Secret Hitler (Voting)

[MrTrow]

sound fun
/in

[MrTrow]

And there we have it.
Our first request for facist-policies.
Still, gut says town.

Berry: given how we can't know we can trust the president doing the investigating, why you?

[MrTrow]

@shos: any preferred topic?
You were the first to request the game to start.
Second to actually post when it did, directly after an 'i want to be investigated'-post
You then asked the d10, why it rolled 3 and now are asking others to get this started.

Since you effectively declared the 'i want to be investigated'-post, not worth discussing.
Who should Drench nominate as chancellor and why?
My other pick: lillith, her assistance in BEs tactic might be null-read stuff, but at least she is doing something
Picks on which i will consider voting nein: BE 'gut says play mafia', followed by doing nothing and you (see above)

[MrTrow]

literally everything in that post is incorrect.

Current Phase

:

Election, Chancellor Nomination

Presidential Candidate

Drench

ok legitimately so what are we doing here
should i just nominate someone after everyone checks in or what

Reads like, 'must double down'-approach.

@Drench: i changed my mind, if you pick shos as your chancellor i WILL vote 'nein'

@shos:
who did you think the president was?
why did you skim half the posts sofar?
why didn't you provide your input on the 'should drench be counesllor'-question?

ow and ofcourse:
the questions in my previous post.

@lilith (Pretty much at everyone):
Who should Drench nominate as chancellor and why?

[MrTrow]

Come on people, start talking!

because they don't matter yet, lol

[MrTrow]

Yup, the entire post was referencing you.
This was also spot-on the response i expected. (and i agree with the C inspects B approach)
Despite it being exactly the 'hey look i am town, because i want to be investigated'-claim (and actually presents a case why you would want this outcome even as a facist) it looked like.
the gut-town read still stands

You do realize you've just excluded yourself from the position of president, until at least 2 fascist policies are in place right?
as for 'FACIST NOT RACIST', the 2 aren't really mutually exclusive.

My last question directed at 'Pretty much at everyone', is also directed at you.

[MrTrow]

@lilith: I too am against this particular structure.
Any structure that cuts short the phase that has the widest deadline for a reason basically,
but especially a structure that instantly results in 2 failed elections for a single objectionable candidate.

You want to know who supports which government? ASK.
eg.

@lilith (Pretty much at everyone):
Who should Drench nominate as chancellor and why?

@shos: i know you have decided to not read posts and not give any reasoning what so ever for any preferred groups of government.
But could you at least: read the fuckin rules.

[MrTrow]

I'm also going to oppose any government including mr trow for his unecessary rudeness towards shos and his failure to act like a dignified politician.

My apologies dear sir, if i had known implying someone in this chamber was acting out of an ulterior motive for claiming to have a far greater interest in the future of our great nation, that the interest this person actually showed, while holding the same intelligence-documents i assume you also received, showing such individuals are more than likely in our midst
or
after subtly pointing out this same individual has not read the briefing we all received, while telling us what to do, receiving a response indicating he knows to be right about the briefing (which he wasn't) and doesn't care about what any of us have to say.
Only to follow it up by acting against the previously mentioned briefing and instructing all of us to do the same.
Use less subtle wording to inform this individual, going over the briefing again might be a good idea.
An individual which, if my quick background-check is even remotely accurate, is no better with the length of text more suitable to anyone aspiring to rule our nation, than with the shorter memos he has explicitly claimed to consider of zero relevance

would cost me a vote,
i might consider adding more nuanced text to the second case, but for the first case i fully stand behind that one.

TL;DR (no real politician should ever need this )
'read the fuckin rules' may have been needlessly harsh, sorry
shos is still a fascist though.

I don't know who you're talking to half the time

A known issue with nearly everything i write (not just here), i'm working on it, if i screw up again, feel free to ask.

I don't think I've excluded myself from being President at all

You want to be investigated (in your breakdown 'player A').
Being the President and drawing 3 fascist policy-cards could force you into the position of player B or C.
Player B, no problem, (we, or rather you) pick a different Player A
Player C, while you already are Player A, breaks the entire strategy
(i agree with the 'probably not an issue', though)

Do we want to set up a system where the first three presidential candidates all announce their chancellor ahead of time so we can make a better informed decision on if we want to vote YES or NO to the current running party? Obviously a presidential candidate can change their mind based on what occurs but it'll give us a more informed decision.

I'd say, no.

Given the 'completely random policy should the counter hit 3', NOs should be avoided. (at least a bit)
And once Drench has a shortlist there is nothing to stop him from sharing this 'only these reads are relevant to the next deadline (, unless you have something really convincing)' the same way nothing is stopping us from being clear as early as possible.
And i would advice him to use this.
I see no benefit to running this short-list 2 candidates ahead of time, should an upcoming candidate feel different, please share this case.
But setting up other limitations, to make sure this happens (to the detriment of other discussion), no, i'm against that.

We could discuss the concept of 'policy-no' should a presidential candidate refuse to state 'intent to nominate x', but again
I would advice to state such an intent, but making a policy out of it, not sold on it.

Can someone please point me to where ANYONE proposed we intentionally get fascist policies?

Did not happen.
Closest thing to it, my remark about your plans with the first 2 that do show up.

[MrTrow]

I'm suspicious MrTrow that you talk a lot to obfuscate the truth.

A known issue with nearly everything i write (not just here), i'm working on it, if i screw up again, feel free to ask.

Yes this does mean i would like to see a question from you, soon. (the offer stands, regardless)
Should a decent response to this come, i'll probably support this chancellor

Given the 'completely random policy should the counter hit 3', NOs should be avoided. (at least a bit)

This is bad, if we avoid NO simply for the sake of avoiding NO we deny ourselves a lot of info while advancing the gamestate faster than we ought to.

As the quote states, it is 3 consecutive NOs that should be avoided.
Let me clarify:
Voting No, because you don't want the current candidate to be president, perfectly fine. I intend to do so myself in case of shos, by that time i hope for some others as well
Voting No, because the presidential candidate goes against your (or the entire towns) advice on chancellor selection, great ('merely ok' of the advice ignored is 'stating intent to nominate')
Voting No, because you showed up too late to argue against the 'intent to nominate'-target, shit happens, go ahead and vote no
Voting No, because you refused to state your concerns for no other reason than 'hey, i can still always vote no', bad idea. (an approach that was the game-state at time of writing (still seems to be), despite reasonable efforts by our candidate-president)

current gamestate, we can vote no on drench: not really a big deal, however then we have lilith, which leaves us with the choice, install lilith (yes) or hand complete control over to Klick (no #2), because voting no(#3) on Klick is a 2/3 chance of a facist policy and no information what so ever to show for it.

To argue we get more info out of the votes themselves, than out of the justifications (with which we already successfully denied a chancellor), i disagree

But after rereading their posts by themselves, shos I'm thinking is more likely overeager to get the game rolling.

That is the image he seemed to be going for when he asked the game to start and posting nearly instantly the moment it did (completely ignoring your post, which did contain content, to joke about the flavor) 2 days before deciding to actually read the game. All the while telling others to provide useful stuff to read without actually believing in it being usefull
I buy his eagerness to play, as much as i buy his scumreads in a gamestate of which he claims it is impossible to have scumreads yet.

