Oi, you ain't conforming to anything, you planet!Cecily wrote:/conformed.
You say /confirm, like that, got it?
/confirm
Oh, dear, I'm not RVSing, I MUST be scummy/actual scum!Jinxx wrote:Keeping my vote on voided for posting, but not contributing anything.
a.) I don't wish to participate.mikemike778 wrote:Hmm.. drawing attention to yourself by outright refusing to random vote isn't something I'd expect a scum player to do ... not sure why a town player would do either though so would interested to hear from Voided:
a) Why he has refused
b) What he thinks is the best way of starting a game if not RVS
His answers (and lack of any questions himself) don't seem to show a massive enthausiasm for RQS either.
I'm not tense, I'm blunt.Cecily wrote: Voided, why so tense already? This game should be fun, and while I'm not saying that not participating in RVS is scummy, it's not particularly team oriented. Maybe could turn into something anti-town later on, but as of yet I've seen nothing conclusive about his play style.
Good point.Cecily wrote:FoS:Pappums rat.
Already pushing someone as scum without any evidence and very few posts seems more scummy than not participating in RVS.
Neither are you. Also, GUT FEELING I'M TOWN AND RAT'S SCUM.Jinxx wrote:You may be active, but you aren't really... saying anything. Also, GUT.Voidedmafia wrote:Why is that? Your only reason for voting me is demolished now that I'm more active (and quite honestly, it was still somewhat in RVS, which is why I wasn't really contributing)
Well, my point is is that Jinxx is being slightly hypocritical in that he hasn't been active lately, nor has he posted content. Granted, he had V/LA as an excuse, but still.Xalxe wrote:...gosh, really? I never would've guessed that. I mean really, who disagrees with the person who calls them scum?Voidedmafia wrote:Neither are you. Also, GUT FEELING I'M TOWN AND RAT'S SCUM.
Point is, make effort besides stating the obvious. You're probably getting strung up anyway, but on the off chance you're town, we'd like some help going into tomorrow.
well, I could see how you could draw that conclusion.Xalxe wrote:The first, yes. I think that if he were ever to turn up scum, that's an easy way to say ZOMG XALXE PARTNER LYNCHLYNCHLYNCH.Voidedmafia wrote:Why does it bother you that he's defending you? You think he's buddying you or trying to cover up something?
Sadly enough.Xalxe wrote:Nope, pappums' claim. That's it, but it's certainly an issue that can't be avoided.
Andrew, it would be wise to start participating more.andrew94 wrote:voided mafia, it would be wise to claim now
I'm not going to answer that first part, because that should be obvious enough.pappums rat wrote:what 'scumbuddy' are you talking about?Voidedmafia wrote:Rather quick with that reveal, aren't you? Maybe YOU'RE worried about your scumbuddy instead?
But then, that raises the question: Why go after me, then, since I haven't really tried to go after you?
...wait...YOU DON'T SAY WHAT YOUR PM TELLS YOU, YOU IDIOT.
what does'Why go after me, then, since I haven't really tried to go after you?'mean? shouldnt i go after whoever came up as scum in my investigation?
quotinga pm is against the rules, not paraphrasing.
topappums rat wrote:there is a reason to claim, i have irrefutable proof that you are scum. (i used my one-shot early because i had a very good gut feeling that voidedmafia was scum).Voidedmafia wrote:My point is that there's absolutely no reason to claim such a role now, which makes me wonder why he didi it. The first question that came to mind was if HE was trying to get protection for scumbuddies. I don't know if it's true, though, but it's the first question that came to me.
All in all, this is a VERY suspicious post that pappums has made.
why is my post suspicious? does it make sense for scum to make this kind of insane play, especially against a new player?
why would scum do something like this to ease pressure off of their buddies?
I say it's stupid because it's wrong. And I have irrefutable proof of that, since a Neighbor is town.pappums rat wrote:why do you say my claim is stupid? you cant prove my claim is false because my role is allowed in normal games.voidedmafia wrote: And right now I'm just focusing more on proving that rat's claim is false and stupid without getting myself lynched in the process. If I escape this particular hole, I'd be glad to start scumhunting again.
what do you mean 'i havent picked anyone'? neighbors dont pick who they want to be neighbors with, they are assigned a person at the beginning of the game.[/quote]pappums rat wrote:Voidedmafia wrote:Andrew, it would be wise to start participating more.andrew94 wrote:voided mafia, it would be wise to claim now
Anyways, I claim Neighbor. 'Course, since we're still not N1 yet, I haven't picked anyone, but yeah.
