Xyl's Relative Chaos - Game over!

[SpyreX]

/confirm

[SpyreX]

Woo, two pages in and already stuff is happening. Thats just UNHEARD of. too bad its bad stuff.

unvote, vote tubby

"Speculation" that if someone were to, in fact, bite could easily lead to power-role leakage is pretty awesome. Except by awesome I mean the opposite.

I am pro-korts. Votes should be up.

[SpyreX]

It doesn't. Of course that list is random. Its Relative Chaos for a reason.

The "speculation" was directly related to PR's and if, of course, anyone was stupid enough to even go "hmm you may be right" and they had votes on them... why not just paint a big red X.

So, yea, scummy.

[SpyreX]

Ok, are we still in the cute joke voting stage or have we moved to reality?

I ask, specifically, for the Coheed and Tubby votes that just jumped up.

As for the difference between what Korts said and what Tubby said... if you can't see it, well.

And yes, it is Relative Chaos. I'll put dollars to donuts that vote count was setup totally to do just this - spawn a what-the-hell conversation about if it means something. Pay no attention to the man behind the mirrors fellas.

[SpyreX]

I cant believe 3 pages in I am comfortable with my vote.

Trying to out PR's and then being a parrot as well?

AWESOME

[SpyreX]

*raises hand*

Yea, I'll be that guy.

I'm not buying his play. The ? vote on Korts that switched immediately to Crazy on the grounds of "Crazy is trying to setup Korts/Spyrex" is..bad.

@Vi:

As for what I think of what's gone on so far, the most bothering thing I can see is Korts's vote on tubby that started this tirade. Korts basically posted HAY THIS MEANS SOMETHING OMGWIFOM and then turned around to backhand tubby over the Internet for trying to guess at what it means. And from there, frankly I think people have been kicking tubby around like a VI.

Note to town: I have a vague idea that this initial votecount has more relevance than just a starting point. It may outline connections or other information. As of now, I'm copying its current state into my notes, because if it contains any relevant information, Xyl is bound to change it eventually.

i would think it has something to do with power roles that those that have them have the most votes to intice them to be more active but thats just pure speculation

The first quote says that there may be more relevance - not a why because, really, the why can't come out until later. The latter, by nature, if discussed by anyone with votes out limits the pool the scum are going to hit. This reeks to me of a scum slipup - because if it had worked, at all, even if he got devoured for it the information gained would have been very valuable. "newb" or not I think this isn't an innocent mistake.

@SSk - why would faking a PR get you modkilled?

[SpyreX]

Dont forget mystic PR hunting.

[SpyreX]

I don't really follow the reasoning here, because it assumes that the scum either know what it means or have a good idea of what it could mean... which in turn assumes it has meaning in the first place. As far as limiting who the scum are going to hit, I would call predictability in NKs rather decent anyway.

I'm as against hypotheticals as anyone else, but this seems like an attempt to silence (permanently) someone for talking about what was on everyone's minds, and I think it's a useless ground for a lynch.

Everyone was thinking about what that vote list meant on some level - it was a natural topic of discussion. Coming out with "its related to PR's" directly only serves to guide the discussion towards scum-advancing goals. Or, kill it all together.

What, Vi is also faking a PR???

I'm not sure what I think about catching animo's fake but not Vi's when Vi's was discussed far more: P

[SpyreX]

Ok, let's make this clear. I honestly don't think tubby is up for a lynch as of yet. His actions can be explained away with a simple explanation that he didn't realize he was rolefishing, and when pressured, it is simply a newbtell to resort to Appeal to Emotion.

I wanted to see how many people would follow in my wake if I pressured tubby for it. I'm looking at SpyreX right now, pretty hard, especially after he professed to being comfortable lynching tubby after page 5 and two valid but far from solid tells dropped.

unvote, vote: SpyreX

I really dont think that it was an accident. Everything about it screams overeager scum to me. The latest "Well Korts did it too" just reaffirms it.

