Xyl's Relative Chaos - Game over!

[Korts]

/confirm

unvote, vote: The Internet

There's too much filth on you.

[Korts]

Note to town: I have a vague idea that this initial votecount has more relevance than just a starting point. It may outline connections or other information. As of now, I'm copying its current state into my notes, because if it contains any relevant information, Xyl is bound to change it eventually.

[Korts]

Note to town: I have a vague idea that this initial votecount has more relevance than just a starting point. It may outline connections or other information. As of now, I'm copying its current state into my notes, because if it contains any relevant information, Xyl is bound to change it eventually.

Can you explain why you think that?

Mostly because otherwise I don't see what purpose it could serve. The only other thing that I could think of was to pre-empt a random voting stage, but since players are not responsible for votes that have been cast for them, there would be nothing to follow up on.

unvote, vote: tubby

Blatant rolefishing.

[Korts]

@ korts i wasn't role fishing i was stating a theory,

Purely by stating the theory you were rolefishing.

i would think it has something to do with power roles that those that have them have the most votes to intice them to be more active but thats just pure speculation

No.

Shut up.

[Korts]

EBWOP: to clarify. I don't want

any

speculation about what the importance of the initial vote count is, not so early in the game, because at this point, it serves scum more than town by far.

[Korts]

@CC09, are you going to do something constructive with that vote?

[Korts]

@Vi, I meant don't comment on that, proving or disproving that theory both hurts the town.

@CC09, are you going to do something constructive with that vote?

meaning? I don't see the need to have it on anybody at the moment.

Explain why it is in the town's interests not to have your vote out somewhere.

[Korts]

Theres no reason because its pretty much the random voting stage, and I was going to Random vote Zazier (he knows why) but then I realised he already had 3 votes from the beginning and didnt want someone halfway to lynch on page 2.

What's wrong with being halfway to a lynch "on page 2" or otherwise? Does it halfway get them killed? Do you oppose bandwagons, and if so, what do you have against them?

It's the biggest deal as of now, CC09... serious or not.

[Korts]

My beef with not voting is that you essentially have few other options for reaching serious discussion than using your vote. If you don't vote, you're essentially not playing.

And I pick on you especially because I only saw you unvoting and not revoting. If you're aware of someone else withholding their votes, please point them out so I can have a go at them as well.

[Korts]

Also, you haven't answered my questions.

[Korts]

Hah. Thanks

SSK, tubby, why aren't you voting, and do you have any intention of putting your respective votes to use anytime soon?

I'm even more comfortable with

my

vote on tubby.

[Korts]

SpyreX gets me. On both issues.

@Crazy, I thought about that, yeah, but it

may

have some relevance later on, in which case it definitely doesn't hurt to be stored away in my notes. I also propose, because you don't or shouldn't trust me, that others do the same.

[Korts]

Wow. Missed tubby's post. The fact that I was ambiguous is important. Any specific speculation other than

in your head

is bad for the town right now. I just made a note to town that it may have some relevance later, but otherwise I don't want us to concentrate on it

as of now

.

Also, I like how you turn to Appeal to Emotion right after the second vote on you.

[Korts]

tubby, no-one, I think, wants to lynch you at the moment. You are my top suspect, but I wouldn't be comfortable going through with a lynch for lots of good reasons. But Appeal to Emotion ("but hey if i have to get lynched to tell the town who the true scum are") is

never

a good route to take. WE don't know you're town, and you won't go very far in convincing us if you just state it over and over, wailing that we'll be sorry.

[Korts]

You did correct, Zazie. I got the same: "fuck I got a PR some1 hates me"

[Korts]

And I don't believe Appeal to Emotion or "getting worked up over a vote" is a scum-tell either. I mean, none of you have ever seen a worked up newbie before?

Dicouraging use of a common scum tactic by pressuring or even lynching is, in my opinion, entirely valid. And the particular setup speculation on tubby's part served scum motives, since it could easily have outed power roles by them either confirming or denying the theory's validity.

What else are you going to discount as newbtell or anti-town, not scummy? You're making an awfully big show of defending tubby, any reason?