[MrTrow]

As previously stated, whether or not i support this chancellor is dependent of the chancellor's next post(s).
As for supporting this president, yes i do.
I think we have too little information to make this call on, but that decision too was a democratic one.
Mr president your position is hereby dependent of your chancellor.
Should a 'Ja' come from me without a clarification from the chancellor, that must mean i've given this too much time and missed the deadline.

@Klick:

About the notion, discussing the nomination (aka D1) is something that should not be discussed and we should approach this in the face-to-face common style of blitz-play:

I do want to say, I haven't played this before, BUT I've watched several videos of it, and from what I've watched it's VERY easy for the fascists to win.

2)

Nominate A Chancellor

All players may talk during this phase. This phase has a deadline of

96

hours.

3)

Vote On The Government

All players may talk during this phase. This phase has a deadline of

48

hours.

- The video-track-record of this game
- The rules in the opening post
- The very existence of the site we're playing on
All say you are wrong.

btw. 3 short reactions to 3 short remarks (which warrant reactions: a baseless accusation , a misread of a statement and an 'i'm not as confident in your read as you are') do not make a wall

only nicer

[MrTrow]

@shos: imagine i said the above but less nice
or consider answering any of the questions posed to you. (preferably both)

[MrTrow]

What exactly are you asking me MrTrow? I'm sure what to respond to.

You accused me of talking much to obfuscate the truth.
Which truth am i obvuscating?
Which text you think contains an obfuscated truth?
Or in simpler words: can you show me you weren't mudslinging?

[MrTrow]

I thought you were trying to misdirect people

Where? (yes this still is the 'prove you aren't mud-slinging'-point)

to find him suspicious for reasons I didn't like.

with which reason do you have a problem and why.

@Aronis, i'm not that sold on klick, but i see no reason to approve of jelly either.

Any particular reason?

would 'claims to know Drench's allignment' do?

[MrTrow]

Is there a point to reminding Jelly the options are confirmable?
Other than the obvious of-course.

As for Jelly's 'i felt you made claims you couldn't back up, but i can't back it up'
I think i'm ready to vote.

[MrTrow]

Either player can lie about the other. We don't get to "see" the discards.

True they can only confirm each-other (and lie about that).
It is confirmable up to 1-v-1, it is not confirmable beyond 1-v-1.
And if they both can't be trusted we have no way of knowing.

My accusation of shos, reminding jelly about the fact that drench has the ability to catch him was an anti-town move.
It only makes sense to say that if shos wants to help his fascist buddy, or wants us to think he's helping his fascist buddy.

I don't like your witchunt against shos in the beginning in post 34 so don't say I didn't

That half-post you quoted?
the conclusion of which you conveniently cut out?

But ok lets take it completely at face value,
lets ,for the sake of argument, say you took those points completely independent of the conclusion in literally the next line. (i am familiar with my writing style, so i know it can happen)
the question remains:
what about those 3 (factually accurate and easily confirmable) statements, gave you this idea?

I felt like you were trying to make things appear one way and I disagreed with your statements.

And it is not a whichhunt, it is a fascist-hunt.
Key difference, we know one of these groups is in our midst.
Now if shos wants to explain why he faked interest in any discussion in this thread, i would be willing to listen.
THAT he faked interest is a given at the moment.

[MrTrow]

hmm, another unsubstantiated accusation of mudslinging.
still not sold on 'the person who declares 'who should be chancellor?' irrelevant to the question 'should this person be chancellor?' actually wants the game to get moving'

happy the fascists have decided i may live, though.

care to answer: 'why did you think it was a good idea to personally make sure jelly would not get caught?' or are you going to call that irrelevant as well?

[MrTrow]

Pretty sure this one is liberal. If anyone gets scum, they *surely* triple read the rules for a unique game in order to not spoil this.

He wasn't asking what the rules were, he knew them.
He was asking whether or not anyone had a tactic better than 'just pick randomly' and explicitly gave everyone (at least) 1 post to say so.
Nice job on the 'reading the rules is a scumtell'-front though.

the president chose Drench by himself, without random dice.

I thought the mod was the president, rolling D10 to decide the chancellor. That should close the deal

Bullshit.
And yes it indeed closes the deal.

So here's a question; you think I haven' read the rules, so..how does that make me a Fascist? anyone who knows me knows that as scum I'm extremely cautious?

Self-meta-read: fundamentally useless. (the fact you've twisted post 27 to suit this theory, doesn't really make it any more credible)

Also, are you really arguing you can't be a member of team-'must lie to win' because of some stuff you posted that should be taken on face-value?
The 'i do what i can to not make mistakes as scum'-point also doesn't help the fact you denied a mistake you made.

I think we're off better with a fascist removing a fascist card from the game and addint a liberal final choice, than the other way around+we know he's fascist.

Now this is an interesting point of discussion.
I think i disagree, but it is a valid way to look at things.

[MrTrow]

@shos: do you mean, other than the reasons i stated i would?
I consider Liberal-drench, not enough of a given to support a fascist Chancellor.

Why didn't you?
Why did you consider the mod confirming my statement i would vote nein, a requirement to ask me this question?
Why aren't you asking the other 'nein' voters (and yes that should have been 9 voters, maybe 8 but no fewer) the same thing? still trying to keep activity as low as possible?

[MrTrow]

i don't think i'm going to oppose the investigation of the one who guarantees to make, the president who just enacted a fascist policy, his chancellor.

Shos: now that the game-state reflects, it is a bad idea to blindly assume drench to be a liberal, to the point we shouldn't think about who we make chancellor,
ready to finally answer a few questions?
you know where to find them

[MrTrow]

Can anyone explain to me the townread on shos?
I haven't seen a single pro-town post from the guy.
Or a sincere one.

Let alone a sincere pro-town post.

As for the brilliant plan to 'should the president who just enacted a fascist policy, state something we are still waiting for him to come forward with, we should immediately jump forward to installing the chancellor who just enacted a fascist policy as president' (yes installing 3rd skip is not a reasonable option)
See above.

So far i like drench did not end up acting according to shos' request.
(this is also the main reason i'm not asking lilith specifically to explain the shos-town case)
And will vote no if shos is nominated as chancellor.

by association (and some decent posts) : blackberry for liberal
I do want you to explain your:
'i am town, therefore you should investigate me,
shos is town, therefore you should NOT investigate him'

[MrTrow]

i know, even entertaining the notion you would explain why you proposed literally the worst plan in the game thusfar, what was he thinking?

[MrTrow]

The fact shos is not afraid to say-whatever-the-hell-is-on-his-mind despite NOT PAYING ATTENTION and NOT MAKING SENSE is not something a Facist would do.

You do realize you're making the assumption he's honest about 'not paying attention', to argue he's honest right?

The combination of you feeling the need to point out you *NO LONGER* consider your town-read on shos so strong, investigation him would be fundamentally useless and claiming you've NEVER been wrong on the very case you're still using to consider shos obv-town. Should probably give you a reason to go over your read on him again.

As for voting no on lilith now, given the investigation:
I expect lilith will not pick obv-scum as chancellor, or at least provide a case why her chancellor isn't obv-scum.
If that case does not convince me, than indeed shos having at least 2 buddies lies within the realm of possibilities.

The fact i feel the same about

if Drench had said "Lilith is Facist" I'd have just assumed Drench was a sure-fire Facist.

will not change that.

