Cereal Killers - Mini 1027 (Game Over)

[xvart]

/confirm.

xvart.

[xvart]

My first order as the Cap'n, I will make the cereal easier to eat than cubed sandpaper. You may thank me later.

I will thank you now. You should also do something about the thick sludge called milk after eating all of the cereal. kthxbye.

xvart.

[xvart]

That is why there is a question mark. I ask the question(that you have not answered, first sign of being scum), and your job is to answer it. In the mean time I assume an answer. You know guilty until proven otherwise.(I think that is how it goes). So are you going to tell me what it means?

Overreact much? Over a Korean smiley face none the less? Hmmm...

xvart.

[xvart]

Hello people!!
Rvs ring any bells to anyone?

Huh? So now you are saying your overreaction was simply RVS shenanigans?

You know a game is going to be entertaining when confirmation stage feels like a part of the game instead of just "waiting before the game starts".

Yes. Agreed.

xvart.

[xvart]

xvart-Reaction?

Oh, now I see. So now your post 14 was a complicated plot to get a reaction vote by overreacting to something so stupid and meaningless and accusing him of dodging your questions about the Korean smiley face? If that is the case, what reaction were you expecting? And, more importantly, what about his reaction made you think he was not scum (I assume since you promptly unvoted him)?

Also,

Daykill: charter

Last time I played with you was Second String Muppets. You were so confusing...

Why is this attribute daykill worthy? Was charter scum in the game where he was "so confusing"? Did his confusion cost you the game? And why did you feel it necessary to do this immediately? I will be voting you after the next votecount if charter does not die.

SSBF, xvart, Xscorpion, hiphop, Kirbyoshi, and Sawyer. Why did none of you comment on how Robocopter voted himself?

Robocopter, why shouldn't we lynch you right now?

Because as annoying as it may be, I find self voting on the first page to have no association with alignment unless there is a comment to go along with it about lynching obvscum, etc.

xvart.

[xvart]

I will be voting you after the next votecount if charter does not die.

Why would you only do that if he doesn't die?

Because if he did die then obviously the daykill ability was not fake and I would have a hard time believing that scum would have a daytime kill in a 12 person mini game. Is there a reason I should vote him if Charter dies? If so, what is that reason? Of course, now that the moderator has written flavor about it I'm not sure what to think.

xvart.

[xvart]

@xvart I was mostly asking why would you vote him if Charter didn't die? What would that have meant to you?

Oh, gotcha. It would have appeared to be a poorly executed gambit, and executed in such a way that I would intend to believe that it was scum just trying to score town points by doing the old "fake daykill gambit" and doing a terrible job at it.

xvart.

[xvart]

However, xvart's reaction in particular bothers me. Usually, I consider people overreacting to fake daykill attempt a null tell, as it is common for people to overreact to them. However, I make an exception to this rule with xvart's comment regarding the fake daykill attempt. I find the below quote scummy:

I will be voting you after the next votecount if charter does not die.

When you go as far as to say you'll vote him after the next votecount if a person doesn't die due to a fake daykill atttempt, this is not something I like. I don't see how an obviously fake daykill attempt is scummy at all, let alone worthy of a vote. I will be keeping a close eye on you throughout this game.

My point was that there is zero town motivation to fake a daykill in the confirmation stage of the game. If it is, indeed, a fake daykill it was poorly orchestrated and even more poorly executed. The point of a fake daykill is to get a reaction from the person being "killed" and hopefully get him/her to confess or spill additional information. On the other hand, now scum do fake day kills to score town points because of the original nature of the gambit. When I saw the daykill the thing that first came to mind, given the context and timing was an overeager, poor planning scum member saying "

I did the fake daykill gambit. Look how town I am

" since I can't think of any other reason for a town member to do it (well actually I can think of one but it still would have garnered a similar action by me, and I'll reveal that after we hear from hiphop).

But if he couldn't really daykill, there would have been nothing to gain as no one would have died.

As scum, he could have thought he was gaining town points.

Basically what I'm saying is, if Kirby was attempting a gambit, he would've been found out right away and it most likely would've only hurt him. So I see no reason to think someone would even attempt that gambit right now, let alone when it would likely only have negative effects toward him.

Exactly. If it was a gambit, it did hurt him. Can you think of any reason a pro-town member would fake daykill on the second page during the confirmation stage? Since I really can't, that means if the daykill was fake, it is more likely to be scum motivated.

xvart.

[xvart]

Why are you so narrow-minded?

That's my MO. I tend to focus on one person and beat on them until I get a lynch or am convinced otherwise.

The votecount has already come by, charter is still alive, and you've made three posts so far after that votecount. Yet no vote on Kirbyoshi coming from you. Pretty interested in why you're still holding your vote, especially after you've explained a few times why you found Kirbyoshi's fake daykill attempt scummy.

Yes, I suppose I was a little hasty in my comment and did overreact a tad. I don't think my vote on Kirby is necessary at this point. The reason I didn't immediately vote like I said was because there was the mod's flavor in the vote count, which confused me. I couldn't determine if it was actual game/ability related flavor or the mod writing flavor about the events that had occurred regardless of any truth to the actions. The point about the joke is well taken, and that is what I alluded to when I said there was an alternative that I would consider. Typically I would still vote for something like this because I vote for things that I do not see town motivation behind; and a joke like that could be considered such.

