Mini 898: The Game (you just lost it)-OVER

[llamaeatataco]

/confirm. Too bad I don't have anyone to say hello to. =( Also, I hate the thread title. xD

[llamaeatataco]

oh, and since it's apparently the thing to do,

Hi almaster!

[llamaeatataco]

almaster, I too probably annoy you more than Peabody.

vote: qax42

blatant OMGUS of course. (I can't think of anything witty to say about other people's names/voting times/signatures.)

However, I WILL say this: I plan to finish this game out, but I May or may not be V/LA on Monday, Wednesday and Friday after January 18th. I'll find out probably at that time, most likely not earlier. Just giving you fair warning.

[llamaeatataco]

I thought about not posting this, but It might make me seem less lurkish later on to have a higher post count (jk): Tacos are definitely a good nutritional choice for llamas. You can put pretty much anything IN the taco, and The taco itself is not bad for them.
---
On a more serious note, I'm probably not going to wall of text you people very often, but this game I'm experimenting with just trying to keep a PBPA of everyone saved on my computer and constantly updated. I'll probably get lazy and slack off though...
----
Also, because apparently we're supposed to give fake justifications for our votes here, I voted qax for not having a decent knowledge of a llama's nutritional needs, or the versatility of that fine food.

[llamaeatataco]

Peabody: Yes. The point of the post was to not have a point.
...
RIP RVS I guess...
...

unvote

Gah. I leave for 24 hours, and now we have a wagon already going. First things first. The wagon: This is both bad and good... Bandwagoning on d1, especially if it leads to a quicklynch, would be extremely stupid. I don't know if the rest of you noticed this, but I find the heavy suspicion (overreaction) put on the bandwagoners a little weird. The reasoning is that bandwagons with no evidence are bad, and quicklynches are bad, so therefore scum will go for both. This is stupid. It's D1. If scum quicklynch, as someone said, they get lynched and we win. I'll be back in about nine hours with a real analysis, but the short version is this: If the scum are stupid enough to quicklynch on page 3, this will be a very easy game. The people that consider this a serious, important threat are overreacting. This includes diamond.

[llamaeatataco]

I hate to burst your bubble, but the RVS is over as of... some time on this page. We have a discussion. Torq, you should probably know this, so it is interesting that you want to keep voting for someone for no reason...


Anyway... The way I see it is this: Diamond had no reason as scum or town to intentionally put someone in 'quicklynching range' d1. It could only lead to harm for either side. His reaction however is interesting. He apparently sees it as some great problem. I know I'm assuming rational thinking here, but the

only

danger he was in was of being seen as part of a bad wagon on day 1.

Also, the last post was weird. Suffer, why do you think he put it on him. Maybe to pressure him? A single vote (especially this early) Is not very pressuring. Also, your accusation, and the assumption that putting someone at l-2 is a bad thing, is strange. Also, the contradiction between 'even though almastergm wasn't in any real danger' and 'absolve yourself of fault for putting him at l-2' is weird...-er.

[llamaeatataco]

Oh, I kind of forgot... The post was mostly me just wasting my own time. I don't mean to vomit my own stupidity out on here, but sometimes it happens. I was debating it in my mind because it was pointless, but the RVS is supposed to be filled with pointed pointlessness, and it was a weak attempt at humor.
---
I think I'm just going to start posting my thoughts about the last post and any others that stand out, in addition to the crazy pbpa idea.
---
Torq, your last post essentially says this: I don't know what's going on, and I don't know why I'm voting, but I'll stay voting on this person anyway. Why is that? also, you contradict yourself here. You say that your vote doesn't matter, and it may as well stay where it is, and then say that the RVS isn't over precisely because of that sentiment. You are essentially saying that the random voting part is still going on, even though nobody is voting randomly, and people are likely going to vote seriously as soon as they get back. Care to explain?

[llamaeatataco]

I guess it's just a misunderstanding. To me, the RVS is just a way to jump-start discussion. As soon as you start saying things seriously (quoting people is a dead give-away) the RVS is over. That's the way I see it. And yes, I was slightly exaggerating the way that I saw your post, but the general idea was the same.

In response to you having reasons... What I should have said is that you didn't have any

solid

reason for your vote. Your excuse is that there is some scuminess to him, and you're entitled. I'll stop beating around the bush and say it here: I exaggerated. I view your reason as flimsy, but it's there, and it certainly justifies a vote on someone who is not currently in danger. Fine.

As for misrepresenting you at the end, I don't believe I was. Nobody has cast a truly random vote for quite a while, and there would be no reason to do so. The RVS was over as soon as the wagon was pointed out and diamond unvoted. When I said 'your vote doesn't matter' I was saying that fypov, there was no danger of diamond getting lynched for quite some time. 'I don't see the reason to unvote' Was I misinterpreting that? On a second glance, you could be saying that you are happy with your vote, meaning you think diamond is scum. I suppose that's legit. I was just in the mindset of "Unvoting means you think they are in danger of a speedlynch."

tldr version: Whoops. My bad.

Eh. To give this post a point:

mod: I will be v/la until Sunday

First post of the page has a point! VOTE COUNT!
Almaster-3-SolemnJ, Suffer, MrSuave
Diamondilium-2-AK47x2, Torqez
llamaeatataco-1-qax42
Suffer-1-AlmasterGM

[llamaeatataco]

First things first... I was too lazy to post last night. Get over it. Now I'm back, and caught up. And I get to semi-rant about things I think are annoying. First of all, lurking. AK claims to not be posting because of time restraints. This is annoying, because we can't immediately call him scum, he's supposedly just unable to post... Interesting though, that he has enough time to post something like the above post,

and

apparently keep up completely with the game,

and

stay on top of things so completely that he can tell who is scummy, and to what degree. I'm going to feel like a douche when I'm wrong, but

FOS: AK

because, even though it's a lame thing to do, I find his claim of being too busy to post very fake. Imo, he just copied what other people said to make it look like he has kept up on things (that would be lying, and he'd be lame for not actually playing the game) , or, the more likely case, that he

has

had time and been keeping up, but he just powerlurked.


^ a good example of awful grammar.


Rant 2: metagaming. I think almaster is scummy because of the last page or three, but apparently this is keeping with his meta for town. I'm all for winning, but I hate this crap... Peabody, I probably already asked for this, but I forgot, do you know where the games you played with almaster are?



Anyway, to explain why I think almaster is scummy. Prepare for (I hope) a wall of text and probably some quoting failures (This part I don't hope for so much).

almaster:

More Suffer votes please.

The entirety of his post. I use this only as an example, coupled with

Also, this game needs way more MrSuave, Tom, and SolemnJ. Post now, plz.

Basically, he didn't contribute anything at all to the case against suffer, or even wait for him to respond, just said "wagon gogogogo." Now, I acknowledge that suffer was kind of scummy at the point where he posted this, but his rebuttal, imo, was good. Made perfect sense to me, so this leads me to be suspicious about this:

Suffer needs to die.

Now.

He didn't respond, he just ignored the post and said we should lynch suffer. Now, because of the wonder of bussing, I can now say that I think almaster is scum, either pouncing poorly on Suffer, OR trying to bus his partner. This is the point where I have to kind of acknowledge that Suffer WAS scummy. This is not because of what I pointed out, but because of

Looking back at it, it's more than just "strange" - it fits the scum mindset well. He displayed suspicion on multiple people, which normally wouldn't bother me, but the fact that his reasons for those suspicions contradict indicates that his suspicion weren't genuine in the first place. Instead, it seems like he was grabbing whatever reasons he could (regardless of whether they were contradicting or logical) and using them to keep his foot in all doors.

I think Diamond pretty much nailed it.

and, on top of that, almaster posted about 3 times between peabody's request for a complete case, and this post. almaster, geef. nao. Seriously, I hate to parrot, but you haven't given a reason.

------------------------

Other issues that have come up: AK's lurking, MrSuave's pointless point (Basically, he joined a weak wagon. Buddying with almaster?)


and finally, the stupidest townie we have, llama. He contradicted himself by saying that throwing suspicion around everywhere is scummy, and then doing the say thing himself.


^^^ lies. I'm sort of throwing suspicion around, but it's different from what I was accusing suffer of doing (So it was Peabody that did it first.... so what?) because I'm not done yet. His random FoS throwing was the beginning and end of his accusations toward those people, but I'm not done yet. I'm still not quite sure who to pick for scum out of the other people, but for now I'll rest with a

vote: almastergm

If you want a reason, read my post. -_-


Anyway, Some time later today I might get around to talking about this page...

[llamaeatataco]

And as soon as I call him on it, the time constraints go away. Cue the self-loathing when he is telling the truth and flips town...

[llamaeatataco]

Diamond, It's just because I'm usually wrong. In my opinion, I think his excuse was bs. That's the way it seems to me, but I'm still paranoid about being wrong.