Any other chancellor will get a yes from me. (though i would like a why, on any choice , obviously)

[MrTrow]

Once again: every single post in the entire game conclusively proves every single thing you said in this one to be false. (including your post itself (and the rules, but we already established that one))

Did you just really state:
- whatever i'll vote after lilith picks a chancellor is (or at least should be) independent of my read on her?
AND
- if my vote reflects i don't trust the chancellor she has chosen, that must mean i have a scumread on her?
Do you not see how these statements are mutually exclusive?
At everyone else: do you not see he DOES see these statements are mutually exclusive?

[MrTrow]

????

you keep saying that but you haven't pointed a single thing to support this.

You mean like how i didn't point to one specific post when i pointed out that EVERY post containing anything more than empty flavor was based on 'who should presidential-candidate-Drench pick as his chancellor and how should that decision be made' when you claimed drench was candidate-chancellor?
I wonder why

your questions:

independent

dependent, yes

Some bullshit analysis based entirely on a twisted point.

Because the president is much more crucial than the chancellor. If we have a town president, then odds are (85%) there will be at least one liberal card in her choices, which means at least one liberal card goes on to chancellor, which in turn, has to not-discard it, because if he is town this is his wincon, and if scum, the president is town and knows that if he doesn't he's scum(aka death sentence).

A death sentence, really? how about nope, how about merely a 1-v-1(+fascist-policy enacting president), which by your earlier reasoning is less useful to town than a liberal policy (and therefore will still happen)
Will merely no longer be elected for such positions? yeah, pretty much. (at best)
So what exactly is the problem with not wanting an obv-scum in that position?

my point that this combination:

should that answer be no, we automatically skip lilith, and then also skip Klick

I don't get it, do you realize lilith is the PRESIDENT candidate?

you don't vote for her

, you vote for her choice of chancellor.

Can't possibly come from the same person, without a damn good reason to reconsider the rules (and go backwards in understanding them), or not being genuine in at least one of the cases still stands.

Also that 2nd post, what was your goal there?
declare me town? or double down on your misrepresentation of my post to support the 'too-dumb-for-scum'-townread blackberry has on you?
(i know which one is true, i have also a pretty strong idea what your answer is going to be)

And are you going to defend the 'should the president who just enacted a fascist policy, state something we are still waiting for him to come forward with, we should immediately jump forward to installing the chancellor who just enacted a fascist policy as president'-plan you proposed?

[MrTrow]

Lilith: I'm awaiting your case for shos-town.

[MrTrow]

Lilith: So you liked the idea of investigating the next presidential candidate, but still take the 'get information on further down the line' as a given?
You dislike JDGA for being able to read aronis?
Your problem with me, is the fact that you refuse to ask questions?

So with 2 full days to spare, you nominate the one pushing the discrepancy above

• engaging with me:
  • flat out stating, i will oppose this government (for containing shos in any way)
    
  • asking you to state a shos-town case before nominating
• the null-read you claim to have on blackberry

You have not (yet) convinced me to support your election.

it'd be nice to have investigation results before voting

Why do i doubt this statement is genuine?

And Drench I guess but only for math, not for play

If you didn't notice Drench 'cleared' your scumread, what is this math you're talking about?

[MrTrow]

Yes, i seemed to have totally ignored 'if lilith is scum, then so is drench' when i pointed out cephrir stated the exact same thing, to later claim never having seen the investigation-result that made it so.
Or when i stated taking installing scum-chancellor-shos as indicative of scum-president-lilith.
and the therefore also scum drench, which would not surprise me as: HE IS A PRESIDENT WHO ENACTED A FASCIST POLICY.

Clearly i'm the one ignoring stuff
nice try.

Lilith:
Why is whether i think you're wrong or scum a factor in answering some simple concerns?
If you believe the legislative session will be indicative of shos' allignment, why did you actively avoid getting a read?
And did you just really spend more time on writing an excuse to stop answering than it would take to ask me to clear up whatever you consider unclear enough to put another fascist in government?

P-edit Cephrir:
Ok that last one sounds reasonable.
I assume the above makes clear why the other 2 posts are not.

[MrTrow]

You asked me yes or no questions that I feel were only asked in order to discredit me.

You mean the holes in your argument for why you chose shos as your chancellor i asked you to clear up?
Ok i'll clear those up:
You claim shos' argument for going AGAINST the 'investigate down the line'-tactic as a reason to like him (the investigation on you)
Yet you take the 'investigate down the line'-tactic as the sole reason, to not even consider Klick and Cephrir.
Can you explain why?

You claim to not get what acronis is doing (can't blame you there)
Yet you dislike JDGA, for having put in the effort to understand the guy.
Can you explain why?

I asked everyone who stated a townread on shos, to explain that read (this includes you) and explicitly stated i would vote no unless that explanation came.
Yet you nominated him with more than 48h left on the clock, over a stated null-read without such an explanation.
Can you explain why?

My point is that if you're a liberal, and you think I'm liberal, then you are arguing with me because you think I'm wrong about shos. But you're not trying to persuade me

I'm not? I repeatedly stated:
- 'this post proves he was insincere in this previous one (or the other way around, or both)'
- This action as pushed by him, hurts town
- If anyone can point me to a single sincere pro-town post, this guy ever made, please do, cause i'm not seeing it
And now i'm pushing the only person who might have something to lose, by keeping to ignore the obvious. (other than, the entire game, of-course)

As for your last two questions, I'm confused by what you're asking. Can you clarify?

Sure thing:

If you believe the legislative session will be indicative of shos' allignment, why did you actively avoid getting a read?

You said:

If you think I'm liberal but aren't townreading shos, then you'll have your confirmation after the legislative session.

For this confirmation to happen, you will have to hand him a choice (one of each policy) AND (if scum) shos must consider it 'worth it' for the fascists to be caught choosing the fascist-one.

If you think it would be in the fascists best interest to place that policy, even if it means getting caught (in a 2v1 (where one of the opponents already has a dirty record)), why would you want to give him that shot?

And did you just really spend more time on writing an excuse to stop answering than it would take to ask me to clear up whatever you consider unclear enough to put another fascist in government?

I read

I don't see how I would convince you to support my election in any case.

as an excuse to avoid answering questions. A typical shos-post basically.
I have my answer on that issue.

My main reason for thinking you're liberal at this point is the fact that it was shos who insisted you'd be investigated.
I doubt he would deliberately link his buddies.

Yes, i seemed to have totally ignored 'if lilith is scum, then so is drench' when i pointed out cephrir stated the exact same thing, to later claim never having seen the investigation-result that made it so.

i don't think i ever stated that.

I took

Not a lilith fan either. And Drench I guess but only for math, not for play

to mean that. (cleared up now)

That doesn't make much sense either. 11/17 * 10/16 * 9/15 = somewhere around 25% chance of getting 3 fascist policies. Whereas there's a 11/17 * 10/16 * 6/15 = about 15% chance of getting 2 fascist cards and one liberal card. By jelly's info we confirm that there were at least 2 fascist cards so it's actually more likely that Drench had 3 fascist policies than 2 fascist and 1 liberal.

true

but

eh

No this math is not correct.
That is the chance Drench drew 2 fascist cards and THEN a liberal one.
If we take 'the liberal card could have been the first or the second' into consideration, we're talking about 45%
And then there is the 24% chance of 2 fascist cards in the draw (also implicating Jelly)

[MrTrow]

@lilith:
So your problem with Aronis (apart from the amount of completely empty fluff), is he doesn't want me to be chancellor based on my tone alone.
Yet you don't want me to be chancellor (and are selective in which questions to answer (despite that outlook, you've answered significantly more than i would expect)) based on my tone alone.
Care to explain?