Sounds a bit like rolefishing here. Why are you asking Kirbyoshi if he was a dayvig or not?

Because I wanted to know if Kirby was actually told by the mod "you are a dayvig." If he was, then he's pretty obv. town.

Why don't you just ask if he is a cop, or a doctor, or some other role? That might make him pretty obv town, right?

Guys, I am 99% sure that XScorpion is scum.

I've already identified three townies.

The rest of you are making this very difficult to figure out who his buddies are (except Sawyer, who is making it very easy to see he is scum).

Actually, it's

probably

SSBF with his whole "There is definently an overreaction to Kirbyoshi's fake daykill attempt. I knew this wasn't serious, so I saw no point in making a negative reaction to it." speech.

XScorpion, Sawyer, and SSBF, what is your opinion of the other two?

Seriously? You have already identified three townies? Wow you are good. How certain are you with these reads on page three? What's the margin of error? Also, I guess we should all apologize for interrupting your scum relationship hunting. It's a little too early to be building scum teams, don't you think?

Sure I can understand xvart's reason, but I'm still not convinced that Kirbyoshi is scummy. If Kirbyoshi was serious about daykilling someone, he would have done it later in the game and someone he's convinced that person is scum. As a result, as I think it's a null/slight town tell, I will not fake a negative reaction just to blend in the crowd.

That was my point; the timing was so off.

I didn't say I think he's town. I said I don't think he's scum. I don't have much of a read on him one way or the other.

This is pretty close to backpeddling in the same sentence. You said he wasn't scum, but you don't have a read on him? If he's not scum, like you said, then what could he be?

Charter: what was it in SSBF's and Sawyer's last posts that makes you feel better about them? You don't give any indication of feeling better about Sawyer anywhere except your next to last statement, and I'm curious about the turnaround.

Agreed.

VOTE: Xscorp

Care to elaborate or is this just a blatant shameless bandwagon vote?

Jenniwren is shaping up nicely for the slot of lurkerscum, we'll have to see how that pans out as time goes by. Actually, now that I actually read her post 53, I believe we've got another scum hooked.

How so? What is scummy about 53? You like to point fingers a lot, don't you? Do you think pointing fingers and making up scum teams makes you look town? It doesn't.

Don't really understand what you mean about Dramonic posting though...

And the this is relevant how? Why should the rest of us care about Dramonic's posting in another game?

Due to his finger pointing, scum team implications, and mysterious town reads, I'm ready to vote.

VOTE: Charter

xvart.

[xvart]

No. I didn't even say who I had the reads on.

That's why I called them "mysterious town reads." The fact that you speak so definitively is where my concern lies. You said you had already identified three town; not that you had town reads or three likely townies; but you had

identified

three unnamed townies.

It's never too early to hunt for scumteams. If you're going to try and discredit my arguments by saying I'm scum because I'm looking for scumteams so soon, you're going to have to do a whole heck of a lot better job.

I'm not trying to discredit anything. The way your posts read, though, is that you are putting a lot more stock into your town reads and scum teams than I think is appropriate at this stage in the game. Either that, or you are simply trying to appear to be scumhunting because of your definitive town identification and 99% scum read. And, it can be too early to hunt for scumteams. You don't even know for 100% certainty that your number one scum pick is actually scum. Building from that can be disastrous and can also be distracting.

Xvart, do you see a difference in how XScorpion responded to me calling him scum versus how Sawyer or SSBF responded?

You might have to be more specific in which responses to which you are referring. I don't even see where Sawyer responded directly to you calling him scum. But SSBF's and XScorp's responses are as follows:

So...why are you 99% sure I'm scum?

Not seeing how that's enough to make me a worthy lynch candidate.

Both responses look fairly similar to me, asking you to explain how they are so obviously scum. What am I missing with your question?

I also found this little gem when looking for those responses. What was the purpose of this question? Were you trying to cast a small amount of suspicion on everyone on your list for not commenting on the self vote? Why did you never follow up on it? Obviously you thought there was something to it or else you wouldn't have asked us about it.

------------

@xvart: Your response to my question is fair enough, when looking over it. However, we should all keep in mind that this is adversite as a "non-serious theme" in the sign-up thread, so it'll be especially difficult to differentiate between actual game-related/item-related flavor or just plain flavor.

Good point about flavor. I had forgotten about the post in the sign-up thread.

------------

Now you never answered my question-reaction? You said overreacted. To do that i would have to react. And then i would have had to act against or opposition too. Which I have not. If anything I acted first and everybody reacted to me. So, reaction?

I think we both know that I was not referring to you asking about the T_T being overreaction. I was referring to this response where you seemed to go off the deep end over something so trivial and minor.

xvart-Reaction?

Oh, now I see. So now your post 14 was a complicated plot to get a reaction vote by overreacting to something so stupid and meaningless and accusing him of dodging your questions about the Korean smiley face? If that is the case, what reaction were you expecting? And, more importantly, what about his reaction made you think he was not scum (I assume since you promptly unvoted him)?