[Korts]

tubby turning on Crazy seems like distancing, to be honest. It was too quick and without consideration, although he does throw in the idea of Crazy-scum leading a witchhunt against SpyreX/me in the event of tubby-town being lynched. Thing is, newbie scum don't always know measure, in my limited experience with them. They might start bussing too hard, too early, or buddying up too obviously. For now, I believe tubby's distancing, because he believes himself to be dangerously close to lynching as opposed to slightly closer than others.

[Korts]

Unvote farside22, vote Tubby216

I really don't like that last post of yours, that combined with is enough to put the vote for me

Care to elaborate?

For that matter, what are

your

thoughts?

[Korts]

Vi, after Nat being called out on morse code, I'm not sure Xyl would allow this. It's worth a try, though. Did you PM the mod about it, or does "querying legality" mean something else?

[Korts]

(It's not like morse code can't be looked up on the net, though)

Ok, I get you. PMing the mod, for safety.

[Korts]

What?

DC, Vi had stated when he started talking in the fake PR that it was a fake PR. Here, I'll quote.

Redetermining false post restrictions... ready... go--
<rest of the post>

He's just being silly.

[Korts]

Ok, as far as I understood, Xyl doesn't

endorse

any codes for the PR, but he didn't explicitly state that it is against his rules, either, so I guess it's okay to go ahead with it.

[Korts]

If you mean Rule 10, it only says to check with the mod first.

[Korts]

*tick, tick BOOM!*

Che?

[Korts]

Raise your hands if you think tubby is the lynch today.

[Korts]

Wait for it.

[Korts]

I don't really like DGB going after vaguely, but not especially anti-town tells when tubby's actions and the others' reactions actually may show something. This looks like fake scumhunting. What exactly are you expecting to devulge from the reaction to your vote, DGB? Or what purpose otherwise does it serve?

Also, hi, hascow!

[Korts]

Ok, that's just an excuse for a vote. It was obvious from the word go that it was faked, therefore I don't see the harm in it.

[Korts]

Ok, let's make this clear. I honestly don't think tubby is up for a lynch as of yet. His actions can be explained away with a simple explanation that he didn't realize he was rolefishing, and when pressured, it is simply a newbtell to resort to Appeal to Emotion.

I wanted to see how many people would follow in my wake if I pressured tubby for it. I'm looking at SpyreX right now, pretty hard, especially after he professed to being comfortable lynching tubby after page 5 and two valid but far from solid tells dropped.

unvote, vote: SpyreX

[Korts]

EBWOP: didn't read tubby's post.

That was his initial post about the pre vote count thingy, since he brought it up I figured it was ok to post what I thought it all meant. Plus he doesn't even take any heat for it,, i mean no one calls him on it thill way later

Thing is, though, I wasn't rolefishing (although I don't actually believe you were intending to). Your theory was attackable, while mine was simply that the first vote count may be of some importance, and it is important that I didn't speak or want us to speak about specifics.

Then there is this response to my thoughts on crazy, I posted this and voted for crazy cause I honestly it was the only other case I could see to make,,

I agree, to an extent, that you didn't have much choice other than to either "OMGUS" or take a jab at those protecting you. Nonetheless, the context of the vote was, again, attackable.

I honestly believe it could be korts leading the lynch for me is scummy, why,
Because either way its win win for him,

If I flip scum he wins because he led the charge to get scum lynched

If I flip town he wins because my actions were to newbish and too scummy therefore I need to be taught a lesson which he stated here

I do hold that my pushing your case was entirely valid and based on pretty solid evidence for the amount of information so far; I don't exactly like how you paint it like I would only have motivation as scum to push for your lynch.

Also in this post he is also polarizing the town, those for my lynch and those opposed

That was exactly my intent, to get someone to state that they actually feel good about your

lynch

based on this evidence, and not just your wagon, because it wouldn't be sensible to lynch on this case, at this stage of the game.

Don't get all worked up, you just need to get ahold of yourself.

[Korts]

Post 27 - Korts: unvoting isn't constructive?

Not nearly as much early in the game as, say, voting. But let's not waste more words on this, this belongs to the MD forum at best.

Post 35 - Korts: False about the vote thing, actually.