@Drench:
On one hand we have:
'hey shos, care to explain why you suggested to install the chancellor who just enacted a fascist policy, based on nothing more than the word of the president who just enacted a fascist policy' getting 'lol, no' as an answer (and that not being a surprise, as it perfectly matches his play the entire game thusfar)
On the other we have:
I asked, pretty much everyone, 'can you point me to a single sincere pro-town post this guy made, anywhere in this game' and not a single person being able to do so.

As for why i voted 'nein' (restated for those who fear walls):
I had reasons to assume that government would install a fascist policy, i was proven right: any 'ja'-voter ready to backup their, now proven to be anti-town, vote?
I also have reasons to assume this one will

[MrTrow]

@Drench: I am aware of the 1 in 4 chance, the fact you enacted a fascist policy does not prove you are a fascist.
I am also aware that (unless he is scum AND you are not) shos had no way of knowing that is what happened(and i'm not assuming it anytime soon either), when HE proposed YOUR word should be the sole deciding factor in installing Jelly as president.

@Jelly: yeeeeeeeeaaaaaah, fucking finally.

Come on people, start talking!

Shos encourages discussion, pro town. It's maybe not the towniest town thing there ever was but it's a pro town post.

Shown to be bullshit
And, no he does not

I think we should go down the line (Drench picks me as Chancellor, then I pick Piggy as Chancellor, and so on). It would give us the most connection between ballots and voting patterns, at least until we have a better idea of who could be a fascist.

bad idea, it robs town of information of who-chose-who and benefits scum probably if by any chance they are one above each other.

Obviously yes I want to be elected, because I know I'm a liberal and it allows me to figure out whether the other person in my ballot is too. At least I'm trying to contribute here. Do you have a better idea?

this feels fake as hell

Discouraging from this idea feels town

Refuses to state a better idea.
Also giving him credit for discouraging a plan that, at that time has already been opposed by:
Arconis, me, JDGA, you,Drench and not supported by anyone,
not seeing it.

He's trying to dissuade me from picking a fascist card if I had gotten 1 liberal 1 fascist and if I was a fascist who didn't know the game very well. I don't know if the logic is quite all there but I think it's genuine

Really?
That's what you think he meant with:

Jelly, after you are chosen, and choose a policy, tell us which options you had; and then Drench will confirm.

That makes one of us

I think there are merits to his argument to investigate Lilith who was next on the list here.

You just slapped the town-label on him for NOT wanting to investigate the next in line (when the rest of the game made it perfectly clear he couldn't push that strategy)

Saying whoever he wants is being useless. The idea is to hekp him want the correct peraon, lol.

This was in response to my ambivalence as to who should be investigated. I couldn't form a strong opinion either way, and he's right that it wasn't helpful. He's being pro town by discouraging opinions that are useless in this case.

And as shown above, every single action he actually took, shows he has no intent to actually make this happen.
I must admit though, taken on its own merits, this would be the 'pro-town'-post i was asking for: it's obviously not sincere though.

Scary part: this still is the best shos-town case out there


@Lilith

his reason for disliking you doesn't seem valid to me, yes, but more importantly he didn't have anything else to offer other than your tone.

His argument against me, was pure policy. (when there was very little else)
I disagree with your conclusion(on how this impacts his allignment, not the usefulness) , but see no reason to doubt your motivation in that statement.
Still would like a reason why you even considered the possibility of shos-town (i'm still leaning 'nein')

[MrTrow]

you have noreason to suspect me.

Shown to be bullshit

[MrTrow]

Which one would you like me to repeat?
Shall we go top-down: starting with: 'if you actually believe that nothing before P4 is relevant, why did you tell everyone to start talking on P2': you know: the accusation, YOU ARE CURRENTLY RESPONDING TO
or bottom up: starting with: 'why did you actively avoid answering 'why did you suggest we install the chancellor who just enacted a fascist policy as president on the word of the president who just enacted a fascist policy?' multiple times already'

[MrTrow]

May I ask why nobody spoke during Legislative seession?

What should i have said?
Reiterate how i consider it practically a given, you will not actually answer the questions, you asked me to clear up?
I think that one is once again answered. (and probably will once again be ignored)

@jdga/trow iterate your feelings on your nein vote

At your request i will RE-iterate.
My main reason for thinking Lilith-town is the detail i consider it unlikely obv-scum shos would suggest to link his buddies:
result: guaranteed 1 scum in government.

New notion on this matter:
not even the president who nominated him, trusted this chancellor.
the chancellor felt the need to inform the president WHAT her claim should be.

Let me return with the second most ignored question in this game thusfar: any 'Ja' voters who would like to provide a motivation?

[MrTrow]

weren't you the one who defended a nein vote with the astounding defense of "they enacted a facist policy therefore i am right"

or is someone else not the brightest bulb in the room

If you can find a point where i actually used that to defend my vote, feel free to show it.
If you mean, was i the one who considered it 'at best useless' my statement i was GOING to vote 'nein' and presented my reasons why, was completely ignored. To later having to justify i DIDN'T lie when i made that statement.
Then yes, that was me.

If you mean, was i the one who asked: given how there was not only a 'this chancellor is scum-case' in thread, but also a noteworthy lack of a 'this president is town-case' AND this government enacted a fascist policy. Why are you only asking the 'nein'-voters to defend their actions?
Yes, that too, was me.

As for what that says about who 'the brightest bulb' in the room is............
I could go on about that, but that would result in more text than you are willing to handle.

Your insistence that those who are perfectly fine with giving up their task of trying to stop the fascists, should NOT be questioned, has been noted.(again)

[MrTrow]

Trow did attack people on voting Ja for Drench/Jelly because of the Fascist enaction; so now he should be attacking himself for voting Nein on a Liberal?

My apoligies, i should have known lilith would draw 2 fascist cards (and blindly believe her claims, and those of Drench).

Now would you FINALLY answer the questions YOU ASKED ME TO FIND FOR YOU?
Didn't think so

[MrTrow]

That should be 2 liberal cards, oops

[MrTrow]

Ok there was a missing post in there:
Let me spell it out (like it was spelled out before)
Question 1:
You defined the starting-point of the game to be P4,
Why did you want the game to be more active on P2.
according YOUR DEFINITION, pre-game. (fundamentally uesless)

Question 2:
This is what happened.
1. president Drench and chancellor Jelly enact a fascist policy
2. president Drench investigates Lilith (but is currently unavailable for comment)
3. shos states: If Drench gets a 'fascist' on Lilith, we should make Jelly, president (and as a consequence give up all rights to oppose his choice for chancellor)
4. Drench is available for comment (effectively shooting down 3)
5. I ask 'why 3'
6. shos states 'lol not gonna answer'(again)
7. i ask 'why 6'

So Now that i have broken things down in sentences so short, it should be really freakin obvious, you're lying when you claim you can't follow:
WHY 6?

[MrTrow]

@Jelly: EXACTLY.
The most useful thing i could have said at that moment, would be completely useless
as the one it is about is unable to answer.
That is why i did not speak during the legislative session.

Not surprised to see the implied 'anything we should have been discussing shos, or are you just mudslinging', conveniently being dodged.



