Kingmaker II-Game Over

[spectrumvoid]

Hi everyone. No point in random voting since the King is the only one right?

[spectrumvoid]

Gah. What a massive post flood.

This is my first time playing any kind of Kingmaker game, so I won't offer any opinion about what PJ said simply because I have no basis for comparison.

I'm leaning towards the side of box being scummy, because he added the vote after he was voted. However, I need to spend more time reading all the posts, so I'll decide tomorrow. Also nothing about Pab/Glork for now till I do the read.

[spectrumvoid]

Box. I'm not buying the newbieness. Playing on emotion is a scum-tell. Claiming when not under pressure is a scum-tell. Giving up is a scum-tell.

vote: cardb0ardb0x.

MMOS: no one is asking for you to conform to anybody. All we're asking is for you to vote. If you don't use your vote, we won't know what we're thinking. If you don't care, why the heck are you playing mafia? And why do we have to take notes on what you say? Pro-town players should make an effort to help the town obviously.

FOS: Ameliaslay and Vaughn for trying to overplay what MBL said about PJ.

I meant that I won't comment on the differences between the previous game and this one since I wasn't in it.

[spectrumvoid]

vote: phoebus

Yep, phoebus is the total opposite of MMOS. But while MMOS claims to think that we can look through his posts to make notes anyway (which is something that I do to everyone anyway whether they vote or not), Phoebus claims to play by gut. While I know that isn't a strong scummy behaviour, it makes it easier for him to randomly accuse others to create confusion (because he won't state cases).

MMOS: I'd say that voting in this game is more 'lenient', as in I feel free-er to vote now since there's so many of us, and only the king's vote will execute. Normally, I always hesistate to vote just in case scum jumps on the bandwagon. So I don't see why you are not voting.

[spectrumvoid]

I forgot to add something else. I'll try to be as active as I can in this game, but it's really difficult when I post just before I sleep, and I have 3-4 pages to go through the moment I wake up... Blame my +8 timezone. I'll try my best to cope, but I may ask for a replacement if the post flood continues and it becomes a major problem.

To whoever commented on Glork: Glork always plays this way. Whatever game he's in. Kinda like raj I think.

[spectrumvoid]

I went to check what 'mountainous' means. It isn't really true, since we don't know whether we have a hero. Sorry for the post flood now.

[spectrumvoid]

I'm a little confused on who to comment on at the moment, since there're so many of us, and so many accusations + votes. King can you do a list?

I'm just going to comment on what I think were the more imortant ones.

I agree with everything said in the above post of CDB's about box and what Ameliaslay said about him in 181, so my vote on him stays.

@box: Oh. I thought kingmaker and heros weren't townies.

MBL: It's hard to do metagaming in mafia, unless Vaughn ALWAYS lurks when he's mafia and is active when he's pro-town. He could just be adopting a different playstyle. Hence, I don't buy what you said post 179. (Also referred to MMOS post 184).

@Twomz: No lingering questions. But thanks for asking.

About the PJ issue. While I don't think his comments that he's town this game are that scummy, I'm worried that the people who poked at it are using it as an excuse to accuse him.

[spectrumvoid]

MOD: I voted for phoebus, but it isn't in the vote count. Sometime Sept 16/

.

Phoebus seems more scummy. Someone said that he didn't post for some time, but that's not true. He posted a vote. I agree he still seems scummy.

I believe PJ is protown. His frustration sounds genuine. One question though: did you know this was mountainous when you signed up? (I sympathise with you over points 3-4. *pats*)

While Glork's comments are irritating, I'm not sure they show that he's scummy. It sounds more like someone being immature.

MMOS: care to clarify why box is protown?

[spectrumvoid]

Wow. I really should start learning from PJ. In most games, after page 10 or so I usually make some big mistake. I finally went to read Kingmaker I, and I admire his analysis.

MMOS: Everyone is assumed to be protown until he/she does something that makes him look scummy. That's the way mafia works. Or else I could jsut go around randomly accusing anyone for the entire game. So the onus is on you to explain why he's scummy, not for me to show why he's town.

Argh... I didn't realise Fritz was here. He's on my blacklist of weird players.

[spectrumvoid]

My take on pab: his play is really weird. I've been in a couple of games with him too, and he didn't play like that.

PJ: can you maybe post a LOE for us? I know you mentioned Bird and Phoebus, but its better to get a list of people we should discuss than go around attacking everyone. (This is one of my first large games where I joined from the start because I replaced in most where fewer people were alive, so correct me if I'm wrong.)

[spectrumvoid]

I'm busy yesterday, today, probably latest sunday. Rushing out a mega project.

[spectrumvoid]

I'm back. I'll fourth it. (I actually asked for it quite some time ago, but someone thought it wasn't a good idea.) It's really difficult to analyse so many people at the same time.

[spectrumvoid]

I asked for a LOE because I wanted to know who you thought were scummy. And also because I thought we might end up being deadlined like what Twomz said.

But then again, I've changed my mind because of what PJ said, that people who weren't on it evade suspicion. Also because I realised that I tend to overly focus on just a few people each game, which has led to horrible consequences in my other games, so I'm trying to change that.

[spectrumvoid]

RC is always retarded. PJ posted elsewhere that he's having keyboard problems.

[spectrumvoid]

Oops... I'm really sorry, it was pooky not petroleumjelly. I messed up the abbreviations. *bangs head on wall*

I agree with the Phoebus vote. (I've stated my reasons before somewhere). What's a newbie like box doing in a large theme? Not sure what to think of Pab for the moment.

[spectrumvoid]

[quote="spectrumvoid"]Box. I'm not buying the newbieness. Playing on emotion is a scum-tell. Claiming when not under pressure is a scum-tell. Giving up is a scum-tell. [\quote]

I know box is a newbie, but this is a large theme and therefore I'm not cutting him slack.

[spectrumvoid]

My original reason for voting phoebus.

Yep, phoebus is the total opposite of MMOS. But while MMOS claims to think that we can look through his posts to make notes anyway (which is something that I do to everyone anyway whether they vote or not), Phoebus claims to play by gut. While I know that isn't a strong scummy behaviour, it makes it easier for him to randomly accuse others to create confusion (because he won't state cases).

Then I decided that it might just be his playstyle. But something else came up:

Vote: Phoebus, I am not liking the coincidental nature of his votes.

Urgh.

I have not read the first kingmaker.
I do not have cases against these people.
I do not know whether I will be building cases.
I play by gut.

Wake me up when September ends.

As it happens, this was the sixth vote on MBL, the seventh vote on Cb0x, and the sixth vote on Pablito. This post was simply jumping on the three people with the biggest wagons, on the basis of "gut".

vote: Mert

And this post was the fourth vote on Mert, which was the largest wagon that Phoebus was not on. Right now, Phoebus' vote is on all four of the largest bandwagons, and all of it on "gut". I would like to hear more explanations for his votes.

.

So my vote on him stays.

[spectrumvoid]

I like people who talk, like Pablito. So don't shut up. By sticking up for certain people, it makes it easier for us to tell what his alignment is.

[spectrumvoid]

Re: What MBL said.

Well, PJ is the king, not the cop (we don't have a cop, right? Just maybe a hero.) He may think the 2 people are town, but there's no cop-proof. So, either way, it doesn't matter whether the 2 people become king tomorrow or not.

Phoebus: Who are you referring to?

[spectrumvoid]

*gives twomz a cookie* Hope you get better soon

[spectrumvoid]

unvote box

Sorry for leaving it for so long, I just forgot I was voting him.

My vote on Phoebus stays, for exactly the same reasons as before.

I can't get a read on bird and CDB, because bird has just not been contributing much, but so have other people in this game.

vote: pablito

I read him as someone who made a mistake, and now is trying to pass it off as a deliberate attempt. It seems insincere to me.

[spectrumvoid]

Twomz: I don't get what your point is... Are you saying you don't want to lynch CTD just because in another game he was like kamikaze or something? How does that affect this game?

[spectrumvoid]

I don't like the way box specially picked out that comment of pablito's to accuse pablito of implying he's a mason. There have been many (way too many) other totally weird comments that some people have said in this game that I can't make sense of.

I am more-or-less satisfied with pablito's latest post explaining his actions. And so

unvote: pablito

MBL: I don't get why you're saying that people who are lazy and weird cannot be scum.

[spectrumvoid]

Pooky: I do not understand your comment.

I sprained my ankle, so I don't want to do a reread now because it hurts. As stated earlier, my preferred choice is Phoebus. I'll still do a read to get a read on the other one (bird) but later.

[spectrumvoid]

I don't get MOS reasons for 'clearing' Phoebus. He says Phoebus has played differently in other games when he's scum or town... We aren't saying Phoebus is scummy because of his difference in playstyle compared to his other games.

Also, MOS sounds like he's accusing random people. Again, giving a crap reason, 'gut'.

I went back as promised. I think bird and Phoebus are currently tied... both are unhelpful, the only thing is I don't like Phoebus's responses too.

[spectrumvoid]

I don't get MOS reasons for 'clearing' Phoebus. He says Phoebus has played differently in other games when he's scum or town... We aren't saying Phoebus is scummy because of

his difference in playstyle compared to his other games.

Then why are you saying Phoebus is scummy, if not because his playstyle is wierd?

I'm saying he isn't scummy due to his DIFFERENCE in playstyle compared to other games (in response to what you said about his playing differently in other games), I'm saying he looks scummy due to his style in THIS ONE. With that said, I don't even know if he's unhelpfulness etc. is a playstyle... I read it as a scum-tell

I stand by point that 'gut' is a bad reason. You should have good reasons for voting someone. If it's just a feeling thing, you should explain what gives you the feeling. Also what PJ said, Phoebus's gut just so happened to point him to the wagon. In this case, gut sounds like an excuse to vote.

[spectrumvoid]

Why 'even Thok'?

Sorry about that, I meant to say you need good reasons for accusing someone. (My defence: vote counts are so confusing this game... I went by tone of posts instead of vote numbers )

Well, yes, his play could be different. But different play does not = scum or = town, it's just a matter of playstyle, not alignment.

