Open 39: Crush Nightless - Game Over! before 484

[Guardian]

LoL, I confirmed before I got a role -- at post 2. What's wrong with that? .

/confirm again (still no role )!

[Guardian]

For random voting:
d5 = 381156019

I highly dislike the random stage, for the record, and would like to exit it soon...

I did quite a bit of thinking about the game, and came to the conclusion that, as town, not getting mislynched is crucial.

As long as I am not lynched, I have a 3/5 chance of hitting scum day one. I have a 2/15 chance of hitting another townie and losing to the lyncher day one. I have a 4/15 chance of hitting another townie and not losing to the lyncher day one.

So, other townies, don't get mislynched, and as town you should obviously scum hunt and try not to lynch town, but townies shouldn't be

that

particular about who is lynched as long as it isn't them -- though we do want to get the mafia first, probably. Ironically, in this game, it is the scum who have particular ideas about who they want lynched and not lynched.

Also, as this game is so small, I don't think it will be burdensome to do the following type of analysis every few posts (note that the following is very weak, but is an example of what we can do once we have more to go off of):

Kerplunk - OMGUS vote. Possible mafia.
schismatized - Too eager. Maybe mafia/lyncher.
Jdodge - Jdodge. The man, the myth, the legend. Obviously town.
Guardian - I am town. See my avatar.
Crub - Random voted Jdodge. Possible mafia.
spectrumvoid - Town?

As the game goes on, we can talk about who each player theoretically might have as mafia partner and lyncher target, and such. I love this setup, I hope I get my first town win here, should be fun .

[Guardian]

Bandwagon

Vote: Kerplunk

. I really

do

love your avatar, though .

[Guardian]

Ha-ha, Jdodge.

Schis, what is wrong with writing a lot on page one?

[Guardian]

unvote vote: Schismatized

.

I largely agree with Kerplunk, I get a gut feeling too (though not about me as scum, obviously ). I would like to hear more from Jdodge and spectrumvoid.

Crub's defense of Schis is noted.

I don't much like the "random/joke" phase, and generally don't buy "it was the joke phase" as an excuse for votes or defenses.

[Guardian]

Posting in all threads: V/LA until Monday. Good luck without me.
---
Jdodge and SV maybe need prods? See you later guys.

And

unvote Schismatised FOS: Schismatised

. I don't want a quicklynch while I'm gone.... It's happened to me before.

[Guardian]

I guess I should not have been worried about a quicklynch. Actual content from Jdodge and spectrumvoid would be nice.

Upon re-reading the whole game (:P) I still find schis suspicious. I don't think I am going to put back my vote without hearing anything from Jdodge and spectrumvoid though -- lurking in a game this small will not fly.

[Guardian]

Jdodge, I mentioned that the above was very week but pointed to it as a way we should play when we have more to go on -- everyone making clear what setup they believe to be the real one will help us analyze things, and in so small a game I think is easy to do.

And what is wrong with analyzing the random -- the random is all we have to go on until someone starts analyzing the random.


I mostly agree with your comments on the rest of the players -- Jdodge and Kerplunk look the best to me so far, Schis little content + over agressive, Crub little content, SV lurk.

[Guardian]

Hey Kerplunk. It is good that you are thinking about the game, but you don't really say anything at all about where your thoughts lead you.

I agree the pace needs to pick up -- but that is hard to do when you comment on me being very active and seem to imply that it is scummy...

SV and Crub I disagree with you on. I find them scummiest next to Schism (assuming SV is active on the site). Crub is actively lurking, and SV, for all we know, can be trying to read lyncher games to figure out how to play as one. People think lurking is scummy for a reason.

I agree with you on Jdodge for the moment. And I think you are probably town, at this point. I doubt that the game will be that easy, though .

[Guardian]

Oh hi.

Happy birthday!

Prod some people, at least SV.

[Guardian]

Note: As per the Wiki and the V/LA thread, anyone with spectrumvoid in their game is going to need a replacement, as her access has been terminated for probably 8 months. She's very sorry for the inconvenience.

So, um, yeah.

[Guardian]

Oops, forgot I unvoted.

