Open 144 - Near-Vanilla - GAME OVER!

[pablito]

My laziness is preventing me. I still haven't through all his defenses.

[Kise]

And on that note guys, I'll be honest and admit that I still have not read the entire thread. I went on V/LA at the end of last month and when I came back, there were just too many pages. With that said, I currently have been going off of D2's activity, and here & there I will iso read anyone who antagonized Cephir (those on his wagon).

If anyone thinks there is something important from D1 that I should go back and check up on, let me know. Otherwise... 36+ pages is a shitload to read and as you can imagine, I really don't have the motivation to look through it all, especially considering I may not live long. So again, if there is anything something would like me to look at, point it out and I'll have a looksie.

[Kise]

So again, if there is anything

something

SOMEONE would like me to look at, point it out and I'll have a looksie.

[MadCrawdad]

And on that note guys, I'll be honest and admit that I still have not read the entire thread. I went on V/LA at the end of last month and when I came back, there were just too many pages. With that said, I currently have been going off of D2's activity, and here & there I will iso read anyone who antagonized Cephir (those on his wagon).

If anyone thinks there is something important from D1 that I should go back and check up on, let me know. Otherwise... 36+ pages is a shitload to read and as you can imagine, I really don't have the motivation to look through it all, especially considering I may not live long. So again, if there is anything something would like me to look at, point it out and I'll have a looksie.

Then how can you possibly be tunneling on Khamisa from D1, as you claim, when now you mention that you haven't even really read through D1?

[pablito]

I was just gonna say the same thing as madcrawdad.

Kise, why don't you think you might last long?

[AndyTony]

My vote is on Al because he hasn't been thinking for himself

Wrong.

To elaborate on what I call "thinking for yourself"

-Having more to go off of than "Whatever he said" *points*
-Doing scumhunting of your own and not having little/nothing to say when MCD isn't doing it for you
-Being incapable of making a list (just like this one) as to why you suspect me to be scum.

and is following a case he doesn't believe

Wrong.

So you believe in the case, but can't tell me what the case IS? lol

gets emotional and angry

Wrong.

You early asked where I got that you were ignorant from.

Please read your own post where you feel a form of communicating is NOT telling me what your case is, what the points are, and responding to me with multiple "wrong. wrong. wrong"

Yeah. You're in a real cheery mood lol

about having to MENTION, and has nothing to say when you're not saying it.

Wrong.

Apologies.

When MCD isn't doing all the work for Al, he is able to say things.

One thing. "Wrong". lol (and "what he said")

He's following the lynch - - he is doing NO scumhunting and was ignorant when I asked him to simply list his reasons.

Wrong. (Seeing a pattern here?) I HAVE listed them. Check post 60 in an isolation read of me.

Okee Dokee....

you made a typo on the post number so I checked 960, 860, 760

I see no list.

Plus, he has a vote on me and you don't.

Excuse me? You're voting me over MCD partly because I'm voting for you and he isn't? That sounds like OMGUS behavior (happy now?).

SCUMMY MISREPRESENTATION

Al - - If we go back and quote fully where you got that text, will it be me telling MCD why I think you have more invested in the "case" than he does, or will it be a reason I voted you?

You've INTENTIONALLY taken that statement and lied.

You've misrepresented me on purpose to make a statement sound like a listed reason I'm voting you. That's scummy.

You even quoted the context in which I said it below!!! lmao

The man believes in your "case" with more passion than you, and he didn't make it, conduct it, or persue it?

I did not make it, but I do pursue it. I don't know how you conduct a case though, what's that supposed to mean?

You didn't build it, and you have NOT persued it. You haven't investigated a single point.

You haven't LISTED a single point since I've asked for them
You haven't INVESTIGATED a single point (becasue they seem to not exist)

hohum: RESPOND TO 843!

That said I have an absolutely horrible habit of tunneling and I'm going to skim through a game and try and second guess myself as much as possible.

If you think

I'm backing off because it's attracting suspicion, fine, I don't care, and I'm fully expecting to get a lot of flak (especially from AT) for flip flopping or wishy washiness

or what have you.

Not going to unvote yet though.

So.

Al,
You refused to give me a quick point list form of the points on me (I wanted to address them all. Only fair, right?)

Your reason for not giving me the points on a "case" for me was....if memory serves...."it would take too much time".

Don't you feel all your posting since then has been hypocritical? Taking so much

time

to have a head to head with me over something as innocent as me wanting to address any points/reasons you're voting me?

