Mini 852- Crayola Catastrophe Game Over (Post 1158)

[Battousai]

Vote Count:

semioldguy (5) – ZazieR, SocioPath, Kirbyoshi, Pomegranate, Budja
Pomegranate (2) – Josh Lyman, semioldguy
GreenDude (1) – Snow_Bunny
SocioPath (1) – GreenDude
Josh Lyman (1) - Nachomamma8


Not voting (2): Manzcar, Chibosempai

With 12 alive, it takes 7 to lynch!

Searching for a replacement for Manzcar

[Josh Lyman]

@Josh

What I don't like about your semi-random vote is:
-It was based upon lurking, while the game had started that day.
-You were the 11th player to post. Only Kirby (The one you voted based upon 'lurking') came after you.

Okay, fine. Yes, it was based on lurking,

on the first day.

What is it about 'jokevote' that you don't get? And, yes, everybody else had posted; that's why I singled out Kirby

for not posting.

Can you say "overanalyzing?" I knew you could.

Once again, it's based upon the 'semi-' bit.

Well, whatever. I obviously can't stop you from perseverating over this, but I

can

stop responding to it. Therefore, this is my last post concerning my 'semi-random' vote.

[Josh Lyman]

@Josh Lyman- Haven't gotten much from him, except a breadcrumb. Not sure what to think.

It wasn't a breadcrumb.

As you can see, I don't have very many reads, but I'm doing this because I think it's important to contribute.

This triggers my scumdar. "It's important to contribute" is usually something scum says when they feel the pressure of not lurking and yet can't convincingly come up with anything concrete.

You are about the only person* pinging me right now. So,

Vote: Pomegranate

*Except

ZazieR

, but I need to stay far, far away from the crazy right now.

So, revisiting this.

Pomegranate

is still pinging me, for lack of specific, non-"gut" reads on anyone in particular. My vote stays, for the moment.

As far as

ZazieR,

as irritating as he can be, I'm not seeing much in the way of scuminess.

[ZazieR]

Hi, SoG

Hi. The answers are there pretty clearly if you look for them (though probably not in that same post). You seem a little over-concerned with this vote on you considering the attention you are giving it despite that it is the only one you've gotten.

You can still restate them and where you posted those reasons. Because as said, this vote is a hypocrite vote to me. You attacked Chamber for not explaining his vote and you're doing the same in the post with the second vote.

SoG

, why nothing against Post 36?

I thought I'd responded to this one in my last big post, but I guess I deleted that part accidentally. What it said was something like "Why would I? He didn't vote for a color being unreadable."

Which brings me to this again:

As for the last bit of that first quote, it's easy. It has to do with SocioPath's vote. Because his vote could also be defined as 'useless'. Yet, you didn't vote him. Why is the 'useless' vote regarding unreadable colour vote worthy, but not SocioPath's 'useless' vote towards your colour?

So please explain. Also, anything you want to say regarding Post 249?

Also, I've been a big fan of semioldguy's aggressiveness; let's not forget who brought us out of the RVS, shall we? I'm getting a pro-town read from him simply because he doesn't seem afraid to mention what looks scummy, nor does he seem to tunnel on anyone; when he sees something scummy, he questions it.

SoG

, your opinion of this quote please.

Looks good to me

Not to me.
-You do tunnel
-You state that you only point out the scummy things of your top 2 suspects.
Making the last two statements invalid.

This is a bad wagon right now.

We need to run up a counter wagon to get some responses

.

Unvote; Vote: Pomegranate

Elaborate on the bolded

[ZazieR]

@Josh

What I don't like about your semi-random vote is:
-It was based upon lurking, while the game had started that day.
-You were the 11th player to post. Only Kirby (The one you voted based upon 'lurking') came after you.

Okay, fine. Yes, it was based on lurking,

on the first day.

What is it about 'jokevote' that you don't get? And, yes, everybody else had posted; that's why I singled out Kirby

for not posting.