Well, I can't say anymore since that'd be talking about my PM, but yes I can.Jahudo wrote:Neighbors don't choose their night talk partners.
I'd prefer to get the lynch away from me, maybe onto pappums or Jinxx. Really, anyone but me until I get out of this mess.Jahudo wrote:Voided looks like he could be trying to reason with Xalxe and Mikemike in post 113, like they could be townies he could get on his side still. And then he suspects Jinxx in post 131. I wonder if he would think to distance at that point, or if he still thinks he could swing a lynch that's not himself or pappums. Maybe Jinxx is town too, although I feel a little more confident about the post 113 tell.
what if he is liartown, instead? It's certainly a possibility, though I still think he's a liarscum.Xalxe wrote:pappums: Lynching you is/was an option where we believe you are liarscum, so we lynch you to test. Obviously this is sub-optimal.
Also, voided's defense is...better than I expected, actually. He hasn't laid down without a fight.
Considering that I think his claim is bollocks, and that I think there's little reason for him to do so, yet everyone is still going along with it, why wouldn't I?Jahudo wrote: It looks like he's mostly resigned himself to being lynched.
You're right: I should've voted Pappums immediately after he put forth the claim, or when he unvoted. Those were both mistakes on my part, along with I suppose a too-cautious approach. Now I feel as if if I voted, I'd somehow be falling to the wishes of the town for me to vote, period. Irrational? I suppose, but it's still making me stay my hand.Jahudo wrote:- Voided hasn't placed a vote on Pappums, which I cannot understand.
Not that I don't want to make connections with everyone else, but everyone is just about as equally resigned to my lynch as I am. I could find some non-pappums links, though.Jahudo wrote:- He has ignored the other votes on him and everyone else's reaction, only talking about Jinxx. He should be guessing if pappums has a buddy or two supporting him, but this looks like he doesn't want to make any connections to anyone else.
No, I didn't not think it was a safer, less obvious choice, I said it because it is my role. Also, unless my PM lied, I can choose my neighbor in N1.Jahudo wrote:- The claim was a poor one. Neighbors can't pick their night talking partner. Another role can, but not "Neighbor", so you know he's lying. I'm a little surprised scum wouldn't pick a better claim like miller, to leave some doubt about his alignment, or another power role like doctor to try and draw a counter-claim into the open. But I'm guessing that voided is just inexperienced scum and thought neighbor would be a safer, less obvious choice?
Considering how much he's been on the sidelines with only 3-5 posts to his name here, I'm inclined to think that its either anti-prod or just to have a semblance of participation.Jahudo wrote:Out of curiousity, what did you hope to get out of this question if you already believed pappums claim?andrew94 wrote:voided mafia, it would be wise to claim now
havingfitz wrote:Voided....why should we not believe pappum's claim? What would be his incentive to not tell the truth? I believe the different possibilities have already been covered well enough and there aren't any good ones I can see that involve pappum lying.Voidedmafia wrote:Considering that I think his claim is bollocks, and that I think there's little reason for him to do so, yet everyone is still going along with it, why wouldn't I?Jahudo wrote: It looks like he's mostly resigned himself to being lynched.
I think a one shot day investigative role that returns inaccurate results would be a pretty crappy role to put in the town. Also...I think your claim is pretty fishy as you claimed you were going to be picking your neighbors at night (which I do not believe is how the Neighbor role is set up to work) and then you change your role to the Neighborizer. That's a pretty unusual role IMO opinion to forget and/or confuse with just a standard Neighbor.
I'm assuming your "Neighborizer" is someone who can recruit/select others to be his neighbor. I'm not familiar with this role (like a cult leader?) but it could just as easily be a sccum aligned role. And as has already been mentioned...if you aren't scum, then wth is pappums doing?
At least you should have some solace in the fact that is pappums' result is not accurate...that he is probably next on the gallows.
