Mini 773- Welcome to Lynchville! Perfection! (Over)

[hohum]

I've also noticed that since I replaced in and started questioning qwint's motives the two of you have reverted to this weird mode where you're defending each other now.

[qwints]

Hohum, you don't find LK's most recent vote hopping suspicious at all?

[hohum]

Hohum, you don't find LK's most recent vote hopping suspicious at all?

He votes spastically in lots of his games, so while yes it is a tell based on Meta I would have to see a supplemental reason to vote him.

[Light-kun]

...okay. Looks like KK hasn't answered enough today.

Answered what? You (again) haven't asked me any questions.

This is a crap shoot for me. I know I'll look pretty good if KK is scum. But...I am gonna look suckish is KK is town.

Still, I can see the scum...and qwints, more or less, reaffirms that earlier thought.

What does the bolded part mean?

I said earlier that you've answered enough today (to qwints). However, since someone just completely shot down my thoughts on Looker, I moved my attack back to you.

Qwints' case does bring up enough questions that I am reminded of earlier, you might be scum, thoughts I had. So, I am okay going back to voting you.

OK, so light-kun's last four votes are
1) opportunistic - archaist
2) OMGUS - RC
3) opportunistic - archaist
4) a "crap shoot"?

Way too much vote hopping with way too little reasoning.

unvote, vote Light-kun

1 and 3 were not opportunistic. They were opportuistic-bandwagon. Since the second isn't inherently scummy, you are lacking a case. You also fail to prove how OMGUS, particularly this case, is OMGUS. As for your fourth vote, the "Crap shoot" is that KK's alignment should, to others, look to be inverse of my own. Hence that idea. I am slightly worried because, on day 1, I am never sure of scum. No one to reference. Therefore, it is a bit of a crap shoot. (You can't read a single post to understand my play. I reference the rest of the game constantly, especially my own posts.)

Red Coytote:
Archon can't adress my issues with Pie. Also, I said I "should" have moved on to Pie (80 posts ago) because I didn't understand a post by KK.

Also, a role does not = thought process. How could Archon understand Pie's thought process. And when I tried to question Pie, he threw it off like my answers should have been obvious. No one else gave similar thought, so I'm off of that.

Qwints: So...forgetting is impossible? I'm perfect? Wow, I had no idea.

Unvote; Vote Qwints

Why so close minded?

Also: I think "out loud" as Hohum said...Hohum, curiousity, have I had a game with you? Wait...it was a large something with Dejkha right? Too bad it was canceled:

Also, Qwints, I've said very early that while I slightly leaned KK, Pie was also scummy. KK even defended himself and attacked Pie. Their brazen aggression may have been throwing me off, but it was my thought process at the time.

Would be, as you evidently do not know, is a verb tense indicating a past action that was a possibility, but no long can happen due to circumstance.

I've seen (all too often) games where people have replaced in and over-bussed their scum partners.

Strictly out of curiosity, where have you seen this before? The theory is interesting, and I'd like to see it in effect.

[hohum]

we were in open 111 together before it was mod-abandoned. I also spent some time reading some of your other games.

[qwints]

5 of LK's last 7 posts have been votes.

LK do you have a case against me or is it just the fact that you don't like my case?

[ppp973]

ppp973's post has been erased. Please do not post in the thread if you are dead/ no longer in the game.

Votecount coming soon...

[BrianMcQueso]

unvote

I'm buying Archaist's claim. I just wanted to make sure we have all the details so we're clear, and things don't go changing later.

I like this hohum guy. But I don't think you've got the right idea about qwintz. Yes, he laid out a long elaborate case against KK, and then switched to Archaist, but (forgive me for putting words into your mouth, qwintz) I think he suspects both of them.

I'm liking Light-kun less. "Spastic" does seem to be a good word to describe his voting behavior. The latest vote on qwints, which seems to be little more than an OMGUS vote, is concerning at this point in the game. He's not the only one that's had quite a number of vote-switches (Lester and Coyote are the others that come to mind), but considering the rest of his behavior, I could see the motivation to single him out.

Light-kun: Who is your top suspect at this point in the game, and why? You only get one pick, and keep your explanation simple and clear. I know you and your "percentage" system.

