899 FABLES- THE GRIMMAFIA GAME - The End. Mod Sucks.

[RayFrost]

I really hope you're just sharing your gut feeling and not softclaiming information, because there's hardly enough pressure on Sociopath to make that worthwhile.

It's a gut feeling.

with some meta

[Gerhard Krause]

I take it from this that you have played with Sociopath before,
and his play is consistent with his vanilla townie lore?

[RayFrost]

So far, his play is consistent for town aligned play, whether it is PR or VT is not something I'll answer.

Nice meta-rolefishing, though

[Iecerint]

Check out the game he mentioned. His play here is pretty similar to that. But I also read through another game of his a few months back (it was a theme game with flavor that interested me; I can't remember which one atm), and his play there matches both games, but he was scum. So. I think it's just an SP tell, but RF may know him better than I do.

[RayFrost]

I've played one game with him known as Slicey's Pokemon Mafia.

He was town that was attacked by half the town and half their mothers.

[Iecerint]

K. Then I think it's just an SP tell.

[SocioPath]

Well there is a method to my madness.

I work best at determining alignments when personally attacking people, or they are personally attacking me.

There was a recent MD poll about the subject,
I was one of the very few that picked:
"I'm town, the rest of you are scum until proven otherwise."

But my methods also work hand-in-hand:
when I attack a pot of people,
people generally use that to attack me.
Win/win.

[Gerhard Krause]

Meta-rolefishing?
I'm not sure that even exists as you are wishing.

If you think he is town based on what you've read,
could I not ignore you and go read it instead?

[Mina]

Holy SHIT, this game is fast. The other one I played on this site averaged maybe two posts per day. I'm really sorry for coming so late.

First, could someone unvote, like,

now

? L-2 (L-1 if you count mal's vote) when not everyone has even checked in is ridiculous. I don't like defending people right off the bat, but I agree with kpaca on the two points that seem to have drawn the most contention (that pressuring someone on an RVS vote is more productive than casting a joke vote based on someone's avatar, and faking a posting restriction is a bad idea). Maybe it's worth questioning to see what pops up, but not exactly the damning scummy elephant that everyone's taking it as.

Catching up on what I missed:

Vote: Rayfrost

He doesn't appear to like people being up in his face. I'm feeling contrarian.

Mordy, you still haven't explained this post. Where did you get that impression from RayFrost?

Kpaca, you seem to be favoring fluff
rather than focusing on the important stuff.
PR's and lurking as tells are all well and good
but still focus on the content of posts you should.
Looking at easy targets can be seen as scummy
And relying on others research is tactics for a dummy.
Look at some of your other games I shall
And report back what I find I will.
Being non gendered does not save you from weather
But it does seem like you are trying to avoid rustling feathers.

Okay. Homework. I understand if you don't want to rhyme your explanations, but at the very least, provide quotes showing:

-where kpaca has gone after an easy target.
-where kpaca has avoided rustling feathers (if anything, he's coming across as quite abrasive so far)

Also:
-why you think kpaca asking about other players' game histories is scummy?

Your post isn't substantiating any of your arguments. It sounds like you're just writing a laundry list of suspicious behaviour and pinning them on a popular group target.

If it's because you just have difficulty expressing yourself because of your posting restriction (whether or not it's real)--see, this is also why I agree with kpaca that no one should fake a posting restriction. Remember that the rules say most people, even if they start off vanilla, have some kind of powers that will eventually come into effect. Anyone could be a potential PR, so trying to hide who has a posting restriction doesn't accomplish anything. You help your faction more by being easier to read--and therefore a likelier NK.

You wouldn't necessarily know this, but mal as a player is even more of a lurker than SP. SP at least tends to make good posts when he does post. Mal doesn't participate much at all. (I've only played with him in a Newbie game, so he may have chaned.) But I could see MM doing what he's doing for the same reason that I'm doing what I'm doing.

I've played with Mal before and can second this.

I gave a reason, just because you did not hear it
does not mean I did not say it.
The player on whom my vote is is more suspicious
it does not mean that kpaca is not vicious.

Interesting. Your vote is on malpascp at the moment for voting you for voting the mod

after

voting the mod himself,

in the confirmation phase.

