviously bad for town. However, you're an IC and I don't believe you would be silly enough to do this as scum. Why did you feel the need to do this? Was it purely down to NM's self-vote?

There's also the fact that NM is coming across as scummy so far in this thread and I highly doubt you would put your newbie scum partner under that much early pressure. So, at this point, I have a slight town read on Thor and a slight scum read on NM.

NM is also not being very helpful so far either. Strange posting without much direction/content. Even if he is town, he is going to need to up his game if he is going to help out in any way.

Tr1ckster is coming across weird to me. I was developing a town-read on him after the first couple of pages, but then his willingness to throw his vote around and possibly be OK with an early D1 lynch without any real good reason yet concerned me. Not sure what to make of him yet.

Aquanim and Madonna come across as null/slight town reads so far, although Madonna's comments on being happy to watch an early D1 lynch are again, a little concerning. We have 2 weeks for a reason, let's use this time to actually come up with some useful reads/information for a lynch.

Here are your reads to date;

....

So the whole point of your argument is flawed because you have provided no reads yourself. You're basically saying "Well done for providing information, but it's not to my liking because you haven't furthered it" when you have actually provided nothing in this area so far? That seems somewhat hypocritical.

Also, the line about lack of effort to improve them is farcical. We have 2 weeks to do this, do you want me to do it all myself and provide soul-reads before a week has passed?

...

Can we please lynch BlueBloodedToffee now? I see a lot of people not voting him at this juncture - I feel the above quote from 120 should really be a fairly self-contained scum case for him. If people don't get it they could at least ask - and if people get it and disagree they should say why.

BlueBloodedToffee stretching the truth about why people were voting for N_M to justify his own Hemp vote is indeed pretty sketchy. There's another aspect to BBT's play this game which also makes me suspicious - namely, he has a lot of weak reads

and doesn't seem to be doing anything to improve them

. The central part to the argument is this post:

UNVOTE:

OK, let's see what we got going on here.

I really, really don't like how quickly Thor jumped on the NM wagon. You seemed to be OK with an early D1 lynch, which is obviously bad for town. However, you're an IC and I don't believe you would be silly enough to do this as scum. Why did you feel the need to do this? Was it purely down to NM's self-vote?

There's also the fact that NM is coming across as scummy so far in this thread and I highly doubt you would put your newbie scum partner under that much early pressure. So, at this point, I have a slight town read on Thor and a slight scum read on NM.

NM is also not being very helpful so far either. Strange posting without much direction/content. Even if he is town, he is going to need to up his game if he is going to help out in any way.

Tr1ckster is coming across weird to me. I was developing a town-read on him after the first couple of pages, but then his willingness to throw his vote around and possibly be OK with an early D1 lynch without any real good reason yet concerned me. Not sure what to make of him yet.

Aquanim and Madonna come across as null/slight town reads so far, although Madonna's comments on being happy to watch an early D1 lynch are again, a little concerning. We have 2 weeks for a reason, let's use this time to actually come up with some useful reads/information for a lynch.

These reads are pretty weak. And that's fine, up to a point. His read on Thor contradicts itself, which I don't like, but sometimes it happens. There is a question to Thor in there, which is a start... but it isn't a question which gives me much confidence that BBT is putting a great deal of thought into scumhunting.

The reads on NM, Tr1ckster, myself and Madonna basically boil down to "I dunno".

Now, let me reiterate:

Having only weak reads early on day 1 is fine. It is not scummy.

What DOES reflect a scum mentality is a lack of interest in improving reads by interacting with the players in question.

BlueBloodedToffee himself says we should be "actually coming up with useful reads/information"... but his actions don't seem designed to accomplish this.

I don't expect anybody in this game to demonstrate a clear interest in drawing out information with

every

post. The point is that I think very few of BBT's posts satisfy that description. Furthermore the posts which do satisfy that description are not particularly insightful, and don't really satisfy me that BBT is putting significant effort into solving the game.

That being out of the way, let's take a look at his total contributions to the thread.

Spoiler: BlueBloodedToffee's posts to date

Woo Hoo! That took a while.

Hey all.

VOTE: Not_Mafia coz obvious reverse psychology n shit. Not mafia = mafia.

Random vote. Whatever.

OH hello! I'm an SE.

I'd like to start the game off with a couple questions.. just because it's a Newbie game and it's good to ask questions!

1. You probably are about to vote for some random person you've never voted for before. Why? Why that person in particular?

2. Have you ever played mafia before? IRL or on a forum? Where?

3. What can you give to this game, why are you important here? What role do you think you'll play as the game develops? Do you tend to post in short bursts or in long paragraphs? A mixture?

4. How often can you visit the thread?

1. Already done and answered.

2. Never played before. Have my first game ongoing, that's it.

3. I'm not really sure how to answer this due to having limited experience of the game so far, I don't even know how to play a full game. I have a mixture of post lengths though, depends what I am posting about.

4. Right now, I can probably visit around 4-6 times a day, maybe more, so expect me to be very active. From 28/4 onwards however, I will be busy and my activity levels will drop, should still be able to get on at least once a day though.

Questions answered.

I don't have any thoughts to add right now.

As far as I'm concerned, it was a random vote.

However, I don't like Not_Mafia's vote on himself, and agree somewhat that it's a chance to pass on the RVS stage and see what everybody else does.

Reply to Tynn's #24 and a +1 of Madonna's #23.

Guys. Stahp. The RNG rolled 6, what else could I do?

Roll again?

No meaningful content.

@Trickster - I think the self vote is just a way to sit back and see what is going on without actually having any input, which is obviously bad for town.

