NY 172: Another Large Normal (GAME OVER)

[Mister Rogers]

@Pere: Your organizational skills. Are we going to pressure a lurker or are we going to lynch an active poster. At this point its becoming concerning because deadline is approaching and I don't think we can afford to waffle about. Scum I think would love a divided town to waste more time towards the deadline.

Activescum- posters are easier to catch as scum later. Pless-mod is on top of prods, etc., so lurkers will most likely be replaced.

Scummy lurkers should be hung

/vigged. Town lurkers should nut it up and get in here anyway.

I would rather lynch bjc, but would consider Luca, maybe Aptil, maybe Snow. Probably not 4nxiety or DV or BiPolar out of the low posters.

Out of the high posters, cases require more validity. Only ones I'd really consider at this point are talah and pisskop.

Ok well this is some meat and potatoes, thank you.

At first I thought these was a contradiction but not because you consider BJC a scummy lurker?

[Mister Rogers]

I understand being annoyed by BJC's play but I think we both know there's a lot more bigger fish to fry.

With all this uncertainty I have about those who are active among us, I feel like there are quite possibly 3 or more scum hiding among the lurkers. That is where I currently see the game being played. To those who do not like this, I want to be convinced. So convince me that someone else is scum.

Well an update at least. With this fake town posturing statement that you've quoted, Matt has become a new scum suspect. He is voting the very prolific and thread dominating Aptil.

I think you are right to call him out on it but you also get me thinking...

[Mister Rogers]

@Pere: Your organizational skills. Are we going to pressure a lurker or are we going to lynch an active poster. At this point its becoming concerning because deadline is approaching and I don't think we can afford to waffle about. Scum I think would love a divided town to waste more time towards the deadline.

Activescum- posters are easier to catch as scum later. Pless-mod is on top of prods, etc., so lurkers will most likely be replaced.

Scummy lurkers should be hung

/vigged. Town lurkers should nut it up and get in here anyway.

I would rather lynch bjc, but would consider Luca, maybe Aptil, maybe Snow. Probably not 4nxiety or DV or BiPolar out of the low posters.

Out of the high posters, cases require more validity. Only ones I'd really consider at this point are talah and pisskop.

Ok well this is some meat and potatoes, thank you.

At first I thought these was a contradiction but not because you consider BJC a scummy lurker?

Also, my take on it. On the low posters def not Snow but ya on Anx, Luca & Aptil. On the high posters yes on Talah but no on PK (he is not yummy with ketchup tho).

No on PK because he appears to be using critical analysis on his reads and pushes. Even though he is obviously skilled & can do so as scum, barring a slip I see no reason to lynch him D1.

[AngryPidgeon]

Pidgeon - Oh I'm sorry, I must have missed the part where Luca said he had some intense real life issues happening and arranged V/LA with a view to replacing out if he was unable to play the game. What's that? He actually apologised for not providing content and promised content and then fucked off to 'scum iz intense'-land? Oh my. Well I suppose we should wait for LUCA TO RESPOND THEN, don't you think?

Yes that sure is what happened. And then you made an obscure-ass case on him for it:

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.

[projectmatt]

I feel as though there's been a pretty clear misinterpretation on what I've said versus what you guys are trying to make it look like I'm saying.

Can lurkers be scum?

Absolutely.

If someone is lurking, does this mean they are scum?

No.

Currently, the way I see it - there is no logical justification to vote BJC other than for the idea of a liability lynch (which I disagree with strongly) or because he is lurking. Lynching someone solely on the basis of lurking is not a good idea. I am not, nor have I ever implied that because certain people (like Aptil!) are lurking, that they are town. This shouldn't be hard logic to follow, thank you.

And in terms of the bigger fish I mean that literally as I have indicated, I think that BJC is very likely to be town and there

are

better things to do than vote someone out of policy. As for the mafia? Dunno, I'm working on it.

[projectmatt]

And to be clear, "lynch all lurkers" is a horrible strategy, in my opinion. I think that in this case the lurker I'm voting has scumtold, which is me lynching somebody for scumtelling and not for lurking.

[PeregrineV]

I feel as though there's been a pretty clear misinterpretation on what I've said versus what you guys are trying to make it look like I'm saying.

Can lurkers be scum?

Absolutely.

If someone is lurking, does this mean they are scum?

No.

