Open 163 (Jungle Republic)- Game Over before 835

[DTMaster]

@Hohum

Wouldn't we be following your script if we followed the Mastin bandwagon?

Talk about using your own argument against yourself.

[Nikanor]

Sorry dude, but I'm not going to follow YOUR script. You had no right to question my vote (or lack there of) when the original target of my aggression has yet to present himself in thread. You and DT both effectively mooted pressure on a potentially useful wagon.

Did you agree with my post 20 when you said, 'Well said, Nikanor.' in post 21? If not, what was the point of that post? If so, why was your vote left on Mastin? If you choose to not answer this question again, why are you not answering my question?

[saberwolf]

you seem eager to derail a BW in progress and just as quickly start up a new one. Only difference is this one isn't RVS.

That was an attack? I think real reasons are much better for starting a BW over random reasons, thank you very much. Are you telling me you think the opposite?

to be honest, while our votes were in RVS, there was serious intent behind our votes. [actually, I'll just claim for me, and let the others claim that too if they want] I just don't want to see a lot of "mastiness" in this game, so I put my vote on him immediately, to either pressure an annoying player to dumb down his game [hopefully], or maybe get scum to slip up if we actually lucked out on the BW choice. However, I still agree with your overall statement, logical reasons make better reasons than random ones.

[Nikanor]

2. The point is read my 27. I agree that you can interpret my post as a defense post, but I'm asking you to explicitly show how I did it

It's all about context. I can't explain your post any more than I already have.
There is no such thing as a post with no purpose. Don't try to convince me otherwise.

[saberwolf]

Ok, so if you guys are gonna do this, do it in an organized fashion so at least others can follow it.

those so far in this tunneling: In ONE post, can you please target each player [including myself] and analyze everything they have done, and why you think each one is scummy/not scummy in their own right?

[hohum]

@Hohum

Wouldn't we be following your script if we followed the Mastin bandwagon?

Talk about using your own argument against yourself.

The difference is I'm not sitting here demanding votes for my wagon.

[Nikanor]

@DTM: Do you find hohum to be scummier than myself at this point? If so, is it for the same reason(s) you initially voted for him? If not, what convinced you that I was scummier than he?

[Nikanor]

those so far in this tunneling: In ONE post, can you please target each player [including myself] and analyze everything they have done, and why you think each one is scummy/not scummy in their own right?

So long as you respond to your own request as well.

[DTMaster]

@Nik
Look at point 3. Be very, explicit. (I'm a rock talking to a guy running in circles around a thought.)

@Sabre
I can only interpret yours and Hohum having some seriousness in the vote (and maybe Nik but I think that's more RVS talk then actual accusation) The rest is RVS before it got horribly, horribly derailed. I'll make that summary post starting now.

@Hohum
But you are attacking a player (or players) for not following through on that wagon.

[hohum]

DTM: I'm not attacking anyone for not following through on that wagon. I'm attacking nikanor for attacking me for not voting you.

You really are as dense as you say.

[Nikanor]

I'm attacking nikanor for attacking me for not voting you.

What? I never attacked you. I'm just trying to get you to answer my bloody question! I have legitimate reasons for doing so. If you are town, your answer to my question will affect my opinion of you accordingly. If you have a reason to not answer my question, say so. 'Your question is dumb' is not an acceptable response. Even stupid questions have meaning.

[hohum]

I'm attacking nikanor for attacking me for not voting you.

What? I never attacked you. I'm just trying to get you to answer my bloody question! I have legitimate reasons for doing so. If you are town, your answer to my question will affect my opinion of you accordingly. If you have a reason to not answer my question, say so. 'Your question is dumb' is not an acceptable response. Even stupid questions have meaning.

I've answered your question 3 times already. Pay attention, dumbass.

[DTMaster]

SUMMARY POST AS OF NOW: TUNNEL MANIA EDITION (end caps lock lol)

Cain

1. Added a third vote to the Mastin Wagon. No reads so far.

Kill-kill

1. Added a vote to Cain in the RVS. No reads so far.

magichands

1. Replacing out, probably the lucky soul to escape the Mastin wall-fest. No reads so far.

Now with that uselessness out of the way:

Hohum

1. I'm attacked and my words are twisted. Argument started post 13. + scum points for twisting my words. +town points for pointing out why L-3 bandwagons aren't dangerous for the town.

2. Hohum points out leading argument. Null tell since it's a stretch for day

3. Null tell on 42. I can interpret both scum and town reasoning. But it reads as self contradictory to me.

Nik

1.Perceptive but not explicit about it. You need to infer his arguments (see the start on post 20) Null tell due to conflicting ideologies.