Probably, yes. But I didn't see CC09 trying much to find alternative routes to discussion.

[Korts]

Post 159 - Korts: No, we can totally talk about it here, since we can't talk about it out of game. Why push this conversation to the side when it could have bearing on the game?

Okay, let's talk about it, then. Unvoting in the early game, especially from a vote you did not make of your own accord and therefore aren't responsible for it, does not promote discussion other than perhaps being called out for it. It doesn't really evoke reactions, because it isn't something that affects someone negatively (as in the case of a vote, where someone gets a vote closer to a lynch). Do you think unvoting without revoting is constructive? If so, how?

[Korts]

EBWOP: meant to paste this at top of last post.

Post 144 - Korts: ALERT! ALERT! PAGE ARGUMENT SIGHTED!

As much as I myself don't like the page number senselessly waved in my face when trying to scumhunt, I think when people are committing to a

lynch

, the state of the game should also be factored in. And the state of the game, as in the amount of information for Day 1, can best be measured by page numbers.

[Korts]

It's just, what is there to analyse?

I think there has been plenty of actions that are worthy of a closer look.

Since nobody died as of now, we don't know the possible motives around anything that has happened. So any analysis made at this point would have to be revised later.

And what's wrong with revising the analysis with new information gained? There is no point in an analysis if you're only willing to make it when there's been mod-confirmed information revealed. You might as well just ask the mod to post the setup and role PM distributions.

[Korts]

Well, you know your own. Guess the rest.

[Korts]

A bad newb move that the only recourse is negative for the town is a bad newb scum move still.

I seriously did. Not a newb tell this time.

That wasn't directed at you.

A bad newb move that the only recourse is negative for the town is a bad newb scum move still.

Okay, then please clarify how tubby only had motivation as scum to do what he did.

[Korts]

I know you explained how there's scum motivation before. My point is, there's also motivation for town, especially newb town, considering the town doesn't have any information to start with, and newb townies in particular tend to grab at every piece of information they can get.

In addition, given tubby's claim of never playing so seriously before, I'm having doubts as to whether he'd think such a scum gambit through in his first post.

[Korts]

(big surprise)


---


DGB, what were you hoping to achieve with that question exactly?

[Korts]

I feel ignored .
I posted some stuff in my previous post and there are many who just ignore it.

Let's see what we can do

Korts, do you have anything to prove that spyrex is scum, or is it only him willing to lynch Tubby already?

My only proof is that he considered himself confident enough in tubby's guilt, even though discussion hadn't been about any other player, to lynch him. Although I do give him slight town points for not OMGUSing me when I turned on him.

Why did you change from attacking Tubby to understanding tubby?

Because I didn't really believe in the wagon to start with. I jumped on a newbie making a fairly obvious mistake and tried to push it as hard as I could to see who would follow in my wake.

---

Dear The Internet

Kindly post some content ASAP

With love(?) the fair town of Xyl's Relative Chaos

RSVP

(PS. posting to say you're here isn't content)

[Korts]

I'm having some problem with these quotes. DGB asked this after Tubby's response, the only response between the posts of DGB. Then Tubby asked about who DGB was talking. He should have known that it was about him and someone else. If he was a townie, he wouldn't have to ask what I have quoted as he isn't a buddy with anyone at all as townie.

If he had said "no, of course not", it would've been strange because there's no implication who DGB meant. I don't think that's a very good point at all.

[Korts]

Are you two buddies? You can tell me the truth.

DGB, what were you hoping to achieve with that question exactly?

[Korts]

DGB, what were you hoping to achieve with that question exactly?

It's psychological. Please do not interrupt the experts.[/quote]

Ok, so what did you deduce from the reply?

[Korts]

Oh, wow, now that you've changed sides I agree with everything you say. This is insane.

Your point, other than being sarcastic?

I see you've recently died, Vi

[Korts]

What do you think of the new avatar?