[hohum]

unvote

I like this hohum guy. But I don't think you've got the right idea about qwintz. Yes, he laid out a long elaborate case against KK, and then switched to Archaist, but (forgive me for putting words into your mouth, qwintz) I think he suspects both of them.

But he didn't jump ship for archaist. He jumped for LK and proceeded to post some weak justification.

This is in spite of the fact that he made a post highlighting Archaist as his number one target.

There is stark contrast between how he treats Archaist and LK, even though he says he suspects them both.

He won't reiterate the case against archaist sighting the rest of the town's input as his vote justification even though archaist is qwintz' #1 suspect, but he's happy to flood the topic with a weak LK case.

My position is either KK, or qwintz for D1 at this point. I don't like where the LK wagon is heading currently, though I can't completely discount the case against him.

[qwints]

1. ARCHAIST CLAIMED TRACKER. YOU DON'T LYNCH CLAIMED PR'S ON DAY 1 WITHOUT A GREAT REASON.

2. Repeatedly saying I have a weak case is not an argument. My case against LK is that he has twice been significantly inconsistent and that his vote changes have been unjustified and erratic.

3. LK, who I've always thought to be somewhat scummy, joined the KK wagon right after Archaist claimed. This made me nervous about my case against KK (although it might be consistent with scum bussing a partner.)

4. LK's reaction to me voting him was an OMGUS vote. 2 posts and 2 days before he voted me, LK posted

I feel that KK has been answered enough today, though I admit to generally agreeing with Qwints post.

The next post was a vote against KK and the one after that one against me. Admittedly, he did say he thought KK was scum but there was not one hint in his posts of suspecting me until I attacked him. This reaction is scummy.

[BloodCovenent]

I feel that LK has established enough of a pattern as a shifty voter that it can't really be considered a slipup. He has nothing to gain.

You would expect a scum player to be hopping on the cases that have numbers in them. Like KK's for example. But LK abandoned this case for qwints, who really hasn't gotten too high in anyone's scum ratings yet. What would he have to gain from this if scum? It seems to me he is really trying to scum hunt and doesn't quite understand how the zeitgeist uses votes.

Hohum: Did you totally miss the fact that Archaist claimed? That's why everyone has been unvoting him. Do you suspect him to be lying?

Mod-edited to clear up confusion of who this is...

[hohum]

1. ARCHAIST CLAIMED TRACKER. YOU DON'T LYNCH CLAIMED PR'S ON DAY 1 WITHOUT A GREAT REASON.

Correct. But you didn't SAY this when I asked, did you?

2. Repeatedly saying I have a weak case is not an argument. My case against LK is that he has twice been significantly inconsistent and that his vote changes have been unjustified and erratic.

Pot, meet Kettle.

3. LK, who I've always thought to be somewhat scummy, joined the KK wagon right after Archaist claimed. This made me nervous about my case against KK (although it might be consistent with scum bussing a partner.)

I don't follow your logic. Please explain how you reached this conclusion.

4. LK's reaction to me voting him was an OMGUS vote. 2 posts and 2 days before he voted me, LK posted

I feel that KK has been answered enough today, though I admit to generally agreeing with Qwints post.

The next post was a vote against KK and the one after that one against me. Admittedly, he did say he thought KK was scum but there was not one hint in his posts of suspecting me until I attacked him. This reaction is scummy.

I've already given my opinion of his voting habits. I don't like them either, but I think there are better lnych targets.

[hohum]

I didn't miss the fact that he claimed. In games like these guys like LK have a tendency to be lightning rods.

[hohum]

I feel that LK has established enough of a pattern as a shifty voter that it can't really be considered a slipup. He has nothing to gain.

You would expect a scum player to be hopping on the cases that have numbers in them. Like KK's for example. But LK abandoned this case for qwints, who really hasn't gotten too high in anyone's scum ratings yet. What would he have to gain from this if scum? It seems to me he is really trying to scum hunt and doesn't quite understand how the zeitgeist uses votes.

Hohum: Did you totally miss the fact that Archaist claimed? That's why everyone has been unvoting him. Do you suspect him to be lying?

Wait. Why am I answering your questions. Are you even part of this game?

[qwints]

1. ARCHAIST CLAIMED TRACKER. YOU DON'T LYNCH CLAIMED PR'S ON DAY 1 WITHOUT A GREAT REASON.

Correct. But you didn't SAY this when I asked, did you?