Still feel schis is the best place for my vote.

vote: Schismatized

Crub, why was being afraid of Kerplunk lyncher preventing you from placing a vote? Your vote wouldn't have even -1'd schis.

[Guardian]

If Crub finds schis most suspicious except for paranoia about schis being the lynchee of Kerplunk, I do not think it would be unreasonable for Crub to put schis at minus two, as it would mean that two more people would have to vote schis, neither being the lyncher, for us to instantly lose.

Basically, I think Crub is getting out of taking a stand on schis by a concern that is not greatly justified at this point.

[Guardian]

Heh. I'd vote schiz but I'm paranoid about you being the lyncher.

I never said I found him the most scummy. As I pointed out I don't even find him remotely scummy.

One statement you say you would vote him except for a "paranoid" slight possibility that Kerplunk is the lyncher. That would imply that except for your acknowledgedly paranoid concerns, you find schis the most scummy.

Then, you say you don't find schis even remotely scummy.

Explain how those two statements are indicative of you being internally consistent in your suspicions.

[Guardian]

Since when do you have to find someone scummy to vote for them?

Since... ever? Saying that your vote is not at all correlated with your suspicions is quite scummy... You just passed schis for me.


Idea -- guys, let's all vote for Crub. You don't have to find him scummy to vote for him, just do it .

unvote vote: Crub

[Guardian]

And Guardian, why should we vote for Crub now? I don't think it's a good idea to lynch someone because you said it. What if Crub is your target?

I said we should all vote Crub now to point out the ridiculousness of Crub's reasoning that voting someone doesn't imply suspicion of them.

I said let's all vote him, even if we aren't suspicious, to show him how stupid his statement about votes not being an expression of suspicion was.

It usually is a good idea to lynch someone because I say so, because I'm usually town and I'm usually right, but I'll let that go for now .

But the reason I voted Crub and winked twice was to show that his statement that vote =/= an expression of who you find suspicious was ridiculous.

Aargh. This game is drenched in WIFOM.

This game is drenched in 1/2 of the players lurking, especially SV (replacement needed) and Schis (???). The mod also seems to be lurking a bit, too .

[Guardian]

Bandwagon

Vote: Kerplunk

. I really

do

love your avatar, though .

So at that point you thought kerplunk was scum?

No, at that point

I rolled a die

and made a random vote.

So, first off, this is a ridiculous question to ask, except for rhetorical effect. Secondly, do you think we are still in the random stage? Because if not, then comparing how you feel votes should be treated now, and MY actions earlier, is even more ludicrous.

[Guardian]

Hm. Kerplunk is not Crub's lyncher.

I don't particularly want to find out at this point if schisma is Crub's lyncher. I still want to hear much more from Schis and D3sisted.

unvote: Crub

.

FOS: D3sisted

. Coming into the game with a "random" vote to put someone at lynch -1 is extremely suspect. You have nothing better to go on at this stage in the game!?

Actually --

vote: D3sisted

. I really don't like that play.

[Guardian]

Fuck, I didn't realize it's -1

What the hell?

How did you possibly not realize this? It is 4 to lynch and I placed the -2 vote right after the vote count.

If you had hammered, would you have had a similar defense? "Fuck, I didn't realize I was hammering"? Not knowing the status of the votes -- and then placing a vote -- after replacing into a 3 page game strikes me a scum tactics.

I am very happy with my vote.

[Guardian]

Did you read the thread at all? I don't understand how it's possible for anyone to think that this game had 12+ players?!

Yes, I read the thread. I'm going to say this one last time, I didn't realize there were only six players on D1. Think about it, even a Newbie C9 has 7.

How in hell did you not notice that there were only 6 players, and really only 3 players being active???

I think you are lying, and covering up.

Wouldn't d3sisted be more careful if he was scum?

FoS: Crub and Guardian, for jumping on him so fast.

Kerplunk, that's complete WIFOM -- why are you defending him?

Maybe I am not paranoid enough, but if I replace somewhere than I make myself very familiar with the details. Especially when I am scum.

It is odd that

he didn't read the thread

or that he didn know how many players there are.

Are you not reading?

He has claimed to have read the thread!

@d3sisted: why didn't read the thread? You could have easily seen that there are NOT 12 players in this game.

