Open 35: Big Love - Game over!

[ryan]

Confirm

[ryan]

4 more to go

-YogurtBandit
-xyzzy
-Adel
-darko

[ryan]

Love........exciting and newwwwwwwwwwww

[ryan]

Xyzzy is the last one. Than the love fest BEGINS

[ryan]

Vote:JordanA24

[ryan]

Unvote

WOW this thread blew up since my random vote on Jordan. I'll have some thoughts (couple of people showing some scumminess off the bat) later on.

[ryan]

So should we just vote out xyzzy just to make it easy on everyone?

This has been talked about a few times but it was the first black mark on his track record.

Perhaps.

vote: xyzzy

FoS: pickem

SOP

Adel posted this right after Darko and I’m not sure if she was agreeing with darko or somebody else, nonetheless it popped up after a weird start by darko

Nah,

Unvote, Vote: Xyzzy

He's clearly lurking, and his username is unwieldy.

This read to me as somebody trying to start a bandwagon on somebody who hadn’t even posted yet, very scummy indeed.

Eh, I guess we might as well start analyzing things. I'm going to go ahead and say that Adel and NabNab are obviously scumbuddies. Adel, at least, is definitely scum. Adel, I wish you were town, I really do .

Vote: Adel

.

Comment was made on Page 3 and you think they are “obviously scumbuddies” A very bold statement made in a game that had just begun.

By the way, I'm still not voting anyone.

This type of comment is usually done by a lurker trying to look active, but to me this looked like you trying to keep yourself away from your scumbuddy, possibly because he/she is on a wagon? Maybe NabakovN? Adel possibly?

Unvote, Vote: Darko

Total and complete newbscum right out of the box. Starts the idea of voting Xyzzy, then let's me and Adel actually do it (I was joking btw). He sees Guardian getting on Adel's case for her vote, then decides to emphasise that he is not, in fact, voting Xyzzy and is therefore a good citizen, not scumz at all.

Bam! Done. Let's wrap this baby up and call it a day.

Nabakov goes after Darko, and blames him for starting a bandwagon? Did he lead you to vote and if so why did you follow?

Unvote

I apologise for claiming that Darko's post was a "bit of a cock-up". It was an epic cock-up...

Vote: Darko

Obvscum.

Was called out for not contributing and goes right after the easy bandwagon ( Darko) how about a little content on some of the other happenings?

One. I'm not refusing to vote. I'm stating that I never voted xyzzy in the first place, therefore showing how non-committed to my so-called "plan" I am. Honestly, if I truly wanted xyzzy gone, I would've voted him in my first vote, no?

Two. Why should I random vote right away? What purpose would it serve me? Why am I supposed to do it? You say I will look town if I do it, but what if I refuse to random vote, will you lynch me?

Three. Don't you think I was calling attention to myself with all my posts? You guys are calling me mafia already for little obvious suggestions because it's easy to do so, but fail to look at how quickly everyone is voting for me. In fact, anyone who has even bothered to defend me or even state that they're putting me aside for the moment (except one person) is even turning against me and voting me.

You guys here have such preconceived notions of what a newbie should and shouldn't do. I'm frankly pissed because no one bothered to tell me how I should act in my first game here. Oh shall, I give you some smilies while I'm at it to show how annoyed I am? I'm supposed to do that right?

It's very offputting and making me regret joining here, actually.

A lot of “woah is me” stuff in this post. You’ve been signed up since June 8th and you don’t understand the random vote stage? You do make one good point in this ramble, there are a lot of people who are hopping on your bandwagon rather quickly BUT you’ve also made that very easy to do with quite a few scumtells. A few players have asked who you believe is scum and I would be interested in that as well. Until I see an actual list

Strong FoS: darko

[ryan]

So should we just vote out xyzzy just to make it easy on everyone?

This has been talked about a few times but it was the first black mark on his track record.

Perhaps.

vote: xyzzy

FoS: pickem

SOP

Adel posted this right after Darko and I’m not sure if she was agreeing with darko or somebody else, nonetheless it popped up after a weird start by darko

I'll try asking this again (I don't see an answer anywhere to it) Were you agreeing that we should lynch xyzzy because he's been inactive? These two posts were back to back and I can't find where else Adel would be saying "perhaps" too.

[ryan]

Yeah, I am. I don't like 50 page noise filled days. If I think someone being wagoned is scummy, I'll push it, and try and get results fast. Problem, love?

Yeah, I have a problem with that. I absolutely find anyone who wants to lynch before page 10 in a game of this size scummy. If we have 50 pages, we have lots of information, and more information is always beneficial to town.

A quick lynch gives less information. Wanting to give less information to town = scummy.

Just *try* reading through day one of a game with 50+ pages. (

Hint

: Mafia 64). It is impossible. If this game goes over about 25 pages I am probably not even going to attempt to re-read today, it is just not worth it. Longer days are better for town,

in theory

. Shorter days are better for town,

in reality

.

I am tempted to quote raj from an ongoing game about how he doesn't like to sit around masturbating in his own words for 20 pages when we can just try and lynch scum in half of that.

Sorry to burst your bubble, but long days

seem

to be better for town, but in my experience they

are not in fact

better for town.

I love how fleaboy qft'd it .

50 pages is as unreasonable a Day1 as 5. I personally, don't want a 50 page Day 1! That is silly! I've never been in a large game,

but I'm going to assume that a 10-15 page day 1 is reasonable.

Alright?

I think in theory that's correct BUT inactive players can also drag on a day as well.

[ryan]

Eh people constantly find me scummy.

I can't really be bothered to defend myself any further from this wagon, as I don't see any merit behind it

.

If you are town (which you are implying) why are you just giving up? I would hope if you are town you'd fight like heck so we don't lynch you (Being a townie and not wanting a mislynch) I can't say I'm that happy to see a townie just give up the fight.

[ryan]

Refuse to fix it? I'd love to fix it, but it seems that I can't. Whatever, honestly, there has been one game so far on this site that I wasn't a suspicion target in, and even in that game I was lynched day two, and I was scum....

I have no pity for you guys if you lynch me, and I have no desire to defend myself.



I am going to keep playing and scumhunting, but I am sick and tired of defending myself from baseless wagons, and I refuse to do so in this game. I am definitely not feeling the love.

You just said in one sentence you'd "love to fix it" but than in the next you said you refuse to defend yourself. Which one is it?

NabakovNabakov: I understand your frustration with this subject but if he's town, what a bad way to start this game? Ya know? I don't disagree with your post but if he is just a frustrated townie, maybe we need to find a way to help him instead of just lynch him and lose a townie

[ryan]

But being lazy in these games isn't a good way to find scum, it's a good way for mislynches to happen. Being active helps, sitting back and being lazy is anti town.

[ryan]

So should we just vote out xyzzy just to make it easy on everyone?

This has been talked about a few times but it was the first black mark on his track record.

Perhaps.

vote: xyzzy

FoS: pickem

SOP

Adel posted this right after Darko and I’m not sure if she was agreeing with darko or somebody else, nonetheless it popped up after a weird start by darko

Nah,

Unvote, Vote: Xyzzy

He's clearly lurking, and his username is unwieldy.

This read to me as somebody trying to start a bandwagon on somebody who hadn’t even posted yet, very scummy indeed.

Eh, I guess we might as well start analyzing things. I'm going to go ahead and say that Adel and NabNab are obviously scumbuddies. Adel, at least, is definitely scum. Adel, I wish you were town, I really do .

Vote: Adel

.

Comment was made on Page 3 and you think they are “obviously scumbuddies” A very bold statement made in a game that had just begun.

By the way, I'm still not voting anyone.

This type of comment is usually done by a lurker trying to look active, but to me this looked like you trying to keep yourself away from your scumbuddy, possibly because he/she is on a wagon? Maybe NabakovN? Adel possibly?

Unvote, Vote: Darko

Total and complete newbscum right out of the box. Starts the idea of voting Xyzzy, then let's me and Adel actually do it (I was joking btw). He sees Guardian getting on Adel's case for her vote, then decides to emphasise that he is not, in fact, voting Xyzzy and is therefore a good citizen, not scumz at all.

Bam! Done. Let's wrap this baby up and call it a day.

Nabakov goes after Darko, and blames him for starting a bandwagon? Did he lead you to vote and if so why did you follow?

Unvote

I apologise for claiming that Darko's post was a "bit of a cock-up". It was an epic cock-up...

Vote: Darko

Obvscum.

Was called out for not contributing and goes right after the easy bandwagon ( Darko) how about a little content on some of the other happenings?

One. I'm not refusing to vote. I'm stating that I never voted xyzzy in the first place, therefore showing how non-committed to my so-called "plan" I am. Honestly, if I truly wanted xyzzy gone, I would've voted him in my first vote, no?

Two. Why should I random vote right away? What purpose would it serve me? Why am I supposed to do it? You say I will look town if I do it, but what if I refuse to random vote, will you lynch me?

Three. Don't you think I was calling attention to myself with all my posts? You guys are calling me mafia already for little obvious suggestions because it's easy to do so, but fail to look at how quickly everyone is voting for me. In fact, anyone who has even bothered to defend me or even state that they're putting me aside for the moment (except one person) is even turning against me and voting me.

You guys here have such preconceived notions of what a newbie should and shouldn't do. I'm frankly pissed because no one bothered to tell me how I should act in my first game here. Oh shall, I give you some smilies while I'm at it to show how annoyed I am? I'm supposed to do that right?

It's very offputting and making me regret joining here, actually.

A lot of “woah is me” stuff in this post. You’ve been signed up since June 8th and you don’t understand the random vote stage? You do make one good point in this ramble, there are a lot of people who are hopping on your bandwagon rather quickly BUT you’ve also made that very easy to do with quite a few scumtells. A few players have asked who you believe is scum and I would be interested in that as well. Until I see an actual list

Strong FoS: darko

This was my post from earlier this morning, also darko I currently do not have a vote on anyone, so I'm not sure how my unvote could be hidden

[ryan]

Darko: Where am I arguing with NabakovNabakov? I disagreed with his statement to lynch somebody who could be town but isn't acting like it. Wouldn't it be smarter to help that person instead of automatically lynching a townie? I know we are moving at a race car pace BUT if you are going to drop stuff on me, make sure it's me that did it, most of this stuff looks like you didn't watch my posts at all and are thumbing things at me that should be on other players.

[ryan]

NabakovNabakov: I understand your frustration with this subject but if he's town, what a bad way to start this game? Ya know? I don't disagree with your post but if he is just a frustrated townie, maybe we need to find a way to help him instead of just lynch him and lose a townie

If Guardian comes up scum, I know now who is his possible scum buddy.

Who are you fingering here ST, me or Naba? You aren't very clear on saying my response was scummy or the fact that Naba wanted to lynch a possible townie who's frustrated.

[ryan]

NabakovNabakov: I understand your frustration with this subject but if he's town, what a bad way to start this game? Ya know? I don't disagree with your post but if he is just a frustrated townie, maybe we need to find a way to help him instead of just lynch him and lose a townie

If Guardian comes up scum, I know now who is his possible scum buddy.

Who are you fingering here ST, me or Naba? You aren't very clear on saying my response was scummy or the fact that Naba wanted to lynch a possible townie who's frustrated.

Ah, yes, I should have been more clear. I thought your response was scummy, and mostly because that response came from you. I have never really seen you post anything like that... usually you are very aggressive and would attack Guardian instead of defending him.

I think there are a few scum right now who are taking the opportunity to really nail Guardian on a few things and IF he is pro town, I think the rest of us townies need to make sure he's isn't ganged up on and lynched. I'm not denying that he is showing a few scumtells BUT I also feel like he's retaliating for being backed in a corner. I don't think he's scum (at least right now) there are a few other candidates (along with Guardian) that deserve the same line of questioning/grilling that he's getting (IMO)

[ryan]

I think there are a few scum right now who are taking the opportunity to really nail Guardian on a few things and IF he is pro town, I think the rest of us townies need to make sure he's isn't ganged up on and lynched. I'm not denying that he is showing a few scumtells BUT I also feel like he's retaliating for being backed in a corner. I don't think he's scum (at least right now) there are a few other candidates (along with Guardian) that deserve the same line of questioning/grilling that he's getting (IMO)

Well, I tried to do some of that (grilling the other players) yesterday. But the thing is, just because someone else needs to be questioned does not mean that Guardian needs to be defended.

I felt a bandwagon had been started rather quickly on Guardian and that is what I was defending.

And if Guardian's scum Ryan?

Than I defended the wrong person. I would rather he get a chance to fix his "lack of pro towniness" he's admitted he has had problems looking scummy in the past when he was town, so why not give the guy a chance to show he's town? If he stays scummy than I have no problem voting him but for now I have no problem giving the guy a chance.

[ryan]

No problem. Guardian should be lynched because he's scum.

My suspicion of Numenorean has dropped off somewhat, and I can't remember why I FoS'd Adel. It doesn't really matter, since we can just lynch Nabakov tomorrow.

