Newbie 1757 - Game Over

[Vijarada]

"I haven't analysed anything"

[Huntress]

Vote Count 1.2

XnadrojX (3) - Accountant, nn30, Wyvernite
Accountant (1) - XnadrojX
nn30 (1) - Vijarada

Not voting (4) - Chicken2013, copper223, fruitsman, shannon


With nine players alive, it takes five votes to lynch.

Deadline for Day One is Sunday, 27th November 5pm GMT, (in (expired on 2016-11-27 17:00:00)).

[nn30]

He also unvoted copper when prompted, suggesting he's trying to be too cooperative.

Ffs I explained this already, it was my RVS vote that i forgot to get off before exiting RVS. Is it that hard for you to understand?

I found that your explanation insufficient to change how I feel about it.

[shannon]

I've never been so confident
in a lynch 5 Pages in, lets go boys

I don't want him to be at L-1 when we have like 4 people who haven't contributed. But with my vote and shannon's vote, he's absolutely getting lynched today.

Wait a minute..."put your vote where your read is" is weird from a person who was scared of 3 votes on page 1. Maybe you're trying to get my vote off you? Because you didn't say the same thing to shannon who heavily scumread nadro but didn't vote him like five posts ago.

Disagree, it's less weird to have L-1 now than it was on page 1.

We have time to wait out some of the lurkers, so let's do that. It's silly to lynch without getting all input. But yeah, I think XX is toast.

[nn30]

What kinds of input are we looking for from the lurkers?

[Accountant]

Mainly I'm interested in forcing them to take a solid opinion on XX.

[shannon]

I'm just wondering whether the game will change when they start participating in it. It could be that one of them proves scummier than XX. I don't want to let potential scum get away with lurking, but it's tricky because lynching lurkers just because they're lurkers is also a poor strategy.

[Wyvernite]

UNVOTE:

VOTE: Fruitman

You need to hurry up and talk and provide substance so we can lynch scum instead of your inactive ass

[Huntress]

I'm finding replacements for Chicken2013 and copper223 who have not picked up their role PMS.

[Huntress]

Keyenpeydee replaces Chicken2013.

[Wyvernite]

Welcome Keyenpeydee!

[Huntress]

ArcAngel9 replaces copper223.

[ArcAngel9]

6 pages already. Not bad

Hello folks and welcome newbies.. Will catch up soon,may be by tomorrow. gotta sleep now.

[shannon]

Hi replacements, thanks for playing <3

[Accountant]

Hello and welcome replacements! Take your time to catch up, and then share how you feel about the state of the game or individual players!

[keyenpeydee]

Hi people. I'll read the thread later!

[nn30]

Welcome!

[Huntress]

fruitsman has been prodded.

[shannon]

*sigh* Anyone else feel like the game is on hold a bit?

[Accountant]

Yeah, replacements can be rough. I'm waiting for them to come in so I can talk to them.

[keyenpeydee]

Okay so I'm here and catching up. Alright I'm on page 1. Give me time to read the game by heart.

[keyenpeydee]

Can I also ask everybody to give me a summary on what happened? Everything is too TL;DR and I'm pretty much spent my whole 30-40 minutes reading pages 1 and 2 so reading posts isn't my hobby. This isn't lack of wanting to read everything, I'll read but I still want summary on what happened. Also, Accountant looks town. I still don't get the case on nn30.

[keyenpeydee]

Wait what I'm still on copper? oops lemme fix that real quick

UNVOTE: Copper

and yes I count that as stalking

PEdit: There was a cover up. You clearly stated "scum" in 10 followed by "newbie town" in post 12. There's nothing to clarify

This definitely reads as scummy. Especially the part where you didn't put your vote on me...

VOTE: xnadrojx

Of all the scummy things I did this is the one that asks you to lynch me? Me moving off my RVS vote after forgetting about you is scummy? What in that post suggests I had intention to vote you?

So you actually know you're acting scummy? But in this post, I kinda agreed with.

[keyenpeydee]

nn30, why has your tone changed to extreme defensiveness/hostility when you were relatively calm before?

Compare the tone in these two posts:

You have indeed found an inconsistency.

I play, and write, quickly when I play mafia scum. As a result, my posts lean towards 'stream of consciousness' rather than 'carefully considered and reread to deduce possible implications.'

When I unvoted you in post 10 I was doing so because I didn't want scum to have the opportunity to hammer you. Just because this is what was on my mind at the time of that post doesn't mean that I can't point back to it and say 'well other scenarios exist which would also be disadvantageous to town.' Raising the possibility of a townie being the hammer is one such consideration.

The real question is whether or not inconsistencies are scummy. In and of themselves, I don't believe them to be.

If you're looking for inconsistencies, look for inconsistencies in reads. Say on one page I have someone listed as a town-lean and on another page six days later that same person is a scum-lean. If I've offered no reason as to why that read has changed, and that person hasn't done anything worth changing a read over lately, that's scummy. It implies I don't have a consistent read list and that I'm pretending to have one instead.

Finding inconsistency of stated logic from post to post is NAI. It implies that I'm human - a mistake both town and scum can and do make.

@ Accountant - Do you agree with these competing versions of inconsistency, and why?

versus

I understand that you've already moved your vote, but you already voted me for being inconsistent. You're scum reading me for my inconsistency, but you're being inconsistent yourself! Do you see how stupid this is?

There was no cover up. Only my attempts at clarification. Stop trying to throw shade at me.

In the space of half an hour. What is the reasoning for this discrepancy?

I definitely agree with all of this.

[keyenpeydee]

Of all the scummy things I did this is the one that asks you to lynch me? Me moving off my RVS vote after forgetting about you is scummy? What in that post suggests I had intention to vote you?

Of all the scummy things you did? So you're acknowledging that you've done scummy things - which ones?

Post 52 doesn't need to imply an intention to vote me. Your posts 26, 31, and 35 imply a scum read on me. Not voting your scum reads is scummy.

Moving your vote off of someone, when asked, is scummy. It implies that you want to be 'cooperative' with the town members.

No. Not voting your scum reads isn't scummy. I'm not defending Nadroj here but It's a player's play and you shouldn't say that's scummy. You've even pointed out back then that you won't change your playstyle, what if Nadroj is like that too?

He even clarified it on post 55.

This post doesn't say that I'm actually town-reading nadroj. I'm still reading the game before I jump into further conclusions.