Open 131 - Nightless Vanilla (Over) before 767

[Wall-E]

You can't have it both ways. It's either significant and therefore a scumtell or it isn't. Which is it?

[skitzer]

It just bothered me. So I guess it isn't a scumtell and therefore not significant. But I don't like that perspective. There can be unscummy things that are significant as well.

[Wall-E]

In this context, I meant "significant" to mean "vital to finding scum." If you think WC's use of the wiki means something about his or anyone else's alignment, I'd like to hear what/how. Don't take this to be an attack, merely asking for clarification.

[millar13]

skikter your not making a lot of sensr tbh....confusion is a scum-tell

[Lowell]

pretty sure skitzer is town. don't ask how I know. magic.

[Jazzmyn]

The "townie list" empking was more or less a joke, in relation to the policy-lynch scenario. I said sadly because obviously farside was joking,

What makes you think farside was "obviously" joking? Here's a hint: she wasn't.

And there is a difference between farside's link and wc's link: farside's was merely for reference, to clarify a term used, both of wc's are used in correlation with the gameplay.

I think that is both inaccurate, and a distinction without a difference, frankly. Farside linked to the wiki regarding metagaming, which is a method that many players utilize in playing the game. WC linked to the definition of 'utility lynch' which, if anything, is far less detailed that farside's link and actually just provides a definition of a term. WC also linked to a list of (alleged) tells, which lots of people link to in lots of games, by the way, in response to a specific post by Lowell in which one of the tells on the list is closely related to what WC perceived Lowell's post to be. How can you fault him for pointing out what might be a scum tell, just because he links to a source that backs up his suspicion?

And why do you

continue

to insist that WC linking to the wiki twice is somehow a big deal, while maintaining that linking to it once is perfectly acceptable? This is ludicrous. You know, it seems to me that a townie would have just conceded that you over-reacted if that was the case, but scum doesn't want to admit that they made too big a stretch in an effort to present a false case on someone they know to be a townie.

Your reason for unvoting is awful; to me it looks like someone found a hole in WC's case against Lowell, so you jumped off the wagon to save yourself.

Lol - save myself from what, exactly? My reason for unvoting is simple, straightforward, and articulated in the post in which I unvoted, and had nothing to do with someone finding a "hole" in WC's case against Lowell; rather, it was because Lowell's explanation made sense, was backed up by reference to the signup thread, and thus the theory was no longer valid. See, when townies are shown evidence that allays a specific suspicion, they acknowledge it and move on. Unlike, well, you for instance, who just can't seem to back off of your baseless accusations...even after you purport to.

I honestly don't see what is wrong with this. If it helps, here's what I think. White Castle just went too gung ho on the wiki, and that's what I felt. So what if I use the wiki once in a game? That is not in any way similar to White Castle's use of it twice. On day 1.

Again! This is just silly, and the fact that you keep insisting that there is something sinister about WC's legitimate use of the wiki is ridiculous.

My vote is staying.

Regards,
Jazz

[Netlava]

Skitzer's farside was obviously joking comment is suspicious because I can't see how he would arrive at that conclusion.

[White Castle]

White Castle, I vote to lynch. When I vote, it is with the intent to lynch and everybody who's played with me before has learned that and knows that and now so do you. So my vote is never misinterpreted as something that it isn't. And your hypocrisy comes right here...

Post 51 was Lowell, not me. Your question strikes me as anti-town because an answer leads down a dark path. Suppose I answer "Lowell could have said X". In Lowell's next post he says X. I could keep my vote on him or unvote. I think either option looks bad. (Either I let him off too easy or I didn't keep my word). All that said, it is hard to come up with cases and defend them early in the game.

You just admitted how nervous you were about doing something because you didn't want it to "look bad". Wow, that's such aggressive play...

As for Empking I don't like him, never have, probably never will. I think he's unhelpful and it sucks playing with him.

Oh and as for non-voting being a choice between indecisive town or something more sinister? That's a little silly. You can't honestly believe that. I don't vote until an intent to lynch because I don't like mistakes in this game. I like for us to win and I like for us to win as cleanly as possible. Does it ever happen? No, but I can try.

We're 181 posts into a game and we've been going at it for a while now. Why did you wait until now to tell me (and everyone else) about your voting?

There is no hyporcisy in being aggressive - and smart. I already commented on that about learning from past mistakes. Your idea that I am "nervous" is reaching, and innacurate. See my Post 82 below for my additional comments.

As you haven't commented on your own hypocrisy in two posts, I can only assume that you are content to be labeled a hypocrite.

When you quoted me above, I find it interesting that I was replying to skitzer who I'm also pressuring to vote.

As for non-voting, or any other action/inaction for that matter, everything in this game boils down to town or scum. I believe you are acting anti-town at best (sinister), and scummy at worst (more sinister).

How about linking me to a game where you were A) town and B) voting only to lynch?