So Jordan, taking your logic, if Guardian is lynced and comes up scum should Sacrastro be the #1 suspect the following day?

[ryan]

My scum list does not include Sarcastro.

Uh thanks for volunteering that info?

[ryan]

My scum list does not include Sarcastro but does include ryan.

LOL, because you've mentioned me so many times before in your scum lists? Talk about a "huh" vote there. Upset because I called you out on meaningless post? Or is it time to throw suspicion my way to get it off yourself?

[ryan]

My scum list does not include Sarcastro.

And the point of this post was? You can investigate me all you want Adel, I have no problem answering your line of questioning. But explain a few of the posts that had no content just suspicion thrown in them?

[ryan]

I would

vote

Adel at this point, but my vote

appears

to already be on her.

Um, you didn't know where your vote was?

[ryan]

I'll give my own opinion on ryan's defending of Guardian, before anyone asks me a question (now where would be the fun in that?). This was ryan's original defense:

NabakovNabakov: I understand your frustration with this subject but if he's town, what a bad way to start this game? Ya know? I don't disagree with your post but if he is just a frustrated townie, maybe we need to find a way to help him instead of just lynch him and lose a townie

Now, interestingly enough, this is what ryan later says about it:

Ah, yes, I should have been more clear. I thought your response was scummy, and mostly because that response came from you. I have never really seen you post anything like that... usually you are very aggressive and would attack Guardian instead of defending him.

I think there are a few scum right now who are taking the opportunity to really nail Guardian on a few things and IF he is pro town, I think the rest of us townies need to make sure he's isn't ganged up on and lynched. I'm not denying that he is showing a few scumtells BUT I also feel like he's retaliating for being backed in a corner. I don't think he's scum (at least right now) there are a few other candidates (along with Guardian) that deserve the same line of questioning/grilling that he's getting (IMO)

Well, I tried to do some of that (grilling the other players) yesterday. But the thing is, just because someone else needs to be questioned does not mean that Guardian needs to be defended.

I felt a bandwagon had been started rather quickly on Guardian and that is what I was defending.

And if Guardian's scum Ryan?

Than I defended the wrong person. I would rather he get a chance to fix his "lack of pro towniness" he's admitted he has had problems looking scummy in the past when he was town, so why not give the guy a chance to show he's town? If he stays scummy than I have no problem voting him but for now I have no problem giving the guy a chance.

I'm seeing two entirely different things here. In his original post, I'm getting the feeling he plays on the emotions of Nabby (and successfully, too). In the second and third posts, he's more arguing in general things. He thinks scumbags are taking advantage of the situation to nail Guardian, he says that he thinks the bandwagon on him is going too fast. But he never said that in his original post nor did he post any opinions on Guardian's alignment until he was specifically asked about it. These posts are horribly scummy, in my opinion.

Huge FoS: ryan

Horribly scummy? I was asked different questions and I responded. If Guardian is a townie, why would we want to get rid of him because he's playing incorrectly? I thought/think that Guardian was a townie that was picked on unfairly and than had a couple scum jump on his bandwagon. He had 4 or 5 votes pretty quick before it slowed down. If his train of play continues I don't have a problem placing a vote on him but for now he reads to me as a frustrated townie who was hit by quite a few accusations and never had a chance to recover. He's stayed consistent in admitting he has been picked on in other games and lynched unfairly, I'm giving the guy a chance, why are you so quick to dismiss him as a townie?

[ryan]

Horribly scummy? I was asked different questions and I responded. If Guardian is a townie, why would we want to get rid of him because he's playing incorrectly? I thought/think that Guardian was a townie that was picked on unfairly and than had a couple scum jump on his bandwagon. He had 4 or 5 votes pretty quick before it slowed down. If his train of play continues I don't have a problem placing a vote on him but for now he reads to me as a frustrated townie who was hit by quite a few accusations and never had a chance to recover. He's stayed consistent in admitting he has been picked on in other games and lynched unfairly, I'm giving the guy a chance, why are you so quick to dismiss him as a townie?

I will stick to my metagaming on you ryan. You do not generally give anyone "chances". You jump on people after finding the slightest possible suspiciousness. I have seen that. This is contrary to what you usually do. That is the reason I find you scummy.

And not giving anyone chances has got me lynched rather quickly (IMO) in my last two games, so instead of jumping all over him I gave him an opportunity to explain himself

[ryan]

-Zindaras
Post 80 drops a ton of probabilities and numbers and honestly, I suck with probability so I was turned off by this post as it looked like filler to me. Does call Jordan on his “pressure vote” Post 82 points out how fast the darko bandwagon picked up steam, agreed here as I felt that some scum jumped on to further their agenda and see if they could get a quick lynch. Post 86 asks the question I had of darko as well, who is scum if it isn’t you? Darko has spent so much time defending his random vote he hasn’t told us about any suspicions he has. 113 has good content and than a vote on Guardian (which at the time was warranted as Guardian was being a little scummy up to this point) Large post in 329, I like the refute of leading the town to be scummy, (a Guardian post) 347 you place a huge FoS on me basically due to a couple of posts I did on Guardian and my subsequent responses to people saying I’d be a candidate if Guardian came up scum.

-Xdaamno
Post 99, finally something unfortunately not much content wise. 365, a player analysis, fingers Sarcastro as a #1 scum suspect BUT very vague on why. Says he already posted his reasons why (but I cant seem to find them anywhere) Hasn't been active as far as content in my eyes.

-JordanA24
Hops on the darko bandwagon in 62, and after having his random vote on NabakovNabakov, gives no reasons to jump on darko. Trying to further a bandwagon here? Very possible. Tries to clarify his vote in 74 but basically uses the “if you don’t random vote you aren’t town” argument, which isn’t always true. Random voting is great for getting discussions going but also can start bandwagons on players way too early. Tries to explain to darko the positives of random voting. I don’t like 272, if Guardian is scum and I defended him that doesn’t mean I’m automatically scum, it’s called a mistake, I guess I should follow your game more closely and if you vote somebody who ends up town I should automatically watch you closer? I mean that is the reasoning you gave. 344 talks on pickemgenius’s posts having no content even after a rather lengthy game review where comments were consistently made, not sure if you hadn’t read that post or why you’d say that.

-YogurtBandit Are you even playing?

-xyzzy
299 throws suspicion on Sarcastro but I don’t believe you had a vote on him and not much evidence on WHY you think he’s scummy.

-Sacred
Votes Adel in 178 for agreeing with Darko, I’d like to see the reference of it instead of just putting it out there. Post 199 I thought was a good content post, I’d like to see more of these from you as you bring up good points. 287 brings up some good stuff on Guardian and Darko. Analysis on Adel, Guardian and NabNab in 326 that was helpful, drops a conclusion on a vote of Guardian.

-Adel
Post 59 saying “well this is all still fun and not real voting” was strange as there was enough information to definitely get the game going. Being in a game with Adel before she is very cautious when she’s scum, looks like caution already in this game. Post 92 drops a vote on NabakovNabakov and than says it’s NOT for his actions, uh……than why vote? Hops on the Guardian bandwagon in 195. Post 209 asks Zindaras and Sacred a strange question on how many games they’ve played with eachother, what are you digging for here Adel, OH you think one is scum…….how did that question help you solve that? I dislike 302 for obvious reasons, THAN restates it in 309 and throws my name in (probably because I called her on it not being necessary for her to state what she did on Sarcastro) 314 votes me just because (no real reasons)

-Sir Tornado
Makes a good point in 78 about when to claim. Goes after Darko and says he made a “newbie scum” mistake, which reading it I agree, darko looks extremely bad up to this point. Fingers Adel and NabakovNabakov as “obvious scum” I never like terms such as “obvious scum” although he does have some nice points made toward Adel in this. Notes some inconsistency in a couple of somestrangeflea’s posts, a good find indeed. 244 tells Darko if he needs to get a replacement to do it……….uh why, is your scum partner making you nervous with the amount of suspicions he has? Darko is just fine, we have quite a few others who haven’t posted anything up to this point. 311 puts out a scumlist/innocent list. The one thing 353 didn’t admit was that I am an aggressive scum hunter and although it is true I go after people who put up lame excuses (like Guardian) it was early enough that the guy deserved a chance to at least try and play the game, as I posted, I’m not above placing a vote on Guardian if it warrants later.

-Honary Hitchhiker Oh you are playing in this game currently? I didn't notice, wonder why that is?

-darko
Post 47, although early is still a very scummy one and something that will stick out during re-read’s. Post 56 is another one of those “I’m here and not participating” comment. Almost as if to say “Don’t lynch me, cause I’m here” I never like that argument. Post 79, blasts the game for people getting mad about what townies should do and the fact he’s not doing it. Says he never refused to vote but what purpose would it serve (discussion is the #1 thing I can think of) A lot of “poor me” and “woah is me” stuff in here that looks like he got backed up and can’t claw out. Look who comes back in 242? Lots of defense in this post, BUT we do finally see some people you suspect. 336 you did make an interesting point that I did make it on radars but only AFTER you brought up some information that wasn’t correct, it is more obvious in a re-read that is for sure.

-Numenorean7
171 is the first real post I’ve seen from him (not great) Jumps on the Guardian bandwagon per a Zindaras post (I’d rather hear your own opinions though) 244 is a good one for Guardian as it shows who’s voted him and why, nicely put together and we’ll see if Guardian fixes these scum tells OR if he’s just scum and we found him WAY too easily. 368 is VERY weird indeed. Says Guardian and I are lovers BUT fingers us both scum? Uh, can you say slip up? Lovers win when the TOWN wins my friend

-NabakovNabakov
Post 51 about somebody “lurking in clear sight” Yet xyzzy clearly hadn’t posted anything. Why throw his name out there for no reason? Seemed like “look at xyzzy, he isn’t posting” Post 57 about somebody “letting you vote somebody else” is just plain dumb, either be a leader in the game or get left behind. Nobody “makes” anyone vote, that is your own choice. Post 185 I thought was a good one, Guardian does need to be held accountable for his play style, but two posts later you vote him saying Darko can wait, kinda a flip of giving him a chance to happy to see him lynched, very quick indeed. #236 is a nice post for helping townies, I thought it was put together quite well, let’s hope the scum missed it. Addresses the scummy claims made on him in 333. I did find it interesting he thought Sacrastro was hiding things or keeping them secretive, I hadn’t really considered that optinon as I found him to be pretty blunt in his reactions/posts, I do agree that SSF has looked rather scummy though.

-FeRnAnDo I got nothing on this guy, a random vote and nothing that jumped out at me. Non participator.

-pickemgenius
THANK YOU for post 233, those numbers didn’t help me either, glad I wasn’t the only one. 235 has some gut choices but nothing really concrete, could you elaborate a little more. OH man, post 239 is such a copout and I liked your reasoning up until that one. Not posting because everyone hadn’t is just an excuse not to commit, I hate those. 324 mentions that since xyzzy posts than he can post? I call a “WHAT?” We still have quite a few others who haven’t said anything and you haven’t mentioned them, why not? Post 338 is troubling as you put FeRnAnDo on your scum list, but I haven’t seen anything from him noteworthy to even put him anywhere.

-Guardian
Post 53 is a very strange exchange where he automatically fingers Adel and NabakovNabakov as scum just 3 pages into the game. Not a good start and definitely something that led to people starting a wagon on you. Than responds to NabakovNabakov and says “you might be town but Adel is scum” Again nothing from Adel substantial to warrant such a claim and especially after he JUST said that NabakovNabakov was a scumbuddy of Adel, I’m starting to see why you started off so badly. Furthers the wagon on darko in 94. In 105 sounds like “here are my three suspects, vote them with me” If anyone is votefishing up to this point, it’s you. Post 109. Unvoting and than dropping a FoS is NOT defending. Good point in 137 about a lot of noise about dice and other games and blah blah blah. Votes somestrangeflea without content or reason, just tosses the vote on, than tries to rectify it in 151 (without any evidence again) Post 160 FULL of responses to various questions asked. Post 181 is the “why do I always look scummy” speech. 316 is the “let me have another chance” post.

-Erg0
Post 272, who are you again? OH yeah, a current player with no content. Promises content soon, we shall see.

-somestrangeflea
Post 81 sums up what I was thinking on darko at that moment as well. Fingers Jordan and Guardian on the top of his suspect list in 91. Post 114 is an obvious follow. You agree with his post and than vote Guardian (rev up the bandwagon) I also don’t like one of your reasons is because the darko bandwagon was crawling (if you think he’s scum why unvote?) Feels to me like you were hopping you’d get darko lynched and when the support fell off you went on to somebody else. If your numbers that you bored us with for two pages were “barely relevant” (Post 234) why use them? Oh I know, NOISE. 301 is a scumlist, and not sure why you put it out there. Nothing to talk about? Or just a thread filler? Seemed out of place. 348 is a player analysis, a good bunch of thoughts on Adel as I’m sold on her right now as well, so I understand what you were saying, but she is a tough read. 360 was right on to NabakovNabakov, seems as though he jumps back and forth on what he considers to be scummy and what he thinks is content, a good place to call that.

