NY 172: Another Large Normal (GAME OVER)

[Zdenek]

I figure Pisskop isn't talking about his Talah read because he's scum and he's hoping no one will notice his shifting read on the slot.

[ThAdmiral]

I think I agree with this.

VOTE: bjc

@bjc

- Is voting for you the only way to extract content?

No... Not at all.

Are you voting me because you think I'm scummy or just to be stupid?

What have you actually provided without being voted first?

[bjc]

Well, I did claim my role before getting voted on so there's that.

And lol at that fucking question. I claimed scum and drew like three votes pretty quickly. So of course the content generated after that was in response to being voted on. Le'sigh.

[pisskop]

I figure Pisskop isn't talking about his Talah read because he's scum and he's hoping no one will notice his shifting read on the slot.

Im unsure whats sillier -

-that you have a solid enough scumread on talah to vote me for (quite) publicly waffling on him and yet still vote me

-that Im avoiding discussion about a read I have when nobody has outstanding questions about. that includes you, who made a deliberate show of ignoring direct reference to me until then.

-that of all the content Ive put forth my read on Talah is your focus. nevermind my 'flip' on thad or my interactions with yates or my refusal to judge the absence of content.

-that you responded to a quote of APs to vote me

in short, get bent or get a case.

[AngryPidgeon]

Well, I did claim my role before getting voted on so there's that.

And lol at that fucking question. I claimed scum and drew like three votes pretty quickly. So of course the content generated after that was in response to being voted on. Le'sigh.

So cheeky, very wow.

How about you take the hint instead. And ... provide content.

[bjc]

And if I'm content with lurking?

[Mister Rogers]

Well time to claim lyncher then? But nobody will believe you. So quit it. You also realize that there is a sitewide rule to play to your wincon and you're close to breaking it right?

[Mister Rogers]

I meant Jester and you have seen all the ban's that have been happening lately right?

[talah]

I think the PK issue needs addressing though.

Pisskop? Did I miss something specific?
Do you think aptil votes are just as useless/bad as luca votes? I mean I guess aptil has slightly more content, but I see a slew of people voting both of these players who, imo, are lurking and nullville.

Ya I mean holy crap unless we decide we are going to wagon these prod dodgers to lynch unless they contribute. Odds are there is scum in that lurker list (if you count ALL of the lurkers) but its really a crap shoot.

But its not like the wagon will be helpful because its on a lurker and our D2 will lack a beneficial wagon to analyze.

Aptil is not any better than Luca.

We should be able to do better than a crap shoot and I bet we have better odds in the lurker voters.

I feel like Larry David here.

"Can't vote the LURKERS, oh no, don't vote the LURKERS, the LURKERS are SACRED, no voting the LURKERS"

That's just horseshit. How do you propose that lurkers *ever* get read, then? Cover our ears with our hands, look elsewhere, and hope they work it out between themselves in a few game days?

No - you wagon lurkers and if they refuse to provide content and opinions you lynch the living shit out of them.

And you do it *early* so it doesn't become an emergency deadline lynch and so there's time to think clearly about what's occurring.

Will finish work and get to this today .

Sure you will. No pressure from us.

Apologies for my lack of activity thus far, I will commit a bit of time later to going through this thread and will post my reads then.

No worries mate. Take it easy, you've got a free ride into Day 2 if Rogers has anything to do with it.

[talah]

Actually Luca's a much better vote than aptil. There's that scum-cerity where he's expressing that he's sorry he can't post (because making a scum post he's happy with is so draining and unsatisfying). I've known the feeling.

VOTE: Luca

[Mister Rogers]

I actually am a fan of "lynch all lurkers", its just not the best option. Usually they get replaced.

Since Anx , DG & you are scummy, I am not liking Luca. Aptil at least showed some signs of townie intention. Nobody will vote Rach.

BJC is the worst of them and we gain good info from their wagon. At least the others sound repentant.

Unvote, Vote BJC

[talah]

Why not Luca then? He's due for a prod if he doesn't post and I saw him logged in yesterday where he didn't bother posting. You should be asking pisskop (or potentially aptil if you want double the value given aptil is more likely scum) about bjc if you haven't played with him before.

Luca kind of randomly called out bjc as something to say in RVS so it's not so likely that bjc is scum if Luca is, but is says pretty much nothing about Luca if bjc's scum. If you're considering one or the other on a coinflip, Luca's your man.

(I'll just gloss over the fact you voted me for essentially advocating wagonning lurkers and seem to be as switchy as a diode in your opinions... )

[RachMarie]

Still working on getting in this game, but one thing I DO know about Nero is he is far more active as town and lurks a lot as scum, he has even admitted this to people.


I want to see more from you Nero.

Also feeling better about Pere.


VOTE: Nero

[Mister Rogers]

I just noted you you did that. The reason I am voting for you is a lackluster approach to scum suspects & a bizarre cog-dis in your approach to the game. It just appears like you are trying to skate through by simply commenting combined with a "lynch me or lump it" attitude.

With that being said, I don't like how ZD is being so mysterious with his reads either. Pere's ISO reads: BJC is the entire scum team, you all are town and everyone else bleh.

I got a couple of town reads lurking like Snow & Matt too.

Luca fencesat BJC, he didn't call him out. He town postured the issue which is like barfable but at least he's not saying "I'm lurking deliberately".

