Open 211: Tit for Tat v.2 -- Game Over!

[DizzyIzzyB13]

/conform

[DizzyIzzyB13]

vote wolframnhart

I don't trust lawyers.

[DizzyIzzyB13]

unvote

vote Looker

Useless noise? Check
Ulterior motives affecting play? Check
Rampant over-reaction? Check
Actively attempting to avoid scum-hunting? Check
Actively trying to stop other people scum-hunting? Check
Most scummy player so far? Check, check, check.

[DizzyIzzyB13]

I can't see anyone scummier than him, not as if there's a whole lot to choose from. Don't get me wrong, if anyone has any alternatives, let me know, but right now I think Leafsnail's the way to go.

Try a mirror.

[DizzyIzzyB13]

That's strange - there should be a comment around the start of the game pointing out I'd be v/la for a couple of days (which eventually extended to just over half the time the game has been going). I posted that in both of my other games, I guess I just missed this one.

[DizzyIzzyB13]

That's strange - there should be a comment around the start of the game pointing out I'd be v/la for a couple of days (which eventually extended to just over half the time the game has been going). I posted that in both of my other games, I guess I just missed this one.

So does this mean your working on a giant, content filled post?

No, it means apparently the goddamn forums ate most of my last post.

[DizzyIzzyB13]

Do you have any content to add? Because if you were "gone for half the time the game has been going", I'd be interested in knowing what you've been up to, game-wise, for the other half.

Catching up on my other games - this started most recently and was the shortest, so I left it 'till last to properly catch up on.

[DizzyIzzyB13]

Dizzy, could you tell me who placed the worst vote on Leaf?

The1fifi's vote was terrible. The only reason given was pretty much "yay, someone else voted for him so I can jump on the wagon without taking heat for starting it".

IT was still less terrible than Looker's crazy unexplained vote hopping, which really irritates me and contributes to my belief that Looker is scum, since the voting patterns with him are all over the place in what appears to be a deliberate attempt to make analysis more difficult.

and when you are doing that, what do you think about Kiku's posting till now?

I don't think much of it. It's more not-particularly-helpful than deliberately unhelpful, though. He's stated he's convinced Flinter is scum, but never posted in his own words why and later gave up because nobody would follow him. I could understand how you could get a scum-read on his play but... I don't know, the vibe doesn't quite feel right. Someting is whispering "not scum" to me and I can't put my finger on what it is.

[DizzyIzzyB13]

We have plenty of time before the deadline of April 1st in order to come to a lynch. Attempting to curtail discussion through pushing towards lynch too wuickly doesn't help your town credentials.

[DizzyIzzyB13]

Mod: Since there are replacements being drafted in, will there be a deadline extension if necessary to allow them to make a proper contribution?

If necessary. Right now, they have more than a week to catch up. If/when it gets closer I'll make a decision then.

[DizzyIzzyB13]

Mod: Since there are replacements being drafted in, will there be a deadline extension if necessary to allow them to make a proper contribution?

If necessary. Right now, they have more than a week to catch up. If/when it gets closer I'll make a decision then.

Sweet, so there's no reason at all for us to rush towards a bad lynch because we're running out of time.

I've taken into consideration the fact you've had multiple replacements throughout the game. If I don't get a replacement soon for wolf then I'll consider moving the deadline. Sarcasm won't convince me.

Edit: The sarcasm comment was unneeded and I apologize.

[DizzyIzzyB13]

Mod: Since there are replacements being drafted in, will there be a deadline extension if necessary to allow them to make a proper contribution?

If necessary. Right now, they have more than a week to catch up. If/when it gets closer I'll make a decision then.

Sweet, so there's no reason at all for us to rush towards a bad lynch because we're running out of time.

I've taken into consideration the fact you've had multiple replacements throughout the game. If I don't get a replacement soon for wolf then I'll consider moving the deadline. Sarcasm won't convince me.

Edit: The sarcasm comment was unneeded and I apologize.

I wasn't being sarcastic. I was referencing this post:

I asked flinter a rather direct question which they avoided. I am currently voting Looker and I think at this point I'm comfortable ringing her up. She doesn't conflict with my current suspicions. We should be moving toward finalizing our first lynch candidate so I would urge a couple more votes on Looker so we can get a claim with time to discuss any implications.

Eep. Mod'll keep his mouth shut unless otherwise needed. Sorry again.

[DizzyIzzyB13]

I choose "oppurtunistic". And yes, I

would

kill you. And yes, I'd love to vote the1fifi.

Unvote

But I'm busy atm.

Vote: Dizzy

Asking town to come to a consensus with enough time to spare before a deadline in order to obtain and then discuss(if need be) a claim is not "rushing" anything. If at any point you would like to start participating, feel free.

But you

are

rushing. We have plenty of time until the deadline without forcing ourselves to take up an improperly thought-through lynch, plus the possibility of extra time being granted due to replacements. Forcing the game to come to a conclusion is anti-town behaviour. Encourage debate, express your suspicions in a way that actually persuades people. Don't try and compell the town to act against their own interest.

[DizzyIzzyB13]

I choose "oppurtunistic". And yes, I

would

kill you. And yes, I'd love to vote the1fifi.

Unvote

But I'm busy atm.

Vote: Dizzy

Asking town to come to a consensus with enough time to spare before a deadline in order to obtain and then discuss(if need be) a claim is not "rushing" anything. If at any point you would like to start participating, feel free.

But you

are

rushing. We have plenty of time until the deadline without forcing ourselves to take up an improperly thought-through lynch, plus the possibility of extra time being granted due to replacements. Forcing the game to come to a conclusion is anti-town behaviour. Encourage debate, express your suspicions in a way that actually persuades people. Don't try and compell the town to act against their own interest.

I disagree. I think it's actually more pro-town to begin discussing now as opposed to later. The town's best interest would be to think, so let's begin.

Thinking is not the same as preemptively deciding who to lynch and rushing teh game to come to a conclusion. Thinking is good. Rushing to decisions, not so much.[/quote]

But you

are

rushing. We have plenty of time until the deadline without forcing ourselves to take up an improperly thought-through lynch, plus the possibility of extra time being granted due to replacements. Forcing the game to come to a conclusion is anti-town behaviour. Encourage debate, express your suspicions in a way that actually persuades people. Don't try and compell the town to act against their own interest.

WoW. Another post which lacks any scumhunting or worthwhile contribution. Well done.

She has a point.

I'd say her response is proof that she's wrong.

[DizzyIzzyB13]

I have some family issues, and I've fallen a bit behind. I need to catch up before I can post anything useful at the moment. Sorry. Hopefully, this will be tonight, but I make no promises.

[DizzyIzzyB13]

And there we go with RL excuses for lack of participation. Not trying to be confrontational and I'm not saying Dizzy is lieing, but the behavior pattern only benefits scum. Please replace if you don't have time to play.

I posted the same message in both of my other games, and as anyone there will tell you, my activity in Scumchat is way down at the moment, too. It's not an excuse, unfortunately. I appear to be okay for now, but if circumstances change, I'll be sure to let you know.

[DizzyIzzyB13]

Catching up. I'm just posting responses to posts that catch my eye, stream of consciousness style.

Thinking is not the same as preemptively deciding who to lynch and rushing teh game to come to a conclusion. Thinking is good. Rushing to decisions, not so much.

Preemptive to whom, Dizzy? The last-minute wagon you're going to push at deadline?

I'm still seeing no reason we can't decide on a lynch and have them rebut their case while there's still time for them to do so. That's a nice word, though. "Preemptive".

We have (or rather had at that point) enough time that doing so then, especially when there's no consensus case for us to get behind, would have a damaging curtailment of the day. Now we have 5 days left, we're running out of time.[/quote]

But you

are

rushing. We have plenty of time until the deadline without forcing ourselves to take up an improperly thought-through lynch, plus the possibility of extra time being granted due to replacements. Forcing the game to come to a conclusion is anti-town behaviour. Encourage debate, express your suspicions in a way that actually persuades people. Don't try and compell the town to act against their own interest.

