SSW III: Game over

[farside22]

vote: CoheedCambria09

Do you guys ever sleep.

Vote count

(12 players alive = 7 to lynch before deadline)
(1) CoheedCambria09 – farside22

Not voting:

Cass, cerebus3, CoheedCambria09, donkeyz12212, Empking, Grimmy, Lord Gurgi, Porkens, raider8169, Septia, SpyreX

Deadline:

Tuesday 5 August 2:00 PM (GMT -5 according to forum clock)

[raider8169]

I admit I was not pushing for the Wall-E vote because I wasn't sure waht exactly was going on and since it was Day 2 only, I didn't feel it was necessary to take out a roled character.

What? You were not sure what was going on, so what exactly led you to believe his claim? Also, did

anyone

think it was "necessary to take out a roled character"?? (Scum don't need to answer that one...)

Anyway, looks like Wall-E was not feigning the obliviousness after all. It'd be nice if from now on everyone could read the rules and the thread first, before doing something stupid

So, does this mean the scum actually bought the claim? And the 'confirming' of BM? Or were the scum the people calling for quicklynch?

FoS: Donkey
FoS: Lord Gurgi, Coheed & raider

You forgot to FOS yourself and everyone else on the bandwagon. We voted based off the same information you had. Only difference is that we waited longer to place our vote. I do like how you moved the focus away from yourself though EGMEOY!

[Cass]

Well, Wal-E wasn't making any sense, so voting him wasn't scummy. But those who tried to end the day quick could be scum. as soon as the scum have decided on a nightkill, they'll want to end the day, at least if there's a townie already on the chopping block.
I would have liked to get some more information out of Wall-E and BM before that day ended. Many of my questions were still unanswered, which I think this is the way scum likes the day to end.

A different theory is that the scum hasn't been online for a while and sent in their nightchoice a while ago, when Wall-E was more credible. Do you think that's more likely?

[raider8169]

I dont see it like that at all. As night choices can be sent in at any time why would people not send in their choice as soon as possible? No matter what then there choices are in.

Wall-E was not the night choice though, the night choice must have been sent in a long time ago as why else would they kill BM when he would have gotten crap for being the hammer and not try and take out the claimed power role.

[Cass]

I'm pretty sure you can't send in choices

after

the hammer, so that doesn't make a lot of sense. If sent in early, it might have been an conditional: lynch wall-e, if dead lynch BM. That makes sense if they sent it in early and never overrided it.

[CoheedCambria09]

@farside- yes i do sleep, everyday i wake up with like 3 pages of this game to read (its 12:15 where i am) so ive been up for 4 hours today already and checked in when i last posted.

[donkeyz12212]

I don't think you can send night choices after the hammer?

I remember when I was scum in the first DWW, I hammered someone before sending a kill and the next day began. So I do believe that the choice for BM was chosen before everything came up?

[CoheedCambria09]

[008] Night choices: If you have a night choice to make, it is due by the lynching vote is cast or the posted deadline (whichever comes first). Observe that there is no separate night phase. I will not wait for you – if you do not submit a choice to me no choice will be made. Night is only the time it takes me to resolve night choices, write lynch scenes and describe what happens. (You can send in as many night choices as you want, I will only acknowledge the last one sent before a lynch.) You are allowed to add one conditional in your night choice ( track player X, unless he is lynched, in that case track player Y)

I think that clears up everything. Night choices have to be sent in before lynch or deadline.

[donkeyz12212]

DWW = SSW lol...oops.

[SpyreX]

Well, what the hell.

I'm still new, I'll give you that, but I was SURE he was scum.

If BM was the same role berserk was in the others, I am really surprised he didn't use his vig either night.

I'm still really suspicious of Donkey & Raider. The funny thing the point Raider brings up about the NK choice on BM is kinda valid; BM would have had a lot of suspicion today, which means that there is a good chance the scum sent in the NK early and then wasn't active (Raider & Coheed jump to mind)

[raider8169]

I jumped to mind by not being active? Kind of odd but ok.

