Open 394 - Double Day UNLIMITED (Game Over )

[hoopsmcgee]

Greed is one of the deadly sins.
I'd vote for kondi2424 for not respecting the voting conventions.
But he's already got 3 because of Jackal's quick post. So...

Vote : Jackal

[hoopsmcgee]

Regarding Hoopla's "I'm putting my credibility on the line", I generally feel that scum aren't likely to speak with assurance when they outline their suspicions so that they can more easily "change their minds" later. That being said, Hoopla, I don't think your credibility will do much to convince others of anything. So, it's basically empty words to me.

@kondi2424, you've kept your initial vote on n00b while unvoting your others, yet haven't really justified it other than with

I'm good with a n00b lynch. (lol)

Are you still good with it? If so, why? You've posted a few things since that comment, but haven't taken that opportunity to expand on n00b or bring anything else forward.
VOTE: kondi

[hoopsmcgee]

@hoops, n00b was the only person who had done something scummy as of Page 2. I was basically sheeping off of Hoopla's sureness. ON PAGE 2. How exactly is this scummy when put into context?

Well, in the context of page 2, I'd say it's about as scummy as most other prelim suspicions. Also, since you had many posts on page 2, I thought you could've provided some content. You did have Hoopla's #36 to comment on, if nothing else.

[hoopsmcgee]

- hoops pointing out me at L-2 but not izak at L-1 was pretty scummy, and a connection between him and izak could be applied if he is scum.

This was during RVS. I wasn't pointing out you were at L-2. I wanted to vote for you in RVS but votes were coming fast, jackal quick-posted me with a vote and I didn't want someone to accidentally hammer.

But buddying me with izak really perplexes me. There's no logical reason for making that statement. If I were scum with izak, at RVS, I'm sure I would want to point out he's at L-1 so he doesn't get accidentally hammered in RVS. The fact I didn't mention izak was because I wasn't analyzing the vote count, I was merely changing my RVS vote with a P-Edit.

- hoops scummy in #81 for reasons already said, plus his comment about Hoopla. It seems like he's trying to sit on the fence there by saying he's seen town act this way before, but the words are empty. Not actually a real read.

Please explain "reasons already said". As for my stance on Hoopla, I feel that town are more likely not to waffle with their feelings. So, I wouldn't think Hoopla was scummy for staking her position. However, I find her use of "credibility" meaningless and stated so.

What does bother me around Hoopla is everyone coming out saying she's obv town. Two problems with that :
1) It conditions players to read her with "town-goggles" and not really doubting or suspecting whatever she writes. If she is scum, town is in big trouble with such a mentality. Also, wouldn't it be in scum-Hoopla's interest to contribute to scum-hunting with no PRs in the game. She can't be outed at night, and any mislynch she leads could be chalked to the likelihood of D1 lynches.
2) In a town-Hoopla case, there is most definitely one scum who has hopped on the "Hoopla is town" train. I'll be looking closely at Hoopla's cheerleaders (izak, jackal and kondi) in the coming days, along with the impact of Prolapsed flip.

[hoopsmcgee]

Hoopla Cheerleader analysis

izak

Looking at his iso before Prolapsed's lynch, 8 of his 32 posts talk of Hoopla in a positive light, either agreeing with her, or building, in his words a "town!Hoopla case". He has been scum-hunting in other areas, but the amount of buddying up to Hoopla D1 is definitely to be noted and considered later on with more flips and info.

jackal

First post after RVS claims hoopla is town matter-of-factly, with no stated reason for it. The only other post of substance repeats that hoopla is obv-town by the end of page 1!. To me, it reeks of scum buddying early on.

kondi

Hoopla is also automatic town after page 1 (says this twice here! However, he is suddenly unsure after I call him out on Hoopla cheerleading and Prolapsed flips town, here. I don't think a lurker-lynch would be enough for him to completely rethink is "automatic town" judgment. I feel it is much more likely he gave pause to the optics of his unreserved support to Hoopla, which I highlighted, and therefore "reconsidered".