@Shos:

I don't understand why after 300 posts you still cling to that.

1. because you asked me to restate outstanding questions
2. because it is clear indication, your 'intention to get discussion started', is bullshit.
pick one. (or both, they are both true)



Even taking your 'i don't understand 3' at face value.
Why did you say 'lol not gonna answer' (Point 6) instead of, could you clarify your question?

But to AGAIN do the work for you.

should that answer be no, we automatically skip lilith, and then also skip Klick

As for the brilliant plan to 'should the president who just enacted a fascist policy, state something we are still waiting for him to come forward with, we should immediately jump forward to installing the chancellor who just enacted a fascist policy as president' (yes installing 3rd skip is not a reasonable option)

the President Drench and the Chancellor ForWhomTheJellyRolls.

The government has enacted a

Fascist Policy

.

Playerlist

4) lilith2013
5) Klick
6) ForWhomTheJellyRolls

....

Election Tracker:

The Election Tracker begins at 0. Every time a government is rejected, it increases by 1. If the Election Tracker reaches 3, a frustrated populace takes matters into its own hands. Reveal the policy on top of the Policy Deck and enact it. Any power granted by this policy is ignored, but all players become eligible to hold the office of Chancellor for the next Election.

[MrTrow]

Is this still addressing me?

Nope, not specifically, just asking:
@Shos:

May I ask why nobody spoke during Legislative seession?

What SHOULD we have spoken about?
any followup to this? at all?

things I disagree with

What exactly?
And why aren't you asking questions about them?

The detail i had counter-arguments for everything you managed to bring up, to explain your shos-town read (that i had to drag out of you), doesn't mean the conversation should end there.
Unless of-course, you don't want in-thread clarity about his allignment. (But there is only one good reason, you could possibly want that)

Can anyone take a look at shos' latest and find a single townie thing in there?

[MrTrow]

I don't really feel the need to ask you questions about things you seem to

unwaveringly

believe in.

There is nothing unwaveringly about it. (other than a single claim of 'too dumb for scum') you've been the only one who bothered spending even a single post, to convince me otherwise.
Hell, even shos himself only recently stopped stating explicit refusal to do so.

@trow:
Anytbing? If I cannot talk the game is completely void of content?

Per your insistence: yes it is.
A lot of people aren't saying a thing because (among others) you insist, there is no point to talking (or voting 'nein' on anyone in any circumstance) in this game, until it is at least half over.

Can you give me ANY example of something worth talking about?
Anything at all would do.
Anything that would not have resulted in advising my top-scumread on which policy to enact would be better.
Anything that also wouldn't be dependent on your ability to reply, would obviously also be a requirement, given the topic.

If you see anything scummy, point it out.

Do you mean like HALF THE POSTS I'VE MADE THUSFAR? (and that's just pointing out YOUR scummy behavior)

Or do you mean i have to be specific about ' shos' latest ' in my previous post:
ok here goes:

@trow:
1. re: getting discussion started. I don't think you understand. you are literally pushing a page 2 post that says 'people, start talking' as something serious. it isn't. it really isn't. when I say "start talking" I mean start talking, as in, get the game moving. I don't understand what you don't understand, I don't understand what you find scummy, I really just don't get what the fuck you want.

Shos tries to get town-cred for pushing the game forward with something HE DOES NOT BELIEVE TO push the game forward.
(and now tries to brush this off by doubling down on the fact: he did not actually believes, he was trying to be helpful)

2. I literally ISOed myself and looked post by post and found nothing; I ctrl+F-ed " no " "lol" "no " " no" and couldn't get it. I asked you like a billion times - PLEASE QUOTE.

Brushes off the 'refuses to answer questions', by lack of quotes of 'explicitly refused to answer questions'
but sure:
the game as a whole
here we have explicit refusal towards me directly
But lets return the question actually posed in the above.
quote, where you asked for a quote and i did not give one.
In this case, you asked me to quote, the question i was talking about (one you ignored) and i did.

and I think I understand now what you're trying to say. Basically you tell me 'why trust drench'? Well, if you don't, then you have nothing to work with, and if you do, then you do. Drench's chance of getting all-fascist draws will be clearer later on. so if you want to suspect him, do that all you want, but for then, assume better.

So it actually was your intent, to let the outcome of both investigations, ride on a single person.
and actually want no-one to oppose that notion for literally half the game (the hunt for missing liberal policies, requires we are 15 cards = 5 policies = at least half the game, in)

Also, when I said I wanted to skip klick too that was because I was partially scum reading bothhim and lilith, as you can probably see my ISO. I didn't think who the next president is going to be. that's probably why I didn't have any idea what you're talking about when you talked about Jelly.

So, you want everyone to believe, you went back to the player-list: for the express purpose of checking who the next candidate after lilith was.
For no other reason, than to already discuss that read.
But did not bother to check, who would be 'pick me, or the restless public(random-draw)' that would directly follow?
Despite the fact that, that very action, was the only way you knew Klick was the next relevant read, in the first place?

If there is anyone still out there, who still believes shos is town, but doesn't want to lift a finger to engage this discussion: the fascists salute you.

[MrTrow]

@Shos
Why ceph?
I assume you have a reason that's better than the fact he's the second most vocal on: there should be no talking. (after you)

Should i add your decision to quote "zzzzzzz" to the list of 'refusal to answer questions'-posts?


@Jelly
No since he flat out admitted, all attempt he had made to kick the town into actions up to that point, were blatant lies i did not ever believe he was town, no one gave me any reason to, very few even bothered to try. And the scummy actions just keep piling up

Given the amount of content (and the implied, any and all reads that are in any way dependent on shos will be ignored: like shos wouldn't want to link his buddies so, lilith is prob-town) i would be limited to:
Ceph and Jelly are explicitly anti-content
Aronis is just fluff-heavy, i do not share the 'he supplies too much text, therefore must be scum' sentiment that goes around. (while i do agree he's not as useful as he makes himself out to be (the 'ja-vote trough timeout only'+'bragging about perfect-voting-record' is a combo that doesn't sit well with me) )
Other than that, we would have:
Who is being one-directionally supported for no good reason by (up to 3) people doing things like 'taking Drench's claim of the initial draw, as a given for no good reason'?

Shos is fascist, but no Hitler
Drench is currently my best bet for Hitler (and a pretty weak one at that)

Your turn. (or anyone else, the order doesn't really matter to me)

And: i will support a blackberry nomination. (and don't see a reason to oppose Klick (especially given 'next up Jelly'))

[MrTrow]

As ordered by 'obv-town', 2 more instances added to the 'shos refuses to answer questions'-list

'can you provide even a single instance (of the billion you claim are out there) of where you asked for a quote and did not get it?' added to the corresponding list of questions, no obv-town player should answer.

I would add 'why this particular chancellor?' as well, but that one has been there for a while.

[MrTrow]

Is it not plausible that shos could have just started the game with a post encouraging activity and people to post and check in, but also believe that there isn't a lot of information to be gathered in those early posts? That's what I see there. I don't see it as some blatant misdirection. It's possible you are right but I think my scenario is much more likely.

There is a distinct difference between:
- 'pushing for activity on P1, because then we'll have some workable content by p8'
and
- 'pushing for activity on P1, while firmly of the belief nothing before 'arbitrary game event X' can ever matter and actively hindering situation 1, by pointing this out on P4'
shos did the latter.

