Open 103 (Even/Odd C9): Schoolyard Vengence! Over before 712

[Stef]

Vote Stef

! I am having a horrible hair day.

[Stef]

HE! goddammit

[Stef]

ZazieR meant that she is the last in alphabetical order.. not zachattack. That's what i think she meant anyway.

[Stef]

Unvote vote -TinVision-

Your avatar looks weird.

[Stef]

nope.. shaved it all off.

[Stef]

I unvoted. I'm at L-2. 3 people weren't going to jump in and hammer me before i could unvote. Be serious.

[Stef]

I self-voted bcoz "Raundome Staige" basically.

[Stef]

Unvote, Vote Atlas

for not being voted.

[Stef]

What what?

[Stef]

I never self-voted before. That's why i've done it. As far as my third random vote.. ehm.. what exactly is it about them that bothers you?

[Stef]

unvote, Vote: ZazieR

Serious vote and end of random for me.

You raise red flags that have no rational reason whatsoever and put a lot of meaning in random stage events.

You ask for reasoning in random stage when such a reasoning is not required ( thus the "random" word in "random stage" ) nor necessarily present.

There's one thing to try to end the random stage but it's a whole other ball game to do it like you did. I don't like it.

[Stef]

You rush to make accusations based on randomness.

I've learned that the random stage has it's purpose and cutting it short only gives off less vibes and isn't that particularly helpful for the town.

You rely way too much on meta. Especially because most players who have less then a year under their belt keep changing their style, thoughts, beliefs, etc.

Did i say it's helpful to vote 3 times in the random stage? No. You seemed to think it was odd/suspicious for some reason. Why? Why would 1 one random vote be better than 10 random votes? How is it relevant if a player self-votes in the random stage? I want to see your reasoning before answering anymore of your questions.

[Stef]

Explain where I relied on meta.

I would love to point something out, but that game's still ongoing.

That draws attention to you. And now you got it.

Ok, i got your attention. So? How is that a tell for anything?

If I hadn't made this comment about your selfvote and the other random votes, what would you have done in your next post?

Probably i would have tried to get the users who haven't posted to post and watch for reactions from the other players. When all the players are active there is more to go on.

But if you're a townie, you want the best for town. So your action of 3 random votes should have been helpful. Besides, why do it if it's not helpful?

No they shouldn't have been helpful. It was the RVS. In the RVS the actions of players don't need to be helpful for the town even if the player is town. It shouldn't be anti-town, i agree, but you aren't accusing me of being anti-town. You are accusing me of not being helpful in the RVS which is bull. How can a town player help the town in RVS? Enlighten us please.

Take your last vote. Due to your unvote, you went from someone with two votes, to two players with each one vote. To me, two votes on one player is better than two players with each one vote.

Usually it would be but not if the player who has the two votes is in the game and posting and not doing anything suspicious yet while other players haven't posted in the thread and should do so. Not to mention that i do not see how it's better for a player on whom we have no tells either way to be at L-2 so early. Pressure is one thing but it doesn't work the same in a 7 player game.

And your selfvote. Give me one reason why a selfvote is good. Town doesn't gain anything from it. And I've seen scum use it as a pro-town gambit. So I'm extra weary due to that. But if you had a good reason for your selfvote, then tell and I won't bring it up in an attack.

It was the RVS. I don't need a reason since i didn't need to do anything good or bad for me or the town. Just having fun. As for you not bringing it up in an attack if i explain it.. why should i care about your attack as long as it has BS reasons?

And once again. How would your vote hopping have lead us out the RVS if nobody attacked you for it?

Where did i say that i wanted my vote hopping to lead us out of the RVS? Tisk tisk.

Besides, why vote me for attacking you, while TV also made a comment about it?

because he made a comment. He didn't make a case out of nothing and he didn't vote based on it since, as he stated, it's no reason for a vote. You, on the other hand, seem to think it is when it's clearly not.

This, in my opinion, happened after random voting was over. Cease and desist!

Why was the random stage over?

And man, his almost OMGUS vote against Zazier. Calling her out on raising irrational red flags and then does the same with his 'too-much-meta' argument?