I stand by the difference between "This list may have a purpose" and "This list shows power roles" as a scummy one.

As for saying I'm comfortable with his lynch. I am. Now, who knows, maybe someone will light themselves on a scum fire but until that day my vote can sit.

[SpyreX]

Post 41 - spyre: GAH! PAGE ARGUMENT SIGHTED. Don't like the buddying-up to Korts

More surprise that something that I find valid as a scumtell happened that early. The only "buddying" is the fact I agree with him on those points.

Post 44 - spyre: How do you know the list is random?

I dont "know" but I have every reason to believe it is random.

[SpyreX]

The faked PR's are null as far as I'm concerned.

Why is that wagon so forced? New or not, I'm not seeing any beneficial outcome from what he was trying to discuss at the point he was trying to discuss it.

If anyone had really bit, it might have been worth it for scum.

[SpyreX]

SpyreX - In SpyreX 57 he asks if the cute random voting stage is over, but he had already placed a NONrandom vote on tubby. Logic failure, check. I don't buy SpyreX 117, as I stated earlier.

That's half right - I wasn't ever referring to my vote.

Ok, are we still in the cute joke voting stage or have we moved to reality?

I ask, specifically, for the Coheed and Tubby votes that just jumped up.

...Help me out; I'm not sure I follow this line of logic. What *could* have happened that would have been so beneficial for scum?

I'll toss up the list so I can explain a bit better.

MafiaSSK - 3 (farside22, Korts, ZazieR)
ZazieR - 3 (Natirasha, Crazy, DrippingGoofball)
farside22 - 2 (DoomCow, Vi)
CoheedCambria09 - 2 (CoheedCambria09, SpyreX)
Crazy - 1 (tubby216)
Scattered - 1 (The Internet)
animorpherv1 - 1 (MafiaSSK)
The Internet - 1 (animorpherv1)
Korts - 1 (Scattered)

Tell me if it had went something like this (the is a very dumbed down version, but):

Tubby: I think the people with votes have PR's.
SSK: You're probably right.
SpyreX: No, I dont think it has anything to do with it.
ZazieR: I agree with SpyreX.

Now, if we weren't -thinking- when we answered that it could be assumed that:
1.) SSK is a PR
2.) I am a PR.
3.) Zazier is not.

Could they be lying / having that opinion without any basis of their role? Sure. However, the chance of them telling the truth is high enough it would have been useful. Further - what good does that conjecture do in

killing scum

? The focus on Roles versus Alignments I think is a tell and a large enough one to warrant my vote.

[SpyreX]

Even with the lurkers (which I dont like) and the fake PR's (which I see as null) tubby still is my choice.

I'm waiting for any reason for his business to be anything but a bad scum move.

[SpyreX]

A bad newb move that the only recourse is negative for the town is a bad newb scum move still.

[SpyreX]

Okay, then please clarify how tubby only had motivation as scum to do what he did.

I've..done this?

Your statement made sense: "This vote count may have information we can use in the

future

"

That, to me, is simply saying we need to keep track of this as normal events happen.

His statement: "The vote count correlates specifically to PR's - the people that have more votes have PR's so they are forced to play" isn't just bad, but scummy, because any discussion of it (as I've said before) would be potentially outing PR's.

Also, of course, outing the PR's doesn't do anything to discuss

alignment

. I think that the focus on roles versus the focus on alignments, again, is a scum tell.

I'd flip it on its side: What motivation does town have for a statement like this?

[SpyreX]

My only proof is that he considered himself confident enough in tubby's guilt, even though discussion hadn't been about any other player, to lynch him. Although I do give him slight town points for not OMGUSing me when I turned on him.

At this point I am more than confident that it wasn't just a slip.

I've seen no reason to believe otherwise.

[SpyreX]

Because tubby still hasn't explained his "play" to where I think its anything but bad news.

[SpyreX]

Dahill is partially right - I am focused on Tubby but thats because I still find it a solid tell.