I do agree with you I thought was really scum. I need to relook Porkens.

[Grimmy]

Vote: Coheed

Same reasons as yesterday

ps
im v/la until monday or tuesday

Computer at work got fried, so I gots alot to make up now

Grimmy

[Lord Gurgi]

Well I stand by my vote of Wall-E guy was as scummy as heck. But I have no clue who is scum now, so I'm going to hold my vote for now. I am suspicious of people who end the day not voting for anyone so I'll reread and check.

[Lord Gurgi]

So, upon my checking. I found something interesting:

Septia: Not-voting at the end of D1, was on the Wall-E wagon.

Porkens: On the M4yhem wagon, not-voting at the end of D2.

Vote: Porkens

for reasons stated yesterday and not voting anyone when he was the #2 wagon.

[SpyreX]

No, you didn't jump to mind for being a lurker. You jumped to mind because of timing and well, everything I said in my other post.

This time around I definitely do think finding out who pushed/not pushed for Wall-E is important, as scum knew Wall-E was telling the truth and better to get him out now than later?

What do you mean by pushed? Thats real vague and, although I wouldn't be surprised if there was a scum on it, his play was erratic enough that it COULD have been an all town thing. However, I will take a look at them, as always.

Maybe it's the fact you've been scummy all game, but that really makes me think you're pushing for us to look at them and, well, not you.

@Cass - I'm not sure what a "vengeful" berserk is, but the berserk from the last game was:

You role: werewolf berserk
You are a frenzied killer, highly valued in the tribe. You’ve got two one shot-abilities:
1. Frenzied attack (a.k.a one shot vigilante): You can kill any other player during one night, just PM me and tell who you’ll be targeting (make sure to send in your choice in time – see rule #008).
2. Rabid defence (a.k.a. one shot bullet proof): You will not die the first time someone tries to nightkill you (however, you won’t know when this rabid defence is used).
You win when all the threats against the werewolf pack has been eliminated.

Now, more than anything, the death of BM really confuses me. Its some WIFOM on some level, I know, but if the night-kill was early in the day, then BM would have made sense. As it was coming to a close, it would have made sense to let him live and be a solid suspect today. I cant figure out if I'm right about this theory, because I'd be looking for someone active early then dead...but, the lurkers came out to drop votes and, if they did, why wouldn't they have changed their night action?

Maybe I'm just giving myself a headache.

Looking at the Wall-E votes, personally:

SpyreX, cerebus3, Cass, Septia, Lord Gurgi, raider8169, CoheedCambria09, Battle Mage

Not Very Suspicious:

SpyreX - I'm not suspicious to me
Septia - Has been uniformly against the claim from the start.
Lord Gurgi - Voting for exactly the reason I expected, and saying so.
Cass - Kinda borderlline, but considering the play we had his posts (especially post 19) make sense and are giving a reason and the logical connection.

Suspicious:

Cerebus3 - Although he brings up the case (on top of me). I really dont like the "Anyone else see this?" without a vote or even a FoS at that point. I dont like building cases without backing them up, at all.

Very Suspicious:

Raider - Late vote, mostly lurked, no true reason for the vote (not even I agree, just I noticed what he said).
Coheed - Late vote, mostly lurked.. bad quantifier "Wall-E- he's been caught,

or thats what its really looking like

"

So, as it sits, I'm back to where I was before Wall-E decided to commit scumicide. Donkey, Raider and Coheed all look real bad. Although, between yesterday and today.

Vote: Raider

You've overtook Donkey as the scummiest player in this game. Its a close damn race though.

[raider8169]

Nice try bud. I think thats all we need.

You're scum and scum dont have safeclaims.

Well done gents. I better see some votes up here in the morning. Hell, it better go through hammer.

Raider - Late vote, mostly lurked, no true reason for the vote (not even I agree, just I noticed what he said).