Exactly...

@all: what does the L-1 vote of d3sisted mean if he did it on purpose? Is he the lyncher and Crub is his target: a little too obvious isn't it?

Why? He gets this nice WIFOM defense from you, and he has the slight chance of winning it all if someone else believes him that his vote is the second vote only.

Is he scum: hard to believe, it's very dangerous to put some1 at L-1 if you are not the lyncher. Hmmm... that last train of thought is very interesting.

Indeed -- he could be the lyncher with another target, as scum would be more worried than that. Or he could be the lyncher with Crub as his target and be trying to WIFOM us.



I don't like how Crub followed me in voting d3sisted even though Crub didn't realize the state of the votes himself. I feel there is probably some connection between them.

That being said, I doubt d3sisted is town at this point. I am happy with my vote.


On preview:

I didn't actually thing "GEE, THERE MUST BE 12+ PLAYERS IN THIS THREAD", I just didn't think there'd be as little as 6.

And sure I may be new, but you actually think if i were scum I'd be stupid enough to come in, randomly shoot off a vote, and on top of that put them at L-1?

This defense, as I've said, is complete WIFOM. I don't buy it.

[Guardian]

Why do you think Kerplunk is the lyncher? I get a pro-town feeling from him.

I feel like the scum are probably D3sisted, Crub, and Schis, at this point. Kerplunk could be scum and Schis town though. At this point I would not support a Jdodge lynch, and D3sisted and Crub both seem like good lynch candidates.

[Guardian]

Jdodge, anytime you want to provide us with reasons, let me know...

We need a new mod for this game, inHim is gone from mafiascum.

[Guardian]

Hi Thesp, thanks! Prod d3sisted, replace schis .

[Guardian]

You still think I'm scum? What are your thoughts on the other players? What do you think of Crub, specifically? What do you think about Jdodge's assertion that Kerplunk is the lyncher?

[Guardian]

Hi

Thesp

Zindaras

, thanks! Prod d3sisted, replace schis .

[Guardian]

You still think I'm scum? What are your thoughts on the other players? What do you think of Crub, specifically? What do you think about Jdodge's assertion that Kerplunk is the lyncher?

Answer, or explain why you refuse to answer. Also, why does me asking you direct questions not qualify as something happening?

[Guardian]

Hm. Lynch -1.... I fear a lyncher but we're never going to progress in this game if someone un-votes every time someone gets to -1.

Eh...

unvote

.

D3sisted, you need to respond to my questions,

or my vote is going right back on

. I think there is a high probability that you are scum, and thus I am not that afraid of us losing to a lyncher from your lynch.

[Guardian]

I don't think Kerplunk and d3sisted are the same type of scum, but it seems quite possible that both of them are scum. Crub I could definitely see as being teamscum at this point, but not with d3sisted. He doesn't seem like a lyncher. Sammich seems a bit unsure of himself, but he is more townlike than the above three atm imo.

I still get a good vibe from Jdodge, despite his rather annoying ambiguity...


What I really don't like about d3sisted is that he refused to answer my questions until he was at lynch minus one and I quite explicitly threatened him. I would think a townie would be more interested in discourse.

vote: d3sisted

.

I am not that worried about him being a target, and I find it quite likely that he is scum.

[Guardian]

Sammich, why exactly is jdodge scumz?

[Guardian]

Jdodge, who's scum?

And give reasons. Enough is enough -- you mock Sammich for it, and you've done 0 scum hunting with reasoning this game, period.

Why do I think you are town again...?

[Guardian]

unofficial Vote Count
d3sisted - 1 (Guardian)
Kerplunk - 2 (JDodge, Crub)
JDodge - 1 (Sammich)
Sammich - 2 (Keplunk, d3sisted)

6 alive, 4 to lynch.

I wanted to do that so I didn't place an errant vote, am going to re-read and consider things now..

[Guardian]

reread notes:

Kerplunk
-possibly schisma lyncher. possibly team scum. I don't like post 22. his analysis of d3sisted is really sketchy. I think Kerplunk could easily be teamscum with d3sisted or lyncher. pushes easy case on sammich.
*NOT lyncher of Crub.

schis/Sammich
-post 24 seems bad from schis. I don't like how he said my game analysis was obvious, either. not terribly bad analysis for a new player, though, when sammich replaces in.