[spectrumvoid]

I don't like lurking too, but why pick on one when so many people are lurking too?

[spectrumvoid]

My stand on bird: Uncertain. He could be a townie who wised up (our night was pretty long so he could have taken that time to read) or a scum who got yelled at my his scum buddies. I think it's hard to tell.

[spectrumvoid]

I thought Bird might have gotten the nudge from either the mod, or his scum partners. I'm not ruling out either option, but it's difficult to get a good read on bird because he's said so little all game. Hm... *wonders if that's a scum tactic*

[spectrumvoid]

MBL: I remember agreeing with many of PJ's theories day 1 about who he thought he was scummy etc. I was surprised at the lynch of RC though, since I don't think there was that much spotlight on RC before the lynch. However, I'm not sure if that means PJ is a scum-king, because we were at deadline. I also remember thinking that RC wasn't the most scummy of all the people on the LOS. (I can't remember exactly why now, but I'll do a read.)

I won't vote any new lurkers yet, I'd prefer if we give them more time to get back after the crash. However,

vote: stalling champ, ubertimmy

for the same reasons as 557.

About Twomz: I can't remember what he said and what happened...

[spectrumvoid]

On MBL and Glork: I'm not getting MBL's case on Glork at all. It's ridiculous to expect a vote to be as important as it is in an ordinary game. However, votes are still important because they confirm a person's stand on someone. Votes should also preferably come with some kind of explanation. Note the case on Phoebus early yesterday, where he voted without explaining. With that said, I don't think MBL is right to assume that Glork sees only votes. I don't think I have a long playing history with Glork, but from some of his other games, I read him as a pretty analytical player. Also, there's no evidence to prove MBL's accusation in this game. I also think MBL is wrong to not take note of discrepancies, it could be a scum slip.

On Pooky: Hm... I thought it was obvious exactly what game Pooky was talking about. This IS the game we're playing after all.

[spectrumvoid]

Aaand I suppose since someone brought up Fritzler, it's fairly apparent that he's just clinging onto a character theme- i.e. vote crashtextdummie ARR ARR ARR CAPTIAL LETTERS. This is neither helpful nor, um, productive. I really wanted to use a neither/nor sentence there. If he does this in every game, it's probably a good strategy for *him.*

To anyone who's been in these players' games, do they always do this...?

I think so. I've skimmed through a little of his games. But he does occasionally post analysis.

[spectrumvoid]

Phobus: I really can't get a good read on him at the moment. His shameless bandwagoning dosn't look good, but I'm not sure if it's a scumtell at this point. More suspicious is his refusal to contribute in any real way, with helpful comments like "still nothing to add at this point".

You seemed awfully wishy-washy in this post. Saying that you thought he didn't look good, but couldn't commit to such an inkling (even rejecting your own feelings by saying "I'm not sure if it's a scumtell") feels very uncharacteristic of you.

I think you misrepresented Yos here. He said
A: he can't get a good read on ph on the bandwagoning issue, because he's not sure if his bandwagoning is a scumtell.
C: he thinks phoebus not contributing to this game is 'more suspicious'.

This explains pretty clearly what Yos thinks of Phoebus, and why. I don't see how this makes him wishy-washy. And there's nothing wrong with not having a 100% confirmed stand on someone. (I got this from the 'not commiting' point.) For example, just look at what some people, myself included, think of bird and MBL's accusation (was it MBL?), especially the uncertainty involvled.

Take note of my sig addition.

For the blatant misreprentation,

vote: Glork

I know this is Kingmaker, but this makes it clear where I stand.

[spectrumvoid]

I see Yos's earlier post as someone pointing out things that could be scummy, but not committing whether he has scummy. But

unvote glork

. Even though I still disagree with you, you've clarified and I don't think it's a misrepresentation.

Oh, and vote:pablito. Yesterday I had the feeling he was trying to get on Glork's "good side" so that he could manipulate him when he became king, and today it seems he's trying to manipulate Glork into killing a good guy by just saying "I agree with everything Glork said and disagree with everything Yos said" without actually responding to anything or giving any reasons.

Forgot about this one. You're assuming pablito and Glork are of the same alignment, and that Glork will be king. I don't see grounds for this assumption.

Phoebus: I believe most people have repeated their various stands that were lost, and you should do the same.

[spectrumvoid]

MrBuddyLee (0+K): UberTimmy, Fritzler
Nightson (0): Twomz
pablito (1+K): UberTimmy, CrashTextDummie
Pariah (0):
petroleumjelly (1): PookyTheMagicalBear
Phoebus (0): bird1111
PookyTheMagicalBear (3+K)
spectrumvoid (0): StallingChamp, ubertimmy
StallingChamp (2):
Twomz (5+K):
UberTimmy (4):
Yosarian2 (0+K): Twomz

What is +K?

[spectrumvoid]

As for spectrumvoid, I tend to find her scummy all the time. I don't remember what she's done in this game specifically to have garnered any attention. I really found that last vote to be suspect though. It seemed alright and justified, but it really surprised me. And the subsequent unvote was more alarming to me. I would require a re-read on spectrumvoid to get a better read on her because I don't remember her well in the context of this game only.

What a nice way to plant the idea that I'm scum into people's head. I anxiously await your reread for me to have reasons to respond to.

[spectrumvoid]

That was by pablito by the way.

[spectrumvoid]

I'm finally back after a horribly long absence. I was having some weird problems on MS.net logging in and posting (I was posting from the future), read the 2 threads devoted to my problems in the help forum for details. Thanks to those who have alerted people to my problems. I'll respond to everything tomorrow.

[spectrumvoid]

Present.

[spectrumvoid]

The search all thing was one of the reasons the site went down I think. About CTD: nope, I don't see how that line is scummy too.

[spectrumvoid]

Hi luckayluck. I'll make my own summary of your posts to make it clear.

People leaning on the side of town:
MoS, MBL, Nightson, Pablito, PJ, box, dead rikimaru, fritzler, glork, mert, SV,

People leaning on side of scum:
bird, stallingchamp, uber

?
Pooky, Vaughn, Yos, CTD

You find a very large number of people pro-town. I'm not saying I disagree with any specific person on your list, but a lot of how what you use to judge people on is based on your feelings. I agree with MBL on that you generally think people who post analytically are pro-town. But thanks for jumping in so quickly.

I don't understand this line: bird1111: You didn't have the posts to go of... fishy. I know you find bird scummy because you voted for him, but I'm not sure why.

Side-note:
How do you do links in the posts?
I'm suffering from yet another error message, check it out in help forum. If I get another one I'm getting out of here permanently.

[spectrumvoid]

I feel that MBL's case on Glork not airing his views directly before the execution doesn't make sense since there were many other people who didn't do so. I also remember that Glork had told us what he thought of the people already before that time.

Note: I only mean that this particular MBL's point is wrong. I still find the king vaguely scummy for reasons I've mentioned earlier and MBL's other reasons. Picking up specific people to do homework also draws attention to those specific people, for the king's own reasons, which may be scummy. However, since it's obvious the king won't die today, I'll bring this out again tomorrow, since it's a useless discussion now.

I've already mentioned what I think of the PJ killing RC issue.

I didn't mean that you didn't have a case on bird, I meant I didn't understand your case on bird... but now that I've spent some time going through your post, I got it.

Your humble servant at your service... do I have an assignment?

[spectrumvoid]

I also promise to do a read to decide if MBL's many scum-pairings ring true for me... but I'd rather have some HW to do so I can do that at the same time when I'm doing my read.

[spectrumvoid]

I missed some interesting discussion.

Skimming through, I caught pab's comment about my change in king. For the record, I believe that the king is slightly scummy. For many reasons, e.g.: the one MBL and Yos said about he's already decided etcetcetc. In response to Glork's earlier question, I also think picking out specific people is scummy.

I don't think we should discuss this today, since he won't be executed today. Mainly because I predict the discussion going around in circles, and I think it's more productive to discuss someone who may be executed. It is something I will bring out tomorrow if I'm alive after night.

I've done my HW, just let me go dig up my word doc.

[spectrumvoid]

Oh I missed this. Zindaras: i think you missed out on a couple of posts when you say I didn't give opinions. Before you replaced in, I've discussed Phoebus when he was under fire, the people on the LOE, the ex-king, bird, the current king.

Here's my read from day 2 onwards to page 25, more to come later. I've grouped discussions by issues instead of timelines.

Glork doesn't want to be king. He votes Pooky, MBL Pablito. And reads CTD.

Here's an interesting bird/pablito interaction.
pablito votes bird for lurking.
Bird posts:
Ameliaslay, glork, nightson, box, twomz, yos = protown. Mert, pablito, Phoebus = scum.
? = MOS, MBL, PJ, pooky, sv, sc.
Lurkers = CTD, Dead Rikimaru, Fritz, MOS, Pariah, UT, Vaughn
RC = scum.
pablito unvotes.

Looks to me like a day nut-kicking.

Responses to bird:
Twomz says he normally bandwagons day 1.
Pooky says he has nothing to respond to (in response to bird's accusation).
MBL makes the nut-kicking post.
SV sits on the fence re bird.
Nightson fos everyone on the bird wagon.
Yos votes Twomz for jumping on the wagon. Suspects people on wagon.
PJ + Phoebus: bird = scum.
Mos: bird = scum, but not lynch today.

General:
DR votes pablito.
Nightson votes Twomz

CTD: vote PJ for lynching RC, vote SC for missing post, vote Twomz for bird wagon + logical fallacy, vote UT for lurking. SC responds MUCH later in post 597, saying he thought PJ made a good decision, but did not understand the RC execution.

Pablito: vote UT, vote CTD for voting PJ.
MBL: votes all lurkers. discusses what PJ scumking would do.
SV: thinks RC wasn't the most scummy day 1, votes old lurkers.
Yos: Thinks PJ breaking the rules is townish.
Pab: defends PJ.
Mert votes Twomz, Pooky, defends MBL for his bird theory.
Glork: Bird = ? but maybe no, votes pooky + twomz scummy for jumping on wagon.

