[Game Over] Open 673 - Tit for Tat

[Siblings Quarrel]

I think this is provably untrue - could you provide supporting evidence that makes you believe this?

Yeah sure. Go look at your iso, then at yourself, then your iso, then at yourself.
-Ali

[Siblings Quarrel]

Also losing confidence in Siblings Quarrel. The Sheep wagon feels very forced

How was it forced?
-Ali

[MiniDeathStar]

O

pen

G

ame

#

673

Notice

Tucan Safe

has failed to pick up his prod and will be replaced.

[MiniDeathStar]

February 8, 2017 - 12:51 AM (GMT)

Day 1

As the clock tower announced the 12th hour, a hooded figure appeared amongst the crowd
and casually strolled in. Conversations immediately halted at its arrival and even the odd
hushed whisper died a moment later, like a cockroach stamped by a heavy boot.

Frogger:

Who the hell are you and what are you doing here? We're sorta busy hanging a shepard.

Cooperative Sheep:

Feck off, Frogson.

Kop:

Aye, about that.

The figure cast its hood off and revealed itself as a stubby bearded man, suspiciously
resembling the old Tucan Safe, who had so far been absent from the meeting.

Kop:

I'm here on behalf of the old Tucan Safe, who has so far been absent from the meeting. Old man kicked
the bucket this morning. Mayor sent me to cover for him. I'm related to him by way of---

Transcend:

Blah-blah okay cool. Can we continue now? We have a shepherd to hang.

Unimpressed by the anticlimax of his arrival, Kop quietly joined the crowd and asked for a
brief update on what he had missed. A few moments later everybody including Kop had
forgotten about the old Tucan Safe and resumed deciding the shepherd's fate as if nothing
had disturbed their conversation.

Cooperative Sheep (L-4)

: Charloux, Siblings Quarrel, Sesq

Sesq (L-5)

: Cooperative Sheep, The_Jester

Intermission (L-5)

: Bellaphant, Transcend

ECMitchell (L-6)

: projectmatt

Bellaphant (L-6)

: theplague42

Transcend (L-6)

: Intermission

Not voting:

Kop, ECMitchell

With 12 alive it takes 7 to lynch.

Deadline for Day 1 actions:

February 19, 2017 - 8:00 PM (GMT)

You have (expired on 2017-02-19 20:00:00) to discuss and decide on a lynch.

Vote Count 1.04

[Siblings Quarrel]

If you can't or won't explain yourself, then it's fair to vote you.

VOTE: Transcend

This might actually be a scumclaim? Maaaaaybe.
Idunno, will talk to Frogger about it.
-Ali

[theplague42]

You're the only person I recognize. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Apparently never.

That's an awful shallow read to just vote her for asking questions. You know nothing of her play and you're just going to throw a bullshit reason out there.

You're going to have to explain why the questions are coming from scum, and not town.

-Frog

Well at first it seemed like she wanted to ask some questions then back off, unlike Intermission who kept following up on what he was saying. If you claim that's her playstyle, then fine, I can accept that. But don't try to claim that my lack of meta-knowledge means I can't make a statement about what I think is suspicious because of "playstyle".

@plague,

genuinely curious about your vote: maybe some of my points are more 'subtext' than others', but I've certainly expressed opinions.

See above.

Not sure what to think of Transcend's non-compliance. Seems bored, which would indicate VT to me.

AI = Alignment Indicative, NAI = Non-alignment indicative

TIL.

@Sheep, why do you think a pressure vote would work if there was nothing behind it?

[Siblings Quarrel]

Well at first it seemed like she wanted to ask some questions then back off, unlike Intermission who kept following up on what he was saying. If you claim that's her playstyle, then fine, I can accept that. But don't try to claim that my lack of meta-knowledge means I can't make a statement about what I think is suspicious because of "playstyle".

I'll claim whatever I want to claim tyvm.

Your scum read was based off "lots of questions, not much saying"

Yet you didn't even try to bother to figure out if that's her playstyle. You just pigeonholed her into scum for that. That's why I think it's bullshit, because you made ZERO attempt to understand if it's her playstyle. So yes, I will claim your lack of meta-knowledge means you can't make a statement about something suspicious since you didn't try to understand if it really is suspicious in the first place.

I'll give you a hint ... Bella as town isn't the most confident, is pretty cautious (which she's been with me so far), and doesn't play all tryhard.

Scum bella is a total tryhard and is more confident with her reads (I wonder why...because she knows who everyone is).

And if all you think is she's asked questions with not much saying, I'll disagree. She's made some subtle points that you haven't picked up on, and instead have just dismissed as questions without saying.

[Cooperative Sheep]

@Sibling - Should I take that as a 'I can't explain the issue with your questions' or a 'I refuse to answer questions'?

@Bella - I acyaally did address my evidence - he cited issue with all my questions that went nowhere, i pointed out that I'd only asked two questions at that point (and am willing to argue that one went to a valid answer and the other wasn't answered yet. At this point I've added on another question to Sibling, and he avoided it - so if my questions are indeed going nowhere, i fail to see how that is my fault in Sibling's eyes.

I will admit that Frogger and I don't vibe well, but the tell against me came from the other head - so who knows how much is or is not Frogger's influence.

@non-Frog sibling - Here's the timeline;

1. Sheep votes Sesq
2. Sesq reacts
3. You call me scummy for not doing more with my vote.
4. Sheep follows up on Sesq reaction.

