Newbie 1289 - Game Over!

[BT]

Airick10's got the right idea.

VOTE: Deltabacon

You don't need to kick

all

our arses, just some of them.

[BT]

By the by, what internet provider?

[BT]

Hello everyone!

Let's get this show on the road.

So, a random vote for BT from Deltabacon? Hmm... I don't know about a random lynch.

Going no lynch right now until we get more clues.

##VOTE: No Lynch

Getting the show on the road by doing nothing and waiting passively for someone else to do something?

VOTE: PaperSpirit

Serious vote?

[BT]

UNVOTE: Deltabacon
VOTE: vendetta21

Low progress : words ratio. Getting some vibes here.

Airick10 also gets a thumb of disapproval for not going anywhere with "he's jumping the gun". Does this mean something, or are we back at square 1?

[BT]

A confirmed town should never be the only possible lynch anyway. Or a possible lynch at all.

[BT]

It's not, but how do you think the game is going to start moving *without* random or otherwise premature votes? If everyone played like you suggested, we wouldn't have a game.

I don't think it takes 24 hours to respond to my #26. I'm not liking this lazy start.

[BT]

It wouldn't be the first time I saw newbies rambling about theory in lack of anything better to do. It's null. If you do think it's scummy, though, what did you find worse in Sylvant's 3 posts?

[BT]

Sounds like a good reason to press them for reactions.

[BT]

I think people are encouraged to create content regardless.

Prepare to be disappointed.

[BT]

UNVOTE: Deltabacon
VOTE: vendetta21

Low progress : words ratio. Getting some vibes here.

This seems opportunistic. It happens on post 26. BT -- what progress do you feel was made previous to that point in the thread? It appears to me that my action in post 11 has spurred the a lot of things currently being discussed. Essentially you voted me for making a move that took us out of RVS. What is your idea of progress?

The way I see it, any progressive RVS post that isn't intent at making progress is to be looked at. Worse, any post that is intent at

not

making progress, but scum are usually more subtle about that. Your #25 seemed like a lot of effort with no result; You update your read, explaining that you find act x scummy but it's not worth your vote, but you leave it at that. You put a reasonable amount of effort into reading PaperSpirit, so you have no excuse for not keeping the ball rolling.

By the way, opportunistic is a nice word to tack on. Care to explain why it fits? I'm surprised I'm not your vote after that quote. It's currently on no one, as a matter of fact.

I do not agree with your [Tierce's] read on Sylvant/ovyo, but it is still early. I do find it odd that Sylvant voted PaperSpirit after PaperSpirit's post about a no-lynch.

You disagree but you find it odd. Which is it? 'Odd' needs elaboration.

What is your read on Vendetta? He voted PaperSpirit too, and it clearly was not random. It seemed like that was a quick and easy vote on a newbie jumping on a bandwagon.

What wagon?

Repeatance of previously posed questions and made statements in conjunction with your claim that

I'm

responsible for the ongoing of this discussion appears scummy to me. The same goes for your insistence that talking theory is a scumtell in conjunction with (I assume) the fact that you did not read my only other game.

VOTE: Tierce

I'd be willing to vote this as well. These are reasons that existed after your exchange that ended in #58. No comment on her more recent exchange with Deltabacon, no comment on anyone else.

Though I don't find it scummy, your reasons are flawed as well. Townies aren't prompted to immediately read past games of people they're voting (although that would be nice), and her 'insistence' on her view of you doesn't strike me as scummy either. Don't forget to reply to this with your opinion on others.

@Tierce: All in my posts. If you're asking about Ovyo, her predecessor's vote seems likely enough to be mindless RVS (so much that he didn't consider his target - I see it plenty).

RedRabbit needs to show up.

[BT]

Buldermar, what Tierce means by addressing the current game is talking about the current players (instead of general lynch talk, which you seemed to be doing for a while).

I think Airick10 is being a bit inconsistent. He seems to be advocating random votes to get conversations going, but in post 24 it appears that he considers a vote based on a limited amount of information pre-mature (which is odd when he advocates votes based on no information at all). I tried to dig a bit in post 56. Based on post 73 I concluded that the inconsistency is most likely a coincidence (or at least not deliberate)

Is Airick's inconsistency scummy? I don't understand what your aim was with this part.

Tierce:

Thinks that PaperSpirit is obvtown based on four posts.

Is this something you find odd? I don't think it's difficult to see how she got to that conclusion.

[BT]

So this tells you nothing about Airick? Why mention it in the first place?

[BT]

So this tells you nothing about Airick? Why mention it in the first place?

I didn't say it tells me nothing about Airick, I said it is null with respect to his alignment. Why do you twist my words in this manner?

Null with respect to his alignment is exactly what I meant by "it tells you nothing". I'm not twisting your words because you never said it - rather, I'm stating a fact. No one was arguing that it

wasn't

null, so there was no need to point it out. Why did you point it out?

As a general note, 72hr prods suck. 4 posts and 1 votecount in 24 hours.

[BT]

I genuinely cannot see why you are being so obstructive to my probing, I'm asking you for your reads, but you're holding your cards close to your chest. I accept that you have a townread on Paper, I just don't see why? Has your position on him been reaffirmed or shaken by their most recent contribution however succinct it was? I need to know why you are doing what you are doing.

She said explaining it is detrimental to the town. It's a

townread

and that's completely understandable. Why is this not enough for you and why is this so important to you?