Bird: votes pooky for wanting to execute him and wagoning, MBL = town.

Interaction between Pooky and Glork.
Pooky brings up wagoning, makes a specific/general game slip, Glork is accused of ignoring context.
Glork summarises: Pooky says wagoning is useless in kingmaker
Glork gives an e.g., pooky says wagoning with king glork is useless. Pooky brings out context, Glory says it wasn't clear, pooky is sarcastic again, questions when, glork says kingmaker in general VS a specific game.

Post 592: Pooky says Glork assumed he was talking about another game, which is dumb, says it's only 1 e.g. etc.

Post 595: Glork says Pooky's doesn't show he's talking about a specific case, says metagaming is okay, brings up more examples.

There are valid reasons for both, but I note that Pooky played with little content and little logic till Glork pushed him for it. Also that pooky was very sarcastic, which might have led to the confusion. I'm not sure if that was deliberate. On the flip side, it's weird for Glork to keep assuming Pooky is talking about some other game. I think he harped on Pooky's so-called slip too much, as I see no reason for pooky to be talking about kingmaker games in general rather than specific. (I have mentioned this in post 598).

Interaction between Glork and MBL:
MBL says Glork has bad judgement. After some posts, Glork votes MBL for raising theory and not voting.

MBL says votes aren't important, and he has stated his stance clearly.
Glork: MBL didn't clarify stand on bird till pressured, says votes are important.
MBL: says kings are lazy if they rely on VC (agrees with MoS), wagoning is useless, glork is a bad king.
Glork: defends himself nicely, says he doesn't take VC to be the sole measure, saying he pays attention to the background, mentions possibility of false reasons for execution. Says if king loses either way whether he goes with wagon or against it.
MBL: says Glork thinks he's hiding his position on bird, says Glork is pretending to have poor judgement ie scummy.
Glork: thinks MBL was presenting a theory, but wanting to claim nonresponsibility.
MBL: Says all his other posts save his 1st one showed his opinions clearly.

I think MBL comes off looking scummy in this one. Note that MBL insults Glork. Also note that MBL made a bizzare accusation when he accused Glork of relying only on VCs, when nowhere has Glork said that. It's also true that MBL didn't clarify till Glork pushed for it, so MBL's accusation isn't true. And I believe votes are important in this game to make your stand clear, so Glork's accusation is true. (I've explained this in 598.)

Pooky + PJ + Glork:
PJ votes pooky for inconsistency + his attack on Twomz for saying nothing + defending PJ (because pooky knows PJ reciprocates) + being too sarcastic and defeatist. Twomz = town.

Pooky defends himself. Says it's consistent because he knows he's town, he wasn't attacking Twomz but shaming him, says he was being sarcastic, he loves PJ, says he made a post about winning it he's king.

Glork: says Pooky criticised PJ's early gameplay, yet defends him D1 in another game. Asks Pooky who else he suspects.

Pooky: says he didn't criticise his play.

On this exchange, I think Pooky was trying to deflect PJ's accusations and not responding to them properly. The shaming response is wrong because he was obviously attacking Twomz, his consistency response doesn't make sense because only he knows whether he's town or not, and it's true he was defeatist, bringing up 1 post does not show his overall attitude and tone. Pooky also did not adequetely respond to Glork (It's true he criticised PJ).


box:
says he doesn't like PJ for executing the person who thought he was the most scummy, but yet he's getting a lesser scumvibe, due to the amount of thought PJ put into it.
DR + UT lurk, but DR says more.
Fritz is unproductive.
Asks about metaming.
SV responds to the point of Friz, says that's Fritz's normal play, but he does post analysis occasionally.

About Yos:
G votes Y for being something scummy, asks about his change in opinion re phoebus.
Y asks why did G follow him if G thought Y was scummy. Explains why he didn't have a change of opinion: he didn't have a good read, but his lurking is suspicious. Y votes in 423 because he doesn't think people on the LOE are really suspicious, Phoebus is just the more suspicious one.
Glork: he did not follow Y. says Y was non-committal till deadline, and says someone with Y's experience should be suspicious of someone.
Y says he thought G was following him, says he thought he should say something due to deadline and stagnant activity, says he voted due to deadline, says Phoebus didn't respond to poking.

Pablito votes Yos, he doesn't like the defense, but says Yos might be misguided, and that pab's biased. (Pablito is off. He votes Yos, admits he doesn't have strong reasons for voting, and says he himself was biased... I don't see why he voted in the first place if he wasn't sure. Why did most people harp on Yos for around the same reason, and not on Pablito?)

[BREAK HERE to make the timelines less mixedup.]

Glork asks for prods on Amelia and Pariah and VC.
Unvotes pab, MBL, Twomz
FoS: MBL, Twomz.
bird asks for the reason for the unvotes.

Pab + Glork:
Pablito unvotes CTD because the attacked was well-intentioned but the reasons weren't there. He thinks CTD had no scummy motive, but his actions are suspicious.
Glork: asks which actions.
pablito: CTD's vote on PJ, because a pro-town voter would have done the same thing. And Fritz's accusing him. He adds that he unvoted, but unvotees will still be suspicious for him.

Twomz pops in and says non-content.
Bird unvotes Mert because poor logic was the reason, and his logic has improved. (I think Mert hasn't even posted... where did the improvement in logic come from?)

Back to Yos:
Yos asks what arguments of Glork's.
SV defends Yos, saying his stand was clear, says Glork misrepresented, votes Glork. (post 615).
Glork explains why Yos was wishy-washy, says Yos brings up 2 things that are scummy and yet finds Phoebus not suspicious.
Phoebus votes yos + pablito on gut. (This was after the pablito and Glork exchange.)
bird votes yos for Glork's reason, and for contradicting himself on birds's wagon. Yos explains that he wasn't contradicting.
Phoebus votes bird.
Yos explains that he wasn't sure if it was a scumtell, and that he couldn't get a read on Phoebus.
Yos votes Pablito and foses phoebus,
PJ votes bird, defends Yos, votes UT for lurking.

Summary as of page 25 (+ my HW assignment):
I think mbl, pablito, bird, phoebus, pooky, glork is scummy (in no particular order). They are currently scummy individuals, I haven't picked out pairs yet.
I think Twomz is slightly scummy for disappearing once the spotlight is off him + the wagon issue.
I think Yos isn't scummy, based on the reasons people have brought up against him.
I have no clear read on PJ other than the RC issue, no read on Mert, CTD, SC and whoever else is lurking.

This is of page 25.

[spectrumvoid]

whoever else includes: UT, Fritzler, box. I have 0 impression of anyone else and have 0 read.

[spectrumvoid]

Whoops, forgot to post in this game about my exams. Anyway, the last day is tomorrow so I'll post longish stuff tomorrow evening or so.

[spectrumvoid]

I have a couple of problems with this post specifically.

Pooky: Hasn't contributed a whole lot, but his contribution isn't that bad either, and has shown pretty much no interest in scumhunting, thinking he's likely scum.

Yosarian2: Has contributed a good deal, but hasn't shown a whole lot of interest in scumhunting, leaning slightly towards scum

MBL: Has contributed a lot and has clearly been interested in scumhunted, looks very protown to me

What do you define as scum-hunting? It sounds more like an attempt to accuse them of being scummy for not posting enough... in which case there are other people who are guilty for that.

[spectrumvoid]

Pooky seems to have disappeared. I have him pegged as missing in a couple of other games.

[spectrumvoid]

spectrumvoid (unless I'm missing something, she hasn't answered Yos's questions yet)

You missed the part in Yos's post where he says he knows enough about where I stand on certain players. You also missed my somewhat reorganised PBPA. I think I've aired enough of my views.

Phoebus is irritating me again. While he may not be on the LOE for today, his behaviour has generally not been pro-townish.

[spectrumvoid]

Crap. That's the 3rd time I hit submit instead of preview today.

vote: Phoebus

[spectrumvoid]

Here's why I was less harsh on LL: He replaced into a 37 page that has been running for nearly 4 months... considering how hard it's been to find replacements for all the other games, I thought it'd be nice if I didn't jump in and yell at him immediately.

I'd actually like to get rid of Phoebus. I see him as dead weight, and he himself that he'll post little, but won't be replaced. I also think he's less likely to get NKed because he confuses town. Phoebus is someone I definitely do not want to see in endgame, reason being I'll have no read on him whatsoever.

bird111: I don't like meta-gaming. I'll only use it in cases where a player's playstyle extremely consistent. I've skimmed through bird's, and I don't think he's consistent enough to meta-game.

[spectrumvoid]

This is out of point but: BMQ!!! You're around and didn't answer my prod!!!

PJ: I don't like how you're disagreeing with CTD on the basis on you having played with Mert. That's blatent meta-gaming. And you've only played one game, I don't think it's sufficient to get a good grasp on a person's playstyle.

[spectrumvoid]

I'm back from camp, break-camp was delayed due to floods. Catching up coming soon.

[spectrumvoid]

Gah. I had a power outrage yesterday while I was posting.

I won't discuss the kingmaker strat bit that Lowell brought up since I don't think I'm experienced/smart enough to have anything worth saying.

About Mert:
I'm not sure if someone has pointed this out, but Mert has kinda gone missing in all his games, and he's stated that he won't be coming back. Unless I missed it, I don't think we've gotten a replacement for him, so no one will answer the attacks against him.

I'm kinda neutral about this, and here's why:
1) This is pure strat without taking Mert's possible scumminess into account, but should we be lynching someone who won't respond? I think lynching someone else might give us info for tomorrow.

2) Again, pure strat.
We haven't managed to get a replacement for Mert yet. And if we get one, will the replacement just pop up and get lynched? It's also tough to find replacements for a 40+ page game I think, and it's unfair for the newbie to defend himself. With that in mind, I'd say we lynch Mert purely to get rid of dead weight.

I haven't really decided which option I favour, but I thought I'd at least post my thoughts about it. Of course, both are void if 1) if we get a replacement soon (unlikely) 2) If there's someone more scummy on the LOE.