Currently, the way I see it - there is no logical justification to vote BJC other than for the idea of a liability lynch (which I disagree with strongly) or because he is lurking. Lynching someone solely on the basis of lurking is not a good idea. I am not, nor have I ever implied that because certain people (like Aptil!) are lurking, that they are town. This shouldn't be hard logic to follow, thank you.

And in terms of the bigger fish I mean that literally as I have indicated, I think that BJC is very likely to be town and there

are

better things to do than vote someone out of policy. As for the mafia? Dunno, I'm working on it.

bjc has responded. ISO him and base your townread on what he has said, if you could be so kind.

Also, look at the votes on him and why. Is anyone, in your opinion, voting him "solely for lurking"?

[PeregrineV]

And to be clear, "lynch all lurkers" is a horrible strategy, in my opinion. I think that in this case the lurker I'm voting has scumtold, which is me lynching somebody for scumtelling and not for lurking.

You think Aptil scumtold in 36?

Talk me through it like I'm 6.

[projectmatt]

[quote="In post 573, projectmatt"]Anyway, I don't like the wagon on BJC at all. No, claiming mafia is not objectively a towntell or anything but the way I see it, it looks like he got put as an easy target pretty early in the game and the amount of people jumping on something that is absolutely not a tell at all makes me worried. You can say that BJC is scum for not contributing but of course that fails to account for your reads on literally 40% of the other players who are also not contributing. I might be off the mark here, but there's usually a player like BJC in every large normal game that's, well,

lynchbait

. However, this doesn't make them mafia.[quote]

is the basis for my townread along with me feeling that his tone and reaction to getting pushed on was a fairly natural way of reacting that I read as town. To me, voting BJC for the reasoning of saying "I'm scum" on page 1 is fairly ridiculous, and I have failed to see any other logical case towards BJC, which leads me to believe that he's either being lynched for liability purposes or because he is currently lurking. In Mr. Rodgers case, it appears to be both. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

[projectmatt]

Alright, I have to go get dinner but I'll try to make a relatively bigger post tonight that explains what I haven't liked about Aptil so far. He isn't a solid scumread but yeah, I don't like his beginnings.

[AngryPidgeon]

I am a closet lynch all lurkers fanatic but I have repressed that impulse due to site meta

LOL. IDK why site meta is holding you back, usually people end up waffling all day and compromise lyncinhing random lurkers.

Just going to put this out there

vote: Mister Rogers

I would rather lynch bjc, but would consider Luca, maybe Aptil, maybe Snow. Probably not 4nxiety or DV or BiPolar out of the low posters.

Out of the high posters, cases require more validity. Only ones I'd really consider at this point are talah and pisskop.

Why snow? I cant actually recall anything hes posted which is probably a bad sign for him. If we're lynching lurkers I would support bjc (mostly policy) and aptil (latest post read a little forced, meh).
Talah is just blatantly scummy this game and I have mixed emotions about pisskop but have him a little on the scummy side of the fence and he seems like a lynch people would actually compromise on.

Aptil talking only about people with less post counts then him is pretty lazy and the "Nero has 4 posts but it may as well be 3 because ones a double" in particular made me .

so I'll be back around my prod timer because you fucks obviously need time to work things out between yourselves anyway. Did I mention that I'm an excellent wagon for those of you that want to

push a policy/information

scum lynch? Probably.

ftfy. Stop trying to paint yourself like a bad policy lynch.

I still don't get the anxiety pressure, can we not lynch probable townies today?

[Mister Rogers]

@Matt: Yes you are wrong on your assertion as to why I am voting BJC. It is because he is deliberately lurking (as opposed to Aptil who is simply lurking) and because of the bizarre attention that he got for his simple "I'm scum" post.

I think moar people should be voting him.

[AngryPidgeon]

projectmatt is being pretty pro-town so lets not lynch him today either.

[talah]

Pidgeon - Oh I'm sorry, I must have missed the part where Luca said he had some intense real life issues happening and arranged V/LA with a view to replacing out if he was unable to play the game. What's that? He actually apologised for not providing content and promised content and then fucked off to 'scum iz intense'-land? Oh my. Well I suppose we should wait for LUCA TO RESPOND THEN, don't you think?

Yes that sure is what happened. And then you made an obscure-ass case on him for it:

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.

And what, to you, indicates that this "obscure-ass case" isn't 100% accurate? Do you have information that Luca really *is* having RL issues which are affecting his ability to post - anything at all?
Here's the post:

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.

