Open 131 - Nightless Vanilla (Over) before 767

[Wall-E]

Equating people jumping on your badwagon with idiocy is ad hominem. Man, your post is just full of nonsense.

[Lowell]

Good point! I bet Millar agrees with you!

[Wall-E]

I do not understand the point you are making in 251. Can you please elaborate?

[Wall-E]

You are saying that millar has been playing follow-the-Wall-E.

I suppose I can't refute that (or even think of a reason why I'd want to) but I'm curious what conclusion you've drawn from this data.

[Wall-E]

Good point! I bet Millar agrees with you!

I've shown you the courtesy of addressing each of your points against me and you've responded to criticism of your own plays with deflective rhetoric. I'm beginning to dislike this course of actions from you.

[Rishi]

Vote Count – Page 11

Lowell – 4 (Adam Smith, millar13, Empking, Wall-E)
millar13 – 2 (farside22, lixyl)
skitzer – 2 (Netlava, Jazzmyn)
hewitt – 1 (White Castle)
Wall-E – 1 (Lowell)

Not voting: skitzer, hewitt

With 12 alive, it takes 7 votes to lynch.

V/LA until Sunday.

[Lowell]

The point I'm making is that millar follows you around agreeing with you. As for your other point about wanting to vote but being scared to, I even LIST post numbers... it's 55. Read again.

[Wall-E]

Post 44 is a great post.

I'll vote Lowell when we're ready to end the day.

This is post 55.

[Wall-E]

Great a nightless with a billion scum...

vote white castel

OMGUS aside, this reminds me of something I read here:

http://www.mafiascum.net/wiki/index.php ... dard_Tells

At the bottom of the page is the "Well, That Sucks" Tell.

You signed up for this game knowing the ratio of town to scum, and that it was nightless.

unvote, vote Lowell

And this is post 44.

[Wall-E]

I see nobody exhibiting fear in either post. The fact that you gave a good reason for the lack of knowledge mollified me, if that's what you mean, but I don't go around advertising when someone looks town to me. Saavy?

[Wall-E]

Yeaaaah, you're reaching on me. Sorry. If anyone else takes you seriously at all I'll go through and properly explain my actions in regards to you, but I think it's pretty clear you're pulling this out of your rump.

[Lowell]

Explain why you voted WC for a "slip", then left white castle to vote me when I said it wasn't a slip. Not only that, you said that by declaring WC town I was "clearing a path for scum" or something.

Did I convince you WC was town? If not, why aren't you voting him? If I did and you're worried scum will kill him (in a nightless, somehow), why are you voting me?

[White Castle]

Runthrough:

150- white castle wants a "list" from everyone [-, this can't help]
180s- hewitt and white castle argue over former's voting habits
188- white castle votes hewitt [-]

Some things that strike me now that I'm actually paying attention:

netlava

and

hewitt

are the most pro-town players, by far. Netlava has not jumped lazily on bandwagons. He doesn't post all that much, but I feel like I know clearly where he stands, which is a plus. The fact that hewitt isn't afraid to make people angry is good. Also that he hasn't been an idiot and jumped on my wagon is a plus.

Something is up with

millar

, and it isn't good. I read him originally as town, but now I'm not feeling it. He jumped on the lowell wagon in 59 with no explanation (right after wall-e had said he wanted to). In 136 emp accuses me of lurking. Millar immediately agrees in 137. Again, in 221 wall-e votes lowell, and millar posts right after to CONFIRM his vote on me. Everything millar does reeks of a desperate need to be loved... particularly by emp and wall-e.

wall-e

, as well, looks bad. He initially states his interest in voting me, but is cautious to do so in fear of looking too eager. Then he votes for me when it's safe. Later, post 221 makes no sense, and he looks eager to go back to a safe wagon. Worse, he did this after I voiced my disagreement with those who considered there to be a white castle "slip." Wall-E was one of these people. So, if he thinks white castle slipped, and is scum, why did he immediately jump on to me and say that I was "clearing people for scum to kill"? I think his heart was never in the white castle wagon.

white castle

is hard to read. On the one hand, I admire his aggressiveness and willingness to move the thread forward. On the other hand, I have him linked to unsavory characters like wall-e and millar a little too much for my liking. They tried a bit too hard in the 220s to run interference.