About LL: I think I've understood LL's logic, and while I disagree with it, I think it's more of a difference in opinion rather than something that is a scumtell. However, I disagree with what someone said about the thinking more people are townie = town tell bit. Thinking more people are townie could also = lousy scumdar, which may be a scum/town tell.

About Lowell: No handle yet on Lowell, but there was some interesting analysis there that I didn't think about. What do you mean by the meta-game in a scummy way bit? Considering I generally dislike meta-gaming unless there is a very good reason for doing so.

From here on, it's going to get a little confusing. Here's why: I don't want either Yos or Pooky to get executed, but I don't have a better candidate to recommend. Pooky first: he came back after being inactive. He was inactive across mafiascum.net, I did a quick check, so he wasn't lurker-scum. I don't see anything wrong with Pooky reviving himself here, considering he was under pressure to do so. I agree that this is a completely different situation from bird (whom I'm neutral about and I've explained why earlier), since it's been some time since day 2 started.

About Yos
The king seems to be banging on Yos a lot. He accuses Yos, but as yet I haven't seen a reason for why the king is doing so. King claimed that he will attempt to be more coherent and actually posts reasons, but they haven't appeared yet, though he's posted since then. It smells a lot like an attempt by the king to frame yos, since Yos has nothing concrete to defend against. I feel that the king could be deliberately not posting reasons hoping for someone (like lowell) to fill in the gaps. I also think that yos response to lowell's reasons are satisfactory.

I think we're missing a few people. What happened to phoebus? I remember voting him, but I completely forgot he's even in till I read lowell's 1013.

[spectrumvoid]

Oh no. I always get confused when nightson and nightfall are in the same game.

I disagree with both targets on the execution list, for above stated reasons.

[spectrumvoid]

I know the king hasn't checked in yet, but I'm still waiting to hear his reasons for choosing Yos. His reasons for pooky and yos have been guessed at, and they have responded, so I'd like to hear his reasons.

[spectrumvoid]

King: I thought you had 'already' decided who you were going to lynch?

[spectrumvoid]

vote: Glork

I've been wanting to do this since yesterday. Reasons are scattered around, I'll organise them later.

[spectrumvoid]

As I promised, here are my reasons for voting Glork.

- already 'deciding' who he was going to lynch.
- choosing Yos without a reason. (Glork chose pooky with a reason.) I elaborated about this in post 1030. But as of post 1037, he still didn't provide a reason.

I read backwards, and the only thing I found was in my PBPA post 839, where I summarised Glork of accusing Yos of being scummy because of his change of opinion regarding phoebus. In the same post, Yos responded adequently. Later on the game, Yos again asks Glork for his reasons, Glork explained that Yos was wishy-washy. Yos responded by saying that he didn't contradict, and explained that he wasn't sure if it was a scum-tell. Glork did not respond. (As a side-note, I accused Glork of misrepresenting Yos in post 615, and Glork clarified, I responded in 630.)

I will be doing the same for other people I find scummy (ie, going backwards to get a better look/reasons.)

[spectrumvoid]

prelim fos: luckayluck

I remember her/him as a strong Pooky supporter, but I'll take another look.

I must admit that Glork executing Pooky yesterday brings him a little lower down my LOS, but I still find his behaviour regarding Yos scummy.

[spectrumvoid]

Player analysis

Who was against both lynches
LL,SV, MBL, CTD, Yos (for thinking Pooky was neutral)

Who was against both lynches, but thought pooky was townier (wanted Yos)
CTD, LL

Who wanted Pooky
Zindaras, Scope, Pablito

Who wanted Yos
DR, Mos (wanted either but prefers Yos), lowell

Who changed their mind halfway:
Glork: said he was not THAT sure Yos was scum in post 1009, then attacked Yos.
PJ: asked Pooky to hurry up with analysis, then said Pooky was neutral, but he wasn't getting a good read off his posts.
Zindaras: jokes that pooky was nutkicked, says he's disappointed by a Pooky execution, says Pooky is not a good execution.
pablito: suggests stay of execution of Pooky, then says he would execute Pooky.

I might have missed out some people, feel free to add.

[spectrumvoid]

Now, I checked to see why SV would think I was town and Glork scum, and reading through her posts, I noticed her last two posts which mention me are:

* edit for length *

Overall, I just not understanding why SV has been going after you, and seemingly shying away from me.

If you noticed my entire gameplay, you'll realise that I've been going after a few specific people, and more-or-less ignoring the rest. I've explained myself regarding this behaviour early game, where I said I thought it was better to concentrate on a specific few.

I have mentioned CTD, Glork, scope, mert, nightson/fall (can't remember which) yos, phoebus, M-M and PJ. Up till my 2nd last post, I have not mentioned content about the rest. (Der hammer, fritzler, lowell, LL, Mos, olio, Twomz.) I have probably mixed up a few due to replacements, but I'm pretty sure I've actually commented on you more than the rest.

[spectrumvoid]

Glork: Thanks for the clarification. However, I'm still leaving my vote on you, due mainly to your hesitancy to 'articulate your reasons' for Yos yesterday. I will be reconsidering my stand on Yos in the light of Glork and Yos's recent posts. But whether the player you're accusing is scummy or pro-town, accusing someone without reason is a scum-tell.

Defends Pooky in post 1007.
For post 1020, with defending Pooky with weak arguments. Also finds Twomz "not so scummy" when pushed by Yos2 and "easy pick" when voted by Mert.

Agreed.

I will not be voting lurkers for now, as I can't remember who is genuinely lurking, and who will be replaced. W.r.t to any questions about Phoebus, I went for him day 1 for being unhelpful and for lurking. Then practically a third of a game started being inactive... So there was no reason for me to go for him specifically.

I'd like to hear Samus's response.

[spectrumvoid]

SV, you missed that I was willing to see Pooky die, just thought Yos deserved it a little more.

Nope, I didn't.

Who wanted Yos
DR, Mos (wanted either but prefers Yos)

Take a look at open 4, where IH (scum) posted a whole chunk of long posts and PBPAs as proof that long posts aren't necessarily pro-town.

LL: About the bit you quoted and FOS'd yourself, I did use it in my player analysis.

I'll shut up about MoS till he says something. Possible scum-pairing: LL + MoS.

Zindaras (reference post 1154): Quit using meta-gaming as an excuse for not getting Pooky. Your defense for thinking pooky's long post is town is meta-gamish. (As in, you don't know his playstyle because you've never played with him before.) Meta-gaming is too unreliable.

[spectrumvoid]

Oh, and there's just something nagging at me about Glork and Yos's recent posts and interactions, but I haven't figured out exactly what. It's something to do with the change in Yos's attitude towards Glork. Post 1159 in particular.

[spectrumvoid]

This isn't really intended as an argument, because of the extreme WIFOM implications, but it did just occur to me that if you are town, Glork, it's likely the scum were hoping to set me up by leaving you alive but killing MBL. If you're town you would be the most obveous target for the kill last night, but it was fairly obveous after yesterday that you were going to come after me hard today and that you'd have a lot of credibility, and then the scum kill the person who was defending me yesterday.

(shrug) Again, just a thought, but it does seem possible that the scum were hoping they could get us to bash heads all day and take the attention off of them, and perhaps use you to get me lynched. Scum often kill so as to manipulate the next day's conversation. Which might also explain why you weren't killed last night, which was something I had been wondering about.

Yos could you please explain this post?
- you say glork is town. WIFOMishly, scum left G alive to set you up.
- you say that if glork is town, G would be the most obvious kill. Does that imply G is not town?
- are you saying Glork is town because scum is hoping you two will bash head.

I'm confused.

More on MoS later after I read his posts in isolation.

[spectrumvoid]

Sorry about low activity, I'm rushing out homework.

Top 2: Glork, Yos, and any lurker would be ideal.

I'm not really getting the case on MoS here. I'm not too sure why (I'm seem to be lost of words often recently) but I don't buy his case. Call it gut for a change.

PJ: I'm pretty sure I've said this before. I systematically pick out people who I think are scummy and concentrate on them. It's a way of playing that I think will help me weed out players in a large game. Then I add in my commentary on other people/issues as they come up. I've already mentioned that in my last response to you, where I point out the fairly large amount of people who I've left out including you.

[spectrumvoid]

Edit: I will be looking into PJ, since he's so adamant that I address him. And Phoebus (since I vaugely remember thinking he was scummy because he was inactive or whatever, then I left him due to the large number of inactives.) And my proposed pairing in my earlier post.

[spectrumvoid]

Oops. Nope. I did a typo. Insert / instead of , . (I did mention top

2

, not top

3

.)

Edit in red:

Top 2: Glork

/

Yos, and any lurker would be ideal.

To DR: 'll try to explain why: I didn't like the way Glork was going after Yos without a reason hard yesterday, making everyone basically choose between Yos or Pooky. Even though the end result was good (we got scum yay!), going after someone without a reason is generally a major scum-tell. I've elaborated on this before somewhere recently.

Then again, Yos rubbed me the wrong way today, so I'm less adamant about defending him. I promise to go into detail for this one tomorrow, together with the other people I mentioned.

I put Glork/ Yos because I don't get a Glork + Yos connection. I think it's still possible, but unlikely. Mainly because of the way Glork went after Yos open-ended. Scum could have easily fabricated reasons for why yos was scummy, and if they had done that, Glork would be in danger of executing his scum-buddy, or for looking scummy if he failed to do so. Hence why I think it's less likely to be a distancing tactic.

Clarification: I'm not saying that if we lynch one and alignment is town/scum, the other one is definitely scum/town. My current conclusion is based on evidence I have now, and I'll definitely re-evaluate after we lynch, whoever it may be.

[spectrumvoid]

Olio: I have been going after a few specific people all game. Check my voting record and my posts each day. Today, I've been going after Yos and/or Glork. The reason why I'm listing more people is because 'some' people have been accusing me of leaving them out.

Sorry, that post I promised will only be out tomorrow, too tired after speed chess tourney today.