It was pretty obviously a joke. And yet you think that was more suspicious than the player you felt the need to criticize?

What was all that noise about the rhimes? Thats not a valid reason to vote someone. You have no case against the musician guys.

Vote: kpaca

Why do you suspect kpaca?

[MordyS]

I did explain that post, Mina. But if you're still confused, go back and read RayFrost in iso and it'll become immediately clear what I was referring to.

[Mina]

I forgot but didn't need a replace.

Why you up in my face?

Oh. Right. *crawls away sheepishly*

Also just realized that MonkeyMan explained why he left his vote on malp:

Mal never gave a responce.
So he is suspicious for the neauonce.
Also changing a vote requires more scrutiny
than merely placing a vote can be seen as one's duty.

I'm not quite sure what he's trying to say here, but I can interpret it in two ways:
1) He thought malp was suspicious for never responding to MM's original "case" on him in the confirmation stage.
2) He thought malp was suspicious for never responding to MM's random vote.
3) He thought malp was suspicious for lurking.

1) is incorrect, because malpascp immediately explained the joke in the confirmation stage. As for 2) and 3), well, here's the timing of malp's:

MM's post: 2:30 PM

malp's response:: 2:44 PM, fourteen minutes after MM's vote

MM's post FOSsing kpaca: 7:17 PM

So clearly malp didn't ignore the vote on him, and 2) is wrong. And if he's claiming that it was a pressure vote because malp was lurking...well, four and a half hours had elapsed between malp's last vote and MM's decision to FOS kpaca but not move his vote. So why did he leave it on malp, again?

Vote: MonkeyMan

FOS: DragonofSummer and Jazzmyn

. Any thoughts on...well,

anything

?

[Mina]

EBWOP: Um, by "two ways," I mean "three ways." I can count, I swear.

[Iecerint]

I agree with kpaca on the two points that seem to have drawn the most contention (that pressuring someone on an RVS vote is more productive than casting a joke vote based on someone's avatar...).

Did someone make a joke vote based on someone's avatar, or are you just trying to caricature the position that participating in RVS is pro-town?

[Mina]

Yet another EBWOP: I meant "here's the timing of the exchange between MM and malpascp"

Did someone make a joke vote based on someone's avatar, or are you just trying to caricature the position that participating in RVS is pro-town?

No, but GK voted for Jazzmyn because his/her name rhymed with "reason." Do you think that's an example of voting for the person he thinks is most likely to be scum?

Either way, I don't want to waste time with a debate on the usefulness of the RVS. Some people take it seriously, while others just use it as an excuse to have fun. My point is that I see where kpaca is coming from, so I'm not treating his lack of vote as a serious scumtell.

[MonkeyMan576]

I forgot but didn't need a replace.

Why you up in my face?

Oh. Right. *crawls away sheepishly*

Also just realized that MonkeyMan explained why he left his vote on malp:

Mal never gave a responce.
So he is suspicious for the neauonce.
Also changing a vote requires more scrutiny
than merely placing a vote can be seen as one's duty.

I'm not quite sure what he's trying to say here, but I can interpret it in two ways:
1) He thought malp was suspicious for never responding to MM's original "case" on him in the confirmation stage.
2) He thought malp was suspicious for never responding to MM's random vote.
3) He thought malp was suspicious for lurking.

1) is incorrect, because malpascp immediately explained the joke in the confirmation stage. As for 2) and 3), well, here's the timing of malp's:

MM's post: 2:30 PM

malp's response:: 2:44 PM, fourteen minutes after MM's vote

MM's post FOSsing kpaca: 7:17 PM

So clearly malp didn't ignore the vote on him, and 2) is wrong. And if he's claiming that it was a pressure vote because malp was lurking...well, four and a half hours had elapsed between malp's last vote and MM's decision to FOS kpaca but not move his vote. So why did he leave it on malp, again?

Vote: MonkeyMan

FOS: DragonofSummer and Jazzmyn

. Any thoughts on...well,

anything

?

It's quite possible that I was wrong.
I have been known to make a mistake.
But my vote now is not on malp.
So your vote on me is a fake.

[Gerhard Krause]

I am still waiting for MrSauve's reply,
hopefully it will be forthcoming and he won't deny.