The self-vote does bring attention to himself however, but as of right now, I'm not sure that this means, if it means anything. Also, whilst all of the early votes are random, when people provide some sort of reasoning, stupid, funny, or otherwise, it gives other people something to talk about. By claiming he uses a RNG, he gives absolutely nothing to work with.

Reply to Tr1ckster's #30. I also disagree that NM claiming he uses an RNG contains any less content than some made-up nonsense based on someone's name. I reckon BBT is stretching a bit here - however his argument is at least beleivable.

UNVOTE:

OK, let's see what we got going on here.

I really, really don't like how quickly Thor jumped on the NM wagon. You seemed to be OK with an early D1 lynch, which is obviously bad for town. However, you're an IC and I don't believe you would be silly enough to do this as scum. Why did you feel the need to do this? Was it purely down to NM's self-vote?

There's also the fact that NM is coming across as scummy so far in this thread and I highly doubt you would put your newbie scum partner under that much early pressure. So, at this point, I have a slight town read on Thor and a slight scum read on NM.

NM is also not being very helpful so far either. Strange posting without much direction/content. Even if he is town, he is going to need to up his game if he is going to help out in any way.

Tr1ckster is coming across weird to me. I was developing a town-read on him after the first couple of pages, but then his willingness to throw his vote around and possibly be OK with an early D1 lynch without any real good reason yet concerned me. Not sure what to make of him yet.

Aquanim and Madonna come across as null/slight town reads so far, although Madonna's comments on being happy to watch an early D1 lynch are again, a little concerning. We have 2 weeks for a reason, let's use this time to actually come up with some useful reads/information for a lynch.

These reads are pretty weak. And that's fine, up to a point. His read on Thor contradicts itself, which I don't like, but sometimes it happens. There is a question to Thor in there, which is a start... but it isn't a question which gives me much confidence that BBT is putting a great deal of thought into scumhunting.

The reads on NM, Tr1ckster, myself and Madonna basically boil down to "I dunno".

Now, let me reiterate:

Having only weak reads early on day 1 is fine. It is not scummy.

What DOES reflect a scum mentality is a lack of interest in improving reads by interacting with the players in question.

BlueBloodedToffee himself says we should be "actually coming up with useful reads/information"... but his actions don't seem designed to accomplish this.

@BlueBloodedToffee

: How do you think Not_Mafia's read on HempHHH reflects on NM? Do you have a read on HempHHH yourself?

I don't really make much of NM's reads on Hemp. However, I just looked at it from the other perspective, looking at Hemp's posts and it seems off to me.

Wazza
Thor

Tynn
Hemp

Those guys

Im just a busy guy, I have a gut feeling it is one of the more experienced guys

What is?

I have a feeling one of the more experienced guys are Mafia.

Why is that reason to quickhammer, why not just keep your early reads but still fully utilise the 14 days

UNVOTE: Not_Mafia

So I did actually RNG and I did roll a 6, I was going to re-roll but then I thought I'd try it out as a reaction test, I was either looking for people who were eager to jump on my wagon or people who whiteknighted me out of the blue. It wasn't very successful.

1) Aquanim - Slight town
2) BlueBloodedToffee - Town, towniest read, I liked his inquisitive response
3) HempHHH - I don't like that he didn't even acknowledge my posting, skittish scum trying to play around it?
4) JasonWazza - Post pls
5) Madonna - Weird posting style makes him hard to read
6) Not_Mafia - Scum
7) Thor665 - Not a fan of the way he jumped on my wagon
8) Tr1ckster - I was thinking town, but those last few posts are concerning me now
9) Tynn - slight town

VOTE: HempHHH

Serious vote. Why are you scumreading Trickster and why did you not reference my self voting, which was the main topic on your entry?

why are you self-voting though ?

Why aren't you answering my questions though?

You never asked me anything directly, and your probably self-voting to decrease your suspicion, but you fail to realize that has to opposite effect.

Hemp comes in and immediately tries to take the attention that is building on NM away by making a nonsensical claim that he believes one of the more experienced players are scum, without actually saying why. Now, would he do this as town or would he do this as scum? Let's just think for a second if NM and Hemp were scum partners, this is how Hemp would react right? It also may be seen as a newbie tactic to try and remove the more experienced players, and thus better players, out of the game as early as possible.

He then proceeds to ask NM why he self-voted. NM doesn't answer his question, so he answers it himself. The feeling I get from post 77 is Hemp basically saying 'you're self voting hasn't worked, you tried to decrease suspicion which hasn't worked, please take your vote off because everybody is focusing in on you.

Of course, he may just be town who doesn't want an early lynch. I just don't get that feeling from his posts and this is something I am certainly going to keep my eye on.

Again a wishy-washy read on Hemp... he also kind of side-steps my original question about Not_Mafia, preferring to talk about the possibility of a NM/Hemp scumteam. Perhaps he simply misunderstood, or maybe he's not interested or comfortable with analysing another player from a particular perspective (which would indicate scum).

@BlueBloodedToffee: Most of your thoughts there (post 85) are based on the supposition that HempHHH and Not_Mafia are mafia together. I'm not a fan of trying to associate scumbuddies together before any scum have flipped; however, that aside, Not_Mafia's agression towards HempHHH would make that partnership... unintuitive, in my opinion. Do you disagree?

Supposing that you somehow knew Not_Mafia was... well, not mafia, what is your read on HempHHH in that case?

I was looking for a reaction from either Hemp or NM. Hemp replied with a weird question which didn't really respond to anything that I wrote and NM pretty much ignored it. I'm not really sure what to make of that from either of them. In addition, I am by no means claiming I have found both scum on day one within a couple of days, that would be preposterous. I'm simply searching for information, a failed attempt it would seem.