Can you say "overanalyzing?" I knew you could.

Once again, it's based upon the 'semi-' bit.

Well, whatever. I obviously can't stop you from perseverating over this, but I

can

stop responding to it. Therefore, this is my last post concerning my 'semi-random' vote.

Aaaawww, I <3 you too ^.^

[semioldguy]

Hi, SoG

Hi. The answers are there pretty clearly if you look for them (though probably not in that same post). You seem a little over-concerned with this vote on you considering the attention you are giving it despite that it is the only one you've gotten.

You can still restate them and where you posted those reasons. Because as said, this vote is a hypocrite vote to me. You attacked Chamber for not explaining his vote and you're doing the same in the post with the second vote.

Wrong. I did provide explanation for my vote, just not when I voted. Which you would also see is a point of view I hold from a previous post in his game where I defended the possible reasons to initially conceal the reason for a vote as long as the reason is eventually revealed. Mine has been; chamber was going on as if his never was going to be. This is a misrepresentation by you. You are reaaallly reaching ZazieR

SoG

, why nothing against Post 36?

I thought I'd responded to this one in my last big post, but I guess I deleted that part accidentally. What it said was something like "Why would I? He didn't vote for a color being unreadable."

Which brings me to this again:

As for the last bit of that first quote, it's easy. It has to do with SocioPath's vote. Because his vote could also be defined as 'useless'. Yet, you didn't vote him. Why is the 'useless' vote regarding unreadable colour vote worthy, but not SocioPath's 'useless' vote towards your colour?

So please explain. Also, anything you want to say regarding Post 249?

You are blatantly ignoring me. And in multiple places. It is noted.

Did I say that I would be voting for anyone who made a useless vote? No. I didn't say that. Why are you constantly drawing that conclusion despite multiple times me having said that it is not the case? This is more blatant misrepresentation from you. It is beyond ridiculous at this point. You haven't correctly characterized anything I've done this game.

[semioldguy]

This is a bad wagon right now.

We need to run up a counter wagon to get some responses

.

Unvote; Vote: Pomegranate

Elaborate on the bolded

No.

It is not always pro-town to come forward with reasoning first. I'll elaborate after it happens. If you disagree with something that doesn't come with a reason, you should post your reason for why you think it would be bad to do that.

HoS: ZazieR

[semioldguy]

I have reads on players and suspects other than you ZazieR, which (again) if you actually read my posts, you would be aware of. however, I know that you can't possibly be reading many of my posts because otherwise I wouldn't believe that you could get so many things wrong. This is scummy because scum have less motivation to read the whole thread, or if you have read the thread then you are lying in an effort to misrepresent me and create an easy mislynch. It makes sense to push the lynch of the player I find the most scummy. Just because it's you doesn't mean that I'm tunneling.

You are just as guilty of OMGUS as your predecessor by the way.

[Nachomamma8]

Hey, Nachomamma, that's one.

This is two.

Three more to go.

Care to make a more realistic case against me?

Sure.

You're being a wee bit overdefensive based on a single vote on you, and you're also assuming I'm making a case on you (in case you haven't gotten this yet, I'm not). I was simply voting to get you to give us more content.

Nacho, your "case" on Josh is pretty hypocritical. You're saying he hasn't posted, yet the only one who's posted less than you is Snow. Please, if you're going to vote for someone, make sure you're not committing the fault you accuse them of. Thank you.

Again, where have I been making a case? I just voted, and said the vote wouldn't move until I made five posts. I didn't make a case or accuse of a fault. It just seemed I hadn't seen him post in a while...

<snip>

That is a good point, I hadn't thought of that. However, it doesn't explain why semioldguy is still voting for Zazie and in fact pushing for his lynch for no good reason.

<snip>

Please elaborate on the part in which you say that that was the explanation you were looking for.

Why Josh and not somebody else?

SoG is going for my lynch.

