Open 419 Diffusion of Power - Game Over

Venmar · Post Post #525 (ISO) » Thu Jul 19, 2012 1:07 pm

FuDuzn was a great investigation.. he wasn't on anyones scum list or town list.. not that i could see anyways.
IceGuy is either scum or he is trying to push another mislynch.

Also note that Voided was really the only person who actually was defending me, another reason for why scum would have killed him.

DeltaWave · Post Post #526 (ISO) » Thu Jul 19, 2012 2:03 pm

I would have preferred an investigation on Dayne, that would have made this a lot simpler.

Ser Arthur Dayne · Post Post #527 (ISO) » Thu Jul 19, 2012 2:31 pm

In post 522, Venmar wrote: Too scummy is not a reason to be town in my opinion. This isn't a newbie game and IceGuy isn't a newbie, that's for sure. It would make sense for IceGuy scum to push the two town mislynches on day 1 and day 2, not wanting to lynch a guilty-confirmed scum, and then trying to dispose of the possibly confirmed town who got the guilty on his partner by trying to frame him.

That’s what I was saying... he might be scum trying to go for the “too scummy to be scum” tactic.

In post 522, Venmar wrote: Dwayne, who is your number 1 pick for scum today? If it isn't IceGuy, who is?

Maybe the guy I’m voting? *cough cough* Scott *cough*

In post 523, IceGuy wrote:
It's the perfect plan ... until somebody notices what I noticed. That's the reason why Venmar tried to rush the lynch through and is now pushing me so hard.

Or why can’t he just be a cop who got a guilty on a scum?

In post 525, Venmar wrote:FuDuzn was a great investigation.. he wasn't on anyones scum list or town list.. not that i could see anyways.

Actually, no, I nailed him as scum day2

Hence my single vote on him even at the lynch

Cogito Ergo Sum · Post Post #528 (ISO) » Thu Jul 19, 2012 10:02 pm

Vote Count

IceGuy - 2(Venmar, Natalie)
Natalie - 1(absta101)
Venmar - 1(IceGuy)
Scott Brosius - 1(Ser Arthur Dayne)

Not Voting - 2(Scott Brosius, DeltaWave)

Prodded Scott Brosius.

IceGuy · Post Post #529 (ISO) » Thu Jul 19, 2012 11:29 pm

In post 527, Ser Arthur Dayne wrote:
Or why can’t he just be a cop who got a guilty on a scum?

He's too scummy for that.

DeltaWave · Post Post #530 (ISO) » Fri Jul 20, 2012 2:38 am

The best thing to do would be to treat yesterday's lynch as a null event for Venmar. That is to say, not as conclusive proof that he's innocent or guilty. I can see scum trying to pull an epic gambit near the end of the game to get one of their own confirmed as town. But it's equally possible that Venmar is actually a cop and actually got a guilty on Fu.

Ice, other than the events of yesterday, what do you have on Venmar?

Venmar · Post Post #531 (ISO) » Fri Jul 20, 2012 2:44 am

This is stupid, is this setup going to penalize any cop who got a guilty? Because this is just frustrating, it makes claiming on this setup really hard.

DeltaWave · Post Post #532 (ISO) » Fri Jul 20, 2012 2:48 am

FWIW I think you're probably town (at least, more town than null) regardless of your guilty. It's just that the timing is enough to make me wary to call you confirmed town. If scum was going to pull this gambit now would be the time to do it.

Venmar · Post Post #533 (ISO) » Fri Jul 20, 2012 2:52 am

I claimed right after night 2.. my night where i was allowed to investigate. I got a guilty, so of course I claimed when i knew i was going to either get lynched that night or never get to use my power. Claiming on Day 4 would have been even harder because i would have to deal with a possible result from Night 3 cop. Even then that cop could have wasted a investigation on FuDuzn.