Pretty nice. What's it from?

i lolled so hard when i read this...so let's get this straight you were pressuring tubby for reactions? i usually only see scum do this type of thing in which they afterwards say they did it "for reactions". looking for reactions can pretty much be an excuse for anything. ex- me:hey i'm scum vote: me.
player 2: omg he's scum vote: him
me: HA ONLY SCUM WOULD JOIN THAT WAGON SINCE THEY KNOW IM REALLY TOWN I WAS LOOKING FOR REACTIONS VOTE: YOU!!
i'm unsure about Korts atm. due to a previous game i was in with him i saw him attempt some stupid gambits then too as town, so i'll have to think about this one.

Let's clear this. It's scummy when you dismiss a

scummy

action as having fished for reactions. I don't see how simply pushing a fairly valid wagon is in and of itself a scummy action, therefore I don't see how I could've benefited from stating that I was fishing for reactions unless, oh yeah, I was fishing for reactions.

This post is a quckie, expect something later in the day.

[Korts]

So you say that suggesting a theory that, both if confirmed or denied, hurts the town, cannot be percieved as intentional or unintentional rolefishing?

[Korts]

especially since korts was the one to bring up the subject in the first place! korts, what did you think you would achieve by bringing up the weird VC if you didn't want any further discussion of it

I'd brought it up because it had just occured to me that it might have some relevance. I didn't think my post through, much like tubby; but his phrasing and the fact that he suggested a theory that, if commented on in any way by others, might easily out power roles, was something that I could easily attack.

It's the biggest deal as of now, CC09... serious or not.

really? this is stretching it, to me.

I didn't like how he was avoiding my request to put his vote somewhere or adequately justify not voting. And "not having any suspicions" does not justify, especially early in the game, his vote staying away from any player, because without voting, it's hard to acquire suspicions. And I didn't see Coheed trying to stimulate discussion in any other way, either.

not true at all. if you don't vote at all in the game, then yes that's bad. but i'm sure CC planned on voting at some point in day 1.

I'm sure he was. My beef was with his unvote without anything else (while discussion had already begun), which implied lurking until that specific point in day 1.

[Korts]

So you say that suggesting a theory that, both if confirmed or denied, hurts the town, cannot be percieved as intentional or unintentional rolefishing?

it could be by some

, but i didn't think it was and i felt those who did think it was were trying to push a crap case

And there you have your point disproved

[Korts]

This game needs a kick in the ass.

[Korts]

My vote's willing to go that way. I didn't really find his reluctance to vote especially helpful, particularly because he didn't try to do anything else, either.

[Korts]

Which one was that?

[Korts]

Which one was that?

[Korts]

Damn. sorry. Glitch in the matrix.

[Korts]

dahill, I didn't find CC's opportunistic vote (although admittedly I just skimmed). Where was that?

[Korts]

Hmm. I see what you mean. I support a CC lynch.

unvote, vote: Coheed

[Korts]

You want me to join you on the MafiaSSK wagon?

Or am I Suspect no. 2 after MafiaSSK?

[Korts]

I see no point in a vote that just sits there, without support. "Every vote counts" but one vote does not make a lynch. I've made my case and unfortunately I don't have any more points, therefore pursuing other suspicions seems like the best way to keep contributing.

[Korts]

Fair enough

Will make my case on SpyreX clear again tomorrow.

[Korts]

Huh. Actually when I consider it now, my case on SpyreX is void because it all was based upon him being opportunistic. Not backing off tubby's case when I turned on him makes my whole case null.

I will do a reread tomorrow most likely, and post any thoughts.

[Korts]

I think I would, yeah. Did you expect any other answer than that after my conclusion?

[Korts]

Um, that's my point exactly. SpyreX not backing off the case proves his conviction in it, and is therefore not a scumtell.

[Korts]

I owe this game some attention and a big post. Unfortunately I also owe the chemistry department the minutes of some experiment for tomorrow. The weekend, I promise, will go towards catching up with this game among others.

[Korts]

Hi all. I took the day off to catch up on sleep. Just letting you know I didn't forget about you.

I abstain from posting untill farside rereads.

Whoa. and since when have you been contributing more than farside?

[Korts]

First, answers to farside. Then, a reread in a seperate post. Reread may come a bit later today, because I'm going home by train in ca. three hours and have multiple games to catch up on.