Post 51 was Lowell, not me. Your question strikes me as anti-town because an answer leads down a dark path. Suppose I answer "Lowell could have said X". In Lowell's next post he says X. I could keep my vote on him or unvote. I think either option looks bad. (Either I let him off too easy or I didn't keep my word). All that said, it is hard to come up with cases and defend them early in the game.

White Castle why are you so worried about looking bad? It's page 4 of D1 the game isn't about you it's about the town. I don't like the fact that you're so hesitant to take action, seems like you're a little bit more skiddish about doing something to attract attention to yourself. Neither option would look bad if you properly explain yourself.

The question reminded me of a past mislynch I participated in over similar events (zwet in Open 110). I'd prefer to not make the same mistakes twice. I think it would have also set a bad prescedent. I'm also against bad prescedents, like when millar voted without giving a reason.

As for your concern about me not taking action, I've got a high post count and I'm also leaving a voting record.

Speaking of voting records, I noticed you and skitzer have yet to vote.

[hewitt]

We're 181 posts into a game and we've been going at it for a while now. Why did you wait until now to tell me (and everyone else) about your voting?

There is no hyporcisy in being aggressive - and smart. I already commented on that about learning from past mistakes. Your idea that I am "nervous" is reaching, and innacurate. See my Post 82 below for my additional comments.

As you haven't commented on your own hypocrisy in two posts, I can only assume that you are content to be labeled a hypocrite.

When you quoted me above, I find it interesting that I was replying to skitzer who I'm also pressuring to vote.

As for non-voting, or any other action/inaction for that matter, everything in this game boils down to town or scum. I believe you are acting anti-town at best (sinister), and scummy at worst (more sinister).

How about linking me to a game where you were A) town and B) voting only to lynch?

Because I didn't think it was a big deal obviously. I was not aware that voting with the intent to lynch was a bad thing White Castle. I don't see how I'm a hypocrite so give me a good reason as to why I'm a hypocrite and then I'll talk about it. I pointed out that quote because it was where I found you to be a hypocrite and please give me good examples as to where I'm being sinister, anti-town, and scummy. I don't save my games so I'll have to go look them up.

[White Castle]

Still here. Will write a summary post when I get a chance.

Hey Lowell - we're still waiting for that summary post from April 4th. Here are all of your posts since then.

Still here. Jury duty kept me away.

154 is a dumb response to 153. millar looks worse in my eyes as a result of 153.

pretty sure skitzer is town. don't ask how I know. magic.

I also noticed that you've posted about 50 times since you resolved to write your summary. So when will you "get a chance"?

We're going to need more from you than just "majic" reasons too.

[White Castle]

In response to hewitt 183

hewitt is the other non-voter.

I don't like the people who are hopping on and off the bandwagon. They hop on for a pretty silly reason and then hop right back off once it seems people are questioning the wagon.

If you don't find it scummy, then why are you telling us that you don't like it? You said you don't random vote. Fine. What are you waiting for? We're close to 150 posts now. I've got news for you: 10 of us have already voted. At most, 4 out of those 10 are scum meaning that at least 6 town have already voted. You are the outlier, not those of us who have voted. Skitzer hasn't voted, but was on V/LA. You have been around, and your lack of voting is astounding.

Well in my opinion wasn't even an attack Wall-E. I wanted to point out that I didn't think he needed to be so skiddish about looking bad. I don't think I phrased it as an attack at all I was merely voicing my opinion.

We're not mindreaders. If it wasn't an attack, then what point did it serve?

Touche. I guess I just disagree with you then.

And that's fine, I guess I just encourage throwing yourself out there for the town's benefit over your own personal safety. I would much rather appreciate town not holding back instead of holding it in.

So we should "thow ourselves out there", huh? Wouldn't voting be a prime way to do that? Between this post and 90, I see a lot of hypocrisy.

Alright hewit. Here is your hypocrisy.

You encourage us to "throw yourself out there for the town's benefit over your own safety". I stand by my statement that voting (even if the sole purpose of the vote is not to lynch) is a means of "throwing yourself out there". As I have shown, you were on people for voting and unvoting. I have also shown that at least 6 town players have voted, yet you and skitzer have not. It is fascinating that your criticism applies more to town than it does scum.

In a nutshell, you can't have it both ways - you can't encourage us to throw ourselves out there and then criticize us for voting.

And as for your claim that "I was not aware that voting with the intent to lynch was a bad thing", that is not what I said or implied.

And by the way, I've noted that your story has evolved from "I just don't random vote" (below) to "I don't vote until an intent to lynch because I don't like mistakes in this game" in post 170.
[quote=""hewitt Post 42""]Of course I'm aware of the policy lynching of Empking, who isn't that has played with him before? But no I just don't random vote.

