Open 10 -- C9: Game Over! - before 400

[ChannelDelibird]

/confirm

[ChannelDelibird]

/confirm, I'm awesome at this setup. (The trick is lynching the scum.)

So that's where I've been going wrong...

[ChannelDelibird]

unvote, vote:CDB

for not being scum in Kitten Mafia.

seriously, you have no idea how much I want to self-vote for Kitten Mafia...

[/ongoing game talk]

Vote: Cogito Ergo Sum

because it's fun.

[ChannelDelibird]

Bad sock puppet.

[ChannelDelibird]

O SNAP, CES is on to me.

[ChannelDelibird]

unarbitraryvote: Cogito Ergo Sum, vote: Cogito Ergo Sum

I know it's your shtick, but I really don't appreciate people putting players who are likely to get replaced in a moment on -1.

Not much to go on, but the most so far, IMO.

[ChannelDelibird]

....Since when did you become likely to get replaced CDB? ._.

I was talking about lazarusmoth, who is being replaced as we speak.

@ CES - it's worse because he can't talk while you're yelling 'HAMMAH! HAMMAH!'

[ChannelDelibird]

My mistake - spectrumvoid's comment about your vote on me after you revoted lazarusmoth made me think you'd put lazarusmoth on -1.

I'll just keep my vote on you for putting me at -1 then.

[ChannelDelibird]

It's not. I just don't like being at -1.

[ChannelDelibird]

OMGIS!

QFT

[ChannelDelibird]

HAMMAH! HAMMAH!

Oh, wait...

[ChannelDelibird]

OK, this game is going nowhere at the speed of continental drift.

unvote, vote: No Lynch

[ChannelDelibird]

Allow me to explain, although this is later than I was hoping.

First off,

unvote: No Lynch

.

Spectrumvoid - yes, there were 5 pages of arguments or whatever there. But don't you think this game could use 5 pages of serious discussion? That's why I did that, to stir up discussion.

Ripley - I intend to post those lessons in every newbie game I IC in, because I believe them. I had no intention whatsoever of going through with a No Lynch today, but I wanted to see what people would say.

So while I expect to get some votes for this, it should at least get us going.

I was going to vote Spectrumvoid for not being concerned with the actual night-and-day implications of a No Lynch, but I think I probably misread that, looking at it a second time.

[ChannelDelibird]

Silly Channel, when will you learn?

Probably when one of you or Fritzler hammers me.

But at least I tried.

Mod:

could we have a vote count please?

[ChannelDelibird]

.... = | If CES AND Fritz wasn't here I'd put you at -1. (I dunno if he'd actually do it, but I don't wanna risk it)

Seriously. I keep expressing why I hate this phrase

But don't you think this game could use 5 pages of serious discussion? That's why I did that, to stir up discussion.

It's a catchall phrase that can cover anything you do, and is essentially a way out WHICH I DON'T LIKE.

I agree, it's scummy. But I'd prefer for me to be scummy and therefore there be some discussion than for the game to fall flat on its face because nobody is saying anything.

[ChannelDelibird]

Apologies for the lack of posting.

Looking over page 4 there was actually less going on than I thought there had been coming up to this post. I don't think I've played enough with IH to have my own metagame read on him yet, but frankly I think his Ripley vote was weird. By my read of it, the post by Ripley that he was responding to contained a couple of well-made points (that I don't necessarily agree with totally; I'll expand on that in a moment) and IH's vote really stuck out like a sore thumb.

vote: IH

because it's easily the scummiest thing this game, but I'm still trying to decide just how scummy it actually is.

As far as your points of contention against me go, Ripley, while I certainly see your point, I don't really have any reservations about picking up votes in a C9 game. I know that if I get speedlynched then the culprits are going to be very obvious the next day, and I also know that this game is newbie-free, which means that everyone knows what they're doing.

[ChannelDelibird]

I'm always hesitant to lynch Fritzler because it's always based on his lack of meaningful contribution, which is what he always does, meaning it's not a scumtell for him. I guess we could lynch him but I do feel that we'd gain more information for use tomorrow and afterwards if we lynched someone who's actually been saying things during D1, so that we can try and make connections.

[ChannelDelibird]

And what if Fritzler is our cop/doc? Do we lynch him anyway? If he is, what would you suggest?

[note: Fritz, don't take this as a request to claim. It's not.]

[ChannelDelibird]

OK then, what the hell.

unvote, vote: Fritzler

[ChannelDelibird]

Craplogic. He'd be more useful if he turned up dead tomorrow morning after we lynched scum today.

FoS: Cogito Ergo Sum

for being an idiot.

[ChannelDelibird]

Meh. So would Fritzdoc.

Patrick's death is interesting - he was opposed to the Fritzlynch. That doesn't look great for Ripley, who suggested it.

[ChannelDelibird]

Where d'you get the 66% from?

[ChannelDelibird]

Well, while I don't really approve of your thinking, I do understand it, and it is backed up personally by the fact that I wouldn't have wanted Fritz lynched after his claim. For good reason, obviously, but that's hindsight for you.

[ChannelDelibird]

Ok Ripley. Essentially your logic for me being suspicious is...

I'm lazy.
Some other people thought it was suspicious, so I'm going to say it too.

Did I get that right or not?

That's not the impression I got...

[ChannelDelibird]

It's how I seem to be seeing it. I asked a question, which I would have to go back a page or two. Instead of doing as such, I asked a question. This is apparently odd. If it is odd, it is only because I am lazy.

