Open 598: GAME OVER


User avatar
You Got Schooled
You Got Schooled
Goon
User avatar
User avatar
You Got Schooled
Goon
Goon
Posts: 420
Joined: May 13, 2015

Post Post #250 (ISO) » Mon May 18, 2015 6:54 am

Post by You Got Schooled »

In post 243, ika wrote:
1) they are bad cus they are not the same as your is what your saying right? do you understand how stupid that line of reasoning is and how wrong it is as well?

2) i already told you interactions. if you ahvent already realized its day fuckign 1 and 99% of the time on day 1 i go off gut calls and role reads.

3) *shrugs*

4) then we agree to disagree, if he gets wagoned heavy i will out the role i think he is cus its very mch follows a certain mindset that i see.

where bella? i rather talk to her then get into anothe petty smatic battle with you

1) Yes, I'm glad you see where I'm coming from. It makes it worse when you have no reasoning at all for your reads.

2) What interactions? Between who? What was result of said interaction? There is information to be analyzed and you're not doing that instead referring to some bullshit 'gut calls'.

4) Indeed.

ika is probably town.

PEdit - @GC - That is so fucking weak. Because I want to enjoy playing the game it makes me scum? That is quite possibly the worst shit I have ever read in my life.

PR's are different when everybody doesn't know what everybody else is doing. That comes down to the individual player, not the whole group working out how to break the game.

For example, I recently finished an Open where all we had to do was protect the tracker while she searched for movement in VT's to win game. That's not mafia, it's fucking boring.

@Lane - You accused us of vote hopping and called it scummy. I want you to back up your claim of us vote hopping by showing me where we did it (remembering that you excluded Persivul from vote hopping with first/second votes on a wagon)
User avatar
Green Crayons
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 7612
Joined: September 21, 2002
Location: Richmond, VA

Post Post #251 (ISO) » Mon May 18, 2015 6:56 am

Post by Green Crayons »

In post 250, You Got Schooled wrote:PEdit - @GC - That is so fucking weak. Because I want to enjoy playing the game it makes me scum? That is quite possibly the worst shit I have ever read in my life.

PR's are different when everybody doesn't know what everybody else is doing. That comes down to the individual player, not the whole group working out how to break the game.

For example, I recently finished an Open where all we had to do was protect the tracker while she searched for movement in VT's to win game. That's not mafia, it's fucking boring.

Boo hoo it's boring.

Get a new/fix the setup if the setup is boring because town can attempt to come together and try to strategize night actions.

Pushing for less than optimal town play because it's boring is anti-town, pro-scum.
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
User avatar
Green Crayons
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 7612
Joined: September 21, 2002
Location: Richmond, VA

Post Post #252 (ISO) » Mon May 18, 2015 6:56 am

Post by Green Crayons »

town shouldn't tell doctor to protect cop because BORING
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
User avatar
You Got Schooled
You Got Schooled
Goon
User avatar
User avatar
You Got Schooled
Goon
Goon
Posts: 420
Joined: May 13, 2015

Post Post #253 (ISO) » Mon May 18, 2015 6:58 am

Post by You Got Schooled »

I'm not great at set-up spec, I didn't realize the set-up could be broken (nor is it something I look for when I'm joining a game)

Like I said, if the majorty want to go with the plan I'll replace out.

I have no problems with that.

Pedit - Now you're being fucking dumb.
User avatar
Green Crayons
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 7612
Joined: September 21, 2002
Location: Richmond, VA

Post Post #254 (ISO) » Mon May 18, 2015 7:01 am

Post by Green Crayons »

I'm taking your bad argument to it's logical conclusion.
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
User avatar
Green Crayons
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 7612
Joined: September 21, 2002
Location: Richmond, VA

Post Post #255 (ISO) » Mon May 18, 2015 7:01 am

Post by Green Crayons »

its
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
User avatar
Green Crayons
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 7612
Joined: September 21, 2002
Location: Richmond, VA

Post Post #256 (ISO) » Mon May 18, 2015 7:02 am

Post by Green Crayons »

Also lol @ BB's strategy "breaking" the game.

Pretty sure it isn't foolproof.

So isn't game breaking.

Hyperbole. Stop it.
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
User avatar
lane0168
lane0168
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
lane0168
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 6285
Joined: March 7, 2011
Location: Minnesota

Post Post #257 (ISO) » Mon May 18, 2015 7:04 am

Post by lane0168 »

No my response is "that is literally exactly the same but one is scum and the other is not"

And it's not to everything. It's to shitty reasoning
User avatar
You Got Schooled
You Got Schooled
Goon
User avatar
User avatar
You Got Schooled
Goon
Goon
Posts: 420
Joined: May 13, 2015

Post Post #258 (ISO) » Mon May 18, 2015 7:04 am

Post by You Got Schooled »

In post 222, You Got Schooled wrote:/ - This feels off. Are you seriously saying you read BB's plan, agreed with it, posted that you agreed with it, then went back to read THE EXACT SAME POST AGAIN, only this time noticing the no lynch part?

Like, I could see this if BB made two separate posts but it was all in one post.