And anyway like I say I saw him logged in about a day ago, and he posted nothing. Not another prod dodge, not general comments or an indication about how he was going to go about catching up - nothing.

If he was *really* apologetic and had RL issues, perhaps he'd flag a V/LA or replace out or something.
But the fact is, I'm seeing this as more likely a case of newb-scum who has no idea what initial angle to take to further his wincon. And without further information to dispute that likelihood, why would anyone give him a free pass to not be voted for not playing the game?

Why are you defending him?

(anyway back later, so I waive my right of reply for a couple of days)

[PeregrineV]

Anyway, I don't like the wagon on BJC at all. No, claiming mafia is not objectively a towntell or anything but the way I see it, it looks like he got put as an easy target pretty early in the game and the amount of people jumping on something that is absolutely not a tell at all makes me worried. You can say that BJC is scum for not contributing but of course that fails to account for your reads on literally 40% of the other players who are also not contributing. I might be off the mark here, but there's usually a player like BJC in every large normal game that's, well,

lynchbait

. However, this doesn't make them mafia.

is the basis for my townread along with me feeling that his tone and reaction to getting pushed on was a fairly natural way of reacting that I read as town. To me, voting BJC for the reasoning of saying "I'm scum" on page 1 is fairly ridiculous, and I have failed to see any other logical case towards BJC, which leads me to believe that he's either being lynched for liability purposes or because he is currently lurking. In Mr. Rodgers case, it appears to be both. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

OK, then go beyond "his reaction to people voting him for claiming scum".

I'll give you those additional posts.

I think I agree with this.
You're a terrible person.

List why you think this.

And you're a moron.

I also have no clue why you're calling me a terrible person.

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?

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.

And if I'm content with lurking?

[PeregrineV]

EBWOP:

Anyway, I don't like the wagon on BJC at all. No, claiming mafia is not objectively a towntell or anything but the way I see it, it looks like he got put as an easy target pretty early in the game and the amount of people jumping on something that is absolutely not a tell at all makes me worried. You can say that BJC is scum for not contributing but of course that fails to account for your reads on literally 40% of the other players who are also not contributing. I might be off the mark here, but there's usually a player like BJC in every large normal game that's, well,

lynchbait

. However, this doesn't make them mafia.

is the basis for my townread along with me feeling that his tone and reaction to getting pushed on was a fairly natural way of reacting that I read as town. To me, voting BJC for the reasoning of saying "I'm scum" on page 1 is fairly ridiculous, and I have failed to see any other logical case towards BJC, which leads me to believe that he's either being lynched for liability purposes or because he is currently lurking. In Mr. Rodgers case, it appears to be both. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

OK, then go beyond "his reaction to people voting him for claiming scum".

I'll give you those additional posts.

I think I agree with this.
You're a terrible person.

List why you think this.

And you're a moron.

I also have no clue why you're calling me a terrible person.

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?

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.

And if I'm content with lurking?

[AngryPidgeon]

Pidgeon - Oh I'm sorry, I must have missed the part where Luca said he had some intense real life issues happening and arranged V/LA with a view to replacing out if he was unable to play the game. What's that? He actually apologised for not providing content and promised content and then fucked off to 'scum iz intense'-land? Oh my. Well I suppose we should wait for LUCA TO RESPOND THEN, don't you think?

Yes that sure is what happened. And then you made an obscure-ass case on him for it:

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.

And what, to you, indicates that this "obscure-ass case" isn't 100% accurate? Do you have information that Luca really *is* having RL issues which are affecting his ability to post - anything at all?
Here's the post:

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.

And anyway like I say I saw him logged in about a day ago, and he posted nothing. Not another prod dodge, not general comments or an indication about how he was going to go about catching up - nothing.

If he was *really* apologetic and had RL issues, perhaps he'd flag a V/LA or replace out or something.
But the fact is, I'm seeing this as more likely a case of newb-scum who has no idea what initial angle to take to further his wincon. And without further information to dispute that likelihood, why would anyone give him a free pass to not be voted for not playing the game?

Why are you defending him?

(anyway back later, so I waive my right of reply for a couple of days)

Wow. How are people townreading this.

He logged in and didn't post. Congratulations! You've identified a lurker. Confetti EVERYWHERE.