Look, people get away with voting for all sorts of dumb reasons so when a vote attracts as much negative attention as yours did it has to be especially weak. It's not just my opinion, it got you a vote and a FOS from other people:

My vote got negative attention, so it must have been weak. If you don't believe that it got negative attention, look at this, where some people said so!

Seriously.

OK, I get where you're coming from. It looked more to me that Ripley was concentrating on your voting for him yesterday (at least, that's what his most recent post looked like to me), with the laziness thing tacked on. For what it's worth I'm not bothered about you asking about the deadline - I do that sort of thing quite often. I do however still feel that your vote yesterday for Ripley was weak.

[ChannelDelibird]

*cough*

I'm unenthusiastic about going after CES today. I'm thinking more about Ripley - the more I think about it, the more unhappy I am that we let ourselves do an essentially random lynch, which Ripley had a lot to do with.

[ChannelDelibird]

My gut is telling me Channel is scum. But I'm not sure why nor do I particularly trust my gut.

I don't think you're maintaining a very good diet.

[ChannelDelibird]

If we don't get an upturn in discussion I might actually vote Ripley. I don't really have anything to add to what I've already said.

[ChannelDelibird]

So your gut > dodgy Ripley town-leading?

[ChannelDelibird]

Tell me then why you feel I am scummy.

[ChannelDelibird]

As you say, WIFOM. Besides, I don't know where you're basing your obviously metagame feeling that I wouldn't do it as town...there's no basis for whether I would do it as town or as scum because I've never been in a game that was that slow before.

[ChannelDelibird]

No, bad idea. I'm gonna claim now.

I'm the Cop. I have an innocent on CES, so I know the two scum are still out there to quicklynch.

Unvote me, NOW.

[ChannelDelibird]

I'll look at doing some PBPAs of the other three players during this week. Ripley will probably be first, no real order for IH/voidybuns.

[ChannelDelibird]

Ripley PBPA:

Post 21: Nonchalantly comments on the fact that Patrick and CES voted for him and votes Lazarusmoth to see if he's playing. (this post seems fine to me)

Post 61: Half-heartedly asks if CES is doing anything other than bandwagoning for fun. (been there, done that...waste of time. Everyone does this at some point)

Post 71: Rightfully questions my No Lynch vote (wrongfully referencing an ongoing newbie game). Perhaps should have noted the difference between a newbie game (what he is referencing) and a non-newbie game (what we are playing in), but I wouldn't call that scummy.

Post 74: Apologises for using ongoing games as evidence, fair enough.

Post 81: Asks a couple of intelligent questions about my No Lynch vote, questions that I don't have great answers to, to be fair. It wasn't a great play, but it was at least a play, which is more than we had.

Post 84: Rightly questions IH's vote on him. I find it

a little

strange that Ripley doesn't vote IH here...

Post 87: Explains the lack of IH vote. I don't agree, because just letting someone get away with scummy behaviour is a bad thing. Promotes the Fritzler vote.

Post 91: Good posting, basically.

Post 107: Reiterates his Fritzler position.

Post 113: Now here's where I start to not like things with hindsight. Quotes Fritzler's four admittedly frustrating posts but then proposes what is essentially a random lynch for a null tell.

Post 115: Responds to my concerns about Fritzler being a bad lynch by saying that Fritzler not posting content allows him to drift through to Day 2. Yeah, but it's not scum behaviour for him. It's normal, every game behaviour. It makes him no more likely scum.

Post 117: Translation - meh, we could probably lynch Fritz before he claims. (That turned out well, didn't it... >_>)

Post 147: Goes down the ol' "this game has disheartened me...lynch me if you must" route. Then says it's worth lynching all docs, something that I disagree with (but another player I know to be pro-town, CES, does, so that doesn't really accomplish anything). Calls IH out on laziness (is that really worth a FoS? Seriously?) Then FoSes voidybins for getting the time to deadline wrong. I don't think that's FoS-worthy, either, simply because I don't think the time to deadline made an awful lot of difference in the situation.

Post 150: Continues making too much out of IH's perceived laziness. Points out to IH the worthwhile case about his Ripley vote on Day 1.

Post 173: Says he believes my claim because IH/SV were his picks for the day. Fair enough, I guess.

Post 177: Continues pushing the laziness thing...yada yada. Correctly questions IH's response to post 150. Claims he hasn't seen where IH questions his logic but is responding to IH's questioning of his laziness logic in the same post.

Post 181: Good posting about Le Void.

Post 186: Continues on the theme from the previous post, to good effect.

Post 189 & 191: Nothing to say on this really.

After doing this I'm still not sure on Ripley, but I'm prepared to leave that until tomorrow. Rereading while compiling this PBPA has convinced me that voidhat's probably scum.

Obviously I am not going to be alive tomorrow, so I would like to decide before we lynch specs whether I feel IH or Ripley is more likely scum. No vote from me yet until I've decided that.

[ChannelDelibird]

CDB, are you intending to write PBPA's on anybody else or are you done? I'm getting conflicting messages from you and CES, one wanting to go ahead and lynch SV right now, the other wanting to take more time and decide about tomorrow.

I don't know if I'll do PBPAs on the other two. Your conflicting-messages thing is correct.

CES, while I appreciate that you will be alive tomorrow I would like to be sure that I've done everything I can to win us this game. I will vote for spectrumvoid in 24 hours, give or take. By that time I expect to have decided one way or the other.

[ChannelDelibird]

Bah. Well, for what it's worth, I think I was leaning towards IH, but good luck guys.

[ChannelDelibird]

Bah.

[ChannelDelibird]

W00t, go us.