Korts: Post 9 what do you mean too much filth comment?

I meant it as a pun on The Internet's name, because of the huge amount of porn and such online. Why do you feel my comment was any more than random?

Korts: Post 13 why point this out?

I didn't really think it through, actually. I was making a mental note, but then it occured to me that it would be better to share with the town.

Korts: Post 19 how is that role fishing?
Korts: Post 22. I don't see it.

I could be taken as rolefishing because tubby's raised theory basically asked for confirmation or denial, both of which would've outed power roles. But I'm pretty convinced that that wasn't intentional on tubby's behalf.

Korts: Post 23 then why bring it up in the first place?

Again, I didn't realize that it would promote speculation, which was dumb of me. I brought it up because it could be important later on.

Korts: post 144: Why SpreX and not Doomcow?

Because of SpyreX's post 119. DoomCow didn't profess undying loyalty to the tubby wagon.

Korts: post 273: Not in this case

Why do you deny the likely possibility that any reply to tubby's theory would've outed power roles easily?

Korts post: 303: Why just skimming?

RL pressure. Don't have much time to be thorough...

Korts: post 310: That's because your case on SpryX was weak.

Wasn't weak when I made it; there just weren't any more points to back it up. And I acknowledged that when I went over it again.

A bad newb move that the only recourse is negative for the town is a bad newb scum move still.

I seriously did. Not a newb tell this time.

Looks like Tubby's the main suspcious person. Will get working on a PBPA of him.

? If it has to do with gut, just quote this post.

Unfortunately that's how MafiaSSK operates every game he's in. He can only scumhunt in PBPA's and will only do PBPA's on the most suspected players. This is regardless of alignment. I can provide links if you want... (seriously though, SSK, don't you feel guilty that you don't contribute?)

[Korts]

I certainly don't like invented PR's, even if they're claimed to be false at forehand. Therefore I'm getting a bit suspicious about Animrpherv1 and Vi (especially the first fake PR he used, the one that wasn't anounced as fake at forehand).

I'm gonna be needing a reread soon, but I'm not sure when I get the time to do a full read. I'm still up with the game as it goes though..

I don't understand why this is an issue. There are other things that have happened, and the PR issue is ambiguous at best anyway.

DC's post 151 is much better.

Post 94 - morph: You're adding a fake PR too? ridiculous.

What can I say? I felt like it.

animorpherv is lurking in plain sight again.

Anyone believe that Korts really

was

making a case against tubby just to gauge reactions? I don't. Saying "Nevermind about all that stuff I was doing; I didn't really mean it" is a scum-tell in my book.

Anyone else have thoughts on this?

Vote: Korts

This whole post relies on the fact that me originally pushing the tubby case was scummy. Since it was entirely valid factually, I don't see why the switch could've been done in order to show myself in better light. I've already said this, haven't I?

I don't believe faking post restrictions is a null tell. At all.

DGB coming in to say a vague statement about a minor issue implies that she's lurking in plain sight.

Korts - I find myself agreeing with you about tubby being the most serious thing to talk about early on. I also agree that votes/lynches are good ways to discourage scumplay. However, by Korts 80 it sounded like he had made the jump to tubby being scum and extending it to Crazy being a scumpartner, which I don't agree with.

I think I'll err on the side of caution on this one and not vote Korts this time. But my (weak and usually incorrect) intuition is telling me I'm making a bad move on this one...

Hardcore fence-sitting, if you don't mind me saying so...

farside - I'm not sure about this one. On one hand, it IS jumping on an easy bandwagon; on the other hand, she has defended her point a couple of times. I don't think I have enough information to move on here.

Hardcore fence-sitting, if you don't mind me saying so...

Also in the same post of Vi's, he makes a jab against SpyreX on weak basis (doesn't acknowledge the possible downsides to tubby's theory).

farside, see SpyreX's post 173 to see how tubby's initial theory could validly be taken as rolefishing.

Post 149 - DoomCow: Wow, what a wonderful noncommital post.

I still need to reread, had some busy days but will eventually get to it though. As for that post, I clearly state my suspicions towards Vi and Animorpherv1.

Post 151 - DoomCow: Why do you think he's the option?