WoW. Another post which lacks any scumhunting or worthwhile contribution. Well done.

She has a point.

I'd say her response is proof that she's wrong.

So you're saying that last bit didn't seem like Appeal to Emotion (AtE) to you?

Appeal to logic is a more accurate description. It doesn't help town to try and get town to act against the town's interest.

The recent inactivity and possible multiple replacements being required lead me to extend the deadline by a week. Get moving people.

Deadline is April 8, 2010.

Oh. Deadline extension. Disregard my concession that we're running our of time in reply to Looker's prior post.

OK so right now, my primary suspect is kiku.

In ISO 10, I noticed kiku saying this:

I would rather pick someone I think is scum for whatever reason and stick with them. Flinter lit up my scumdar earlier, I'd have to reread a bit to put together a case, but I'm willing to work a bit harder.

This statement seems out of place to me. Her initial vote of flinter seems quite random. There is virtually no explanation for it, and it just seems that kiku wants day 1 over with, getting whatever lynch fits.

Then at the end of this post, kiku switches her vote to Looker for seemingly no reason other than that kiku's empty vote on flinter wasn't getting a bandwagon going.

ISO post 12 then seems to suggest that kiku doesn't actually feel that Looker is the most likely scum.

I asked flinter a rather direct question which they avoided. I am currently voting Looker and I think at this point I'm comfortable ringing her up. She doesn't conflict with my current suspicions. We should be moving toward finalizing our first lynch candidate so I would urge a couple more votes on Looker so we can get a claim with time to discuss any implications.

What do you mean by Looker doesn't conflict with your current suspicions? You seem to find flinter to be scum, and you said that you tend to stick with your scum suspicion to see it through, but you seem to have switched to a more likely bandwagon candidate simply because you weren't going to be able to get a bandwagon on flinter.

I'd love to vote the1fifi.

Unvote

But I'm busy atm.

Vote: Dizzy

Why would you love to vote fifi? Why did you vote Dizzy? If the vote was based on Dizzy's inactivity, why haven't you put pressure on Dizzy earlier to post more? Also, why haven't you put pressure on other lurkers?

WoW. Another post which lacks any scumhunting or worthwhile contribution. Well done.

This comment is worthless unless you've done any scum hunting or given any worthwhile contribution. You've asked a few questions that constituted a bare minimum of scum hunting, you've asked people to clarify their case on someone else, and you've thrown your vote around without substantiating it whatsoever. Why would you ask someone else to clarify their case on someone when you've done no such thing?

You've definitely been sliding by, posting enough to avoid prods but never actually bringing forth your opinions of anyone except for baseless votes.

Vote kikuchiyo

.
Who do you think is scum, and why?

This post chimes with my prior disagreements with kikuchiyo's attempts to rush us towards a lynch. His characterisation of kikuchiyo's pursuit of me as hypocriisy chimes with kikuchiyo's activity priot to this post. I'm not so sure kikuchiyo is scum as he is, though.

I choose "oppurtunistic". And yes, I

would

kill you. And yes, I'd love to vote the1fifi.

Unvote

But I'm busy atm.

Vote: Dizzy

Asking town to come to a consensus with enough time to spare before a deadline in order to obtain and then discuss(if need be) a claim is not "rushing" anything. If at any point you would like to start participating, feel free.

But you

are

rushing. We have plenty of time until the deadline without forcing ourselves to take up an improperly thought-through lynch, plus the possibility of extra time being granted due to replacements. Forcing the game to come to a conclusion is anti-town behaviour. Encourage debate, express your suspicions in a way that actually persuades people. Don't try and compell the town to act against their own interest.

@Dizzy

You have really mischaracterized kiku's vote on you. By my count, it is only your second vote or L-5. It is hardly "rushing" or "forcing".

I wasn't characteristing Kiku's vote on me at all. Rather, I was responding to a specific approach she has been advocating, as here:

We should be moving toward finalizing our first lynch candidate so I would urge a couple more votes on Looker so we can get a claim with time to discuss any implications.

Kikuchiyo has been attempting to push for the town to come to a lynch consensus far too quickly. That's what I was responding to, the fact that she voted for me was meaningless.

Granted, there weren't very good reasons for the vote in the vote post but you didn't go after the reasons, you went after the vote.

The case was less scummy than the attitude and thought ptrocesses on display. The case itself isn't necessarily scummy from the perspective of someone who doesn't know I'm town, even if it is incredibly weak.[/quote]

It is fascinating that as early post 24 you were on the wolf bandwagon - in fact you were the third vote.

2 questions for you:

Why is it OK to put a third vote on wolf, but not to put a second vote on you?

There are the points I would make in response to this question:

- The game exited the confirmation stage and began properly in post 17. I voted seven posts later for wolf. At that point, we were still in what is term the "random voting stage" (I hate the phrase, since I never vote randomly in it). At that point, I voted for him purely because of his name (I like Angel, hence the "I don't like lawyers" comment with the vote) and the fact that he had a mini-wagon starting so people would respond to the early game wagon and create content and begin actual discussions. At that point, there was absolutely no intention of carrying that wagon through to lynch without Wolf providing actual evidence of scumminess.

- I've not objected to the actual vote or the wagon, so for you to characterise my opinion as thinking it's not okay to place a second vote on me is simply inaccurate.

- Even so, an early game wagon and a late game wagon are very different beasts, especially with regards teh intentions behind placing votes.

Isn't voting a great way to (in your own words) "Encourage debate, express your suspicions in a way that actually persuades people"?

It is, but that wasn't kikuchiyo's stated intent behind voting.

Oh, sorry for not posting for a while. I felt slightly disheartened about this game.

Anyway, one thing I've noticed is DizzyIzzyB13's strange aversion to getting discussion rolling now. It looks sortof like she's hoping for an inactivity death before deadline, or to be able to rush a lynch beforehand. She really hasn't been doing much other than defending herself, pretending to scumhunt (very little) and telling us why we shouldn't be trying to find scum. And this didn't really come until after some pressure was applied to her.

Vote: DizzyIzzyB13

Thes is such a hideous mischaracterisation of what I said, it's best described as libellous. On the contrary, I'd been arguing against curtailing discussion by pushing for a quick lynch.

Anyway, one thing I've noticed is DizzyIzzyB13's strange aversion to getting discussion rolling now. It looks sortof like she's hoping for an inactivity death before deadline, or to be able to rush a lynch beforehand.

Actually, Dizzy is trying to prevent exactly what you're talking about. She is telling people to not rush, because we have some extra time. We especially have time now, because of the deadline extension. We have plenty of time for discussion, and I don't see anyone suggesting a lynch right now.

If you feel that Dizzy is doing what you claim, then can you back your vote up with quotes proving, or at least supporting, what you say?

We have plenty of time before the deadline of April 1st in order to come to a lynch. Attempting to curtail discussion through pushing towards lynch too wuickly doesn't help your town credentials.

Sweet, so there's no reason at all for us to rush towards a bad lynch because we're running out of tim

But you are rushing. We have plenty of time until the deadline without forcing ourselves to take up an improperly thought-through lynch, plus the possibility of extra time being granted due to replacements. Forcing the game to come to a conclusion is anti-town behaviour. Encourage debate, express your suspicions in a way that actually persuades people. Don't try and compell the town to act against their own interest.

Leaf, Dizzy isn't trying to stop discussion, she is trying to stop a rushed lynch and get discussion going again. You are yet again trying to misrep someone, and it's getting old.

And these posts demonstrates that it's not a case of me failing to express myself clearly, since ICEninja and jmj are clearly aware of my intentions.

But a far off deadline should not prevent disCussion or debate now. It is being used as a reason to avoid suspicion now.