While I did not say that explicitly, I did say

. I didn't elaborate on the case [against Archaist as] it had already been effectively laid out, and [Archaist] claimed a PR 3 days after I replaced in.

In other words

Archaist claimed a PR
[You don't press cases against PR's on Day 1] - implied premise
Therefore I didn't elaborate on the Archaist case.

2. Repeatedly saying I have a weak case is not an argument. My case against LK is that he has twice been significantly inconsistent and that his vote changes have been unjustified and erratic.

Pot, meet Kettle.

I've given my reasons for my ONE vote change. LK has something like 7 vote changes, most with minimal or flawed reasoning. The very fact that you admit that "I don't like [LK's voting habits] demonstrates that you believe I've put out a valid reason for my vote. Saying that there are better candidates is not saying that I don't have a valid case.

In conclusion, while I'm not opposed to a KK lynch, LK's last few posts have convinced me he is a better target. I also did not like my company on the KK bandwagon.

[qwints]

Oops, missed a point

3. LK, who I've always thought to be somewhat scummy, joined the KK wagon right after Archaist claimed. This made me nervous about my case against KK (although it might be consistent with scum bussing a partner.)

I don't follow your logic. Please explain how you reached this conclusion.
[/quote]

Scum are more likely to vote for town than their partners unless either they are under severe pressure or their partner is a lost cause. This is not an ironclad tell, but it was enough to change my mind about who the scummiest player was.

[alexhans]

Ok... I haven't really meta'ed Cater and Light but skimmed through 1 game from each so I guess it doesn't really count. I'll do it when I have more time, I guess.

*Shrugs*
I'm having a lazy game due to the timing of it. I really miscalculated real life. Oh well, I'll try my best anyway.

Scum: KK, Archaist (not together)

???: Everyone else.

Unvote: Vote archaist

I feel that KK has been answered enough today, though I admit to generally agreeing with Qwints post.

Which post? He made dozens.... Why can't you be more specific?
You seem to generally agree with the mayority lynch...

Archaist, which of the following best describes your role:

A) You select a player, and then you learn who that player targeted.
or
B) You select a player, and then you learn who targeted that player.

This is very important.

A is a tracker, B is a watcher. I am a tracker. Why is this so important and what do you intend to do with that information?

He was probably testing you.

280: Light-kun... you're just wishy washing your way through the game...
281: QFT
283: Good points about Light-kun's suspicion of Pie/Archon... totally abandoned... And I, too, agree that Chief should state clearly what she thinks instead of just writing what happened.

Hi hohum.

However, qwints seemed to be trying REALLY hard to get KK lynched, then quite suddenly abandoned his case completely in favor of a Light-Kun lynch?

Don't you think Light-kun is wishy-washy?

It's fine to change your mind, or go after different/better lynch targets but the way qwints was posting it sounded like there wasn't a doubt in his mind. In that context abandonment this close to a deadline is a decidedly scummy move.

I certainly don't get that feeling.

Hohum... you seem to be doing exactly the same Qwints did to KK... tunnelling.

LK has totally reversed himself without a good reason twice, both times leading to a vote on KK. He has also vote hopped spasticly as deadline has approached. This seems much like the opportunism he started off saying was scummy.

I agree. LK has been wishy-washy. Unhelpful. Unclear. softly going for a policy lynch.

Geez.. You replaced in in 3 minutes and already you've had time to research my meta? Astounding.

Great Point!

It seems to have come down to a choice between you and LK

Really? You think so? With 5 days to go? Anything can happen.

I've also noticed that since I replaced in and started questioning qwint's motives the two of you have reverted to this weird mode where you're defending each other now.

Is that so? Or are you going for Qwints with not much of a case?

He votes spastically in lots of his games, so while yes it is a tell based on Meta I would have to see a supplemental reason to vote him.

So he can get away with being totally wishy washy because it matches his meta?

Unvote; Vote Qwints

Why so close minded?

WTF man!!! You don't leave people to adjust to a vote that you're already changing it... How is that pro-town? You're just confusing everybody... WHY EXACTLY ARE YOU VOTING FOR HIM?

5 of LK's last 7 posts have been votes.

LK do you have a case against me or is it just the fact that you don't like my case?

So true.... I want to know too...

But he didn't jump ship for archaist. He jumped for LK and proceeded to post some weak justification.