How was my vote OMGUS? How did i do the same with that argument? You seem eager to jump on with ZazieR on very weak basis.
___________________

@ZazieR: I am not really defending myself because the case you made is too weak and that's also why i've voted you. Posting just to point the holes in your case since scum sometimes makes crappy cases against players if they can find anything out of the ordinary about them and try to push them towards a lynch and usually those cases have holes in them as does yours.


I'd also like everyone to post more and give their thoughts on the matter.

[Stef]

Only my attention?

you seem awfully picky on semantics. I know you to be able to understand what i meant.

Which is the reason why he is number two for me.

[irony]Great logic![/irony] So you think that people who don't share your line of thought are scummy?

How is it a tell? Why do it? That's my point. I don't trust it as it had no use at all.

O_o Your logic fails. It was the RVS. In that stage things don't have serious or individual use for that matter. If you don't trust that then it means you are paranoid and you should also suspect all the people for their votes in the RVS and ask for reasons for all of them

What would you have done to let the non-active players post?

What would i have done to let the non-active players post? O_o What the hell? How can i let or not let them post? That question fails on so many levels.

Why aren't you trying right now?

i voted for atlas because she hadn't posted. That's all i can do really besides asking her to give her thoughts on what's happening which i did. This question fails as well.

You got reactions. You addressed mine and Fhq. Why not -TV-? He attacked you as well. He gave you a FoS. So how come Fhq is jumping with me, but not -TV-?

I can't and won't build on 3 people at once. All in due time. I noted his reaction, don't worry.

Perhaps I'm not calling you anti-town, but doesn't suspicious apply for this as well ?

huh? Make an effort to write more understandable questions please. What "this"?

Uhm, no townie can help the town in the RVS, but they can help the town to get out of the RVS. And I don't think random voting the whole time will achieve this. And that's my point of you not being helpful.

Well.. as i stated earlier i don't think it's good for the RVS being cut short so that was not my intention. Random voting the whole time won't achieve this because i wasn't trying to end it. So your point of me not being helpful, as i said earlier, is crap and a logical fallacy if not also a misrep

In the RVS the actions of players don't need to be helpful for the town even if the player is town.

Oh really ?

Yeah, really. Can you comment something more articulated or is this how you react when you see your arguments are being dismantled?

I unvoted. I'm at L-2. 3 people weren't going to jump in and hammer me before i could unvote. Be serious.

Not to mention that i do not see how it's better for a player on whom we have no tells either way to be at L-2 so early.

So how is this different from the time you were at L-2?
And how is a random vote useful on a player who is probably not even checking this game?

What is the connection between the two situations? Yet again you make no sense. And about the vote against atlas, it is a common practice to vote for people who haven't posted. How would any other random vote be more helpful than that? O_o

I don't need a reason since i didn't need to do anything good or bad for me or the town.

I think you are able to find out what I mean. Otherwise, I'll bold it the next time.

Please bold it next time and be more explicit since some of the things you have said so far make no sense whatsoever

Where did i say that i wanted my vote hopping to lead us out of the RVS? Tisk tisk.

You didn't. I assumed it as I thought this was your way to get out of the RVS. Then what was your reason for changing your vote the whole time?

So you assume my intentions and make an argument based on your assumption of my intention behind my RVS actions? I already said that i didn't think it was time to end the RVS so it wasn't that and yet again you ask me for a reason concerning RVS voting. Logical fallacies all over the place

because he made a comment. He didn't make a case out of nothing and he didn't vote based on it since, as he stated, it's no reason for a vote. You, on the other hand, seem to think it is when it's clearly not.

FOS Stef for bouncing his vote around so much. It's still early yet, so it's not worth a vote.

You sure about that quote Stef?

What's there not to be sure about? I said he didn't make a case out of that which is true. I said he didn't vote based on it which is true. He stated it isn't reason enough for a vote which is true. What am i to be unsure about?

@ZazieR: I am not really defending myself because the case you made is too weak and that's also why i've voted you. Posting just to point the holes in your case since scum sometimes makes crappy cases against players if they can find anything out of the ordinary about them and try to push them towards a lynch and usually those cases have holes in them as does yours.