Jdodge
-lurker. refuses to give reasons. I am now decidedly neutral on him.

Crub
-definitely possible teamscum with Kerplunk. Don't like 23 and similar interactions. Don't get a lyncher read, he just seems to not want to take responsibility for votes. Also seems genuinely afraid of lyncher.

d3sisted
-replace in ==> lynch -1 vote suspicious as hell. wtf, really? then he OMGUSes me, and refuses to answer my questions, and then he answers them only when I threaten to lynch -1 him. pushes easy case on sammich.


Conclusions:

My two top suspects are Kerplunk and d3sisted. Kerplunk has a lot of people he could be teamscum with too.
I don't want to place a lynch -1 vote on him, though in re-read he is actually quite suspicious. I think d3sisted is more vote worthy though. Jdodge could be Kerplunk's lyncher for all we know; he has flat out refused to provide any content on anything.

I want everyone to scumhunt, obv, but specifically:
-I want Kerplunk to explain why he thinks Sammich is scum.
-I want Jdodge to explain anything, or I am going to be VERY wary in trusting his reads.

[Guardian]

WHY aren't you explaining? It's not like the mafia can NK you or something, I can't understand why you don't want to give reasons.

[Guardian]

unvote vote: Jdodge

.

[Guardian]

I'll give reasons just as soon as you give yours.

[Guardian]

Jdodge, I'm not going to consider removing

my

vote unless you start explaining.

I can think of no reason to not explain your suspicions in a nightless game. If d3sisted or Crub is your lyncher, you brought this on us yourself.

[Guardian]

That isn't what I said at all, Jdodge.

You haven't given *any* reasoning for your suspicions on d3sisted or Kerplunk. Your "clear reasoning" on Sammich being a lyncher had the caveat that he could just be new, as well.

I find the incredibe lack of explanation suspect. You continue to not give any reasoning even when at lynch -1, only defending yourself by trying to deflect attention to Kerplunk and myself.

[Guardian]

I want to find the scum first.

A non scum lynch means lylo day two

-- and ignoring scum hunting means people can not give reasons for their suspicions -- like you are doing -- and instead just try and get someone lynched -- which would be perfect for the lyncher that you supposedly want to get lynched.

I think you are anti-town.

[Guardian]

Jdodge, explain your suspicions. Seriously.

Or are they just fabricated?

[Guardian]

Jdodge, explain your suspicions. Seriously.

Or are they just fabricated?

They're thinking off the top of my head and remembering who was scummy, not exactly what they did. I do this for secondary suspicions because otherwise they are a waste of my time. Happy?

No, I'm actually not happy with that at all.

I could say that about anyone in the game, and then never back it up with anything if that was acceptable. I think it is not acceptable, and a response easily used by scum.

d3sisted isn't your lyncher, we'll see if Crub is, but I doubt it -- I think if Crub is scum he's teamscum.

I think a Jdodge lynch today would be great.

[Guardian]

I think you just used Ad Hominem to try and convince others I'm wrong, when I'm not.



In a game this small, with 60% of the other players being scum (IF you are town), you should have more than one legitimate suspicion.

Your suspicions at this point basically are:
Sammich -- he could be my lyncher, maybe, well -- if I have a lyncher, he is it. I think.
Kerplunk -- scum with d3sisted. .
d3sisted -- scum with Kerplunk. .


I think that if you are town you could and should do much better than that.

[Guardian]

Jdodge, is this what you are referencing?:

WHY aren't you explaining? It's not like the mafia can NK you or something, I can't understand why you don't want to give reasons.

Telling you why would defeat the purpose of not explaining

If you want me to buy in to you having legitimate pro-town reasons for not giving reasons for your suspicions, I need something more concrete than that.

If you are town, maybe you really do have something that is best kept close to your chest -- but if you

aren't town

, which is

statistically probable

, then letting you not explain yourself would be letting you get away with murder. At this point I am not willing to let it go on faith, and you need to explain further.

[Guardian]

In a game this small, with 60% of the other players being scum (IF you are town),

you should have more than one legitimate suspicion

.