I wanted an explanation for his action. An explanation is what I got.

Why Josh? I looked through and saw a minimal amount of content from Josh. Posts? Sure. Content? No.

And how do you know SoG is going for your lynch? You aren’t psychic, are you?

Dear SoG,

Can you please help me? When I thought I found the three scum in you, Pome and Manz, Nacho suddenly decided to act as a possible buddy of yours. Whom of the three is not your buddy?

Please respond asap

Zaz

You mind explaining why I'm acting as a scum buddy to SoG? Because I don't agree with a bandwagon that doesn't have a whole lot of thought put into it?

@SoG: Why are you voting for Pome when it seems like Zaz is your #1 suspect?

[semioldguy]

Because I suggested, and believe, that the town could benefit from a counterwagon against my own. Since it seems obvious to me that won't happen with ZazieR, I chose to vote Pomegranite, whom I am also suspicious of as suspect number two and wouldn't mind seeing run up and/or lynched.

[Nachomamma8]

Not to me.
-You do tunnel
-You state that you only point out the scummy things of your top 2 suspects.
Making the last two statements invalid.

Surely you're not serious. You have been focused on ONE suspect this entire game, and you're saying someone else is tunneling? Forgive me if I'm missing something here, but the only scummy thing you actually pursued came from SoG.

Secondly, I fail how to see how the second bullet point is scummy. Your two major subjects are the two people who you have the most information on. So, in focusing on the two scummiest, you get a lot better read on someone, as opposed to flying all over the place and pouncing on scummy things about everyone. It doesn't mean your not noting it, but it does mean your keeping silent about it.

[Nachomamma8]

SoG, do you mind explaining why Pome is your second? Because right now, it seems fairly random to me.

[semioldguy]

I find it suspicious that she has time to come on and see questions posed to her and make a post about it, yet needs until Wednesday to be able to answer the questions. Doesn't make sense to me if she's town. It gives scum time to fabricate an believable response.

Also her reads on most people in the game being along the lines of "I'm not really sure about ___" does not seem protown to me. I have been able to see many things from most of the players in the game that have been helping me get reads and this has been one of the easier games to do so I believe since a lot of things have been happening. Her reads don't seem sincere to me.

[Kirbyoshi]

This is a bad wagon right now.

We need to run up a counter wagon to get some responses

.

Unvote; Vote: Pomegranate

Elaborate on the bolded

No.

It is not always pro-town to come forward with reasoning first. I'll elaborate after it happens. If you disagree with something that doesn't come with a reason, you should post your reason for why you think it would be bad to do that.

HoS: ZazieR

How would it not be pro-town to give reasons for why you think something? This game is built on reasoning, and if you're not willing to state it, it makes you look pretty scummy.

[Kirbyoshi]

Ok, so I think I can give a more realistic representation of SOG's discussion with Zazie over not voting Socio than they can themselves...

I'm going to vote for anyone who votes for someone based on having an unreadable color.

I vote SOG for having a

readable

color.

SOG, you don't find that scummy?

No, it's perfectly OK, since he voted for the opposite reason I mentioned.

But it's still a vote based on color, which is in the same ballpark as what you mentioned.

But it's not the same, so I don't find it scummy.

But shouldn't you find it scummy, since it's still a color issue?

No.

Is this basically what SOG and Zazie mean by their arguments?

I hope this helps you both to stop arguing about this, and maybe team up to do some scumhunting

[Josh Lyman]

This is a bad wagon right now.

We need to run up a counter wagon to get some responses

.

Unvote; Vote: Pomegranate

Elaborate on the bolded

No.

It is not always pro-town to come forward with reasoning first. I'll elaborate after it happens. If you disagree with something that doesn't come with a reason, you should post your reason for why you think it would be bad to do that.

HoS: ZazieR

How would it not be pro-town to give reasons for why you think something? This game is built on reasoning, and if you're not willing to state it, it makes you look pretty scummy.