UNVOTE:

OK, let's see what we got going on here.

I really, really don't like how quickly Thor jumped on the NM wagon. You seemed to be OK with an early D1 lynch, which is obviously bad for town. However, you're an IC and I don't believe you would be silly enough to do this as scum. Why did you feel the need to do this? Was it purely down to NM's self-vote?

There's also the fact that NM is coming across as scummy so far in this thread and I highly doubt you would put your newbie scum partner under that much early pressure. So, at this point, I have a slight town read on Thor and a slight scum read on NM.

NM is also not being very helpful so far either. Strange posting without much direction/content. Even if he is town, he is going to need to up his game if he is going to help out in any way.

Tr1ckster is coming across weird to me. I was developing a town-read on him after the first couple of pages, but then his willingness to throw his vote around and possibly be OK with an early D1 lynch without any real good reason yet concerned me. Not sure what to make of him yet.

Aquanim and Madonna come across as null/slight town reads so far, although Madonna's comments on being happy to watch an early D1 lynch are again, a little concerning. We have 2 weeks for a reason, let's use this time to actually come up with some useful reads/information for a lynch.

You didn't mention Hemp or Tynn. Is there a reason for this?

Also... I would shy away from reads lists for now ... especially this early in the game. They can help scum figure out who to NK that night by telling you who you're willing to lynch tomorrow, among other things.

I didn't mention them because I didn't think they were very active, I pretty much focused on the main situation that was happening (NM's self-vote, early day lynch) and didn't really look at anything else. I guess they just flew below my radar for that post. I also don't post reads/thoughts on everyone if I feel I don't have a lot to add/anything useful.

I have no problem posting reads. Obviously it's early, and there is a high probability that most, if not all, are wrong but it helps to provide some sort of information and can provoke discussions/questions.

Is it obviously bad for town? Why? Also, do you think an early L-1 wagon is also obviously bad?

I felt the need to do it to try to educate Not_Mafia that he was playing provably badly, and also to see if he might be scum. I still lean that it was a slightly scummy reaction to my vote but don't feel strongly about it.

Why do you find my vote the only one worth questioning on his wagon? I didn't put him in lynch range alone, but I was the only one moving 'too fast' in your mind?

It's bad for town because 2 weeks worth of discussion can go down the pan, that could be a lot of potential information that isn't only useful for D1 but can also be used later in the game. To an IC, I thought this would have been fairly obvious. If someone had come in, and not paid attention to what was going on so far, and voted for NM, we would have lost a lot of information.

I don't really have much experience of L-1 wagons. However, trying to make somebody claim this early seems really bad, and only good for scum. If NM had to claim a power role to save his life, he could lie of course but let's just assume he doesn't, town are at a huge disadvantage with a power role exposed. Again, I'm not sure why I have to explain this to an IC. L-1 wagons are good for applying pressure and increasing activity for sure, but that was really early and I'm sure it was warranted.

I had a problem with your vote because a) you're an IC who looked super happy to lynch straight away and b) you voted for him in your very first post knowing he already had 3 votes and there was a chance somebody could lynch him by mistake.

Answering questions from myself, Tr1ckster and Thor. I again feel like he sidestepped my question, the answer to Tr1ckster's question is immaterial and the answer to Thor's question is a pretty easy answer to make.

Hm.

*takes notes*

I would be careful about letting people fly underneath your radar. I think it's interesting that you said you don't post reads/thoughts on everyone if you feel you don't have a lot to add/anything useful... but two posts later you post some very useful stuff on Hemp.

Like I said, I glossed over the information and focused on the main activity points. I believe it was Aquanim who asked me about the Hemp/NM situation also and I was responding to their post.

A not particularly interesting post.

@HempHHH

: When you say "one of the more experienced people is mafia", who in this game do you consider as "experienced"?

Also, is there something in particular about the play of the "experienced people"

as a group

which makes you think this?

I think a SE is a mafia

These posts really are not helping anyone, it's barely a contribution. You're making nonsensical claims with nothing to back up what you are saying.

VOTE: HempHHH

This places you at L-2.

Voting HempHHH could be construed as pressuring him in an attempt to extract information, which would be town-motivated. However, at this point HempHHH is a very safe place for a scum to park his vote, too.

Dude its the first day, how the hell do I know who is Mafia ?

I'm not asking you to pick out both mafia on day one, although if you could that would be nice. What I am saying is that you're not contributing very much to the discussions that are ongoing. You're stating the same thing over and over, with nothing to back up what you're saying and it's just one line at a time.

Contribute, ask questions, discuss, provide information; that's all I am asking.

BBT claims the town-oriented motivation for his vote. I don't feel inclined to take his word for it, but it is perhaps a small towny sign that he knows what it is.

1. Is that obvious? I've been in exactly one Newbie game that had an early speed lynch - Town won that game. What is your evidence supporting that speed lynches tend to lead to town losses? I mean, if it's silly that I, as an IC, wouldn't agree with that - clearly it's a well known fact with supporting evidence...right?

2. I do not understand how you think a claim is bad. A claim is good. If people don't want a claim early then they shouldn't vote people. Claims, and L-1 wagons with hammer intent create trackable evidence of who people are willing to lynch and also provide information. If you agree that after two weeks a claim is "good" then I don't see the issue with having a claim at one week, or two days, or one day. If it happening is good (and I presume you're not arguing that there shouldn't be a claim) then the time it happens is merely one of preference, not an absolute.

3a. I was looking super happy to lynch right away. Is that scummy? Why?