Because of that scummy looking post he made about Crazy.

DoomCow: Hasn't posted any analysis. Just information. I(and tarhalindur) find that scummy. High scumminess.

Wow! no analysis on day 1. Imagine that. It's just, what is there to analyse? Since nobody died as of now, we don't know the possible motives around anything that has happened. So any analysis made at this point would have to be revised later.

Admittedly he says he needs to reread, but I severely disagree with the analysis point. The stance he takes is so counterproductive to town win conditions that it's slightly scummy. More anti-town than scummy, though. The reasoning for the tubby vote is very vague, however, and seems like he doesn't want to properly justify it because he can't and was, in reality, trying to inconspiciously bandwagon.

Post 149 - DoomCow: Wow, what a wonderful noncommital post.

I still need to reread, had some busy days but will eventually get to it though. As for that post, I clearly state my suspicions towards Vi and Animorpherv1.

unvote vote: DoomCow

. Your a great suspect, the fake PR's are what we want to do. We've already talked abou tit. It's ocer. Stop brininging ti up. I ahve a new PR, bulit just for you.

*DoomCow sucks*

Happy?

I dislike how the most animorpherv can come up with in the way of contribution is a vote rooted in the vote on him (a.k.a. OMGUS), and the reasoning is based on an entirely minor issue. The vote here is weak, and the contribution to the whole of discussion virtually nil.

But I was annoyed at the fact he wanted to vote us both because of personal preference. If you can't take personal prefernce, then you have a problem.

Could you explain this a bit better? I don't understand what you're trying to say here.

Seconded, I dont understand either.

CC's contribution levels are on par with animo's pretty much.

A bad newb move that the only recourse is negative for the town is a bad newb scum move still.

What bugs me is that SpyreX refuses to acknowledge the possibility of tubby not understanding the consequences of his proposed theory. This does imply that SpyreX wants an easy lynch.

Tubby: I don't like him following first Korts (post 18), the Crazy (post 47) and then Farside (76). I also don't like post 76 at all, it's the reason I voted him in the first place. After that not much that made him more or less scummy.

Again, he only vaguely indicates post 76 as a reason for his vote, but doesn't clarify what about that post is scummy.

Post 214 by DGB I approve of. Proper fishing for reactions and stirring up shit. Post 216 by the same author is a little bit off, though, I don't know what DGB was hoping to achieve with a direct question about alignment.

animo, however, is still lurking in plain sight. Case in point:

Thoughts ATM:

Korts & Tubby thing: have no clue if their just angry, or Korts has a good idea behind it.

Yes, it would be nice to see more people post!

Because tubby still hasn't explained his "play" to where I think its anything but bad news.

What kind of explanation are you expecting, exactly, other than the one that you already got?

Post 258 by animo is also bad.

With that, I'm up to dahill's analysis. Gotta go and work on catching up with another game now. Will return to this tonight.

PS.
----------

Dear Coheed and animo

Kindly post actual suspicions and proper arguments

Make it snappy, too

With love, your dearest Korts, on behalf of Xyl's town

RSVP

----------

[Korts]

I'm not sure what you're talking about re: "tubby's theory".

I mean this:

Note to town: I have a vague idea that this initial votecount has more relevance than just a starting point. It may outline connections or other information. As of now, I'm copying its current state into my notes, because if it contains any relevant information, Xyl is bound to change it eventually.

Can you explain why you think that?

i would think it has something to do with power roles that those that have them have the most votes to intice them to be more active but thats just pure speculation

unvote

sorry diddn't realize i had a vote out there

[Korts]

EBWOP:

Is it okay for me to not know where to go with some people at any given time?

Yeah, sure. Is it okay for me to point out potential scum behaviour?

[Korts]

How about, I stop the PBPA and actually just contribute more. Would that work?

Absolutely. You should try it.

[Korts]

The claim doesn't change the fact that CC hasn't been contributing. I don't see how him not knowing his win condition should stop him from analysing the other players' actions, he'd have nothing to lose by doing that. As far as he allegedly knows, he doesn't have any allegiances other than to the town by default, therefore his lack of scumhunting is still scummy.