In the words of captain jack sparrow, "Now you're not making any sense at all. " The first question is no, which of course means that the next two questions are voided, because they are only asked if the first question is a yes, which of course it is not. Accusing him of not answering a question was the same type of post as me saying the tears(what google said it was) was tnt.

Then apparently I was confused by your lengthy post answering my question about your overreaction by simply saying "xvart-reaction?" I thought you were saying that your overreaction was actually fishing for a reaction.

xvartWhat is the difference between charter being scum to xscorpion?

The only concern I have about Xscorp is his rolefishing. Oh, and his and robocopter's back and forth about some other game was mildly annoying, but that doesn't tell me anything about alignment.

Seriously after reading this post it was obv that the mod was playing along.

It was really that obvious? It couldn't possibly be because the target was bulletproof?

What is the difference between the mod ignoring the point and the mod responding like he did? And don't come back and say the timing was off for the vig-kill, like you said in iso 8, when truly at the time you didn't believe any such thing. Did you not say that a fake day-vig is scummy? It was a fake day vig. Looks a lot like back pedaling to me.

The difference is that if the mod had not said anything at all and continued with the game it would have obviously been fake. Since something was said, it made me question it. And I did not say that fake day vigging is scummy. I said that in the context of this situation it would be more indicative of a hasty and over eager scum than town.

xvart.

[xvart]

Ok, so Kirby says it was a fake daykill, charter is still alive and you would typically "still vote for something like that"? Well, what were you waiting for? You say a vote is unnecessary at this point, but give no reason why. All you did in that paragraph was continue to say why you should've voted Kirby... yet, you never did.

Kirby didn't say it was a fake daykill until much, much later. As you may recall, when I responded to you originally in post 44 I said that I didn't know what to think now that the mod had written the flavor that he did. Also, the reason I'm not voting for something that I normally would; I've found Charter to be scummy enough to garner my vote over something I would normally vote and prod on in the first few pages.

And, I wasn't explaining why I should have voted Kirby; I was explaining my reasoning why I was going to vote him if events transpired a certain way; which they did not.

xvart.

[xvart]

Look I am not going to argue whether I overeacted, undereacted, or just gave people something to talk anout, what I want to know is does that make me scum? If not why are you making pure noise?

Because you

immediately

tried to cast suspicion on XScorp for not answering your question (over a T_T? Really?).

You just gave one of the biggest scumtells and act like it is nothing. What has charter really done that has counter this scumtell?

Then we will have to disagree about the magnitude of rolefishing as a scumtell. I don't believe scum would be so blatantly obvious about role fishing. Of the top of my head, I recall town flipping more for obvious rolefishing than scum. If his rolefishing was more subtle or less transparent and if I felt he had more of a case I would probably be voting for him. To answer your question directly: I do not think obvious rolefishing is a better vote than the one I have currently.

With a fruitloop? Sure like that will pass. I throw a fruitloop at you, I wonder if you will die.

I've never played a game where the moderator openly comments on conversations in the game, and the ridiculous nature of the flavor is what made me pause.

It was fake. Therefore a vote was in order, yet you come back and say no, why? Anyone here say that the bolded is not saying something is scummy? In fact I would go and say that he is saying it is a scumtell, just with more words. So why do you not vote? Anyone ever heard of lynch all liars?

Are you suggesting that XScorp should be lynched because he lied about the vig kill? Or I should be lynched because I said I would do something and never did? Is that your case? I can understand your point, because I am a pretty literal player; but this is reaching after I have explained and you keep going back to the original post. Have events never transpired that have changed your plans?

xvart.

[xvart]

Note: This post is a little sloppy and I'm sure I've missed some things as I took a break in the middle, but I want to get it out there quickly in case robo gets modkilled and the day ends.

Xvart

- I'm pretty sure he isn't a newb but thats the way he's acting. Going NewbTown with this guy.

lulz. As Vanilla Townie I have a pretty high N1 kill rate, which I'm pretty proud of, so I'm not newbtown.

------------

Most Likely Scum Team Day One:

OMG. Can we please stop with the definitive scumteam hypothesizing on D1? It is not helpful. Passing comments about possible links are fine; but stating three man scum teams so early in the game is detrimental as with no flips (especially early game) stating scum teams will only distract you or you will read the game with that mindset and your reads will be off because whatever you see will probably just reinforce that notion. Trust me, I know.

I wasn't even on his radar until I questioned him. He didn't bother to answer the question first, but instead declared his intent to go after me. He didn't vote for me, but he said

Jenniwren is shaping up nicely for the slot of lurkerscum, we'll have to see how that pans out as time goes by. Actually, now that I actually read her post 53, I believe we've got another scum hooked."

No explanation, nothing. That quote reads as though he is looking for a reason and a way to justify a future vote on me, and that he hadn't even actually read what I wrote before deciding this.