Pappums had voted for me in RVS becasue I flat-out said I wasn't going to participate. Later, he asked me if I have ever been scum before, which also heavily implies that he thinks I am scum. Claiming a one-shot day cop A.) Gets others to go with him on me being scum without everyone second-guessing what his motives could be, b.) potentially quicklynches me (I know he didn't want that, but it was still a possibility, like if Jerbs came back and vote for me while I was still at L-1), and c.) Keeps him safe from a cop counter because being a one-shot claim means he's just a regular townie after the usage. Arguably the only flaw in the plan is if I'm actually town or town-aligned, which puts him on the block tomorrow (and I don't need to be scum to point out that NKing him would be stupid since he'd be lynched tomorrow barring some other case gets thrown up before he's hammered. It'd just be a waste of a NK.).havingfitz wrote:Voided....why should we not believe pappum's claim? What would be his incentive to not tell the truth? I believe the different possibilities have already been covered well enough and there aren't any good ones I can see that involve pappum lying.Voidedmafia wrote:Considering that I think his claim is bollocks, and that I think there's little reason for him to do so, yet everyone is still going along with it, why wouldn't I?Jahudo wrote: It looks like he's mostly resigned himself to being lynched.
To answer the first and last part, at this point I'm more inclined to believe its pappums trying to get my lynch through getting all of you to follow along becasue he's a cop.havingfitz wrote:I think a one shot day investigative role that returns inaccurate results would be a pretty crappy role to put in the town. Also...I think your claim is pretty fishy as you claimed you were going to be picking your neighbors at night (which I do not believe is how the Neighbor role is set up to work) and then you change your role to the Neighborizer. That's a pretty unusual role IMO opinion to forget and/or confuse with just a standard Neighbor.
I'm assuming your "Neighborizer" is someone who can recruit/select others to be his neighbor. I'm not familiar with this role (like a cult leader?) but it could just as easily be a sccum aligned role. And as has already been mentioned...if you aren't scum, then wth is pappums doing?
I do, somewhat, but I'd prefer to be alive when he is lynched to be satisfied then, not dead in the ground and pacificied that his death came right after.havingfitz wrote:At least you should have some solace in the fact that is pappums' result is not accurate...that he is probably next on the gallows.
What with you being "Why so serious?" to me and all?Cecily wrote:I have to say, I am impressed with the way Voided has been coming back from pappums' claim. If we were still on the first page and I had to guess, Voided would have been the person I'd expect to blow up fastest at being targeted and him having not done that is surprising. Even though his reaction is not up to what I had anticipated, that's not to say that he's not just uber awesome at keeping calm under pressure. And I've never heard of a neighborizer role before.
Oh, dear god, I hope I don't start doing THAT. That is not something I'd want to do at all.Cecily wrote:The slip from him saying neighbor at first to neighborizer later is also suspicious. Seems like he was just rifling through potential roles, misread one, and now being called on it has to make something else up. Acting like it was just a simple error is a good way of making other people think he actually knew what he was doing. It's a simple and effective lying tactic to keep attention off of a slip up like that.
With everyone so focused on me, no one else is trying to hunt anyone else, and I'm not excluding myself from that, either. And I'll start now by asking this: why you think no one else has jumped out as scummy? (from ISO #10)Cecily wrote:All that said I don't think we need to wait the entire continuation of this day unless someone is going to admit to being scum, and I think it would be more useful to learn if Voided is actually scum or not before continuing on with deliberations over who his buddies are. We can always come back and re read these pages tomorrow, and knowing explicitly who is lying would definitely be better than throwing random guesses around.
No, neighbor becasme neibghborizer becasue I realized my mistake. Pressure had nothing to do with it beyond making me realize what that mistake was.P.T. Barnum wrote:I don't buy voided's claim (neighbor became neighborizor only under pressure)
Why would that be? Only part that looks like flailing to me is the part where I realize I had claimed the wrong role.P.T. Barnum wrote:Voided's responses to Jahudo look like flailing.
Becasue, yknow, I don't have any? (Well, not until I pick my neighbor choice, anyways)P.T. Barnum wrote:I haven't had time to look for partners for voided. That might be fruitful, although he's spent most of his posts protecting himself.
Because he thinks I'm scum and wants me gone. If you'll note, until he unvoted all his posts were about me being scum, and nothing else. I'm not counting RVS or anything before Idiotking confirmed to start the game, mind. After he unvotes me, he gets on Fitz and Jahudo for seeming overeagerness and the gambit suggestion, respectively. But other than that, it's been all me. Perhaps a case of tunneling?havingfitz wrote:Voided...none of the options you provide above explain why pappums would call you guilty when if you are town...he's lynched next. I applaud your efforts to turn things around and stay alive but your reasons for disputing pappums claim don't hold water...your claim seems off...and there is no non-suicidal reason for pappum to fakeclaim a result on you.