[spectrumvoid]

But why do you think he would throw his buddy under the bus so early in the game?

I need a read to see what was happening and what made Glork choose Pooky and Yos. I'm actually now somewhere around page 20 because I wanted to try to get a better perspective on the game and of the people I promised to discuss. 29 pages more to go!

[spectrumvoid]

I have done my read at long last.

Remove Glork from my LOS. I'm still wary of his behaviour towards Yos, but I went back to read yesterday thoroughly. I don't think Glork was under significant pressure to execute scum yesterday. Also I noticed that quite a few people wanted to execute non-scum, and Glork could have very well not chosen to execute his 'scum-buddy'. So I'm removing Glork from my list.

I've decided not to do what I promised, mainly because it'll degenerate into one mega long post about 5-7 people, I don't think it will help the game, and I'd still prefer to concentrate on specifics. Instead, I'm asking for homework from the king (something like the homework Glork-king did yesterday.) I'm fresh from my read and I should be able to respond quickly to any assignments.

[spectrumvoid]

(Replacing Mert)

I'll check in at greater length later on.

In the meantime,

vote spectrumvoid

. I've been reading the thread for a while in expectation of replacing in, and he's been tripping the meters like no other. I do not understand why the pressure on him went away.

Please explain.

I'll do what MoS did, but on other people while waiting for assignments since I think it's helpful.

[spectrumvoid]

Sorry for the post flood. My first post was at page 50 because I didn't realise there was a 51.

One question: How do I see a person's post in isolation after page 1? I click on page 2 then it goes back to the main game page.

My player post will be a pure summary with no analysis, it'll be something like a reference.

[spectrumvoid]

Non-revealed scum would be better phrasing, referring to Yos. Mistake occured because I spent too much time in the reread I think, mainly because I thought Yos was non-scum yesterday, but his reactions have changed my mind earlier today. Coupled with me and my lousy attempt to be generic.

Here's an edit: I don't think Glork was under significant pressure to execute Pooky yesterday. I'll quote a post I made earlier:

Player analysis

Who was against both lynches
LL,SV, MBL, CTD, Yos (for thinking Pooky was neutral)

Who was against both lynches, but thought pooky was townier (wanted Yos)
CTD, LL

Who wanted Pooky
Zindaras, Scope, Pablito

Who wanted Yos
DR, Mos (wanted either but prefers Yos), lowell

The 'quite a few people' are the 3 who wanted Yos, and the 5 people who didn't want both of them. So my conclusion is that Glork wasn't under pressure to bus his scumbuddy.

[spectrumvoid]

Reading comprehension here people.

Quite a few people BREAK wanted to execute BREAK non-scum. Nowhere did I imply that the people I was talking about were non-scum. By non-scum, I was referring to Yos, and I've explained why (ie, because I thought he was non-scum yesterday. Check my defense of Yos against Glork's attacks yesterday.)

[spectrumvoid]

MoS: Doesn't giving up = scum tell? I don't like this defeatist attitude.

My question again: How do I see posts in isolation after page 1? I want to do a player summary.

[spectrumvoid]

LoL, that's because I don't particularly care if I make it through this day.

And you don't call that giving up?

I see only 1 page of posts, not all the posts.

[spectrumvoid]

Apologies for the long delay, but I'm running out of money at the internet cafe to do the player analysis thing (since I've lost access at home due to flooding), which will take a long time. I'll respond to any queries as soon as monetary possible.

[spectrumvoid]

Response to RafK:

1) Like what you mentioned, I attacked box in my first few posts. That was an attempt to stir up activity. I don't get what you mean by rampant labelling here. It is true that playing on emotion + claiming when not under pressure + giving up are scum tells. And it's undeniable that box did make those scum tells. Are you saying we shouldn't accuse people when they exhibit scum tells?

2) You claim that my next few posts didn't go anywhere, but you appear to be ignoring that fact that I did mention Phoebus in my next few posts even though you mentioned it. So your accusation of me barning pj regarding phoebus doesn't stand. Regarding the rest, I was affected by another game I was playing at that time, when pj pulled off something really awesome. I can't remember specifics now since it was pretty long ago, but if anyone wants I'll try to dig it up.

3) About kingmaker strategy (the MBL bit): You missed the section where I clarified that I considered myself too inexperienced to discuss strategy. I also said that because I wasn't sure how the kingmaker strategy should be, I went to look through kingmaker I.

4) My point was and is completely valid. There was a large proportion of lurkers at that time in the thread. You quoted 455. If you'd looked down a little to 457, you'll noticed that pablito verified this by saying of ALL the lurkers. Wouldn't you naturally be suspicious of someone who went after a specific lurker? (as a side-note, that's exactly what I did as scum in mini 7 samurai mafia, and we won even after the victim claimed cop.)

I'm not accusing you of misrepresentation, because I don't think you were intentionally trying to do so, I think you missed the contexts of my comments. It's difficult to read isolation posts, hence why you might have missed some stuff that I point out above.

I mentioned this in my earlier post. Dear kingy, I thought you were going to give us a list of questions as homework?

[spectrumvoid]

RafK: Have you read my responses yet?

My top: I can see a MoS execution. I've explained why somewhere about him giving up, and I buy Glork's reasons, now that I think Glork is town.

My 2: CTD. Reason being he's been under fire, he promised to post nearly a week ago, and he's done little to defend himself. Because I like the reasons laid against him, and he hasn't responded to my satisfaction, he's on my list.

And like before, lurkers. I know there are differences between the lurkers, but I'll support the lynch of lurkers. Reason: Who would you rather see at endgame, a lurker, or a poster?

[spectrumvoid]

Olio: Just curious, but is the sole reason for your unvote MoS's player analysis? (Don't answer if you're not olio.)

MoS: Did you miss the part in the king's post asking us not to post player analysis?

[spectrumvoid]

Edit: I did mention somewhere that I'm having MoS not just for giving up, but for Glork's reasons which I didn't want to repeat. Here's the list:
- Giving up.
- For not explaining anything.
- For flip-flopping, ie, for repeatedly throwing out new ideas without explanation, and without considering his previous ones.
- For evading answers.

I'd also like to clarify that MoS posting his player analysis now doesn't explain away his not doing so in the past, and his evasiveness in the past. Only after Glork made that blatently obvious did he do something.

I'd also like to add that I think Glork isn't scum.

I'm removing CTD from the list, because I did a quick check to affirm that he's disappeared.

[spectrumvoid]

Two Discussions I'm Sure Happened But I Missed:

1) Why don't we have the Kingmaker out him/herself and use that person basically as a proxy for the King? That way, we can be sure we have, at the very least, a PRO-TOWN player "directing" the executions. If the reason is no more than "the kingmaker won't want to out himself because he doesn't want to die in the night," that's a crappy reason.

2) When people give their List of Suspects, why don't they also give a List of People Who Would Make a Good King? I feel that choosing the King is as important as who the king executes. So why are we leaving this decision for one anonymous townie to make during the night without help?

I can't remember if it's been said before, and I'm too sleepy to check, but, as to the 1st, why do you think scum won't nightkill the kingmaker? When I'm scum in mountaineous games, I generally try to kill the most pro-town person. Why: by night-killing the most pro-townish, town has a harder job of choosing who to lynch, because everyone else could be potentially scummy. In kingmaker, it'd be the kingmaker.

I need more time to think over the 2nd. The first thing that comes to mind is the danger of scum winning the discussion, and us having scum kings.

[spectrumvoid]

Just skimmed through because I'm in school

Olio:
Here's a hypothetical example. I accuse you of lurking. Immediately after the accusation, you post something. How does that in any way erase the fact that you were lurking before? So you're saying that you're unvoting him because he listened to you and changed? I don't think that's a good enough reason, simply because it doesn't excuse his past behaviour. That's like saying we'll forget everything that happened day 1 when we get to day 2.

[spectrumvoid]

Olio: Erm. I think he meant he didn't want to look through and summarise, not that he had done the look through. Thanks for the explanation.

Last addition to the MIDDLE of my list (it's MoS, XYZ, any lurker): LL.

After the last couple of posts of his, he comes across as scummy. I was willing to excuse him earlier because I thought that him assuming that a lot of people were protown, could be his playstyle, and I try not to penalise people solely based on that. I don't like the way he looks through everyone else's list, and picks out the more common names. It seems as if LL has 1) no mind of his own 2) wagoning 3) completely not paying attention to this game.

[spectrumvoid]

Oh, and I'm not going to bring out the kingmaker strategy. I don't understand a lot of the reasons for and against it, so I have no solid opinions on that.

[spectrumvoid]

Actually, it's because I realised I only had 2 on my LOS. I originally had Yos, but I think he has answered adequately about the interaction between him and Glork.

[spectrumvoid]

Because CTD hasn't been around the whole site, not that he's been lurking in specifically this game only. The same cannot be said for the other lurkers. And I don't see the point of putting CTD on my list, when we don't have a replacement to answer anything. Obviously, I don't want to execute people without giving them a chance to respond.

[spectrumvoid]

To clarify: lurkers for me mean specifically to people who I know are on-site, and are active in other mafia games. I've definitely seen Nightfall around. CTD isn't around at all. I don't want CTD for now, till we get a replacement for him, or something else happens.

[spectrumvoid]

Remove generic lurker from my list, I'll come up with somene else (reasons below):

Skimming through, more later (brain-dead from school )

I don't understand why nightfall and phoebus have to be replaced, when they're clearly still on-site. Maybe if we begged them to come back? The rest I'm not so sure of. Mod: Would you consider mod-killing? I don't think it'll be easy to get that many replacements for a game on page 55. I have no idea how to maintain balance and all that, but mod-killing is something I could live with provided the game's still balanced. Reason being we have 5 people I have little read on, other than lurking = scum tell, but that isn't true if they're going to be replaced.