Now, I don't mean to OMGUS here, but your accusation doesn't exactly make sense. You seem to jump to the conclusions that I both know he is town, that I know that now, and that I'm not actually being stupid. These are all wrong. My instinct is that he is faking it, but I know myself well enough to believe that it is entirely possible for me to be wrong. My post is not saying what you're saying it's saying, it's saying (say that three times fast) that I think he is scum, but I also think I am wrong. If you can manage to understand what I just said, then I both applaud you and know that now you know what I know I'm (what's with these tongue twisters?) probably wrong, but that I never the less think he is faking it. I'm not going to go into how his claim of no time is weird for irl reasons, but I WILL recap what I already said about it for game reasons. First of all, he has had time to read the thread, AND post that he doesn't have time to post. I also know that for me, reading the thread is 90% of the time I spend on the game.

Basically, It was me saying that I both think he is faking it, and I think that I'm probably wrong... I'm just predicting my own failure, because if I do, it's a win-win. Either I'm right, or I'm right. It's my way of saying that I know that I don't know what I know I know. (that time was on purpose)

[llamaeatataco]

what made it so interesting? Was it the semi-schizophrenia at the end or my lack of proofreading?

Anyway, as promised, my stupid thoughts about this page. (last page, really, I mean page 5. I think this will be the start of p6. I love getting the vote count!)


I have two things to say here: The first is this: Posting to say you are here without actually saying anything is active lurking (imo). You could at least comment on the post above you, or wait until something has happened. At least say

something

. Now, this is not a problem at all if you don't make a habit of it, so let's try to keep that from happening.

Second, on the alamaster issue. Peabody, I read one of those links, and I can see that alamaster has the same general style of posting (short posts, just stating what he thinks succinctly, without bothering to tell us why) as town, but I don't really see why that means he is not mafia. I guess I'll take your word for it that it is his meta to behave like this as town, but that does not discount the possibility that he is mafia. I see him as scummy, not just because of the lack of content he has put into the game (easily explained away by the whole meta thing) but also because he has been so pushy in addition to not really saying much. The impression I get is that he is behaving close to how he would as town (short posts, to the point) but he is also pushing lynches a little harder than he should. Now that I think about it, he could be a bad townie, but I think scum attempting to try to look like town is more likely.

Certainly you do not mean that this is it, a Paranoia Rebirth?
Suffer-3-Diamondilium, Torqez, MrSuave
AK47x2-2-Peabody, AlmasterGM
Almaster-1-SolemnJ,
Torqez-1-Suffer

[llamaeatataco]

Interesting. As town he is scummy, as scum he is pro-town. Argggh I hate metas in general.

unvote

then. Also, I lied earlier about actually doing some heavy thinking about page 5. Now, some time between tomorrow and a couple of days after, I'm going to go pick out my next best guess for scum.

[llamaeatataco]

What I've been doing on the almaster issue is sort of flip-flopping, but not quite. At first, I thought he was scum, then peabody pointed out that he is playing townish according to his meta, so I figured he was just playing town, then I realized that he was behaving slightly more pushy, due to the repeated calls for evidence. After that, Peabody pointed out that he was extremely different in a game with him as scum. I'm willing to trust him on this one, because lying about it would be extremely stupid if they were scumbuddies and pointless if they aren't. This is the part where I become flip-floppy. I have sort of come to the conclusion that almaster is scummy. Whether he is scummy town or scummy scum, I am not sure of, but after reconsidering I think I will just go with my original gut feeling. Yes this is similar to his town meta, but it is quite possible that he has noticed he plays differently and is adapting.

vote: almastergm

[llamaeatataco]

Hahahahaha! Diamond, that was some very good BS. I WAS stating something matter - o - factly. However, as I was trying to say in my post, you are wrong about

what

I was saying as a matter of course. I was not saying I knew his alignment, I was saying that I knew that I was most likely wrong. As I have already explained, I am wrong about these things a lot. Interesting that you call me the second most scummy person in the game, based on a single bit of faulty reasoning. It's most likely because it's only page 6, so I don't find it worthy of suspicion, but you should think about taking a few seconds more to consider what you believe. There are two equally logical conclusions to be made from my post: Either I was saying I knew his alignment, or I was saying that I knew that my opinion was most likely wrong.

[llamaeatataco]

First things first, I'm going to be V/LA starting tomorrow evening, but I don't know exactly when I'll be back yet, so this is just a heads up, I'll clarify when I post... In about 12 hours or so.

Now, about this whole apparently claiming scum thing:

ak wrote:

If one of the logical conclusions to be drawn from your post is that you know my alignment, that's where something's gone wrong. At best it's bad wording. At worst it's practically a confession to being scum.

And then you totally agree. Thing is, it's completely stupid. You champion this supposed admission as proof positive that I am scum. Based on me supposedly blatantly stating this fact. In public. You are calling me scum because you think I claimed scum. This is the point where I begin to question your motives by the way, because this has crossed from ridiculous to downright suspicious.

diamond wrote:

Bolded (mine): I don't see why these are mutually exclusive: in fact, both are probably true given the circumstances. I mean, you did state that you thought you were wrong and AK47X2's alignment matter-of-factly.
I even believed your explanation about thinking you were wrong. The explanation doesn't, however, change the fact that you spoke as if you knew AK47X2's alignment it only explains the remarks about believing yourself to be wrong.
For clarification, claiming that you only stated your degree of correctness matter-of-factly doesn't change the fact that you also stated AK47's alignment matter-of-factly.

See, this is pretty much the exact point where it crosses the line for me. You see, all the points where you claim that I am claiming to know his alignment are really just me saying I'm probably wrong. On a side note, now that I think about it, me the conclusions are not at all equally logical. Me predicting my own failure is infinitely more likely than blatantly claiming scum.

Diamond:

I've ruled out bad wording at this point.

Read as: I am no longer accepting a logical explanation and will be assuming you just claimed scum. That's essentially what you are saying. You are saying that there is no possibility that it was just a strange way to say "this is what I think, but I think I'm wrong about what I think" and that is most definitely in your mind me claiming scum. The real interesting thing is that (note: this is directed at diamond, I just realized I was using second person now and I'm too lazy to edit, so just replace all the you's with diamond if it's confusing you.) you and AK are together on this. When you look at it, it's ridiculous. The only shred of logic in there was that I didn't explain this line:

llama:

And as soon as I call him on it, the time constraints go away. Cue the self-loathing when he is telling the truth and flips town...

1. This is not me claiming to know his alignment, it is predicting me being wrong.
2. This is not meant to be taken literally. You see, I am a pessimist for a reason. Either something good happens or I at least get to be right.

The explanation for this wording unless you know two things about me. (ignore this if you are one of those paranoid types that thinks everything is an appeal to emotion. This is put here merely to explain the statement, and I believe it does.) First, I really fail at this game. I normally play on a different site, and there I am usually wrong. This is the seed for the pessimism about my suspicions. Second, I doubt myself a lot. This serves to amplify the Negative light that I view my reading of people in.

Now that that's out of the way, There is one last thing that I need to say here. Potential Diamond/Ak scum team? The buddying is pretty hardcore. Diamond first tries (succeeds really) to divert attention away from Ak's very convenient sudden increase in free time, (If you think this is a really stupid scumtell, I'll explain why I think it's suspicious, but I don't want to waste time) and then proceeds to attack me for something extremely far out. AK backs him up. If they aren't scum together, then this behavior doesn't really make sense. They both did things of a buddying nature, even when it was not necessary. Diamond first deflects attention, AK then comes up with some quick bs and Diamond backs him on this. Now that I have (hopefully) explained why this is a stupid thing to attack someone on, I will ask you... Why are you teaming? More importantly, why are you teaming on something so silly?


------
last note... What exactly is the policy for applying scumminess to a replacement? Should all previous activity be ignored, should it be fully applied, or should a medium be reached?

Also, sense the last bit of the post is easy to find, Here I will say that I have a suspicious gaze aimed in the direction of Diamond and AK. (Unless they happen to sit on opposite sides of me in your vision of this game, In which case I switch the gaze from one to the other frequently)

[llamaeatataco]

uggh. THAT Is why I should not post at 2 AM. From what I can understand, here's what I was trying to say, and the order of events as far as I can tell:

1. I accuse AK of lurking
2. He pops back up super fast
3. Diamond starts attacking my post based on wording.
4. AK also goes on this line of attack.
5. They continue together.

Now, that's the impression I got. This may or may not be correct. As explained below, AK's post is a little like mine, in that you can either think he is accusing me of being scum, or that he is just pointing out bad wording. I don't quite remember why I chose the first option... But anyway, As it stands, the more I think about it the more I find myself believing his explanation.






Ak wrote:

If one of the logical conclusions to be drawn from your post is that you know my alignment, that's where something's gone wrong. At best it's bad wording. At worst it's practically a confession to being scum.

That's what gave me the impression you are saying I am stupid scum.

Ak again:

Thing is, I don't think you're scum. You're scummy at this point, but I think that's more down to the "being a bit too candid about your assertions" bit. Saying that you're scum based on that is the same as saying "llama is an idiot".