Exactly; although I think the point about him setting up future vote might be valid, I think it is more the false appearance of scumhunting by all these half comments about people or nonsensical mysterioso comments about people will somehow dupe everyone into thinking he is actually scumhunting. Just because you throw a lot of names around does not make you town. In fact, I might go back through and find all the subtle comments about someone being scummy with no follow through, no evidence, etc.

------------

The only concern I have about Xscorp is his rolefishing. Oh, and his and robocopter's back and forth about some other game was mildly annoying, but that doesn't tell me anything about alignment.

So his weak defense, parroting, and hypocrisy aren't something you should be concerned about?

1. re: parrotting
   - is this what you are considering parrotting:

   I dunno, because Xvart said he would vote for Kirby if Kirby's daykill was fake? That seems like the right reason.

   Parroting much? This is also hypocritical of you because you attacked charter for parroting me about rolefishing.

   Because I don't see how answering an question about someone else's vote is a really solid parrotting scumtell. First of all, why is XScorp responsible for knowing the details of my vote and how can he possibly be scummy for not knowing? How else is he supposed to provide an answer to the question except use the context of the game?
   
2. re: hypocrisy
   - In my opinion the hypocrisy is moot because I fail to see the parrotting argument based on the circumstances.
   
3. re: weak defence
   - I don't really think that having a weak defense of oneself is necessarily a scumtell either; not everyone is good at defending himself and I don't think that indicates alignment; especially when the cases are weak (in my opinion) to begin with.

------------

Where you are trying to tell someone (I'm not sure who, but it doesn't matter, it kind of sounds like everyone) that I did something scummy too, but no one is paying much attention to it. First off, I don't think the situations are similar at all, and second, the way you try and soil my good name all slyly like that, quite scummy.

lol? This is especially funny coming from you. Man, you're scumtells are quite amazing yielding such definitive results. And speaking of tells, can you explain this solid town tell and how the quoted comment is a town tell?

Hiphop goes on the town list with stuff like "really do not like how there was so much arguing about kirby's day-kill"

So you obviously don't like all the arguing about Kirby's daykill? Is this a correct observation? Even though it lead to you positively identifying scum (you think)?

It's not their direct response, but the manner in which they gave it. XScorpion's post tried to spin the questions back as an attack on me. Sawyer and SSBF just answered the questions, and didn't try and turn it into an attack.

How? Where? I actually find his follow up comments to you pretty relevant and hardly an "attack." The only thing that remotely fits the bill as an attack on you is this comment:

Your parroting of his rolefishing argument is noted.

And maybe the wishy washy comment in post 78... maybe. But it is quite a stretch to say that he is spinning the questions back on you in an attempt to attack you.

I said he was active lurking, not lurking. And it's not a contest. Just because someone else might be doing something, doesn't mean that Sawyer isn't.

So, in this game, who is lurking, who is active lurking? Which is worse?

I wanted to know why they didn't comment on his self vote. I didn't follow up on it because there was nothing to follow up on. People gave their responses and they were all satisfactory. I think something did come out of it, Sawyer's deflecting.

Why was it relevant? What did you expect to get? We all clearly disagreed with your assessment of the self vote and the motivation of the self vote, yet all the answers were satisfactory? What would have been an unsatisfactory answer? My guess is you were trying to drum up a wagon on robo or maybe making a passing comment about a buddy that would go nowhere, but that can be debated later.

xvart.

[xvart]

I'm actually more sure of Jenniwren at this point, but I really can't imagine XScorpion and Jenniwren not being scum together.

If you are more sure of Jenni at this point, why are you not voting her?

xvart.

[xvart]

^^^ I love the blatant chainsaw.

The irony of this post makes me lulz. First of all, it wasn't a chainsaw defense because I am not defending XScrop. In fact, if you were paying attention at all to my posts you would know that one of my biggest concerns about Charter is his finger pointing and casting suspicion on others in "subtle" way which is exactly what I was asking him about (you know, the part where he claims someone is the most scummy and

isn't

voting that person). You don't find it even remotely strange that Charter isn't voting the person he is most suspicious of? If you want to see a blatant chainsaw check out this post.

Because it would be a crime to remove support from an XScorpion lynch unless it would result in a Jenniwren lynch.

Would it? Is your case on Jenni so flimsy that you can't possibly convince others of the legitimacy in seven days?

It also doesn't mean you can lighten up on activity. Remember that Robo.

What did he just say in the previous post? He said "just because I am voteless does not mean I am going to back down." So why did you feel the need to basically remind him of what he just said? Were you trying to look more town?

---

Yes;

Because you

immediately

tried to cast suspicion on XScorp for not answering your question (over a T_T? Really?).

Again i will repeat-what I want to know is does that make me scum? If not why are you making pure noise? Before that post, what was the most scummy thing? To me it was the not answering questions. So does it not make sense to attack the most scummy thing up to that point?

Sorry to be so obtuse. I've added in red (in my quote) what was apparently needed to sufficiently answer your question that I thought was obvious. If it had been a legitimate game related question I wouldn't be as concerned; but it was something so ridiculous and unrelated to the game and you immediately called him scum for not answering the question. And I should clarify; it doesn't necessarily make you scum; but it does make you scummy. People that try and undermine other players (especially for inconsequential things) are scummy. Right back at you, though: what was the scum motivation behind not answering what T_T meant? The most scummy thing up to the point that I posted was you casting suspicion on someone for something so menial and petty. Either that or you are super duper defensive; but I am leaning towards that not being the case.