I have no idea how leaf can honestly express this opinion based on the evidence available to him, so I can hardly respond to it than by simply stating he is entirely wrong.

Ok, I will first start by

unvoting

because of this rapidly growing bandwagon on Izzy and because my vote served its purpose. The argument that she is "wanting to prevent discussion", even if it were somewhat true, shouldn't be reason enough to change your votes. However, this notion doesn't reflect at all what she was saying (as jmj just pointed out). Of the three votes on her, I would say one if not two of them are scum. And, with leafs' last post, where he totally ignores jmj's point and is basically confirming himself with each new post (reiterates the same thing, to support his claim), along with my previous reasons, I'm happier to

vote : Leafsnail

Oh look, someone else disagrees with Leaf. I'm not entirely sure his vote is quite justified, though.

and in the end, Hewitt is correct. Leaf is lynched for being antitown, tunneling etc.

You have been warned, leaf.

This is a very curiously worded post. It reads very much like scum advising scum, although I'm not entirely sure this is the intention behind the post.

@peanutman

I see now...

Ok, I will first start by

unvoting

because of this rapidly growing bandwagon on Izzy and because my vote served its purpose. The argument that she is "wanting to prevent discussion", even if it were somewhat true, shouldn't be reason enough to change your votes. However, this notion doesn't reflect at all what she was saying (as jmj just pointed out). Of the three votes on her, I would say one if not two of them are scum. And, with leafs' last post, where he totally ignores jmj's point and is basically confirming himself with each new post (reiterates the same thing, to support his claim), along with my previous reasons, I'm happier to

vote : Leafsnail

...your vote was to get Dizzy more active.

2) Did anyone else notice that DizzyIzzy was in this game? Because with only 4 posts (1 confirm, 1 RV, 1 vote and a snide remark - so, if we add that up, makes 1 sorta worthwhile post), it would have been quite easy to miss her.

Vote : DizzyIzzy

Dizzy, I'm sure you've been following things as they've developped in this thread, and yet have only decided to comment on Looker. Please, join us, stay, chat, tell us what you think. The shadows are no place for anyone of us.

I think Dizzy had actually gotten up to 4 votes. In order they were peanutman, kiku, kyle, and leaf. Which 3 were you talking about?

the other three votes on me, since he'd covered the reasons for his own vote.

Oh, sorry for not posting for a while. I felt slightly disheartened about this game.

Anyway, one thing I've noticed is DizzyIzzyB13's strange aversion to getting discussion rolling now. It looks sortof like she's hoping for an inactivity death before deadline, or to be able to rush a lynch beforehand. She really hasn't been doing much other than defending herself, pretending to scumhunt (very little) and telling us why we shouldn't be trying to find scum. And this didn't really come until after some pressure was applied to her.

Vote: DizzyIzzyB13

It doesn't pay to get disheartened; we have to stick it out, especially when you're right about Dizzy.

I have no idea what the hell is going on here.

FoS: Looker and Kiku

Dizzy has not been trying to squash discussion, she's trying to get discussion started and prevent a mislynch. We could get someone to L-1 and be discussing and scum, or a dumb townie, could come along and hammer. If we start discussing now, instead of ending day 2 weeks early, we can discuss and come to a decision with a lot more connections and a lot more information to go on.

I have no problem with anyone scummy going to L-1 since it would get them talking under pressure. I highly doubt anyone in this game is a dumb townie.

I wish I shared your faith in ther playerbase.

Basically, if she is attempting to get discussion going and avoid a rushed lynch, she should be scumhunting. She should be asking questions, she should at the very least be stating her suspicions. Put Dizzy in ISO and ask yourself which of her 13 posts could actually be called scumhunting.

I would say 2, 7 and MAYBE 3 (although that is extremely debatable). Other than the normal confirm and RV, she has 3 posts in a row apologising for lack of activity (4, 5, 6) and SIX posts about the deadline (8-13). Half of her ingame posts have been about the deadline, and she has made twice as many posts about it as she has made about finding scum. If no scumhunting is going on, the only thing that extra time is going to do is make the town die due to inactivity.

I find it interesting that you don't characterise an exchange with a player about their anti-town behaviour to be "not scum-hunting", especially given how kiku reacted to those posts.

Dizzy has NO suspicions. She made a small (neutral) comment on fifi, repeating herself on Looker and another (pretty neutral) comment on Kiku. This was 3 days ago, and she has not followed up any of these suspicions.

Not an unreasonable comment, but I wasn't active at this point so I can't really help that.

So, for killing discussion, she has moved a large part of the town's effort from scumhunting to discussing when the deadline is. I cannot see why Dizzy would want a deadline extension other than to look town - it's not like she's used the time we have had so far for much.

Uh, aside from the fact I am town and I would like to make sure we lynch scum because of a well-formed case rather than picking at random which is pretty much what would have to happen at the point of the game this was posted?

I certainly don't asgree that I killed discussion. Aside form the fact that I didn't foresee being inactive at that point, I also would point to the reactions created from the discussion with kikuchiyo as something that has certainly created discussion amongst the town.

@Peanutman - I really do not understand your reasons for voting me. You say that Dizzy's actions weren't enough reason to vote her... so why vote her? Your only real eason for voting me seems to be that "I would say one if not two of them are scum", and that my previous post did not address jmj's. I suppose you also cite "previous reasons", but you have not given any previous reasons why I'm scummy - only reasons you dislike my play (see: peanutman's ISO post 1). I'd like you to lay out your entire case against me, please.

This, however, is a good part of your post, since it raises logical questions in your defence.

flinter: We need a replacement on the Dizzy wagon. Apparently her scumbuddy, peanutman, has changed his mind about bussing his scumbuddy on day 1. So climb aboard. Leaf 276 pretty much explains it. Its not that she's "attempting" to squash discussion, its that she's saying "hey guys, we should think and discuss," while not doing

any

thinking or discussing of her own. She'll most likely try and come back with what looks like a pro-town post, but honestly, she is most likely scum and a scum flip just about guarantees peanutman as a partner.

This is a terrible, terrible post filled with unfounded speculation and a statement as to peanutman's alignment that Kiku has pulled out of her ass considering she's not mentioned him once before this post and yet now she's labelled him as obvscum. Stupid, opportunistic, anti-town posting.

ICEninja: You are entitled to your opinions. If you are attacking me that's fine, but your posting seems to be more a defense of Dizzy than anything. And that makes no sense to me.

Also a poor misread of the ICEninja post she's responding to.

I don't think anyone has suggested that we hurry up and lynch someone.

Kikuchiyo. Explicitly so.

unvote leafsnail
vote kikuchiyo

What a random vote change, and explanation free, too.

I don't want my vote on Leafsnail and find it'd be too ironic if Dizzy were quick-lynched. Kikuchiyo it is.

Ah. The explanation. And it is, as usual, more inanity from Lookerscum.

I don't want my vote on Leafsnail and find it'd be too ironic if Dizzy were quick-lynched. Kikuchiyo it is.

Wait... what?

1) "Not wanting a vote on Leafsnail" could be mean many things. Please elaborate on your leafsnail thinking.

2) It would be ironic and scummy if Dizzy were quick-lynched.

3) Why the kiku vote? It's scummy to vote at this stage of the game and not give reasons. It's scummy to not answer ICE's question. I took your ISO 21 (below) to mean that you'd stop screwing around and scumhunt. I was wrong.

@Leafsnail: I'mma be perfectly honest with you. I'm actually not this useless usually, but I tried a different approach to this game to see how it would work in the future and it sucks. I'm trying different approaches in several different games as of right now and this is by far the worst.

Sorry, town, not trying to cause a mislynch, but I went about this game all wrong.

confirm vote Looker

What he said. I don't like to do that, but I agree with everything in that post.