I've made comments about the PR's, but I'll go back and do a read and give my feeligns on it over the weekend hopefully.

[SpyreX]

I've been sucked into WoW, but I will give an extensive post later.

Its not playing badly, its playing scum-badly.

[SpyreX]

So I finally went and did the reread.

Animorpherv - Lurking in plain sight. I haven't seen one concrete opinion on anything from him this game.

CC - Starting off with I see no reason to vote then ends with a vote on tubby? Lurking as well.

Crazy - One of the players in "tubgate". I -can- see what he is saying about it (although I dont agree with tubgate itself). The only thing that really raises my suspicion at all is the "I'm normally the day 1 scumbuddy" statement. I know what he's saying but it just sits wrong.

Dahill - I like the analysis. I dont like all the meta, but hey, thats my meta. . The only concern I have his the fact he replaced The Internet who was worthless up to this point. Not a big concern though.

DoomCow - The whole "PR's are scum" business. Blah. "Both are good enough excuses to vote". Blah blah.

DGB - Votes animoperv for faking a PR (somehow missing VI's). Jumps to tubby as a scum meltdown (which I could agree with). However, jumps on dahill in what appears on all levels to be an OMGUS?

Farside - Strong, aggressive without being in-your-face. No real beef at all.

The Puff - I'd like a little more of his statements and not his questions (I think most of them have been answered). I want to see what he got from them all.

Korts - Out of the gate I really liked the play. What tubby did was STILL to me a far higher probability of scum-newb versus town-newb. I am not one to automatically condemn "reactionary" moves early day 1 but when your initial move was on something scummy I'm not sure what you're trying to accomplish.

SSK - Lurking. Waiting for his pbpa.

Nat - Foisted with the worlds worst PR or lying. I've got nothing.

Tubby - Comes out saying our list relates to power roles. Votes Korts after Crazy makes reference to it. Votes Crazy as scum defending bad town. Repeatedly ties Korts and I together (I dont like this). Posts a lurking post to say he isn't lurking. We know my stance on this.

VI - Only real grief is tubgate. Aside from that, no probalos.

Zazier - I cant get a good read on Zaz. In general the questions she's been asking make sense to me. The "wild card" quote bothers me a little but.

So, what do I make of all this?

Tubby, to me, is still the right choice. Maybe its bull-headedness but I think, seriously think, that his starting move was scum and the rest of this has been flailing around.

Aside from that, I do not like DGB or Anim at all. DGB hasn't "done" much and definitely there isn't consistancy in what she has been doing. Anim hasn't laid down an opinion on anything.

We're using up time. I could be persuaded to either of the above but, personally, I still want tubby.

[SpyreX]

Well, we've got 3 hardcore lurkers that I dont like but I'm nto one to jump on their ass day 1.

We've got you and Crazy who defended tubby and most of his replies have been parrots of that. Not that I think either of you are inherently scummy for it, but I would have much preferred to hear HIS opinion before he parroted yorus.

Then we've got Kort's push on tubby being for information? There was information there - that question was scummy.

We've got DGB who jumped out on anim for "anti-town" behavior while missing the larger discussion on yours.

Then there's anim who hasn't said anything.

Sometimes its fine to put pressure on the obvious targets - they ARE obvious for a reason, afterall.

[SpyreX]

All this talk about "easy lynch" the lurkers are the easiest. If it becomes a pattern it gets eliminated as the game progresses or they get replaced.

I'll hang someone I've got a scummy read on over a lurker every time.

[SpyreX]

SpyreX: post 327: Why no beef with The Internet and then dahill replacement?
SpreX: post 332: The problem with lurkers. If they are posting enough the mod won't replace them. The scum love them and if they are town the town suffers. Usually with lurkers I find one or two scum in that group.

1.) The Internet was such a lurker I had no real read beyond lurker. Dahill doesn't give that bad vibration at this point.
2.) If it becomes a pattern then yes it needs to be eliminated. Day 1 does not make for a pattern. In addition, there are multiple avenues that I find to be more scummy than day 1 lurking. Tubby, still, being first and foremost.