Please explain how Cephrir and I are anti-content.

you argued, chancellor nominations should not be discussed
you argued, trying to get reads on P4 is scummy, while unwilling to go deeper into that read
you argued, 'who should be investigated?' should not be discussed (though admittedly, did end up joining the discussion)

Though, that's nothing compared to Ceph: who
- refuses to read
- refuses to have reads
- doesn't want readable stuff to exist
- considers, just wait and let the fascists win, the default approach to this game
- is fine with creating (even more) apathy, in this game

JDGA's last post looks more town than before even though I disagree with some of the things in it. Her post here about Aronis strikes me as really strange.

Sorry not seeing it.
True at that point most of what Aronis said, was completely empty fluff. The rest though:
Lilith's plan is bad and as a result i will vote 'no' if you nominate her
I'll policy-vote no on Trow, for rudeness
all his actual content by that point and, yeah, that did make him one of the more reasonable/useful players by that point

I'm also not a fan of This post here

Guess we'll have to disagree on that one.
That's pretty much my 'opposes content'-argument in a nutshell.
It almost makes up for this one

Aronis is weird, that's for sure. He's playing anti-town, whatever his role happens to be. He's fluffing and he's refusing to answer questions.

Ok you've got my interest.
Which question did he refuse to answer?

[MrTrow]

you could really stand to get over this.

My apologies, i though post 366 of the game, would be quick enough to respond to post 365 of the game, my bad.

what's truly impressive is that not one of these posts says or does what you represent it as saying or doing

Sorry, i thought: " I mostly don't read them", means you mostly don't read them(posts, that is)
Or that describing the game, or your own feelings about it, by showing you are asleep, making sure everyone notices it and not lifting a finger to fix that issue, implies. 'There is nothing to do here, and i'm fine with that (maybe you should be too)', really far-fetched i know.

Now we're on the subject of posts like 'a JA vote doesn't need defending' (it IS the default, one needs a very good reason to provide 'usefull vote data') and your more recent

b) I don't think we're going to accomplish much of anything until we get a nomination here

Now that we have reached 'arbitrary game state' nomination #3, anything you want to bring to the table?
Not necessarily something that could not have been stated, when the intended nomination(which *shocker* matches the one actually being made) was already in thread.

The next 'arbitrary game state' we need to wait for before playing, would do.

but then again i think that's how i got him mislynched in that one game like six years ago

Interesting comparison.
I remember that one, (had forgotten you were in it though)
I replaced in late D1, correctly pinned your slot as scum D2, later you replaced in, insisted early-tells were bullshit, read only half of posts and got a perfect scum-win out of it.

And here you're playing the exact same tactic.

Wow, that actually was a useful analog to this game. (why did you bring it up?)

[MrTrow]

When I said it was the default I was not referring to the game mechanic, I feel that you should vote for it unless you have a good reason not to

I know, that's EXACTLY what i was accusing you of saying.
The thing you called a misrepresentation.

'Unless you have a very good reason to vote no, you should vote yes.'
Therefore, there will not (or should not, pick one) be any useful vote-data, until we reach the arbitrary point, where people decide we need to start actually playing the game.

And given how you've just stated the 3rd nomination (a quarter of the game-in) is not only, not far enough in the game to start playing.
But not even far enough to start stating WHEN IS?
I'm gonna stand by "considers, just wait and let the fascists win, the default approach to this game".
I await the completely arbitrary moment you decide, to make an attempt to prove me wrong.
Wild guess, it's gonna take at least 2 more fascist policies

As for 'the closest thing to playing' you've got now:
b) as you are now?
c) and you're brushing them off, in exactly the same way now because? they are against your buddy?
d) trying to get arguments ignored by 'nothing new, drop it', 'claims of only reading things half' and 'hoping the poor pace continues'. Looks familiar to me. As for not going pot-commited LYLO-lynch on me(leaving 1 buddy behind 'just in case') in a game that has no lynch (and by extention no LYLO): no shit sherlock

2 down, 2 to go.

[MrTrow]

@Cephrir: See lilith: this is how you admit the current game-state AND try to fix it.

@Lilith: do you have a reason why you're asking ONLY me?
As for the answer:

And: i will support a blackberry nomination. (and don't see a reason to oppose Klick (especially given 'next up Jelly'))

Blackberry is probably my strongest (shos-independent) town read.
(I like JDGA, but i am aware, there is some playstyle-bias there)
And i have explained why my read that you are town is shos-dependent

And i do not want Jelly in charge, but have a null-read on Klick.
So my 'Ja' is already in (Klick, berry) and i currently intend to follow that up with a 'nein'(Jelly, whoever)
You?

@Aronis:
Can i expect you to do something with the 48h, you intent to 'buy us'/'drag out'?

[MrTrow]

@Lilith:
Is it relevant, you saw no reason to vote no, on the first one (Drench, Jelly)?
Or is it only relevant whether or not you believe i saw one?

But to restate my jelly-case i had at the time of that first nomination:
- He was mudslinging. (accusations of mudslinging he could not back up (at least not without cutting conclusions off posts, to then claim the accusations to be empty. and even then barely))
- He implied knowing Drench's allignment (no need to reach across the aile)
- and (one you don't want to hear, sorry) Shos felt the need to advice him on something that would be a no-brainer if he was liberal.

@Aronis:
So you have no town-reason what so ever, for why you are fueling the 'hope everyone gets bored'-tactic?
Care to state why you won't just place your vote?
Your lack of a read on berry has been noted.

[MrTrow]

@Lilith
If you do realize i had a reason to vote no before (and have a reason to vote yes now).
Why was the fact, i voted no before, a reason for you to doubt your planned 'yes'-vote?

@Aronis
Did you just really state 'i saw your point and acted accordingly' and a misrepresentation of that very point, in the same line?
Good to see your reads though. (still not sold on the 'using klick as a disclaimer on berry', but the rest i can get behind)

[MrTrow]

Just because I recognize a reason doesn't mean I agree with it.

True,
But for your argument, that you're doubting your decision to vote ja on klick-berry, (just) because i did, to make sense. You must think me scum.
Whether or not you agree with my Jelly-read doesn't matter, what matters is whether or not you believe, i believed what i said.

When did I imply that I knew Drench's alignment?

As stated in the post you're quoting: when you said your government wouldn't need to 'reach across the aile'

However as I am a liberal I don't really need to reach across the aisle so to speak.

For this to be true, the other would have to be a liberal, which you couldn't possibly know........ right? (D1-vote stuff, but that's what i was talking about)

[MrTrow]

We should kill aronis

Are you suggesting, you think he's hitler, or are you suggesting we take an anti-town action?

In this case, i understand the latter though.
The 'ow, you're not a fan of me mimicking Lilith's motivation for a read?, ok then i'll mimic JDGA's (with no sincerity behind either)'-approach annoys me more than the 'yup ,i don't give a shit' response to accusations of misrepresentations.

Yah :/

Trow, why vote yes?

Short answer: as stated
Long answer: there is a link above here, it will lead you to information you should already have.

I'm sure the fascists realize there isn't much point in being contrary

I agree, the fascist are probably being supportive of the 'lets avoid getting vote-data until the game is half over' approach.
Should i assume the above is still your reason for voting?

[MrTrow]

Are you suggesting, you think he's hitler, or are you suggesting we take an anti-town action?