This game is spiraling. We are at 300+ posts. and its still day 1. All the talk about taking our time is wonderful, but we do need to move forward. I don't see any reason to stall a Dizzy wagon, and yet we have people doing it. Not sure why Looker isn't on board, but I'm going to lose interest if this keeps up.

Oh look, more pushing stuff towards a conclusion from Kikuchiyo. I don't see how this could be interpreted as pro-town - she's complaining about TOO MUCH posting on day one.

Her posts say "Let's discuss before we lynch." What happened? We started discussing as a direct result of her posts.

Perhaps, but she is not

participating

.

You keep misrepping her by saying "she doesn't want discussion" when its the exact opposite, she wants discussion, she doesn't want a rushed lynch, she wants an informed lynch.

How do you know what she wants? I want a good job, but if I don't go jobhunting I probably won't get it. You are engaging in a rather vehement defense of a player who is null tell at best. There is nothing uber town about any of her posts and yet you seem admant to halt her wagon.

Wow, an actual, reasonable kikuchiyo post.

I don't see any reason to stop scum hunting and lynch when we have almost 2 weeks left. You seem to be doing exactly what Leaf is calling Dizzy scummy for.

No. That's not what Leaf is calling Dizzy scum for. The reason to lynch is because we're over 300 posts. There is plenty of information to be sifted through. The conversations only get circular and that makes scumhunting even harder. Dizzy has shown herself to be disinterested enough in the case against her to dissappear. This tells me that she is either scum or vanilla. A fine candidate for lynch.

Agreed. Dizzy needs to get in here and start scum hunting right now. Without a solid defense followed by some decent scum hunting, every point against Dizzy stands, and I will likely be in favor of the bandwagon. I still want people to look a kiku, though.

The defense is "I had RL issues." Same as before. Its day 1. All you are doing is stalling.

This post and the intention behind it is horrifically anti-town. You're pretty much proving the points I was making to you earlier by pushing the town to stop talking and make a decision when they're obviously not ready to do so.

MOD: Has The1fifi reached prod territory?

And, for future reference, don't use "This stage of the game" arguments against me. I don't care. Especially if your vote's already on me [for asinine reasons]. Thinking you can discern someone's secret by reading what they type on the internet is a stretch to begin with, so please don't blow my high.

Tl;dr: I'm too cool to scumhunt.

Not good, Looker.

I do like this post. Aside from making a good point, it made me lol.

@everyone

Dizzy hasn't been around for a while, so her votes aren't putting her under pressure. Looker is around. He is defiantly and deliberately not telling the reason(s) behind his votes. He isn't paying attention to know that the Mod already started to replace The1fifi. He claims that he isn't reading posts. He's also claiming that scumhunting is worthless by saying "thinking you can discern someone's secret by reading what they type on the internet is a stretch to begin with". He's said he's sorry for his past behavior, yet he continues to do it.

Did anyone else read his post to imply that he has a "secret"? Would being a townie be a "secret" or would being scum be a "secret"?

Does anyone have meta on Looker? Does he always say that scumhunting is worthless?

Please don't think that I'm trying to derail the Dizzy wagon. Looker is being all kinds of scummy, and I think votes on him would be infinitely more useful.

MOD: Has The1fifi reached prod territory?

And, for future reference, don't use "This stage of the game" arguments against me. I don't care. Especially if your vote's already on me [for asinine reasons].

Thinking you can discern someone's secret by reading what they type on the internet is a stretch to begin with, so please don't blow my high.

Mod says...

Replacing: The1fifi

So... maybe?

YAH! So that means I get to wait for a replacement.

And how would I've replied to something I didn't read

...? Hmmm.... I am cool tho.

Doc hasn't posted a single disagreeable thing in this post.

If Dizzzy is lynched and comes up town, what's that going to make me in y'alls eyes?

I can't see a pro town reason to answer this question. If we are both alive tomorrow we can discuss this, but at this point in time I only see answers to this question benefitting scum. I can expand on this point if need be.

And there we go with RL excuses for lack of participation. Not trying to be confrontational and

I'm not saying Dizzy is lieing, but the behavior pattern only benefits scum

. Please replace if you don't have time to play.

So, you're not saying I'm lying, you're just calling me a liar? This is the behaviour pattern of people with r/l issues, often imitated by scum. Interestingly, you say you're not trying to be confrontational, then provoke a confrontatioin by spinless, weasely activity, probably so you can say the justifiable emotional reaction makes me scum. Go for it, you fucking bitch. I mean, you did respond to my rather calmer response by claiming that the 30 seconds it took me to respond to that meant I had time to keep up.

@Dizzy - Why did you spend what little time you had talking about deadlines?

I was scumhunting. Specifically, Kikuchiyo's idea was anti-town and the discussion was an attempt to discern whether she was proposing somehting that was anti-town because she's scum or because she's misguided.

Dizzy: You obviously have the time to stay current. Replace out or die. Should be an easy choice for a townie.

I'm sorry, a couple of minutes to skim the games I have going and respond to a post containing a personal attack =/= time to stay current. Creating the false dichotomy in an attempt to make anything I do look scummy is a nice touch, though.

Accusations of unoriginality? Ouch.

---

Dizzy: You obviously have the time to stay current. Replace out or die. Should be an easy choice for a townie.

I have to say I agree. Kikuchiyo, Dizzy, and I are the three main players in this game and the burden's going to be on Kiku and I if you don't post, Dizzy.

This post makes no sense.



Hey! I'm up to date. Any questions?

[DizzyIzzyB13]

Thanks for the ad hom and the misrep in regards to my requests.

So, you're not saying I'm lying, you're just calling me a liar? This is the behaviour pattern of people with r/l issues, often imitated by scum. Interestingly, you say you're not trying to be confrontational, then provoke a confrontatioin by spinless, weasely activity, probably so you can say the justifiable emotional reaction makes me scum. Go for it, you fucking bitch. I mean, you did respond to my rather calmer response by claiming that the 30 seconds it took me to respond to that meant I had time to keep up.

I did not say you were a liar. I said "the behavior pattern only benefits scum". If you disagree then you are saying that your behavior "benefits town". At the time the post was made you were not posting content, only responding to posts directed at you(which means you were checking the thread), not voting, and not scumhunting. Those are all behaviors which "benefit scum" regardless of your own alignment. Do you disagree?

Bah, I misread your post. I withdraw those statements and apologise profusely.

[DizzyIzzyB13]

I'm still unnerved by Dizzys lack of actual scumhunting (endless deadline rambling =/= scumhunting, Dizzy

Yay, I can respond to this now...

If you see someone doing something anti-town, would you ignore it? Or would you engage the subject in order to determine whether said anti-town behaviour is scummy or not? Hence the exchange with kikuchiyo.

On which note...

vote: kikuchiyo

[DizzyIzzyB13]

Did a skim read .. This is where I'd put all players ..

peanutman (replacing Budja)
kikuchiyo
kyle99
ICEninja (replacing wolframnhart who replaced Lacey)
------- Town Line--- Scum Side ^^^^
Fat_Tony (replacing hewitt)
Doctor Who (replacing Slaxx)
DizzyIzzyB13
flinter

Initially put Fat-tony on the scum side, but an iso gave me a pro-town read on him.

---

Well, shows jmj wasn't the best judge of character.

Well jmj is a fool. I seriously can NOT believe that he gunned for Leaf, who was probably one of the most pro town players we had. Definitely giving +lameo points here. We lost a valued scum hunter. At least we know he won't be shooting blindly again.

Wow

, JMJ was a moron. Leaf was one of the most townie players in this game.

Does the "Wow" betray a certain sense of elation that Leaf was killed??

Vote: Kyle99

Why Kyle over kiku or peanut, who you appear to have rated more scummily? And why is Doctor Who only rated as your third most town player?

[DizzyIzzyB13]

Hi, I'm here. I don't really have anything to say right now, though - I'm mostly waiting for the Easter V/LAs to get involved and post some content.