Oh, jeez. Not only is he unhelpful, he's not even bothering to check where his info comes from.andrew94 wrote:o here we go. this might be reason why he apparently checked voided.Voidedmafia wrote:Why do you not think it's right? From the looks of things, he's trying to defend you, in a way.
The hell is this post, anyways? You do nothing to help by just saying "HEY GAIZ I FOUNDZ TEH SCUMPOSTZ LOOK LOOK LYNCHIE LYNCHIE!"andrew94 wrote:also, i discovered an extremely scummy post that i missed before due to the cop claim.
NEIL
his post is so scummy that my teeth hurts. lynching him day2/3
Well, you've mentioned that my first post in reaction to your claim was rather scummy (and I'd have to admit I was rather taken aback by the claim, so it wasn't as good a response as I could've presented). And like I said, I never even clicked the link, so that takes out that possibility for my role mix-up.pappums rat wrote:not really, i still think it is pretty likely you are scum. in fact,
vote voidedmafia
How would you test it? Even if I decide to pick you as my neighbor you could just come out and say "See! The mod picked me as his neighbor! Voided never picked me at all!" And I'd be the only one to be able to argue that unless Rhinox has a problem with that, and I don't think he will.Jahudo wrote:You had my hopes up pappums. But at least it did get this game sorta moving so your initiative was good.
Part of my suspicion on voided is whether he lied about his claim or if he just misread it. Yes, he could have misread a neighborizer claim as scum, but if he had that power role as scum I also think he'd be more careful about getting it right because its not something he'd have to make up on the spot. As town he might be more likely to think he's going to be lynched anyway so he answer like its an offhand comment.
So I think we should test voided's claim to clear up one suspicion I have.
Not my point. Unless both I and the person I'm neighbored with get notified that we are neighbors, this point of yours is nulled.Jahudo wrote:Neighbors are determined pre-game, it would be part of your role pm.
Dude, make some goddamn SENSE before you open your mouth.andrew94 wrote:to the previous page, i meant this post was suspicious, not his next one.neil1113 wrote:@Andrew: WHY are you posting to little and have such a lazy meta? Are you willing to pick your game up for this game and be pro-town, or do you really not care? If the latter, I won't have any problem with a policy lynch later on in the day.
if you look at this, it basically shows that he is making abackup andrew wagon.
infact he is gonna be day 2 lynch
How is it not diverting scumhunt when, by your claim, everyone was focused on me, my actions, and what would happen on my lynch, and nearly nothing else? And you can't just write it off as just being narrow-sighted for everyone, either.pappums rat wrote:i would like to clear it up for everyone that this was a gambit, as i have stated already, since cecily thinks it was a joke. a gambit is meant to do something specific, such as in this case gauge peoples' responses to there being a confirmed guilty. i didnt do this for shits and giggles. i did itin an attempt at scumhunting, not to divert scumhunting, as havingfitz accused me of.
You could argue that andrew asking to claim is implicating he would hammer.pappums rat wrote:and i never forced vm to claim, he only claimed after andrew asked him to. he should have only claimed if someone had expressed intent to hammer.
They're examining others, let them be. If they want to probe my replies, they'll get to them.pappums rat wrote:i am very disappointed that people have abandoned talking about vm's responses. vm's responses are still just as valid as if i hadnt gambited, and they need to be examined, as well as everyone else's responses.
Well, you are.pappums rat wrote:and note the namecallling 'liar' once again.
If you had bothered to LOOK, you'd know he'd be V/LA up till today. So don't hate on him because he had a reason to not be there.pappums rat wrote:and you enjoy intercourse with aardvarks. start contributing please, or replace out.Jerbs wrote:@fitz
I WAS V/LA
andrew and pappaums are VIs
p.s. while i was typing that up i thought that it may be the case that jerbs was trying to send a message with that post i quoted, as in, 'stfu about them, you are looking bad'.
'cause, yknow, this game is more than just responding to what people tell you.andrew94 wrote:i cant really do anything due to the fact that people are not responding to me apart from calling me 'vi' and 'speak english pls'
That ain't fencesitting. That's a promise as to where his vote is going next if his current wagon falls through. Fencesitting would be like teetering between you and Fitz for the vote.andrew94 wrote:imagine if i said this: alright X is scummy (no vote) and andrew should be policy lynched later on if there is no body else.
thats what neil did, thats fence sitting, thats scummy
I don't know about distancing, but there is some backtracking in them.pappums rat wrote:these last several posts by neil feel like distancing to me.
and now that i think on it more, his vote on me doesnt really make much sense. he is voting me because of the possibility that vm could have been mislynched while my gambit was still in play, but that possibility would have been there whether i was town or scum.
also, the 'aardvark' comment was out of line. sorry about that.