-Sarcastro
174 a “thanks for saying it” post. I too was getting tired of when to claim, why not to claim, etc etc etc. Talk about noise, yikes. 281 is a little troubling as you act as though you haven’t watched the thread but WHY isn’t Guardian dead? That could be tongue in cheek but why say it like that? Very aggressive in 286 about Guardian being scum and you being town, we shall see, I like the confidence BUT it’s also a gutsy stance to make. Here’s hoping 290 is a joke, after being quite quiet you have jumped back in VERY aggressively. 294’s argument of why Guardian is scum is not a good one. 298 explains he’s aggressive early in the game. Still arguing in 312 why he knows Guardian is scum.

Overall thoughts
-We seem to use the term “oh I was joking” quite a bit in this thread. If you are going to joke about something, make it obvious so we don’t have to rehash it over and over again.

-We are in day 1 and there are quite a few calculation posts on the probability of this or that happening. I’m not math braniac BUT once the game is furthered won’t it be smarter than to throw out your equations?

-Seems as though we do have quite a few newbies in this thread which did make for a tough re-read on tendencies

-Erg0, FeRnAnDo, Honary Hitchhiker and YogurtBandit all need PRODS

Vote Adel

We are in a game together currently, and her style is the same there as it is here. Lots of questions, lots of asking to get the popular decision (so not to look bad) overly cautious, Fishing for roles. Soon we'll see her get into her numbers that it takes to lynch and probabilities and other info to look busy but not really be, just a distraction. I find her to be our scummiest player right now.

Scummy List
1) Adel
2) Numenorean7
3) somestrangeflea

[ryan]

Ryan: A couple of things stick out for me here:

Strong FoS: darko

Why not vote? This is another common scumtell.

I would vote Adel at this point, but my vote appears to already be on her.

Um, you didn't know where your vote was?

Wow, way to misinterpret/misrepresent Guardian there. You either read that very poorly, or you're deliberatly making an already suspicious player seem even scummier. MAJOR SCUM TELL.

Did you read the next few posts AFTER that where Guardian explained why he did that? Read the next two posts and THAN tell me what I did that was "a major scum tell?" As far as FoS somebody, what is wrong with that? It isn't commonly scummy to FoS somebody Jordan, do I need to metagame you to see how many times you've done it?

[ryan]

I would

vote

Adel at this point, but my vote

appears

to already be on her.

Um, you didn't know where your vote was?

I knew exactly where my vote was after reread -- it was a figure of speech .

So you stated it like that just for rhetorical effect?

So you stated it like that just for rhetorical effect?

Yes.

[ryan]

He still knew his vote was on Adel though, didn't he.

He had to admit to knowing it and that his comment was "rhetorical effect" It wasn't a misrepresentation it was not having enough info to accurately make an assesment

[ryan]

I remember NabNab asking me why I and Numenorean7 were feeling ryan was acting a bit strange. Just came across this post while making a re-read. Here is the ryan as I know it from my other games:

So should we just vote out xyzzy just to make it easy on everyone?

This has been talked about a few times but it was the first black mark on his track record.

Perhaps.

vote: xyzzy

FoS: pickem

SOP

Adel posted this right after Darko and I’m not sure if she was agreeing with darko or somebody else, nonetheless it popped up after a weird start by darko

Nah,

Unvote, Vote: Xyzzy

He's clearly lurking, and his username is unwieldy.

This read to me as somebody trying to start a bandwagon on somebody who hadn’t even posted yet, very scummy indeed.

Eh, I guess we might as well start analyzing things. I'm going to go ahead and say that Adel and NabNab are obviously scumbuddies. Adel, at least, is definitely scum. Adel, I wish you were town, I really do .

Vote: Adel

.

Comment was made on Page 3 and you think they are “obviously scumbuddies” A very bold statement made in a game that had just begun.

By the way, I'm still not voting anyone.

This type of comment is usually done by a lurker trying to look active, but to me this looked like you trying to keep yourself away from your scumbuddy, possibly because he/she is on a wagon? Maybe NabakovN? Adel possibly?

Unvote, Vote: Darko

Total and complete newbscum right out of the box. Starts the idea of voting Xyzzy, then let's me and Adel actually do it (I was joking btw). He sees Guardian getting on Adel's case for her vote, then decides to emphasise that he is not, in fact, voting Xyzzy and is therefore a good citizen, not scumz at all.

Bam! Done. Let's wrap this baby up and call it a day.

Nabakov goes after Darko, and blames him for starting a bandwagon? Did he lead you to vote and if so why did you follow?

Unvote

I apologise for claiming that Darko's post was a "bit of a cock-up". It was an epic cock-up...

Vote: Darko

Obvscum.

Was called out for not contributing and goes right after the easy bandwagon ( Darko) how about a little content on some of the other happenings?

One. I'm not refusing to vote. I'm stating that I never voted xyzzy in the first place, therefore showing how non-committed to my so-called "plan" I am. Honestly, if I truly wanted xyzzy gone, I would've voted him in my first vote, no?

Two. Why should I random vote right away? What purpose would it serve me? Why am I supposed to do it? You say I will look town if I do it, but what if I refuse to random vote, will you lynch me?

Three. Don't you think I was calling attention to myself with all my posts? You guys are calling me mafia already for little obvious suggestions because it's easy to do so, but fail to look at how quickly everyone is voting for me. In fact, anyone who has even bothered to defend me or even state that they're putting me aside for the moment (except one person) is even turning against me and voting me.

You guys here have such preconceived notions of what a newbie should and shouldn't do. I'm frankly pissed because no one bothered to tell me how I should act in my first game here. Oh shall, I give you some smilies while I'm at it to show how annoyed I am? I'm supposed to do that right?

It's very offputting and making me regret joining here, actually.

A lot of “woah is me” stuff in this post. You’ve been signed up since June 8th and you don’t understand the random vote stage? You do make one good point in this ramble, there are a lot of people who are hopping on your bandwagon rather quickly BUT you’ve also made that very easy to do with quite a few scumtells. A few players have asked who you believe is scum and I would be interested in that as well. Until I see an actual list

Strong FoS: darko

I'm still not sure why in different setups I can't adjust my playstyle for the certain game, you've been on me for my playstyle in this game quite a bit, why isn't it possible I've adjusted for style of other players in this game?

[ryan]

There are a number of reasons for ryan's

uncharacteristic defense

of Guardian:
1) They're both Mafia
2) They're lovers (in which case Guardian is perhaps treacherous)
3) Ryan is Mafia and is attempting to look good later by having defended a partner, or having defended a townie.
4) Ryan is town and is not being aggressive for some reason.

I just wanted to mention possibility #2. I didn't say I thought you were lovers, I wanted to mention it as another possible explanation of ryan's behavior. It still strikes me as scummy, but it could be a lover-tell.

Hope that makes sense. I will finish my player-by-player, and address this more fully.

I am probably being a little more cautious in this setup and I just didn't see anything that warranted a vote on Guardian at the time when his bandwagon was going crazy so I felt I should say something to slow down the wagon on him. I didn't feel like at the time he had "Said" enough, now we saw quite a few of his "everyone thinks I'm scum" and "I just can't play my town role" type comments but I still hadn't seen enough from him commenting on other players to find him scum at the time.

[ryan]

Horribly scummy? I was asked different questions and I responded. If Guardian is a townie, why would we want to get rid of him because he's playing incorrectly?

This feels really pro-town, as contrasted with:

I thought/think that Guardian was a townie that was picked on unfairly and than had a couple scum jump on his bandwagon. He had 4 or 5 votes pretty quick before it slowed down.

I thought you weren't sure but wanted to give me a chance? Like NabNab... now I am town?

If his train of play continues I don't have a problem placing a vote on him but for now he reads to me as a frustrated townie who was hit by quite a few accusations and never had a chance to recover.

This is interesting to me... lynch the role, not the player, correct? If you thought/think I am town, why are you willing to vote me?

He's stayed consistent in admitting he has been picked on in other games and lynched unfairly

To an extent. This game, in the beginning, I played like a twat though, and I am admitting that was an abberation.

Ryan, a response to some of these quotes would be great.

1) I did think that some scum picked up a chance to throw some votes on you during this whole process. I didn't feel like you commented enough on the players to warrant such scrutiny, and since I've defended I hope to hell you are town because I seem to be getting quite a bit of flack for giving my opinion that you were town and that people should slow down on the voting for you

2) As I said, I gave you a shot with your playstyle but even you admitted that your play up to that point was more along the lines of a Village Idiot (no disrespect) you weren't playing town and you weren't playing scum, you seemed to be just defending yourself constantly. Since that time I believe you've given better analysis on the players and been helpful.

3) I'm willing to keep my mind open on every player in this game and although I do find a few people to be playing scummy right now (Adel) I've also played enough where you can't label everyone as a townie/scum with 100% certainity, you have to be open to the fact they could be vice versa what you thought they were. Right now I believe you to be a frustrated townie but it wouldn't surprise me if you played me like a fiddle and you are scum, I'm smart enough to keep my options on you open.

Did I miss anything?

[ryan]

368 is VERY weird indeed. Says Guardian and I are lovers BUT fingers us both scum? Uh, can you say slip up? Lovers win when the TOWN wins my friend

Hm, and I was finding this analysis so townlike too -- Ryan, not all lovers win with the town. Also, I already pointed out why I don't like how people are fingering Numenorean7 for this.

Lovers x5

You and _ are lovers. When your lover is killed, you will not be able to bear it, and you will die together with him/her. You are allowed to talk to your lover during the night.

You win when every member of the mafia is dead, including the treacherous lover

.

This is why I found it scummy.

[ryan]

Backtracking, Ryan's 371 struck a really scummy chord with me. Maybe he's just agressive or doesn't bother to read posts where people defend/explain themselves or others, but it's basically a list rehashing every scummy thing all players have been accused of doing with no mitigating factors and few town reads. He seems like he's trying to spread the suspcion around without actually comitting to much. I'm not sure how this effects his relationship with Guardian. He could have been defending him because he's a scumpartner (risky) or defending him because he's likely to be lynched and come up town, giving Ryan a handy "I told you so" moment.

Like I said, I'm playing a more tempered game right now, so I will just place an

FOS: Ryan

and look for more in coming posts and a limited re-read.

I have no relationship with Guardian as I've stated before (at length) I didn't think the bandwagon on him was appropriate so I stepped in and commented and now all of a sudden I'm his lover or scum partner, (both not true) The post I did was on the players scummy tactics (I'm not denying that) but it's not to say I can't do one later on and look at those tendencies along with current posts and compare and contrast. Why posting my thoughts on players scum tendencies is scummy, I don't know I guess.

[ryan]

[quote="Numenorean7]

ryan: Scummmy

Is annoying the heck out of my by using "than" instead of "then". On the anti-darko side near the beginning, but didn't vote. My biggest problem with ryan is that he is being less aggressive here than he is in the game I'm currently playing with him, and in a game I read which involved him. It could be a reaction against the wagoning in this game, but it rubs me the wrong way.[/quote]

Seriously? You start out a scummy argument on me because of my wording? Do we really want to start nitpicking how people are wording things in this game? Should I check your grammar now too? Come on now. And I'm scummy because I'm not agressive and because you metagamed me and I'm not playing the same? That's the one thing I dislike about metagaming is if a player alters their playstyle due to a specific format of a game they are seem as scummy because they aren't playing the same. I am agressive in my games, that isn't a lie but I've also changed my style as I've played enough to watch scum bandwagon townies on Day 1 and get them to cave with constant wagoning and accusations. I can't say your reasoning "rubs me the right way" either.

[ryan]

Ok I think I responded to what was directed at me.

[ryan]

Ok I think I responded to what was directed at me.

Yeah... Was there a reason you had to do it in 6 seperate posts!? =D

I wasn't sure if one gigantic post would be beneficial plus I didn't realize so many questions would be directed toward me as quickly as they were.

[ryan]

somestrangeflea: You and Sarcastro seem to be going at eachother alot yet neither have a vote on one another nor a FoS (or did I miss that?) Do you feel he is the best lynch today?

[ryan]

Sorry, I went back a few pages and must have missed the one right in front of my face. Do you believe in lynching players or lynching roles?

[ryan]

You seem to be "not pleased" with Sarcastro's play and almost like you'd rather see him gone regardless of his role.

[ryan]

Interesting concept. As I said you seemed to be pretty pissed at Sarcastro and I was hoping that wasn't clouding your judgment. I've also been in games where a certain player plays like an ass and it seems easy to lynch them BUT if they have a possible power role than it's a mistake.

[ryan]

@Flea: FTR, lynching Sarcastro because he

is

being an asshole would be an incredibly stupid play to make now.

I say we ignore him for now and hope he's more helpful once we get to the part of the game he claims to enjoy

.

The problem is what if he's scum? Than we ignore a potential scummy player and focus on others who could be town

[ryan]

1) Once again my point of us constantly saying "oh that was a joke" is irritating, if that's your case, so be it, I apologize for misreading it.

