Open 160 Bird 7P (GAME!) - before 823

[VP Baltar]

Still, my vote rests on Charnel because I want to know why he tried to ask for a lynch on someone else when he's under some pressure himself. I think he was in no position to do that.

This is a horrible reason to be voting someone.

Unvote, Vote: BloodCovenant

I'm fine with this. If anyone else is thinking about voting you, you need to claim.

[Octupis]

@all: If you vote or unvote, can you put it at or near the end of your posts on a separate line?

Will do, I apoligise for the confusion I have caused.

Still, my vote rests on Charnel because I want to know why he tried to ask for a lynch on someone else when he's under some pressure himself. I think he was in no position to do that.

This is a horrible reason to be voting someone.

Unvote, Vote: BloodCovenant

I'm fine with this. If anyone else is thinking about voting you, you need to claim.

I think BloodCoovenent is now at L-1. Wouldn't it a good idea for him to claim now?

[hohum]

Don't apologize. You actually may have done us a favor with that ninja-unvote

[hohum]

@BloodCovenant: I know you're alive. I see you posting. Care to claim?

[VP Baltar]

I think BloodCoovenent is now at L-1. Wouldn't it a good idea for him to claim now?

Depends on if the town actually wants to lynch him at this point or not. I personally feel it is a decent choice for the day, but if the wagon doesn't have support to follow through we might not want to force a claim just yet. So, do you think BC should be lynched today?

[muzzz]

@BC:
- Where did Hohum insist that you would "fuck up" in the future? Because I didn't see that. Which makes 164 look like a really,

really

bad stretch.
- How is the last line of 136 a scumslip?
- You really did say "your [sic] so gay".

@Yabba: I agree with Baltar. The alternative would be for Charnel to do nothing but defend himself. Now

that

is a reason to lynch people.

[yabbaguy]

@Baltar+muzzz: I'm still confused. Do you not find it scummy Charnel did that?

@hohum: Why did you say "lynch BC or lynch me"?

[hohum]

@hohum: Why did you say "lynch BC or lynch me"?

I don't like ultimatums but in this case I feel it's necessary to draw a line in the sand.

He's obvscum. He isn't even good scum, because he's trying to pull case on me out of thin air. Instead of concentrating on my Charnel vote (which he should have done), he's quibbling over the meaning of a few hastily typed words.

[VP Baltar]

@Baltar+muzzz: I'm still confused. Do you not find it scummy Charnel did that?

You're going to have to be more specific than "that". What are you refering to?

[yabbaguy]

@VP-183: "That" = saying "Can I have a lynch please" when he's under pressure.

[mykonian]

@all: If you vote or unvote, can you put it at or near the end of your posts on a separate line?

no sorry, I won't. Being that the point you will likely read, I want to be able to place it where I want, to make you read my posts better.

Still, my vote rests on Charnel because I want to know why he tried to ask for a lynch on someone else when he's under some pressure himself. I think he was in no position to do that. I'd rather have him over BC at present.

I was more then annoyed by octupis his case, something that was blatantly following VP, plus he called me a lurker, something I try not to be, in any way, and seriously: I haven't only made fluff posts. I try not to swear, and this was my way of outing how strong I felt about it.

@Charnel-131: I'm saying the link *between* you and VP as specifically a scumpair wasn't there. I really, really don't get how that even relates to me being scummy.

I misread your post, sorry. Thought you had 2 people you suspected, but couldn;t be scum together.

Why do you think I went on about keeping a level head and cool emotions? You're a living example. If your sanity is lost, you completely lose sight of the game.

qft. I might be wrong with octupis (his unvote prevented my lynch, and that has to count for something, he could easily have waited, although it shows he is careful.) In conclusion:

unvote vote muzzz

back to my first suspect, since octupis didn't have to unvote, but prevented a mislynch.

[Charnel]

whaaaaaaaaa

ok. Unconcentrated posting kills me. Hohum here is your proof.

[BloodCovenent]

@BC:
- Where did Hohum insist that you would "fuck up" in the future? Because I didn't see that. Which makes 164 look like a really,

really

bad stretch.
- How is the last line of 136 a scumslip?
- You really did say "your [sic] so gay".

- Note the wording "subconsciously." And, other things that I'm not allowed to mention, but you would just have to take my word for it.
- Post 136 -

@Baltar: You fucked up dude. You shouldn't have said anything. I would have gone right on blissfully trying to lynch Yabba or BC.

- Post 144 -

i was doing so well too.

-Gay was referring to his behavior.

I'm voting based on my well-documented case against him, but also because he's useless. He's going to be an automatic policy lynch for me in the future, though.

your case is full of holes.

back to my first suspect, since octupis didn't have to unvote,

but prevented a mislynch.

wait.. who are you?

and second...

you know for a fact that it prevented a mislynch?