You've overtook Donkey as the scummiest player in this game. Its a close damn race though.

Mostly lurked, I love it when people say that about me. Yeah about that...No I didnt lurk. Looking back I posted on the 31st and then wait whats this OMG this will be my 5th post for today. Wow for a lurker that must not be enough. Sorry, I hate it when people call me a lurker when I post more then most people on this site.

Its funny that you are accusing people for voting late when

YOU

told people too. That was more/less my reason for voting. I was trying to push a porken's lynch but the Wall-E one I thought was a confirmed scum.

[SpyreX]

Well I stand by my vote of Wall-E guy was as scummy as heck.

This is 100% true. The only reason I feel bad about EITHER lynch we've done so far is the fact they were actually town. Both players were very scummy - which, on one level, does screw up looking at the votes.

However, we do still have some classic scum-hunting tools with all this.

1.) Opportunistic voting (Raider, Coheed)
2.) Distancing voting (Donkey, Coheed)
3.) Building cases yet not voting (Cerebus)

I'm still REALLY not seeing Porkens or Septia at this point. Probably on some level because of the above.

The reason I am voting for Raider over the other 3 is, of all the above, both of those reek of opportunism and, ultimately, its the opportunistic votes that help get people lynched whereas the distance votes just are troublesome.

[raider8169]

Nice try bud. I think thats all we need.

You're scum and scum dont have safeclaims.

Well done gents. I better see some votes up here in the morning. Hell, it better go through hammer.

I find myself coming back to this quote. Did you not want people to join the bandwagon to a lynch?

[SpyreX]

Nanananaa MULTIPOST

Mostly lurked, I love it when people say that about me. Yeah about that...No I didnt lurk. Looking back I posted on the 31st and then wait whats this OMG this will be my 5th post for today. Wow for a lurker that must not be enough. Sorry, I hate it when people call me a lurker when I post more then most people on this site.

Ohh, I guess thats my bad then. Lets look at your posts for day 2.

Ok I owe everyone a case as I was the hammer and said I would do so.
Post 64, he was trying to kill someone quickly, but yet questionable about it (about a claim). For someone who has played for a while I thought this was a small hint and caused me to keep an extra eye on his posts.
Then in post 69 he wants Wall-E to defend himself. If you are trying to quickly hammer someone why would you let them defend themselfs it just doesnt work. The idea behind a quick lynch was bad from the get go. Scum most likely checked in quickly or was lurking from the get go. As soon as the thread opened I am sure they sent in there night requests as did everyone else.
Post 131 just was trying to get someone to hammer even though the quick lynch was called off. Post 136 he backs off saying he was not serious. I thought that to be BS. At this point is when I wanted to vote for him. Nothing from there on out convinced me otherwise.

Ok, an after-the-fact explanation. Thats ..ok. A decent sized post as well.

Ok, moving on next is my case on Porkens.
Post 169 he jumped bandwagons and said that seems sound. I didnt get a good feeling about that. Post 171 he said he was scummy to stop a wagon. The Wall-E wagon after the claim was bad. I belive the claim. Plus if some gets off a bandwagon at L-1 that is not scummy. Where a person puts their votes is up to them and if they feel the person is not scum I would hope they remove their vote (post 173). Post 308 M4yhem said to look at him so I am trying to honor his wish. To me the signs are there so Vote Porkens .

A very short case on Porkens, including the "M4yhem said to" at the end.

Porkens was the L-1 person, I was the hammer.

One line.

A while later:

What does the I was out of town have anything to do with it? My case waited until I was back and then I posted it.

Another, one liner.

Just as long as you dont mind an OMGUS DIACFWLS vote later!

DIACFWLS- Die in a car fire with leather seats. I just learned that the other day and wanted to use it Razz

Junk post.

Cant say I read them, more skimmed then for the storyline.

Another one liner.

Again, much later.

Im not voting Wall-E because I just read up and noticed what he said. So Unvote, Vote Wall-E .