VOTE: jackal
VOTE: cogito ergo sum replacing kondi
For reasons stated above, though unrelated (i.e. they aren't necessarily both scum).

[hoopsmcgee]

I find it interesting that a bandwagon has developed on me, mainly because of PoE. I have yet to see any type of reasoning for it other than, "hoops is scummy", or a variation on "it's the best we can come up with (i.e. PoE)". I feel that if we are already resolved to just lynching without any thought out reason, we are in big trouble.

Also, why hasn't anyone looked at the Prolapsed wagon closely? My feeling, giving the mechanics, is that there would be a scum on that wagon with maybe one or two other votes on other people. They may even have their Prolapsed vote as a secondary target, not their main focus. So, let's so what that gives us :

izak

- first vote on Prolapsed, has 4 other votes, including all wagons

jackal

- one other vote, on izak, and he does expand on his suspicion of Prolapsed, though it's difficult to get a proper read given his low posts/low content.

kamikrazy

- only vote, seems to be playing like he only has one vote, has never double voted.

mafia-n00b

- has 3 other votes, including all wagons. Put both jackal and Prolapsed at L-1, though did admit it. Seems to favor lurker lynches.

Hoopla

- hammered Prolapsed, and one other vote, on mafia-n00b

VOTE: mafia-n00b
He stated here that there was no town motivation to lurk with no PRs in the game, votes Prolapsed who later gets lynched, and then immediately votes another lurker. Maybe he should have re-assessed his convictions following the flip if he truly believed them.

[hoopsmcgee]

Quite frankly, I'm scared of CES. His playstyle is such that I really don't know how to deal with it. He's quite a good player, so as scum he'd be especially lethal. Unfortunately, as town, he's also unpredictable enough that scum could easily use it to their advantage in sowing discord/mayhem. Basically, I worry that he'll be such a powerful player in the game that, regardless of alignment, he makes me nervous.

He needs to be lynched. He has far more reason, as scum, to fear CES. A townie would be more interested in removing threats to town. Scum would prefer getting rid of their own threats. Afraid that CES may have a good read on you?

[hoopsmcgee]

@hoops: worried about the wagon developing on you and want to shift attention? Noted.

I see you've noted a question that you just asked. Does it help you not forget it later on? Does it become unnoted when it's answered? Or was that your way of accusing me in the form of a question so it doesn't seem as important if you need to backtrack later on? Or something else maybe?
Really, I'm not worried about a wagon on me as there still hasn't been any solid reasons that I have seen for it, and if I am lynched, the town will easily be able to pick through the wagon to find scum. I'd defend myself if there was something to defend, but so far I haven't seen anything, so no reason to address the wagon.

[hoopsmcgee]

Hey CES, I thought anyone on more than two wagons was scum?

Care to explain what wagons I jumped on? I think if you look closely, you'll see that I haven't been jumping on wagons left and right. I was the first to vote for mafia-n00b and CES today (ie. no wagon to jump on). The only vote on a wagon I have made is jackal. And placing a 3rd vote on someone scummy, with reasoning, isn't scummy in itself.

@all

, why does one of the hoops have to be scummy? I believe CES first brought it up, but it was never explained and many people are going along with it, but this whole notion has no foundation. I feel this game is getting easier for the scum-team because there are accusations and statements that are being made and supported without evidence or explanation.

[hoopsmcgee]

Is this regarding 183?

[hoopsmcgee]

Public service announcement: having more than 2 votes out is considered scummy from now on.

Missed that. Why exactly?

[hoopsmcgee]

I'm not sure that my "responsibility is diluted" with three votes that were all justified (couldn't say the same about most players in here), but if you all prefer, I can unvote one of them.