3b. Yes, I did vote him...so did a number of other people. Why am I the only one who would be guilty if he was lynched? I'm pretty sure I can't lynch people on my own.

This places you at L-2.

Like take this - here you are pushing for a lynch. You're making an aggressive and early move...something you seem to find questionable when others do it. But...I guess since you're not L-1 and not an IC it isn't scummy when you do it? Is that right?

I don't believe I have stated that early lynches lead to town losses - if I have, please provide evidence to correct me. Do you disagree that losing 2 weeks/1 week/5 days worth more discussion is a bad thing?

I'm arguing about the timing of the claim. You were looking for a claim when we hadn't even had everyone post in the thread at that point and the game had barely started.

I thought I explained why it looks scummy to want a lynch straight away. I'm pretty sure I did. You're repeating your questions for some reason.

I'm applying pressure for information, I'm not looking for an instant lynch. I also got a quick reaction from Hemp, which is exactly what I was looking for. There are also more reasons to start applying pressure to Hemp, as opposed to your rant on NM's self-vote and proceeding vote to L-1. I hope you can see the difference between the two.

Just answering some questions for Thor, mostly not about actual reads.

I don't believe I have stated that early lynches lead to town losses - if I have, please provide evidence to correct me. Do you disagree that losing 2 weeks/1 week/5 days worth more discussion is a bad thing?

I do disagree that loss of time is a bad thing. It is not. Is that the full extent of your reasoning that an early lynch is bad for town?

I'm arguing about the timing of the claim. You were looking for a claim when we hadn't even had everyone post in the thread at that point and the game had barely started.

So when am I allowed to want a claim? Only after everyone has posted at least once? What difference would that make?

I thought I explained why it looks scummy to want a lynch straight away. I'm pretty sure I did. You're repeating your questions for some reason.

I'm repeating it because the answers you've provided don't actually show scum intent. At most they show 'a playstyle you disagree with'.
I can explain the difference if needed, but I'm curious why you think it's a scum plan.

I'm applying pressure for information, I'm not looking for an instant lynch. I also got a quick reaction from Hemp, which is exactly what I was looking for. There are also more reasons to start applying pressure to Hemp, as opposed to your rant on NM's self-vote and proceeding vote to L-1. I hope you can see the difference between the two.

Oh, so when you do it it's "pressure for info"
But when I do it it's "rushing and forcing a claim"

Yes, I need you to explain the difference between the two - they appear identical.

That was pretty much it yeah. A couple of days worth of discussion does not help town later in the game. The more posts/information you have, the better chance you have of making informed decisions further down the line. There is also a chance for people to make mistakes as the day goes on. Do you disagree with this?

You're being facetious. You can want a claim whenever you like, it makes more sense however to wait until you can give some valid reasons for why you want a claim from a specific player, not just OMG he self-voted. Claim now.

OK, I'm gonna try again. The less information there is in the thread, the better that is for scum. The less information there is in a thread, the harder it is to make reads on people. The less information there is in a thread, the better the scum have of surviving an extra day without getting lynched.

OK, at the time of your vote to push NM to L-1, he hadn't actually done anything worthy of all his votes, and one of them was a RVS vote. I agree he was being difficult, with his short, pointless posts, but worthy of a claim/accidental lynch, I don't think so.

When I voted for Hemp, he was posting the same thing over and over. He was not contributing, he hadn't joined in any of the discussions, he wouldn't answer questions, he wouldn't elaborate on his posts. These are reasons more worthy of trying to apply pressure to someone, not just a self-vote.

I can't be any more clear than that.

Well, BlueBloodedToffee is doing a lot of thinking about this conversation with Thor about pressuring earlygame. What I'm still not seeing is him really trying to figure out Thor's or anybody else's alignments.

OK, I feel like we're about to start going round in circles. Until next time.

Stuff.

From what I have read, probably a townie so no harm there

What specifically from what you have read makes you think I am town?

Am I not ganging up on you with the third vote? Why is my vote different from NM's and Tr1ckster's?

Do you have reads on anybody else in the game?

This is a start; BBT is trying to quiz Hemp here. Still though, these are some pretty obvious questions to ask. Scum also have a tendency to be interested in other people's reads on themselves, but townies can be interested in it too so this isn't conclusive.

You unvoted me, so maybe your scum trying to lower my suscipion on you, or you could be town, who the hell knows, i would need more evidence for you, as for the rest of the game, no because I have been busy lately

I have not unvoted you.

When you get some time, have a read through the thread, and see what you think so far.

Stuff.

OK, I feel like we're about to start going round in circles. Until next time.

No - you don't get to do that. Address this point please;

When I voted for Hemp, he was posting the same thing over and over. He was not contributing, he hadn't joined in any of the discussions, he wouldn't answer questions, he wouldn't elaborate on his posts. These are reasons more worthy of trying to apply pressure to someone, not just a self-vote.

Ah, so...when Not_Mafia had self-voted, and been asked for reads and refused to give them, and had been asked by people why he had self voted and said "but the RNG" all of that was being totally helpful and not at all like what Hemp is doing...right?

I feel like that's *exactly* what Not_Mafia was doing. How am I wrong here?

I slightly pull back on my Madonna town read.
I endorse an Aquanim town read.
I might be tending town on Trickster too - shock, i know.

Can we please lynch BlueBloodedToffee now? I see a lot of people not voting him at this juncture - I feel the above quote from 120 should really be a fairly self-contained scum case for him. If people don't get it they could at least ask - and if people get it and disagree they should say why.

OK, I'll try one more time; just for you.