Define weak. I find your vote weak for that matter, and his vote on KK weak too.

WHO THE HELL IS BloodCovenent!!!???

I feel LK is a good lynching choice because he is totally wishy-washy. Ignores questions. Jumps on waggons opportunisticly. Shifts votes according only when other people make cases (this could mean he is easyly influenced). OMGUS on qwints. Doesn't decently explain his vote changes... I'm gonna try and see if he acts like this when he is town but I'm totally willing to lynch him. We'll loose a really anti-town player at worst.

[alexhans]

Farside: Townie. you voted and unvoted the same character several times. Then another one. Both were town.
I was writing each game but accidently undid what I had written.

Anyway, general idea:
Well... It seems you have been wishy washy in at least one other game but that happened after day 1. There's no game where you vote hop so much the first day.
You also seem to unvote several times... One is enough...

@Light-Kun: Why do you think this happened here? Do you feel your gameplay has been diferent from your other games?

[hohum]

Alex,

The notion that 5 days is enough time to COMPLETELY refocus the entire town on a different lynch target is laughable at best. Lots of people with lots of different motives to take into consideration.

Wishy-Washy is definitely what LK is, but that's more anti-town behavior than scummy behavior. Remember that scummy =/= anti-town.

[hohum]

also, since when is farside in this game?

[alexhans]

I meant the farside game he played... it was part of my notes... check LK's wiki...

[alexhans]

EBWOP: Should read: Mini 618: Farside of the Moon by farside22. That's the game I was talking about.

[Kublai Khan]

I've also noticed that since I replaced in and started questioning qwint's motives the two of you have reverted to this weird mode where you're defending each other now.

What? Defending? All I did was point out your hypocrisy!

I said earlier that you've answered enough today (to qwints). However, since someone just completely shot down my thoughts on Looker, I moved my attack back to you.

What attack? All you do is vote for me and repeat that you think I'm scummy (when you're not mistaking me for someone else). And who is "Looker"?

Qwints' case does bring up enough questions that I am reminded of earlier, you might be scum, thoughts I had. So, I am okay going back to voting you.

Oh, right. The same thoughts you never articulated, then recinded under the guise of 'mistaken identity'.

My position is either KK, or qwintz for D1 at this point. I don't like where the LK wagon is heading currently, though I can't completely discount the case against him.

What's your argument against me again? That I'm not playing to my "meta" and that qwintz is "over-bussing his scum partner"? I'm not sure what to make of your accusation-by-proxy technique.

Furthermore, anyone who attacks or defends someone else for reasons of meta is automatically slightly scummy.

[Looker]

i'm not in this game, Light-Kun...

[Light-kun]

5 of LK's last 7 posts have been votes.

LK do you have a case against me or is it just the fact that you don't like my case?

You voted KK with a long and well thought out case. You vote me on something that is meta null. Hence, double standard. I'm voting you for this reason.

Qwints' post 309, point number 3 is invalid.

I didn't miss the fact that he claimed. In games like these guys like LK have a tendency to be lightning rods.

Which is strange too since I've never been lynched except in two games, one I was scum (cult, and found out by cop) and the other as mafia where we calculated my lynch, led by the godfather, would lead to a town win. It was cool. (Both games over).

Alexhans, that was very selective quoting. If Qwints is scum, you're scum.

Farside: Townie. you voted and unvoted the same character several times. Then another one. Both were town.
I was writing each game but accidently undid what I had written.

Anyway, general idea:
Well... It seems you have been wishy washy in at least one other game but that happened after day 1. There's no game where you vote hop so much the first day.
You also seem to unvote several times... One is enough...

@Light-Kun: Why do you think this happened here? Do you feel your gameplay has been diferent from your other games?

It happens in several of my games. I play this way to keep players active and to nullify every usual scum tell. If I were mafia, to beat me, you'd have to follow my meta enough to find scum tells specifically for me. (Or, you'd have to lynch me every game. Whatever works for you.) My game play hasn't changed much, no.

I will admit, however, that the Farside game was my first game (on this site), and the worst recorded game I've ever played. At the very end, I started to realize something, but deadline constraints fucked me a bit.

KK: Archon, not looker (in my OrangePenguin game). They act the same...
I understand your frustration, so I'm not going to hold that against you.

Looker:...Do you just go through games and look to see if your mentioned, wtf?