Scott Brosius · Post Post #534 (ISO) » Fri Jul 20, 2012 4:15 am

Prod received will read

DeltaWave · Post Post #535 (ISO) » Fri Jul 20, 2012 7:04 am

IceGuy: What specifically makes Venmar scum other than your gambit theory?
Absta: What's the deal with your vote on Natalie?
Dayne: Who do you suspect other than Scott?
Scott: Who is your top scum read?
Venmar: Do you have any other reasons for voting IceGuy besides his gambit theory?
Natalie: Who do you agree with more, Ice or Venmar?

that should get some more discussion going on

Natalie · Post Post #536 (ISO) » Fri Jul 20, 2012 7:48 am

I agree with Venmar more.

absta101 · Post Post #537 (ISO) » Fri Jul 20, 2012 8:14 am

UNVOTE:
I don't remember why I voted her. I haven't been paying much attention to this game.

Scott Brosius · Post Post #538 (ISO) » Fri Jul 20, 2012 9:03 am

In post 516, Venmar wrote:Also, why has IceGuy been behind all the wrong wagons? 2Birds and MalaKittens, he tried to push both of their lynches pretty hard, and Voided before both of them. He wanted to vote all of them off of speculation and guessing, but when FuDuzn became a victim of a guilty, IceGuy took a step back and didn't want to push an obvious scum. Why doesn't anyone notice this?

Because it's pretty irrelevant who was on the FuDuzn wagon. Your point about fueling the mislynch wagons is fine, but being on/off the FuDuzn wagon is completely null. One could argue that it's more likely for scum to jump on the wagon, since they know the lynch is inevitable and maybe they can get a little towncred. Trying to slow down the day and get as much as we can out of a probconfirmed scum (at the time) is not scum play. Scum would try and get the lynch over with quickly with as little discussion as possible.

I'm not buying the Venmarscum either. They would need someone more experienced to even broach the topic of that gambit I feel, and this game does not have many experienced players. Unless we are getting completely reverse double leveled by a Fuz/Venmar/Ice scumteam (which would be hilarious).

Venmar's opening post of D3

In post 369, Venmar wrote:LOLOLOL.

Vote: FuDuzn

Your opening post of D4

In post 502, absta101 wrote:LOLOLOLOL
VOTE: ConfidAnon

Trying to see if you could fake a guilty here? But nobody bit?

Why not replace out if you are not paying attention?

Vote: absta101

DeltaWave · Post Post #539 (ISO) » Fri Jul 20, 2012 9:13 am

In post 538, Scott Brosius wrote:
Venmar's opening post of D3

In post 369, Venmar wrote:LOLOLOL.

Vote: FuDuzn

Your opening post of D4

In post 502, absta101 wrote:LOLOLOLOL
VOTE: ConfidAnon

Trying to see if you could fake a guilty here? But nobody bit?

Why not replace out if you are not paying attention?

Vote: absta101

If anyone still doubts that Scott is town after this, you need to lay off the drink

VOTE: Absta101

DeltaWave · Post Post #540 (ISO) » Fri Jul 20, 2012 9:18 am

FYI, I'm voting because that first post of the day thing is an awesome observation

absta101 · Post Post #541 (ISO) » Fri Jul 20, 2012 9:19 am

@Scott
If I remember right, the "LOLOLOL" part was copying Venmar but faking a guilty? If I wanted to fake a guilty, seriously, I would have to claim first.
----

@Mod: I guess it wouldn't be fair for me to stay. Replace me out please

----

DeltaWave wrote:FYI, I'm voting because that first post of the day thing is an awesome observation

Not really. I made it obvious on purpose.

Ser Arthur Dayne · Post Post #542 (ISO) » Fri Jul 20, 2012 10:07 am

In post 540, DeltaWave wrote:FYI, I'm voting because that first post of the day thing is an awesome observation

Please stop. You're killing me here. You're voting someone because an observation was "awesome"?!

Yea... no. That won't hold up.