Now, as to that whole tubby business. He keeps asking me if I have anything else to ask him when he knows he hasn't done anything else and others had been more than happy to jump up and defend that initial action. So, yes, I still find what happened scummy enough to warrant the vote I still have. I really dont like not being able to get anything else out of him knowing that what I will go to the grave saying it was a scummy play that, due to his defenders and absence, isn't going to get the lynch.

@Vi:

No need to prod. I'm here.

SpyreX - Not useless; I just disagree with him. I'm still not confident in his reread in 327, but aside from what I've already said about it I don't think I can go forward with attacking it. Intuitively, I'm leaning toward anti-Town.

What would you like further explanation of about 327?

What made you decide on throwing that vote my way versus the other 7 (or 2 sans italics) on your list?

[SpyreX]

@Vi

I'd like to ask your opinion of DoomCow, and also whether tubby is still the best choice IYO considering all the scummy people you pointed out earlier. But again, I still feel it's a weak analysis. Aiding my intuitive read of weakness, for instance, was how you didn't express concrete suspicion of Korts until after I poked you. Also,

DC's focus on faking PR's being scummy although I do not agree with I do understand the mentality. Aside from that he hasn't been contributing much (as he has been on the defensive).

I dont like it but I am, like I said, bothered far more by Anim and DGB.

As for Korts: Korts - Out of the gate I really liked the play. What tubby did was STILL to me a far higher probability of scum-newb versus town-newb. I am not one to automatically condemn "reactionary" moves early day 1 but when your initial move was on something scummy I'm not sure what you're trying to accomplish.

There is a little suspicion, yes, but not much.

Well, we've got 3 hardcore lurkers that I dont like but I'm nto one to jump on their ass day 1.
SpyreX 330 wrote:
Sometimes its fine to put pressure on the obvious targets - they ARE obvious for a reason, afterall.
Do these statements conflict?

My vote on you is a placeholder at the moment; with seven people on my scumlist and three of them with questions outstanding I chose the person I was already most suspicious of, to be revised pending replies.

I dont see a conflict in those two statements. In fact, they are only very loosely connected at all.

Intuitively, it feels like a scum-side analysis. Most people are Townish, many of your accusations/suspicions (the ones that you make, anyway) seem weak, little pressure on anyone except the obvious targets (and CowPuff) to contribute, easy lynch target that I don't agree with, etc.

This is what that is a reply to. The former is saying that I do not have a huge "townish" list and the latter is saying that, in this case, I find every reason to pressure the obvious targets. So, no?

@Korts

What bugs me is that SpyreX refuses to acknowledge the possibility of tubby not understanding the consequences of his proposed theory. This does imply that SpyreX wants an easy lynch.

Right or wrong its obvious that he didn't understand the consequences of what he was saying (assuming players were paying attention). The difference is that it was designed in such a fashion that, again, nothing pro-town could have come from it.

IN NEW SHOCKING NEWS:

I'm suspicious of the following players:
SpyreX, ZazieR, CoheedCambria09

Reason: I don't like how they are hanging on to a wagon that has lost much of its steam. That stinks of disappointed, lazy scum to me.

In other news, Korts is town. I agree that animo & Coheed should be pushed. I pick Coheed because he persists on the tubby non-wagon.

unvote, vote: CoheedCambria09

Condemning an entire wagon because it "lost its steam"? Check.
Pushing a different candidate to the lead? Check.
Saying said push is between two lurkers? Check.
Helping in this game? .... still no check.

Unvote, Vote: DGB

[SpyreX]

Wait.. what?

Your role doesn't say your win condition, powers or anything else. Just "you are a squashed banana"?

Considering the fact that we have a sample PM in this thread I dont know what to think of that.

