Mini Normal 1873 (Game Over)

Alisae · Post Post #100 (ISO) » Fri Jan 20, 2017 6:09 pm

VOTE: LicketyQuickety
Choo Choo

Garmr · Post Post #101 (ISO) » Fri Jan 20, 2017 6:14 pm

I don't think It's scummy to have flawed reasoning like Lickety had. Town can be Flawed as well.

Garmr · Post Post #102 (ISO) » Fri Jan 20, 2017 6:19 pm

That being said

In post 99, karnos wrote:VOTE: LicketyQuickety

Real vote time.

This vote feel opportunistic to me. It' hasn't got real reasoning and I feel like it's on someone he thinks will end up being a wagon.

VOTE: karnos

ISO · Post Post #103 (ISO) » Fri Jan 20, 2017 6:25 pm

Third Votecount

:

Alisae - 2 (PranaDevil, XnadrojX)

LicketyQuickety - 2 (karnos, Alisae)

nydushermain - 1 (All Alone)
Garmr - 1 (KTthecreeper)
XnadrojX - 1 (shannon)
All Alone - 1 (Lexa)
shannon - 1 (LicketyQuickety)
karnos - 1 (Garmr)

Not Voting - 3 (BlueBloodedToffee, nydushermain, Pepchoninga)

With

13

alive, it takes

7

to lynch.

Day 1's deadline is Friday, February 10th, @ 2:30 PM PST--(expired on 2017-02-10 14:30:00).

V/LA Notices/Mod Notes:

mastina, the moderator, is V/LA over weekends.

karnos · Post Post #104 (ISO) » Fri Jan 20, 2017 6:45 pm

In post 102, Garmr wrote:That being said

In post 99, karnos wrote:VOTE: LicketyQuickety

Real vote time.
This vote feel opportunistic to me. It' hasn't got real reasoning and I feel like it's on someone he thinks will end up being a wagon.

VOTE: karnos

In post 101, Garmr wrote:I don't think It's scummy to have flawed reasoning like Lickety had. Town can be Flawed as well.

Seems like you tried to guess the reasoning, and then assumed I had none afterward. Weird.

If LQ is scum, you are the partner jumping to derail the lynch.

I wasn't scum reading him based on his logic, it was his defensiveness and over-explaining himself that pinged me.

Also, isn't an opportunistic vote usually characterized as jumping on a growing wagon?

Alisae · Post Post #105 (ISO) » Fri Jan 20, 2017 6:46 pm

As fuck as this VCA wagons are going to be to look at later, pre-flip associations are bad. Especially this early.

<<< I'm one of the three queens of VCA, so when I mod games, I give every possible variable that players would be interested in tracking during VCs. Hella lots of work, but worth it. <3 >>>

Alisae · Post Post #106 (ISO) » Fri Jan 20, 2017 6:46 pm

wtf did I just write.

<<< Something something "the mod is an awesome woman" something. So, just the usual. >>>

karnos · Post Post #107 (ISO) » Fri Jan 20, 2017 6:49 pm

Agreed, but was hoping to see his reaction to the accusation. You make me sad

shannon · Post Post #108 (ISO) » Fri Jan 20, 2017 6:50 pm

In post 88, LicketyQuickety wrote:
In post 84, Alisae wrote:I asked for reasons knowing not to take them seriously as well. Does that make me scum?
How do you know they were going to take the reasons seriously?
And why can't they ask for reasons if they are town?
What makes you think they are attempting to push the game forward.
How do you know you aren't taking their post the wrong way?
1) That isn't all you did though.
2) Can you tell me they were not going to? Why would you think that? I see more reason to believe they would than they wouldn't; its the simplest explanation, Occam's Razor.
3) They can, but tbh it looks like a really weird place to ask that. Again, that is all shannon has done. Its a really simple question to ask. The trick is finding out if it is out of place or not and I think it is.
4) I think its a fake way to
look
like you are trying to push the game forward.
5) I could be. Its not a solid read at all. It is, however, an actual starting point out of RVS.

I asked what the reasons were because the poster said they had reasons and they

weren't good

. Whether or not I took them seriously would depend on what the reasons were, or whether the poster backtracked (i.e. said that there were no reasons, they were just talking shit or reaction testing or whatever).

Whether my post was forward-pushing, fake forward-pushing, or just making conversation, your reaction to it has been provocative. So yay for that.

In post 94, Garmr wrote:
In post 90, LicketyQuickety wrote:Clearly this is almost a Newbie game if people have this kind of thing to say about my analysis.
You know you should of waited before trying to push her right. Asking questions can be protown or a scum tell depending on what they do with the answer. So instead of waiting to see what she does with it you pretty much spoiled anyway of telling if she is scum or not

This is a good point.

Also worth noting that the answer itself is now compromised by all the discussion around my question-asking.

Alisae · Post Post #109 (ISO) » Fri Jan 20, 2017 6:51 pm

Now that I know you were reaction testing I make myself sad too.
I'ma go cry now.

Alisae · Post Post #110 (ISO) » Fri Jan 20, 2017 6:52 pm

You are a very good mod btw.
And friendly too.
I like friendly.

<<< <3 >>>

Garmr · Post Post #111 (ISO) » Fri Jan 20, 2017 6:59 pm

In post 104, karnos wrote:
In post 102, Garmr wrote:That being said

In post 99, karnos wrote:VOTE: LicketyQuickety

Real vote time.
This vote feel opportunistic to me. It' hasn't got real reasoning and I feel like it's on someone he thinks will end up being a wagon.