[spectrumvoid]

I got sick and I came back. Hello to the replacements... *goes to see if I promised to do anything*

[spectrumvoid]

Unfortunately for the town, the assassins have killed all the town's power roles, such as cops, doctors,

masons

, vigilantes, and so forth. With two exceptions, that means that each pro-town player in the game has received the following PM:

[spectrumvoid]

I will not be adding a 3rd suspect to my LOS till I've gotten a feel for the replacements. I think we'll get quite a few, judging from what I've seen in the kingmaker replacements needed thread.

[spectrumvoid]

Huh? I said
1) We have quite a few aka many replacements.
2) I need time to remember who is replacing who.

*pokes Zindaras*

Enough with the guilt trip, post! Especially since you're active in every other game I'm in with you!

[spectrumvoid]

*prods king*

If kingy would give us some input, I'm sure this game will get going again.

[spectrumvoid]

Cool! Activity!

First off, I have brought up bird earlier since the start of day 2, and I've mentioned him a couple of times. Too lazy to go bring them up, but it's easy to verify this looking at my posts in isolation. So it's wrong of you to say that I attaked bird because he attacked Pooky and Yos.

I wasn't defending Yos, I was repeatedly pointing out that Glork's case for Yos was extremely weak. I felt that Glork's attacks on Yos didn't make sense because a. he refused to give a reason, b. when pressurised to give one he said he was 'unable to articulate one' or something like that c. he repeatedly banged on Yos for not answering his accusations, when there weren't any. (I summarised all my reasons in the post you linked to.)

a. b. c. are classic scum tells. Therefore I concluded at that point in time Glork = scum. Since I thought Glork = scum, the people on his LOS were obviously town (or so I assumed anyway.) That's where the defending of Yos and Pooky came in.

The lynch the AWOL guy thing is a mispresentation. Here's a part of the actual post:

About Mert:
I'm not sure if someone has pointed this out, but Mert has kinda gone missing in all his games, and he's stated that he won't be coming back. Unless I missed it, I don't think we've gotten a replacement for him, so no one will answer the attacks against him.

I'm kinda neutral about this, and here's why:
1) This is pure strat without taking Mert's possible scumminess into account, but should we be lynching someone who won't respond? I think lynching someone else might give us info for tomorrow.

2) Again, pure strat.
We haven't managed to get a replacement for Mert yet. And if we get one, will the replacement just pop up and get lynched? It's also tough to find replacements for a 40+ page game I think, and it's unfair for the newbie to defend himself. With that in mind, I'd say we lynch Mert purely to get rid of dead weight.

I haven't really decided which option I favour, but I thought I'd at least post my thoughts about it. Of course, both are void if 1) if we get a replacement soon (unlikely) 2) If there's someone more scummy on the LOE.

And I didn't pick Phoebus as a deflection lynch. Here's exactly what I said about it:

From here on, it's going to get a little confusing. Here's why: I don't want either Yos or Pooky to get executed, but

I don't have a better candidate to recommend.

blahblah

I think we're missing a few people. What happened to phoebus? I remember voting him, but I completely forgot he's even in till I read lowell's 1013.[/quote]

I backed down on Glork after I realised that he was under no pressure to bus a scum buddy. Call it stupid, but I forgot this was kingmaker. And it's undeniable that Glork did make the scum tells I mentioned above.

[spectrumvoid]

Ignore the earlier post. I screwed up the tags.

Cool! Activity!

First off, I have brought up bird earlier since the start of day 2, and I've mentioned him a couple of times. Too lazy to go bring them up, but it's easy to verify this looking at my posts in isolation. So it's wrong of you to say that I attaked bird because he attacked Pooky and Yos.

I wasn't defending Yos, I was repeatedly pointing out that Glork's case for Yos was extremely weak. I felt that Glork's attacks on Yos didn't make sense because a. he refused to give a reason, b. when pressurised to give one he said he was 'unable to articulate one' or something like that c. he repeatedly banged on Yos for not answering his accusations, when there weren't any. (I summarised all my reasons in the post you linked to.)

a. b. c. are classic scum tells. Therefore I concluded at that point in time Glork = scum. Since I thought Glork = scum, the people on his LOS were obviously town (or so I assumed anyway.) That's where the defending of Yos and Pooky came in.

The lynch the AWOL guy thing is a mispresentation. Here's a part of the actual post:

About Mert:
I'm not sure if someone has pointed this out, but Mert has kinda gone missing in all his games, and he's stated that he won't be coming back. Unless I missed it, I don't think we've gotten a replacement for him, so no one will answer the attacks against him.

I'm kinda neutral about this, and here's why:
1) This is pure strat without taking Mert's possible scumminess into account, but should we be lynching someone who won't respond? I think lynching someone else might give us info for tomorrow.

2) Again, pure strat.
We haven't managed to get a replacement for Mert yet. And if we get one, will the replacement just pop up and get lynched? It's also tough to find replacements for a 40+ page game I think, and it's unfair for the newbie to defend himself. With that in mind, I'd say we lynch Mert purely to get rid of dead weight.

I haven't really decided which option I favour, but I thought I'd at least post my thoughts about it. Of course, both are void if 1) if we get a replacement soon (unlikely) 2) If there's someone more scummy on the LOE.

And I didn't pick Phoebus as a deflection lynch. Here's exactly what I said about it:

From here on, it's going to get a little confusing. Here's why: I don't want either Yos or Pooky to get executed, but

I don't have a better candidate to recommend.

blahblah

I think we're missing a few people. What happened to phoebus? I remember voting him, but I completely forgot he's even in till I read lowell's 1013.

I backed down on Glork after I realised that he was under no pressure to bus a scum buddy. Call it stupid, but I forgot this was kingmaker. And it's undeniable that Glork did make the scum tells I mentioned above.

At this point in time, I also don't particularly who we lynch as long as it's SOMEBODY.

[spectrumvoid]

Has the king replied?

[spectrumvoid]

PJ: There's nothing I can say to that actually. Looking back, I'm pretty ashamed at the way I've lacked suspicions this game. That's probably why I've been having trouble listing out possible targets. What I've tried to do is try to see who I think is protown, and work backwards from there. I'll try my hardest to change this.

I forgot we're in kingmaker. Look at the almost complete absence of votes as the thread progresses. I've said very early on that votes were less important this game, and I even thought not putting a vote on in kingmaker was scummy. Then I forgot about it, and played like normal, being very careful with my vote.

[spectrumvoid]

Good posting shanba.

Did you miss this:

Player analysis

Who was against both lynches
LL,SV, MBL, CTD, Yos (for thinking Pooky was neutral)

Who was against both lynches, but thought pooky was townier (wanted Yos)
CTD, LL

Who wanted Pooky
Zindaras, Scope, Pablito

Who wanted Yos
DR, Mos (wanted either but prefers Yos), lowell

Who changed their mind halfway:
Glork: said he was not THAT sure Yos was scum in post 1009, then attacked Yos.
PJ: asked Pooky to hurry up with analysis, then said Pooky was neutral, but he wasn't getting a good read off his posts.
Zindaras: jokes that pooky was nutkicked, says he's disappointed by a Pooky execution, says Pooky is not a good execution.
pablito: suggests stay of execution of Pooky, then says he would execute Pooky.

Quoting the whole post just in case you missed it. The important bit is at the front. There were 5 people who disagreed with both lynches (ie: playing both sides.) Is there a particular reason you decided to single me out?

[spectrumvoid]

Was the Rafk vote bit addressed to me?

I stated somewhere in a recent post that I didn't think Rafk was scummy for misrepresentating what I said, but

I'm pretty sure nowhere did I say I want either a Yos or Pooky lynch. If you look at the king's summary, I defended Yos yesterday because I thought Glork's reasons sucked (he didn't have any). I defended Pooky too saying he was away in other games, hence his inactivity here, and that he had contributed when he returned. That wasn't playing off both sides. Note: That LL bit is meta-gaming, which is unreliable precisely because he could have deliberately did that to make you think this way.


I think our discussion is becoming repetitive.
Dear king, wherefore art thou LOS?

[spectrumvoid]

Edit to 2nd line:
I stated somewhere in a recent post that I didn't think Rafk was scummy for misrepresentating what I said, but I thought it was a mistake due to viewing posts in isolation.

[spectrumvoid]

So really, Dead Rikimaru goes through the trouble of making and posting all those comments and you guys (not all of you, but there's a lot) can't be bothered to look or comment on what he's said?

Seriously, if you're going to comment on his inactivity or lack of hammer, then at least do something with what he's given you. Dead Rikimaru may be lagging, but he's hardly unpassionate.

It'll help him make his decision quicker if you can process and discuss in the same manner as how he would like to proceed.

I disagree slightly here. What the king has done is merely summarise each player's posts in isolation. If I do it 'in the same manner', there'll be nothing that's different, because he's merely presented us with a summary.

[spectrumvoid]

Nice quick change of attitude there, after Rafk, TS and me pointed out your mistakes... scummy...

[spectrumvoid]

I'll be away from now till Monday, CHinese New Year.

[spectrumvoid]

I'm back.

I'll join in the mutiny.

vote: king

Is there any chance of us ever getting a LOE?

[spectrumvoid]

mod

There's a note in the large normal queue about Dead Rikimaru disappearing from the whole site.

[spectrumvoid]

I'm mod-prodding out mod.

[spectrumvoid]

Edit *our mod

[spectrumvoid]

Our mod is dead.

[spectrumvoid]

You know what? How many people do we have that are active? Is it enough?

Anyone interested in a restart? I know it sucks when we're so far ahead, but I know that this game has been having a ton of replacement problems.

[spectrumvoid]

Let's just let MBL take over?

[spectrumvoid]

Pretty sure we're not going to get DR back. I'll second the proposal for a deadline.

[spectrumvoid]

Thanks Thok. Not too sure Der Hammer needs replacing, I know he's been around elsewhere.

[spectrumvoid]

Looking at everyone's top 3 would also help.

Post an LOE soon please or I'll die of boredom.