I expect more, generally, all the way around, from

skitzer

and

farside

. I've played with them before and nothing about their play here makes me think they care who wins.

jazzmyn

looks relatively town, though I don't have much to go on.

Anyone I haven't mentioned I have no opinion of because they're lurky or pointless.

FOS millar
FOS white castle
unvote, vote Wall-E

It's an ambushing thing: Suddenly popping up with a huge amount of carefully collected evidence... I've seen it win games for the town.

If, on the other hand, I said, "Oh, I've got my eye on you, Wall-E" then Wall-E is going to stop providing me with evidence against him. Feedback is a tool the scum use in this manner.

No feedback for the scum is my motto. That's also why I don't discuss who's town-looking without a good reason.

Uh, I don't like to discuss my meta unless it's relevant, so try to keep it relevant, ok? I don't have a good judgement of such things which is what gets me into trouble sometimes with moderators, so help me help you help me, if you please, kiss.

There may be additional merit to the ambush in a nightless game, since you don't have to worry about the NK.

This also leads me to believe that being an aggressive townie is the best strategy. You've got nothing to lose at night. I believe that anyone that has been passive (especially non-voters, low count posters, and low content posters) is more likely to be scum.

What do you think about each of us putting together a list of their top four suspects in order? At a minimum, we should get this from everyone before they are lynched (a town lynch would give us an un-scum-biased list, I won't comment on what a scum lynch would tell us because, as you say, don't give the scum feedback).

I'll start with Post 150. Note that I was asking for suspects only, and then I came up with what I though was a really good suggestion (that we get a list of suspects from everyone before their lynch). You hold this against me ("it can't help"), and then what did you do is post 247? Make a list!

For completenesss, here are the people not on your list:

Adam Smith - where has he been?
Empking - to policy lynch or not policy lynch?
lixyl - being replaced
Lowell - "Some things that strike me now that I'm actually paying attention" - nice that you've been at L-2 three times and are now just taking this game seriously. Maybe you don't have to worry since your scumbuddies have your back?

[White Castle]

hewitt, could you please go look those games up?

[quote=""hewitt Post 183""][quote=""White Castle""]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?[/quote]

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.[/quote]

[hewitt]

My two completed games as town were Open 121 and Newbie 715.

[White Castle]

My two completed games as town were Open 121 and Newbie 715.

Anything completed as scum?

[hewitt]

Open 104.

[Wall-E]

Who, in your opinion, has had my back in this game?

[hewitt]

...Who was that question directed at Wall-E?

[Wall-E]

It seems I was on another page when I posted that and now I can't find the post I was referencing nor the name of the person I was talking to.

[skitzer]

This would have been a lot funnier if Lowell was already at L-1 when you did it.

I don't like this statement. If Lowell is town, that wouldn't be funny at all. You sound like you know his alignment.

wall-e, as well, looks bad. He initially states his interest in voting me, but is cautious to do so in fear of looking too eager. Then he votes for me when it's safe. Later, post 221 makes no sense, and he looks eager to go back to a safe wagon. Worse, he did this after I voiced my disagreement with those who considered there to be a white castle "slip." Wall-E was one of these people. So, if he thinks white castle slipped, and is scum, why did he immediately jump on to me and say that I was "clearing people for scum to kill"? I think his heart was never in the white castle wagon.

I was thinking the same thing about Wall-E. I don't like the way he's been jumping on and off wagons, and that very quick vote on White Castle.

Vote: Wall-E

I expect more, generally, all the way around, from skitzer and farside. I've played with them before and nothing about their play here makes me think they care who wins.

I think farside's been acting differently as well, but the way she's doing it doesn't feel bad to me.