2) I'm wondering when I did my re-read if I posted that under you instead of Adel, it was an honest mistake, a mistake by me why so defensive?

3) You are one of those who metagamed me and brought it up, I'm commenting that I am an agressive scumhunter/player but for this style of game I've backed off a little so as not to jump to conclusions too quickly on players. I'm sorry if you didn't appreciate my analysis Tornado, beside the one flub I made on posting something on Adel in your slot my analysis is what I read and how I interpretated it, that's what this game is, how people read into what other people post.

[ryan]

@Ryan: Ok, you've obviously changed your playstle, but

why?

Just saying you changed it doesn't get you off the hook. Many people play more conservatively as scum than as town to avoid suspicion.

I didn’t say it got me off the hook, I was pointing out with the setup of the game I’ve tried to be little more conservative in who I finger scum and also keep an open mind on others. I’ve tended to play in the past where if I thought somebody was scum I’d go at them balls to the wall until they were lynched and than take the consequences later, I’m trying to be smarter play while still keeping my eyes on the scummiest players. I’m not saying I’m going to play conservative all the time but with suspicions I’m going to make sure I have enough information to make an accurate decision.

I can attest to the fact that Ryan does not play conservatively as a scum either. In fact, he isn't playing conservatively for the entire game either. He posted a very aggressive Ryan like post in the beginning (I quoted it recently). Then came only time he played conservatively in this game which was near the point where he let off Guardian. After I pointed it out to him, he continued in that vein of conservative play for quite some time and has now reverted to his usual aggressive play.

And how would you identify your play style this game Sir Tornado?

[ryan]

Wow, I just realised that that's Xdaamno's first vote of the game.

I would be going after him so hard if it wouldn't look totally OMGUS (especially considering I said before that he looked pro-town

). >_>

Seriously, though, being conservative with one's votes on day one is often a scumtell. I'd like Xdaamno to give an explanation of why he hasn't voted until now, at least. As well as a reason for voting.

One comment by him was enough to vote after you just said this a page before?

[ryan]

Sarcastro: Why does everything have to be an argument with you? I just asked a question as a page earlier you said he looked pro town, he makes a comment, you find it scummy and vote him, seemed like a quick trigger.

[ryan]

Why am I the play, apart from the fact I'm voting you?

Mostly because you're scum.

Ryan, I'm not trying to make it an argument. Perhaps you misread my tone. You made it seem like I went from thinking he was pro-town to voting him after just one comment, when I thought that post made it clear that I wanted to go after him, but felt that it wouldn't look very good. I quickly proceeded to decide that I shouldn't be worried about what looks good.

I did misread the tone of the post, thanks for clarifying.

[ryan]

I am still not understanding Adel's logic behind her Guardian vote. It appears as an OMGUS vote to me.

The only reason I could figure out was she had been holding suspicion against him for awhile but hadn't voted, but it does look closer to a OMGUS vote instead of an actual case.

[ryan]

Here and still voting Darko.

How about some more reasoning?

[ryan]

Reasoning coming.

What if Darko is lynched and comes up town?

[ryan]

Reasoning coming.

What if Darko is lynched and comes up town?

Wow, did you completely not see that post 635? This was posted 3 hours later or so.

635 is a jumbled mess of quotes of quotes of quotes, darko is the only one you actually comment on. I asked a simple question that only asked for a simple answer.

[ryan]

If Darko is town, he needs to do a better job of being town. but I find it unlikely.

Not really what I was looking for. I want to know with all your eggs in the darko basket, if he ends up being town, where do you go with your suspicions next?

[ryan]

There seem to be a lot of arguments being used here that are based on very minor scumtells. I suppose it's important that we don't rush day 1 in this game since the stakes are higher than they would be in a normal setup.

I find it mildly strange that here isn't more voting for lurkers in the game so far. I guess I'm noticing because I know I've hardly posted (unexpectedly busy, sorry sorry sorry), yet I don't have any votes on me and nor do any of the other people that Numorean listed in 628. I'm not sure what to make of this, I just think that it's interesting that the normal pattern of pressure voting doesn't seem to be followed here. Might be indicative of something?

Well since you've started posting again, who do you believe is scummy and why?

[ryan]

There seem to be a lot of arguments being used here that are based on very minor scumtells. I suppose it's important that we don't rush day 1 in this game since the stakes are higher than they would be in a normal setup.

I find it mildly strange that here isn't more voting for lurkers in the game so far. I guess I'm noticing because I know I've hardly posted (unexpectedly busy, sorry sorry sorry), yet I don't have any votes on me and nor do any of the other people that Numorean listed in 628. I'm not sure what to make of this, I just think that it's interesting that the normal pattern of pressure voting doesn't seem to be followed here. Might be indicative of something?

I expect the lurkers haven't been voted because there has been so much other suspicion flying around. I'd agree that we've only seen relatively minor scumtells, but there have been a lot of different controversial accusations against a lot of different people, as well as discussions of various theoretical strategies. I think that we have been so busy debating about various issues, we forgot the inactives were even here.

The ideal situation for a malicious lurker...

I find it interesting that Sacred has been advocating a "lynch all lurkers" strategy, but her vote is on Guardian.

Which we do definetly have a few of those unfortunately

[ryan]

I find it interesting that Sacred has been advocating a "lynch all lurkers" strategy, but her vote is on Guardian.

HER?

Sacred is a girl

[ryan]

Which we do definetly have a few of those unfortunately

Definitely? Seems like someone knows what his scumbuddy is up to.

So, in conclusion:

Vote: Ryan

I don't disagree that the "Guardian debate" doesn't look good for me and if he turns up scum, than I absolutely deserve to hang, I felt as though at the time he was getting ripped on for things that he should have had a chance to at least explain before the votes started piling on. As for my above comment, your response is crap. THIS was why I originally said that………..

There seem to be a lot of arguments being used here that are based on very minor scumtells. I suppose it's important that we don't rush day 1 in this game since the stakes are higher than they would be in a normal setup.

I find it mildly strange that here isn't more voting for lurkers in the game so far. I guess I'm noticing because I know I've hardly posted (unexpectedly busy, sorry sorry sorry), yet I don't have any votes on me and nor do any of the other people that Numorean listed in 628. I'm not sure what to make of this, I just think that it's interesting that the normal pattern of pressure voting doesn't seem to be followed here. Might be indicative of something?

I expect the lurkers haven't been voted because there has been so much other suspicion flying around. I'd agree that we've only seen relatively minor scumtells, but there have been a lot of different controversial accusations against a lot of different people, as well as discussions of various theoretical strategies. I think that we have been so busy debating about various issues, we forgot the inactives were even here.

The ideal situation for a malicious lurker...

I find it interesting that Sacred has been advocating a "lynch all lurkers" strategy, but her vote is on Guardian.

Which we do definetly have a few of those unfortunately

It was in response to him talking about lurkers in his post. You completely misquoted my post and let it stand alone to make me look like scum. Post 674 if you want to look back for yourself. I appreciate your insights in your post but you were NOT 100% correct.

[ryan]

And if Guardian is town? I suppose that still makes me scum right?

[ryan]

Which we do definetly have a few of those unfortunately

Definitely? Seems like someone knows what his scumbuddy is up to.

So, in conclusion:

Vote: Ryan

I don't disagree that the "Guardian debate" doesn't look good for me and

if he turns up scum, than I absolutely deserve to hang,

I felt as though at the time he was getting ripped on for things that he should have had a chance to at least explain before the votes started piling on.

You're scum. He's town. Period

. WIFOM be damned, scum don't tie themselves that closely to their buddies, and it's a tremendously bad idea for a pro-town player to suggest that he himself should be lynched in pretty much any situation. Hence, I feel the only way you make this statement is if you know there's no risk of him coming up scum.

As for my above comment, your response is crap. THIS was why I originally said that………..

It was in response to him talking about lurkers in his post. You completely misquoted my post and let it stand alone to make me look like scum. Post 674 if you want to look back for yourself. .

I don't particularly care about the context. That statement gave the impression that you knew the motivation of more than one lurker.

Sorry Fonz, I am NOT scum though and for you to be so damn cocky about it being correct is completely crap.

[ryan]

a) I gave reasons why I believed Guardian would be town during the entire ordeal, while also saying that I would keep my options on him open. I didn't feel that the bandwagoning on him without his chance to respond was fair.

b) I stated that if Guardian turned up scum than yeah I could see how people would find me scummy for defending him.

[ryan]

We also have quite a few inactives that should be weighing in as well.

[ryan]

Honary Hitchhiker is probably the one that needs replaced

[ryan]

Numenorean7: You do make an interesting point about Jordan, he was very much apart of this game early and has kind of faded away. Jordan, who are your three scum suspects right now and why?

[ryan]

Yeah, where is Guardian? He said he would be back Sunday evening.

I saw him logged on a few times today

[ryan]

Just saying I saw your name pop up on the bottom of the "who's online" list earlier this morning.

[ryan]

I stayed an extra day... Hi thread, I'm glad I was missed <3.

I note with extreme displeasure Adel's not responding to my questions. I await your response, Adel.

I note with some sadness Sir T's finding me to be one of the most likely players to be scum.

I note with reserved optimism that I think I agree with The Fonz on ryan. I really don't like how ryan tried to tie me showing up town (which I would/will) with him not being scum in 684.

Mod

: Prod/replace Honary Hitchiker and Fernando. It is a travesty to lynch someone while certain players have not contributed all game. I believe that a deadline is also ill advised considering the circumstances.

Also, after hitting preview, ryan, that is quite curious, as I arrived home about an hour ago....

Also if you read 684 closely you will see it was in response to Sir Tornado's 683 AND also had a rolling of eyes in my post.

[ryan]

Jordan: Now that I see you are online, care to answer my questions posed to you in 710?

[ryan]

(I should have done this when I saw Guardian's name pop up earlier)


The newest registered user is Lemming1607
In total there are 53 users online :: 21 Registered, 13 Hidden and 19 Guests [ Administrator ] [ Moderator ]
Most users ever online was 231 on Mon Jun 04, 2007 9:07 pm
Registered Users: BillyTwilight, bird1111, Blackberry, distad, Gatorguy91, GreenLiquid, Guardian, Hjallti,

JordanA24

, Maz Medias, mneme, Nox, PookyTheMagicalBear, pulsewidth, ryan, Save The Dragons, Sir.Laggalot, somestrangeflea, Sudo_Nym, Thok, YagamiLight
[/b]

[ryan]

Man, that's bush league.

And why is that?

[ryan]

Just because he's online, doesn't mean he's reading this specific thread at the moment. For all you know, he could be doing an hour-long readthru of another game (similar to the one I did when I replaced in here) at the moment.

I guess that gives him an excuse to NOT post in this game than doesn't it? Why so defensive of him not posting? Earlier I said I saw Guardian online and he says he wasn't, is posting this that big of a problem?

Mod edit
Votecount:
Adel (3): ryan, Guardian, pickemgenius
Darko (2): YoghurtBandit, FeRnAnDo
Guardian (2): Sacred, Adel
Sarcastro (2): JordanA24, Xdaamno
JordanA24 (1): Sarcastro
ryan (1): The Fonz
somestrangeflea (1): Numenorean7

Not voting (7): Honary Hitchhiker, darko, Sir Tornado, NabakovNabakov, somestrangeflea , Zindaras, Erg0

With 19 alive, it's 10 to lynch.

[ryan]

Well, I'd be extremely pissed if I were, in fact, doing a re-read of another game and someone pulled a cheap stunt like that on me, trying to imply I were lurking. Judge people on what they actually do post, not when they post it.

And I'd say it's more attacking you than defending him. But you know, you say potato, I say 'You're scum...'

And you don't know what he's doing so don't imply ya do.

[ryan]

I don't. But nor do you.

So what the hell is the argument for than? I don't like when people actively lurk and than say "oh I haven't had internet access for the past two weeks" or whatever lame excuse they give. Back off.

[ryan]

No the argument is you are being a straight up ass, period. You have a problem with me personally? Take it up outside the game with me than idiot. Jordan hasn't posted on this for how long now? I called him on it you took offense and didn't learn to move on when you should have.

[ryan]

No, I called

you

on it, you refused to admit you were in the wrong, and now you're resorting to getting personal. Real mature.

I made a valid point, the guy is ONLINE RIGHT NOW and hasn't posted any content since the 24th. Personal? Mature? How about defending a guy you DON'T EVEN KNOW? Leave it be, it's OVER.

[ryan]

WHY is it unfair to metagame somebody like that? Are you saying if Fernando or Jordan is active in another thread and not ours it shouldn't be brought up? It's far from unacceptable or unfair, it's a way to find out who's active and who isn't. Why is it impossible that somebody could be not participating in this thread because they are scum and trying to keep a low profile???

[ryan]

Um, I don't take this as a scum tell necesarily, but wow....

I just set hide online status to Yes.

Before I posted I metagamed him and he is active (quite active) in other games. I don't see why me posting that he was online and active in other games is bush league.