The difference between semioldguy and chamber is that SoG said "... come forward with reasoning

first."

chamber, on the other hand, wasn't going to explain. Ever.

I see the difference. Don't you?

[semioldguy]

How would it not be pro-town to give reasons for why you think something? This game is built on reasoning, and if you're not willing to state it, it makes you look pretty scummy.

I never said I wouldn't give reasons. I just said I wouldn't do it first. If you don't think my reasons later match up with what they should have been now or if I refuse to give reasons later, then that's different.

[Snow_Bunny]

Ok, I read SoG in ISO, and this is what I found:

-Vote jumping like crazy. This is never a good thing. Shows that you can't make your mind (weak cases overall) and that you are just fine with any lynch (scummy).
-In the beginning attacks Chamber because trying to get "townie points", but later SoG himself does this by saying that anyone who votes for color reasons will get his vote.
-Hypocrisy on his policy vote on color voters.
-The already-mentioned rolefishing
-On ISO 15, after attacking Chamber, he is not ok with a lynch on him. A policy lynch is not pro-town, he says.
-However, in ISO 20, he says that he wants to policy lynch ZazieR. Hypocrisy is not good.
-Again, he jumps from one wagon to another as he recognize that won't take him anywhere.
-Stretches a FOS from ChiboSempai as a scumtell.
-In ISO 41 runs to another wagon to try to save his own skin.

Ok, in conclusion, I find his play really scummy. Vote jumping, wagon pushing to save his own skin, among other things, makes me vote for him.

Vote: semioldguy

Ok, now SoG, if I'm right, is at L-1.

[Nachomamma8]

Unvote

as promised. But I still want more content.

@Snow Bunny:

1) To me, vote patterns (how much you vote) are null-tells. You can vote for one person because you find them the scummiest, or you can vote for multiple because you believe in pressure voting.

2) Did you read my bit on SoG's hypocrisy? If so, what do you think about it?

3) Not necessarily stretching. Pointing FoSes without votes down suggests a fear to have to explain a vote.

4) Self-preservation isn't scummy either. If you are a townie and are trying to avoid being lynched, defending yourself and starting a bandwagon against someone else is preventing a mislynch, which is pro-town.

[semioldguy]

I've answered each accusation with a solid explanation, and have been pointing out all the jumps to conclusion and misrepresentations in my attacker's arguments. My wagon is scum-backed, and not only for the sloppy case against me, but for other suspicions which I have been pointing out as well all along.

[Nachomamma8]

Suspicions like what? Please reiterate.

[Pomegranate]

Will catch up and post tomorrow afternoon. (I've got school.)

[Budja]

It's the only thing he has to defend against, which is almost the only thing he does lately though.

That was my point and he seems to have picked up on it.

I wanted an explanation for his action. An explanation is what I got.

But what exactly about my explanation was ok or could I have just said any old thing? I wasn't exactly saying anything new.

And how do you know SoG is going for your lynch? You aren’t psychic, are you?

SoG is voting (or was) for Zazie. SoG has said a Zazie lynch would be good (see a couple of my posts back for the quote). So SoG is going for a Zazie lynch. Its pretty clear.

Is this basically what SOG and Zazie mean by their arguments?

I think so.

I hope this helps you both to stop arguing about this, and maybe team up to do some scumhunting.

Who is this directed at? You do know the case on SoG is a more than that issue don't you .

[ChiboSempai]

Sorry, I have been sick the past couple days, just caught up.

So SoG is at L-1?

Tell me SoG, what is your reasoning for voting Pomegranate? Make it a good one.

[SocioPath]

I will be V/LA on Saturday and Monday. After that, I will generally be V/LA on weekends.

Days that are weekends are bad...

Will catch up and post tomorrow afternoon. (I've got school.)

Days that are school are bad...

Doesn't leave a lot of room for much...

Hopefully enough for something other than coasting.