2. Asking for votes. Null tell. Conflicting scum hunting ideologies.

3. 49 is pro-town. + townie brownies (no points for you).

Sabre

1. Doesn't want tunneling in 18. + town points to stop the impending confusion

2. Post 34: more defusing of tunnel war. Town points.

3. Post 40. Sarcastic pro-town statement about the current situation.

------

Now for comments:

@Hohum
1. That actually is a good explanation. You win that exchange minus the name calling.

In review of what I summarized I cannot support my own vote since I actually just only get null-tells. I'm reacting to comments in a hyperactive setting. So to make my vote useful:

Unvote

Vote: Kill-kill

Read Nik's 20. This isn't a RVS vote (like my first one on Kill), but it is something I want to explore since Kill's RVS vote is after the whole tunnel exchange.

[Nikanor]

@hohum: So you're saying your random pressure vote on Mastin was more valuable than a vote with some (if little) basis on DT? That's the interpretation I'm pulling from your one answer that is anything close to acceptable.
hohum, some advice: Answer questions well, and your answers won't be questioned. You wonder why people keep asking you the same question? They're not stupid, you just haven't clearly laid out your answer to a degree they find acceptable. Instead of resorting to insult, perhaps you could clarify your original answer next time? It would save everyone quite a bit of trouble in the long run.

[hohum]

Nikanor: If you don't like my answers that's your problem, not mine.

[hohum]

and for the final time: I'll throw my vote around as I see fit. I'm not discounting your case but you seem too desperate to push it.

[Nikanor]

Nikanor: If you don't like my answers that's your problem, not mine.

I assume my interpretation is correct, then.

I'll throw my vote around as I see fit.

I've never said you shouldn't. I asked if you thought one bandwagon was better than a potential bandwagon. But this conversation has gone on long enough. I have your answer, that's enough for me.

[saberwolf]

Nikanor

Post 4: RVS vote, neutral.
Post 20: I'm a little suspicious of you commenting on kill kill's vote, It's RVS and even has an explanation with it, which is fine, but when I read the following:

@Kill-kill: Your random vote seems very out of place there. Where do you fall on the DTM-hohum debate?

I tend to read it as: I don't like where your current vote is, why not vote for DTM or hohum? I don't think this was intentional, I think it was just poor choice of how you lined up your sentences. When you attack's DT's post 11, I tend to disagree with what you think. I don't think the post was bitchy at all, it was a general comment saying that mastin hasn't shown up yet. However, I do agree that there is a slight defensive stance to the post, but defending other players is not [always] scummy.
Post 23 I don't like, for the pressuring on hohum. I didn't find your main argument for your vote that satisfactory for my tastes, and wasn't sure why you were trying to aggressively pull more votes on DT.

first real time of suspicion, scum points: 1

Post 24 is a valid claim on the OMGUS, and I agree.
Post 33 and 36 are neutral posts. Mainly opinion and logic reasoning.
Post 37 has me unsure of the contents..in a way, yes you are right, but in a way, you are also wrong. You WERE rather pushy with the vote switch request. Although rewording it like that makes it seem better than it was.
Post 45,48,49 nothing to read about.
Post 51, we are seeing you get aggressive again, but the points you raise are legit.

In summary, Nikanor for now seems legit, but just a tad bit pushy.

DTMaster

Post 5: RVS vote, neutral
Post 11: Gets a little defensive for Mastin, but nothing to arouse any of my suspicions.
Post 14: OMGUS post. Might be getting a little edgy in his defending
Post 16: Starting to get more defensive.

first real time of suspicion, scum points: 1

Post 19: DT makes a reasonable pro-town judgement call
Post 22: more defending, but at this point I can't blame him, as there is clearly a bit of tunneling going on now.
Post 26: goes from defensive to aggressive. I like that. It isn't too agressive, but enough to show that this is a man trying to show his innocence, and not trying to cover any tracks.
Post 30 can go both ways...on one hand, it is wise to wait for others to chip in [lurkers = bad] but it could also be an attempt to divert unwanted attention at scum.
I ignored posts 32,38,39. 41...sarcastic and rehashing is not worth my time.

In summary, DT gets edgy when pressured, and while I sympathise slightly for him being on the defending end, I also don't like how he handled some of the comments said against him. To his credit, he has made a decent effort with a couple of pro-town posts. Hope to see more of this later.

hohum

Post 6: I fully agree with this. Doesn't win any townie points from me, but I've warmed up to hohum here already.
Post 8,13,15: general comments, nothing special.
Post 21: showing signs of siding with nik
Post 28: misconstrued my efforts, but that's fine. Also your last comment is slightly anti-town sounding, although you are correct, your vote is your own.
Post 31, general comment/slight attack. To me, nothing too useful.
Post 35: surprises me by voting for who i thought was the guy he was siding with. Has legit reason though.
Post 42: LOVE this post, agree with him fully.
Post 47: nothing useful

In summary, hohum is my favourite of the three. He seems to keep his individuality, and doesnt let others speak for him. [ nik and myself] He plays his own game and seems to be playing with logic.