[ryan]

WHY is it unfair to metagame somebody like that? Are you saying if Fernando or Jordan is active in another thread and not ours it shouldn't be brought up? It's far from unacceptable or unfair, it's a way to find out who's active and who isn't. Why is it impossible that somebody could be not participating in this thread because they are scum and trying to keep a low profile???

But that line of thinking can be completely circumvented by going invisible. If someone's participation level is unsatisfactory, you can make that argument by itself. Like I say, there could be myriad reasons for a player not to be posting in a specific thread. Perhaps he only has time for a few posts a day, and another game is very close to deadline. Perhaps he prefers posting every few days so that he has more to comment on. Arguing that because player X is posting in another game and not this one is no clue whatsoever to his alignment.

I find metagaming to be a good tactic

[ryan]

Let me explain why I think it's not.

That tell only works if a player only ever does it when scum, right?
But, if being online and deliberately not posting is getting you caught as scum, you can just go invisible.

Therefore

: Players only remain visible whilst not posting in specific games if they also do it as town, or are very new. Hence, no kind of tell whatsoever. It's arguable if you've really got nothing to say, you should post nothing rather than lurk in plain view by making a post of the 'here, nothing worthy of comment' ilk.

So what about the people posting in other threads very actively and not active in this thread even AFTER prods? It could be said they are happier with their roles in other games and not this one OR it could be said they are lurking as not to make a slipup?

[ryan]

I think ryan's assuming too much. That's not good.

Actually it's coming up with opinions and thoughts, something this thread could use a little more of.

[ryan]

Hey, I'm back, but it might take a while to get into the groove of things.

No problem with ryan bringing up that point about guardian, but I feel he probably should of backed down a little and stopped arguing for the sake of it when Fonz pointed out the problem.

Ah heck what can I say but "chalk one up for a bad day at the office" (lost a $3000 potential sale today and it REALLY pissed me off) You are right the arguing wasn't necessary and just filled a page of back and forth dribble.

[ryan]

I find metagaming to be a good tactic

That's not true. You did not like when I meta-gamed you. If you find meta gaming a good tactic, then why did you not like it when I meta-gamed you?

I thought you metagaming me was misguided and the assumptions you were coming up with I disagreed on.

Mod edit
Votecount:
Adel (3): ryan, Guardian, pickemgenius
Darko (2): YoghurtBandit, FeRnAnDo
Guardian (2): Sacred, Adel
Sarcastro (2): JordanA24, Xdaamno
JordanA24 (1): Sarcastro
ryan (1): The Fonz
somestrangeflea (1): Numenorean7

Not voting (7): Honary Hitchhiker, darko, Sir Tornado, NabakovNabakov, somestrangeflea , Zindaras, Erg0

With 19 alive, it's 10 to lynch.

[ryan]

Mmm, kay. I can't see any proof a scum player would do this more often than a town player (Input Needed )

If a scum player wants to stay under the radar he/she would post less, not add any content and keep out of spotlight of others.

[ryan]

Guardian's Question: Now answer me this question: if I started going back to one line posts and not detailed and arduous explanations of what I was thinking, would you go back to trying to lynch me? Explain why or why not.


I'm not a fan of one line answers to questions because to me it looks like somebody trying not to slip up or make a mistake. I'd rather see somebody state a case against somebody (if that is the jest of their post) or at least try and explain their reasoning to a question/accusation. I've played enough games to see that somebody who responds with.....

"I'm town, don't lynch me. I think *insert name* is scummy"

Don't help the town and don't give information. I'd rather see a player give some sort of explanation for their actions because even if I don't agree with what they say it's still information that I mull around in my head and think "well I guess I can see their point of view" OR it gives me something to think about for later Days during the game. I'm a fan of info and content.

[ryan]

Guardian: I didn't quote but answered your question above (in case you missed it)

[ryan]

Usually it's not just one thing that makes somebody look scummy but a combination of a few things, are you sure it wasn't a few things said before that and that was the icing on the scumcake? (so to speak)

[ryan]

Guardian's recent posts look overdefensive to me. Flea's are giving me scum vibes (Which admittedly they weren't/I didn't notice before).

I must be missing what you are seeing with "scum vibes" please explain?

[ryan]

Guardian: I find it REAL interesting that I'm at the top of my list, yet Adel is getting a chance to "answer your questions to get unvoted" Thanks for the chance to answer questions (such as the one I extended you earlier)

[ryan]

Your argument appears to be that if person A does X and also votes person B because B does X, one shouldn't vote A unless X is itself scummy?

This is not my argument.

A(del) has said doing X is scummy, but has done X herself. Enter P(EG) who does X himself. He says A has claimed as scum because she is doing X which she claims is scummy. So, P votes A. Note, that all the time, P does not believe doing X is scummy.

Let me ask you this than ST, does that make Adel or PEG more guilty? It's almost the blind leading the blind in that situation

[ryan]

The question is: why whould Adel declare that making short, careful posts is scummy, when she had just made a self-proclaimed short, careful post?

I find it REAL interesting that my 1-2-3 responded immediately and almost in order.

So it was some sort of scum conspiracy?

I don't understand how this could be anything but coincidence.

I think it's safe to assume that we've got one more week until the deadline. I wonder who our replacements will be?

Because Guardian's current scumlist seems to be about 6 people.

[ryan]

The point about 1-2-3 should be dismissed

unless you know other people were online at the time

.

OH let's NOT get into that again

[ryan]

Let me ask you this than ST, does that make Adel or PEG more guilty? It's almost the blind leading the blind in that situation

It makes Adel a known propagator of flawed opinions (third one in this game),

and PEG a misguided player who is jumping on something that isn't really there, while ignoring more solid evidence on the same player. Neither of them look particularly scummy to me at the moment.

But, I don't like Guardian saying PEG voted Adel for hypocrisy. That is simply not true.

IYO, do flawed opinions help in distracting the town?

[ryan]

Your argument appears to be that if person A does X and also votes person B because B does X, one shouldn't vote A unless X is itself scummy?

This is not my argument.

A(del) has said doing X is scummy, but has done X herself. Enter P(EG) who does X himself. He says A has claimed as scum because she is doing X which she claims is scummy. So, P votes A. Note, that all the time, P does not believe doing X is scummy.

Let me ask you this than ST, does that make Adel or PEG more guilty? It's almost the blind leading the blind in that situation

I think in this situation it's quite obvious PEG is more guilty, Adel was only guilty of X, PEG was guilty of X and hypocrisy.

Did you ever answer my question in 710? (If so please quote where, I can't seem to find it)

[ryan]

Yeah, but when scum make flawed arguments/opinions, they usually use it to try to get someone lynched. Adel just seem to state her opinions (which I think are flawed) in the middle of some discussion about them. She does not actually try to use them to get anyone lynched.

I guess I always figure if a person is making comments that are distracting from the cause of finding scum that should be considered anti town/scummy.

[ryan]

Because Guardian's current scumlist seems to be about 6 people.

Five, actually.

Do you have a problem with that?

Is throwing a wide net scummy? If so, I ask you the same question I asked Jordan -- did you find Sarcastro suspicious when he did the exact same thing and wished he had a pentuple day vig?

Speaking of "jumpy" What I do have a problem with is that thinking there are all these scum just a few days before deadline when you JUST asked me to make a case on three people. Why do I have to narrow my list to 3 but you can throw out 5 names and have no problem with that? As far as Sarcastro goes, I didn't have a problem with his list because I felt he was consistent in who he felt has been scum throughout the game and I'd rather have somebody be consistent than constantly battling people over terms they use or a "6 hour brain explosion"

There are townies in this game that will show signs of scum and turn out to be town and vice versa depending on what sort of a player they are (line of questioning, experience, not knowing how to play a certain role, etc....) We have quite a few non existent people in this game who could very easily be scum and are watching the rest of us townies fight with eachother over silly things that have to make them smile.

[ryan]

Jordan: I'm not going to get into that discussion again, I just stated that you were online, posting in other games, and not doing anything here and low and behold you have jumped back on the posting horse and are posting like a mad man (not a complaint mind you)

[ryan]

Didn't she actually state it in the early game somewhere? I believe as a joke but it was stated by her if I remember correctly

[ryan]

Didn't she actually state it in the early game somewhere? I believe as a joke but it was stated by her if I remember correctly

I strike this post from the record as Adel did NOT state she was scummy. (I never found a case where she did in a re-read this evening)

In post 644 pickmegenius stated that Adel BASICALLY called herself scum, she never really did, he took two posts she made and said it looked like she called herself scum with the two posts combined.

[ryan]

I literally am having trouble believing that SSF and Sir T are voting me as a result of the last few pages.

I don't see how SSF can find PEG less scummy as a result of the exchange and find me more scummy. I really just don't

understand

-- I interpreted PEG correctly (maybe we were slightly off and Adel was affirming the consequent, whatever), he confirmed that I was interpreting him correctly, SSF believes him and

unFOSes

him, and then votes me. Explain, I really, really am not getting it at all.

Sir T at least is consistent in that he is suspicious of both of us....

This bears repeating: I

literally

am having trouble

believing

that SSF and Sir T are voting me as a result of the last few pages.

My vote is not on you because of the last few pages. You have been on my suspect list for a long time (I have said this before, I think) although I never voted for you. (Come to think of it, I did not vote of anyone except a random vote for ryan in my first post and pressure vote on darko in my third or fourth post)

I would be happy to vote both you and ryan today. But, ryan has only 1 vote on him, and you have 3, keeping in mind that person with most votes gets lynched, you get the vote. Had the deadline not been fast approaching, I would not have voted for you just yet.

I'm missing how Adel is not on your list (especially after this entire debate that has raged on for pages upon pages) it looked to me you found her mildly scummy

[ryan]

We are probably getting a 1-week extension. Even if not, I see no reason at this point to vote me over ryan solely because we have 3 days left -- like half the town is not voting, and it is not unlikely that some of them would consider voting ryan, myself included.

Don't you find it a bit odd that ryan has been on and off my scumlist all game, and is currently my #1? You are fishing for a pairing that isn't there.

One thing I will say for the record, me coming up town does nothing to prove ryan's innocence, as ryan, in his response, tried to imply

.

This has been brought up once and already responded on by me. I never said that you being town would make me innocent, I made a remark that "Oh I suppose if Guardian is innocent than I'm still scum" followed by rolling of eyes (to indicate sarcasm) You've misquoted this exchange TWICE now.

[ryan]

We are probably getting a 1-week extension. Even if not, I see no reason at this point to vote me over ryan solely because we have 3 days left -- like half the town is not voting, and it is not unlikely that some of them would consider voting ryan, myself included.

Don't you find it a bit odd that ryan has been on and off my scumlist all game, and is currently my #1? You are fishing for a pairing that isn't there.

One thing I will say for the record, me coming up town does nothing to prove ryan's innocence, as ryan, in his response, tried to imply.

I have already said that I am willing to vote ryan if there is a realistic possibility of him being lynched. At the moment, there appears to be none.

He may be your number 1 suspect, but interestingly, we are 3 days from deadline and you still haven't voted him. What good is a suspect list if you aren't going to vote for your suspect at the end of the day?

Apparently suspicion on anyone but him is the way to go right now for Guardian.

[ryan]

This is crazy. 6 pages in 16 hours???

NabakovNabakov: I understand your frustration with this subject but if he's town, what a bad way to start this game? Ya know? I don't disagree with your post but if he is just a frustrated townie, maybe we need to find a way to help him instead of just lynch him and lose a townie

If Guardian comes up scum, I know now who is his possible scum buddy.

And lazily jumping to conclusions like this isn't far behind.

I think there are a few scum right now who are taking the opportunity to really nail Guardian on a few things and IF he is pro town, I think the rest of us townies need to make sure he's isn't ganged up on and lynched. I'm not denying that he is showing a few scumtells BUT I also feel like he's retaliating for being backed in a corner. I don't think he's scum (at least right now) there are a few other candidates (along with Guardian) that deserve the same line of questioning/grilling that he's getting (IMO)

Ding Ding!

We have a big scumtell. IF he is pro-town, we need to make sure he isn't lynched? Way to say absolutely nothing. Ryan admits Guardian shows scumtells. Then he says he doesn't think he is scum, and that there are other candidates in need of grilling. Surely the correct pro-town play here is a) explain what it is that overrides the potential scumtells to give you the not-scum feeling and b) Actually grill those players you feel are in need of it.

I find this funny. Of course, I was not jumping to conclusions. I have explained my reasoning to suspect ryan quite well in my later posts. And, I disagree with you. Ryan is more likely to be scum if Guardian is in fact scum.

Personally, I would like a Guardian lynch today, but ryan lynch is fine too, followed by Guardian tomorrow if Ryan is found scum (or, we can do it the other way round, Guardian today, and Ryan tomorrow if found scum). I am willing for either of the approaches. I would also look closely at NabNab if they turn up scum too.

I am planning, as of now, to vote for either of Guardian or Ryan (it depends on who has the larger wagon) when the time is right.

And if Guardian is town? I suppose that still makes me scum right?