And your case against me is that I'm having a weak case against you. Now that's a strong case

No. My case against you is based on the fact that you use a lot of weak arguments and logical fallacies together with exaggerations and misreps to throw suspicion onto a player based on mostly nothing. That is something the town wouldn't do. That's something the scum would do to try and start a bandwagon. That's why i'm voting for you.

[Stef]

EBWOP What do you think of Fhq right now?

Waiting for him to answer.

[Stef]

Since my trip has been canceled i am back. If i have something i need to address i will do so today. This is a standard message posted in all my games..

[Stef]

Ok.. since me not answering seems to be holding the game off lately i'll make time today to post. Sorry. IRL > Mafia sometimes.

[Stef]

Ok.. doing this now. >.<

[Stef]

@Farside:

Stef post 38: Don't like this vote. Seems like someone buckling under pressure of questions. Also most people vote once during the random stage as a random vote not 3 times.

Your impression is your impression. I usually vote the people who make crap cases since i always think it's scummy and go from there. I don't care if most people only vote once during the random stage. If

most

people do something it doesn't matter than if i do it differently it's something scummy. It's just different. If you can prove it's something more, fine, please do but otherwise it's just another nulltell.

Stef post 40: How did Zazie cut the random stage short? Why is it so important in your view?

She overreacted to basically nothing. I always consider crap cases = scummy

fhg post 43: Wins!

Wins? So you agree with what he had to say completely?

stef post 45: So when is the random voting stage over in your opinion?

That's been a very discussed topic. I'd say it is over when a player does something

scummy

and some1 else calls him out on it

FOS: Stef

I get the impression you keep justifing your vote hopping as rvs. I disagree. Your vote on Zazie seems like a knee jerk reaction.

My first two votes were completely RVS, my third was a semi-serious vote since atlas hadn't posted and my fourth was the real thing. What's there to agree or disagree about? My vote on ZazieR was a "Warning! Crap alarm!" vote as i have gotten in the past.

[Stef]

@Zach:

I would like to know what purpose he thinks the random vote phase has and why we should keep it going longer than necessary.

the RVS has the purpose of practically starting the game obviously. People start posting random crap until some1 posts the first real scummy post and he gets called on it. There was nothing scummy yet to jump on. ZazieR jumped on .. nothing without having anything to go on. That's why i think she took us out of the RVS too quickly before we could observe any possible connections or enough possibly scummy things. You saying that we should keep it going longer than necessary is a misrep. I never said that.

I find it weird that he commented on fhq calling his vote OMGUS and asking about his vote hopping in post 43, but ignored tinny posting nearly exactly the same thing.

Ehm.. TV posted

"Not entirely at ease with Stef's jumping around but in this case he's pointed a finger where it ought to go."

How is this the same thing with what fhq said? It's like comparing a rabbit to a cow. Doesn't fit

[Stef]

@fhqwhgads:

fine, you voted because you thought the case weak, but it is OMGUS nonetheless

It's not simply fine, it's the reason i voted for her. Building crappy cases is a scumtell in my book and i will pursue it. Would have done it if it were against anyone in this game. If you like to call it OMGUS that's fine.

[Stef]

@ZazieR:

@Stef
You said it yourself:

Probably i would have tried to get the users who haven't posted to post

That's why I asked how you would get them to post. Especially when it's likely that a player isn't looking at this game. How would a vote get them to post when they aren't looking?

How would you know that they weren't looking? It's coincidence that Atlas got replaced. Anyway, even if selfvotes aren't a common practice, voting people who hadn't posted yet is. Why make a deal out of it? Making a deal out of things like this is what strikes me as scummy.

If I remembered correctly, you started attacking me as I voted you with reasons which you saw as stupid. After a few posts, you started attack FHQ as well. You thought that he wanted to jump with me. Then tell me, why FHQ over -TV-, while -TV- FoSed you for the reasons I voted you?

No reason. Fhq just stood out more than TV because he gave it even more credit than TV did. I did find TV's FoS a little off since it was hardly enough to warrant anything since vote hopping in the RVS is a nulltell. I said i noted it and when i state my cases it will be mentioned. I didn't ignore him/let it go.

You said that I didn't call your actions anti-town. You said this in one of your posts. But I've said that your actions were suspicious. That was my point with that question.