[DizzyIzzyB13]

We can lynch Looker again?

[DizzyIzzyB13]

We can lynch Looker again?

Sorry meant flinter.

Unvote. Vote: Flinter

Dammit. I was looking forward to lynching him again.

[DizzyIzzyB13]

Ick.

[DizzyIzzyB13]

That's because kikuchiyo isn't posting and I'm happy enough with my vote that I'm disinclined to move it to people I'm less opposed to without kikuchiyo actually showing up and providing even the slightest evidence that she is town (for the moment, anyway). She isn't doing that, so... I have nothing to add. I could post fluff, but that's pretty pointless and anti-town.

I'm also pretty sure you're smart enough to understand exactly what I meant with that post.

[DizzyIzzyB13]

That's because kikuchiyo isn't posting

You aren't either! You've given crap contributions all game until you were put under major fire.

Blatant misrepreserntation acknowledged.

[DizzyIzzyB13]

That's because kikuchiyo isn't posting and I'm happy enough with my vote that I'm disinclined to move it to people I'm less opposed to without kikuchiyo actually showing up and providing even the slightest evidence that she is town (for the moment, anyway). She isn't doing that, so... I have nothing to add. I could post fluff, but that's pretty pointless and anti-town.

I'm also pretty sure you're smart enough to understand exactly what I meant with that post.

re Ick - I'd rather not make interpretations when I don't have to.

Why not?

[DizzyIzzyB13]

That's because kikuchiyo isn't posting and I'm happy enough with my vote that I'm disinclined to move it to people I'm less opposed to without kikuchiyo actually showing up and providing even the slightest evidence that she is town (for the moment, anyway). She isn't doing that, so... I have nothing to add. I could post fluff, but that's pretty pointless and anti-town.

I'm also pretty sure you're smart enough to understand exactly what I meant with that post.

re Ick - I'd rather not make interpretations when I don't have to.

Why not?

You are here and able to comment.

Do you think that posts which could have more than one interpretation help town or scum?

Both, potentially.

Dizzy, could you please answer the underlined below?

For the sake of discussion, suppose that kiku is scum. Who is the last scum?

I don't know. I'm trying to avoid thinking in a potentially dangerous manner as that.

Blatant misrepreserntation acknowledged.

Further posting without content noted. I'm not misrepresenting anything, you are dead weight to this game right now. You haven't posted any content in the past 10 days or so, but are voting for someone because they aren't posting content.

In case you missed that part of Mafia 101, making a statement that expresses a fact or opinion on a person's post would generally be considered content. Especially when it's something scummy, like, say, a blatant misrepresentation of factual elements of the game. I also love that you continued this trend of blatant misrepresentation (since it's, y'know, not subtle at all) in that post, particularly with the unnecessary liue about my vote.

[DizzyIzzyB13]

"Both, potentially" is a weak non-commital answer. Putting statements out there that can be interpreted in more than one way clearly helps scum. It allows them to

after the fact

choose the path that suits them better.

And town can gaim insight into mindset and thought processes utilised by a player who is forced to think for themselves and not be lead by the hand like a child.

Which, y'know, makes my answer accurate rather than "weak and non-commital". It depends on the circumstances and situation.

So you don't know who the second scum is (assuming kiku is scum). There are two scum left, and they both have to be lynched. How are you helping to catch the second scum? You aren't. What if kiku isn't scum? Then you'd have a whole lot of nothing, nada, zilch. That is the danger. If you are town you are myopic.

I find linking players to be disingenuous, since it inclines players towards making false assumptions based on teh actions of one or other players, thus I avoid it. Just because I think kiko is scum doesn't meanm I don't have opinions on other players, just that those opinions are not reliant upon potential scum relationships.

[DizzyIzzyB13]

Dizzy, I'm not misrepresenting anything. Your posting is ambiguous and unhelpful. You're voting a player for hypocritical reasons because your posts don't have more content that kiku's. You may feel that they have content, but I'm really not getting anything helpful out of you. You pretty much seem to be voting kiku because she isn't posting much. You make a vague statement in your vote post about kiku having some anti-town behavior. If you want people to look at kiku, then present a case explaining why she is scummy. If you don't, then why are you voting her at all?

You need to go back to yesterday, clearly.

[DizzyIzzyB13]

Looker's last post is rather strange. Its actually quite a direct connection to Dizzy. You just have to weigh whether or not Looker would have called out a partner in such a manner. The wifom surrounding that one is mind boggling. Seeing as how Dizzy never directly addressed it makes me wonder if Dizzy actually

is

scum.

That's because addressing it is pointless because a) of the WIFOM and b) because it's ridiculous.

[DizzyIzzyB13]

As for your post 27, I'll address each part individually.

Both, potentially.

This is the second time you answer Dr. Who in a weak way (short answers). By saying both potentially, you are once again leaving your answering up to interpretation. You, in fact, aren't answering the question at all. Without justifying your comment, it is utterly useless, and yet you then hide behind that to say that you're contributing. I don't believe you at all right now.

It wasn't a dishonest or inaccurate answer, and I expounded on it when he asked to (several posts before the quoted post, btw). Regardess, your contention that a short answer is scummy or weak is... very, very silly. Short answers are good. They include no fluff to distract from the essence of the answer. In this case, I boiled it down to the simplest expression possible, if perhaps too far since apparently, it wasn't as obvious to some people for some reason.

I don't know. I'm trying to avoid thinking in a potentially dangerous manner as that.

Here, Dr. Who is giving you a chance to redeem yourself, giving you the opportunity to actually contribute, and you shut the door. Could you please elaborate on how trying to figure out who else could be scum in thinking in a dangerous manner? Look, we all know that you've convinced yourself (rightly or wrongly) that Kiku is scum, but the game doesn't end with just catching the second scum. You then go on to say that you linking players is dangerous. But Who never asked who you thought was Kiku's buddy. He asked who you thought was scum. I'll ask you in a different way, and there should be an answer since you mentioned other opinions you had. Who are you top suspects, independent of each other, and why?

See, there's another blatant misrepresentation. He

did

ask who Kiku's buddy was. His specific question rested upon the condition that Kiku was scum. He was asking me to identify who could be Kiku and Looker's buddy. For you to say he didn't ask that is to entirely misrepresent the situation.

Kiku is my top suspect, on account of scummy attempts to dictate the pace of the game, scummy interactions with Looker, proclivity to make bizarre leaps of logic and a genberal disinterest in advancing the town's cause. Kyle is second, pretty much for the reasons you've eloquently stated earlier (except, I don't really agree with your Looker-voter point). Third is... eh. I'm less sure here. Probably either Dr. Who (mostly for gut reasons that could admittedly be OMGUS, though I'm disliking his voting during day two) or Flinter/TheButtonmen (the case as stated elsewhere is stronger than the position here, but something feels off on it.

In case you missed that part of Mafia 101, making a statement that expresses a fact or opinion on a person's post would generally be considered content. Especially when it's something scummy, like, say, a blatant misrepresentation of factual elements of the game. I also love that you continued this trend of blatant misrepresentation (since it's, y'know, not subtle at all) in that post, particularly with the unnecessary liue about my vote.

If you're going to use the accusation of blatant misrepresentation next time, make sure that it is misrepresentation (i.e. intentionally changing the meaning/interpretation of someone's comments) rather than just an accusation you refute. For you to charge Ice of that is totally disingenuous.

I'm sorry, but any time you make a statement that flatly contradicts verifiable facts, it is a misrepresentation of the situation. His post contained a statement that flatly contradicted fact. Thus... why are you arguing with me, unless you like the obscurement of facts?

In the end, that fact that you are so ardently defending your contributions, even though they haven't amounted to very much IMO, while conveniently not adding anything new because you're somehow convinced of kiku's alignment and have nothing further to add makes me very uneasy about you.