This is the EXACT exchange that has already been quoted and spoken about once. Why are you bringing this up? Start a wagon on me and take it off of you possibly your motive?

[ryan]

First, realize that we are talking about different incidents. You may be right that your inconsistency about discussing relationships is not important. But none of my other suspicions (Jordan, SSF,

ryan

) have more than 1 or 2 votes on them, so I think you are the best place for my vote atm.

Psst, Guardian, Num7. Wanna vote Ryan out?

Real Cute

[ryan]

What is your deal ST? If you have a case on me than state it, I've answered every question that has been asked of me in this game and have done my best questioning to find the scum and out them. Guardian putting me at #1 on his list and not voting me is interesting indeed and since I came to his aid when everyone was piling on I find it funny that I'm not given a chance to defend myself in his eyes. IMO Adel has done enough scummy tactics to be lynched Day 1.

[ryan]

Guardian putting me at #1 on his list and not voting me is interesting indeed

Yes, it is indeed very interesting. And, I daresay it might get even more interesting...

Which means what? That you and your scum buddies are going to go after me at deadline and get me lynched? Or maybe nightkill me? What's gonna get "more interesting?" Watching you try to start up bandwagons at deadline is the thing that is

real interesting

at this time.

[ryan]

Guardian: 371 has my top 3 scum (which hasn't changed) and my reasoning for Adel to be voted. You still haven't answered WHY you brought up TWICE your post 914 and you still haven't owned up that you misquoted me in it, twice now.

[ryan]

ARE YOU SERIOUS???? Look at the little face at the end rolling his eyes. Read the comment ST made and than how I answered it. You are not reading this correctly. ST made a comment and I responded with that, NOTICE THE SARCASM oozing. I responded because the comment ST made was that basically no matter what I was scum, which isn't true. I think this entire debate or whatever the heck you want to call it is exactly something Adel strives on because when she's scum (which I did just finish a game where she was scum with me) she does a GREAT job of misleading the town and bringing up points that aren't used to find scum, I think the past 10 pages she's done a perfect job of doing that. I believe that there was one scum in that entire debate egging on the others and I feel she was the one doing it.

[ryan]

AND please explain how I'm "forcing your vote?" You've used this excuse a few times during the game and it's just a real poor one. Nobody can force you to vote anyone, you ask for people's opinions and when they give them you seem to come back with the "so and so is forcing my vote" I really don't understand your reasoning with "people forcing your vote" Just makes me shake my head.

[ryan]

Back. Deadline. Urgh.

See you guys in 16 pages.

Good luck with that

[ryan]

And once again somebody voting with no case, good to see that approaching deadline we are bandwagon voting.

[ryan]

Jordan - still feel bad about

her

Well that's the first time someone's called me that for a while.

Does make ya wonder how close Guardian is reading this game.

[ryan]

It was simply

You'll have to do it without Sacred

I also have another shameless metagame tell on someone, but I won't say it.

Don't bring up metagaming tells here, they'll lynch you for it

[ryan]

NabakovNabakov: Question on Sarcastro. I do not disagree that his play style is.......well........ uniquem but when you talk about pressure voting why shouldn't he be somebody we pressure vote to talk? You seem like you are giving him a free pass to Day 2 without much of a discussion.

[ryan]

unvote: Guardian vote:SomeStrangeFlea

My second pick is now ryan. I could vote for either of them.

I'm putting a lot of trust into NabNab in this game, but now he seems really townie to me in this game to me.

His explanation for what is going on makes more sense to me than what I was looking at.


And I wasn't very happy with my vote on Guardian.

I know I'm supposed to lookup new evidence or present a new case, but I don't have one, and I don't really have one against Guardian either, so i figure it balances out.

So we could easily see this vote as following correct? As cautious as you usually play I'm very interested in how you let a new person replace in and went right with him on your vote selection.

[ryan]

EDIT: went right with HER on your vote selection (sorry Ether, my bad)

[ryan]

NabakovNabakov: I'm not going to argue with you, I've stated on numerous occasions it was a response to Sir T made in jest, but anyway............

[ryan]

NabakovNabakov: I'm not going to argue with you, I've stated on numerous occasions it was a response to Sir T made in jest, but anyway............

Was that a response to my comment? If I remember correctly, that was in response to a comment made by The Fonz.

I think it was a sort of combined effort, I'll have to go back and look

[ryan]

Post 683 and 684. You said I'd be more likely to be scum if Guardian was scum.

[ryan]

somestrangeflea: In response to the "metagaming" of me used to say I'm scum, I don't see it being that compelling, using an agressive style (on the Online Now) status was looked up on as being "stupid" and "bad idea" (can't think of the exact words Fonz used to talk about it) so I'll take that and make sure I don't use it again, I thought it was evidence that Jordan wasn't paying attention to the game and could be scum just following and not participating and whether it worked or not (since I did bring it up he has posted quite a bit more) it was a tactic that was seen as scummy, so I'll file it away and not use it again (in hindsight it was probably a shot in the dark anyway) I am agressive in situations where I feel I've got evidence or an obvious reason somebody is scum and the funny thing in this game is that I think quite a few people have shown normal scum tendencies (lack of content, denial to give content, distancing, quick to bandwagon, actively seeking a bandwagon etc......) in this game though styles obviously need to change due to the format.

[ryan]

Why isnt Darko dead?

Because this game has more than 1 scum in it. Remember?

And he should be the first scum dead.

Why is Darko the best option to lynch today?

[ryan]

Fonz: Here we go again, calling people blonde or blind because they don't agree with you? I suppose if I state that I could see a case on you for you and I being lovers or scum together than I would be stupid too? I do enjoy your non consistent attacks of me (how many pages has it been since you brought up my name now? Should we count together?) Is referencing a game (without providing a link) wrong? Please tell me how metagaming (which has been done on me and nobody balked) is a bad thing to do?

It is your behaviour regarding guardian that I think is the big flashing red light concerning you. In general, when I read through your posts, I find it hard to spot a consistent pro-town motivation. You claim to be more cautious here than usual, then defend your below-the-belt metagame attacks by your 'aggressive playstyle.' Essentially Ryan, you're all over the place.

I’m sorry Fonz, why is it again that I couldn’t see an obvious bandwagon starting on Guardian and say I disagreed? Or disagree with tactics that I believe some scum used to discredit somebody who I felt wasn’t given a fair chance to explain themselves? Tell me how that is scummy again? You are stating that is your main case against me, yet if I’m aggressive on something I feel is scum that is wrong? I have been extremely cautious here and except for a two situations ( the Jordan post and the Guardian situation) show me where I’ve went over the top in this game being aggressive?

Ryan, the big question I have for you here is, what is it about this game that you think warrants a big change is playstyle, and in what way?

I believe with the certain roles in this game you do have to be careful so as not to lynch somebody who has a potential lover and instead of going all crazy on who should be lynced and who shouldn’t I believe playstyles should be looked at carefully. (There are a few that have been tough to analyze due to their lack of content) I’ve been trying to watch people who have been following others leads instead of making their own decisions and also paying closer attention to people’s styles (aggressive or passive)

Mod edit
Votecount:
Adel (2): ryan, pickemgenius
Darko (2): YoghurtBandit, JordanA24
Sarcastro (1): Xdaamno
JordanA24 (1): Sarcastro
ryan (2): The Fonz, Numenorean7
somestrangeflea (5): Guardian, NabakovNabakov, Adel, Ether, Erg0
NabakovNabakov (1): Jalyn

Not voting (5): darko, Zindaras, Sacred, Sir Tornado, somestrangeflea

With 19 alive, it's 10 to lynch.

[ryan]

Why is every argument I make crap? You are really starting to bore me with your lack of new content in your posts. You make the same argument constantly.....

"You are crap, I am right, you are scum".

It's a friggin joke Fonz and what is funny is that your logic is good for some but not for the other. I stated a current game I'm in with Adel and that's bad logic? But ST's games he was/is with me are fine to use? Bullshit. Metagaming isn't a bad thing right? I didn't post a link to an ongoing game, I let anyone who wanted to see how Adel plays when she's scum to metagame it, it's not that damn difficult to find what games I would be in with her. When I come up town who will you attempt to bandwagon than? Picking one suspect and constantly ripping apart their posts is CRAP. It's called a suspect list (which includes more than one) check into it.

[ryan]

EBWODP: Not to mention, of course, that you attacked me at the top of this page for not having mentioned you in a while, whilst, I was, of course, pursuing other angles of interest.

Now I return to pointing out how scummy you are, and you accuse me of picking only one suspect, you, and constantly ripping you apart. You're so friggin inconsistent it's not even funny.

I attacked you because you don't allow me to respond to anything and when I do it's craplogic.

Jalyn: I never stated she was absolutely scum in my posts about Adel, nor gave you any information that you could have used to win that game.

[ryan]

I attacked you because you don't allow me to respond to anything and when I do it's craplogic.

When you respond to my questions with craplogic, I point that out. What's wrong with that?

IT IS CRAP TO YOU!!!!!!!!!!!! I am stating the point from my point of view, you have been the only one in this god damn game to consistently call everything I say CRAP, forget it, I'm tired of arguing with you.

[ryan]

And where did I say that Adel and I were scum together in a game that was still going on?

[ryan]

I'M DONE with you Fonz, there is nothing that I can do to have a chance in your eyes, you've taken the bullheaded approach where nothing I say/do matters anymore, so forget it, you've made your point (over and over and over again) I suck at mafia and you are god, so aren't we all content?

[ryan]

Jordan: I've TRIED to make a defense and whenever I say anything it's always "you're scum, nice try" Everytime I make a post to defend it's instantly shot down by him. Look back through every discussion we've have.

[ryan]

(Votecounts will be above the first post of every page by request, if you don't want this tell me.)
Mod edit
Votecount:
Adel (2): ryan, pickemgenius
Darko (1): YoghurtBandit
Sarcastro (1): Xdaamno
JordanA24 (1): Sarcastro
ryan (4): The Fonz, Numenorean7, Sir Tornado, JordanA24
somestrangeflea (5): Guardian, NabakovNabakov, Adel, Ether, Erg0
NabakovNabakov (1): Jalyn

Not voting (4): darko, Zindaras, Sacred, somestrangeflea

With 19 alive, it's 10 to lynch.

Oh, and your "I'm sick of arguing with you" sounds like you're just giving up because he's beating the crap out of you.

I'm tired of beating my head against the wall. I've answered every question that has been posed to me but it never seems to be innocent enough to him, why fight when you can't win? I'm not going to argue with somebody who thinks they are always right.

[ryan]

Jalyn: Well it does feel like its personal. I have been consistent in what I've said and answered all questions that were posed at me, it's not like I'm sitting here saying "I'm not scum trust me" I've tried to show that I'm scum hunting but apparently I haven't done that good of a job

[ryan]

ryan, especially, even if you are paraphrasing a post that got lost earlier, I'd like you to make a 1-post clear case on Adel and why you think she is the best lynch.

Adel: I believe she is following whatever is the most popular bandwagon at the time to look more pro town. She’s admitted (as late as 976) to having terrible arguments, I believe terrible arguments can be used to distract a town and she’s had her fair share in this game. I am also not a fan of her complete change of thought on relationship speculation. I do think that SSF is guilty for leading the town into arguments but I find Adel to be a better candidate to be lynched today.

[ryan]

Right to the point is what you asked for Guardian and that is what I gave you. 8)

[ryan]

I do think that SSF is guilty for leading the town into arguments

Explain please!

I believe the debate that raged on for pages after pages was

partially

your fault.

[ryan]

I do think that SSF is guilty for leading the town into arguments

Explain please!

I believe the debate that raged on for pages after pages was

partially

your fault.

The argument regarding Adel?

Yes and by the way, I really hope you are a townie Guardian because defending you when a group of bandwagoners and your meltdown happened earlier is getting me crucified right now.

*mental note to not defend anyone in mafia games*

[ryan]

But by still arguing you aren't really stopping them either.

[ryan]

Guardian: So me saying I disagreed with the bandwagon starting on you and that I felt that scum were driving it AND that we should give you a chance to speak (after your meltdown) were all invalid reasons? Because those were the top three I gave in defending you. And stop saying that I have EVER mentioned you and I being lovers, that is a lie and something YOU keep bringing up. I have NEVER even mentioned possible lovers in this game until right now in this post.

[ryan]

Guardian: You've also brought it up in other posts NOT just in the past few pages. In fact it seems like when other players turn up the heat on you, you find someway to bring up me in your posts as NOT your lover. I encourage you to read back through the exchange where I tried to stop the bandwagon on you and said you were pro town. I stated that you looked to me as a frustrated townie and gave reasons.

[ryan]

I wonder why ryan chose not to comment on both my and The Fonz's comments...

I'm not liking where this is going, and I'm starting to feel that ryan's wagon mightn't be as unreasonable as I orignally thought.

What did you want me to comment on?

[ryan]

I wonder why ryan chose not to comment on both my and The Fonz's comments...

I'm not liking where this is going, and I'm starting to feel that ryan's wagon mightn't be as unreasonable as I orignally thought.