If Absta was gonna fake-claim cop, WHY THE HELL DID HE NOT JUST FREAKING FAKE CLAIMED COP? IF SOMEONE WAS GOING TO "BITE" WOULD HE NOT HAVE TO FAKE-COP ANYWAYS? AND IF HE STILL WANTED TO FAKE-CLAIM, AND NO ONE "BIT" HE WOULD'VE SAID HE WAS A COP.

I'm not saying Absta isn't scum. But you better have a better reason than jumping on a wagon because of a cute observation.

DeltaWave · Post Post #543 (ISO) » Fri Jul 20, 2012 10:10 am

Way to be super-literal about it

I'm clearly saying that I think Scott's line of reasoning is legit

Claiming that I'm just voting absta because I liked the observation is terribad

Ser Arthur Dayne · Post Post #544 (ISO) » Fri Jul 20, 2012 10:13 am

In post 543, DeltaWave wrote:Way to be super-literal about it

I'm clearly saying that I think Scott's line of reasoning is legit

Claiming that I'm just voting absta because I liked the observation is terribad

Wut?

Scott's "line of reasoning" is that Absta tried to fake-claim cop but no one bit.

And you quoted what he said, voted Absta, and then said "FYI, I'm voting because that first post of the day thing is an awesome observation"

I mean, you

literally

said that you are voting because of what Scott said...

And now you're trying to say me saying you are voting because you "liked the observation" is terribad...

DeltaWave · Post Post #545 (ISO) » Fri Jul 20, 2012 10:14 am

Also, this line of reasoning is legit because of the inconsistent statements absta was making. He apparently intentionally mimicked Venmar's guilty (he said he did so on purpose in 541) but he couldn't remember why he chose to vote Confid/Natalie (537).

What's the town motivation behind that? Usually when people want to gambit by implying a cop guilty, they have a reason why. There are two options here: either absta is town and decided to copy Venmar's opening post just for some random reason (who the hell knows why), or he was scum who wanted to float that out there and see if anyone supported it before putting his chips behind it. The second sounds more likely.

P-Edit: See above

Cogito Ergo Sum · Post Post #546 (ISO) » Fri Jul 20, 2012 10:24 am

Looking for a replacement for absta101.

DeltaWave · Post Post #547 (ISO) » Fri Jul 20, 2012 10:29 am

In fact let me flesh this out some more.

We've got two options here.

Option A (Absta is town): Absta decided to copy the same manner in which Venmar introduced his guilty yesterday. By his own admission he intentionally crafted his post to be similar. He remembered that fact, but he can't remember why he voted Confid/Natalie. He didn't even offer the simple reason that "I thought they were scum", he just said he didn't know. So in that scenario, absta would be a townie engaged in a very specific gambit but with no reason whatsoever for why he would do it.

Option B (Absta is scum): Absta decided to copy the same manner in which Venmar introduced his guilty yesterday so that he could see if anyone would buy it. If not, he'd just brush it off. In this scenario, he didn't want to commit to his breadcrumb unless he had some indication that there would be support for it. This makes sense as scum will often be hesitant about breadcrumbing because it locks them into what they're claiming and holds them accountable for it later.

If you think Option B is more likely than Option A, then Absta is more than likely scum. It's a simple choice.

Also I want to hear from everyone which option they think is more likely.

Ser Arthur Dayne · Post Post #548 (ISO) » Fri Jul 20, 2012 10:33 am

In post 545, DeltaWave wrote:he was scum who wanted to float that out there and see if anyone supported it before putting his chips behind it.

By throwing a random statment that people might or might not catch?

Ser Arthur Dayne · Post Post #549 (ISO) » Fri Jul 20, 2012 10:37 am

In post 547, DeltaWave wrote:Also I want to hear from everyone which option they think is more likely.

This is stupid. You're distracting town with this. We're not playing the option game because these whole scenarios are basless and are serving nothing pro-town. They are basically hypothetical random things that might or might not be true on Absta's motives because he decided to copy a cop with a guilty from the day before. You're just stretching waaaaay too much.

Do you have any other reasons for voting Absta atm?