I agreed with you that NM was being difficult and probably downright stupid with the self-vote and the nonsense that followed, although I don't believe he refused to provide reads? My point was, you wanted to lynch him in your very first post. I explained that this was a problem for me because if he accidentally got lynched, I believed (and still do) that losing two weeks worth of discussion when hardly anybody knew anybody else due to only having 4 pages or whatever it was at the time, was a bad thing for town. This was the main point from my side of the discussion, which you disagreed with.

Now, NM explained his behaviour, a bad explanation but an explanation nonetheless. Hemp has done nothing to change my opinion, and other people's opinions from the looks of it, of him through his posting. I also explained that I had a lot more information available to me at the time of my Hemp vote, than you did at the time of your NM vote.

Some more talking with Thor about stuff not really related to reads.

Summary of content: A bunch of fluff, a long-winded discussion with Thor about votes for HempHHH vs. votes for Not_Mafia, and a couple of ok but lacklustre questions of and pressure of HempHHH. As far as I can see he's not doing *anything* to improve his weak reads on Tr1ckster, Madonna, myself, or the other players he hasn't stated a read of at all yet. His posts have enough redeeming features that I'm not certain yet, but this is definitely good enough for

VOTE: BlueBloodedToffee

I was stretching the truth about why people were voting for NM? I don't think I was. I was talking about my opinion of his early posting and why I felt the need to vote for Hemp.

My latest posts have been in reply to Thor, you state this almost as a negative in your summary. Would you rather I just ignore his questions? I tried to answer them the best I could.

Now, let me get this straight. My question to Thor is a 'good start', but doesn't convince you. I could take that, but when your level of questioning is this;

@Not_Mafia

Do you see anyone as "awkward and self conscious" so far?

I'm sorry but you don't have a leg to stand on here. What is that question supposed to accomplish?

I'll agree I haven't been posting a whole lot lately, but I haven't had anything to say. When I do, I will post. I'm not gonna post for the sake of posting.

[Aquanim]

...
Here are your reads to date;

....

I just gave a read - on you. I could talk about townreads but I don't feel like that's a constructive use of my time.

So the whole point of your argument is flawed because you have provided no reads yourself. You're basically saying "Well done for providing information, but it's not to my liking because you haven't furthered it" when you have actually provided nothing in this area so far? That seems somewhat hypocritical.

This isn't really what I was getting at. My opinion is that your posts reflect a disinterest in improving your reads. I am unconvinced that your actions towards Hemp are genuinely town-motivated and you haven't really questioned or pressured anybody else at all.

Also, the line about lack of effort to improve them is farcical. We have 2 weeks to do this, do you want me to do it all myself and provide soul-reads before a week has passed?

Again, not what I was saying. I don't expect you to do all of it yourself, I expect you to do your fair share. And so far I don't think you are.

I was stretching the truth about why people were voting for NM? I don't think I was. I was talking about my opinion of his early posting and why I felt the need to vote for Hemp.

You're voting for Hemp, in short, because he is not contributing anything useful to the thread. This is the same reason why other people (myself included) voted for Not_Mafia, however you tried to cast their votes (Thor's in particular) as being

only

in response to the fact that Not_Mafia random voted. There's a clear contradiction thwere.

My latest posts have been in reply to Thor, you state this almost as a negative in your summary. Would you rather I just ignore his questions? I tried to answer them the best I could.

Answering Thor's questions is fine. The negative is that you are doing very little

besides

answering Thor's questions.

Now, let me get this straight. My question to Thor is a 'good start', but doesn't convince you. I could take that, but when your level of questioning is this;

@Not_Mafia

Do you see anyone as "awkward and self conscious" so far?

I'm sorry but you don't have a leg to stand on here. What is that question supposed to accomplish?

That was a question on Page One, so hardly my most material contribution to the thread so far - and it was intended to get some reads out of Not_Mafia.

I'll agree I haven't been posting a whole lot lately, but I haven't had anything to say. When I do, I will post. I'm not gonna post for the sake of posting.

I'd suggest you get on with it.

[BlueBloodedToffee]

...
Here are your reads to date;

....

I just gave a read - on you. I could talk about townreads but I don't feel like that's a constructive use of my time.

So the whole point of your argument is flawed because you have provided no reads yourself. You're basically saying "Well done for providing information, but it's not to my liking because you haven't furthered it" when you have actually provided nothing in this area so far? That seems somewhat hypocritical.

This isn't really what I was getting at. My opinion is that your posts reflect a disinterest in improving your reads. I am unconvinced that your actions towards Hemp are genuinely town-motivated and you haven't really questioned or pressured anybody else at all.

Also, the line about lack of effort to improve them is farcical. We have 2 weeks to do this, do you want me to do it all myself and provide soul-reads before a week has passed?

Again, not what I was saying. I don't expect you to do all of it yourself, I expect you to do your fair share. And so far I don't think you are.

I was stretching the truth about why people were voting for NM? I don't think I was. I was talking about my opinion of his early posting and why I felt the need to vote for Hemp.

You're voting for Hemp, in short, because he is not contributing anything useful to the thread. This is the same reason why other people (myself included) voted for Not_Mafia, however you tried to cast their votes (Thor's in particular) as being

only

in response to the fact that Not_Mafia random voted. There's a clear contradiction thwere.

My latest posts have been in reply to Thor, you state this almost as a negative in your summary. Would you rather I just ignore his questions? I tried to answer them the best I could.

Answering Thor's questions is fine. The negative is that you are doing very little

besides

answering Thor's questions.

Now, let me get this straight. My question to Thor is a 'good start', but doesn't convince you. I could take that, but when your level of questioning is this;

@Not_Mafia

Do you see anyone as "awkward and self conscious" so far?

I'm sorry but you don't have a leg to stand on here. What is that question supposed to accomplish?

