Open 456: Faith Plus One [Game Over]

[borkjerfkin]

Votecount 1.5

[4] Declan_giggs (Radelle, shos, Abaddon, buldermar)
[2] Aether (CityElectric, RedCoyote)
[2] FourTrouble (rapidcanyon, Aether)
[1] Abaddon (Furcolow)
[1] Furcolow (FourTrouble)
[1] RedCoyote (Declan_giggs)

[2] Not Voting (ImJadenYuki, absta101)

With 13 alive, it is 7 to lynch.

Let me know if you see any problems.

Deadline is: (expired on 2012-11-06 22:00:00)

rapidcanyon, who did not pick up his prod, is being replaced.

ImJadenYuki has been prodded.

[buldermar]

Because nothing is random. Well, that's the short answer anyways. The truth is more complicated than that, but suffice it to say that I think there's a purpose behind everything, even if it's to appear "random".

Yes, duh, but not a purpose significant enough for the human mind to comprehend how it affects the outcome of this game. If I base my vote on relative positions of stars I doubt you'll be able to analyse it, despite it being non-random. Stop your metaphysical bullshit talk, it's not relevant for the current context.

[RedCoyote]

@RC - saying that DG is scummier and then voting aether? Way to avoid voting your buddy, only to postpone it so that u can bus when it's inevitable...

Are you ready for the day to end, shos?

---

@RC

- What's your opinion of City?

Leaning town. She hasn't really done anything impressive yet, but she hasn't done anything scummy either. Further, we have similar impressions of Aether, so I'm more inclined to give her credit for that.

---

Yes, duh, but not a purpose significant enough for the human mind to comprehend how it affects the outcome of this game. If I base my vote on relative positions of stars I doubt you'll be able to analyse it, despite it being non-random. Stop your metaphysical bullshit talk, it's not relevant for the current context.

It's not metaphysical bullshit talk. You brought up an example about stars. Okay, let's take that. So, hypothetically, if you're going off about relative positions of the stars dictating your vote, I'd be asking why you're doing that as opposed to voting based on actual content in the game. Then you're obliged to respond to that pressure in some way. Others may opine as well... etc.

It's very relevant in that you're asking how one could theoretically analyze a supposed random vote. I'm not only explaining how I would do so, but I'm responding to your direct question. If you mean to say that it's not relevant because the issue has been put to bed, well then you're being hypocritical to engage me further. I was the one that needed to get caught up in this game, so the burden is on me to address what I wanted to address with regard to events that happened earlier.

More than just your sharp edge, which admittedly caught me by surprise, I'm concerned that this was the only thing you cared to respond to. Was that deliberate?

[buldermar]

Yes, duh, but not a purpose significant enough for the human mind to comprehend how it affects the outcome of this game. If I base my vote on relative positions of stars I doubt you'll be able to analyse it, despite it being non-random. Stop your metaphysical bullshit talk, it's not relevant for the current context.

It's not metaphysical bullshit talk. You brought up an example about stars. Okay, let's take that. So, hypothetically, if you're going off about relative positions of the stars dictating your vote, I'd be asking why you're doing that as opposed to voting based on actual content in the game. Then you're obliged to respond to that pressure in some way. Others may opine as well... etc.

It's very relevant in that you're asking how one could theoretically analyze a supposed random vote. I'm not only explaining how I would do so, but I'm responding to your direct question. If you mean to say that it's not relevant because the issue has been put to bed, well then you're being hypocritical to engage me further. I was the one that needed to get caught up in this game, so the burden is on me to address what I wanted to address with regard to events that happened earlier.

More than just your sharp edge, which admittedly caught me by surprise, I'm concerned that this was the only thing you cared to respond to. Was that deliberate?

That depends on your definition of deliberate. I have a feeling you might be using the word in a different way than I would. What else do you suggest I respond to?

[RedCoyote]

Hmm, if you have to ask me, that kind of defeats the point, doesn't it? I think I got what I wanted though.

[borkjerfkin]

Greygnarl replaces rapidcanyon.

[greygnarl]

Checking absta's meta. I have like ten minutes before I disappear for the rest of the day. Will try to post.

[CityElectric]

Yes, duh, but not a purpose significant enough for the human mind to comprehend how it affects the outcome of this game. If I base my vote on relative positions of stars I doubt you'll be able to analyse it, despite it being non-random. Stop your metaphysical bullshit talk, it's not relevant for the current context.

It's not metaphysical bullshit talk. You brought up an example about stars. Okay, let's take that. So, hypothetically, if you're going off about relative positions of the stars dictating your vote, I'd be asking why you're doing that as opposed to voting based on actual content in the game. Then you're obliged to respond to that pressure in some way. Others may opine as well... etc.

It's very relevant in that you're asking how one could theoretically analyze a supposed random vote. I'm not only explaining how I would do so, but I'm responding to your direct question. If you mean to say that it's not relevant because the issue has been put to bed, well then you're being hypocritical to engage me further. I was the one that needed to get caught up in this game, so the burden is on me to address what I wanted to address with regard to events that happened earlier.