I mean they actually could be scum buddies which is why he was so wishy washy about it.

But regardless of alignment lynching BJC goes the farthest towards repairing the game state.

PEDIT: See, a lurker has returned and is contributing.

[talah]

I just noted you you did that. The reason I am voting for you is a lackluster approach to scum suspects & a bizarre cog-dis in your approach to the game. It just appears like you are trying to skate through by simply commenting combined with a "lynch me or lump it" attitude.

In acknowledgement of this - I don't think any of this is unusual for me.

I got a couple of town reads lurking like Snow & Matt too.

I'm leaning town on Matt. I ISO'd snow this evening and can't say I'm feeling the town.

Luca fencesat BJC, he didn't call him out. He town postured the issue which is like barfable but at least he's not saying "I'm lurking deliberately".

He commented on bjc which is as good as calling him out in RVS. He had anyone else he could have drawn attention to and I doubt being wishy-washy is good scumplay in that circumstance if he and bjc were buddies.

But regardless of alignment lynching BJC goes the farthest towards repairing the game state.

Surprisingly, I understand this. Remind me I have you as town because of this specifically if I continue to be irritated by your posting.

PEDIT: See, a lurker has returned and is contributing.

Indeed, and just as I was about to drop Rach from prob-town to maybe-town. I like her vote on Nero, and although I've never SEEN Nero as scum, he's a troll and a half when he's town and scumhunting. So we shall see.

[Mister Rogers]

Errm. I mean Rach is starting now again to contribute anyway...

[Plessiez]

It's day 1. Deadline for the day is March 28th, 21:59 UTC. That's (expired on 2014-03-28 17:59:48).

Vote Count 1.10

pisskop [3 votes] (bjc, Luca Blight, Zdenek)
Luca Blight [3 votes] (Damon_Gant, 4nxi3ty, talah)
bjc [3 votes] (Peregrine V, Yates, Mister Rogers)
aptil [2 votes] (projectmatt, DeasVail)
Damon_Gant [2 votes] (SnowStorm, mastin2)
4nxi3ty [2 votes] (ThAdmiral, pisskop)
talah [1 votes] (AngryPidgeon)
Yates [1 vote] (Nero Cain)
mastin2 [1 vote] (BipolarChemist)
Nero Cain [1 vote] (RachMarie)

1 player is not voting

: {aptil}

With

20

players alive it takes

11

votes to lynch somebody or to go to night.

Activity

Nobody has recently been prodded.
BipolarChemist is V/LA until March 23rd.
mastin2 is V/LA until March 31st.

[Damon_Gant]

If you guys (i.e. Mister Rogers and talah) are impressed by Rach's vote on Nero then you must be really easy to impress. That post barely counts as contribution. My read on Rach is still null at best.

bjc is still scummy as hell - he's either scum or just horrible, horrible town. Of course it's the fault of most of the other players in the game who for some reason gave him town reads, which only encourages him to continue not helping the town in anyway. My vote isn't on him anymore, but obviously I could still get behind a bjc wagon. My stance on him did not magically change anywhere, and I agree with the point Mister Rogers made that lynching bjc would help "repair the game state". Pretty much everyone has given their stance on him or people who are attacking him at some point during the day, so knowing his alignment would certainly give information to the town.

Aptil is more meh to me - I'd rather stick to Luca or bjc for now but I totally understand why people are voting that way as well.

Going to ISO pisskop, 4nxiety and ThAd when I have time this evening, because those are the active players that have worried me the most, and I need to try and understand why that is, and whether it's justified.

Oh, and I definitely agree with this post by talah.

[Damon_Gant]

@Mod: Can you update the original post with the replacements please?

[Plessiez]

@Mod: Can you update the original post with the replacements please?

Done.

[Zdenek]

I figure Pisskop isn't talking about his Talah read because he's scum and he's hoping no one will notice his shifting read on the slot.

Im unsure whats sillier -

-that you have a solid enough scumread on talah to vote me for (quite) publicly waffling on him and yet still vote me

-that Im avoiding discussion about a read I have when nobody has outstanding questions about. that includes you, who made a deliberate show of ignoring direct reference to me until then.

-that of all the content Ive put forth my read on Talah is your focus. nevermind my 'flip' on thad or my interactions with yates or my refusal to judge the absence of content.

-that you responded to a quote of APs to vote me

in short, get bent or get a case.

This is basically a confession, so I guess I don't need case.
Good. This way to the gallows.

[Zdenek]

So what does Pisskop do when the problem with his reads on Talah is mentioned. He ignores it. When I don't let him get away with that he tries to pretend that he was "publicly waffling" on Talah, which would be all well and good if it came with some explanation of what he was thinking, but it doesn't. He acts as though somehow that I didn't mention him before affects his alignment, as though somehow is other content should make me forget about his Talah problem without explaining why, and as though since AP pointed out the problem with his Talah read, I shouldn't be using it against him.

Also there's one of my favourite things, he asks me to get a case on him. That's just him telling us that he's scum.

[Mister Rogers]

I did notice that his sudden switch on Talah looked poorly done, based on his own expressed logic.

[Mister Rogers]

I also noticed how Talah appeared to "pressure me" into a lurker vote and then buddied me once I complied.

[Mister Rogers]

Errm. I mean Rach is starting now again to contribute anyway...

This post was meant to indicate how Rach has much more posting to do.