Well, I would hound you about contradicting yourself, but I can easily believe your explanation. This would be an example of not thinking about all the explanations for something.


Diamond however, I believe, has also misinterpreted this post. He basically says,

QFT. And, I've ruled out bad wording at this point.

As I said before, this is read as: "I think you are scum that is confessing on Day 1."


GAH! Diamond posted again.
(I'm lazy, so I will just be posting my responses with little numbers that correspond to the arguments he made in bold)

1. You are now being stubborn I believe. I am not saying that they cannot both happen. You have three choices. Either A, B or AB. Your argument of "They are not mutually exclusive" Is so utterly pointless when you realize this that I will at least let you respond before I pass judgment.

2. 'scuse me. I guess I misinterpreted your one sentence vague post. You see, you didn't specify WHERE you ruled out the bad wording. Please do before we argue on stupid things any longer.

3. I am predicting my own failure. You are now obviously tunneling. You see, you refuse to accept that it could possibly be a prediction stated as fact. You have even refused to answer this. You see, After a little more thought, in my opinion, the wording isn't that bad. It is only bad when you think in only concretes. You still have not addressed this, even AFTER a huge post like that.

4. (this one isn't bold, it's the normal text at the end) Wow. And you say I am being fallacious? The way I see, there has been no direct mention of AK's Reappearance since my first post about it. The entire discussion from the three of us has been based around the wording. Are you serious about not seeing the red herring here? Now you get to the point of accusing me of OMGUS. This is only a valid argument when someone has no reason at all for their counter vote. I have both rebutted your accusations and then shown WHY I find your attack scummy. This is a perfectly legitimate course of action as far as I am concerned. I would have gone after you on this regardless of whether I had been your victim. Now, a few posts ago I was thinking that this might escalate too far, but now I'm fairly certain. Your attack is both utterly wrong and utterly scummy. You have ignored my responses and instead pushed your ridiculous case forward hoping to roll right past me. As soon as someone looks at the thread, it becomes obvious what you are doing.

(I guess this trivial little thing turned out to be not so trivial...)


On a side note, I am now happy with AK's activity. The only thing I would fault him for is still the slightly suspicious way he came back. I even buy his excuse.


So, the end result of this is that I find Diamond more scummy and AK less so. You see, both Diamond and I thought Ak was saying the same thing, but that might just be due to bad wording. (deja vu?)

unvote, vote: Diamondilium

[llamaeatataco]

Diamond:

First of all, the entirety of his case was based on an impression which he didn't even bother verifying. Second, my attack started before AK was even being accused of lurking. Third, the fact that two people find you suspicious for the same thing doesn't necessarily mean that they're buddying. It is much more likely to mean that you are actually being scummy. I've also pointed out multiple instances in which others could be considered buddying that llama did not point out. Seems like a double standard to me.

An impression that I didn't bother verifying... What impression? That AK was calling me scum? You had the exact same impression, which is why you put in the bit about QFT while you accused me of being stupid scum.

What attack started before AK was accused of lurking? It was the same post that you have been attacking me on that accused him of lurking. (Unless I spontaneously started hallucinating) 'Splain this bit to me please... Am I just confused, or is this another contradiction?

Yes, it is possible that you and AK aren't buddying. Except for the fact that this accusation is ridiculous, and you both have the same unlikely opinion. The difference between this instance and the others of people having the same opinion is that this opinion is completely silly. All of the others were legitimate, this one is just stupid. It is not a double standard, it is two completely different standards.

Moving on, saying that I have "ignored" your responses is a lie. A pretty blatant lie considering that there used to be more to the original case that I dropped because I believed part of your explanation.

A blatant lie? By your own admission, I apparently didn't add anything new... Even though what I last posted I refuted everything you have said.

As for my original point. I ruled out bad wording after you failed to explain it on bad wording and instead tried attributing it wholly to predicting your own failure.

First of all, I didn't make any effort at all to say it was bad wording because first of all, you and I see things differently. I believe that what I said was meant figuratively, whereas you see it as a literal statement that I know his role. Secondly, I didn't see in reason to parrot what had already been put forth. This pretty much kills your entire reason for voting me, which is what exactly? That I claimed scum? That my logical refutation of your attack and my pointing out the scumminess of it set off your scum alarms?

I haven't refused to answer that it could possibly be prediction stated as fact. The prediction part is irrelevant because you're still explaining and acting as if you knew his alignment.

At this point I would probably insert a line of smileys banging their heads against a brick wall if I knew how. I am not at all explaining and acting as if I knew his alignment. I am explaining and acting as if I know I am probably wrong. This is another contradiction. You say that I acted on an assumption that I took no time to verify... And then you do the same thing yourself. You see, we both have a similar problems. I assumed that AK was calling me scum because that's how it seemed to me. You assumed that I was claiming to be scum because that's how it seemed to you. The problem is, AK calling me scum is perfectly normal. That's kind of the point of the game, to accuse people and such. Claiming scum is not at all the point of the game. You will most likely accuse me of using a double standard here, but I'm pretty sure I just explained the difference between the two cases.

Also, I am not detracting from the suspicion on AK by attacking you because A) I attacked you before people pointed out AK's lurking and B) the only person who cared about his reappearance was you and you clearly haven't forgetten it and C) the other people most likely to care about his reappearance (Peabody and Almaster who attacked him earlier for lurking) haven't even posted since I attacked you.

This is so weird I don't even know how to refute it. It's just a non-sequitur.
A.) You most certainly did not start this line of attack before I posted my suspicions about AK.
B.) The first part is owned by C, so I'll leave it for then. The second part, that I haven't forgotten is irrelevant. No, I haven't. How does this mean that you weren't trying to distract us? I certainly was distracted for a while, and in that sense you did partially succeed.
C.) You shouldn't have added this in here. This completely disproves your first point on B. If they haven't posted yet, how do you know they don't care? You went one point too far. In addition, this doesn't help you at all. Their lack of activity does not mean at all that you weren't trying to distract them. Are you saying you know in advance who will post when? This particular contradiction baffles me.

If anyone reads the thread, even if they don't agree with my original point would have to agree that your counterattack has been very scummy. Also, I note how you vote me right after I vote you, yet you didn't add any new points.

My counter attack is scummy? Nope. You see, your attack on me was scummy, because of the flawed logic and the contradictions. I am pointing this out. It would be scummy if I was using it to discredit you and deflect attention, but I am not. I have defended myself adequately, and in fact, I am drawing

more

attention to myself by attacking you. As for discrediting you... This is merely more smoke. You see, I first defended myself, rebutting your arguments. It would be pointless for me to try and discredit you, making more of a fuss over this, after demolishing your arguments like so. This is essentially saying "I'm right, and everyone has to agree with me." Your very last bit is a logical fallacy. I don't know the name, but it's something like an appeal to majority, or an appeal to intelligence.

So Diamond, did I add new points, or did you just fail to respond to my old ones?

mod, I will be v/la until Sunday (55 hours or so)

This is the aforementioned other half of the contradiction. You say that you didn't ignore my points,

and

that I didn't add any new points, and yet my last points sink yours completely. I suppose I will settle for a compromise: You attempted to address my points and failed.

[llamaeatataco]

EBWOP: The v/la notice should be at the bottom, after the first paragraph.

and I need to doublepost due to people posting as I type.

With regard to the current conversation between diamond and llama, I think llama comes out worse. I'm not sure if I buy the whole "omg he just confessed" thing (to be honest, I think the initial reaction to his comments was way overblown and I've never found such "slips" to be reliable tells), but at the very least, even interpreting his words charitably, I have to say it seems fucking crazy to vote for someone when you're as sure you're wrong about them as llama is saying he was. It's hard for me to say whether it would be stupider for him to do that as town or as scum, but either way it's not someone I'm sure I want alive with me in LyLo. If we can get our lurker problem taken care of, I think I'd be okay with llama as our lynch today if things haven't changed much by deadline.

Have you heard of hyperbole? First of all, at the time I really thought he was suspicious for coming back in that manner. It was kind of a pressure vote, kind of me putting my suspicion of his return (only noteworthy action in the game so far) in a quantifiable form. I do believe that there actually

was

some bad wording. You see, in my mind, I thought he was scummy for it. I was just wording my belief that my belief that it was a scum move was wrong. So, I was not saying that I didn't believe he was scum. I most definitely thought it was scummy, I just also knew that I am not very good at determining such things.

My vote was not all that drastic. I don't think he even had any other votes on him. Why do you think it's such a crazy thing? Would you prefer it if I didn't acknowledge my less than stellar abilities? I would rather be a pessimistic person of inferior skill than an egotistical, overconfident person of lesser skill.

[llamaeatataco]

Ok, I'm back. Fortunately, the situation hasn't changed too much.

MRSuave, do you plan on answering for yourself? Is that all you have to say?