[Mina]

It's quite possible that I was wrong.
I have been known to make a mistake.
But my vote now is not on malp.
So your vote on me is a fake.

Whether your vote is still on malp is completely irrelevant. You gave a list of reasons for suspecting a popular target, but didn't move your RVS vote. When pressed, you said it was because you suspected malp more, which is completely ridiculous. When pressed on that, you gave incorrect reasons for suspecting him (although I don't know if it was deliberate or by accident). While all this happened, your vote stayed on malp.

I'm not suddenly less suspicious of you because you changed your vote

after several people had called you on it

to a popular bandwagon. On the contrary, it's another point against you. Clearly your suspicions of malp weren't very serious if you changed your vote after nothing more from him than a quick one-liner. Here's your post:

Kpaca has no meta
he also has no sex
I believe this is an alt
and all one big hex.

He has enough suspicion
and bad karma around to tote
that I should change my vote.


Unvote:
Vote: kpaca

So in other words, you voted for kpaca because you thought he was an alt (which says nothing about his alignment) and because lots of other people were swinging in his direction.

Anyway, if you made a mistake, then could you explain why you suspected malp? Was it 1), 2), or 3)? Did I misinterpret anything you said?

Finally, could you answer the questions I asked you in my first post?

[MonkeyMan576]

I had several reasons for voting kpaca
as post 143 shows.
Why I have to explain this again
God only knows.

I suspected malp because his initial vote was in error,
inconsistant and not fair.
He accused me of voting the mod
when it was part of the rules, not attacking a god.

He then said he himself had voted the mod.
Another inconsistancy so his vote was a fraud.
After analysis Kpaca's sins were far worse.
Hence my changing my vote, not because of others curse.

[MonkeyMan576]

EBWOP: Post 183
not 143

[Iecerint]

Fair enough. But two wrongs don't make a right, etc . Still, I can see where you're coming from.

I think your concern over MM's mal vote is reasonable. I thought he was just doing it because mal hadn't really come in and played the game yet, which I would have found reasonable, but that's not the reason he ultimately gave.

[Gerhard Krause]

am still waiting for MrSauve's reply,
hopefully it will be forthcoming and he won't deny.

Oh! Holy Shit!
I was thinking of the wrong game dammit!

Completely discount my last bit of text,
I was not in this game, but the next.

[MonkeyMan576]

Fair enough. But two wrongs don't make a right, etc . Still, I can see where you're coming from.

I think your concern over MM's mal vote is reasonable. I thought he was just doing it because mal hadn't really come in and played the game yet, which I would have found reasonable, but that's not the reason he ultimately gave.

Are you saying my reason's not a good one?
Because voting someone for following the rules is not good fun.

[Iecerint]

This is how it happened:

Mal votes Mod.
MM voes Mod.
Mal votes MM, saying LOL DUN VOTE THE MOD BRO.
MM FoS's Mal.

The game starts.

MM votes Mal for "nonrandom voting in an unreasoned fashion."
Mal OMGUS votes MM.

As I read it originally, all of that was a joke except for Mal's OMGUS vote, which read a tad scummy. (The bit where he called you out for voting the Mod was almost certainly a joke; he'd already done so.) Then I figured you were keeping your vote on Mal because you wanted to hear more out of him. But you were really voting him for the Mod-voting joke?

[MonkeyMan576]

This is how it happened:

Mal votes Mod.
MM voes Mod.
Mal votes MM, saying LOL DUN VOTE THE MOD BRO.
MM FoS's Mal.

The game starts.

MM votes Mal for "nonrandom voting in an unreasoned fashion."
Mal OMGUS votes MM.

As I read it originally, all of that was a joke except for Mal's OMGUS vote, which read a tad scummy. (The bit where he called you out for voting the Mod was almost certainly a joke; he'd already done so.) Then I figured you were keeping your vote on Mal because you wanted to hear more out of him. But you were really voting him for the Mod-voting joke?

Not because it was a joke, but because it was inconsistant.
He didn't mention everyone else who had done it.
Picking and choosing your argument can be seen as scummy.
Especially later on when the results aren't so funny.

[Iecerint]

Those first 4 posts I listed are the firsts 4 non-Mod posts in the game. There was no one else who had done it yet. Or did you mean something else?