What has charter really done that has counter this scumtell?

To answer your question directly: I do not think obvious rolefishing is a better vote than the one I have currently.

Why do you keep not answering the questions? I asked what charter has done to counter rolefishing, not if role fishing is better than the case on charter. Now will you please answer it.

Then perhaps I do not understand what you mean by "what has charter done to counter XScorp's scumtell?" I thought you were asking why, if XScorp's rolefishing could be considered scummy, why I am not voting him; or rather, why I am voting charter. This should be abundantly clear under that pretext, except in your quoted quotes you deleted everything relevant where I actually answered the question I thought you were asking me. Compare your quote in 184:

What has charter really done that has counter this scumtell?

To answer your question directly: I do not think obvious rolefishing is a better vote than the one I have currently.

Why do you keep not answering the questions? I asked what charter has done to counter rolefishing, not if role fishing is better than the case on charter. Now will you please answer it.

to my actual quote in 125:

You just gave one of the biggest scumtells and act like it is nothing.

What has charter really done that has counter this scumtell?

Then we will have to disagree about the magnitude of rolefishing as a scumtell. I don't believe scum would be so blatantly obvious about role fishing. Of the top of my head, I recall town flipping more for obvious rolefishing than scum. If his rolefishing was more subtle or less transparent and if I felt he had more of a case I would probably be voting for him.

To answer your question directly: I do not think obvious rolefishing is a better vote than the one I have currently.

For everyone's convience, I have highlighted in red the truncated sections of hiphop's attempted misrep. Now again, if I misunderstood what you were actually asking, rephrase your question; but I have answered what you were asking from what I can tell you were asking. If, with the actual quotes being reviewed, I have not answered your question, then the only answer I have is that I don't have a clue what you mean when you ask me to explain Charter countering XScorp's rolefishing scumtell.

It was fake. Therefore a vote was in order, yet you come back and say no, why?¹ Anyone here say that the bolded is not saying something is scummy?² In fact I would go and say that he is saying it is a scumtell, just with more words. So why do you not vote?³ Anyone ever heard of lynch all liars?⁴

Are you suggesting that XScorp should be lynched because he lied about the vig kill? Or I should be lynched because I said I would do something and never did? Is that your case? I can understand your point, because I am a pretty literal player; but this is reaching after I have explained and you keep going back to the original post. Have events never transpired that have changed your plans?

The whole post is you evading my questions. Now answer it. And I think you got the names mixed up it is kirby that we are talking about not xscorp.⁵

Now to answer your questions. No i don't think he should be lynched because of that, but you said it deserved your vote. Yet you didn't. Now will you please go back and answer the three quotes that you quoted, but failed to answer them.

¹I didn't answer it because I didn't know who you were referring to (hence my question for clarification). I didn't vote because I wasn't convinced that it wasn't actually a daykill.
²The bolded you were referencing was me explaining why I was going to vote if the daykill was fake.
³See second sentence in the answer to superscript 1.
⁴Yes, I have heard of it. If you think I'm lying why wasn't that in your justification to XScorp on your upgraded vote from an FoS?
⁵Yes, I did get the names mixed up. Thanks for clarifying that error.

---

I know there are still a few posts I want to respond to on the previous page, so I'll get to those in a minute. This post is long enough.

xvart.

Red is the mod's color; don't use it

[xvart]

Responses from page 7:

Because I don't see how answering an question about someone else's vote is a really solid parrotting scumtell. First of all, why is XScorp responsible for knowing the details of my vote and how can he possibly be scummy for not knowing? How else is he supposed to provide an answer to the question except use the context of the game?

1. Because your declaration that you would vote Kirbyoshi has been talked about a lot and he should know at least that.

Sorry, I misread their back and forth. They were talking about Sawyer's vote on me. And the back and forth was basically both of them saying they didn't know why he was voting me, and XScorp responded with what I assume he dug out of the thread.

2. It means that he was not reading the thread, which is known to be scummy.

I agree that not reading the thread is anti-town, but not necessarily scummy. I think there's been a couple people say the same thing (but I might be mixing a couple games now).

3. This is a very good question. Right now, tbh, I haven't been able to formulate a decent answer to this question as I have no clue how to answer this. If I can ever answer it decently, I will immediately get back to you on this.

Yeah, that was my point above (except for the wrong vote in question). He was asked to justify a vote by someone else. XScorp asked Charter why Sawyer's vote was bad (as Charter said); Charter responded that he didn't know why he was voting for me and then asked XScorp if he knew why Sawyer was voting for me; XScorp responded: "I dunno, because Xvart said he would vote for Kirby if Kirby's daykill was fake? That seems like the right reason.". That isn't parrotting in my opinion, which was the original quote in question when parrotting was raised.

re: weak defence - I don't really think that having a weak defense of oneself is necessarily a scumtell either; not everyone is good at defending himself and I don't think that indicates alignment; especially when the cases are weak (in my opinion) to begin with.