Your suspicions at this point basically are:
Sammich -- he could be my lyncher, maybe, well -- if I have a lyncher, he is it. I think.
Kerplunk -- scum with d3sisted. .
d3sisted -- scum with Kerplunk. .


I think that if you are town you could and should do much better than that.

Remembering that they probably did something that could have been scummy doesn't cut it for me as your full explanation of why you suspect them.


Also, how did revealing that defeat the purpose of not explaining? Like, what were you gaining from NOT telling us that your suspicions of them were only peripheral?

[Guardian]

I bolded the important part because you seem to be having great difficulty finding it

I did that too...

I am not OK with you having only one primary suspicion -- only one player whose alignment you have put significant thought into.

[Guardian]

Again, you say JDodge is teamscum with me and you want to write his deathscene, yet you're confused when Guardian wants him lynched?

Yes.

Why?


I can see Kerplunk-scum, though not Kerplunk lyncher...

I don't like how he unvoted Jdodge, frankly. Jdodge needs 2 more votes.

[Guardian]

Why?

Meh.

That really isn't good enough. What is wrong with me advocating JDodge's lynch?

I am not OK with you having only one primary suspicion -- only one player whose alignment you have put significant thought into.

What's wrong with JDodge only having one suspicion?

There are 3 scum in this 6 player game. Having only 1 suspect amidst 5 players of whom 3 are anti-town makes little sense to me, and is indicative of a scum perspective. That combined with Jdodge's strong desire to find the lyncher and not to find scum makes him look quite suspicious to me.

[Guardian]

Why?

Meh.

That really isn't good enough. What is wrong with me advocating JDodge's lynch?

respond.

[Guardian]

I can def see Kerplunk lyncher Jdodge d3sisted scum; I think Crub might be among the scum, but other than that his analysis seems pretty on.

Crub -- do you think Kerplunk is likely to be scum? Why or why not?

[Guardian]

Happy with my vote on Jdodge.
Kerplunk is a close second choice.
Crub and d3sisted in third.

I've said what I've had to say for the moment;

I'm still waiting to hear from

Crub

about whether he thinks Kerplunk could be mafia and why or why not.

[Guardian]

I PM'd the mod requesting Crub be prodded earlier today, hopefully this game will get back on his radar.

[Guardian]

Crub.... respond?

I still think Jdodge is anti-town. Y'all should vote him.

[Guardian]

I don't want to give reasons, Guardian, but my guess is now d3sisted and Kerplunk. I feel that Sammich might be newb-lyncher and I might be his target.

Interestingly enough I'm trying to look for scum, not play "do what Guardian tells me to do", so I'm just going to start ignoring this and focusing on getting rid of Sammich the Lyncher.

I think that if you actually think about it a lyncher is more of a danger than the scum.

Obviously he's a lyncher looking for the scum. Or scum looking for the lyncher.

Wanting a deadline is anti-town

Given all this... why are you voting for Kerplunk right now?

Not to mention his entire case on me is that I "haven't given any reasoning", when I have given clear reasoning as to why Sammich is the lyncher if I am the target.

Can you quote them for me?

All I can see of "clear reasoning" is what I quoted above from your 19th post .

imo, we don't need a deadline, we need two more Jdodge votes.

[Guardian]

d3sisted... the game is nightless.

I want jdodge lynched because I think he is very likely to be scum. Kerplunk is a good second choice for me, but I slightly fear him jdodge's lyncher.

[Guardian]

no hammer.

[Guardian]

you *are* voting him.

I can't be his lyncher -- I just didn't hammer him. That's why I posted "no hammer"

......

[Guardian]

d3sisted... the game is nightless.

I want jdodge lynched because I think he is very likely to be scum. Kerplunk is a good second choice for me, but I slightly fear him jdodge's lyncher.

GUESS WHO ISN'T GIVING REASONING

OH THE IRONY

And I can give reasoning upon request -- you keeping your vote on him while attacking Sammich, and your keeping your vote on him while refusing to give any reasons whatsoever that he might be anti-town -- both are very suspicious.

I will consider voting Kerplunk... but I am happy with my vote for now.