Basically Empking gets policy lynched because people don't believe he's helpful and contributes to the game positively and that it's helpful to lynch him before we get stuck in a situation like lylo and we still have him in the game.[/quote]

[hewitt]

I have also shown that at least 6 town players have voted, yet you and skitzer have not.

Oh really now? Nice freudian slip White Castle.

[hewitt]

Throwing yourself out there is throwing out your opinions, ideas, analyses, and calculations on other players. I got on people's backs voting without reason or for a crappy reason, which is absolutely not throwing yourself out there for the benefit of the town. I also love how you keep using us-ourselves-etc. when it's clear that I'm not criticizing everybody in this game and really the only person I have heavily criticized is you. And I don't random vote and I don't vote without the intent to lynch, I don't see the problem with that.

[White Castle]

I have also shown that at least 6 town players have voted, yet you and skitzer have not.

Oh really now? Nice freudian slip White Castle.

Hey genius, I said that in post 145 that I referenced above.

That's the best response you could come up with?

unvote, vote hewitt

[hewitt]

I have also shown that at least 6 town players have voted, yet you and skitzer have not.

Oh really now? Nice freudian slip White Castle.

Hey genius, I said that in post 145 that I referenced above.

That's the best response you could come up with?

unvote, vote hewitt

What are you talking about? I posted right after that, unless you're just going to ignore that.

[White Castle]

It was a cross post, but you'd know that if you had paid attention to the time.

I don't like the people who are hopping on and off the bandwagon. They hop on for a pretty silly reason and then hop right back off once it seems people are questioning the wagon.

As of the time of your post 90, everyone but you and skitzer had voted. There had been 18 votes cast, of which 8 were unvotes/revotes by me, Adam Smith, Jazzmyn, millar, Jazzmyn again farside, Netlava, and me again. The last voting was done in post 77.

So that's a lot of "people you don't like".

If only this game were full of people like you and skitzer. There's be no votes.

Are there any other scumhunting tactics you are against?

[hewitt]

No, White Castle, I've made it clear that I don't like players who hop on and off wagons for no or silly reasons. I especially don't like when people hop off a wagon when it starts to be questioned. I don't know how to make it any clearer then that for you.

[White Castle]

No, White Castle, I've made it clear that I don't like players who hop on and off wagons for no or silly reasons. I especially don't like when people hop off a wagon when it starts to be questioned. I don't know how to make it any clearer then that for you.

Then name names and make cases. Be specific. Make it clear which players in the list I made were "hopping on and off wagons for no or silly reasons". Your post 90 uses pronouns and not names.

[Wall-E]

I'm going to go along with hewitt here. It's clearly a slip.

Unvote: Vote: White Castle

[hewitt]

Then name names and make cases. Be specific. Make it clear which players in the list I made were "hopping on and off wagons for no or silly reasons". Your post 90 uses pronouns and not names.

Oh yeah White Castle, I didn't name names...

Hm the speed of the bandwagon was pretty quick, I'm not convinced Adam Smith or Jazzmyn really paid attention to what they were doing. Seems more to me like they were just like oh cool a bandwagon let's jump on!

Eh, I guess I should add millar to that list as well with Adam Smith and jazzmyn.

Yeah I really don't check out what game I'm going into before signing up either. So why did you hop on the bandwagon Wall-E?

[White Castle]

I'm going to go along with hewitt here. It's clearly a slip.

Unvote: Vote: White Castle

Wall-E, you've misread things I've said before. This is another instance.

10 people in this game have voted. It means that

at least 6

town players have voted. That means that 6, 7, or 8 of the players that have voted are town because there are 4 scum out of 12 players.

Would a scum slip have included the phrase

at least

? A scum could make an absolute statement like "X town players have already voted" because they would know for certain.

[hewitt]

Aight well are you going to ignore my post White Castle?

[White Castle]

I never said you didn't name names.

Then name names and make cases. Be specific. Make it clear which players in the list I made were "hopping on and off wagons for no or silly reasons". Your post 90 uses pronouns and not names.

Oh yeah White Castle, I didn't name names...

Hm the speed of the bandwagon was pretty quick, I'm not convinced Adam Smith or Jazzmyn really paid attention to what they were doing. Seems more to me like they were just like oh cool a bandwagon let's jump on!

Eh, I guess I should add millar to that list as well with Adam Smith and jazzmyn.

Yeah I really don't check out what game I'm going into before signing up either. So why did you hop on the bandwagon Wall-E?

I added the post numbers. How were we supposed to know in Post 90 that this is what you were referring to? There were other votes between 67 and 90, and earlier votes you didn't comment on. Be specific and leave a trail.

[White Castle]

Aight well are you going to ignore my post White Castle?

Would you please stop doing this? I had to go back and find post numbers.

[hewitt]

White Castle I made it SO clear that the people I didn't like were the ones who hop on and off the bandwagon for no or silly reasons. I don't know how you couldn't have known who I was talking about and actually yeah you did say I didn't name names. You JUST said it in post 192.