I don't think my actions were suspicious. This is becoming more and more a discussion over what is a tell and what is not so it's getting rather pointless

What could the RVS have done which could be helfpul for discussion later on?

Answered that already in the aforementioned posts so it makes no sense to answer it again.

I reacted like that as there was no other reaction possible. I've learned that everything you do should be helpful towards the town. Clearly, you didn't.

Well, i haven't been anti-town. You have imo when you cut the RVS short. Why i think cutting the RVS short is bad for the town i've already mentioned.

Not to mention that i do not see how it's better for a player on whom we have no tells either way to be at L-2 so early.

Then why did you keep your own vote on yourself for some time?

Didn't think it would make such a big fuss. Since the second vote on me was .. well.. mine and the first one was from the RVS i didn't consider it as posing too much of a threat since i could always unvote which i did. Would have unvoted the second things got serious anyway.

Normally a vote is put on a lurker to show that player that he has a vote. To make sure that he will post. It's kind of a threat. But what's the use of this when someone is probably not checking this game?

Again.. there was no way of knowing if she was checking the game or not. Did you know somehow? because unless you knew then your point is.. pointless. As i have said before, it's a common practice on the site to vote for people who hadn't voted yet. It's a null-tell.

The reason why I wanted to know why you changed your votes the whole time, is because i don't see it happen much. May I not be curious? But now, you give a reason to your random votes (the 'post more' reason). Then I start wondering why you just didn't say that.

Not all of my votes were an incentive to post. Where have i claimed such a thing?

[Stef]

I frankly don't know why but this game disappeared from my watched topic list. Going to catch up today.

[Stef]

Ok.. so

#88 - fhqwhgads, I'll name my suspect/suspects last since i always catch up first.
#89 - Farside: It was not an OMGUS vote as far as i'm concerned since for me making weak cases out of nothing and overreactions together are a pretty good scum-tell. If you will continue to call it an OMGUS vote it might be a different opinion or not. As far as my multiple RVS i still fail to see any possible hidden connotation. I am curious as to hear a better argument other than "it isn't done very often (which is debatable)" since i sincerely doubt that even if it were less often done it would be a tell either way.
#91 - ZazieR: Oh come on.. are you serious? You expected me to do a post check to see if she was paying attention when it was page two in this game? It wasn't important enough for me to check so i had no idea. You're exaggerating over the point with the Atlas vote.
Sometimes nothing big happens in RVS.. something could have happened in this one but you cut it short. You didn't investigate crap. You overblown nothingness to build a crap case. That didn't help the town with anything since cases based on nothing tend to dissipate and make the game run dry.
How do you want me to explain the reason for the bolded? O_o I was talking about the RVS and that was pretty clear. If i were talking about actually playing the game i would have understood your point but in this case.. jeez..
#92 - zachattack: That's my point. We're more likely to see connections and scummy things when we discuss something of substance. She took us out of the RVS with nothing of substance to go on making it very hard to spot any connections and scummy things and generally creating confusion.
#99 - fhqwhgads: If you guys agree that lynching me would be the best for the town then i won't fight it but unless you give me reasons for that action i will do my best to fight it.

[Stef]

Now.. about suspects:
#MafiaSSK: would be the first obvious one due to his simple nature although it is a very tricky subject since we can't actually afford policy lynches in a 7 player game considering we only got two lynches and if we mess them up.. well.. that's it. That's why we would have to lynch whom ever seems the scummiest or whom ever would give us the most info if dead.
He's a no-read at this point and hopefully he'll get replaced by a more.. interactive person.
#ZazieR because:
- She exaggerates to mislead the town
- Very tunnel-visioned
I know it isn't much but it's the most i've got on anyone at this point of the game.

Right now i'm not fine with lynching anyone but we'll have to decide on some1 eventually.

[Stef]

Is that a documented comment? O_o
You seem awfully picky. I think being tunnel-visioned is anti-town and can sometimes be scummy. I don't see why you consider it ok.

[Stef]

Welcome Kmd Nice to be playing with you again.

[Stef]

Well.. we'd still need to wait for him to answer.

[Stef]

Ehm.. deadline today O_o

Anyway.. i'm back from my vacation.. going to re-read and vote.

Unvote

till then