I also think DGB's change of heart after the claim and her vote on DoomCow without comment is somewhat suspicious.

[Korts]

I also think DGB's change of heart after the claim and her vote on DoomCow without comment is somewhat suspicious.

Only if you forget that I mentioned my agreement with the case against DoomCow earlier.

Where, when? Because a quick search of your posts in isolation yielded no results.

[Korts]

unvote, vote: DGB

[Korts]

DoomCow for not adding any content.

Maybe I'm not so senile. I believe that's the post I agreed with, my agreement coming in the form of a vote immediately following.

You didn't either quote or mention in any way that post or any other suspicion of DoomCow. If I'm remembering correctly, the whole of your post was the vote.

Are you bussing and trying to tie me to your buddy? Don't worry. You can be honest with me.

[Korts]

Meanwhile, I do endorse other people realizing DGB's slip.

[Korts]

I must be retarded. I am missing it entirely.

DGB alluded to previous agreement with the DC case, but having gone back through her posts, no such support is expressed. When this is pointed out, she promptly unvotes, instead of keeping the vote on DC and saying that she probably forgot to agree with the case expicitly. To top that, she tries to tie me to DC when I vote her for the 180 stunt.

On the DC case, I really don't like how he's expressed that his vote was for claimage only, and not for lynching. That smells much like rolefishing to me.

I'd also gladly lynch a claimed third party. But I still don't understand how DGB's tell was ignored by everyone else.

[Korts]

mod: condsider me pseudo-V/LA until next Friday. I got some exams and experiments and such.

I'm willing to vote DC pending a claim.

[Korts]

Ok, that's L-1 now. I suggest that MafiaSSK shouldn't revote until a claim.

[Korts]

Gah, that's what I meant...

[Korts]

unvote, vote: DoomCow

You can claim now.

[Korts]

Very well, I will claim, but just to tell, Korts voted me for the exact same reason I got bandwagonned, he just wants a claim. And I'm sure he's not the only one doing so voting for me.

Wrong. I also was comfortable lynching you, while you stated that you weren't comfortable with a CC lynch. Voting CC to a claim while you don't want him lynched is scummy, and I don't see why you're trying to turn this on me.

Considering your claim, however. It can be confirmed. Do you have a kill? (yes I know this is rolefishing technically.) If you do have a kill, you should shoot tonight, and shoot the person that the town chooses.

also, animorph stop rolefishing it's pretty obv what some of the abilities are

I don't see how that's the case. The abilities of Jacks of All Trades can vary depending on mod/setup/whatever. But I do agree with you; it should not be said what each and every ability is.

Also, I still don't feel animo's contribution levels being adequate. His comments are basically about minor matters almost each and every time, exception is his latest about what exactly DC's abilities are (massive rolefish by the way, kudos to dahill).

unvote, vote: animorpherv

[Korts]

Wait, nevermind the claim of kill or no kill. If you do, shoot. If you don't, there's plenty of chances for you to trip up.

[Korts]

Considering your claim, however. It can be confirmed. Do you have a kill? (yes I know this is rolefishing technically.) If you do have a kill, you should shoot tonight, and shoot the person that the town chooses.

DC shouldn't answer this, and even if he does we most certainly shouldn't guide him.

I know, I've reconsidered. See my very next post after that comment.

[Korts]

He doesn't give ANY information about his role. Considering my own I would eat my hat if his role is "Jack of all trades".

Consider this a counter-claim?

[Korts]

Considering your claim, however. It can be confirmed. Do you have a kill? (yes I know this is rolefishing technically.) If you do have a kill, you should shoot tonight, and shoot the person that the town chooses.

DC shouldn't answer this, and even if he does we most certainly shouldn't guide him.

I know, I've reconsidered. See my very next post after that comment.

Korts do you feel we should keep looking for scum or lynch a 3rd party right now?

Also FOS Korts for rolefishing.

Please stop.

Did I say I reconsidered before DC could reply? Also, I wasn't asking for a full description of the abilities, that wouldn't benefit town as much as it would scum. But a claimed kill could be confirmed or denied in theory.