That was a question on Page One, so hardly my most material contribution to the thread so far - and it was intended to get some reads out of Not_Mafia.

I'll agree I haven't been posting a whole lot lately, but I haven't had anything to say. When I do, I will post. I'm not gonna post for the sake of posting.

I'd suggest you get on with it.

I don't really know how to sort out the quotes so just gonna reply in one chunk.

Your first line is very interesting. You're saying you have reads, but you're not willing to share them because it's not a good use of your time? I would have to disagree, any information at this point of the game is valuable, the fact that you have information and are not willing to share it, is very strange indeed. I would like to see more about your reads please.

I don't believe I spoke about other people's votes on NM, if I did, I didn't mean to. I was talking about Thor's vote, and only Thor's vote. Thor's reasoning was his whole self-vote thing, which he provided some Wiki page for unless I am mistaken? So it clearly rubbed him up the wrong way.

But...as far as I can tell you agree with random.org that you are scummy...?

Sweet!

Vote: Not_Mafia

Also, look at Not_Mafia - please list all the pro-town reasons he has to self vote.
Here - I'll help and do it for you;

1. None.
2. Though, if you *really* squint, you could argue 'for reactions'

That's two posts on the self-vote thing, with no mention of anything else to do with NM's posting. I questioned this, Thor's stance changed from the self-vote to his lack of contribution etc which are clearly two different things.

[Aquanim]

...
I don't really know how to sort out the quotes so just gonna reply in one chunk.

Your first line is very interesting. You're saying you have reads, but you're not willing to share them because it's not a good use of your time? I would have to disagree, any information at this point of the game is valuable, the fact that you have information and are not willing to share it, is very strange indeed. I would like to see more about your reads please.

No, I'm saying that I don't see any need to talk about my

town

reads at this juncture. This is for a couple of reasons:
1) The objective of town discussion is to decide who to lynch.

I don't believe I spoke about other people's votes on NM, if I did, I didn't mean to. I was talking about Thor's vote, and only Thor's vote. Thor's reasoning was his whole self-vote thing, which he provided some Wiki page for unless I am mistaken? So it clearly rubbed him up the wrong way.

But...as far as I can tell you agree with random.org that you are scummy...?

Sweet!

Vote: Not_Mafia

Also, look at Not_Mafia - please list all the pro-town reasons he has to self vote.
Here - I'll help and do it for you;

1. None.
2. Though, if you *really* squint, you could argue 'for reactions'

That's two posts on the self-vote thing, with no mention of anything else to do with NM's posting. I questioned this, Thor's stance changed from the self-vote to his lack of contribution etc which are clearly two different things.

In that very same post (#56), Thor also talked about Not_Mafia's failure to contribute usefully:

1. I am about to vote Not_Mafia because he is playing an an anti-town and wuss manner and it would amuse me to see him dead

or active (Aquanim's emphasis)

.

Wazza
Thor

Tynn
Hemp

Those guys

Oh, you need people to post before you can provide a valid post?
What if they're like you, and need you to post before they can provide a valid post?
Seems like either you're a bad player or you're trying to avoid saying things for no clear reason. I'd like to lynch you know.
I guess I'll wait for other people to post 'Hello' before you're allowed to talk to me. Shame. I'll try to get you lynched first so we don't need to wait, how's that sound?

Thor did indeed talk about Not_Mafia's self-vote as

a

reason for lynching Not_Mafia, but he also cited Not_Mafia's uselessness at that point as a reason for lynching him. This is not at all

...with no mention of anything else to do with NM's posting...

as you have asserted.

[Aquanim]

...
I don't really know how to sort out the quotes so just gonna reply in one chunk.

Your first line is very interesting. You're saying you have reads, but you're not willing to share them because it's not a good use of your time? I would have to disagree, any information at this point of the game is valuable, the fact that you have information and are not willing to share it, is very strange indeed. I would like to see more about your reads please.

No, I'm saying that I don't see much need to talk about my

town

reads at this juncture. This is for a couple of reasons:
1) The objective of town discussion is to decide who to lynch. As long as I don't think we're going to lynch one of my townreads or nullreads, I'm not particularly interested in discussing them; I'm interested in pushing the lynch of my scumreads. Since I don't think there's any immediate and close danger of Hemp, Tr1ckster or anyone else getting lynched. For the curious, my gut/guess read on Hemp is town (not substantiated by much, but I'm waiting for him to actually read the thread before proceeding) and I'm not impressed with the case made against Tr1ckster so far.
2) If I happen to be wrong about one of my townreads, telling a scum that I have a townread on them will give them confidence. I'd prefer to keep scum guessing about who I'm confident is town, if only so that they do not know who is their best kill.

[Aquanim]

Okay, this is just getting terrible. #179 is an Edit By Way Of Post of #178's incomplete first part. The third sentence of the second paragraph in #179 should read:

"Since I don't think there's any immediate and close danger of Hemp, Tr1ckster or anyone else getting lynched, I am not interested in arguing about their alignment for the sake of arguing. Talking with somebody else about Hemp or whoever for the purpose of discerning their alignment is something I might do, but I'd prefer to leave Hemp or whoever to defend themselves."

Apologies, I will proofread better in future.

[BlueBloodedToffee]

...
I don't really know how to sort out the quotes so just gonna reply in one chunk.

Your first line is very interesting. You're saying you have reads, but you're not willing to share them because it's not a good use of your time? I would have to disagree, any information at this point of the game is valuable, the fact that you have information and are not willing to share it, is very strange indeed. I would like to see more about your reads please.