Anyway, I'm lazy, so no quotes this time.

Diamond: The wording issue really

is

a dead horse. I used hyperbole, I assumed I was wrong, blah blah blah. That's dead and gone. I still find you attacking me for it scummy, and I think your case was as flawed as I said it was, but until somebody else adds something in, us going at it really won't matter. However, some things need to be addressed. First, I admit that the accusation of buddying was a little tenuous. I mainly just threw that in there to see what you'd say. I find that reaction testing works better if you sneak it in there with something legitimate. You're obviously done with this discussion, so there's not point in leaving it out there. Your response was essentially that you don't understand the accusation at all, but this was rendered moot because of a little memory lapse. Second, I was not blatantly lying. The way I see it, you have ignored my posts, because I don't see any refutation of them in your last post, and the situation is similar elsewhere.

AK: Why do you say this? My defense was logical and perfectly warranted. I would be interested to hear what 'weird little bits of logic' you think I was using. I acknowledge that what makes sense to me probably won't make sense to some other people, but in this instance I don't think I was using particularly peculiar reasoning. Also, what exactly were you saying in your first post since I left? You find me townish because no scum would do what I have done/said. What? This bit thoroughly confused me. What exactly was so stupid no scum would do it? Are you saying that I am too scummy to actually be scum?

Peabody: You must be as crazy as me. =/

Raskol: I don't see how your hostility is warranted. It's almost as if you want to pick up where diamond left off. First of all, I'm pretty sure I just bolded my FoS of AK, I didn't actually vote. Second, I was not 'flailing around' I was going with my first instinct. You are more likely to be wrong if you second guess yourself, so, in the interest of giving myself the best hope, I second-guessed myself and still went with my gut instinct. Now, I still went with my gut and allowed myself to see

why

I would be wrong before hand. You say you wouldn't want me with you in lylo, however your reasoning is flawed. I get the impression that you would have attacked me anyway if I had instead gone ahead and not done anything regarding AK for being indecisive. You see, I voiced my opinion on my reliability and still went with my gut. I was decisive, but I also let you know my own opinion of myself. Your accusation that I am flailing around is backwards.

I think that's everybody, so now I'll go back to Diamond. I voted you because I found you escalating your attack on me to a vote scummy, especially after I easily refuted your points. If you find that action scummy, that's fine.

[llamaeatataco]

I'm pretty sure that starting this game over Christmas break might have been a bad idea. I feel like only half of the people here are active...

Basically, if you aren't peabody, Raskol, Diamond or AK, post more. Now. I'm not too concerned yet (when exactly is the deadline?) but I don't really get the feeling that you're actively doing anything.

Now, to beat a dead horse in a spot not yet bruised...

Diamond, is it safe to say that your reaction to my accusation of buddying was essentially to blow smoke? You brought up the other times where people have had agreeing ideas, and you had your memory slip, but other than that you didn't do anything else other than to deny it... I'm pretty sure this is called a red herring.

Also, I was going to ask Raskol why he was so intent on wagoning on MrSuave, but that already got cleared up. =/

Basically, be more active and someone please start acting really scummy so we know who to lynch. kthx.

[llamaeatataco]

I still resent all of these people saying my logic is flawed, but that's probably my fault...

Anyway, the hot issue is now MrSuave and his lurkiness. Too bad everyone else already said the things I was going to say (he talked without saying anything, he hasn't even said who he finds scummy, etc.) on the issue. Now, I was giving him a break because he claimed that...

mrsuave:

it's almost 6pm here so that gives me 6 hours from the time I post this to post my thoughts.

I guess I just have my hopes to high. The last time I saw someone say this, they posted a huge wall of text that was probably as long as the rest of the page put together. They hadn't said anything previously, then BAM! But I digress. Essentially, this doesn't cut it:

as for who I think is scum atm, I don't really have any strong negative vibes from anyone personally. if I do, I'll let ya know.

Those are his thoughts so far. As far as I am concerned, he is still active lurking. MrSuave, post a huge wall of text, or at least your actual thoughts about specific people please.

unvote, vote: MrSuave

.

[llamaeatataco]

yeah. Torquez hasn't posted since about page 4. Is he still V/LA?

The fact that he has not posted leads me to believe that his inactivity is legit. When compared to MrSuave, who has just posted random trivial nonsense, he comes out looking like he really doesn't have computer access. Raskol, who is this Tom you speak of?
Basically, If I had to choose between the lurkers, I'd choose the one that is actually posting. My vote stays.

As a side not, how do you get it to just say in bold "AlmasterGM wrote" instead of the regular quote?

Also, let it be known that I have now increased the game speed to 9001. That means people should be posting... A whole lot more.

[llamaeatataco]

I guess I'm picking up my prod. This tom person... did he forget the game?
yeah. I just checked.

mod, can we replace Tom yet? If so, then please do so.

umm. This post has no other point...

[llamaeatataco]

mod, I actually have three votes on the list...

[llamaeatataco]

that's quite a lot for not having anything to say...

but most of it I agree with, except for Raskol and MrSuave. You see, MrSuave hasn't actually posted any content yet. Sure he has posted, but none of his posts have been about the game, except to say that he has a neutral read on everyone. This wagon is intended to either get him to post

content

by making him care, or to lynch him for being a warm, useless body, and potentially scum. This wagon doesn't have to end in a lynching, it just has to end in something other than MrSuave continuing to activelurk. Does that still seem naive to you? In my opinion, since we don't have anything substantially scummy to go on so far, using a mislynch on someone who could be scum, but isn't contributing or helping the town, is a good thing.

[llamaeatataco]

@quax: I have already voted for MrSuave, and for the same reason as Raskol, so I considered your question to be in part directed at everyone that is voting for him. As he has already noted, my feelings are in line with his and he has already posted them, so no, it's not a 'free out.' Please don't misrepresent me. (reverse deja vu)

everything else was pretty much filler mixed with people asking for MrSuave to claim, and a little bit of conflict between Raskol and Quax.

@Raskol:

Why do you continue to say that I would be a good lynch? I'm sorry if I missed your reason, my bad.

@almaster:

did you say you were going to post some huge post a few days ago? It's been more than 24 hours.

[llamaeatataco]

seems like you're just lurking more. If you came on here, you thought you had time to make your big post. You still haven't posted it. DO THE POST!!! Anyway, I'll actually post some sort of something probably the day after tomorrow, and

mod, I will v/la Wednesday through Saturday

so I would appreciate it if we can decide on who to lynch before then. (I think the deadline is before the v/la is up)

[llamaeatataco]

@last: Yeah.

@MS: I figured you'd say that. Now we get to go through wifom about whether scum would claim blue when about to be lynched, or go for something less believable but more important. Yay.

@almaster: I still don't believe you. You would have posted your vote, then doubleposted your analysis. Do that case thing, before I get back.


Anyway, my substantial post will have to wait until tomorrow. Suffice it to say that my top suspects are MS then almaster.

[llamaeatataco]

@almaster: Why rush the lynch? I say we just wait until he posts next, without delivering content, and then hammer. I don't think it will matter at this point, but it's better to be on the safe side. Maybe Orange has something to say about it?

Anyway, I probably won't be back until day 2, so I thought I would put my two cents in.

Basically, it's easier to hammer after waiting a couple of more days than to un-hammer.

[llamaeatataco]

I assume you're not going to go the way of MS, the guy you replaced and half of the town and not post anything? I would say OMG HE QUICKHAMMERED, but the lynch was already decided, and there wasn't anything to say. Anyway, go twilight, we can talk now woohoo!
...

...

Anyone have anything to talk about?

[llamaeatataco]

First things first, MrSuave was an idiot. Unless he didn't know he was the nurse. Could this be the mod not telling backup roles who they are until they activate?

Second, I'm not down with a Raskol lynch. After he posts (for the third or so time) the reason why he hammered, I'll say why I don't want think he is scum. (to ensure that there is no whining about giving alibis)

Third, I think almaster is scum even MORE now. Disregarding metas, he just looks like scum. He latches on to any bandwagon there is really, doesn't post any content and merely states that people should be lynched, without giving a reason. This is why I will

vote:almasterGM

. I would like to clarify that this is not based solely on the lack of content, it is also because he has attempted to speed lynches up without doing anything other than saying the person is scum and needs to die.

also, I'm slightly suspicious of Flareon, but I can't clarify that atm without giving things away or whatever.

[llamaeatataco]

Basically, what Suffer said. Flare's attack on Raskol makes no sense. We had no way of knowing he was the nurse, and he claimed that he was a Townie. We only knew that he was the Nurse AFTER the lynch had been decided. Flare also thought he was hammering, so he can't fault Raskol for wanting to lynch him. Basically, what everyone else said.

vote:flareonage

also, Almaster, do you see how Peabody said that he was going to post some content? Do you see how MrSuave said that? Do you see how I said that? Do you see how YOU said that? Don't just go and get lynched/be too lazy/quit and not post the content. I will continue to harass you until you do.