You said there was no time (to do something I find reasonable), yet there was time for all this. Hypocritical.

You have decided to flip your attention elsewhere yet won't take a vote off of me?

I'd ask you to explain, but I don't think you have the time.
===============================================
@Al
**
Only Scum vote for people and have NO reasons.
All Townies deserve an opportunity to explain, clarify, and defend.
I am entitled to see a point form/list of all points and evidence against me so that I can address them.

If there is no list - there is no case. Not complicated.
==============================================

@Kise -
Read the game and then give an opinion. This is a text based game.

@Alduskkel -
I was more than fair and reasonable with you, even in my voting post. All I want is to address poins and EVIDENCE on me.

If you have none - that is an issue.

And you cannot just willy nilly say "I already listed them" because you must understand that since you listed MCD's points, I've had discussions and have addressed/clarified things - -

So at THIS TIME - what are your reasons, what is your evidence, what indescrepencies are there, what would you like to investigate with me, where is the list?

These should be easy to answer if you're not scum, Al - - shouldn't people know why they're voting someone?

And THAT is another reason I repeat my cases and let people know where I'm coming from

*thoroughly unimpressed with your manipulation up above with that scummy misleading - -- that was NOT a reason I was voting you, I was telling MCD that it was sad that you had more passion invested in HIS case.
===============================================

MOD

Was there a specific reason for Khamisa to be gone this long? Something msg'd to you?

[Crazy]

MOD
Was there a specific reason for Khamisa to be gone this long? Something msg'd to you?

She didn't state anything specific to me.

[AndyTony]

Alright - - well in post 894, she seems to acknowledge V/LA being unfair if too often and states she'll be gone until this Friday - - I can reserve judgement until then - she could be back.

[Kise]

@MCD - I say I'm tunneling because even after kham acknowledged the fact that she missed Zer0 saying he was brothers with dejkha, I still have a hunch about her.

@pablito - I don't expect to die soon or anything. But I've considered that it could have happened during N1 so I waited until D2 to determine whether it was worth reading the entire thread.. and I still am pretty unmotivated to go back and read page-for-page. I'm doing selective reading at the moment. (the Cephir case)

[MadCrawdad]

@AT

I found something else interesting while re-reading the thread, and am hoping you can clarify...

If you remember back to D1, after you claimed that you had the most concrete case on Ceph based on possible role-fishing, I asked you why you hadn't called OccamR on his possible role-fishing (when Ceph was being pressured about the 'Note to Self')

Scummy..........
fishing for the role. No matter how it gets spun, he knew which words to throw out there to coax Zero to claim and it was scummy and manipulative. There is no doubt in my mind that he hoped a claim would come - - the moment he knew the consequences of fishing for it when I brought it up, he got ansy again.

Vote: Ceph

I feel the suspicions are valid, and my opinion on his scum action is more so concrete than something weak and interpretive - - my vote will stay for now.[/area]

AT, what are your thoughts on OccamR's apparent role fishing from earlier on Day 1 (post 255) below?

It's the same thing. When I talk about it, you'll see why I didn't want to, I promise. I'd like to give a hint or something but then it would probably be obvious. If everyone really insists I'll do it now. It's not as big of a deal as it appears to be, but I'd still rather save it.

Are you talking about a role ability you have?

In your response to me you mention that it was hard to tell whether OccamR was role-fishing or seeking clarification whether Ceph had claimed. You then go ahead and FoS OccamR for possible role-fishing.

I find it hard to tell whether or not he is

fishing

or asking for clarification. At the time that was posted, Ceph was a suspect, so asking for clarification in the sense of "Did you just claim?" (which would aid the suspicion on Ceph) is more so understandable as opposed to "so you're....?".

I feel it would be far too early to pull a stunt like that and a major slip up. We could only really know later (Day 2 later) with more substantial activity and post lynch/nk clarity.

You see, where:

OccamR's post suggests a variable, a 50/50 of "Is he fishing, or is he asking for clarification?"

Ceph has a post where he tries to provoke the very

idea

of claiming to someone who at a time, based on meta, would potentially screw himself over with a scum claim (far more valuable a scum tactic than what OccamR did).

So I would stick with Ceph, "the devil I know" (as in the one with what I feel was a scummier action) and maintain that OccamR's was suspicious. (this is just in my opinion though)

so

Confirm Vote: Ceph
FoS: OccamR

In my response to a question of yours, I mention that I thought it was odd since you found role-fishing to be such 'concrete' evidence for a vote, that you apparently missed OccamR's possible attempt.