This looks like a very weak attempt at some sort of town cred (scum going along with a plan that is made to catch scum) and then finding a reason not to shortly after. I would expect better from you as scum but I can't pretend this doesn't exist. I don't like it.
User avatar
You Got Schooled
You Got Schooled
Goon
User avatar
User avatar
You Got Schooled
Goon
Goon
Posts: 420
Joined: May 13, 2015

Post Post #259 (ISO) » Mon May 18, 2015 7:05 am

Post by You Got Schooled »

For you Lane;
In post 250, You Got Schooled wrote:
@Lane - You accused us of vote hopping and called it scummy. I want you to back up your claim of us vote hopping by showing me where we did it (remembering that you excluded Persivul from vote hopping with first/second votes on a wagon)
User avatar
You Got Schooled
You Got Schooled
Goon
User avatar
User avatar
You Got Schooled
Goon
Goon
Posts: 420
Joined: May 13, 2015

Post Post #260 (ISO) » Mon May 18, 2015 7:05 am

Post by You Got Schooled »

258 is for GC.
User avatar
Newbie
Newbie
Goon
User avatar
User avatar
Newbie
Goon
Goon
Posts: 413
Joined: August 8, 2013

Post Post #261 (ISO) » Mon May 18, 2015 7:05 am

Post by Newbie »

In post 228, You Got Schooled wrote:
In post 225, Persivul wrote:
Who would you put a wagon on right now, and why? If it makes sense I'll help with some pressure.

I haven't finished rereading yet but I wouldn't mind a wagon on GC, Newbie or you. Here's why;

GC for his absurd comments in relation to the game breaking plan.

Newbie for stopping his push on Lane when he had been given no reason to do so.



Lane's lynch wasn't going anywhere, and I liked his reaction to sthar not unvoting him.

I also completely agree abut GC. They seemed to be laying it on a little too hard when accepting the plan.

In post 245, lane0168 wrote:
In post 6, You Got Schooled wrote:VOTE: Persivul


Calls for a wagon come later
In post 25, You Got Schooled wrote:I'm much more interested in wagons, so

VOTE: ika

But,
1) Not scum!
2) Because my partner is better at attracting the town-fairies than me
3)Someone without a gun? :P Right now, probably lane, but it's a bit early to tell.

You?


Ooo pretty wagon
In post 65, You Got Schooled wrote:Newbie is making a lot of sense right now.

VOTE: Lane


Ooo prettier wagon!



This is completely unfair. YGS' thoughts on each lynch is pretty clear as he explained them, and each came with different circumstances.



My current scum reads are ika, Persivul, GC, and sthar.

VOTE: Persivul
User avatar
You Got Schooled
You Got Schooled
Goon
User avatar
User avatar
You Got Schooled
Goon
Goon
Posts: 420
Joined: May 13, 2015

Post Post #262 (ISO) » Mon May 18, 2015 7:10 am

Post by You Got Schooled »

Missed this.
In post 245, lane0168 wrote:
In post 6, You Got Schooled wrote:VOTE: Persivul


Calls for a wagon come later

This was the 2nd vote. You discounted Persivul's wagon hopping if he was the first or second vote; why does this not apply to us?

In post 245, lane0168 wrote:
In post 25, You Got Schooled wrote:I'm much more interested in wagons, so

VOTE: ika

Ooo pretty wagon

Again, second vote. Same as above.

In post 245, lane0168 wrote:
In post 65, You Got Schooled wrote:Newbie is making a lot of sense right now.

VOTE: Lane


Ooo prettier wagon!

I don't know where you're going with this?

OK, one wagon vote accompanied by some pretty solid and well explained reasoning.

I fail to see the difference between us and Persivul from your viewpoint.
User avatar
Green Crayons
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 7612
Joined: September 21, 2002
Location: Richmond, VA

Post Post #263 (ISO) » Mon May 18, 2015 7:10 am

Post by Green Crayons »

In post 258, You Got Schooled wrote:
In post 222, You Got Schooled wrote:/ - This feels off. Are you seriously saying you read BB's plan, agreed with it, posted that you agreed with it, then went back to read THE EXACT SAME POST AGAIN, only this time noticing the no lynch part?

Like, I could see this if BB made two separate posts but it was all in one post.

This looks like a very weak attempt at some sort of town cred (scum going along with a plan that is made to catch scum) and then finding a reason not to shortly after. I would expect better from you as scum but I can't pretend this doesn't exist. I don't like it.

I read BB's plan when it was initially presented, posted, read the next page, saw the no lynch, posted again.
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
User avatar
Green Crayons
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 7612
Joined: September 21, 2002
Location: Richmond, VA

Post Post #264 (ISO) » Mon May 18, 2015 7:11 am

Post by Green Crayons »

The plan and the no lynch was in two separate posts.

Unlike what you say in 258.
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
User avatar
Green Crayons
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 7612
Joined: September 21, 2002
Location: Richmond, VA

Post Post #265 (ISO) » Mon May 18, 2015 7:11 am

Post by Green Crayons »

In post 92, BBmolla wrote:Hey I haven't read anything but

I believe optimal strategy is to plan out our visits tonight and to have two players visiting different people.