[llamaeatataco]

I'm to lazy to quote, but flareon is scummier than hell. He claims he doesn't know what to post, and that he is only posting because he was prodded or something... wtf? You could at least tell us what your supposed read of the thread got you.

@Almaster: No. You have pretty much just said "I agree with this guy" and bandwagoned or said "dienaoscum" without giving a reason. That is not content, that is you doing a bare minimum to seem active. It's not that you aren't posting walls of text, it's that you aren't posting reasons.

@Flareon: When you suddenly, the next day, accuse the person who started the wagon of being scum... Does it really need to be explained any more?

[llamaeatataco]

oh, I missed pretty much the whole last page of discussion... Anyway.

@Flare: AtE's are weak. Fatalistic "woe is me, they want to lynch me" AtE's even more so. you claimed after what, a single page? Either you realize you are super scummy and you cracked under the pressure, or... Nope. No or. The only 'or' is whether you are scum cracking or town cracking. I think you can guess which one you look more like...


also, if you did something to generate discussion, then you might as well at least act like it isn't so serious. You say that that's the only reason you attacked Raskol, and yet you now see yourself as lost... Contradiction much? If you really had just been starting a discussion, you would have said so and then asked us to stop being tools and unvote or something. Instead you act as if the lynch is already decided and you are dead. 'splain these things please.

[llamaeatataco]

geez alamanatee-er, I never said that he wasn't scum. I totally agree with you there, but I DO think that posting more content more regularly (like what you just did (the little numbers are helpful (and don't put to many parentheses inside of parentheses (like this)))) would be helpful. You haven't given 'tons of reasons' in my opinion, but arguing with you on this will not serve a purpose. I say you haven't posted enough content, you say you have, and there's nothing more on the subject for us to discuss.

also, defensive much?


@peabody: Errm... eleborate so I can see if I'm right, kthx. Why did you suddenly switch from following flare (completely ignoring the failness of the argument) to attacking him after you are called on it?

[llamaeatataco]

So do you think they are both scum now?

[llamaeatataco]

Or Peabody, you are scum with Flare. When the day started, he tried to get the failwagon going, and you followed him on it to make it more likely that the town would hop on. As soon as people realized that the wagon was so fail and pointed it out, you stopped, seeing it was pointless and tried to cover yourself with this "I was suspicious of him from d1" stuff. Except the wagon made no sense in the first place, and if you had even read the post you would have seen this. Except, as alamanatee says, you didn't do anything about your suspicion (even voice it) on d1. Except you hopped off before everyone had even posted, but not before people had pointed out how stupid it was.


^ would you say that that makes more sense than your excuse? I would.

[llamaeatataco]

aww, I thought I was being subtle.

[llamaeatataco]

yay more prods!


but really... Flare = scum. Peabody is most likely scum with him. I'm just making sure I don't get kicked, because I don't really have much else to say. Well, I will be

v/la Thursday through Sunday.

However, that's nowhere near the deadline, so it's not as bad as last time.

[llamaeatataco]

No, I start with a supposition and see if it fits the evidence. Then I start with the opposite supposition, and see if it too fits the evidence. If both fit, then I pick the one that makes more sense. To be honest, most of what you say makes sense. However, the one thing that bothers me is that you admit to having read the post, and that you didn't even consider how incredibly stupid/scummy it was. Are you serious? You didn't even comment on it. Also, you say that the one difference between us is that I assumed you had an ulterior motive and you didn't... Exactly. We both have the same evidence. What you posted. Why would you use this as an argument? Of course it's the only place where we differ, because your motives are the only thing in question!

Anyway, back on track: You seem like a pretty smart person. You also seem rather observant. So why did you not observe how fail Flareonage was, to follow your previous suspicions? You said that you didn't voice them, so obviously they weren't too important, (It takes about 5 seconds to say "I am slightly suspicious of Raskol) because at the moment MrSuave was being far more antitown... And then you go and do the exact opposite by ignoring the immediate scummy person to follow your Raskol suspicions.

[llamaeatataco]

It's not ok. We hate you forever and think you are a troll now.



Anyway, about the game, because it's serious business:

FFS... Am I the only one slightly unhappy with this here? I won't beat the dead horse and call Flareon all sorts of creative names, but really...

I don't really know where this leaves me, because my suspicions of Peabody were mostly based on Flareon being scum. Peabody is still semi-scummy without Flareon being scum, but I'll need to do a re-read in the morning to try and figure out what the deal is and respond to things I need to respond to. For now all I really have to say is this: People are stupid.

[llamaeatataco]

Eh. I didn't re-read. Massclaiming is cool... Just to let you guys know, I'm going to be LA again for a few days starting Monday I think. This is the last time for quite a while though, I promise.

At any rate, I don't have much to say about anything, obviously.

[llamaeatataco]

Mod: I will be v/la starting day after tomorrow through the weekend (US time)

Sorry, nothing game related. Active-semi-lurking ftw?

AlmasterGM wrote:
Agar was just replaced in another game on the site, so I get the feeling he may not be showing up today.

Mod, can we have a prod/replace on Agar please?


Pretty please??

mod: With a cherry on top?

[llamaeatataco]

OK, nothing interesting has happened.

mod: pretty pretty pretty please?

Anyway, my Trip starts tomorrow morning, so this is my last post for the week.

Basically: moar active lurking.

[llamaeatataco]

Bv... Too about about the game, right?



Anyway, I'm sorry I missed... The whole 10 posts you guys have made since I left. Seriously, get more active. I'm going to be as active as I need to be now, probably checking every day. If the rest of you agree with just claiming as you come in, I'll do so, but I personally want to hear Raskol's claim.

[llamaeatataco]

I will claim after Raskol claims and other people support his idea.

[llamaeatataco]

After checking the thread, holy crap, you're right. If you really want, I have a whole host of legitimate reasons for my inattentiveness, but they aren't really relevant.

On that note, all we are waiting for now is for some other people to come on, Or for bv to pick someone.

[llamaeatataco]

If you get shot, do you still die?

[llamaeatataco]

I'm a regular (if slightly silly) townie.


The reason I ask is this:

Anyone who night-targets me has their action carried out, but dies in the process.

As far as I know, the PGO kills mafia that target them and survives. I just wanted to confirm my suspicion that this is not the case. I've been burned before by assuming things, so I wanted to be absolutely clear. (that's the purpose of a massclaim, isn't it?)

[llamaeatataco]

bv, explain to me how that is scummy. Also, please go and read the rest of the thread.

[llamaeatataco]

The only way you could be worried about getting burned by a PGO is if you're thinking about targeting him.

Learn to think, or learn to be less obvious about your brainless bandwagoning. I want to know if we can count on him being alive or not. That is a perfectly valid reason to be curious. You are completely ignoring any other possibility, including the actual reason. You see, if I were scum, why would I even

think

about targeting a PGO? Assume I am scum. If I know that a person is a PGO, I am immediately going to completely throw out ANY thoughts of killing them, unless there are 5+ scum and the person is really good. Unfortunately, the first cannot be true and we have seen no real evidence of the second. Now, assume I am town. Someone makes a role claim that seems contradictory to the understood idea of the role name. I want to know whether or not we can trust this person to be alive, assuming they are telling the truth. I am also just wanting to obtain more information.



Now, look at this sequence of events:

I make my inquiry.
Peabody says it is suspicious.
I explain why I asked my question.
Bz votes for me instead of posting content, completely ignores my explanation.
Suffer bandwagons.
Raskol Bandwagons.




The interesting thing here is that Suffer provides no reason, much the same as Bz, and Raskol hardly even makes an attempt to cover up the fast one. To be honest, I could see them being a scumteam. Raskol being the best player of the group, obviously, with bz too inexperienced, scared or lazy to participate and Suffer being of average skill.




So really, to the rest of you, ask yourself two questions:
1. What would I have to gain from trying to kill a pgo as part of the mafia when we are most likely either at lylo or one day away. 3 scum is more likely than 2 scum, especially with a nurse, possibly a doctor and apparently a couple of other PR's.

2. Does this bandwagon make sense? This answer really depends on the previous one, but once the obvious answer to question one presents itself... Look closely at the actions of the below people, and measure them against their previous play.

Bv has not shown himself to intelligent enough to be above this, so it's not any more scummy than the rest of his playing.

Suffer HAS been participating. He acts like he knows what he's doing, so this one, imo is more scummy. He provides no response, and just votes on an inane reason.

Raskol is the worst offender. He basically outright lied, ignoring the obvious possibility that I am town and hopped on the wagon.



This makes no sense as town, but as mafia on what would then be lylo, this is an obvious scumwagonwagon.

[llamaeatataco]

Llama, I have read the thread. You claimed vanilla, but are concerned over whether an action targetting the Hermit would kill both of you. Explain to me how that isn't scummy.