More than just your sharp edge, which admittedly caught me by surprise, I'm concerned that this was the only thing you cared to respond to. Was that deliberate?

That depends on your definition of deliberate. I have a feeling you might be using the word in a different way than I would. What else do you suggest I respond to?

I love how there is so much in Red's post, and yet bulder only comments on that...

Also, welcome greygnarl!

[shos]

Not ready
For day to and but ur vote would be only l-2

I want the replacement to post walls now

[greygnarl]

I skimmed the game pretty much. Read some indepth but mostly skimmed. declan seems like he is adapting from the other site he's played on. His posting just seems different rather than scummy. A more indepth read could change that though. bulder's crap at teh start was a good jump into the spotlight like I've seen scum do, but if that's his meta then groan we'll have to accept that. shos is rubing me the wrong way with his early play.

[borkjerfkin]

Radelle has been prodded.

[buldermar]

I love how there is so much in Red's post, and yet bulder only comments on that...

You're free to make suggestions.

[CityElectric]

I love how there is so much in Red's post, and yet bulder only comments on that...

You're free to make suggestions.

I'll leave that to you to find out.

[Radelle]

Been busy. Going to catch-up.

[shos]

Back on computer! sort-of caught up.

Fourtrouble needs to post their analysis already.
the new posts by the ex-lurkers make me feel bad about them, specifically, aether; seems like he's either not seriously playing the game, or just fluffing his way through so that it looks like he's active.

DG hasn't done anything to change my vote on him. neither did bulder so I'm sticking with my earlier one-of-these-two-is-scum theory.

I need to see more of absta. when he was town he was an active(even yellish) scumhunter and it doesn't look the same at all in this one.


I need to catch up with other games too, so if I missed any questions/other stuff that were addressed to me, tell me and I'll get it.

[absta101]

Shos that was "bad" play by me. I'm not going to play like that again.
---
@Greygnarl - Why are you looking at my meta?

[Declan_giggs]

My houseguests are gone but I have to go to work to prepare for the big storm. I do not think that under a STATE OF EMERGENCY it will be good for me to get caught playing on my phone. So I will be away from the forums for the next day at least, maybe through Tuesday.

Not much happening here right now anyway. The wagon on me looks to have lost some steam, more's the pity. Maybe there will be some new hunting to think about once I'm back. Lots of people need to exercise their fingers and post some analyses. I suggest starting with the A's...Abaddon, Aether and Absta all need a good hard look for their own reasons respectively.

[Radelle]

buldermar is useless
declan i am leaning useful
you are scummier to me than both, though I will be unvoting

These aren't reads. Useless and useful don't denote anything. Am I to take it to mean useless = possible scum or what? Because otherwise, I can't figure out a townie motivation for attacking Abaddon and I's town read on Buldermar by calling him a VI and me scummy for it.

absta and buldermar (except for him Sucking up to Shos'; his VI tendency he is actually faking imo; the hostility he breeds) look good potentially... still early... too early for me to be giving good reads, hence the potentially

Here again, "look good potentially." Not only is this

not a read

but you're leaving yourself open to switching your reads at will. Scum sometimes have problems giving definitive reads. It feels like you're too afraid to commit yourself to a read in case it makes you look bad, which I see is definitely the case in:

Abaddon was a policy lynch vote, because he is someone who knows me, doesn't like me, and is going to be pushing my buttons ... I disguised it as more with thinly-veiled, weak reasoning
I even voted someone before voting him so that it wouldn't be completely obvious that I was voting him for him being an asshole to me on page 1
I was WAITING on a reason. I'm not content with my vote being there, though I would have kept it there had nothing better popped up, considering Declan's OMGUS on absta

unvote
vote: Declan_giggs

This looks like scum backtracking every vote they've made in the game to just then justify a vote on Declan essentially because "something better popped up." I don't get the impression you even think Declan is scum. I'm not seeing town motivation in anything you're doing or saying either.

VOTE: Furcolow

[Abaddon]

Furcolow is for tomorrow, maybe.

Declan is a much better wagon. You have some reason to counter-wagon Declan?

[greygnarl]

I think that based on his meta absta is scum. Not really feeling declan. I'll reread him soon though.

Normally absta goes around making reads on people's posts and then asking a few questions. When he is scum it looks like he asks a lot more questions and that's what he has been doing here.

[greygnarl]

VOTE: absta

[Radelle]

Where does Radelle "guarantee" she's town?

For the record, Fur he was referring to my explanation of why Buld is prob town. I think.

Scolds me for fluff or something then fights with fur, just what we need another row.

This feels like you were about to vote for RC, saw his mega-post, then tried to come up reason to still justify your vote on him. RC asking questions is not starting a row with Fur, nor is it in any way equivalent to your mega fluff posts at the beginning of the game.

i thought it might be the hammer

Why would you even hammer this early?

[CityElectric]

On meta? Seriously? Anything he did this game that stuck out as scummy to you? Non-meta related?

P-edit: That's for grey.

[Radelle]

I have more ot say, but I've got to catch a bus and train. Be back later tonight.

[Radelle]

@City, while you're here: you haven't really revealed or said much after your initial reads. Have they changed any? Is Declan still town to you?