I'm sorry to hear that.

[DizzyIzzyB13]

@Dizzy, thanks for responding. I think on some things we can agree to disagree. However, you did not make any comment on my accusation that you are spending more time defending your activity than actually contributing. I would like a reaction to that.

Does it need a comment? Defensiveness when being attacked is not a scum tell, or any kind of tell and should be expected behaviour on account of being the natural reaction to the situation.

As for the misrep claim, I believe in my previous post I showed how you have provided very little content. Therefore, for Ice to say you're hypocritical to vote someone else for low content seems justified. As for the obscurement of facts charge, well, I've presented mine. I would like to see you justify your claims with actual and not just your own commentary (re-read your D2, I've yet to see you provide evidence for your various claims).

Allow me to state again. I am not voting for kikuchiyo because of activity. I have never been voting for kikuchiyo because of this. I have not used this as part of a case against her. My only comment on kikuchiyo's activity is that while she was v/la, she was not providing anything that would change my opinion of her or provide further evidence as to her scumminess. Any statement that her activity level is a factor in my vote against her is, simply, a lie and thus a blatant misrepresentation of the truth. I seriously don't know how much more clearly I can say this so that this argument can stop being a distraction for town finding scum.

As for the approaching deadline, I would also like a claim from buttons ASAP, so that we can address the claim, lynch him or change our target if necessary.

I concur.

[DizzyIzzyB13]

Since when does "Ick" have multiple meanings? The only thing ambiguous about that is why I said it, not what it means.

[DizzyIzzyB13]

vote kikuchiyo

[DizzyIzzyB13]

Mod Question: Would the Mafia Deputy be outed as a deputy to the Rolecop, or, since they haven't been activated, would they should up as vanilla?

I ask this because we have 2 scum in a group of 7. Both of them have power roles that should theoretically make them obvious to the role cop, as our vanilla Mafia member is dead. If the Deputy would be outed to the Role Cop, I think it might be worth claiming the results now, since if we wait 'till tomorrow, the scum might get lucky, and we'd lose the opportunity to take advantage of his or her information. If the Role Cop claimed now, there are four scenarios that would play out, each being beneficial to town:

a) Role cop claims with a vanilla result on a player. The claim is uncountered. In this instance, we have two players who would be confirmed town, thus improving the odds of finding scum to 2 in 5.

b) Role cop claims with a result on a player. The claim is countered. In this instance, we are assured that one of the claimed cops is scum and we also get scum possibly outed by teh claimed results.

c) Role cop claims a result on the deputy or jailkeeper. The claim is uncountered by scum wishing to deny the town the opportunity to discuss and debate competing claims in order to prevent additional data to be generated to help town find teh third scum. In this instance, we kill scum today and leave one scum in a town of 5 tomorrow.

I believe all these situations help us. Does anyone agree with me?

[DizzyIzzyB13]

Mod Question: Would the Mafia Deputy be outed as a deputy to the Rolecop, or, since they haven't been activated, would they should up as vanilla?

I ask this because we have 2 scum in a group of 7. Both of them have power roles that should theoretically make them obvious to the role cop, as our vanilla Mafia member is dead. If the Deputy would be outed to the Role Cop, I think it might be worth claiming the results now, since if we wait 'till tomorrow, the scum might get lucky, and we'd lose the opportunity to take advantage of his or her information. If the Role Cop claimed now, there are four scenarios that would play out, each being beneficial to town:

a) Role cop claims with a vanilla result on a player. The claim is uncountered. In this instance, we have two players who would be confirmed town, thus improving the odds of finding scum to 2 in 5.

b) Role cop claims with a result on a player. The claim is countered. In this instance, we are assured that one of the claimed cops is scum and we also get scum possibly outed by teh claimed results.

c) Role cop claims a result on the deputy or jailkeeper. The claim is uncountered by scum wishing to deny the town the opportunity to discuss and debate competing claims in order to prevent additional data to be generated to help town find teh third scum. In this instance, we kill scum today and leave one scum in a town of 5 tomorrow.

I believe all these situations help us. Does anyone agree with me?

Umm - think the role cop should have two results (one for N1 and one for N2). I do not think the cop got a guilty or the best play would have been to declare his\her results by now. I do not think scum will counter the cop right now - they'll take their chances with the 2 in 4 odds and kill him in the night.

Also agree that the cop should claim now as there are chances he may be killed tonight and we'll lose the info he has ..

Ugh, sorry... the v.2 in the thread title made me think it was mday two for some reqason. So, there's a chance at two investigations, which would be even better for the town.

[DizzyIzzyB13]

Excellent.

[DizzyIzzyB13]

Did a skim read .. This is where I'd put all players ..

peanutman (replacing Budja)
kikuchiyo
kyle99
ICEninja (replacing wolframnhart who replaced Lacey)
------- Town Line--- Scum Side ^^^^
Fat_Tony (replacing hewitt)
Doctor Who (replacing Slaxx)
DizzyIzzyB13
flinter

Initially put Fat-tony on the scum side, but an iso gave me a pro-town read on him.

---

Well, shows jmj wasn't the best judge of character.

Well jmj is a fool. I seriously can NOT believe that he gunned for Leaf, who was probably one of the most pro town players we had. Definitely giving +lameo points here. We lost a valued scum hunter. At least we know he won't be shooting blindly again.

Wow

, JMJ was a moron. Leaf was one of the most townie players in this game.

Does the "Wow" betray a certain sense of elation that Leaf was killed??

Vote: Kyle99

Why Kyle over kiku or peanut, who you appear to have rated more scummily? And why is Doctor Who only rated as your third most town player?

I believe this statement adequately expresses mny opinion on Doctor Who.

[DizzyIzzyB13]

He's town. Is that clear enough for you?

[DizzyIzzyB13]

Why would I change my vote (since I was, y'know, voting for Kiku yesterday when TBM was mislynched) when all that's happened is the mathematical probability of me being right has increased? Kiku is scum. I am convinced of this. That's why I went straight back on her.

[DizzyIzzyB13]

I don't believe we are in a mylo/lylo situation yet. I'll claim under threat of hammer.

We're not. That would be tomorrow if a townie is lynched today.

[DizzyIzzyB13]

Sorry, in my sheer disinterest I did the unthinkable and posted without editing. I managed to forget to actually vote.

Vote kikuchiyo

.

Dizzy, what the hell. Why are you not posting your case against kiku? I really need you to do that in your next post.

I didn't have time when I made my last post.

Prior to Kiku pushing for the end of discussion and for the town to come to a lynch quickly, this is what I posted on Kiku's posting (in Post #228):

"I don't think much of it. It's more not-particularly-helpful than deliberately unhelpful, though. He's stated he's convinced Flinter is scum, but never posted in his own words why and later gave up because nobody would follow him. I could understand how you could get a scum-read on his play but... I don't know, the vibe doesn't quite feel right. Someting is whispering "not scum" to me and I can't put my finger on what it is."

This was shortly after she'd given up on pushing wagons and made the first post of her "vote looker and stop discussion" strategy. At that point of teh game, Looker had done nothing but look scummy. The strategy she was pushing, that we decide to lynch Looker, get a claim and go from there seems, particularly in light of Looker flipping scum, to be scum trying to distance themself from a scumbuddy, get town credit for pushing along a scum lynch and to ensure this goes down with the minimum of information being generated to form links between the soon-to-be-lynched scum and either of the other buddies.

When I started challenging her on her "less talk, more lynch" attitude, she switched to an Izzy wagon built on a precarious foundation of nothing more than accusations of lurking and the fact that I wanted town to generate the maximum amount of info from the end of day 1 in opposition to her strategy. The vehemence with which she switched to a wagon she'd shown no inclination for (since the vote for me was the first time she'd mentioned me all game) struck me as very much as an OMGUS vote, which was particularly puzzling considering I wasn't even voting for her since I'd been convinced Looker was scum from early on in the game.