[spectrumvoid]

Not sure if this is useful:

Who was against both lynches
LL,SV, MBL, CTD, Yos (for thinking Pooky was neutral)

Who was against both lynches, but thought pooky was townier (wanted Yos)
CTD, LL

Who wanted Pooky
Zindaras, Scope, Pablito

Who wanted Yos
DR, Mos (wanted either but prefers Yos), lowell

Who changed their mind halfway:
Glork: said he was not THAT sure Yos was scum in post 1009, then attacked Yos.
PJ: asked Pooky to hurry up with analysis, then said Pooky was neutral, but he wasn't getting a good read off his posts.
Zindaras: jokes that pooky was nutkicked, says he's disappointed by a Pooky execution, says Pooky is not a good execution.
pablito: suggests stay of execution of Pooky, then says he would execute Pooky.

Quoting the whole post just in case you missed it. The important bit is at the front. There were 5 people who disagreed with both lynches (ie: playing both sides.) Is there a particular reason you decided to single me out?[/quote]

Note that there has been responses to this.

[spectrumvoid]

Purely from memory without rereading:
- for supposedly not voting pooky and yos.
- for changing my mind on Glork. This is pretty major: I was after Glork because of his non-existent reasons for attacking Yos. Then I changed my mind after someone pointed something out and I realised he was under no pressure to bus a scumbuddy.
- for my preference to select a few people at a time (I think).

[spectrumvoid]

LL: Why do you think PJ is pro-town? Why do you think Smashy/DR is very villager?

[spectrumvoid]

Smashy: Post an LOE soon.

I'm not saying we should completely depend on the king, but most people have said who they find suspicious and why. Obviously, after the king posts an LOE, we need time to discuss it. With 8 days left, judging by this game's activity, we might not have enough time left if the king keeps stalling.

[spectrumvoid]

I'm around to answer any suspicions. I'm pretty sure I've already explained myselves regarding my various actions thoroughly when earlier questioned, but feel free to go ahead.

For today's sappy nice day, I'll refrain from direct accusations. I just find something weird about LL and me appearing on the list, and all of a sudden people unvoting LL left right centre.

[spectrumvoid]

SV returns!

I need to go check what I did during the Glork/MBL issue... I can't even remember what I did.

A tentative

vote: smashy

for his predecessor's actions.

vote: MoS

he was on my LOS yesterday.

I'm also voting Smashy for not executing me without sharing his opinions. Obviously, I know I'm not scum. But I didn't like the way Smashy hung back and abruptly made the decision. I'd also like to hear what his decisions are. (To clarify, I'm saying his a scummy king, not that he's scummy for not killing me:))

I'm going to try to start remembering who's replacing who.

[spectrumvoid]

Just adding my 2 cents: I don't like people who direct future lynches.

[spectrumvoid]

Lowell: Your reasoning is sound. However, look at where that kind of play has gotten us over the last few days. It led to a ton of lurkers and chaotic discussion. Seriously, discussion was just all over the place, which I suspect led to some lurkers, because this game was just so hard to read.

Also, what's wrong with so-called protecting "those you worry are garnering suspicion?" Defending/attacking has always led to more info the next day. Judging on who attacked/defended the Yosee? (since we've run out of Glorked and Smashed), we'll have something else to go on tomorrow.

I vote for
Lynch: MoS (he hasn't done much to disprove the previously scummy points. His summary post doesn't mean he's necessarily pro-town.)
Lynch: Smashy (Same, for dragging the game, and for DR.)
No lynch: VitaminR (I don't get the case for VitaminR, besides lurking. Verdict might change if I ever understand it.)

[spectrumvoid]

The reason why I'm not seeing a case for VitaminR is because.

Pablito: Why do you think DeadR did a good job as king? Because he basically stalled the game? Posted nothing but a summary post?

I get where the vitR case is coming from now, after pab's clarification, and I still don't agree with it. I know this sounds hypocritical considering I'm going after DR partly because of the lurking thing, but DR was king and had a larger responsibility to not drag the game down. Also, I understand why someone would lurk in a big page game. It's hard to immediately consolidate. (I really understand, I replaced in a 20 page and I'm already having trouble, let alone a 74 page one.)

[spectrumvoid]

Ignore the first line. I was typing VitR halfway and saw pab's post.

[spectrumvoid]

1) The 2 tells I made early day 1 were just the usual early day 1 nonsense.
2) LL: Think I've said something about this before. I thought LL was scummy because of the weird townie playstyle. I have since changed my opinion due to LL's title, and due to meta-gaming reasons. I then dropped LL completely.
3) The whole Glork/Pablito thing. I've definitely said this many times, but here it is again.
a. I thought Glork was scum. Naturally, I thought those who were defending him were scum. (pab)
b. I did not think Glork was scum for executing Pooky, I thought Glork was scum for going after Yos with no reasons.
c. I looked back at the timing of Glork going after Yos, concluded that Glork had no reason to bus a scumbuddy at that time. So final conclusion: Glork is not scum.

4) Joining in the mutiny. Duh. Who wants an inactive king?

I still do not agree with the case for VitR. I've yet to seen something other than: past lurking and being replaced.

I've read through the case for mnowax, and I can see a lynch for him.

[spectrumvoid]

The LL playstyle thing was something that was going on everywhere. I have since realised that it's a mistake. (said earlier in my previous post.) Hence I dropped him.

Inactive kings are bad for the game. Inactive players are also bad for the game. Players who need replacements too.

I've repeatedly explained myself thoroughly over the Glork/Yos/Pooky issue, and I have nothing else to add.

Seriously, I'd be perfectly happy with a Smashy lynch at the moment due to sheer frustration.

[spectrumvoid]

Suggested reading:
1) The mega summary post by DR.
2) Post by me summarising who was on what wagon

The case for VR.
1) He's scummy because of wagoning. PJ refuted that in the later post.
2) The 'kill anybody' attitude. PJ said it's premature. I think it's alright. I think this boils down to a personal playstyle issue, and not a scum-tell.
3) Meta-gaming his change in stance. I think it's a weak point, because a: it's meta-gaming. b: he did say that he'd only read partway through the thread. I've seen many replacements change their minds after reading all the way, myself included.
4) For his connection with me, ie, for selective voting/commenting, attacking. This is some kind of logical fallacy which I can't remember, but it involves trying 2 players together when both alignements are unknown.

I don't like a VR lynch for today. I'll respond to the MoS thing later, but I prefer his execution.

[spectrumvoid]

The last I heard from PJ about me was
1) I was scummy for not disagreeing with everyone whom Glork put on the LOS. I've explained this already. (For BM: this is regarding the whole Yos/Glork issue.)

2) For changing my mind against Glork (re: the possibility of Glork bussing.) Again, I've responded to this. The only thing PJ has said is that he doesn't believe I forgot this was kingmaker. Call it dumb, but yes, I did.

[spectrumvoid]

In post 1987, I've stated that I'll be perfectly happy with a Smashy lynch. I haven't added anything because I still am.

Not to sound childish or anything, but yes, PJ did. He said to drop that from the analysis.

I did not give up my responsibilities, else I wouldn't be here. Else I wouldn't have gone after Glork, which led to the whole Glork fiasco.

[spectrumvoid]

I'll post a hopefully decent post soon answering PJ and something about mnowax soon. Latest by Monday. (It's very difficult for me to post on weekends.)

[spectrumvoid]

Response to PJ's post:

- I believe that playing on emotion is a scum-tell, claiming when not under pressure is a scum-tell, and giving up is a scum-tell. I am very consistent about this. Check any game other than newbie games because I cut newbies slack.

- I pushed for an early LOE because I thought it'd prevent a deadline situation. Also, because at that time players were pretty much all over the place. There were many names being thrown around, and it was difficult to concentrate on who I thought was scummy.

- Contrary to what PJ said, I did not change my mind ENTIRELY because of what PJ said. I also changed my mind because of something that happened in another game, where someone was too focused on a specific group of people being scum, leading to him missing out completely on who the true scum where. I did refer to this in the post PJ quoted: "which has led to horrible consequences in my other games". I was scum in those other games, which was why I didn't want to reveal much. Also the game was on-going. I can't remember which one right now without digging through a lot of game records to check out timelines, but I'm pretty sure it's a mini, and town lost because they completely fixated on someone else being scum. (I think it could be mini 364 or 400, but I really have to go check.)

- The so-called fawning vibe was because I read Kingmaker I. It's also because of a couple of games where I played with PJ and lost. I also have to check timeline because of this, but I think one game was mini 361. And possibly 2-headed mafia.

- I think it's incorrect to use another person who did the same thing and turned out to be scum to argue that I am scum for doing the same thing. In that case, I can think of a ton of other people who always play scummily, turned out to be scum, but are townies in others.

* I just like to add here that when this game first started in September last year, I was completely new and tended to imitate better players because I didn't know what to do yet. I also played in only a few minis/newbies where I screwed up badly prior to joining this game. The fawning posts where very early game (Post 8 + 12). Do note that I stopped this behaviour of my own accord without someone pointing it out at that time. PJ himself didn't realise this till later.

- I think you have my stand on the bird issue wrong. In one of the posts that was lost, I clarified that I was ambivalent regarding the bird nut-kicking theory. I also stated some logic that I cannot remember now, but I posted something about this when the game restarted after the crash.

- All about Glork etc: This is a recurring mistake that I've made. I thought Glork was pushing too hard on pooky, so I thought Glork-scum, Pooky-unlikely to be scum. I noted that Pooky did not respond adequately to Glork, but I put it down to Glork pushing Pooky too hard. I thought Glork was pushing too hard on yos, so I thought Glork-scum. I've clarified everything regarding this entire thing (including exactly why I thought Glork was scum), and I've also clarified that I now think Glork is not scum and exactly why. There's really nothing else I have to say about this issue without sounding repetitive.

- The weak pooky/yos defense was echoed by a couple of other people. In my voting summary post, I noted that there were others were didn't feel strongly about the lynch one way or another, or who changed their mind.

More later.

[spectrumvoid]

I suggest reading the king's summary a couple of pages back. And PJ's analysis posts.

PBPA on mnowax coming up.