Also, waiting for any response to this :

@all, why does one of the hoops have to be scummy? I believe CES first brought it up, but it was never explained and many people are going along with it, but this whole notion has no foundation. I feel this game is getting easier for the scum-team because there are accusations and statements that are being made and supported without evidence or explanation.

[hoopsmcgee]

UNVOTE: mafia-n00b
UNVOTE: CES

My only vote is now on jackal. For his first actual post since the Prolapsed lynch, he simply votes for both wagons, putting them both at L-1 without warning, and doesn't even give any reasoning for it. CES, you talked about the responsibilities of voting, and this, to me, is completely irresponsible and reckless.
If someone hammers n00b or I before jackal posts again, he can then make up a reason of voting the next day. If he isn't "awake" enough to post more detail and defend his decisions, he shouldn't be "awake" enough to make such votes.

I hope no one will simply disregard my statements because I am one of those at L-1, but just take it for what it is, putting his post in proper context.

[hoopsmcgee]

@CES

, do you have anything to say about Jackal? All you've done is claim you were bussing him in your second post (as a joke I imagine, but could really look bad if he flips scum) and then an unvote a bit later. Your thoughts, please, on Jackal.

[hoopsmcgee]

This response strikes me as town. He's keeping his vote on me for what to me is a legitimate reason.

I'm not really comfortable with that statement because it's ultimately a vote on you. As town, wouldn't you want to defend yourself, especially if you feel there is a "legitimate" case on you? Is there a more legitimate reason for my vote to be placed elsewhere? If not, shouldn't you, logically, be voting for yourself?

What, you're backing down in the face of THAT?

Screams of scum doing anything to earn town point.

UNVOTE: All
VOTE: hoops
VOTE: Jackal

Why unvote me and then vote for me again? If you hadn't realized you were doing that, why aren't you keeping track of your votes? If you had realized, what made you want to highlight your vote on me again? There's no logical step between what you say earlier in your post, and your (re)vote on me.

Also, any progress on that Kami re-read?

[hoopsmcgee]

Hey town, you'll have to do some reads and actually scumhunt. If most townies continue to just skimread and really on only the last few posts, scum will have a lock on this game. Example, Hoopla pushes for my lynch (308), and I get to L-1 within a minute and hammered an hour later. Even though many things were discussed other than my wagon in the last few RL days. You've got your work cut out for you town.

[hoopsmcgee]

Izak, the main issue for me is that very little of these reads were articulated in the thread. I never really saw a case from anyone from which I could defend. If you look in the game, you'll see there isn't much that was out there for the town to analyze. Not saying there weren't reasons to vote for me, I just haven't seen them. It's also funny that the last two votes on me, were from people who raised doubt about my scumminess in page 12. They definitely can change their minds, but there is nothing in their final votes that indicates what made them flip again. Here are each of there last two posts concerning me :

Jackal

UNVOTE: hoopsmcgee

This response strikes me as town. He's keeping his vote on me for what to me is a legitimate reason.

VOTE: Hoopsmcgee

Hammer time.

He didn't address the fact that I questioned his 292, just hammered. Jackal, you are in a horrible position to hammer me. As town, with a competing wagon, a previous post saying I seem more town and questions from the person you are hammering that you haven't answered, it throws a ton of suspicion on you. As town, you could have avoided that suspicion, helping your fellow townies, by either elaborating your read/suspicion before hammering or not doing it yet. So I hope you are scum, because otherwise, you've really made this hard for town.

Voided

Izak, there's hoop's point (which Jackal already admitted was good/legit), and the lurking after prolapsed's lynch point. You don't think either/neither of them are valid?

That, or I'm entirely misunderstanding that post.

Slightly more amiable to a mcgee lynch now. Lack of mafia doesn't exactly help my case on him, and the same generally goes for Jackal.

vote: Hoopsmcgee

Voided, why couldn't you elaborate on what made you more amiable to my lynch? Would've made your transition from your thoughts on 297 easier.