By weak defense, I meant that his defense doesn't really look genuine to me, not to mention he continues to be scummy while defending himself IMO.

I'll go back and reread him to see if it sounds genuine to me; but my initial response is that I feel like the attacks on him are much more contrived.

---

Lurkers: Confid, Zang
Active Lurkers: XScorp

I think you're getting your reads mixed up (which is understandable since you really never justify anything) but now XScorp is the active lurker? He has 11 more posts than you do. I've also noticed that you have continued to not explain any of your reads when asked. Is there some reason other than the obvious?

Spyrex is so obviously town, every time you try and call him scum I just get 100% more sure you are scum.

Why is he so obviously town? Please enlighten me because I have a fairly neutral read on him. I also like you didn't answer Jenni when she asked you, but to give you the benefit of the doubt I'll just assume you missed it. I'm guessing hiphop will probably switch his vote to you since not answering questions is the "first sign of being scum." But maybe that is only non-game related questions?

---

@xvert: Who is your number 2 read?

At the time of your question, I probably would have said hiphop; but now I would definitely say hiphop with his recent attempts to undermine me by misconstruing and truncating my posts to make it look like I'm not answering his questions. The evidence in my previous post where he tailored our quotes to his accusation is especially damning.

xvart.

[xvart]

Quote wall ahead. I typically don't really like PBPA but thought it was important to consolodate scummy behavior of charter in one place. I don't comment on every post of his so I implore you to do your own ISO/full reread for the full scope/double check to make sure I am not misrepresenting him. For you lazy readers, tl;dr version at bottom, but context is excluded.

Wait, I just noticed Robocopter voted for himself. We should lynch him to punish this behavior, OR MAYBE DAYKILL HIM HAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHA.

Suggestion that "we" should lynch robo when he is not voting robo. Could be argued to be a joke, except for the follow up questions and justification for asking the question later in the game.

SSBF, xvart, Xscorpion, hiphop, Kirbyoshi, and Sawyer. Why did none of you comment on how Robocopter voted himself?

Robocopter, why shouldn't we lynch you right now?

The implication that there was something wrong with not commenting on it (therefore scummy) to SSBF, XScorp, hiphop, Kirby, Sawyer, and me for not commenting on the self vote.

Guys, I am 99% sure that XScorpion is scum. I've already identified three townies. The rest of you are making this very difficult to figure out who his buddies are (except Sawyer, who is making it very easy to see he is scum).

Actually, it's probably SSBF with his whole "There is definently an overreaction to Kirbyoshi's fake daykill attempt. I knew this wasn't serious, so I saw no point in making a negative reaction to it." speech.

XScorpion, Sawyer, and SSBF, what is your opinion of the other two?

Solid scum read on XScorp and a solid three town reads on unknown people. No justification for any of it. Says everyone else is making it difficult for him to identify the rest of the scum buddies (although Sawyer apparently is scum independent of XScorp). Also identifies SSBF as probable scum. Overall, terribly scummy post.

Your whole "vote Robo and see what happens idea" is inherently scummy in nature, and as such, I believe (quite strongly by this point) that you are scum.

Scum "wait and see what happens" whereas townies "make stuff happen".

Plus, your timing of it was bad, how you posted some, then did some RVSing. Then, the degree that you're pushing the idea (of which nobody seems to have much interest in following) I find pretty bad.

What about Sawyer do you like? His active lurking, his deflecting questions, his poor voting, or something else?
How is SSBF behaving consistent with his town meta? You didn't really give an opinion on him, I would still like one.

I'm not voting Robo because I don't think he's scum.

I italicized a flawed argument in the quote. You can not unilaterally claim that scum "wait and see what happens" while townies "make things happen." In an ideal utopia, this may be correct; but it hardly has any basis in reality. Just because it supports your argument does not make it true. Also questions XScorp under the pretext that Sawyer is scummy.

It is also interesting how he when he explains his reasoning on voting XScorp he says "[he] believe

(quite strongly at this point) implying that since his 99% claim his scum read on XScorp has increased. What happened between these two posts? One post: This. I think he is trying to validate his scum read by saying more had come forth.

Also charter: Any particular reason you think Robocopter is town?

I didn't say I think he's town. I said I don't think he's scum. I don't have much of a read on him one way or the other.

Waffles on Robocopter, saying he isn't town but doesn't have a read on him at all. Saying someone isn't scum does not equal having no read on that person. Speculation: I'm starting to wonder if this is a slip knowing Robo's alignment (by virtue of not being on a scum team together) but backpedaling to seem ambivalent about his alignment. There is just no good way to argue semantics in this case because it is so clear.

Jenniwren is shaping up nicely for the slot of lurkerscum, we'll have to see how that pans out as time goes by. Actually, now that I actually read her post 53, I believe we've got another scum hooked.

Charter now believes that Jenni is lurkerscum. Note that the game had only been started 26 hours prior to this statement, in which Jenni had posted two times (excluding her confirmation post). This read is most perplexing, as even if he didn't agree with Jenni's analysis or observations, it can hardly be said to be active lurking. Another fluff accusation that casts doubt on someone based on nothing substantial.