Woo, yet another one liner with a vote!

So, maybe "lurking" isn't the right word. Content Lurking sure is. Lurking in plain sight sure is. Saying you post more than other people well, maybe you hit the post button more but you sure haven't provided more.

Its funny that you are accusing people for voting late when YOU told people too. That was more/less my reason for voting. I was trying to push a porken's lynch but the Wall-E one I thought was a confirmed scum.

Yep, you should totally arbitrarily listen to what I say. It makes a good defense for reasonless late votes later.

If you're going to say you voted because I TOLD you too, seriously? Hell, you could have at least said you agreed with my case or what was going on, anything... but just because I told you to?

Nicely done.

I find myself coming back to this quote. Did you not want people to join the bandwagon to a lynch?

Good lord, yes I did. Based on his play, as I saw it and as LG specifically said, he was being scummy and it made PERFECT sense to assume exactly what I did at that point.

However, see, LG at least gave the reason why he was. I sure as hell didn't expect people to blindly follow me. I was just saying the evidence was obviously there in full.

[raider8169]

I hope you are aware that the same stuff can be said about you. Granted I will say that you did have more posts and more non-one liners. Most of your posts is that you like to point out things you noticed which I think it good, and you ask alot of questions which I also think is good. What is missing is that there really is not much information on you so its hard to judge where you stand in this whole mess. I give you much credit for leading the charge against Wall-E. Convinced as you were he still turned up town. I thought the same thing though, the evidence was all there yet I failed to copy and paste everything you and other people posted and add say yup I agree. If he turned up scum this wouldnt have been a problem.

I dont think anyone that voted followed blindly. The evidence was there and I jumped along. Did you really need a reason why I and everyone else voted when you pointed everything out? Also what would you have hoped to get out of it?

[SpyreX]

What can be said about me? That I'm a lurker? That I'm not providing content? Sure, give that a shot. I'll bite.

I dont know if anyone followed blindly, but in a game where all we have is the context of the game itself...there's a huge difference between, for example, LG's vote on that wagon and yours. If you dont see that I dont know how to help you.

As for what I hoped to get out of it? Catching scum. I thought I was right, I still think the lynch made sense, but without people giving reasons that makes me suspicious.

[raider8169]

As for what I hoped to get out of it? Catching scum. I thought I was right, I still think the lynch made sense, but without people giving reasons that makes me suspicious.

What was BM's reason for voting? He is confirmed townie, or do I just need to be dead before you will listen to reason?

I am not saying you are lurking what I am saying is that the town does not have much information on you other then you are very aggressive and you like to accuse and are often wrong.

Side note, I will only be able to check tomorrow morning and then hopefully tomorrow night. Please dont take this as lurking.

[SpyreX]

Let me summarise. Guy claims Tracker. Guy proves he is a Tracker. Guy then attacks the guy whom he got the closest a tracker gets to an 'innocent investigation'. Guy makes no sense, and ends up bandwagonned by almost half the town. So much smoke and white noise that nobody else thinks about hunting scum. I dont know if he's scum or not. I'm completely clueless, and i'm not sure i even care!

Not that it matters in the slightest to YOUR vote, but yes, thats a reason. He made it clear his vote wasn't a strong one when he made it and he did explain it after the fact and YES, believe it, I would have been very suspicious of him for those reasons today if he wasn't dead.

What does his alignment have to do with yours though? I thought you were playing oddly before this whole mess went down.

I am not saying you are lurking what I am saying is that the town does not have much information on you other then you are very aggressive and you like to accuse and are often wrong.

What information do you want from me? My opinions? Those have been made clear. My stances? Those have been made clear. My favorite color? Its dark blue. I'll clear up anything else you'd like.

Side note, I will only be able to check tomorrow morning and then hopefully tomorrow night. Please dont take this as lurking.