VOTE: karnos

In post 101, Garmr wrote:I don't think It's scummy to have flawed reasoning like Lickety had. Town can be Flawed as well.
Seems like you tried to guess the reasoning, and then assumed I had none afterward. Weird.

If LQ is scum, you are the partner jumping to derail the lynch.

I wasn't scum reading him based on his logic, it was his defensiveness and over-explaining himself that pinged me.

Also, isn't an opportunistic vote usually characterized as jumping on a growing wagon?

Lol I'm his partner for trying to derail his wagon. That's the type of accusation people make when they want someone to back off them.

I honestly think his hasn't done anything scummy yet. If his scum and I'm wrong then I'm wrong. But I have a gut feeling that he isn't.

When you say his overly defensive I don't think that makes him scum. His being defending his logic not that his town/scum. A town that believes in his logic and is really stubborn won't want to hear what others will have to say and may act that way. If he was scum I would expect him to retreat a little bit back instead of going full force at it.

Honestly If you had a reasoning for him and didn't just make one up on the spot why wouldn't you post it with your vote? It's towns job to convince others to vote with you. Scum won't care as much.

Scum try to predict the best place there votes while town are looking for scum. You look like the earlier to me so that's why I'm on you.

Alisae · Post Post #112 (ISO) » Fri Jan 20, 2017 7:00 pm

OMGAWD GARMR JUST SCUMCLAIMED LOL
LOL
LOL
ECKS DEE

Garmr · Post Post #113 (ISO) » Fri Jan 20, 2017 7:03 pm

In post 112, Alisae wrote:OMGAWD GARMR JUST SCUMCLAIMED LOL
LOL
LOL
ECKS DEE

????

Alisae · Post Post #114 (ISO) » Fri Jan 20, 2017 7:04 pm

You said you were his partner trying to derail the wagon hehe
don't mind me just a joke.

nydushermain · Post Post #115 (ISO) » Fri Jan 20, 2017 7:17 pm

VOTE: Alisae

For people who don't know him, this is the best way to figure out his alignment. If he's scum, he'll live. If he's town, he'll self hammer.

Alisae · Post Post #116 (ISO) » Fri Jan 20, 2017 7:19 pm

LOL Out of my completed games I haven't even rolled scum.

Need me to desperado you again?

Garmr · Post Post #117 (ISO) » Fri Jan 20, 2017 7:19 pm

In post 114, Alisae wrote:You said you were his partner trying to derail the wagon hehe
don't mind me just a joke.

Lol oh k Still kinda don't get it through.

What do you think about XnadrojX/karnos/liquity/ through? I would like to hear more of your opinions through because you sheep a lot of noticed. Sheeping isn't bad as town since there are times town need to sheep. But it's always good to have some independent thought. It helps me in a variety of ways if all the players are actively posting with their own thoughts. Since I thrive in those scenarios.

nydushermain · Post Post #118 (ISO) » Fri Jan 20, 2017 7:20 pm

Rofl I didn't check your games. I'm still slightly salty about your self hammer. I had you as literal locked town and was going to ride or die with you until the end (even though you didn't reciprocate).

Garmr · Post Post #119 (ISO) » Fri Jan 20, 2017 7:21 pm

I'd rather have Alisae improve as a player than policy lynch him every game.

XnadrojX · Post Post #120 (ISO) » Fri Jan 20, 2017 7:23 pm

VOTE: karnos

Most bullshit defence ever. This is the few kinds of defence I feel warrants a lynch even more than something like what LQ did.

I'd rather push a karnos wagon

Alisae · Post Post #121 (ISO) » Fri Jan 20, 2017 7:26 pm

Nyd I got salty and I was hard tunneling Pep that game. I also thought DBW in that game was a cop lmao.

Jordan I don't like him responding to LQ's points that were directed towards me. I don't see a reason for to interject there. Also I don't like how he basicly threw shade at LQ telling him to go back to a newbie, it felt like discredditing coming from scum.
Karnos I really don't have a good feel on their posts atm.
LQ is where I'm voting atm mostly because I felt like they were reaching with their jump on shannon. Furthermore they feel like they're playing in a newbie because of the responses they are getting from their analysis is really bad.

Alisae · Post Post #122 (ISO) » Fri Jan 20, 2017 7:26 pm

Wow I didn't know a policy lynch was going to happen 5 pages in.

Garmr · Post Post #123 (ISO) » Fri Jan 20, 2017 7:26 pm

wow I just realized my post 111 has so many grammar issues.

XnadrojX · Post Post #124 (ISO) » Fri Jan 20, 2017 7:29 pm

Allow me to destroy another post.

In post 104, karnos wrote:Seems like you tried to guess the reasoning, and then assumed I had none afterward. Weird.

If LQ is scum, you are the partner jumping to derail the lynch.

I wasn't scum reading him based on his logic, it was his defensiveness and over-explaining himself that pinged me.

Also, isn't an opportunistic vote usually characterized as jumping on a growing wagon?

1. It's not weird, it's what Town does when they see a naked vote.
2. That's a trash argument, that's essentially saying he's scum for questioning you.
3. Not looking like that the way you voted
4. An opportunistic vote is when you see the opportunity to vote someone with little possible repurcussions, in this case, LQ was likely going to be wagoned and leading the wagon in advance like this has little implications on you tomorrow.

PEdit: I told him to go back to a newbie after he said this is a newbie game for questioning his analysis. I got pissed and telling him to go to a newbie is my way of telling him that he shouldn't tell people they suck when he's the one sucking.
I responded to LQ's points because they were absolute bullshit and you can't expect a straightminded person to just sit around and let such an obviously bullshit argument fly by without being questioned.

PEdit 2: No policy lynches are going to happen page 5