[SpyreX]

I joined the CC wagon for a claim, which we got, and I'm not buying it by the way. I voted GoofBall before for reasons I still believe (voting Animorph for fake PR, while Vi did it twice before), and which are confirmed by this latest action of hm (voting and unvoting me without giving any reason), but since I believe CC is lying (my not believing his claim) I really like my vote where it is.

Why did you join for a

claim

?

Why are you justifying a previous vote and then hedging your vote here?

How about answering DGB's question.

I really dont know what to make of CC's business. If this wasn't "relative chaos" the idea of a role without a win condition is silly. We have a sample in the OP so its not because he didn't have a format if he was lying.. also, there is the point DGB does make.

I cant see what is gained from lying like this (unless its for exactly this to happen) - but if thats the case CC was planning this from the beginning which I'm not buying.

Unvote

In essence CC is "third party" to me with this business assuming he's telling the truth which I am thinking he is. DGB still confuses me with the early play but she does raise a valid point about this whole mess.

I'm going to do a reread again of the last few days and see if anything jumps out.

[SpyreX]

I joined for a claim, because I wanted to hear a claim. I don't believe the claim because it's something I can't place in the ways of how it could work.

As for why he came up with that role instead of something more likely, I'm betting it's because of the theme of the game. Doc or Cop isn't chaotic enough, and some weird sounding, ambiguous role might just clear him for a few days.

The reason I mentioned the GoofBall vote, is simple enough: It was in response to Hasdfgas' post, number 422

What I'm getting at is what does wanting a claim have to do with lynching scum? You vote because you think they are scum and in rare occurrences should the claim itself be what makes you change your mind - normally because it makes some of the behavior fit better. Pushing people simply for the claims themselves is scummy. Scummy enough to

Vote: DoomCow

The thing is he didn't say -anything- about what he could do. He could have claimed some hybrid hider/cop or a myriad of things that would have drawn out something instead of just going down in flames. Thats the reason why I think he's telling the truth.

ok so if cc is a "third party" than thats really not protown,, i would like to see a case as to why we should keep him around? by his own admission he could go with either side wich definately does not help town at all if anything its one more sperson left lying around to aid the scumm in muddying up the waters.

Maybe I was wrong about you. Lynching "third party" is better than lynching town, but it definitely isn't lynching scum. I think there is a very strong chance that scum is on that CC wagon from how it went up and DC is the one that really catches my attention for the reasoning behind it / position on it.

[SpyreX]

My bad mod

Vote: Doomcow

@SpryeX. You dont' think his lack of alignment is questionable? (In regards to CC.)

Questionable, yes. However, I am not seeing the scum angle on it - there'd be far more to be gained making something either more belivable or filled with PR's if he was lying to try to out someone.

My last vote was to get him to claim, not as much so to lynch. Since I now believe he is lying, he's the most scummy to me and that earns the vote to stay.

This bothers me a lot - why are you forcing the claim if you aren't trying to lynch? Outing roles is far more valuable to the scum than the town - I'd love to run players up then let them off early on.

What does he gain from the lie?

No, the reason I choose for a wagon, is to force a reaction from the one who it's on. That reaches to a general agreeable conclusion of the day.

I thought you just said it was to get a claim? Is that the only reaction you are going for? Late-wagon "pressure votes" aren't going to cut it.

Meanwhile, I do endorse other people realizing DGB's slip.

I must be retarded. I am missing it entirely.

[SpyreX]

I can't believe I missed this. Anyone mind explaining why people are jumping off the wagon after this.

Because it fits with CC not knowing his alignment. It makes no sense for him to be lying (and these little gems reaffirm that).

He is in essence third-party. I would rather hit scum - and since its so easy to string up a third-party it makes sense that scum would be on that wagon. DC is the one that stood out for that.

[SpyreX]

Wait a sec. What just happened?

I'm not seeing why I'm guilty for being honest. I did a blatant bandwagon vote, pushing for a claim, I confirmed my reasoning for it (twice), and in less thatn 24 hours after that (with several players not able to post during it), got from 2 votes to 6.