I agree that Ceph is a better vote than OccamR. On a few occasions, though, you've pointed out that, in your opinion, you made the 'best' case on Ceph based on possible role-fishing. If that's the case, I'm trying to figure out how OccamR's possible role-fishing made it past you without a word...especially as you've decided to FoS him, since I've brought it to your attention.

In response, you mention that you hadn't really been paying attention, early on, but when brought to your attention that you were certainly interested.

@MCD

It's exactly that - - This game had been moving rather slow and I hadn't given earlier posts proper attention until you pointed that out to me. I didn't miss the post/not read it and then make an opinion on it like Khamisa, but I certainly had an opinion (with the FOS) when you brought it to my attention parallel to Ceph's situation.

But yeah, in light of both, those are my feelings.

So now, on to my questions...

Here's the post where OccamR appears to be possibly role fishing. Ceph is under a lot of pressure at this point to divulge the meaning behind the 'Note to Self,' when OccamR asks if the Note is regarding any role ability of Ceph's.

It's the same thing. When I talk about it, you'll see why I didn't want to, I promise. I'd like to give a hint or something but then it would probably be obvious. If everyone really insists I'll do it now. It's not as big of a deal as it appears to be, but I'd still rather save it.

Are you talking about a role ability you have?

You

then respond to OccamR by saying that 'if it were a role, you would definitely want to know.

If it were a role, that would constitute a big deal, so I definitely want to know.

Ceph, what's the big idea/secret?

A few questions:

1. If it actually were a role that Ceph were talking about, why would you want to know? He probably wouldn't be claiming Scum or VT.
2. Obviously, in hindsight, you thought OccamR's post was possibly scummy. What about your response?
3. How is your interest in Ceph's role different than his in Zero's?

[Alduskkel]

-Being incapable of making a list (just like this one) as to why you suspect me to be scum.

For the last time, I have given a list. Look at my posts IN ISOLATION. Do you know how to do that? You select the option that says to show only my posts. Then check post #60.

Since your entire post rests on your lack of understanding of how to do this one simple thing I'm not going to respond to the rest.

[AndyTony]

@ Alduskkel -

I don't know why you're fighting something fair and simple.

A lot of discussion has occured this day, and between myself and MCD.

In light of this, I would like to know what your present case is - what the points are, what the evdience is, what isn't clear for you.

I'm asking for a list please, so I may fairly clear things up. Surely you'd like to be fair.

I'm assuming that your frantic pointing, and fuss making is an attempt to buy time. I don't think you have a case, sir!
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

@ MCD
Can you please post the numbers of the posts you put together.

I would like to read how they flow, what happened in between, etc. - - that way I can have a better scope on the event and give more concise and clear responses.

In the meantime - your questions (listed. *cough* Al)

1. If it actually were a role that Ceph were talking about, why would you want to know? He probably wouldn't be claiming Scum or VT.
2. Obviously, in hindsight, you thought OccamR's post was possibly scummy. What about your response?
3. How is your interest in Ceph's role different than his in Zero's?

1. My first impression, without having the post numbers and knowing the full context - - is that it was D1.
Someone suggesting that they have special knowledge on D1 as a result of a power role is suspicious and nothing but scummy (seeing as it would take one night for them to gain intel as a pro town power role). Hence, I would want to "know" as in I would want concrete clarification that it was NOT the situation we were dealing with.

Which is what it proved to be. The "note to self" was in my eyes, a null tell and I believe that sentiment was shared by more than just myself.

That being said - - the event with Ceph/Zero was seemingly a scum tactic (you can refer to my take on the event in the very post you quoted).
=======================================
2. I'll need the post numbers, as well as a quote where I say Occamr is probably scummy - - I'm not flat out telling you you're putting words in my mouth, but I remember finding the event "interesting" and worth observing etc. - - - it was worth my attention, hence he earned an FoS.
=======================================
3. I didn't have an interest in Ceph's role. I had an interest in whether he was trying to suggest he HAD a role. It would have been a very foolish scumplay for D1 and I wanted clarification.

Once again, had I known you'd tunnel me, I would have worded it better to save you from more fruitless inference.
========================================

I'll need those post numbers as well as the quote where I say Occamr is scum! Just to be sure you're not putting words in my mouth/lying/manipulating!