She then disappeared for the early part of day two, and when she came back, magically forgot any suspicion of me and completely ignored me for a week until she tried to use Looker's self-vote post as justification for linking Looker and me, which is kinda bizarre since it would take one hell of a bus for Looker and me to be linked considering I spent roughly 90% of day one voting for Looker and stuck on the Looker wagon even while Kiku was managing to out-scum Looker on Day one.

After that... to quote ICEninja: "She avoided the Looker wagon for the most part during day 1. Say all you want about day 1 being over and just wanting to get it done with, you did not advocate a Looker lynch very strong at all. You then came back during day 3 and claimed to have wanted the Looker lynch to go through. The only reason you felt like Looker was scum is because votes weren't piling up on him like they do on a townie day 1 miswagon. You also say that Looker's play was "par for the course", but it was not at all. Looker blatantly admitted to playing differently this game to try it out just to see how it worked. People caught on to how he was not giving any reasons for his votes, and he was lynched for being scummy. You stayed pretty far from the wagon, and refused to admit the evidence against him."

ICENinja also made this point: "She just voted ooba to save her own neck instead of doing her best to convince us why Dizzy is the scummiest player right now. " I'd add to that that she tried that on day one when she decided to vote for the Looker wagon when it was the largest and most likely to go through, whilst giving up on her prior suspicions, which she never actually said she'd been convinced to drop and she never really returned to.

tl;dr - Kiku is scum, Lynch now, like you should have done yesterday.

[DizzyIzzyB13]

EBWOP: Sorry, stupid forums made me post twice.

[DizzyIzzyB13]

She calls my vote on her "omgus" while simultaneously explaining how it isn't. That's odd. Maybe she just wanted to post that word in the thread in order to bolster this weak case.

Learn to read. I didn't say it was OMGUS, I said it felt like OMGUS, because it kinda did.

[DizzyIzzyB13]

Dizzy: No. You learn to read. There was nothing omgus about my vote. You threw the word into your post for a reason unbeknownst to me, most likely because you are scum pushing a mislynch and are hoping if you fling enough bullshit around enough will stick.

Don't be dense.

[DizzyIzzyB13]

Fair enough. I'm vanilla. Not sure why you characterize me as "focused on Dizzy", but whatever. This is getting old. I voiced support for your Kyle wagon(I think I voted, too). Your inadequate explanation of why you are not voting Kyle and your inability to compare your situation to Wolf's is noted. Sorry guys.

Just realized I didn't address the wolf thing - Wolf subtly added pressure to the Leaf wagon but did not vote him. Kyle is marginal in most players books slightly scummy but not target one. And there were no votes when I indicated my suspicion of him - Leaf wagon on the other hand had two votes. There's a difference between choosing not to vote at first and third vote. There's no scum motivation not to throw down the first vote, but there is an impetus not to throw down later votes so as to not appear suspicious.

I'm not hammering - I think you're town .. This is the reason why I did not do this till now - A scum who is convinced that the other person will hammer would have claimed Role cop in this situation just to out the role cop and get a claim from him so that his partner can kill him in the night. I think your vanilla claim all but confirms your town status.

Claim: Role Cop

Results:
N1 - Fat_tony - Vanilla Town
N2 - Roleblocked

Explain the bolded statement.

Did a skim read .. This is where I'd put all players ..

peanutman (replacing Budja)
kikuchiyo
kyle99
ICEninja (replacing wolframnhart who replaced Lacey)
------- Town Line--- Scum Side ^^^^
Fat_Tony (replacing hewitt)
Doctor Who (replacing Slaxx)
DizzyIzzyB13
flinter

Initially put Fat-tony on the scum side, but an iso gave me a pro-town read on him.

---

Well, shows jmj wasn't the best judge of character.

Well jmj is a fool. I seriously can NOT believe that he gunned for Leaf, who was probably one of the most pro town players we had. Definitely giving +lameo points here. We lost a valued scum hunter. At least we know he won't be shooting blindly again.

Wow

, JMJ was a moron. Leaf was one of the most townie players in this game.

Does the "Wow" betray a certain sense of elation that Leaf was killed??

Vote: Kyle99

[DizzyIzzyB13]

I would like to

unvote

for the time being. I'll come back with revised opinions.

I still feel that much of my case against kiku stands, however, and I would like to not have her declared town automatically. I don't think I'll pursue a kiku lynch for now, but I'd just like to see how day 3 and night 4 end up.

Why on earth would anyone consider Kiku to be auto-town? Or indeed, town at all? She's claimed vanilla when the only alternative would be to counter-claim Ooba as role cop or claim scum. The vanilla claim does nothing to affect whether Kiku is scum and allowing her to avoid a lynch with such a claim would make you the prime suspect for being her remaining scum partner.

[DizzyIzzyB13]

Umm .. I was the one who brought up this point and he was arguing against it .. I claimed Role cop after she claimed Vanilla .. My argument is "A

rational

scum when confronted with a hammer he\she thinks will happen, would have claimed Role cop in that situation to at least out the Role cop before dying. Kiku claimed vanilla - hence town."

Are you and the doc scum together?

The bolded assumption would be the main issue I have with that argument.

Also, no, and to be honest, to be attempting to prove pretty much the most pro-town player in the game and someone who's voting record is entirely inconsistent with being scum are the two remaining scum is behaviour that is unlikely to result in a town win.

[DizzyIzzyB13]

Okay,m ICE. Here's the thing. My first serious vote went on Looker. For all of Day one, I pushed Looker as scum. Even when Kiku was generating what would become the basis of my case on her for the next two days, I stuck with Looker. How exactly does that behaviour mesh with my being scum? Do you seriously believe that scum would behave the way I did with respect to Looker? Do you seriously think I would have spent two days completely focussed on getting Kiku lynched if I was scum, bearing in mind that only two scum remained and my vote, as scum, would be better used in order to generate a townie lych.

I've voted seriously twice. I had my vote on Kiku early on day two, and it's stayed there, after having my vote on Looker for the entyirely of Day One after the RVS. Is this proiductuive scum behaviour? Is this a winning tsrategy for scum?

Answer: No. The fact that you're thinking Doctor_Who is scum? I know who I'm voting for once Kiku flips scum.

[DizzyIzzyB13]

Dizzy: "Bussing" the goon is an entirely reliable and practical scum strategy. Also, why would you have switched to me on day 1? The main reason you seem to want my lynch is because you believe I am

paired

with Looker. If that isn't the thrust of your case, then what is?

Learn to fucking read instead of ignoring posts. Here's my case against you., that I posted a couple of days ago, which makes it very clear that the thrust of my case is based on your scummy behaviour and has nothing to do with Looker:

Sorry, in my sheer disinterest I did the unthinkable and posted without editing. I managed to forget to actually vote.

Vote kikuchiyo

.

Dizzy, what the hell. Why are you not posting your case against kiku? I really need you to do that in your next post.

I didn't have time when I made my last post.

Prior to Kiku pushing for the end of discussion and for the town to come to a lynch quickly, this is what I posted on Kiku's posting (in Post #228):

"I don't think much of it. It's more not-particularly-helpful than deliberately unhelpful, though. He's stated he's convinced Flinter is scum, but never posted in his own words why and later gave up because nobody would follow him. I could understand how you could get a scum-read on his play but... I don't know, the vibe doesn't quite feel right. Someting is whispering "not scum" to me and I can't put my finger on what it is."

This was shortly after she'd given up on pushing wagons and made the first post of her "vote looker and stop discussion" strategy. At that point of teh game, Looker had done nothing but look scummy. The strategy she was pushing, that we decide to lynch Looker, get a claim and go from there seems, particularly in light of Looker flipping scum, to be scum trying to distance themself from a scumbuddy, get town credit for pushing along a scum lynch and to ensure this goes down with the minimum of information being generated to form links between the soon-to-be-lynched scum and either of the other buddies.