I'm happy with my vote where it is, and I'm not that convinced I should claim, since I was honest about my motivations. One more vote will probably force me to claim, and I probably will, but I find this a bit fast.

Again, I never made it unclear that I wanted the claim, and I wasn't willing to believe it. Also, I haven't seen any real reasoning in the votes against me, besides "he wants a claim". CC was already at 6 votes without mine, that made it cleadr he seemed scum to most of town, and thus that a claim was wanted. I merely responded to that.

And Hasdfgas, about your last post: If you're convincesd that what you quote is worthy of asking why an unvote, then why not a vote for it? From that post, it seems you want people to keep him a target, so why not put your action where your mouth is?

This reads like a scum manifesto.

1.) Says that it was a bandwagon vote for the sole purpose of pushing for a claim. (Not because he thought he was scum)
2.) Alludes to the speed of the wagon on him being because he's town.
3.) Sees no reason nor problem with pushing for a claim on the basis of a claim on not because the target was scummy.
4.) Justifies the bandwagon vote under the premise of "everyone else thinks he is scummy"
5.) Throws some dirt at has.

So, thats bad enough, but:

Very well, I will claim, but just to tell, Korts voted me for the exact same reason I got bandwagonned, he just wants a claim. And I'm sure he's not the only one doing so voting for me.

I am a so called "Jack of all trades". I have several very different night abilities, all one shot, and one used per night.

1.) Korts did what I did defense.
2.) He doesn't give ANY information about his role. Considering my own I would eat my hat if his role is "Jack of all trades". Gives no information on the types of abilities - this is about as vague a claim as you can get.

Then anim gets attackedish for wanting more information.. and this is the reply.

And I won't give more detail. Why would I give scum full access to my role? I have some one shot abilities, which I can use one at night if I choose. I'm not willing to reveal what they are. I do have some willing to survive the night you know...

If this isn't setting up a reason for him to be alive tomorrow even with a PR claim I dont know what is.

On top of it all the OP has the "goddamn batman" which sets a precedent for mult-role abilities and considering the fact its called the "goddam batman" really makes me doubt ANY of this has any truth in it.

Votes staying.

[SpyreX]

No its not a counter claim - its saying that it doesn't match any of the flavor we've been given and I think there's a reason for that.

[SpyreX]

Wait, why the assumption on confused? And, what exactly would a confused Joat be? A skitzo?

[SpyreX]

Fair enough. I think you cleared it up some/enough for now.

[SpyreX]

Ok, so Vi cant vote. I somehow got her vote (I'm gathering from the fact I'm bolded with an X2).

Nat is a cop with a guilty on Zazier?

[SpyreX]

I...agree with tubby.

However, I'll wait to see what Zaz has to say before I doublevote her to the moon.

[SpyreX]

Ohh, the cop-caught scum claims roleblocker?

Not even trying to explain away the investigation, either.

I'm hammering this baby.

Doublevote: Zazier

[SpyreX]

I really didn't expect the other mafioso to be 3 players. I thought Nat was 3rd party and assumed DGB was the other.

I was sad that I didn't get to use my powers - but I figured early game the RB made more sense and letting the unstoppable go forth and cause a ruckus.

Good game though. Lots of fun.

[SpyreX]

Awww DGB <3

Why not Spyrex? He's more dangerous.
Yes, he's more independent-thinking and difficult to influence.

[SpyreX]

The funny thing is, even as scum this game, I still stand by the big things I did.

1.) Tubby was rolefishing and in a bad way. I happened to know because he's was my partner, but hey.

2.) Considering I was a "Special Agent" and our example was "Goddamn Batman" and CC claimed "Squashed Banana" I thought it was bs.

3.) Zaz couldn't have been scummier with Nat's magnificent fake Cop claim. Seriously, kudos for the stones of steel.

I was frantically F5'ing this one and I was really sad when I died.