What did you want me to comment on?

Well I assumed you would have somehting to say regarding this.

I guess I didn't see that as a question but more of a "yeah you're right" type quote. I didn't think I defended Guardian badly, I thought I gave enough reasons for the bandwagon to stop and for people to give somebody (who obviously was having a bad posting day) a chance to regroup and post something without piling on the votes.

[ryan]

Jalyn: In those posts you quoted you pretty well summed it up. I was cautious as to make sure I wasn't stopping a bandwagon on a scum (as you can see) but I was also consistent that the guy should be given a chance. Most of those arguments were 20 some pages ago and I can't remember exactly why I was thinking he could be town but it struck me that he was being unfairly wagoned on. I do remember thinking that with the inactives and non participators it would be real easy for a few of them to step up and place a vote and at the time Guardian did have some legit heat on him (heat he brought upon himself with his "I give up" speech)

[ryan]

I stated in there a few times "if he is town" (heck I said it twice in the first sentence of the first quote you quoted) I was very much 50/50 on his allignment.

[ryan]

Zindaras: I've been giving opinions/thoughts on people the entire game, I'm not quite sure where I "haven't given any thoughts" on players.

[ryan]

So why isn't Jordan dead yet?

Nobody has really made a solid case against him, do you have one that you'd like to make before deadline?

[ryan]

I am concerned that ryan is escaping the lynch.

I also find it interesting that after declaring ryan as his "number 1" suspect, Guardian is now "wary" of the ryan-wagon. Also, he is "not as sure as he'd like to be" about ryan being the scum (again, I don't understand how he was your numero uno suspect a few pages ago then, because since then, he's gone only up in my scum-o-meter)

State a case than Sir Tornado, how have I gone up on your scum-o-meter? You seem to offer very bold statements with little if any evidence, why is that?

[ryan]

@Zindy: My case on Flea is at the top of 41. It's not the most convincing thang, but his crapulent defense was what cemented my vote.

Reading Post 1000:

I must say I rather like the post, first off. I think that's a plus. The points on fleaboy aren't extremely strong though. Adel hops on in a rather scummy way in 1005. Ether in 1016. Same thing which applies to Adel applies to Ether here.

Tornado's 1037 is somewhat fishy, I have to say.

Ah, here we finally get serious with fleaboy. I have to say, that's one massive mea culpa there. He admits some things as "fair points", but I don't see him acting on it, or even promising to act on it. Also, the fishing to see if town would go with a "playerlynch" pains my eyes.

OK, So Jalyn's point *was* a good one. Good thing I asked, huh?

Yes, but does this really help us?

Yogurt with another one of his silly posts in 1072.

Okay, at 1075, fleaboy's at four votes, so I guess that's pretty much it as far as he goes. I'll admit that there are some cringe-inducing attempts to defend himself there, or well, to not defend himself.

I'm going to take a look at his posts in isolation.

Care to answer my question in 1194?

[ryan]

Zindaras: For you to say I haven't given opinions on anyone other than Guardian proves you've skimmed the entire thread without really reading. I had a massive post on thoughts on every player, I've stated my case on Adel and I've explained thoughts on Guardian.

[ryan]

Jalyn: I have a question of your analysis of YB (kudos to actually finding anything) but you seem to rip him for not altering his suspicions since page 3 yet hasn't Sacrastro played the game the same way? Keeping his suspicions on the same person and yet he hasn't been ripped for that. Just an observation

[ryan]

Jalyn: If Jordan were lynched and came up town would Sarcastro be a suspect of yours?

[ryan]

The reason I ask is alot has been made about people in this game having one suspect and sticking with that suspect and not contributing info on others. I find Sarcastro to be a tough read due to his playstyle and am wondering if his approach to Jordan will look scummy if Jordan ends up being town?

[ryan]

Erm,

Vote: Ryan

Trying to sneak a vote in the middle of a discussion without giving reasons?

[ryan]

I think I gave enough reasons yesterday thank you.

Besides, you should have been lynched yesterday (literally). So, my votes on you.

Hey I can't do anything about a mistake by the mod, using that as a reason to vote me is fairly idiotic.

[ryan]

Personally,

I am really happy Adel and Sir T are dead

and their alignments are confirmed. They were distracting me a lot, at least, with Adel doing nothing and Sir T having the very annoying habbit of pushing a nonexistent me-ryan connection.

Why would you say that Guardian? Saying they are distracting is interesting and although Sir Tornado did bring up a connection between you and I, he never pushed it, so why you would say that baffles me. Why do you want two townies dead? You're starting to make me wonder if I was completely wrong about you and your allignment.

FoS: Guardian

[ryan]

Guardian: YOU said you were glad two townies were dead? How is that not the most anti-town move IF you are actually a townie? I never felt as though ST was driving a Ryan/Guardian bandwagon, you seem to be very paranoid about this when you "have been defending me" (allegedly) I think Sir Tornado had been bringing up good points as to the finding of scum. I am parroting other reasoning? YET you vote me? I find that interesting Guardian. Why the attack on me? I asked a simple question of you, to answer why you were happy two town players died and you go off on a tirade? Why is that Guardian?

[ryan]

Your vote smells of OMGUS, but I'm not going to muddy up the thread with arguments and counter attacks. I feel you being happy that two townies died to be an anti town move. If you are in a game with people you don't like, than fine that happens but it is a GAME, but when you are happy that two townies (when you yourself said you are one) are nightkilled I find that to be very telling, it doesn't sound to me as though you want to win the game for the town, it sounds like you want the scum to win.

[ryan]

Guardian: You said you were happy two townies died!!!! Are you missing that? Is that part not registering in your head? You claim to be a townie but are happy we lost two off the town list? That is just retarded and no I'm not gonna argue anymore because that is my main point and has been my point. You are happy townies died even with you claiming to be one, it's completely stupid. You want to talk about reading a thread and paying attention, give it a try sometime and you'll see how absolutely outrageous it is to be happy members of your own team (allegedly) were nightkilled.

[ryan]

NabNab: I don't know how me pointing out that Guardian being happy we lost two fellow townies is me being "wholly anti town" Guardian continues to play this game back and forth from one minute being town to another being either scum or a VI.

[ryan]

and all that. Today, he is parroting the bull levied against me -- not only is his logic horrible, he has demonstrated a complete lack of reading the thread (re: Sir T), and is finding me, the only person even considering defending him, to be likely scum. Complete and utter bull.

Why is my logic horrible? Because I called you on a stupid comment you made? I didn't find Sir Tornado trying to "shove a Guardian/Ryan relationship" down people's throats" (you've been overly sensitive about that.) I invite everyone to read back through and show me how he was trying to say we were 100% a pair, he stated it a few times, made a couple of observations and you freaked out (a pattern with you in this game since the beginning)

And as for not stating a case today, who has? You're the only one voting me with any sort of case. Jordan said he stated his reasons in Day 1 and everyone else is saying I'm distancing myself from you and instead of splitting the vote they are piling on me. (also using the excuse that my play has done it to myself today) I'd like to know from you who have voted, what do you think about Guardian's comments? Should what he said be allowed to not be questioned? Where exactly am I wrong for calling him on it?

[ryan]

Guardian: These games are about opinions, I stated one and you've blasted me since and now I'm looked upon as distancing because of it and receiving votes for an opinion. I called you on what I thought was something scummy (saying you are happy townies were nightkilled) I've gone back and forth and to and fro with my argument and it's falling on deaf ears. (or in this case eyes) I have found interesting the people who have jumped on with votes basically agreeing with somebody else without adding their own content, a case of following possibly? So maybe this disagreement on opinions wasn't completely a waste.

[ryan]

I do not like the fact that desisted completely ignores ryan.

Um..........I'm not the only player he didn't talk about, but thanks for pointing it out

[ryan]

Controversial? Interesting you would mention me in those terms but not Guardian (who has clearly had his share of "wtf moments")

[ryan]

Controversial? Interesting you would mention me in those terms but not Guardian (who has clearly had his share of "wtf moments")

[ryan]

Mod edit
Votecount:

Ryan (2): JordanA24, Ether
YoghurtBandit (1): Jalyn
Sarcastro (1): d3sisted
d3sisted (1): Guardian

Not voting (11): Zindaras, Xdaamno, YogurtBandit, The Fonz, Sacred, ryan, Numenorean7, NabakovNabakov, pickemgenius, Erg0, Sarcastro

With 16 alive it's 9 to lynch.

Didn't Sacrastro promise more activity on Day 2? He's somebody I'm interested in hearing from

[ryan]

I like d3sisted more now that he's voting for scum.

So, whereabouts in Vancouver are you from? Are you a Canucks fan?

If Jordan is scum (as you are saying) why haven't you presented a case or placed a vote on him? I believe you said earlier we could count on you to be more active in Day 2 yet this is your first post (and not much content) when you do you plan on actually helping us find scum?

[ryan]

About my unhelpfulness - I feel behind on this game while I was on vacation, and I've been rather busy and unable to catch up. It's not just this game, in fact, so it's not really a tell.

Unfortunately, I'm going away again for a week starting tomorrow. Once I get back, though, I'll finally be able to give this game (and my other games) proper attention.

If you feel behind, why so sure about Jordan being scum?

[ryan]

Seriously, Ryan, have you not been paying attention? There are two very glaring problems with that question.

You said you feel behind in this game, yet you keep throwing out Jordan as a possible scum and I'm asking you why you feel confident about him? What exactly is wrong with that question?

[ryan]

The Fonz: I disagree that metagaming somebody is a "underhanded tactic" it's a way to see tendencies and playstyles and since there are people in this game I haven't played with I find it to helpful in how they play. You dismissing a possible Jordan bandwagon is interesting though as you seem to think it's completely a waste of time because you have zeroed in on me with tunnel vision. I think the arguments against Jordan have been interesting and at least worth thinking over, why you are against it is something I think you need to own up to. Also if you feel that Yogurt won't be help in the endgame why haven't you thrown much suspicion his way? You've picked one person to constantly attack and go after but you haven't offered up much thought on others in this game that you find scummy, why is that? You've been fairly wishy washy on others in this game, never really giving a reason to vote anyone other than me? (and I'm not buying your "You are scum that's why I attack you" comment you've consistently made whenever I bring up this point, try something a little more original) Who will you attack if I'm lynched Fonz? Or will you be busy defending your actions?

[ryan]

This is unacceptable. Yogurt, pick up your posting. What do you think about ryan? Guardian? Numenorean? Fonzie? Jalyn? Who are scum besides darko? Who are town?

Quite frankly, if YogurtBandit continues to post the way he has, completely ignoring anything and everything thrown in his direction, something will have to be done.

The problem with people who play this way is they do it as town or as scum and you can never really get a read on them. I think more content is obviously needed from YB but I'm not sure if we can use his lack of participation as anything more than somebody who might need replaced, I don't see it as a scumtell at this moment.

[ryan]

/stop the bashing. That's not constructive, that's just criticism.

That's what happens when you get frustrated townies together and somebody who signs up for a game only to do nothing.

[ryan]

Erm, Ryan, why did you say frustrated

townies

, what makes you say Xdaamno is a townie?

I haven't had him on my scum list and feel he is town. Hence why I said "frustrated townies"

[ryan]

Erm, Ryan, why did you say frustrated

townies

, what makes you say Xdaamno is a townie?

Seems like a weird thing to say. Xdaemno sure as hell isn't the only one who said anything of the nature.

Listen conspiracy theories. I could have said frustrated players and it meant the same dang thing. People are frustrated with YB's lack of content or lack of participation and it sounds like this isn't the only place where he hasn't participated.

[ryan]

Jordan's post was weird. Yours, not so much. That's why I was quoting Jordan, not you, and saying something about him, not about you.

Understand. For some reason it just seems to me that Jordan has been attacking anything anybody says, almost like he's trying to get suspicion off of him and onto whoever else says anything.

[ryan]

Sorry for my lurking (again), I've just replaced into Stargate Mafia, and reading and commenting on it is taking up quite a bit of my time.

Numenorean, I'd like you to present a case I can defend myself against. d3sisted, you just seem to following Numenorean, I defended myself against your case, you said it was reassonable, and yet you decide to vote for me again, why?

I still like my Ryan vote, though

Sarc really needs to post some content now

.

It really doesn't look like Sarcastro is going to be around anytime soon (the 26th??) I would think a replacement should be in order but with as many pages as we have would a replacement be able to step in and contribute right away?

Erg0: I'm interested in your content on Day 2, what do ya have for us?

Vote: YogurtBandit

I see a prod has gone out to you (thankfully) I'd like to see some more thought into your posts and some actual suspicions/opinions

Sacred: A decision concerning me? Any reason you aren't looking at other suspects?

[ryan]

NabakovNabakov: YB still stays at the top of my list because he just isn't contributing and whether you call it a pressure vote or whatever, I'd like to hear read some content from him (I can't even gauge who he feels is scummy right now because he's so vague in his posts) Jordan is a close #2 and honestly, I don't know who my #3 would be at the moment.