Player A and B visits Player X
Player C and D visits Player Y
Player E and F visits Player Z
Player G and H visits Player ?
Player I and J visits Player !

This prevents PGOs from activating without confirming them as scum and allows cop to get reports relatively safely.

It also may be optimal to no lynch and then do that twice?

In post 105, BBmolla wrote:If we want to go with my plan we need to no lynch. If things go wrong, 3 people could die (1 by NK, 2 by PGO) and we need to have that mislynch we get from having 7p in the case of that happening.
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
User avatar
You Got Schooled
You Got Schooled
Goon
User avatar
User avatar
You Got Schooled
Goon
Goon
Posts: 420
Joined: May 13, 2015

Post Post #266 (ISO) » Mon May 18, 2015 7:12 am

Post by You Got Schooled »

In post 224, lane0168 wrote:Persivul wasn't really wagon hopping as opposed to throwing around votes all willy nilly like, he kinda hoped on ika, then voted first for sthar8. Then voted you but that was first or second?

Wait, what?

So throwing vote around all willy-nilly is a town tell and throwing votes around that are accompanied by reasoning is a scum tell?

Is that actually what I am reading right now.
User avatar
Green Crayons
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 7612
Joined: September 21, 2002
Location: Richmond, VA

Post Post #267 (ISO) » Mon May 18, 2015 7:12 am

Post by Green Crayons »

Oh there's a mention of no lynch in 92, but I didn't see it because lol @ reading a whole post about night strategy.
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
User avatar
You Got Schooled
You Got Schooled
Goon
User avatar
User avatar
You Got Schooled
Goon
Goon
Posts: 420
Joined: May 13, 2015

Post Post #268 (ISO) » Mon May 18, 2015 7:12 am

Post by You Got Schooled »

In post 92, BBmolla wrote:Hey I haven't read anything but

I believe optimal strategy is to plan out our visits tonight and to have two players visiting different people.

Player A and B visits Player X
Player C and D visits Player Y
Player E and F visits Player Z
Player G and H visits Player ?
Player I and J visits Player !

This prevents PGOs from activating without confirming them as scum and allows cop to get reports relatively safely.

It also may be optimal to no lynch and then do that twice?

For the visually challenged among us.
User avatar
Green Crayons
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 7612
Joined: September 21, 2002
Location: Richmond, VA

Post Post #269 (ISO) » Mon May 18, 2015 7:14 am

Post by Green Crayons »

In post 267, Green Crayons wrote:Oh there's a mention of no lynch in 92, but I didn't see it because lol @ reading a whole post about night strategy.

A bloo bloo

You either believe me or you don't.
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
User avatar
You Got Schooled
You Got Schooled
Goon
User avatar
User avatar
You Got Schooled
Goon
Goon
Posts: 420
Joined: May 13, 2015

Post Post #270 (ISO) » Mon May 18, 2015 7:15 am

Post by You Got Schooled »

I don't.
User avatar
Persivul
Persivul
Survivor
User avatar
User avatar
Persivul
Survivor
Survivor
Posts: 10042
Joined: May 4, 2015

Post Post #271 (ISO) » Mon May 18, 2015 7:15 am

Post by Persivul »

In post 261, Newbie wrote:
My current scum reads are ika, Persivul, GC, and sthar.

VOTE: Persivul

Excluding ZZZX who is on V/LA, your scum reads are the four players (excluding yourself) with the lowest post counts.

I've heard on here that effort is not indicative of alignment. Do you disagree? Is this just coincidence?
User avatar
lane0168
lane0168
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
lane0168
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 6285
Joined: March 7, 2011
Location: Minnesota

Post Post #272 (ISO) » Mon May 18, 2015 7:16 am

Post by lane0168 »

As I said, I can't explain it to you. For whatever reason yours seemed scummier. I've been off that for awhile now.

@gc, see? Other people call out crap arguments when they can be applied the exact same elsewhere. I guess it's just how one views what's going on at the time
User avatar
Green Crayons
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 7612
Joined: September 21, 2002
Location: Richmond, VA

Post Post #273 (ISO) » Mon May 18, 2015 7:16 am

Post by Green Crayons »

In post 270, You Got Schooled wrote:I don't.

And I don't care. :)
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).
User avatar
Green Crayons
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
User avatar
User avatar
Green Crayons
Jack of All Trades
Jack of All Trades
Posts: 7612
Joined: September 21, 2002
Location: Richmond, VA

Post Post #274 (ISO) » Mon May 18, 2015 7:17 am

Post by Green Crayons »

In post 272, lane0168 wrote:@gc, see? Other people call out crap arguments when they can be applied the exact same elsewhere. I guess it's just how one views what's going on at the time

I understand what you are doing.

But I don't think your point holds for a lot of the times you're making it.
"This Court has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is 'actually' innocent." In re Davis, 557 U.S. 952, 955 (2009) (Scalia, J., dissenting).

Return to “Completed Open Games”