In this case, i understand the latter though.
The 'ow, you're not a fan of me mimicking Lilith's motivation for a read?, ok then i'll mimic JDGA's (with no sincerity behind either)'-approach annoys me more than the 'yup ,i don't give a shit' response to accusations of misrepresentations.

You do realize there is another option, being just a fascist?

I was calling 'wasting one of our 2 shots(of which at least one, will likely be controlled by the fascists, so our 1 shot basically) to kill hitler (and thus win the game), on just a fascist' an 'anti-town action'.
Pretty much, BECAUSE IT IS.
(part 2: i can see why one would want it though)

And, your ja vote stems ony from a townread on BB, deapite Klick being the president?

Trow, why vote yes?

Short answer: as stated

Townread on (candidate) chancellor
nullread on (candidate) president
scumread on next candidate president.
I prefer a Klick-BB government over a Jelly-anyone government: i voted accordingly

[MrTrow]

@Lilith
like i said: that view i (would) understand.
That's not what he said, he meant though.

@424
2. you don't have to vote ja for jelly you know, even if you vote nein here.
So far, it looks like you're pretty adamant about your views. So why then, do you vote a ja for a null PRESIDENT? you

know

that the president has much more weight than the chancellor. with a liberal president, you need only a single liberal card to get much goods, either locating a fascist in the price of a fascist rule (which allows the president to kill him immediately) or forcing a liberal rule.

explain that to me.

Any preference to which explanation i should give?

My actual thoughts? (both then and now): '2 consecutive 'nein's, in this town, not gonna happen'

The logical follow-up if i had deemed, 'that solution' as remotely plausible. (which your assumption, there even is something to explain here, implies).
Do you recall my read on cephrir? Who would be candidate #3? EXACTLY
Do you recall what happens when we deny the presidential candidate 3 times in a row?
A situation we have discussed before. (Or more precisely, you decided to dodge (repeatedly?))

I had to choose between:
- null-Klick and Town-BB
- scum-Jelly and Unknown-chancellor
- scum-Cephrir and 'we have no say in the matter'-chancellor
- 'the public'
By choice of president ALONE: i stand by my vote.
(indeed less relevant) By choice of chancellor ALONE: i stand by my vote.
(next): By mechanics ALONE: i stand by my vote.

ALL of the above, has been explained before.
(and yes, if i had the choice to make BB president and Klick chancellor. I would have: that was not an option though)
What do you need me to explain?
Were these sentences short enough?

btw.

which allows the president to kill him immediately

- Not true
- Not confirmable, even if true
- actually believing this and the next post

we are still at least 2 rules away from having an actual shot

are mutually exclusive.

Care to explain, what you were thinking?

[MrTrow]

you just think i'm scum because i can't be bothered to do your stupid song and dance

You mean, scumhunting?
True, that might have something to do with it.

please don't make a long post with a bunch of links in response to that, i won't read it

I know

You won't give a town-motivation, for this call to apathy, either.

None of which, is remotely relevant to the post you're responding to, claim to not read, yet still respond to 1 detail, burried literally in the middle of the thing.

[MrTrow]

Trow, what would you vote if I selected you chancellor?

Pretty much this:

I personally don't feel comfortable with Cephrir or Aronis president.

Given how we have to pick a bad president, at the moment. I'm really looking forward to BBs case.
But yeah, you might have a shot here.
Picking me over Lilith will not add (much) to that shot.
As for Axxle: NO: under no circumstance will i approve of another Jelly-Drench government

Even with 'It will cost us the ability to prevent BBs chancellor-pick' i'm currently leaning to Jelly over Cephrir.
But i'm going to have to think on 'why did Jelly consider his reads on competing presidents relevant here?', it feels off

Shos is an option, I still lean town for him but I think he's a bit more risky given that there are people who think he's fascist and

he's not as strong a town read as he was before.

Really?
what changed?

[MrTrow]

What do you mean my reads on competing presidents?

I mean: what was the purpose of

I personally don't feel comfortable with Cephrir or Aronis president.

I agree, but have a weird feeling with you asking it.
It is something the rest of us need to take into consideration when voting (and basically it is the reason, i haven't decided yet)
But whether or not YOU like either of them as president, is not the issue here.

I don't trust JDGA, Aronis, and Cephrir right now and I will not consider putting them up for Chancellor.

This on the other hand, this makes sense coming from you.

[MrTrow]

Lilith as president sooner than later, sounds reasonable.
I have no intent to skip blackberry as president or install shos as one to make it happen though.

As for whether or not i'll accept jelly as president, currently depends on whether or not blackberry delivers on that case he promised

[MrTrow]

im not upset this died

First (and last) non-bullshit thing you said all game.

No shit the guy who said: 'trying to actually play the game before it is half over, is inherently scummy.'
puts this with his 'i was liberal while actively sabotaging the game' claim.

liberal btw.

[MrTrow]

good?
he's the one who told axxle (then drench), who to check
(and what to claim)

Also he has defended Drench constantly.

Given axxle's insistence on 'getting back to lillith' asap.

I would say

drench(now axxle), jelly, shos, +1 (with jelly or 1 as hitler, and drench fearing aronis more than he trusted shos' plan)
Would make the most sense

axxle, lillith, not a clue beyond there(apart from Aronis and JDGA being automatically elected if the 'to lilith asap' plan got through). (this one would make shos somewhat less likely)
Would also work.

regardless, it seems at least 1 liberal actually does consider it a good idea, to avoid generating ANY playable data until the game is (at least) half over.
If anyone could explain to me, why that would be a good idea, that would be great.

Also Cephrir, your 'i'm thinking of dropping this site entirely'-claim, while considering going on a site-based meetup, still seems a bit off
Having taken another glance-over, it's mostly the 'lets throw away half the game' of which i really don't see any merit.
Some other remarks, were actually pretty good (sorry for overstretching the range of the 'bullshit'-accusation)
The previous was(still is, to be honest) just really pissing me off.

[MrTrow]

I know bothering to check confirmable claims, using public information within the same forum (basic scumhunting) is rude.

shos:
It's not 'being wrong' that bothers me.
It's being called stupid, for actually wanting to play the game.

If you could tell me why it would have been a good idea, to not start scumhunting until turned out to be fascist axxle has had complete control on both investigations.
Until for example
'klick assuming to not get away with hiding a liberal card and that drench did, decided to lie about having drawn 2 and so 'fixing' the count'
making even the very little data we do have even more unreliable.
Or without such moves: 'there is 1 liberal card missing', congrats: you've just shown there is a fascist ex-president: that is (at least) 1 in 6: we already know 4 in 10. that's not narrowing it down
for the second missing card, that president is replaced by the corresponding chancellor, so STILL a 1 in 6 (very optimistically combined: at least 2 in 7).
Still not the kind of 'subset' that warrants, literally throwing away 5 or 6 policies, AKA half the freakin game.

Why wait that long to actually start playing?

To be completely honest, if all calls to do this came from town, i can't blame ChaosOmega for flaking.

[MrTrow]

really?
I'm playing an 'informed minority vs uninformed majority, with the key mechanic being 'the majority-vote' '-game too much like an 'informed minority vs uninformed majority, with the key mechanic being 'the majority-vote''-game.
By not throwing away the first half of the game in the version where the informative powers are ONLY in that first half?