I literally didn't post between 1 and 4, so you called me out *before* you had a chance to see what I would do and called me scummy for not doing anything - how do you justify that?

Vote: Cooperative Siblings

[Cooperative Sheep]

@The Plague - I had presented a case on Sesq - therefore it wasn't an empty wagon, therefore it had as much chance to cause pressure as any other wagon going at the time.

[Cooperative Sheep]

Vote: Siblings Quarrel

Odd mental juxtaposition there

[Siblings Quarrel]

LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL sheep just scumslipped. Subconsciously voted himself because he knows he's scum.

-Frog

[Siblings Quarrel]

I literally didn't post between 1 and 4, so you called me out *before* you had a chance to see what I would do and called me scummy for not doing anything - how do you justify that?

And that's EXACTLY the problem.

You didn't follow up with any questions for sesq, and other pressure for sesq. Just a vote. It was clear you didn't care about *actually* pressuring him, just throwing a vote there instead to look like you were doing something.

You could have immediately followed your vote up with some pressure, challenged him on things in his ISO, asked him what he felt about certain people, but you didn't.

[Siblings Quarrel]

Baaaaa

Vote: Intermission

I could also lynch Sesq (for coming across stilted to me, which, to stave off the inevitable question - is also how Intermission feels.)

I like Siblings and Jester for town.

How about we try to get Sesq to actually do something relevant to the game - or flash wagon him for funsises! Either way, we win.

Vote: Sesq

You could have pressured sesq on the things you think made him stilted. But you chose not to. Instead just a vote for pressure, but no ACTUAL pressure on him, like trying to sort him through pressing the "stilted" part or by interacting with him.

[Siblings Quarrel]

How about we try to get Sesq to actually do something relevant to the game - or flash wagon him for funsises! Either way, we win.

Vote: Sesq

Instead of "flashwagoning him for funsies"

you should have chosen the "get Sesq to actually do something relevant to the game" part by questioning him. You had the opportunity LITERALLY within this post you made. You chose not to.

-Frog

[ECMitchell]

@Transcend, your ISO is a series of mostly unhelpful posts. It's clear you scum read Intermission. Any comments on Siblings vs. Sheep? Other scum reads? I see who you're viewing as town.

@theplague42, seems your vote was on bellaphant for asking questions and not much else. If I'm understanding correctly, that's also Siblings' reasoning against Cooperative Sheep at the moment: asking questions and not following through. Does Sheep ping you the same way bellaphant does?

@projectmatt, need to see a lot more from you.

[Kop]

Baaaaa

Vote: Intermission

I could also lynch Sesq (for coming across stilted to me, which, to stave off the inevitable question - is also how Intermission feels.)

I like Siblings and Jester for town.

I read through the thread, this vote absolutely stinks. I understand pressure wagons, and RVS votes do tend to build up a little wagon with people jumping on willy nilly, but this point of the thread, I feel that the game was getting beyond RVS and starting to get serious, then you jump onto the biggest wagon at the time, with no reason apart from sheeping.

I could also lynch Sesq (for coming across stilted to me, which, to stave off the inevitable question - is also how Intermission feels.)

Talk to me about Sesq and Jester.
-Ali

Jester basically asked a couple of questions that seemed actually likely to get real conversation going (probing at the RQS and the RNG).

Sesq - I'd advocate you go look at his current iso and just ask yourself what real info he's offered about himself thus far, and what actual opinion about anything game relevant he's made (my opinion would be zip and zilch for both). The play feels fake and guarded, and not like he wants to solve anything.

Cooperative Sheep, is there anything in particular about Siblings Quarrel and The_Jester that strike you as town reads?

For Jester see above.

For Siblings, I really liked post #68, it read like a legit inquiry with some consideration behind it and less like noise.

I read that post #68 and failed to see how or why you could town read someone based on that post out of the others they've posted. I think I can agree with Fro99er on this one.

If you can't or won't explain yourself, then it's fair to vote you.

VOTE: Transcend

This might actually be a scumclaim? Maaaaaybe.
Idunno, will talk to Frogger about it.
-Ali

I don't think it's a scum claim. I can see why they said that, I'd be in the same boat. If someone isn't willing to discuss anything or go further into detail then your either uncooperative town, or scum.

[MiniDeathStar]

O

pen

G

ame

#

673

Notice

Kop

replaces

Tucan Safe

effective immediately.
Flavour will be updated shortly.

[Transcend]

Mitch:

Here's my opinion on sheep vs siblings

Ahem.

VOTE: SHEEP

[Transcend]

Also i tr Kop

[Charloux]

I sr Kop

[MiniDeathStar]

O

pen

G

ame

#

673

Notice

Vote counts and flavour have been updated.

[Kop]

Also i tr Kop

This makes me feel uneasy.

[Siblings Quarrel]

I tr ECM

[Bellaphant]

I sr Kop

why? their case on sheep actually felt a lot better than sibs', but that might be because it's a lot more concentrated and connected.


@the plague, the easiest way to get more out of me is to actually ask me questions. if you can't work out my opinions and follow up (because i've had them and posted them), a vote is pointless - it doesn't help you sort me.

ecm seems super town.

VOTE: sheep

[Bellaphant]

That might be l-3/-2