I'm not sure if you're being snide or what. You didn't provide much of anything yesterday. I call it lurking, you argue with the semantics, sure. At the least, you weren't providing content and just hopped on and had the gall to say it was because I somehow compelled you to do it. If you didn't think it was valid, say so. If you thought the lynch was valid, say so. Sure as hell you shouldn't go "SpyreX told us to say so" as part of your reason.

Yep, I've been wrong so far in their alignments. Nope, I'm not going to feel bad about either lynch because I was lynching scummy players.

[Septia]

So, upon my checking. I found something interesting:

Septia: Not-voting at the end of D1, was on the Wall-E wagon.

Porkens: On the M4yhem wagon, not-voting at the end of D2.

Vote: Porkens

for reasons stated yesterday and not voting anyone when he was the #2 wagon.

The reason for my absence of vote on Day one was the fact I was away, missed a bunch of pages, and couldn't get into the game.

About the Wall-E lynch. I didn't vote blindly, I looked back at his posts and claims. They didn't seem to add up. I was close to positive this guy would turn up mafia.

Porkens is not looking too suspicious to me.

vote: Coheed

Based on the fact that he has looked like an opportunist thus far in the game like SpyreX said.

[Porkens]

@ LG

Vote: Porkens

for reasons stated yesterday and not voting anyone when he was the #2 wagon.

I'm pretty sure you would still be voting for me even if I had stayed on the Wall-E wagon. But here's my reasoning anyway;

Yesterday and into last night I was worried that we, who were voting Wall-E, were voting to lynch a confused townie rather than a lousy scum. The BM/Wall-E scumbuddy theory had ceased appealing to me during the discussion of

why

Wall-E would vote his scum partner.

In addition to this, Wall-E admitted that he didn't know what Verbatim meant. To me, that explained all the crap that Spydermex was basing his wagon on, and further caused me to suspect that Wall-E was just confused.

As for not voting

anyone

when I was the #2 wagon, I don't really know how to defend against this because I don't know why it's scummy. I guess I'll just admit that I didn't know who to vote for at the time.

I’m going to respond a bit to SpyreX’s post here:

Not Very Suspicious:
Septia - Has been uniformly against the claim from the start.

But the claim was real, so how does this put Septia in a good light? Scum can be consistent too.

Lord Gurgi - Voting for exactly the reason I expected, and saying so.

But what about being hypocritical with the very same post?

I don't think that "unvote, vote" posts help the town at all.

Ummm, (Wall-E’s win condition)’s different than mine. Unvote; Vote Wall-E

I admit that this is a little OMGUS for being voted by LG every single free moment he had, but take a look at his posts between night 1 and now; there's hardly any content! He just happily wagons me until a better wagon comes along and then hops on over to help misslynch.

Cerebus3 - Although he brings up the case (on top of me). I really dont like the "Anyone else see this?" without a vote or even a FoS at that point. I dont like building cases without backing them up, at all.

Very Suspicious:

Raider - Late vote, mostly lurked, no true reason for the vote (not even I agree, just I noticed what he said).

Coheed - Late vote, mostly lurked.. bad quantifier "Wall-E- he's been caught, or thats what its really looking like"

I somewhat agree with your top 3 here based on the Wall-E voters. Although I would also include Lord Gurgi for what I’ve pointed out above.

To add a little more to your analysis; there were two people who jumped off my wagon directly onto the wagon which was on Wall-E; Raider and Gurgi. I ultimately thought that the case against Wall-E was moderate at best, so I perceive these two jumping wagons as highly suss. Especially if they really believed I was scum.

One person clearly lines up well between your reasoning and mine; Raider.

Vote: raider8169

I’m also putting

FOS farside22

and

FOS Grimmy

for being such background players; voting an unpopular Cambria wagon yesterday and contributing very little on an important day.

Finally, it cannot go without note that the

only

three people to vote for

both

misslynches were SpyreX, Raider, and Cass.

FOS SpyreX

,

FOS Cass

. Before you jump down my throat, I realize both were well-rationalized lynches. However, the coincidence can’t be overlooked.