When I started challenging her on her "less talk, more lynch" attitude, she switched to an Izzy wagon built on a precarious foundation of nothing more than accusations of lurking and the fact that I wanted town to generate the maximum amount of info from the end of day 1 in opposition to her strategy. The vehemence with which she switched to a wagon she'd shown no inclination for (since the vote for me was the first time she'd mentioned me all game) struck me as very much as an OMGUS vote, which was particularly puzzling considering I wasn't even voting for her since I'd been convinced Looker was scum from early on in the game.

She then disappeared for the early part of day two, and when she came back, magically forgot any suspicion of me and completely ignored me for a week until she tried to use Looker's self-vote post as justification for linking Looker and me, which is kinda bizarre since it would take one hell of a bus for Looker and me to be linked considering I spent roughly 90% of day one voting for Looker and stuck on the Looker wagon even while Kiku was managing to out-scum Looker on Day one.

After that... to quote ICEninja: "She avoided the Looker wagon for the most part during day 1. Say all you want about day 1 being over and just wanting to get it done with, you did not advocate a Looker lynch very strong at all. You then came back during day 3 and claimed to have wanted the Looker lynch to go through. The only reason you felt like Looker was scum is because votes weren't piling up on him like they do on a townie day 1 miswagon. You also say that Looker's play was "par for the course", but it was not at all. Looker blatantly admitted to playing differently this game to try it out just to see how it worked. People caught on to how he was not giving any reasons for his votes, and he was lynched for being scummy. You stayed pretty far from the wagon, and refused to admit the evidence against him."

ICENinja also made this point: "She just voted ooba to save her own neck instead of doing her best to convince us why Dizzy is the scummiest player right now. " I'd add to that that she tried that on day one when she decided to vote for the Looker wagon when it was the largest and most likely to go through, whilst giving up on her prior suspicions, which she never actually said she'd been convinced to drop and she never really returned to.

tl;dr - Kiku is scum, Lynch now, like you should have done yesterday.

Also: There's a difference between bussing and refusing to move your vote forom someone no matter what the strangth of opinion on anybody else is. Look at my voting patternm. I have voted for two people since Sunday, March 14th (aka, 2 days after that game began) - Looker, and then after Looker was lynched, you. The votes on you were made in teh first post on both days.

The claim that I'm scum just doesn't stand up to scrutiny when you look at that record. It makes no sense for scum to vote in such a way as to completely work against your win condition and to push for two specific people so hardm, especially after day one when there's only one scum out there voting and pushing a pro-scum agenda. I've had plenty of opportunities in which I could have moved my votes in order to greatly push a pro-scum agenda and assist in curtailing town discussion and I haven't. This makes no sense, and is entirely inconsistent with any example of my play as scum.

[DizzyIzzyB13]

It's an absurd question for two reasons: a) You will flip scum and b) you're essentially asking "If Kiku is town, which of the two people you haven't definitively accepted as town are the two scum". You're asking a question to which the answer is obvious. I don't know which of ICE or Kyle is your partner. I lean ICE at the moment. You're still scum.

[DizzyIzzyB13]

Way to avoid the question.

I answered the question while I pointed out how stupid and pointless it is. The only reason to ask it would be to attempt to create the impression that you're town thaqt's trying instead of scum trying to get a town lynch.

[DizzyIzzyB13]

We really need some more input from our confirmed slots.

QFT.

Re-reading now. Would be helpful if I could get more help from one more confirmed townie read (read Tony's replacement) .. I do have a vibe but not disclosing anything as of now .. I'll say one thing though - not posting is prob. not going to earn ya town cred at this point in time (Dizzy your comments on the last one page?)

Comments on what? Nothing has happened. Kiku is still scum pushing wildly flawed logic, ICE is still her most likely partner, Kyle is still ambiguous and the good Doctor is still the most pro-town player in the game.

[DizzyIzzyB13]

I've already shown that at least one scum was on the Looker wagon.

I must have missed this. We only have one scum flip. Can you reexplain

Quite simple , All 4 unconfirmeds except you on the Looker wagon..

Comments on what?

What if you're wrong about kiku? Who else is scum?

The two people who're non-confirmed, non-Izzy and non-Doctor Who?

[DizzyIzzyB13]

Being least active is not a scum tell, silly scum.

[DizzyIzzyB13]

Oh, hi... maybe if you look around to other games, say by clicking here, you'd see that I'd just posted in another game when you made that post and so your timing was fortunate. Stop reaching, and die scum die.

[DizzyIzzyB13]

Stop reaching, and die scum die.

You're really starting to annoy me.

Sorry Kyle. If you're town, Doctor Who might be a good bet. Rereading the page it seems he put you at L-1 for "pressure". Kind of odd. Oh well.

I'd be annoyed if I was scum and there's been someone trying to lynch me for days. Nice scummy hammer, though. I guess I'll have to start tomorrow with another

vote kikuchiyo

, then.

[DizzyIzzyB13]

vote: Kikuchiyo

[DizzyIzzyB13]

Sorry, just voting for the scum.

[DizzyIzzyB13]

Why didn't you roleblock me kiku? I just don't understand it !!

I'm not a roleblocker.

Whom did you investigate? Barring an innocent on her, I'll be voting Dizzy today.

Interesting prasing considering we know the scum is a jailkeeper, rather than a simple roleblocker.

[DizzyIzzyB13]

And by "prasing", I mean "phrasing".

[DizzyIzzyB13]

tl;dr - I'm looking at anyone not named ooba or DW. kiku had a pretty quick about face on kyle. ICE may have slipped, and Dizzy please respond to kiku's charge.

It really doesn't warrant a response, but c'mon... there is absolutely no justification for saying that my initial vote on Looker was for "weak reasoning", and no way you could justify thinking Looker had changed his behaviour at any point after that. At the point I voted for Looker, Looker had spent the entire game messing around with the whole gender switch thing he was experimenting with, had been engaging in banter and moving his vote around with little to no reasoning, whilst actively avoiuding doing any scumhunting and attempting to prevent anyone else from doing it. Nothing changed. Looker read scum at that point, kept reading scum and then flipped scum. It would have been irresponsioble to move my vote away from Looker-scum at any point, and it stayed there.

I have done the same with Kiku-scum, who's looking pretty desperate right now. I'mn very happy with my vote, and have been since I decided that's where my vote would go following a Looker lunch sometime near the end of day one.

[DizzyIzzyB13]

You won't flip town, but we've been here before. You know full well what my answer will be, since I've been very clear about it before. Stop trying to create the impression you're scum hunting by re-asking questions to which you know the answer.

[DizzyIzzyB13]

I am shocked that the game isn't over.

[DizzyIzzyB13]

Okay guys, which one of you is scum?

[DizzyIzzyB13]

Well... yesterday, I had it between Kyle and ICE as to who would be Kiku's partner, favouring kyle. But since kiku isn't scum, I'm conflicted. I probably favour ICE as scum, but I'm going to have to re-read at least parts of the game before I make any sort of decision.

Seriously, Kiku wasn't scum? What the hell is up with that? =/

[DizzyIzzyB13]

Hi. I'm here. I'm just... really unsure.

[DizzyIzzyB13]

I'll be honest, the only reason I haven't voted for ICE yet is because kiku flipping town has shaken my confidence in my own convictions. Up to that point, I was convinced the Doctor was town to the same degree I was convinced kiku was scum.

Last time I was in this situation, I changed my mind and lost the game for town. Re-reading hasn't let me find anything on the Doctor that my insecurity has really managed to feast on and change my opinion of him... so I'm going to

vote: ICE

and commend whichever of you is scum for playing a good game and making this a tough call.

Knowing my luck, my next post will congratulate the Doctor for winning as scum.