After all, a lot of that was said over a span of multiple posts where circumstances change

Cheers! Hope that helped!
......................................................................................................

One last thing!

Occamr had that one time occurance that raised an eyebrow, to which I said

I find it hard to tell whether or not he is

fishing

or asking for clarification.

At the time that was posted, Ceph was a suspect, so asking for clarification in the sense of "Did you just claim?" (which would aid the suspicion on Ceph) is more so understandable as opposed to "so you're....?".

I feel it would be far too early to pull a stunt like that and a major slip up. We could only really know later (Day 2 later) with more substantial activity and post lynch/nk clarity.

You see, where:

OccamR's post suggests a variable, a 50/50 of "Is he fishing, or is he asking for clarification?"

Ceph has a post where he tries to provoke the very

idea

of claiming to someone who at a time, based on meta, would potentially screw himself over with a scum claim (far more valuable a scum tactic than what OccamR did).

So

I would stick with Ceph

, "the devil I know" (as in the one with what I feel was a scummier action)

and maintain that OccamR's was

suspicious.

(this is just in my opinion though)

so

Confirm Vote: Ceph
FoS: OccamR

============
Ceph looked scummier to me, and more concerned about role fishing (IMO) because of this

Post 378

Not only is Zero worthless, it's not like we know for certain that he's town......

I'd like to see a claim at least, personally.

Post 394

Well I didn't mean I wanted him to claim immediately. As in,

I'd like to see him run up to L-1

so that he'll have to claim.

This goes hand in hand with that "note to self" business - - You're bringing things up uneccessarily and saying that you only brought them up because they rely on things to happen

later

.

I'm afraid I can't count what you say in the above as anything less than backtracking. You mentioned a claim because you wanted him to claim - simple as that - - and the time you chose, was rushed and could only benefit scum given Zero's meta

I agree with AndyTony, mainly because I have already claimed to be town.

Right, because obviously when

I said I wanted you to claim

it was because I expected you to claim mafia.

You don't make it easy to trust you when you bounce between wanting something, not wanting something, meaning something seriously, not meaning it seriously - - I cna't see any other way to look at this event other than you were indeed looking for a claim.

Post 396

I said that wrong

given the context of you actually claiming scum on occasion.

It was sarcastic.

Backtracking again, and on this account, you're saying he claims scum "on occasion" when in reality, you know perfectly well that he claims scum when he's pushed, backed into a wall, facing ignorance, etc. - - it's not something he does "on occasion" for the good of his health.

Post 406

I don't get how this is scummy.

Honestly I'd still like to see him run up to a claim.

make up your mind - you can't want a claim and then try to shrug of the responsibility of asking for it - -

-You try to backtrack by saying that you don't want a claim, you want him to be put at L-1 so that he CAN claim
-There is evidence that can be at best used to

suspect

Zero
-That being said, can you please list the evidence you feel warrents putting him a vote away from dying AND wanting him to therein claim his role?

Take responsibility for the things you ask for - you either want the claim, or you don't - - you either want him at L-1 and have to explain why the case is good enough for that - or you don't

But playing both sides of the fence just won't work in the big picture, is all I'm saying

Yeah. I felt Ceph was a more concrete choice (hopefully MCD and the other voters as well! lol) - - and had more issues with "claim" talk and provoking than Occamr.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Don't forget that quote and those post numbers MCD!

[MadCrawdad]

AT, the post numbers are as follows (in the order they appeared):

470
471
502
503
255
256

As far as indicating OccamR's post might be scummy, you FoSed him in post 471. You don't just hand those out to anyone, do you?

Regarding your statement, "Someone suggesting that they have special knowledge on D1 as a result of a power role is suspicious and nothing but scummy (seeing as it would take one night for them to gain intel as a pro town power role). Hence, I would want to "know" as in I would want concrete clarification that it was NOT the situation we were dealing with. "

As Ceph NEVER mentioned anything about his role, wouldn't that be a topic better left untouched at that point?

[AndyTony]

I FoS'd him for the very reason I stated when I did so, MCD - - if it doesn't suit you, I apologize! - - The minimum requirement for an FoS from me is if the person is of interest (something is unclear, suspicious, questionable, not fully understood)

So do you admit you put words in my mouth when you made the comment that I thought he was possibly scummy? Or was it an accident in the wording? - - I'm sensitive to the fact that not everything is worded so carefully in case someone tunnels you!