[Guardian]

I'm not interested in hammering until Crub responds to my question. Him answering is useful regardless of Kerplunk's alignment, and I want to hear before Kerplunk dies, not after.

Also, I'd like to hear Kerplunk and Sammich weigh in.


Even then, I'm not convinced that Kerplunk isn't Jdodge's lynchee .

[Guardian]

I just did a random re-skim.

The hypocrisy d3sisted exhibited in telling Sammich that he "sucked" "QFT QFT!" and now making the exact same 'mistake' in forgetting that this game is nightless is striking.


Crub looks scummier on re-read than I'd thought. I'd really like to hear from him.
Jdodge - most likely to be anti-town. not helping us at all; we can't evaluate him if he doesn't give reasons, and his refusal to let us evaluate the validity of his suspicions is scummy.
Kerplunk - most likely to be scum. lots of weird things here and there.
Crub - lurking now, hasn't demonstrated a high level of reasoning behind his votes, wagon hopper
d3sisted - hypocrite... either very skillful mafia member, or not mafia. I don't see mafia forgetting that this was nightless, no matter how much they "sucked". could definitely be lyncher, though .
Sammich - most likely to be town. schis seemed pretty town after initial suspect action, and no change here.


oh, and here's what we know about lyncher targets (is this correct?)
Kerplunk & d3sisted are not Jdodge's lyncher
I am not Kerplunk's lyncher

[Guardian]

When will you get time to defend yourself?

Who are your current suspects (aside from me(?)), and more importantly,

why

?

[Guardian]

Why? Explain!

[Guardian]

Ok. Noted. I buy it, I think.

I am waiting for Kerplunk's analysis, but if it isn't good, I think he is a good alternative to Jdodge.

[Guardian]

unvote

.

I don't like how after I'm like "kerplunk or jdodge" keplunk votes jdodge.

I'll place my vote back probably, after I get a chance to think this over. Leaning that y'all are right and Kerplunk is not town .

[Guardian]

......

I have

0 tolerance

for people using my hesitance/wanting to make a good decision as a "scum tell". Especially coming from someone whose schtick as of recent has been "there are no universal scum tells".

vote: Jdodge

.

"Seem like I'm not backing off" -- my ass.

[Guardian]

I can't believe my play is being interpreted as wishy-washy. Cautious, maybe, but I've been very clear for a long while I want Jdodge and Kerplunk dead.

Jdodge reverse-OMGUSing me pissed me off to no end, and that kind of BS attack I think is more likely to come from scum than town. Kerplunk, as I've been saying, is a good second choice.

[Guardian]

Damned if

I'm

going to let

this

bullshit get by.

Jdodge called me out on a

completely idiotic

"scum tell". I was cautious in unvoting him, and he pointed the finger at me for that.

Forget that. Ridiculous.

I can understand him trying to propose it as a tell, but d3sisted, seriously, get your head out of your ass/stop defending your scum partner.

Someone hammer Jdodge and prove me right, please, kthx.

[Guardian]

8) ---

^Me looking you in the eyes.



My unvoting Jdodge, when he is placed at lynch -1, in a game with a lyncher,

is not "WISHY-WASHY"

or a scum tell in any way. Cautious? Sure. Wishy-washy? Come on.

Jdodge calling me out

for unvoting him

is ridiculous and scummy.

Me voting him for being ridiculous and scummy is not a scum tell.

[Guardian]

You had a chance to hammer him earlier. No way, lol.


I'd like to see Jdodge's alignment before we start discussing who is the play for tomorrow . I am happy with the lynch, he was my #1 target.

[Guardian]

d3sisted had a chance to hammer so many times so I ruled him out.... no way he was the lyncher.

gg to whoever.

<--Goon w/ Crub godfather.
I just wanted anyone lynched, had no idea who the lyncher was/etc .

[Guardian]

In retrospect I should have hammered Kerplunk...

[Guardian]

Jdodge was right about Sammich....

too bad he wasn't VOTING him.

I really should have hammered Kerplunk .

[Guardian]

thanks, I try. You were getting suspicious of me there near the end, I needed you dead .

[Guardian]

<3

[Guardian]

Crub you were a good partner. My bad ;P.