I have no idea who Luca is or what is schedule looks like. All I know is that he hasn't posted jack shit that is readable which makes him approximately 75% likely to be town because that is about par for most games.

Yes, it SURE WOULD BE NICE if he'd

post in the thread

to tell us about a possible VLA or actually just get a replacement if he cant play. This is more evidence to support the case that Luca is in fact a lurker.

[AngryPidgeon]

Yates : 7 posts : Has only 7 posts but all of them have content . Reads town to me .

The irony.

[Damon_Gant]

To be clear, I am no proponent of "Lynch all Lurkers". My objective is to lynch scum. My beliefs are that:

a) The lurkers are detrimental to town and need to be pressured out of their shells
b) Scum are disproportionately represented in the lurkers and therefore probability dictates that the lurkers are a great place to go scumhunting.

I could totally vote for an active player if there was a compelling case that they were scum. However, until then, the lurkers look like a great place to look. What's important is that I don't just want to lynch a lurker. I want to lynch a lurker

who is scum

. I look forward to seeing matt's post about aptil.

[Zdenek]

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

It's cause he's scum.

Rather obvious here: MOAR BJC VOTES.

Why's that?
I think Pisskop is scummier. Especially after his response.

I'm having trouble finding a real scumread here, and I'm continually re-reading.

I have a suggestion.

And when I call it out he sits back and instead of elaboration let's you swoop in.

I responded before AP, so he didn't swoop in.

I'm not talking about my talah read because nobody is asking about it.

Me voting you should have been your cue.

His reason for voting me is weak, and his support poor and wifomy.

Maybe, but my new reasons - your response to my vote - are bodacious.

Is this a style of his?

I do both.

[pisskop]

@DG

Who do you consider to be a lurker?

[Mister Rogers]

202 is a terrible Luca vote and a Doc gutfeel dressed in logic. Why would he need to dress it up? also, for a player who says this:

Mastin's play continues to be very bleh. Giving garbage reads, and now trying to spoonfeed us what his meta is. That's not going to work - when I have time tonight I'll be looking at Mastin's meta for myself. It does need doing, because of the unorthodox playstyle - but I'm not going to be told by the player himself what his meta is, and essentially that his meta this game corresponds with his meta for town.

And then doesn't meta Luca. My experience with Luca is as a lurker/very unhelpful player until later and additionally there are better fish in the sea to eyeball.

Perhaps you believe there are "better fish in the sea to eyeball" - and

trust me, I'm eyeballing everyone

I don't see any evidence in your ISO that this is the case. My rust trust has run out.

[pisskop]

Maybe, but my new reasons - your response to my vote - are bodacious.

Good luck with that. Whenever you feel like substantiating anything you say feel free to use that funky squiggle mark above the foreword slash on your keyboard - after you press the shift key, of course.

[projectmatt]

Yeah there is nothing town about a joke early in the game. Sheesh.

I have nothing so far considering I made one comment right before I left for home, just got home when I made the other comment while skimming the game.

So yeah... I have no "take" on this game so far at all, lol. Except for the usual people that are too uptight.

These are bjc's first two posts after "I'm scum" and I actually like how kind of annoyed and rebellious they sound. I would expect bjc as mafia to probably be more defensive towards the early accusations on him but basically the gist of what he's saying is "It was a joke, and no I don't have any reads so screw off". Bad play? Sure, but at the same time I don't see it being scum motivated at all.

The rest of his ISO is similar - with arrogant, self defeatist comments that pretty much make no attempt to generate content but at the same time I really, really have trouble seeing this kind of silly playstyle be something indicative of scum. If anything, I believe his refusal to play seriously under pressure actually kind of solidifies my townread of him.

And if I'm content with lurking?

..this is pretty much just a "screw you, guys" post but it also looks like it came from town for reasons listed above. I don't like the amount of people who jumped on him for his first post due to a joke or how there's been kind of a weird focus on him ever since.

[projectmatt]

@Matt: Yes you are wrong on your assertion as to why I am voting BJC. It is because he is deliberately lurking (as opposed to Aptil who is simply lurking) and because of the bizarre attention that he got for his simple "I'm scum" post.

I think moar people should be voting him.

1. How do you make the distinction between "intentionally" lurking and "simply" lurking? Those two seem like they are exactly the same thing. Bjc is just honest about his own apathy.

2. The second reason you listed is, to me, a very good reason why you should not be voting him and instead be focusing on the people who bizarrely attacked him.