================================
Also, all those posts went from

255, 266 - - jumped over two hundred posts to - - 470, 471 before ending in the five hundreds.

A lot happens in between there, MCD - unless you feel those were hundreds of unimportant posts. I think you've found another dead end here.
================================

And in your final question (wasn't the easiest to read, but I hope this helps)

- - I wanted the clarification. Not the knowledge of his role.

Ceph ultimately did clarify that, leaving it a one time occurance for Occamr. I felt Ceph palyed with fire too many times when it came to claiming and provocation to Zero (hence the vote).
================================

Hope that clears it up!

Did your re-read from the beginning of this game get comprimised from tunnelling me, or did you find anything else out in another direction?

@MCD -
A list of evidence and points please

@Alduskkel -
A list of evidence and points please

Assuming you would both like to be fair, and also assuming there IS a case here, I'd like the courtesy of addressing these points and pieces of evidence (if they exist)

I'd like to continue being forward, open, and clear!

[AndyTony]

@MCD - I say I'm tunneling because even after kham acknowledged the fact that she missed Zer0 saying he was brothers with dejkha, I still have a hunch about her.

@pablito - I don't expect to die soon or anything. But I've considered that it could have happened during N1 so I waited until D2 to determine whether it was worth reading the entire thread.. and I still am pretty unmotivated to go back and read page-for-page. I'm doing selective reading at the moment. (the Cephir case)

1. Can you better explain the tunnelling, and more so - this "hunch"? Was there something suspicious in specific that occured in the post you mentioned (where Kham said she didn't catch that Zero and Dej were brothers)? - - was something missed

2. Why did you feel you were a probable N1 target?

[Alduskkel]

AndyTony, you need to RTF. Check 881 before saying I haven't given a list.

[Alduskkel]

RTF-->RTFT

[AndyTony]

@ Al

-887 is a previous post. I get that. But whether you're repeating yourself or not, I would like to see a list of evidence and points that you have on me AT PRESENT.

That way I can address them fairly.

I'll address them right now

[AndyTony]

881*

[Zer0ph34r]

I'm not liking Khamisa being gone while she's being talked about. I want to hear her reactions... like now.

[pablito]

eh.

vote: AndyTony

[Kise]

@AT - I say I'm tunneling her because, even though she admits she made a mistake, I still think her reactions toward Zer0 were scummy. I am having a moderate job of letting her off the hook, in other words. Also, it's not that I think I was a highly likely NK target. It's just that I don't know the mafia's MO. They could have NK'd vocal players, or quiet ones like me. I didn't know that but I waited to make sure I would live N1 before deciding whether I would read the thread or not.

[AndyTony]

Let's go with AndyTony

My laziness is preventing me. I still haven't through all his defenses.

eh.

vote: AndyTony

Can you elaborate on your vote?

It seems careless and out of nowhere.

There is no case on me, no evidence, and no unanswered questions.

What I do have, is:

A high profile player tunnelling me with empty pockets (MCD)
A follower who like you, has no points or case, and has nothing to investigate on me (Alduskkel)
And a player that's hungry for a lynch with or without fair treatment/evidence (hohum)

This situation is most opportune for scum - - can you please explain what you have to offer here with that vote?

It seems outlandish and irresponsible for the town's sake for you to drop in, shrug off investigating, make note of your laziness, and "meh" - throw a vote on someone without investigating or having evidence
===================================================

****This is pretty odd. When did voting someone with no case NOT mean they were scum?****
====================================================

@MCD -
Your case points
Your queries
Your evidence against me

@Alduskkel
Your case points
Your queries
Your evidence against me

@Hohum
Your case points
Your queries
Your evidence against me

@Pablito
Your case points
Your queries
Your evidence against me
=====================================================
All points that MCD brought up have been addressed (ahem - Alduskkel....hence I want to know what is PRESENTLY unclear for you).

It is only

fair

that I am able to address what I am accused of and clarify any queries. Otherwise, what the heck are we doing here? A wagon of suspicion my way with nothing to investigate, no evidence, and no points?

....How is this injustice not a problem with the rest of the town?

[AndyTony]

***I stress again - - - A voter is SCUMMY to vote someone with NO case***

I've been nothing but willing to play the game with everyone and answer/ask questions - - this constant denial and refusal to list the case and points clearly only proves me right

[hohum]

You've been ignoring a growing pile of evidence against you for a number of pages now. You either don't get it or don't care. Either way, you need to be lynched.