Fine, then. Since you're so sure I'm scum, start elaborating on that.Jinxx wrote:I'm here and reading.
Basic definition of trolling: Intentionally baiting someone with remarks so as to obtain a certain desired reaction, usually along the lines of rage from the person this is instigated against.havingfitz wrote:I haven't ever been accused of "trolling" before and I have never used the term. Can I get a definition. And nice to see you post a few times. You're almost out of lurker territory. Way ahead of Jerbs at least.Idiotking wrote:I also don't like the fact that neil and fitz are trolling the hell out of each other.
Actually makes sense, even if it's a reiterated way of saying what a few of us have said before.andrew94 wrote:@ pappums, you retracted it because you had to.
if we lynched voided and he flipped town, there are no excuses for your 'fail'.
thus, you would have been lynched the next day.
not wishing for a 1 1 tradeoff, you decided to cancel the gambit.
its that simple.
It's still lying, which I believe is his point. <_<pappums rat wrote:every time you have said i lied or called me a liar. i made it clear that this was a gambit, and i took every opportunity i could to ensure that vm would not get lynched, right from the very first post of the gambit.havingfitz wrote:Remind me where I made a personal attack on you pappum...
wow! zomg! that makes me scum, doesnt it?! (obviously i disagree that the gambit didnt accomplish much, as we have a lot of reactions to analyze)Jerbs wrote:your gambit didn't accomplish much tho
You're still disregarding the fact that, no matter the precautions, I STILL could've been lynched by someone who was overeager. Jerbs could've, or anyone else who hadn't voted yet.pappums rat wrote:i made it explicitly clear that i did not want him lynched, and even unvoted him when he was at l-1 to ensure someone would not hammer him. the whole point of this was to gauge people's reactions to having 'confirmed scum' and what sort of action they would take because of it.andrew94 wrote:@ pappums, you retracted it because you had to.
if we lynched voided and he flipped town, there are no excuses for your 'fail'.
thus, you would have been lynched the next day.
not wishing for a 1 1 tradeoff, you decided to cancel the gambit.
its that simple.
nice distancing, brah. Sorry for you, but we're still gonna talk about the gambit, whether or not you want us to.pappums rat wrote:all right then, i am done talking about the gambit, if anyone tries to flamebait me again into explaining it (which i have done in detail) i am just going to ignore them. the results of the gambit speak for themselves, and i am voting accordingly.
I think I could safely say that this entire post--or at least the first paragraph--is one big can of WIFOM. There's just SO MANY WAYS you can interpret nearly everything in that first paragraph as well as the paragraph as a whole, and plenty to go back on if needed.pappums rat wrote:all right folks, here's the dealy-o. to believe that i am scum, you would have to believe that scum would be willing to pull a suicidal move like thatandat the same time repeatedly tell people not to mislynchandtell everyone your pm said you were sane (giving you no option to claim that your sanity was not assured after the supposed vm townflip). to believe havingfitz is scum, you would need to believe scum would want to policy lynch someone who he claims is a vi, thereby bringing about a shorter day without any real scumhunting (which is good for scum)andendorse quicklynching vm after a suspicious early day one claim without scumhunting (once again, good for scum)andendorse lynching someone for using a gambit under the pretense of lynch all liars without scumhunting (are we seeing a trend, here?).
the whole point of my gambit was to see the reactions people would have to there being a confirmed scum cornered, and then after the gambit was lifted people could scumhunt by looking for suspicious reactions. havingfitz has made every attempt to make this day shorter than it should be, which is antitown and scummy. the fact is that havingfitz has done no real scumhunting at all, and has been avoiding doing so all day. obvscum is obvious. moar votes plz.
And what if he flips town instead of scum? Do you think that either way would clear me, or that a townflip would still leave doubt on me?Pine wrote:Hmm. It just occurred to me that if PR does flip scum, that more or less clears Voided completely. WAY too risky a move to play on a scummate, even in the name of bussing.
What if someone else chose me, like Jinxx (who had been riding a gut-scum read on me since the start)? Or if he had chosen someone else?Pine wrote:A Town flip would be irrelevant on you. It means he just made a moronic gambit, and likely chose you at random.