No, I'm saying that I don't see any need to talk about my

town

reads at this juncture. This is for a couple of reasons:
1) The objective of town discussion is to decide who to lynch.

I don't believe I spoke about other people's votes on NM, if I did, I didn't mean to. I was talking about Thor's vote, and only Thor's vote. Thor's reasoning was his whole self-vote thing, which he provided some Wiki page for unless I am mistaken? So it clearly rubbed him up the wrong way.

But...as far as I can tell you agree with random.org that you are scummy...?

Sweet!

Vote: Not_Mafia

Also, look at Not_Mafia - please list all the pro-town reasons he has to self vote.
Here - I'll help and do it for you;

1. None.
2. Though, if you *really* squint, you could argue 'for reactions'

That's two posts on the self-vote thing, with no mention of anything else to do with NM's posting. I questioned this, Thor's stance changed from the self-vote to his lack of contribution etc which are clearly two different things.

In that very same post (#56), Thor also talked about Not_Mafia's failure to contribute usefully:

1. I am about to vote Not_Mafia because he is playing an an anti-town and wuss manner and it would amuse me to see him dead

or active (Aquanim's emphasis)

.

Wazza
Thor

Tynn
Hemp

Those guys

Oh, you need people to post before you can provide a valid post?
What if they're like you, and need you to post before they can provide a valid post?
Seems like either you're a bad player or you're trying to avoid saying things for no clear reason. I'd like to lynch you know.
I guess I'll wait for other people to post 'Hello' before you're allowed to talk to me. Shame. I'll try to get you lynched first so we don't need to wait, how's that sound?

Thor did indeed talk about Not_Mafia's self-vote as

a

reason for lynching Not_Mafia, but he also cited Not_Mafia's uselessness at that point as a reason for lynching him. This is not at all

...with no mention of anything else to do with NM's posting...

as you have asserted.

So because you have town-read somebody, that means they don't need to be spoke about? Let's say somebody starts questioning/scum-reading somebody who you have town-read, do you enter the discussion at this point or stay out because you have town-read them and there is no need to talk about this? It seems you need somebody to follow before you're willing to provide an opinion on somebody. Strange.

In post #56, he says nothing about contribution, you have added that all be yourself. He says anti-town and wuss manner (again in reference to the self-vote). Do you usually put words in people's mouths?

I find this defence of Thor interesting as well.

[Aquanim]

So because you have town-read somebody, that means they don't need to be spoke about? Let's say somebody starts questioning/scum-reading somebody who you have town-read, do you enter the discussion at this point or stay out because you have town-read them and there is no need to talk about this? It seems you need somebody to follow before you're willing to provide an opinion on somebody. Strange.

My re-writing might have already answered this... but anyway. If somebody states a scum-read on somebody who I have a town-read on, yes I will stand back and let them discuss it first. If I feel I have something important to say, I might well contribute it, but I would first let them discuss it amongst themselves so as to get a better read on both of them. If there is a serious danger of my town-read getting lynched, I would then go to bat for them - but there would not be any need before that point.

In post #56, he says nothing about contribution, you have added that all be yourself. He says anti-town and wuss manner (again in reference to the self-vote). Do you usually put words in people's mouths?

I find this defence of Thor interesting as well.

You might interpret "anti-town and wuss" as being solely referring to the self-vote, but I do not. Furthermore, the last part of #56 (re. "you need everyone else to post meaningfully before you do") is clearly referring to Not_Mafia's other posting, not his self-vote.

If you think I'm mafia for pushing this case, come out and say it instead of insinuating it.

[BlueBloodedToffee]

So because you have town-read somebody, that means they don't need to be spoke about? Let's say somebody starts questioning/scum-reading somebody who you have town-read, do you enter the discussion at this point or stay out because you have town-read them and there is no need to talk about this? It seems you need somebody to follow before you're willing to provide an opinion on somebody. Strange.

My re-writing might have already answered this... but anyway. If somebody states a scum-read on somebody who I have a town-read on, yes I will stand back and let them discuss it first. If I feel I have something important to say, I might well contribute it, but I would first let them discuss it amongst themselves so as to get a better read on both of them. If there is a serious danger of my town-read getting lynched, I would then go to bat for them - but there would not be any need before that point.

In post #56, he says nothing about contribution, you have added that all be yourself. He says anti-town and wuss manner (again in reference to the self-vote). Do you usually put words in people's mouths?

I find this defence of Thor interesting as well.

You might interpret "anti-town and wuss" as being solely referring to the self-vote, but I do not. Furthermore, the last part of #56 (re. "you need everyone else to post meaningfully before you do") is clearly referring to Not_Mafia's other posting, not his self-vote.

If you think I'm mafia for pushing this case, come out and say it instead of insinuating it.

I was trying to be a little more subtle than that, surprised you picked up on it.

You're coming across sheepy at the moment, that strikes me as scummy. You sir, are my very first scum suspect. Well done.

[BlueBloodedToffee]

Whoops, forgot to UNVOTE:

[Aquanim]

So because you have town-read somebody, that means they don't need to be spoke about? Let's say somebody starts questioning/scum-reading somebody who you have town-read, do you enter the discussion at this point or stay out because you have town-read them and there is no need to talk about this? It seems you need somebody to follow before you're willing to provide an opinion on somebody. Strange.

My re-writing might have already answered this... but anyway. If somebody states a scum-read on somebody who I have a town-read on, yes I will stand back and let them discuss it first. If I feel I have something important to say, I might well contribute it, but I would first let them discuss it amongst themselves so as to get a better read on both of them. If there is a serious danger of my town-read getting lynched, I would then go to bat for them - but there would not be any need before that point.