Yes, you're obviously twisting my words because it tells me something despite being a null with respect to alignment. For instance, it affects how I estimate his alignment based on his future actions. Generally speaking, any sort of profile/information about the players has the potential to become advantageous at a later point despite currently being null. I pointed it out for these reasons.

Fair enough. "Twisting words" is an antagonizing word choice, though.

Obviously on day 1 the only confirmed town when you're town yourself

is

yourself. Hammering yourself (confirmed town lynch) is inferior to not hammering yourself (no lynch) in this setup.

No, when it's either your lynch or No Lynch, you DO want to allow the hammer (self-hammer if you must) because your presence will keep town off track. Can we please

please

drop this theory convo now? It is literally derailing at this point.

I find it odd how Sylvant's vote, which I'm pretty sure was random, just happened to be on you after your no-lynch proposal. Vendetta's vote was not random.

-_- You never answered this:

I do not agree with your [Tierce's] read on Sylvant/ovyo, but it is still early. I do find it odd that Sylvant voted PaperSpirit after PaperSpirit's post about a no-lynch.

You disagree but you find it odd. Which is it? 'Odd' needs elaboration.

[BT]

Getting stuff out of the way first.

When she said it, Paperspirit had 4 posts which screamed only newbie, as opposed to screaming town. If it gives me a better insight as to how Tierce thinks then damn straight I am going to ask for it. Knowledge denied to town is detrimental, and knowing how Tierce 'Obvtown-ed' Paper within 4 posts, 1 of which was of no game-related content, and three of which were complete nullreads and an analysis of the facts. You ask why it's not enough for me? Because it's screaming scumhood at me, and Tierce's unwillingness to even contribute to other reads in any serious way serves only to reaffirm this. I want to know why, and my vote will be stationary until I find out.

What will happen

after

she explains her

page 2 townread

? Seriously, this ISN'T as critical as you're making it out to be. Her explanation won't do much of anything. If it helps, I'm clearing PaperSpirit from his page 1 posts as well. Denying this information isn't anti-town because PaperSpirit isn't and wasn't ever in danger of being lynched. As Tierce said, if it DOES happen, THEN explaining it will be relevant to anything at all.

I'm astounded to see that you managed to avoid the entire part of my post devoted to trying to get her to clarify a scumread as well, are you not wanting to know her actual reasoning for continuing to vote for Ovyo?

Just because I replied to that one part doesn't mean I disagree with the rest of your post.

You disagree but you find it odd. Which is it? 'Odd' needs elaboration.

This is not a black and white thing. I disagree with Tierce that Sylvant is scum based on his vote. I believe Sylvant's vote was random, but for the timing of the post, the question has to be asked. Player A posts something scummy, Player B votes in what looks like random, Player C votes in what is intentional. Player C is being called out on his actions, why not Player B? Again, I do not look at Sylvant's vote as scummy as Tierce does, but I understand his position and do find it odd that a random vote just happened to be on what was the scummiest post of the game at that time.

It's not black and white but I have no idea what your stance is here. Also, Tierce voting Sylvant/Ovyo over vendetta is a solid point; I am not arguing about that.

Fair enough. "Twisting words" is an antagonizing word choice, though.

"to restate someone's words inaccurately" http://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/twist+words. How is this antagonizing? To me this is exactly what you did.

This is twisting your words:

buldermar said that it tells him nothing

This is not:

it tells buldermar nothing

It happens that what I did was the

latter

, not the former, so I was stating MY opinion, not twisting YOUR words. Any questions?

No, when it's either your lynch or No Lynch, you DO want to allow the hammer (self-hammer if you must) because your presence will keep town off track. Can we please

please

drop this theory convo now? It is literally derailing at this point.

You've got to be kidding me.

If you No Lynch, chances are you will STILL be a likely lynch target tomorrow and the result is that the former day pretty much didn't happen at all. So, no, I kid you not.

[BT]

I have stuff to say on vendetta's recent posts but I'll wait for his response first.

[BT]

No one is going to hammer.

[BT]

Scum won't do it, town won't do it, therefore it won't happen.

I kind of hinted at this before, but antagonizing is one thing you don't do as town. I could sum this post up with "what the fuck" or any other similar comment but I'm not going to because it won't be pro-town. I suggest you get your head out of the gutter and focus on your wincon.

[BT]

Nah, I don't think both scum are on the wagon, I'm just making the simple assumptions that players are smart enough to not hammer so early as any alignment.

[BT]

After some consideration,

@Mod, I'll have to replace out.

No way I can properly play this with my upcoming schedule. Sorry, everyone.

[BT]

Sorry for dropping out early.

Interesting that PaperSpirit turned up scum -- I cleared him along with everyone else and my reason was that new players are more likely to ask these kind of questions in their handy scumtopic, not in the thread. Guess it was, in fact, a 'likelihood'.

Assuming Buldermar remained just as detrimental to the game later on, I'm surprised he wasn't lynched. Then again, I haven't been following the game, so I don't know if that stance would have changed had I stuck around.

[BT]

Your slot confirmed him scum and then Decided to lose the game by changing my vote ;/

You're making it sound a lot worse than it is. The second scum was going to be a problem even if you lynched the first scum... first.

Assuming Buldermar remained just as detrimental to the game later on, I'm surprised he wasn't lynched. Then again, I haven't been following the game, so I don't know if that stance would have changed had I stuck around.

Your impression of me does not reflect that of others or any global truth.

True, but I had a feeling it was the global impression at the time (when Tierce pushed in that direction, in particular).