Newbie 1707 - Game Over

[SethYazura]

A single mislynch will put you at a MyLo, you lynch me knowing this don't you? Are you certain your next lynches after I flip town will be correct? How so?

[wgeurts]

Red Coyote, me not having drawn scum in so long was a comment for people to take into consideration of the thought I could play a great scum game.

Heh

Also saying we're just calling all your stuff crumpets which isnt the case is not a defense.

Why did you deny that you're calling my stuff crumpets, calling me crumpets means you can't understand me or you are being ignorant, this is significant enough to be a case. You are pressing on me for a lynch when you admit you can't even understand what I'm saying.

I wont deny I'm calling your posts that, but ive explained why I believe that which you refuse to touch.

[wgeurts]

A single mislynch will put you at a MyLo, you lynch me knowing this don't you? Are you certain your next lynches after I flip town will be correct? How so?

Actually we have 3 mislynches before loss.

[wgeurts]

Also I've already suggested two partners.
You're flip would be a gold mine for associate tells either way it goes.

[SethYazura]

Also I've already suggested two partners.

I don't want to make you suggest two partners, I want to clarify to you why I am a bad lynch(wait why I'm clarifying it to a scum?).

You're flip would be a gold mine for associate tells either way it goes.

It's a gold mine since the town will figure out you are one of the scum here either way my flip goes.

[SethYazura]

A single mislynch will put you at a MyLo, you lynch me knowing this don't you? Are you certain your next lynches after I flip town will be correct? How so?

Actually we have 3 mislynches before loss.

Practically it's 3, but the 2nd mislynch will only leave 3 town alive, while there is still 2 scum, you're still alive at this day since you're scum, those 3 townies will parrot at you and you will make them cause another mislynch easily, this is one of the outcomes that can occur and I won't let that happen.
VOTE: wgeurts
Fortunately I'm still confident with the town.

I wont deny I'm calling your posts that, but ive explained why I believe that which you refuse to touch.

Don't bury it in a wall of text if you want me to notice it.

[SethYazura]

Why is it that we are the only ones who are actively posting?

[Murph]

@murph: do you think he's town?

I have a hard time believing scum would play it like this. With that said, Seth's play has been anything but conventional. So :shrug:

Rather than push the policy lynch, it would be best for the game, and perhaps the town, if Seth requested replacement over resignation. We'd then have an opportunity to scrutinize Seth's role from a fresh perspective rather than our current combative player on the verge of quitting.

[Murph]

Good morning y'all

[Murph]

Try to get more data to engage people. I think these should all be relevant...

@Murph: What do you think about hoppic?

Hop made a questionable post early about not understanding what was being posted. Since then Hop has been engaging in discussions and scum hunting. Hop's focus on Red's supposed scumslip indicates that they are most likely not scum'mates.

While it's difficult to look past that early post confessing confusion, Hop's current play indicates more town than scum.

[Murph]

Quick recap:

Against policy lynch ✓
For player replacement ✓
Request more participation ✓

Are you against policy lynches in general or in this specific scenario?

Also side note am I supposed to see an emote at the bottom or is it supposed to be just text?

Policy lynch connotes that we are not lynching in attempt to rid the town of scum but rather to rid the town of a problem player. I cannot get behind a potentially adverse lynch just to teach a lesson. That's not why we game.

The solution to removing a problem player lies with said player and the mod.

Now, if we were to take a vote on forcing a replacement, we could have a different discussion.

With all of that said, it looks like Seth has rejoined the game in a manner that suggests desire to continue rather than a desire to resign.

TBC

[Murph]

I just see text for . I don't think @ does anything special, just to be more specific that a response is requested. Not a rhetorical question I guess. Don't need to do it I suppose...

Yes, the emojis/ smilies are lacking at this site.

[Murph]

Actually, I feel like I put my thoughts, about your play, out there coherently and concisely.
The reason I am voting you is documented in my previous post prior to my vote. It has nothing to do with you being controversial at all.

Elaborate.

And those reasons are ?

The number one reason being, of course, it's an "easy" choice. I don't post as much as most of you. It's easy to scapegoat me and call me the "big, bad IC" that's trying to "manipulate" you. Like I said, I'm controversial in the sense that I am willing to always say what I think and unwilling to taper those thoughts to coddle weak-willed townies that nervous about making waves. Other reasons? I know what I'm talking about and the scum would want to get rid of me early on if I am town (which, even with your vote bias, I think you would agree to). I say what I mean and I don't apologize for it.

That something being a clear and flagrant attempt by you to pander as you push your agenda.

Absolutely I am trying to pander to them. Given that I am confident they are both town, it's in my best interest to work together with them. I have no shame in pandering to townies if it gets them to work with me, lol. Why would you think that this is a negative thing?