Unvote
Vote: mykonian?

[muzzz]

@Yabba: no, of course not. Trying to get people lynched is pro-town.

@BC:
- Sorry, not taking your word for that. And "subconciously" is scumspeak for "he didn't really mean it that way but I

want

him to".
- I asked "how is that scummy?" Not "could you please quote that post again?"
- What you said referred to him, not his behavior. You want us to believe that what you meant was less bad than what you actually said. Yet at the same time you want us to believe that what Hohum meant was actually worse than what he said. This is the worst kind of hypocrisy.
- Mykonian = Charnel. He knows it's a mislynch

because he was talking about his own lynch

! Pay attention, please.

---

I forgot to mention this earlier. In my experience, quick-lynching/-hammering is a towntell.

---

BC's had his chance to claim. Can we lynch him now?

[BloodCovenent]

You want my claim. fine. I'm the doc.

I didn't realize that Mykonian was charnel.

Unvote
Vote: Hohum.

back to my earlier case.

[yabbaguy]

Badaboom. We have a docclaim.

[quote=""Charkonian"-185"]no sorry, I won't. Being that the point you will likely read, I want to be able to place it where I want, to make you read my posts better.[/quote]

False. If anything, seeing a vote will make me read a post even more intensely to figure out the reasoning.

Hiding your vote is anti-town. It confuses people, and I don't see how any good can be intended out of it. You're also saying that you're doing this for a selfish purpose, so that people understand you better. Selfishness is also anti-town.

@muzzz-188: But the fact of the matter is that Charnel was *under pressure* whilst popping the question. I agree a lynch could come soon, but the fact that someone who's being pressed is asking the question sounds like Scum trying to accelerate the Day. (Scum love a short Day.)

Maybe he wasn't under as much pressure as I thought? I dunno.

@BC-189: Your way of approaching your role is very puzzling. You start the game with a shock, by voting No Lynch. And throughout the game, you have been tripping wires, drawing cases out of thin air, and flailing around with your vote, like on Charnel- oh nvm- hohum.

I can't see how you're a Doc. I envision the Doc to be a more low-lying person, not necessarily faithfully pro-town because a nightkill would be bad, but just being a little more subtle so that the attention is

@all: If a counterclaim exists, would you vouch for it? If it were me, I'd err on the safe side and have the doc counterclaim, simply because it's (barring a docsave) LyLo if we blow it here.

[muzzz]

People understanding each other better is incredibly pro-town.

I expect suspicious townies to keep trying to lynch scum, even if they start getting votes. I find the opposite (neglecting to scumhunt while under pressure) much scummier.

I suck at numbers and game theory, so I have no idea if it's a good for a hypo-real-doc to counterclaim. But I'm making a policy unvote until everyone has had a chance to have their say about the matter.

Unvote

[mykonian]

Badaboom. We have a docclaim.

[quote=""Charkonian"-185"]no sorry, I won't. Being that the point you will likely read, I want to be able to place it where I want, to make you read my posts better.

False. If anything, seeing a vote will make me read a post even more intensely to figure out the reasoning.[/quote]

yes, and that is what I need. So if I have two messages, one my reason for the vote, and one perhaps defensive, and I want both to be read, I can use my vote for that reason, knowing you will read my post. Simply a matter of getting your points across.

Hiding your vote is anti-town. It confuses people, and I don't see how any good can be intended out of it. You're also saying that you're doing this for a selfish purpose, so that people understand you better. Selfishness is also anti-town.

here is somebody actively trying to make a case out of nothing.

Bolding, not one of my favorite ways of getting attention, is a good thing to get it, it only makes you post more chaotic. Bolding in a vote is needed anyway, so why not use it?

unvote vote Yabba.

You annoy me greatly by trying to put pressure on me by saying I can not say somebody is scummy when at L-1. It is simply not scummy, and there is nothing wrong with it. Now towny would even think it was scummy, because:

or, I was scum, and they don't need to listen, but get the information. (distancing, etc)
or I was town, and I was trying to help the town.

@all: If a counterclaim exists, would you vouch for it? If it were me, I'd err on the safe side and have the doc counterclaim, simply because it's (barring a docsave) LyLo if we blow it here.

if it is you, please counterclaim. I still don't believe in this whole BC scumtheory, he is just an easy target. I think his wagon is scumdriven.

[Charnel]

it seems to be getting my hobby.

FoS VP baltar

btw. You have an odd way of being on both great wagons, that both lead to L-1, or almost further, without getting noticed a lot. You "were fine" with the lynch on BC. You misread, or twisted the "newby card point" something that was in context an attack on someone treating me that way. But you didn't vote for that... no, you voted me because I thought yabba scummy for his defence against Hohum

that wasn't serious!