Lets take your approach, the roster we had in this one, the draws we had in this one
and ONLY change the opening d10.
Aronis starts: hits the same bad draw drench actually had: 1st fascist policy, with not a single liberal giving a shit at this point, the fascists direct the investigation to 'later'
next blackberry, manages to select a fascist as chancellor (which is easy, because 'the first phase hasn't started yet'): second fascist policy in place and an investigation in fascist hands
I'll probably install something liberal
JDGA again completely unopposed places fascist-policy 3, gains control of the special election.
Takes a quick peak at the field to see if still no-one gives a shit: if so, pick Axxle, if not pick any decoy what so ever (blatant scum-claim aronis or blackberry, would do) and get refused
You're up (taking the 'best case-scenario', of 'suspecting JDGA') probably hit a liberal policy
Next Axxle, with 2 unplayed cards he'll get 1 recycled, before we hit 'enough info on cards to start playing', he picks hitler as his chancellor: game over.
According to you, before it actually began.

And (other than the opening role) i took the current scenario, ran in with the draws we had and ran doubts in the liberals favor. Up to and INCLUDING a blatant scum-claim.

You want to take the 'investigate next in line' approach?
Ok the roll was berry: fascist policy 1,
skip me (because the fascist lies about his investigation),
JDGA completely unopposed installs policy 2 and claims another investigation for the fascists (according to the 'investigation-chain'-idea), checks and clears berry
you're up, liberal policy i assume (again, blindly assuming in favor of the liberals here)
next Axxle, policy 3, gains special election: berry, why not: he was found innocent after all (and only 4 policies in, so no one cares yet)
berry nominates hitler: fascists win
2 policies before the game actually starts.
Even if you decide to install something fascist to prevent this outcome, controlling the special election: great: Axxle can directly install hitler: game over.
And that's assuming the 'investigate next person'-approach doesn't stick and give the entire game not a single non-fascist presidential candidate.
Both even without needing the 'bad draw'

So tell me:
what are these 'phases' you're talking about?
when do they start?
and how do they make your (apparently 'pre-game') statement of 'hey

president who just enacted a fascist policy

, you just give the word and we'll hand the (only) other investigative power to

the chancellor who just enacted a fascist policy

' a good idea?

[MrTrow]

*doesnt read*
I dont get what your problem is

nuf said.

But i like your conclusion town played well, while arguing the game hadn't started yet

[MrTrow]

yup
genuinely had shos as 'scums greatest asset, regardless of his role-pm' for damn near all of 'phase 0'

and i still stand by my point that if ChaosOmega had not been among those actively pushed into apathy, he had handed us the game.

[MrTrow]

'phase 0 meant nothing in total, yet allow me to gloat about how much phase 0 did actually mean'
wait what?

'with plans to keep townies dominant'?
really where?
the closest thing to a plan i've seen:
- was pushed entirely by scum.
- would discredit the next presidential candidate (i dare you to claim that investigation).
- would place the president after that, aka probably the actual investigation (otherwise the special election AKA chance to instantly win the game for scum) in the hands of scum

But back to the point, you decided to only half read: (which is an improvement over the breakdown, how it takes luck to not lose the game completely in your 'phase0' alone)
How many townies were still playing, by the time CO gave up?
Did you just answer with a number smaller than the size of the scumteam?
Is that an 'informed majority vs uninformed minority'-situation: AKA a freakin auto-win?

[MrTrow]

Well, nobody trusted neither you with your extreme responses (like now)

Really?
Both you and cephrir (the 2 townies with enough pull in this game to get it abandoned)
declared me prob-town over it

, nor axxleslot

you declared, blindly putting him in charge of the second investigation as well, a good idea (because 'still phase 0')
most arguments against blindly trusting him, came from scum actually

nor JDGA.

Ah yes, that unfounded 'scumhunting is scum' argument, backed by only cephrir

The plan was to only go with trusted members,

Which were? the result of a scum-controlled investigation-result, and that's it?
If there was a second, it was berry (*cough* scum *cough*)

and we had a lead on policies.

That lucky draw, which i spelled out for you in that post you refuse to (admit you) read.

What was pushed by scum?

Rush back to lilith('town by my word only'), if that means installing 'unreadable untrustworthy Aronis' and 'my scumbuddy JDGA' so be it.
Are you saying there was more plan than that at any point in the game?
Care to point me to it?

nothing you said actually got into people because of your longwalls. I think literally everyone came to just ignore you by now, lol.

So no one suspected me (to be hitler)
And no one was even bothering to see if my post contained scumslips.

And you claim i did something wrong?
Care to explain?

would never have guessed you were hitler with such high profile, btw

Case in point

So anyway, explain to me, if you think it had such an impact, what did 'phase 0' mean in the game? (we're talking about the first phase, before the first nomination, yes?)

Uhm no,
'Phase 0', means anything that happened before 'the gospel of shos' arbitrary decides the game has started.
This is literally the first line in the game to imply 'Phase 0' to only be 'Nomintation Phase 1'
Literally the entire game, did you (and ceph) push 'Phase 0' is everything up to 'Executive Action Phase 6'

But hey, it's not like i asked either of you to clear up where 'Phase 0' ends

But if you want to know what 'Nomintation Phase 1' meant:
It meant we actually had a more than 'just vote 'Ja' because 'Phase 0' '-election.
(and so on)
Which means we would have more than the 'we are 1 liberal policy short, so now we have scum 'narrowed down' to an (at least) 1 in 6, great use of 'Nomination 1' through 'Executive Action 6', people.

Are you arguing we actually didn't get much, out of a game that was pushed into abandonment?
No shit sherlock
I see you didn't bothering the really straight-forward question of:
did you leave enough playing townies around, so that the scum-team didn't simply hold the majority in this game?

[MrTrow]

Somehow i'm not surprised.

OK something so damn short that not even your attention-span can be abused as an excuse:

- 'phase 0' is everything before the point you decide the game starts.
- during the entire game you have argued that point to be 'Executive Action 6'
- in your last post you claim that point to be (for the sake of an argument you are unwilling to have) 'nomination 1'

WHICH IS IT?

[MrTrow]

The 'we need to go through the entire deck (at least) once, before it makes sense to question legislative results (or anything really)' argument.

I could go into how 'if everything before the nomination is (by definition) empty, then the first nomination is (by definition) baseless and therefore unreadable' extends far.
Or go into how i spelled all this out 5 times over the course of the game, or how you've made the 'the game hasn't really started yet' argument repeatedly, after 'nominiation phase 1'
But this is getting close enough to the '5-lines is wall' excuse as it is

[MrTrow]

Whether or not drench was a liberal: kind of a big deal. As it is whether or not lilith is conf-town. But enough derailment from the actual topic:

Good to see that even with the 'where did you get 'phase 0 lasts till executive action 6'' backed up (at your request, in a 'non-wall post'), you still refuse to explain where 'phase 0' does reasonably end.

[MrTrow]

So the game was fully going and you never said otherwise: when you declared any and all discussion about the nomination in the nomination 2 phase, is useless as those reads will FOLLOW from the legislation (which in turn requires the deck to be run through to be readable) as lillith pointed out, a triviality that was already clearly stated before

I could list plenty more, but not within the 'not a wall'-constraint
As for 'the moment the JAs are in, IS the moment the game starts', really: if the game has not started at any point before then. So there by extension in no reason what so ever to vote NEIN: which makes, 'the point the nomination is placed' AND the end of the legislative phase, the exact same point. SO WHY EXACTLY THAT POINT?