I put myself in their shoes and answered the question, and I came up with something similar to what they said.

This is strange because he is using a scum read of his (Sawyer) to justify a townie response...

If he's not scum, like you said, then what could he be?

I said I didn't think he's scum (I don't have a scum read on him) and I said I don't think he's town (I don't have a town read on him). He is one or the other, but I don't have a clue as to what he is right now.

Tries to once again explain his read on Robo but tries to muddle the subject by adding in more nonsense like "I don't think he's town and I don't think he's scum" hoping we all would decrypt that jumble to reading "I don't have a read on him." Compare:

I'm not voting Robo because I don't think he's scum.

to:

I didn't say I think he's town. I said I don't think he's scum. I don't have much of a read on him one way or the other.

to:

I said I didn't think he's scum (I don't have a scum read on him) and I said I don't think he's town (I don't have a town read on him). He is one or the other, but I don't have a clue as to what he is right now.

Note that he never said that Robo wasn't town, but that got added in during the third permutation.

I wanted to know why they didn't comment on his self vote. I didn't follow up on it because there was nothing to follow up on. I think something did come out of it, Sawyer's deflecting.

Now Charter admits that there was no point to his self voting question and there was nothing to follow up on. Also, his follow up with Sawyer shows that he was expecting some sort of response.

I'm actually more sure of Jenniwren at this point, but I really can't imagine XScorpion and Jenniwren not being scum together.

This is especially damning, as Charter is more certain of Jenni being scum now but is voting XScorp (and they can't possibly not be scum together).

You never answered the question I asked: Why would I comment on Robo's self vote?

You could for any number of reasons. It wasn't random. It wasn't smart. Anything. It was an innocuous question, which just about any actual answer would have been fine, but you didn't answer, you had to question back.

Accuses Sawyer of "deflecting back" on him, which he says is scummy, by Sawyer simply asking why he would respond to the self vote. Highly defensive trying to make Sawyer scummier by him asking why the question charter asked was important/relevant.

Spyrex is so obviously town, every time you try and call him scum I just get 100% more sure you are scum.

The giant backpedal with your Spyrex and Kirby (and a little bit of Charter) scum reads is pretty scummy.

I'm debating trying to lynch Jenniwren over XScorpion. Spyrex and Hiphop, what do you think about a Jenniwren lynch?

Claims Spyrex is obvtown, and uses his unexplained town read to make Jenni more scummy. Also now wants a bandwagon on Jenni, but apparently doesn't want to start it himself.

Looks like hiphop dies day three.

Now hiphop is scummy, for unexplained, probably apparent reasons, like all his reads.

---

tl;dr version:

charter...

• pulls reads out of nowhere; hardly justifies anything, and when he does it is weak observations;
  
• has a solid scum reads on XScorp, Sawyer, Jenni, hiphop, probably SSBF. Says Jenni is his strongest read, although is voting XScorp;
  
• Uses supposed scum reads to justify townie behavior and uses alleged town reads to justify scum reads;
  
• claims Jenni is lurkerscum for posting three times in the first 26 hours of the game; probably to "deflect" attention on him (as he likes to say) because she is questioning him and putting pressure on him; and,
  
• waffles on whether he thinks robo is not scum or has a neutral read; backpedals a bunch and contrives fake reasoning.

If that's not scum I don't know what is.

xvart.

[xvart]

You and Jenniwren can form the "bad cases with no possibility of leading to a lynch on Charter club". Unfortunately, it's not going to be a popular club.

1

There's no need for all this explaining you keep clamoring for. You see how Five people are voting for XScorpion?

2

You think I'm scum because I didn't concoct some elaborate case on him.

³

The real explanation is there is no need to because the other townies see the same thing I do.

4

It's the same reason I don't need to elaborate on why Spyrex is town. Scum hate when townies identify each other

5

, and you know what they do? They try to undermine it so that the idea doesn't catch on. I'm sure anyone who has played with Spyrex before sees he's town, whether or not they're as vocal about it as me, they are thinking it in their noggin.

6

(and yeah, I meant Xvart in post 195, pretty obvious I didn't mean Hiphop)

1

Maybe, but with posts like this one you're making it much much easier. Seriously, this might be your single scummiest post the entire game.

2

Nice appeal to the masses. Just because five people are on a wagon does not mean they are all town, the wagon is

sufficiently

justified, or the reasons why people are on the wagon are all sound.

³

The only reason I can find that you find XScorp to be scummy independent of everyone else is post 70 where you say his "see where robo's lynch goes" is "inherently scummy." I don't agree with your assessment of how it is inherently scummy because I've seen plenty of games where on page 2 someone is like "gogogo bandwagon" which is essentially the same thing. Although I disagree with how scummy that comment is, I can see the temporary virtue in calling someone out on it. However, your justification of townies make things happen while scum wait for things to happen is invalid, as I already explained. The fact that your justification on your original vote was terrible, it makes the whole vote terrible, especially since you are 99% sure that XScrop is scum based on that one comment.

4

So now you are just blatantly bandwagoning? The vote is more justified just because other people have the same vote?