I noticed to things about this post. I don't know if you are capable of such subtlety, but your wording was strange. 'kill both of you.' You are first assuming that I am inquiring because I have a night action, and then because I want to use it to kill the PGO. This makes no sense at all from any perspective. 'explain how that isn't scummy' is another useless phrase, probably just dressing for what your entire post was: 'You are scum.' That is what your post should have read, because the only thing you conveyed in here was that you are completely convinced that I am scummy. Also, I don't think you really did even read the thread. You have made no comment at all about it, the only thing you have done is get together with your scumbuddies and try to start a bandwagon.

Nice ad hom, Llama.

Nice completely pointless post. You neither responded to my last post or contributed to the game. If I called you stupid in my post, I'm sorry. That's what I do when someone astounds me with nonsensical actions.





Now, I don't actually expect anything intelligent from bv (his post 416 proves he can speak full sentences, but also that he doesn't put this ability to good use), but Suffer and Raskol on the other hand I really want to hear from. And Peabody. And Alamanatee. And Ak. And LastSurvivor. Seriously, where did he go?

[llamaeatataco]

You also said you've been burned before by assuming things, which you use as another reason for saying that. How does that extra knowledge change your play or in any way alter what you have been doing?

I don't know yet, but it's better to know than to not know.

I don't see how that gets more information, unless you're talking solely about the logistics of his role, in which case I'm curious why that interests you given your claim.

I AM interested in the logistics. Playing a game without knowing exactly how a role works is not good. Depending on what other strange roles could be in here, it's possible that him being invincible or not being invincible could change the game.

I didn't add anything new, but that doesn't mean it is without reason.

There wasn't anything to begin with. Bv said

That post seems a bit scummy. And by a bit, I mean a lot.

You then said you couldn't agree more and voted. There was no reason given other than 'that's scummy' and you didn't add one.


I have already given more than enough explanation for why I wanted to know. If the PGO is acting strangely in this game, then other roles could potentially as well.


Now, when you see that this wagon is obviously a sham, it's easy to come to a simple conclusion: Suffer and Raskol are highly scummy, Bv moderately so.

[llamaeatataco]

Raskol... I have no idea what you're doing now, other than trying to rush a lynch on lylo. Let's look at this bit by bit:

Here's a tip for you: post other content and/or come up with an alternate suspect. If someone can name me anything that's as lynchworthy as llama's slip, feel free. Go ahead. After all, there are three scum left, not just one. As it is, simply saying "Let's not lynch yet" without giving us anything to do in the meantime just feels like you're stalling.

I already gave two perfect suspects and a decent you. You, Suffer and bv, respectively. What slip? You cite the earlier incident as a reason to lynch me, even though it was first of all totally harmless and secondly I already explained exactly why I said what I said, and it didn't involve me being mafia. The original assertion was inane, and now you are saying that we should lynch based off of it? This assertion is also inane. It wasn't a slip. I wanted to know how his role worked. I was curious, the game wasn't moving and I wasn't quite sure if I was reading the claim right.

Keep in mind this is now the SECOND time he's done this. How any of you could still think he might be innocent is beyond me.

Second time I've gotten a bunch of crap for making innocent comments?

I mean, think about it---if he's town, why haven't the scum hammered him yet, when it would win them the game to do so? The only real answer imo is that he's scum and the other scum are trying to stall for another lynch to win.

Yet again you prove yourself to be scum with your.... I don't know what to call it. It's like a false dilemma, but with only one choice instead of two. That is one possibility, but the more probable reason is that the scumteam

is already on the wagon

. Or did you miss my post where I called you scum? You seem to be ignoring it... Seriously, even if we assume you are town, bv and Suffer could be scum. Your reasoning is flawed even from your point of view (assuming you are town) which is why we should do the opposite, and assume you are mafia.

Give me one good reason to think that llama isn't scum. This is the SECOND time he's slipped up like that, and I see absolutely no reason to let him off the hook. If you disagree, say so and say why. Otherwise---attacking me for pushing a wagon on someone, while at the same time doing ZERO to show why the wagon is a bad one, is super pathetic.

I already answered the supposed slipping argument, so the only new thing here is the last sentence. We aren't so much attacking you as saying that you pushing the wagon this hard reeks of being mafia. Also, I do believe that (yes this is necessary)

you ignored my last to fuckin' posts!

you know, the ones where I show why I asked what I asked, and why I think you are scum for pushing this wagon. That both shows why the wagon is bad AND provides an alternative suspect. IMO, alamanatee was just going off of that...

I don't care if you want to actually discuss more topics: if you have something to say, by all means say it---I'm not stopping you. I think llama is scum, I think it's fairly OBVIOUS that he's scum, and I don't think there's anyone else who is clearly a better target for a lynch. If you disagree, and actually have something to say, then fucking say it.

Well, unless I read the rules wrong, lynching pretty much ends all meaningful discussion for that day, especially if it's lylo. So lynching me WOULD end discussion, because it would end the game. The rest is just you saying 'llama is the only scummy person in this game,' and doesn't deserve a response. I HAVE said what I have to say, and you ignored it.

But coming out with nothing more than "hey guys slow down" is not helping anything. Having more time is only helpful if we actually fill that time with something---what good is another week if there are only 6 posts in that time, most of which are not even containing much content?

Your paragraphs are too big! But seriously, this is an extremely silly post, especially now. Now that we have something to talk about, the game is speeding up. I ask you this: Why do you want to lynch now instead of letting us see those '6 posts'?

Calling me "desperate for a lynch" because I'm actually scumhunting and moving the game along has to be one of the most ridiculous comments I've ever seen and your attitude is exactly what has pushed this game into such a dead and failed state---if you're town then pull your head out of your ass and start helping find scum, or else get out of the way of those who will.

The first sentence almost made me laugh. You aren't scumhunting, you are in fact suppressing it. You want to lynch now. That will end the day/game. We can't scumhunt if the game is over. We, on the other hand (all the times I say we, I'm referring to pretty much everyone in the game that doesn't have a vote on me) want to look at this wagon and yourself and do some

actual

scumhunting, instead of just going 'omg he asked a question about a weird role lynch him now!' and not stopping to think.

It's not a ridiculous comment. You ARE desperate for a lynch. All Alamanatee said was that nobody else should vote, not that you should unvote. We ARE finding scum. You, on the other hand are just trying to push a wagon down our throats (insert dick joke here) without letting us stop to think. In your position (if you were town) I would rather wait an extra week for the '6 posts' than never get to read them.


This brings me to my main problem with this wagon: (other than it being directed at me) Raskol was the one that suggested we claim one at a time, iirc. That was a very patient attitude. He was willing to wait to gain the minimal amount of information that we could gain from sequential claiming. Now he doesn't want to wait for more discussion. This is incongruous, and shows a dramatic shift in his playing style, indicating that he has an ulterior motive for wanting this lynch to go through quickly. (IE: he's not being impatient, he's scared that we will see through the sham that is his wagon)



tl;dr: Raskol is scum.

vote: Raskol

[llamaeatataco]

First off, sorry I missed that you wanted to speed things up after a while of waiting. I think it had something to do with the page breaks and the entire pointlessness of one of the last couple of pages.

When did I ever say I wanted to lynch now? I want to lynch llama, yes. But if people have anything they want to say, they can say it. I'm not going to hammer---I can't, since I'm already voting you. And I never told anyone to hammer you, either. So how in the world am I "rushing" the lynch?

Alamanatee said that the wagon needed to stop and you told him to stfu and stop getting in your way. I'm pretty sure that means that you want to lynch me now, and that lynching me is the only thing that will satisfy you.

What I have said, and what is true, and what I will continue to say because it's true, is that delay for delay's sake is useless and that asking people to wait on a lynch not because you have things you want to say but just for the sake of waiting is useless and scummy. If people want to wait on the lynch because they have things they actually want to pursue, then FINE. But waiting just for the sake of waiting is stupid. IOW, if you don't want this wagon to go to lynch yet, fine. But it's only fine if you're going to be doing something in the meantime.

It's not delay for delay's sake. You keep pulling this up, and I keep telling you: This is what we want to wait and do. We want to hold up and think about the wagon. From your previous posts, I got the impression that you didn't want to wait, and I feel like Alamanatee got the same impression as I did. Also, as an aside... Why is waiting for the sake of waiting scummy? I'm under the impression that discussion during the day is a powerful tool. It is in no way scummy to use the full length of the day for discussion. In fact, it's scummy to claim that doing so is a bad thing. You seem to be letting yourself slip and show your intention of rushing the lynch here.

Oh yeah? What is, then? You going to wait for him to come out and tell you he's scum?

Honestly though, I agree it's not 100%. But in mafia, you have to work with the best you have. And I honestly think that this is the scummiest thing anyone alive has done. If you don't agree, then like I've been saying, show me something scummier. If I missed something I'd like to see it.

Otherwise, if you're not going to offer a better alternative, then how are you being anything but useless?