In conclusion

I would have to say its too early to place any of them in a role category. I'd say if anything though, I feel that

it is very unlikely that all three of them: DT, nik and hohum, are all mafia

. I would put nik on opposite sides of DT and hohum if any of them are scum. Other than that, got nothing else to contribute yet in analysis.

[saberwolf]

@hohum: So you're saying your random pressure vote on Mastin was more valuable than a vote with some (if little) basis on DT? That's the interpretation I'm pulling from your one answer that is anything close to acceptable.
hohum, some advice: Answer questions well, and your answers won't be questioned. You wonder why people keep asking you the same question? They're not stupid, you just haven't clearly laid out your answer to a degree they find acceptable. Instead of resorting to insult, perhaps you could clarify your original answer next time? It would save everyone quite a bit of trouble in the long run.

what I don't understand is why you haven't appealed to me then. I am in the same boat as hohum: I voted for mastin for the same reasons, and refused to switch my vote. Why haven't you tried to make me switch my vote? Why just focus on hohum? He may have agreed with you at one point [but then again, i partially did too], but you shouldn't target like that.

[Nikanor]

defending other players is not [always] scummy.

Defending others is not scummy

if you have reason to think they are town.

DTM has no reason to think Mastin is town. Mastin hasn't even posted yet. Thus, DTM's defense of Mastin is scummy.

I tend to read it as: I don't like where your current vote is, why not vote for DTM or hohum?

You're right, it wasn't intentional. I meant that his random vote felt very out of place in the middle of a hohum-DTM squabble. The fact he doesn't say anything about the debate going on around him, then disappears, made me ever so slightly suspicious of him.

Why haven't you tried to make me switch my vote? Why just focus on hohum? He may have agreed with you at one point [but then again, i partially did too], but you shouldn't target like that.

I'm looking for potential links. I asked him if he thought DTM deserved a vote based upon the evidence I put forth, since he seemed to agree with me. In my opinion, random votes should be abandoned as quickly as possible in favour of legitimate votes. This is why I questioned hohum's vote choice.

it is very unlikely that all three of them: DT, nik and hohum, are all mafia . I would put nik on opposite sides of DT and hohum if any of them are scum

Wow. Selective scumhunting already? Isn't it a bit too early for that?
Also, buddying of hohum is noted.

[Nikanor]

EBWOP: Never mind that selective scumhunting comment. I get it now.

[Kill-kill]

Nikanor, I didn't comment on the L-3 situation because at this point I really don't think it matters. Will it be interesting to re-examine in later days? Of course. But for now, I think isn't going to tell us anything. My interpretation:

nikanor: RVS on the most well-known player. [nothing wrong with that]
hohum: I don't like Mastin's posts, so I will RVS/semi-serious vote him! [nothing scummy here]
saberwolf: omg, I hate him too! [meh. again, not liking someone's posting style is a reasonable reason for an early vote; it's not like there was anything real to go on]
cain: bandwagon pls, kthks. [Trying to get a bandwagon, create pressure, this is what day one is about. Though, this is probably a vote to keep in mind]
DT: Whoa. That's a fast bandwagon. I don't like that mastin has that many votes before confirming. [I was uncomfortable with the situation when I read it as well, I don't think it is scummy]
hohum: I like bandwagons. [see brackets about Cain]

That how I read it (I hope it was clear the text-speak was tongue in cheek, but if I offended someone I apologize). So, I really don't think there is anything there deserving of a vote.

[Nikanor]

if I offended someone I apologize

Pre-emptively apologizing is a sign of weakness and/or wanting to be on everyone's good side, which is a scummy trait. Personally, I think it's the former, but it's something I'll keep in mind for later.

Nikanor, I didn't comment on the L-3 situation because at this point I really don't think it matters.

I asked you to comment on the minor disagreement between DTM and hohum on page two. Does it matter now? No. You also acknowledge that in your post. So why do you continue to provide your interpretation? To me, this feels like a post for the sake of posting.
Do you have anything new to bring to the table, Kill?

[Nikanor]

I asked you to comment on the minor disagreement between DTM and hohum on page

one

Fixed.

[DTMaster]

@Kill-kill

Wait what bandwagoning are your referring to when you referenced me?