Post 44 is a great post.

I'll vote Lowell when we're ready to end the day.

This is post 55.

You seriously don't get how this post shows intentions for voting Lowell?

[Jazzmyn]

What is your point?

The point is that it obviously wasn't a "slip" and it wasn't "awkward".

Notice what I'm doing and follow along.

unvote, vote farside

Something about her play so far makes me think a "oh, sorry I've been out, vote X" bandwagon vote is about to happen. It's not that she's ignoring the thread so much as when she is on the thread, her posts are weak and vague.

While I agree that farside's participation in this game is abysmal, I'm not going to "follow along". She is currently V/LA until Monday so there is little point in voting her up at present. (I recognize that she wasn't V/LA when you posted that, for the record.)

Also @Lowell - your "magic" declaration of skitzer as town remains highly suspicious.

My top suspect is still skitzer. Hopefully he can respond to my suspicions soon. His comment about how farside was joking is strange. <snipped for brevity>
That's three non-joking posts.

Indeed. He is still my top suspect, too, for reasons already stated.

If she was serious, she would still have her vote on Empking.

Why do you continue to assert that farside wasn't serious, when it seems patently obvious that she was?

Hewitt's freaking out over his messed up quote and his unintentional vote for Lowell and his subsequent refusal to unvote was just ridiculous. Sheesh. Would it have killed you to just unvote rather than risk someone being unintentionally lynched? While you were busy whining about not wanting to unvote when the game mod made it clear that you should do so, the guy could have been lynched.

Jazzmyn also used the wiki in this game, and it was an appeal to authority (Tarlhandur's debunked tells), which is a logical fallacy. He did append the reference by saying that he disagreed with the specific tell, but the fact that he used it at all is still AtA.

No, I didn't, and no it wasn't any sort of appeal to authority on my part. I just responded to someone who referred to it to say that I disagreed with it, as I was aware from previous games what it said.

This would have been a lot funnier if Lowell was already at L-1 when you did it.

That's a pretty scummy thing to say.

The point I'm making is that millar follows you [Wall-e]around agreeing with you.

What conclusions, if any, do you draw from that? It's a bit early to be drawing conclusions about scum-pairs, don't you think?

Who, in your opinion, has had my back in this game?

...Who was that question directed at Wall-E?

It seems I was on another page when I posted that and now I can't find the post I was referencing nor the name of the person I was talking to.

Now, this is interesting, and it might just be a slip. Here, it appears that Wall-e was reacting to White Castle's post #262 (just a few posts above), which White Castle directed to Lowell, saying:

Lowell - "Some things that strike me now that I'm actually paying attention" - nice that you've been at L-2 three times and are now just taking this game seriously. Maybe you don't have to worry since your scumbuddies have your back?

Hmm. Wall-e, did you get confused and respond to the "scumbuddies" bit by accident?

Regards,
Jazz

[White Castle]

hewitt, you're really taking this no voting to an extreme. Just unvote for crying out loud.

This would have been a lot funnier if Lowell was already at L-1 when you did it.

A few have commented on the funnier part now, and it was merely sarcasm.

[Wall-E]

How would it be confusion? I thought it was directed at me. Do you honestly think I'm the type of person who would be baited into responding to the word "scumbuddies" like that? I have a bit better of a poker-face than that!

[Jazzmyn]

I thought it was directed at me.

Um, what? Then why did you say that you didn't know what it was about and that you didn't even know what post you were referencing?

Do you honestly think I'm the type of person who would be baited into responding to the word "scumbuddies" like that?

It is quite apparent that you did, in fact, respond to it (no baiting required), and it is also apparent that you later claimed not to know what you were responding to, nor why. So, please explain that.

I have a bit better of a poker-face than that!

Really? In whose opinion? Aren't you the same guy who claims to be the longest-running newbie ever, and who claims to be useless at the game when it suits you to say so? Was that in this game or some other recent game?

Regards,
Jazz