OK... You have completely ignored my explanation for why it is not scummy. Either you aren't convinced, or you realize that as scum, you can't give up too easily on your wagon. Show you something scummier? You pushing this farce of a wagon. It's completely inane, just like the one before it.

Misrep. I don't say it proves anything 100%, just that it makes it the most likely answer. Overall, it's far more likely than not that I'm right, as I highly doubt that BOTH suffer and BV are scum, especially compared to the chances of the alterrnative (that llama is scum). It's distantly possible that I'm wrong, but in mafia you play the odds.

Well, let's assume you are town and work from your point of view, Then look at the other people on the wagon: Suffer has already come under suspicion before, he's probably the only person besides me still alive that has actually gotten people to think he is mafia. I'm pretty sure you were not suspicious of him earlier though, so he doesn't count. BV hasn't helped at all, neither has his predecessor. It's actually kind of likely that he IS scum. Suffer likewise, if only because of his actions today. So really, it's pretty likely that both of them are scum, and I'm sure at least one of them is.

So FYPOV, you don't really have any ground to say that they AREN'T scum. Even in your own eyes, I don't think you could see anyone scummier than them excluding me. From the rest of the town's perspective however, it's a different story. You are pushing wholeheartedly for this lynch, and you've put far more effort into it and defending yourself than anyone else in the game has in any action from what I can tell. The problem is, it doesn't make sense. The whole basis of you calling me scum is that I have no reason for wanting to know if he can be killed other than wanting to kill him as mafia. First off, no mafia with any brains would consider shooting a PGO as the finishing blow to the town. I was merely curious to see if he could be killed, for two reasons. First, it might mean that other roles are altered as well, and second it might mean that the scum could do some crazy shit that I haven't thought of. So really, your wagon makes no sense and you pushing it with crap reasoning is silly.



Now, to address your attack on me. (post 431)

First of all, as to your post where you 'explain' yourself.---there's nothing in that post that you couldn't have easily made up after the fact to cover your ass. I would have to be stupid to buy such bullshit from someone who has incentive to lie.

What? They are two perfectly valid reasons and you try to say that they could easily be made up and therefore ignored.... The problem is, this is forum mafia. The only thing we have is text. I asked a one line question, in a completely isolated situation. Every single reason that I could give could be called a stupid, made up excuse with this logic. Hell, we could call EVERYONE'S reasoning/logic made up after the fact with this thinking. This is you trying to pull a fast one again, mere empty words.

For the rest of the town, lemme just ask this: what do you think is more likely? That llama is scum unconsciously revealing his true intentions, or that he's a townie who consistently makes "wording errors" that just "happen" to look like scumslips?

What is more likely here? I am mafia and subconciously burdened with guilt about my fictional slayings, my thoughts overridden with remorse and my subconcious is trying to inform the rest of the town of my despicable deeds, or I am town and I let my self-doubt influence my postings, then asked an innocent question based on curiosity and analysis of the setup/roles?

They don't look like scumslips. The first one was ridiculous, the second one was a question with an innocent explanation that you are trying to blind yourself to. Also, I would hardly call two posts, even if they were scumslips, consistent. you are again using flawed logic and attempting to pull the wool over our eyes, but you were too lazy to get it off of the sheep first.

I have to say, if you are willing to take his word for it on what he meant, then you're a terribly naive person and shouldn't be playing mafia.

appeal to intelligence. "You're a moron if you think I am wrong." <--- This is why you look scummy by the way. You use the logical fallacies and basically try to bully the town into voting you for fear of feeling stupid.

Second, your "scumlist" consists of all and only those people who are voting for you. None of those people have been on your suspicion list before, and you have no new reason to be suspicious of them now---yet because they happen to be voting for you, you're willing to say they're all scum? Seems like you're not being very honest with your suspicions---more like self-serving.

Raskol, I'm not going to explain this again. Just look at the post where I gave a very simple sequence of events showing how illogical the wagon was. These people are on a stupid wagon. Two of them for no reason at all, and one of them for totally fabricated ones. If this wagon were directed at Peabody, AK or Alamanatee I would STILL call all three of you scum. You are trying to use the fact that it happens to be on me to allow you to ignore the perfect reasoning behind calling you three scum. Less word trickery and more dying of a broken neck please. (Unless of course, we don't know how to make a proper noose and we just use some other knot and it ends up actually choking you...)

Third, your blatant and obvious misrepresentation of me, my case on you, and my behavior today.

Assertion. Please give me some examples of this misrepresentation.

You haven't been scumhunting anyway. The wagon on you is the first attempt anyone has made ALL DAY to make a case on ANYONE. In fact, even now the only other wagon is one on me, and the SOLE POINT IN THE CASE is that I'm attacking YOU.

IOW, I scumhunt. Then I get attacked for scumhunting.

Second, I never said I wanted to lynch now, jsut that if we DONT lynch you now, it had better be because people are DOING SOMETHING. Those words, "Raskol wants to lynch right now", were put in my mouth by you and almaster, who I can only assume is your scumbuddy.

Umm... Me pointing out the stupidity of your wagon IS scumhunting. I guess you could call you starting the wagon scumhunting, but that's not what we're faulting you for. We're faulting you for not wanting anyone else to scumhunt/get a chance to weigh in. You are saying both that you don't want to lynch right now, but that you DO want to lynch if nobody is going to do anything productive... and then say that we aren't being productive, so we should therefore lynch now. Clear this up: Are you going to stick with attacking us for wanting to drag the day out, or defending yourself by saying you want to wait? You're talking out of both sides of your mouth, but trying to dress it up so we won't see it. Verbal smoke and mirrors.

This is utter bullshit. Completely and obviously false. Yes, I originally suggested that we claim one at a time. That was what, two and a half weeks ago?

But after AGES of waiting, I have been trying to move things along. Read posts 373 and 399, where I try to get the massclaim to go smoother and quicker.

I was the one who suggested we abandon the fucking one claim at a time plan. I have been trying to get things moving for quite some time now.

So you were originally patient and wanted to do this shit right, then you got fed up with taking the time to play correctly and wanted us to move along, and now you don't want us to use the rest of the day. Game-wise, the town gains absolutely nothing by waiting longer to lynch. The excess time doesn't get added on to the next day...

OK, so you have been trying to speed things up a bit from before you wanted to lynch me. I must have missed it. I don't reread the past pages as I'm typing a post, only the relevant ones.

Now, this obviously false point you made suggests to me that you either haven't read the thread, in which case you should stfu until you have, or you're lying scum trying to make me look bad with lies when you can't find anything true against me. Which is it?

Do you just have a list of quotes that you copy/paste into your accusations? I believe I posted on

every page of the thread

and was part of the discussion much more than anyone else more than half the time. This is another interesting incongruity (legit this time). You are blasting me for supposedly not reading the thread (Utter bullshit) and yet you completely ignore the fact that

bv obviously hasn't.

I may have made a mistake in my memory, aided by a couple of periods of L/A and a faulty re-read, but he hasn't even commented on anything that has happened other than to piggyback off of Peabody and vote for me. You tell me I should stfu if I haven't read the thread, while you are currently voting with someone who could legitimately be considered ignorant of the past couple of game-days.




So basically, Raskol has ignored every single legitimate argument I have made in my defense and against him and focused on the one area where I misinterpreted what had happened. The problem with this is that that was a minor point against him, and still the overall meaning (That Raskol was patient at the start of the day and then grew more impatient as the shadows grew shorter/longer) is the same. Raskol may have changed his mind before me, but wanting to rush a massclaim simply because he became bored is at the very least anti-town. Raskol still hasn't done anything other than blow smoke, ignore my posts and drop a crapload of empty words to try and force this lynch through. He has used a large amount of logical fallacies and basic person-with-nefarious-motives-trying-to-get-someone-to-screw-themselves-over techniques. "If you aren't scum, I'll eat my hat."

[llamaeatataco]

Here Is conciseness: (It seems long, but that's just because you've done so much silly crap)

1. I asked to sate my curiosity and to find out if the PGO was screwed up. If it's a legit claim, then the other pr's might have been altered as well.
2. You came up with BS reasons to lynch me, based on flawed logic.

The only way you could be worried about getting burned by a PGO is if you're thinking about targeting him.

Given that you've claimed vanilla, your concern seems a bit strange.

This is actually a misrepresentation of truth. I said I was burned before by making assumptions. I wanted to clear up that his role was indeed vulnerable, just to make sure I was assuming correctly. There are other ways to screw up based on his role-claim, you are just ignoring them. This is why you are scum. Your initial reason was completely fraudulent.


You also claimed (and still claim) that I make consistent slips... However, neither of these comments was a slip, and, like I said before, are not consistent anyway.


3. You misrepresent yourself. You still haven't cleared it up: Are you going to attack us for stalling, or are you going to try to defend yourself by saying you don't want a lynch now? Apparently it's the latter, so I don't want to hear any more crap about stalling.


4. You overuse ad hominem attacks/appeals to intelligence. Saying we are morons if we don't agree with you, calling me either mafia or idiotic town is what I'm talking about here. These aren't logical reasons to vote for me, they are you trying to confuse us.