In post #56, he says nothing about contribution, you have added that all be yourself. He says anti-town and wuss manner (again in reference to the self-vote). Do you usually put words in people's mouths?

I find this defence of Thor interesting as well.

You might interpret "anti-town and wuss" as being solely referring to the self-vote, but I do not. Furthermore, the last part of #56 (re. "you need everyone else to post meaningfully before you do") is clearly referring to Not_Mafia's other posting, not his self-vote.

If you think I'm mafia for pushing this case, come out and say it instead of insinuating it.

I was trying to be a little more subtle than that, surprised you picked up on it.

You're coming across sheepy at the moment, that strikes me as scummy. You sir, are my very first scum suspect. Well done.

So you think I'm scum AND stupid. Whatever.

I still want an answer for why you think the last part of #56 isn't Thor referring to the contentless nature of Not_Mafia's posts, rather than his self-vote.

[BlueBloodedToffee]

I still want an answer for why you think the last part of #56 isn't Thor referring to the contentless nature of Not_Mafia's posts, rather than his self-vote.

I made a mistake. I didn't fully read into his meaningful comment, that is obviously in reference to his other posts. I still stand by the fact the main reason for his vote was because of the self-vote though.

[tynn]

On the HempHHH not participating fully:

I mean I will still play and be on this forum, I will still play in this game, of course I might be lynched, but this is a lesson for me for the future

If it's a lesson why not try to learn it now and get involved with this game?

HempHHH, I agree with Thor that you should try and participate more. You're taking away valuable time and people's resources to hunt scum and that would be disastrous if you flip town.

[tynn]

I'll agree I haven't been posting a whole lot lately, but I haven't had anything to say. When I do, I will post. I'm not gonna post for the sake of posting.

I'd suggest you get on with it.

BlueBloodedToffee seem to have a general playstyle of not posting a lot of content whenever there's a lull in the conversation. It's in line with what he stated in the beginning of the game (see: post #11) so he's at least consistent. I'm far more concerned about Not_Mafia and HempHH's contribution to the game.

[Aquanim]

I'll agree I haven't been posting a whole lot lately, but I haven't had anything to say. When I do, I will post. I'm not gonna post for the sake of posting.

I'd suggest you get on with it.

BlueBloodedToffee seem to have a general playstyle of not posting a lot of content whenever there's a lull in the conversation. It's in line with what he stated in the beginning of the game (see: post #11) so he's at least consistent. I'm far more concerned about Not_Mafia and HempHH's contribution to the game.

Which part of post 11 are you talking about? I wouldn't describe his play as "very active" at this point, though he's hardly a lurker either.

[Zaicon]

Vote Count 1.5

HempHHH (2):

Not_Mafia, Tr1ckster

Tr1ckster (2):

tynn, Madonna

BlueBloodedToffee (2):

Thor665, Aquanim

Not_Mafia (1):

HempHHH

No Vote (2):

BlueBloodedToffee, Luca Blight

With 9 alive, it takes 5 to lynch!

Deadline is Thursday, May 1, at 9:00 AM CDT, which is in (expired on 2014-05-01 09:00:00).

[Thor665]

I made a mistake. I didn't fully read into his meaningful comment, that is obviously in reference to his other posts. I still stand by the fact the main reason for his vote was because of the self-vote though.

Even if the main reason was exactly that - so what?

My issue remains that Not_Mafia was being anti town and avoiding providing info. You didn't vote him. Then you voted Hemp for an identical situation.

I'm far more concerned about Not_Mafia and HempHH's contribution to the game.

I find Not_Mafia's contribution to be weak at this stage, but superior by a solid margin to Hemp's - you didn't find a playstyle shift from him after he took off his self vote?

[BlueBloodedToffee]

I made a mistake. I didn't fully read into his meaningful comment, that is obviously in reference to his other posts. I still stand by the fact the main reason for his vote was because of the self-vote though.

Even if the main reason was exactly that - so what?

My issue remains that Not_Mafia was being anti town and avoiding providing info. You didn't vote him. Then you voted Hemp for an identical situation.

My vote was on him from the RVS stage, I was happy to leave my vote where it was for the time being after his initial few posts. When I came back to the thread, two more people had voted for him to put him at L-1, one rescinded, and then you added your vote to put him back at L-1. For reasons I have gone over, I removed my vote from him to avoid an early lynch, and moved it onto Hemp.

I agreed with you that NM was acting anti-town and posting useless posts.

[Thor665]

So you moved off one L-1 useless voter and then put a different useless voter to L-2 while also indicating that my L-1 was scummy. Can you walk me through your thoughts on that?

[BlueBloodedToffee]

So you moved off one L-1 useless voter and then put a different useless voter to L-2 while also indicating that my L-1 was scummy. Can you walk me through your thoughts on that?

I don't believe I said your L-1 was scummy. I said I didn't like it.

You're actually impossible. You're either trolling me now or you're just plain argumentative. I'm not sure which one.

[Thor665]

I don't believe I said your L-1 was scummy. I said I didn't like it.

How do you define the difference?

[BlueBloodedToffee]

If I thought it was scummy, I would have voted for you.

Me not liking it does not equate to me thinking it is scummy.

[Thor665]

So what do you mean when you say you like/don't like something if not that you find it town/scum? Do you just mean, generically? Like, I like you avatar - but that has no bearing on anything - something like that?

[BlueBloodedToffee]

It means that I like or don't like it.

For example, I don't like early lynches. If an early lynch happened, that doesn't equate to me thinking that everyone involved is scum. It just means I dislike it because I believe it puts town at a disadvantage.

[Thor665]

Why do you mention this to the town if it has no bearing on your reads?