[ryan]

Ether: Actually if I remember correctly, if I would have moved my vote it wouldn't have mattered because I reached the majority of votes first, so unless myself and somebody else would have moved votes I would have been lynched. I did all I could to prove that I was innocent but nobody followed with an unvote and I was sure Adel was scum. Wouldn't it have looked very scummy if I would have moved my vote to SSF before deadline and than he comes up town? I mean I'm darned if I don't, danged if I do ya know?

Why does me not switching my vote make me not a townie Zindaras? You also didn't clarify your contradiction (which Ether pointed out) you only answered a question with a question, why is that?

[ryan]

Zindaras: I disagree slightly with you on the townie switching his vote. Would you rather a townie feel pressure to switch his vote to the highest bandwagon near a deadline? I guess with my circumstance I felt confident enough in my vote on Adel that I kept it there and since SSF ended up being town (as did Adel) I guess in this instance it's a null point because switching my vote would have helped lynch a townie anyway. I'd rather townies think for themselves in the game and not jump on a bandwagon (just to jump) near a deadline.

[ryan]

So even if I felt SSF was town I should have switched? That makes no sense, than I'm just helping the scum with another vote. I'd rather have people stand by their votes than switch to help lynch somebody (and somebody I wasn't certain was scum) I had my reaons for Adel (as I posted) and I didn't see SSF as the scummiest at the time. Saying my vote on Adel was irrelevant is off. Voting patterns in this game are important (example: why people who drop the hammer on somebody are seen as suspicious the next day if that person ended up being town that was lynched) I think it's very telling that we have 9 people who have yet to cast a vote yet today.

[ryan]

So even if I felt SSF was town I should have switched? That makes no sense, than I'm just helping the scum with another vote. I'd rather have people stand by their votes than switch to help lynch somebody (and somebody I wasn't certain was scum) I had my reaons for Adel (as I posted) and I didn't see SSF as the scummiest at the time. Saying my vote on Adel was irrelevant is off. Voting patterns in this game are important (example: why people who drop the hammer on somebody are seen as suspicious the next day if that person ended up being town that was lynched) I think it's very telling that we have 9 people who have yet to cast a vote yet today.

Let me explain it once again, again from your viewpoint, and you being town:

Lynch ryan: All outcomes are positive for scum and negative for town, as ryan already knows he's town.
Lynch fleaboy: Not all outcomes are positive for scum and negative for town. Fleaboy's alignment is unknown. Even if you are 99% sure that fleaboy is town, his lynch will have a better expected outcome than your lynch. 1% is still higher than 0%.

Unless you

know

fleaboy's town (PS: You don't), lynching him is always the correct move from your perspective. You dying helps the scum in more cases than fleaboy dying.

And I don't think you're going to get a lot of use out of a nice and healthy voting pattern if you're dead

.

I guess I was looking at it from letting the rest of the town use the evidence to find the scum, you are right, if I were lynched I wouldn't be much help in finding scum after that

[ryan]

Ether: Please explain how the post was "babble" what exactly did I not make clear in it?

[ryan]

Sacred: A decision concerning me? Any reason you aren't looking at other suspects?

It seems that you missed the post I made upon my comeback from my vacation
In it, I gave my opinion on most of the important stuff that had happened in my absence, yet couldn't comment on you. Why you? Because you should have been lynched and because a good deal of people still have their eyes on you. Clearly, it's an important issue, so, in order to provide an educated opinion, I must do an analysis on you.

SirT, what are your thoughts on Jordan? Please make a longish post and address my and other people's attacks on him and his responses.

yes this statement is incredibly awkward.

I'm sorry but I don't quite see why Guardian's request of SirT is awkward. I find it normal for someone to provide input on a hot topic, although, granted, it's a bit weird to ask a comment on attacks and responses as well...

I'm getting the feeling many are simply pointing out unrelated contradictions than scumhunting.

Well, pointing out contradictions gets people talking and scum screwing up.


I've already started on my analysis of ryan, but I must say I'm terrified by the amount of posts I have to read
I had no idea there were so many.

I don't disagree that I should have been lynched (except for an error in tabulating) or that there are eyes on me BUT Jordan currently has 4 votes, wouldn't that mean that more eyes are currently on him? I'd rather have the opportunity to defend my actions than to just have a vote placed and than that person disappears (example The Fonz)

[ryan]

Numenorean7: I guess my suspicion on YB stems that he's posted just enough to not get replaced, and while my vote earlier was a pressure vote (which he never responded) I guess I don't know what else to say about the guy, he has given little if anything to go on in this game, which is either a style or laziness, I suppose with my vote being a pressure one and one that didn't work, I'll need to look at the Jordan wagon and see if I agree with the suspicions being thrown at him. Erg0 has promised content (and not really delivered) and Xdaamno just hasn't given me anything to think he's scum. Since you threw a gut feeling out there, I will as well, Sacred has been on and off active in this game and I may look back and see if anything sticks out scummy. For now YB hangs onto my vote, although I'm open to Jordan, Sacred or Erg0 at deadline.

[ryan]

Guardian: What are you opinions on deadline voting? Basically I see that 9 people haven't placed a vote yet and I'd like your opinions on anything we might or might not be able to conclude from how people vote here in the next 3 days

[ryan]

Frankly, Sarc's vote is way overdue. But do try to complete your read before the deadline.

I'd like some people who aren't obvscum to at least

acknowledge

my Nabhating.

You've thrown so many accusations around I'm not quite sure who you even suspect anymore I will agree though, Sarc has been on Jordan since Day 1, so I don't know if I agree that his vote is scummy. He's been consistent about Jordan even if his posts have not

[ryan]

Third the deadline extension request

To be honest, I really can't see why the flow of the game moved off of Ryan.

I know I promised I'd explain why I want Ryan dead, but i had a packing crisis. Sorry. I would quote everything scummy he said, but then I'd be quoting everything he said- the foundation of the case remains his godawful defence of Guardian, and his attempt to pull the 'he was online but not posting, he's scum!' argument on Jordan. Like I think I said earlier, I get an opportunistic scum rather than bus vibe off of that, which is why I don't like that lynch.

W/r/t whoever it was who asked if not voting to save himself at deadline was a town tell, well, yes, it is, but it's a small one- notice SSF didn't switch to save himself until late, so Ryan's not doing so can equally be explained by not being around when the deadline hit.

I particularly like Sacred's post on Erg0, and feel if I can't get a Ryan wagon, this one is FAR preferable to the Jordan one.

Vote: Erg0

But for the love of all that is good, can we PLEASE lynch Ryan tomorrow?

Wow I missed you Fonz, and I really missed you not looking at anyone else but me when you target somebody, so good to see you back

[ryan]

Erg0: You stated that lynching Jordan will give us more info than you, please explain why.

[ryan]

Ok, a counter-wagon is one thing, but nobody had even expressed any serious suspicion of me until maybe 48 hours ago. To go from that to a possible deadline lynch is just ridiculous - I think that I've become the easy wagon for people who aren't sure about ryan or Jordan. The fact that happened 24 hours before deadline

on a weekend

(when a lot of people may not be around to unvote if they wish to) just makes me wonder how the hell I'm expected to have a reasonable opportunity to defend myself.

I really can't rebut the case point-by-point due to lack of time today, but I will say that what you are seeing is me dropping in and out of the thread as I get a better or worse handle on what's going on. My original vote for ryan today, for instance, was based on what I thought was good evidence, but my case fell apart within a couple of pages when I realised that his unvote yesterday would have saved flea, which is why I unvoted so fast.

The fact that I've been prodded twice already in this game should be enough evidence that I'm inactive, not lurking. I'm not totally comfortable with using this as a defence, but I really feel like there's more value in lynching Jordan today because lynching me will get us nowhere in the end.

Are you saying you should be replaced? I'm trying to figure out why you are using the "I'm inactive and voting me won't get any info" what if you are one of the scum staying inactive so as not to draw suspicion toward you?

[ryan]

I don't think it would be fair to ask someone to replace into this game 65 pages in, and I believe I still have value to the town, despite my current position.

I agree and am still a little confused on how quickly the bandwagon started on you. We have other inactives in this game (YB, Sacrastro just to name two off the top of my head) and all of a sudden people went after you rather hard. Do you believe this was scum or town driven?

[ryan]

This is making my head spin. Guardian just got off the Jordan wagon recently, and now he says Jordan is 70% town.

Agreed, I've never seen somebody go back and forth that quickly and STILL allow themselves room to switch again.

[ryan]

I don't want Jordan lynched. His post reeks of townness. Sarcastro I do want lynched, and Erg0 is a suitable alternative to Jordan, though by no means optimal.

This isn't that complicated.

Two pages ago he was your #1 and one post and he's suddenly town? Why am I guessing you'll jump around a few more times before deadline?

[ryan]

I'm setting you up? By asking why you deem it necessary to jump from bandwagon to bandwagon? To me it looks like you have no clue and are guessing and hoping you land on the right bandwagon, it just looks strange to me.

[ryan]

So who would have you changed your vote to Guardian?

[ryan]

Erg0, he was the only possible wagon.

So you would have switched to Erg0 BUT you place your first vote today on Sarcastro?

[ryan]

I don't understand your flip flopping of votes Guardian, you've done it the entire game and you seem to do it always near a deadline or a lynch. It's almost like you are looking to say "see I didn't help lynch a townie" If Sarcastro is the one you believe is scum and should be lynched, than build a case on him and stick with a suspect. I'm pretty sure you've had everyone in this game on your scum list at one time or another

[ryan]

Because it makes it real easy for you to say "well I was suspicious earlier but now I'm not so sure" That's why I don't like flip flopping and vote changing near deadlines. If you are confident of somebody than you vote them, if you aren't, than you keep yourself with an unvote. I don't think anyone in this game is going to say you aren't participating if you don't have a vote on somebody. Sarcastro has pretty much stated that he's gonna play the way he wants to play and too bad for us who don't like it. Plus the last few posts it felt like he was behind on the game and wasn't sure who to vote (since his Jordan lynch ended up wrong)

[ryan]

Xdaamno: Uber-Lurker. If we're going to lynch somebody for pure lurking today, it should definitely be him. His vote on Jordan right at the end of yesterday was his only vote of the day. I'd like to at least see him sweat, and might even be willing to go to the lengths of building a case on him.

Yeah, I'm watching the thread. It's hard for me to get into these kind of arguments with 19 players. Despite what I said yesterday, I'm getting a few tells of Erg0, so IGMEOY.

It's a hypocritical, but I'd actually try avoiding lynching those who post a lot at this point. I feel like you guys are ripping each other apart, because I'm getting town tells from a few of you.

I'll try to post more from now on.

Do you believe the scum are lurking than?

[ryan]

Hmm. Who started this ridiculous exaggeration of my lurking? It's not like I can be on this board 24/7 like you guys

I think the problem is that we have quite a few people in this game who pop on with a quick comment and than when asked to clarify they don't. You haven't been as active as others in this game and people who don't post content/opinions can be looked upon as somebody who's just along for the ride and will vote wherever the popular bandwagon is at the time. Maybe a couple of suspects and why would be a good idea.

[ryan]

Vote Sarcastro

Since his "Jordanscum" wagon turned up town I'm interested in who he feels are scum currently. Plus he said he'd be more helpful as the days continued and I haven't seen it yet.

[ryan]

Hi guys.

Welcome to the game...........good luck with the read

[ryan]

[quote="Guardian"]Numenorean, he's scum. He needs to die.

Why lol?[/

quote]

Because you've stated this about pretty much everyone in this game, it becomes comical after awhile.

[ryan]

Okay... But he's scum. lynch plz.

I'd rather lynch you on principal for making irritating comments like these.

Or jumping from wagon to wagon AND than jumping off near deadline.

[ryan]

You are asking to be lynched YET you claim to be town? You want to be done with the game YET the cases on you are horrific cause you are town? Am I getting this all correct?

[ryan]

I'm sorry Fonz, how about your lurking and lack of participation, should we look more into that possibly?

[ryan]

You've targeted one player this entire game Fonz, you can't honestly say you've been scum hunting. Instead of just putting up numbers to make yourself look good why don't you give us a list of your scum in the game and present a case.

Mod edit
Votecount:

Erg0 (4): Zindaras, Numenorean7, NabakovNabakov, Ether
ryan (1): The Fonz
Sarcastro (1): ryan
pickemgenius (1): Guardian
Guardian (1): Sacred

Not voting (6): Xdaamno, YogurtBandit, Jalyn, pickemgenius, Erg0, Sarcastro.

With 14 alive it's 8 to lynch.

[ryan]

And when I come up town Fonz, than what? Than where do you focus your attention to? Ah yes, NOBODY because you haven't had a list of suspects in this entire game. Just one that you've badgered the entire time.

[ryan]

I don't believe for a second you

will

come up town, hence the question is moot. I simply cannot reconcile your behaviour to this point to pro-town motives.

You still didn't answer my question. When I come up town WHO will you lead your war on next? I'm sorry but leading a charge on one person this entire game can't be looked upon as pro town either buddy.