5. wtfwagonswitch? Now, after saying that it is completely obvious to a blind, retarded bat with leprosy that I am mafia, you want to now switch over to lastsurvivor. It seems like you realized that my wagon wasn't going to happen (you haven't convinced anyone) and you now want us to focus on LS. I could understand bringing it up as a side note, but you just gave us another false dilemma: Either I am mafia or a moron.


6. It's silly anyway. Assume I am mafia. Why would I want to know if I could shoot the pgo? This can only hurt the mafia anyway, especially when the town is one mislynch away from a loss. It only makes sense that I was asking for the reasons I gave.


7. You ignored my entire post. Your only response was 'be more concise' and then you just didn't respond to any of it. Not to why I asked the question (other than 'I don't believe you and you're a naive twit') or why you pushing this bullshit wagon is scummy. Not to ANY of the scummy things you have done. This just adds one more to the list.



Now, I'm done making my case against you. Until you try and top your scummy behavior by doing something else stupid, it's pointless. You are thinking that by ignoring my points you invalidate them, and that by telling me I am verbose you destroy my arguments.



@AK: Whatever floats your boat. I have been lynched for silly crap like this before, and I still haven't learned. At least I'm good for getting the discussion going again...

@peabody: I already said why I asked the question, but it's buried under a bunch of other stuff. Basically, I was curious. If the PGO is altered, then some other roles might be as well.




Now, I think that's everything. My personal opinion is that Raskol is scum. I would say stupid town, but he's not playing like stupid town. Stupid townies don't manufacture BS cases and use appeals to intelligence, superiority and insults. Mafia do. As for the other scum, I don't really know. I'm going to go and read again to see what's going on with the others.

[llamaeatataco]

By the way Raskol, (Just like Peabody has to get the first punch in, I have to get the last word in) Telling me that my post is too long and just plain stupid doesn't make you look smarter, or less scummy. It's a basic, noob response. You are completely ignoring everything I have said, and just saying 'no you're wrong and a tool' instead of responding. Now, I understand that I still have to convince the rest of the town of my innocence, but you still make yourself look scummier by doing this.

[llamaeatataco]

I think anything should happen. Seriously. This game has died. On a normal day, I would just randomly vote no lynch to get peoples attention so they would post instead of just lurking, but it's lylo. Has anyone been lurking long enough to be prodded?

[llamaeatataco]

Hmm. I still think Raskol is scum, but it IS quite possible that bv is just... You know. Suffer is not helping himself at all by lurking his way through lylo. At this point, I'd rather lynch Raskol. Him making a bunch of shit up is far more scummy than the other people's superlurking, simply based on who is, imo, most likely to be scum. However, LS would probably be on my list, if I had one. In order of preference:

Raskol
LS
Suffer


Suffer has at least posted, which makes him slightly better than LS. Also, I think Alamanatee might be correct. Lurkers are always targets for scumwagons, even more so on Lylo. Why the silence?

Anyway, after the other people get back (or on March 8, to be safe) I'll switch.

[llamaeatataco]

Active lurking for the win. Anyway, at this point, I'd be happy lynching either, with a preference for Raskol. LS REALLY needs to appear here, or be replaced.

mod, can we get a prod on lastsurvivor yet?

Other than that, this game is about as slow as longcat is long. It's practically 4 days until the deadline and counting now. Ak, who do you want to lynch most? I dunno if we can get a Raskol wagon up to steam, depending on who is scum. (imo I pegged it, but it's possible that I'm wrong, in which case we could be totally left holding the bag if the votes are split.)

Oh, I almost forgot:

Mod, do we only get votecounts if a player rolls it to the next page?

=P

MOD:
Hm... I might be in the process of replacing survivor, I'll check [temp]
[update]Yeah, I'm still waiting on replies for replacement. Just sent out another five PMs asking for a replacement. Deadline moved.

Yes, when the votecount hasn't changed. (Did I miss a vote?)

[llamaeatataco]

Woah, stuff happened!

Watcher and Tracker does seem rather unlikely. Easjo is looking even better for a lynch now. Perhaps Raskol is bussing, or maybe I'm just completely wrong, but easjo needs to die.

vote: easjo682

Do I really need to explain this one? At least this replacement isn't uberlurking, but Raskol does have a point. Watcher + Tracker is too imbalanced, especially with, apparently, a pgo, and I wasn't liking this slot too much before anyway.

[llamaeatataco]

prods? I was gone for all of two days. Anyway, until he claimed, I was almost certain alamanatee was watcher/doctor. I'm still thinking that at the moment, to be honest. My thoughts on the post in specific are these: Either he is doctor/watcher or he somehow knows one of those roles or ease's role. Or he is scum, but I don't think that at the moment.

@Ease: Well, someone's claim is bs (town is already OP'd if all pr claims are to be believed) and yours is most likely. Your predecessors were scummy, and I happen to agree with Raskol's assessment of your claim. I thought for quite a while about why he was wrong, and I came to the conclusion that he wasn't. There is a different between 'watered down' claiming and not giving basic information. Who you watched and when should be said in your claiming post, and there is no excuse for not saying it.

mod: prods on AK?

[llamaeatataco]

Even more than that, what reason could there possibly be for withholding who you watched and when, ever? What's the point of the watcher if we don't get their reports? I might understand holding it back if you got a guilty report, just to see who would cc whom, but it makes no sense with no visits.

[llamaeatataco]

screw it. I've lost my post about three times now, and It's making me have my angry face on. Like this: D:<


Anyway, the short form is this:

I don't discount right out the possibility of both watcher and tracker. I just think that it is HIGHLY unlikely, seeing as we already have a bunch of other power roles. I just personally believe that it is FAR more likely that a.) we don't have a watcher and b.) Easejo is scum.


On fast wagons vs slow wagons: When you have a mislynch, in my opinion, you don't have to be quite as careful with fast wagons. If someone is speedlynched, you can usually find the scum on the next day. Not so on lylo.


On me supposedly being buddies with alamanatee:
wtf? It seems to me that he commented on me when he thought I was being scummy and when I addressed him and ignored me when he didn't have a reason to point the finger in my direction. The same could be said about every single person in this game at one time or another.

On peabody:

I really haven't been paying attention to him due to his meta, but I find it extremely unlikely that easjo is scum

O rly? Uber lurking + bad claim + unlikely claim makes him 'extremely unlikely' to be scum? This doesn't quite check out.

On bv's 'suspicious' post:
Peabody, It does look rather fake, but to add something of my own: First he's assuming that either the tracker or watcher is lying* and then he assumes that we are going to know which one is lying as soon as the lynch goes through. Now, I for one have some small experience with people bringing up bull based on 'knowing people's roles.' I think the difference between this situation and mine is that I was basing my prediction of AK'd role on my own percieved shortcomings. bv has no such basis. There's a difference between predicting your own failure and predicting the outcome of a lynch. I had a basis for my prediction, he has none. Now, I'm not saying that this means he is subconsciously claiming scum, I'm just saying what I see in it.

*I'm not assuming that one of them is scum based only on their role claims, I'm saying that the unliekly roleclaims make easejo even more likely to be scum.

Oh yeah, the alamanatee wagon:
wtf? That's all I have to say.


Anyway, nothing has happened to convince me that easejo is NOT scum, so my vote stays. So the deadline is this Saturday?

[llamaeatataco]

Hered, I think the worst part about that one sentence (aside from it not having about a hundred friends) is that it's just parroting what other people have said. So, not only are you not giving enough information, you're not giving any original thoughts. also,

@lurkers: Every time you flake, we have to give the new peeps time to catch up. When we do that, the game goes on for an unnecessarily long time. Post more. Give me something to talk about.

[llamaeatataco]

@alamanatee: Would that mean you are accusing Peabody of being scum with and bussing bv?

[llamaeatataco]

To be totally honest, it means I wasn't paying full attention to this game. If easjo flips scum, I won't be surprised. If both he and Peabody flip scum, I will be shocked.

I'm gonna call bs on this one.

[llamaeatataco]

Crap, my earlier post failed. Oh well, here's the short version:

@mod: cool setup.
@Raskol: It seemed to me that you were the cornerstone of the scumteam. Nice job.
@Heredotus: Nice job at the end with the 'scumhunting.'
@everyone: Fun game.

I sort of got the impression that I was barely pulling myself along and making up for my slips, like a person tripping and managing to hop through a minefield while trying to get their balance back. =/

[llamaeatataco]

Raskol's assessment is true, I believe. IMO, I was the scumteams weakest member, so I might be a little biased when I say this, but we didn't do too much.

@Raskol: I think it turned out rather well. Either I avoided the lynch or you could nail alamanatee the next day for 'buddying.' It ended up being the former, but the latter would have helped us just as much.

[llamaeatataco]

BB, the answer is that I drugged their food. Yes, I know where you all live.