I could totally see a yabba-VP scumpair.

[yabbaguy]

@Charkonian-192: But if you hide your vote, it runs the risk of getting overlooked. How can that possibly have deliberate intent of helping the town?

I also don't see why you're putting the whole "split your messages" deal in here...

You voted for me because you're *annoyed* at me? I think that's how we define OMGUS.

Also, we could very well both be town just with different opinions. I am not deliberately giving wrong information with scummy intent. I gut-honestly believe that anyone trying to rush the Day when they stand to benefit from it is worth a mention. To say I'm stretching the truth is false. This is gut-honest truth. You're trying to end the Day, and yet you stand to individually benefit, seeing as you were under pressure.

@muzzz-191: I accused scumspects of "not playing the same game as the rest of us" constantly last game I played. Having constant suspicions is pro-town, but the fact that he "ordered the lynch" is a request I would gladly deny, seeing as he could very well be scum standing to benefit from having his lynch prolonged a Day.

Bird is basically a best-of-three. Scum can afford to lose one person, and most often, town can afford to mislynch only once. Whoever "loses" Day 1 (by having one of their own lynched) is at a serious disadvantage, seeing as they have to be flawless the next two Days.

Townies don't have an interest in trying to stop the Day because a) they want more discussion to happen and b) seeing as they're uninformed, if they try to ask for a lynch on another Townie, they run a high risk of getting lynched next day for leading a town lynch, causing them to lose. Scum can get away with this, because their loss isn't immediate. At worst, the game goes to MyLo/LyLo and nothing's really changed.

back to Charnel: In terms of pressing me for my counterclaim, I'll wait. If we mostly agree to go counterclaim hunting, I will go along with it.

I forgot to mention this earlier. In my experience, quick-lynching/-hammering is a towntell.

Why. muzzz?

[VP Baltar]

@VP-183: "That" = saying "Can I have a lynch please" when he's under pressure

Not necessarily. Even when one is under pressure you should still continue to scumhunt if you are town.

(his unvote prevented my lynch, and that has to count for something

Why is that? He didn't unvote because he knew hohum was going to try and hammer.

ok. Unconcentrated posting kills me. Hohum here is your proof.

I'll give you a tip for whatever new alt you create: use your watched topics folder. That way you'll never accidentally post in the wrong game.

In my experience, quick-lynching/-hammering is a towntell.

Unless you are an alt as well, I'd say your experience is limited an inaccurate. I have quick hammered as scum and got away with it. Why do you think it is a town tell?

You want my claim. fine. I'm the doc.

If BC is not the real doc, the real one should counterclaim him now. Catching scum > losing our doc tonight. Did you breadcrumb your role at all BC?

Oh, I see that yabba beat me to it:

@all: If a counterclaim exists, would you vouch for it? If it were me, I'd err on the safe side and have the doc counterclaim, simply because it's (barring a docsave) LyLo if we blow it here.

I will start, I am

not

the doc.

I could totally see a yabba-VP scumpair.

You're certainly thrashing about quite a lot. Pending a counter doc claim and a votecount, I'm ready to put my vote back on you.

Unvote

for now.

In terms of pressing me for my counterclaim, I'll wait. If we mostly agree to go counterclaim hunting, I will go along with it.

Huh? If you are the doc, claim now please.

[yabbaguy]

@Baltar-195: Did you read my chain of logic in 194, the "Bird is a best-of-three" point? Tell me what you think.

I was just making sure I wasn't going to annoy the town if for whatever reason people objected to having the doc counterclaim. Should I assume in the future that a counterclaim should happen by default no matter what?

Seeing as you started the process, let's do this. I'm not doc either.

BC >>> YES
Baltar >>> NO
yabb >>> NO

Passionate Plea: Last game I played, the doc REFUSED to counterclaim, even though the town mutually agreed it was the right thing. This led to disaster and his eventual game-ending lynch.

Don't be that guy. Please claim if you're it.

[hohum]

He isn't the doc. I assure you he's lying. Lynch him please.

[hohum]

Yabba: stop role fishing scum.

[VP Baltar]

@Baltar-195: Did you read my chain of logic in 194, the "Bird is a best-of-three" point? Tell me what you think.

Yeah, but that is the worst case scenario for this setup. A number of factors (such as doc protection) could change the outcome and layout of the days following today. Furthermore mislynching today isn't the complete disaster you describe, as it narrows the pool of potential suspects tomorrow. Yes, we would have to be absolutely correct tomorrow, but the odds of hitting scum also increase dramatically.

He isn't the doc. I assure you he's lying. Lynch him please.

You worth trusting here? I'm not so sure.