Also, I feel that we shouldn't end the day just yet. I'm good for lynching CC if we don't have any better options, but a third party lynch is a compromise, basically.

[Korts]

It's possible to get something else, I'd think, thats why I asked, not to role fish, just to make sure.

unvote, vote: CC09

beacuse he's 3rd p[arty. I'd rather see a scum lynch, but 3rd party is good enough.

What'd I tell you, farside? See this post for scum.

[Korts]

A couple days more of discussion shouldn't hurt, in my irrelevant opinion. Here's my proposition. if the town doesn't find a better wagon in 48 hours, I will hammer.

[Korts]

No its not a counter claim - its saying that it doesn't match any of the flavor we've been given and I think there's a reason for that.

SpreX is correct. Man I need to read more. DC needs to explain more.

So I went back and reread my own Role PM. If any other player's PM is like mine, and judging from reactions, SpyreX and farside at least do have similar PMs, then DC is bullshitting. See, I was on the verge of hammering CC a moment ago. Now, the DC wagon is getting back on track. How cool is that, that waiting has its benefits, farside?

unvote, vote: DoomCow

[Korts]

dahill stop trying to derail your scumbuddy's wagon.

[Korts]

dahill stop trying to derail your scumbuddy's wagon.

seriously thats what i was thinkin

hi5!

[Korts]

why the quotation marks around "targets"?

[Korts]

why the quotation marks around "targets"?

indication of possible one shot abilities

So how will a protect or a block, or even an investigation on CC confirm DC's alignment/role?

[Korts]

But it's not even clear that DC has a one shot

kill

specifically. That's what I was rolefishing about, because the only way DC can be confirmed is to claim beforehand whether he has a kill. If he doesn't, he can't be confirmed, only by extreme circumstances.

[Korts]

Also, you ruined it by answering for him...

[Korts]

I'm not exactly liking your suggestion that DC may be a confused JOAT, SSK. It's almost like you want to get DC to use an ability that he doesn't think is appropriate i.e. waste it.

[Korts]

Again, I don't see how protect/investigate/block can be confirmed as actually happened, except in rare circumstances.

Happy scumday BTW.

[Korts]

farside: don't reveal the information. It may slip up other scum, too, if it slips up DC.

[Korts]

farside: don't reveal the information. It may slip up other scum, too, if it slips up DC.

ahhhh I might die tonight never revealing all I know.

I know it too, don't worry. If that's what you're talking about.

[Korts]

I am. Didn't you notice I was the other one pushing his wagon?

[Korts]

I'm willing to vote Zazie, especially seeing how she is denying a claim as of her latest post.

Also, cow, what do you mean by Nat getting his PR later in the game? My memory says that after the confirmation stage, he has posted only in quotes, periods and question marks.

[Korts]

I don't see how claiming isn't beneficial, Zazie. It stops a lynch if it's plausible.

And don't take it personally You're a cute girl with an unfortunate obsession, it's just that you've been apparently found guilty.

[Korts]

As in passively, or do you choose who to target?

Also, I'm talking about your mafia obsession obv. Playing a lot means you'll eventually be mafia. And lo! and behold! it happened, no?

[Korts]

I didn't read the rules, please mock me.

[Korts]

good job, DGB. I didn't seriously consider you until your last day flailings. Good job to Nat, too, although your play was a little... unorthodox. Twice now I've seen faked PRs out of maybe three times, next time I'll lynch/vidge on sight.

farside, tell me though. What was it you saw in DoomCow's claim that set you off? I assumed from my own role PM that the rolenames ("mayor's wife") are more flavorful than simply the standard name. But considering your own role, that couldn't have been what you saw.

[Korts]

Vi, faked PRs aren't a modkillable offense. They're just a risky and stupid gambit.

[Korts]

Please don't use codes to evade post restrictions.

Xyl, why did you post this?

[Korts]

Please don't use codes to evade post restrictions.

Xyl, why did you post this?

Although I can see the point of neither confirming nor denying the existence (and not calling Nat out would maybe have denied the PR's validity), why not just assume that Nat is faking a morse PR instead of a period/question mark only PR?

[Korts]

Sorry about that, gray screen-o'-death