[spectrumvoid]

CTD:
- votes pablito: voting for everyone who associates with Glork.
- votes bird for joke votes.
- townie vibes from PJ and box, and some from Glork
- In his next post, he votes for bird, unvotes pablito for being confusing, votes UT.
- Votes PJ for lynching RC on short notice, SC for 1 post complimenting PJ while admitting he didn't know why SC was scummy, votes twomz for burden of proof fallacy (pointed out by Glork), votes UT for extreme lurking.

A couple of oddities here: CTD votes bird for joke votes, revotes bird (when he never unvoted), unvotes pablito for illogical reasons, doesn't explain what were the 'townie vibes', criticises PJ and SC regarding RC execution, when he himself didn't contribute to the pre-execution discussion. For some odd reason harped on UT when there were more lurkers around.

- Doesn't believe pro-town PJ would've waited so long, bangs on pablito for defense on PJ.
- In his next post he says he found pablito's play scummy, but he's being intentionally scummy, so he doesn't think pablito is a good lynch.

Yet another brief skirmish with pablito where he comes off sounding a little illogical. Noted the attack on PJ.

- Likes MBL's case against PJ, Pablito, and Glork (weakest.) Points out Glork-town wouldn't dismiss cases against PJ and pablito so easily.
- MBL response: defense of MBL will give scum + points.
- CTD: Voted only UT for lurking, voted T and SC for (now non-existent) scummy posts.

Slightly contradicting here. It's pretty obvious (to me, that is), that T and SC were lurking as well as UT. He himself pointed earlier that T/SC only posted 1 post. Could be an attempt to spread suspicion among all lurkers without drawing attention to any specific one. I also find it hard to believe that he didn't repost what exactly happened (the posts that disappeared.) [edit: till he was asked to by others.] Considering they were the only people he thought scummy, I'd thought he would have remember what happened during the crash. [edit: he clarified later.]

- FInds Glork ignoring T odd, considering Glork first pointed out the fallacy.
- Attacks PJ on RC-execution. Disagree with Zindaras on almost everything.
- Doesn't want either Yos or MBL-execution, unsure about Pooky and pablito, wants to keep them around to prove their (un)worthiness, need to reread Mert, wants SC, slight 'raised-eyebrow' at LL.

Repeated attack on PJ, again brief mention of pablito => CTD thinks someone who intentionally acts scummy is still worth keeping around, supports an SC-execution based on a single scummy post, slightly non-commital-ish on LL, first mention of Zindaras.

- States case on Twomz
- Says he did what he could by voting the people he thought were scummy (against ZIndaras's accusations that he was lying low), says he doesn't have long cases on the people he voted, just points out scummy posts, elaborates on why PJ-king was scummy for executing RC.
- Agreed he didn't weigh in on the RC execution, clearly stated that the one person on his LOE was bird111.

I really can't remember whether the post was lost during the crash, but I can't find where he stated that he agreed with bird111, other than his vote on him, which wasn't clearly explained.

- Clarifies his case on SC.
- Clarifies that he can't vote all lurkers.
- Asks Glorks + LL to speak up.
- Clarify that he did try to get UT prodded.

- Zin: didn't bring opinion to king's attention. CTD: did by voting.
- Zin: why did you vote lurkers when prodding wasn't working? CTD: lurking warranted a vote.
- Zin: no extensive case on PJ. CTD: did.
- Zin: Pointing out scummy posts is not enough. Need to focus attention. CTD: 3/4 people are doing the same as CTD.
- Zin: RC town = PJ-scum? CTD: Yes.
- Double standard by Zin looking over CTD and not SC's posts.
- Don't like to make cases.

I don't think CTD did enough to bring the people he thought were scummy to the PJ's attention, 1 vote is insufficient without a clearly explained case. Slight contradiction here when he said he voted UT for lurking as a prod, and now he's saying it's because lurking is scummy. Just because 3/4 jump down a building doesn't mean CTD should do the same. Repeated banging on PJ for executing RC-town. I really don't like this (Yes, I can predict what PJ is going to say to this...), but I especially do not like the way CTD did not check in on yesterday's execution, did nothing to explain fully why he thought the 3 people he voted were scummy simply because he claims he doesn't post long cases. This point isn't correct, considering the amount of time he's spent repeatedly harping on PJ. And I agree with Zindaras here that voting is simply insufficient.

- Thinks Mert is scummy. Thinks PJ-town would be more alert regarding scum-tells by Mert.
- SC contradicting himself is scummy.
- PJ jumped on UT wagon --> PJ not scummy but CTD scummy?

I think CTD is fixated on the idea of PJ being scum at this point in time. I completely understand, considering how I was fixated on Glork. I think Zindaras made a valid point, not that contraicting himself is scummy, but that blowing up a single post is just over-the-top. And this again contradicts with his 'I don't make cases' argument.

^ Note to self: check whether PJ-fixation changes.

- Elaborates on why PJ should think Mert is scummy.
- Vote on SV and townie mert are the same point.
- Explains non-suspicion on bird.
- Elaborates yet again on why PJ should think mert is scummy: for pushing a box execution on D1.

This is weird. So he's saying bird is not scummy because he followed what CTD said? Weird. Note that his stand on bird has not been clearly explained all game. Also note that he thinks mert is scummy for pushing a box execution. The only thing he's said about box is he gives CTD 'townie vibes', which were not clearly explained. So I don't get where this sudden mert-scummy for pushing box execution thing is coming from, considering mert at least put in more effort to make himself heard to the king, compared to CTD's skimpy post.

- Pooky not scum because he posted a long analysis, which pooky does when town.
- Yos: not good case on Yos.
- Thinks SC and Twomz are scummy.
- Yet doesn't think neither is scum.
- Thinks pooky is townier.

Case for SC and Twomz are again the same beaten cases + lurking. He doesn't want both yet he doesn't think neither are scum?!

- Suspicious of MoS because MoS is impressed by CTD, and olio because of MoS buddying.

In all, I don't like CTD at the moment. Things to take note are:
- repeated attack on PJ despite him claiming not to post cases
- argument with Zindaras
- illogical stand regarding pablito
- defense of mert
- unclear stand on bird
- Thinking either Pooky and/or Yos are not scummy, yet not wanting either.
- Repetition of arguments against T and SC.

Mnowax later.

[spectrumvoid]

Things in bullets are points, things unbulleted are my ideas.

[spectrumvoid]

I am not free to play in large games at the moment due to some personal issues. I'll participate when I can.

[spectrumvoid]

If there's anything specific directed to me, go ahead, I'll answer. I need time to do a read of certain people in isolation, however.

[spectrumvoid]

I'm here.

At this time, I don't see myself adding much to the discussion (about me). Basically a lot of what people think was suspicious has been already explored yesterday. I think I've explained myself pretty thoroughly, leading to a little repetition.

Like I said earlier, if anyone has anything specific directed to me, I'll be glad to answer.

I'll probably go take a look at mossy or yossy.

[spectrumvoid]

Eeks. Forgot my reasoning. I can never analyse Fritzler correctly in every single game I'm in, so I'm not going to try. I've already done something about VitaminR (I remember defending him against something/someone), I'll go dig it up.

I see no point in analysing Zindaras's play at this time. Zindaras has never appeared on my scumdar, so I'm not going to go after him (like the way I did for Glork, and to a smaller extent, PJ.)

[spectrumvoid]

I'll do a quote of one of my earlier posts.

The case for VR.
1) He's scummy because of wagoning. PJ refuted that in the later post.
2) The 'kill anybody' attitude. PJ said it's premature. I think it's alright. I think this boils down to a personal playstyle issue, and not a scum-tell.
3) Meta-gaming his change in stance. I think it's a weak point, because a: it's meta-gaming. b: he did say that he'd only read partway through the thread. I've seen many replacements change their minds after reading all the way, myself included.
4) For his connection with me, ie, for selective voting/commenting, attacking. This is some kind of logical fallacy which I can't remember, but it involves trying 2 players together when both alignements are unknown.

I've also explained why I thought VitR's lurkiness was not scummy, in contrast to DR's lurkiness.

RafK:I've already responded to why I behaved the way with regards to PJ in post 2006. I queried him after the execution, and I posted something along the lines of I was satisfied with his answers.

This is exactly what I meant... repetition...

I read through my own posts. There was something about MoS, but I'm going to have to go dig it up.

[spectrumvoid]

VitaminR did post in V/LA thread about recent inactivity.

[spectrumvoid]

DR etc: What helplessness? He basically didn't do anything other than add a summary? Without any analysis whatsoever.

Could you clarify on which parts of PJ's analysis you disagree with? Do you think the people he's suspicious of are pro-town? He was suspicious of me... and you're suspicious of me too, weren't you?

MoS: That's the too scummy to be scum fallacy.

Sorry, I keep delaying looking at the people I said I was going to look at... trying to work up some enthusiasm to plow through some 30 pages or so.

[spectrumvoid]

Geez. Fascinating argument.

At this point, without going into an extensive quoting post like some recent posts... *ahem*,

vote: MoS

[spectrumvoid]

*goes to look at Fritz*

[spectrumvoid]

My take on the LOE:
I will be happy with a Fritzler lynch. This isn't because I think he's particularly scummy, but because I think SV is town (:)) and I think VitR is marginally more town than Fritz.

[spectrumvoid]

VitaminR: If you've read what I've said about you, you'll notice that I think you're more pro-town than some.

Since votes are formal, I'll

vote: Fritzler and MoS

And you're right... why?

[spectrumvoid]

I thought the reason would be pretty obvious for me not getting into the arguments for who's to be lynched today...

I'm one of the execution-candidates. As such, I will obviously be saying the other 2 are scummy. So I don't see how my input will add much to the game.

I'm not getting why Fritzler is 'yesterday's lynch' though.

[spectrumvoid]

Hi kingycakes!

I disagree. I think that a LOE centres discussion. We still have a pretty large game going on. It's better to have discussion centred on a few people rather than a whole mass. This also increases incentive for people to share their opinions.

And it's not being opportunistic, it's common sense Well, I

could

say I'm scummier than the other 2, but then I'll be insane.

[spectrumvoid]

*poke zindy*

[spectrumvoid]

I am a townie.