My vote for you has nothing to do with your status on this site or how often you post. That's just a convenient crutch for you to lean on.
I quoted your posts and pointed to exactly why I believed you were scum in a concise and coherent manner. What I did find manipulative was your obvious pandering in attempt to garner support for your agenda.

[Murph]

I may have a blind spot to Seth. I just don't see anything particularly negative there. Perhaps if someone presented a formal case against him I could be persuaded.

Why do you have a "blind spot" for Seth ?

Why do you need a formal case? Seth's early actions and subsequent behavior all indicated that he was not acting in the towns best interest and then was on the verge of resigning when called out for said behavior.

[Murph]

Red Coyote, me not having drawn scum in so long was a comment for people to take into consideration of the thought I could play a great scum game.

This is meta. We should not go here.

[Murph]

Also I really dislike this logic of let's lynch him for being a bad town player... in a beginner's game on day 1. A policy lynch? I don't think so.

I think that players need to defend themselves. I don't see Seth doing that.

So all of my past posts intended to defend myself is not actually defense in your book?
I can't give you a scum read as I don't trust everyone else except KaladinStormblessed for the newbtowniness and RedCoyote not pushing to lynch me when he has the perfect opportunity to do so without drawing suspicion on himself. I only explained wgeurts and Simonyd as the rest of the players are parroting them except RC.
If you can't decide I am town, but can't decide I am scum either, don't push me for a lynch, I asked you a question what will you gain if I flip town, and who is my partner if I am scum? Of course you ignored this and call it nonsense.
Emotions do sway and influence posts and the players won't even notice this, we can quickly notice this in another player if I am actually scum.

This is minutia

Your play to date has been anything but town friendly.

[wgeurts]

@murph: do you think he's town?

I have a hard time believing scum would play it like this. With that said, Seth's play has been anything but conventional. So :shrug:

Rather than push the policy lynch, it would be best for the game, and perhaps the town, if Seth requested replacement over resignation. We'd then have an opportunity to scrutinize Seth's role from a fresh perspective rather than our current combative player on the verge of quitting.

Strategic replacement is against the rules and can get you banned.

[wgeurts]

Also I'm definitely not proposing a policy lynch on Seth.
Going to write my analysis on the final few players now.

[Murph]

@murph: do you think he's town?

I have a hard time believing scum would play it like this. With that said, Seth's play has been anything but conventional. So :shrug:

Rather than push the policy lynch, it would be best for the game, and perhaps the town, if Seth requested replacement over resignation. We'd then have an opportunity to scrutinize Seth's role from a fresh perspective rather than our current combative player on the verge of quitting.

Strategic replacement is against the rules and can get you banned.

I'm not sure what strategic replacement is however I've only played one game at this site and there were like at least 8 replacements if not more in that game.


My point being, if Seth doesn't care to play the game and wants out, then replace him before policy lynching him.

Seems prudent and pro-town imo

[Murph]

My bad, only 5 replacements.

[wgeurts]

@murph: do you think he's town?

I have a hard time believing scum would play it like this. With that said, Seth's play has been anything but conventional. So :shrug:

Rather than push the policy lynch, it would be best for the game, and perhaps the town, if Seth requested replacement over resignation. We'd then have an opportunity to scrutinize Seth's role from a fresh perspective rather than our current combative player on the verge of quitting.

Strategic replacement is against the rules and can get you banned.

I'm not sure what strategic replacement is however I've only played one game at this site and there were like at least 8 replacements if not more in that game.


My point being, if Seth doesn't care to play the game and wants out, then replace him before policy lynching him.

Seems prudent and pro-town imo

Basically replacing out for anything game related besides finding the game too toxic etc. is not allowed. Being too busy or site-flaking isn't game related for instance and is allowed for a reason to replace out.

[Murph]

@murph: do you think he's town?

I have a hard time believing scum would play it like this. With that said, Seth's play has been anything but conventional. So :shrug:

Rather than push the policy lynch, it would be best for the game, and perhaps the town, if Seth requested replacement over resignation. We'd then have an opportunity to scrutinize Seth's role from a fresh perspective rather than our current combative player on the verge of quitting.

Strategic replacement is against the rules and can get you banned.

I'm not sure what strategic replacement is however I've only played one game at this site and there were like at least 8 replacements if not more in that game.


My point being, if Seth doesn't care to play the game and wants out, then replace him before policy lynching him.

Seems prudent and pro-town imo

Basically replacing out for anything game related besides finding the game too toxic etc. is not allowed. Being too busy or site-flaking isn't game related for instance and is allowed for a reason to replace out.

So it's simply semantics at this point.

If Seth wants to play, I have no problem with it. The only problem I was having was with the policy lynch discussion and Seth's apparent desire to resign from the game.

Neither of those options seemed appealing to me.

[Simoyd]

I like shawarma

[AlpacaAlpaca]

I was so hyped to analyse a new post but it turns out that your just bored and enjoy shawarma

[Murph]

lol