5

Actually scum love it when townies identify each other. It gives them the perfect night kill target.

6

lol? I wouldn't hold too much stock in that opinion. If I had a certain town meta I would try and emulate it as best as possible as scum; the fact that Spyrex hasn't really contributed much in terms of actual scumhunting doesn't help his town case. Just because he is agreeing with you does not make him obvtown. I'm sure Spyrex is just as capable as both town and scum of speaking in riddles, playing games, and voicing apparent gut reads. If you think it is so great for townies to identify each other then what is the harm in explaining those town reads? Oh, because scum then will undermine those reasons? The problem with this "theory" is that a.)if the town read is so obvious then scum would be pretty scummy to try and undermine that; and b.)if the scum were stupid enough to try and undermine a town read they would expose themselves and waa-laa! Scum identified.

On that note, what do you think of how Robo and charter having not read the entire thread?

To be honest I will have to agree that it is scummy. I disliked how charter said that he did not read jenniwren's latest wall (Referring to her response against me). This seems intentional as although it was mostly directed at me, it did show that she wanted charter dead. Robocopter87 saying that he hasn't read jenniwren's same post is also scummy.

I definitely think that scum have more of a reason to not read, because they aren't genuinely scumhunting and don't need the information as much as town; however, I can't discount the fact that lazy town might be just as likely to not read.

Red is the mod's color; don't use it

Whoops. Sorry. Thanks for changing the red to green.

xvart.

[xvart]

You do realize I said before that post and not including that post, so the bolded does not answer the question, but then again an answer to that one wasn't needed because it was there only to prove a point. Also I never carried that accusation any farther then that post, nor did I post it any legitimate case, so do you really think that I really meant that accusation? What do you think I was trying to prove? So to answer your question there was no scum motivation.

You really like to split hairs to discredit someone, don't you? Okay then, including and up until the post in question by XScorp (post 13) the scummiest thing might have been Sawyer's post 8 where he commanded out orders on changing the Captain Crunch cereal or maybe SSBF's post 11 where he might possibly be appealing to authority by stepping in for the moderator to "start the game." However, these three posts all some something in common: they are ridiculous; and, even if they weren't, since I don't check the thread every single time someone posts, when I came back to read, your accusation that the reason he didn't answer your non-game related question was because he must be scum was the scummiest post in the game. However, now that I've been asked to reread and justify the scumminest of the first page of posting I noticed you said this in post 22:

It's ok. Hiphop had horrible judgment in the last game I played with him too ^_^
Remember that hiphop?

Not funny,

Hello people!!

Rvs ring any bells to anyone?

You never (obviously) responded to my over reacted comment and then you said this. Was the "RVS ring any bells to anyone" directed to me?

Then perhaps I do not understand what you mean by "what has charter done to counter XScorp's scumtell?" I thought you were asking why, if XScorp's rolefishing could be considered scummy, why I am not voting him; or rather, why I am voting charter. This should be abundantly clear under that pretext, except in your quoted quotes you deleted everything relevant where I actually answered the question I thought you were asking me. Compare your quote in 184:...

For everyone's convience, I have highlighted in red the truncated sections of hiphop's attempted misrep. Now again, if I misunderstood what you were actually asking, rephrase your question; but I have answered what you were asking from what I can tell you were asking. If, with the actual quotes being reviewed, I have not answered your question, then the only answer I have is that I don't have a clue what you mean when you ask me to explain Charter countering XScorp's rolefishing scumtell.

I kind of expected something like this. Charter has done this, this, and this, which of course make him scummier than xscorp. That is what i was asking. I thought that maybe if I whittled down to the meat(why should a post be longer?) you might understand, but apparently I was wrong. Either way i have found my answer in some of your earlier posts.

So you were asking why I thought my case on Charter outweighed XScorps rolefishing scumtell? If so, isn't that exactly what I did (in the part you deleted from the quote)? I told you why I didn't think rolefishing in that instance was necessarily scummy, with the implication that my previous posts about Charter you would put two and two together; but now I have learned that everything has to be explicitly stated or else you will try and twist words, tailor quotes, and do whatever to undermine the actual content of posts when it is dealing with you. How was it not obvious that my multiple, lengthy posts were the reason why I thought my case on charter was better than the scumtell I had identified as not being that scummy in that post? Oh yeah, because you read only what you want to read to fit your needs or undermine your attackers?

I'm almost afraid you are going to start jumping on me for spelling mistakes and try and undermine me that way, too. Your mincing quotes and trying to break down my responses into dodging and alluding your questions is highly, highly scummy. I'm currently trying to decide if this outburst of highly scummy behavior outweighs chater's consistently scummy behavior all game.

\link from where this quote came from for those that like to follow along. I don't really get number 2. The daykill was a fake. You explained why you were going to vote if the daykill was a fake. You even explained that there was zero town motivation and all scum motivation to fake-vig. Scum-motivation = scum, no? Maybe just maybe you didn't cast the vote, because by the time you realized it was a fake,charter was clearly more scum. Maybe just maybe you didn't cast your vote because by the time you realized it was a fake, you were convince kirby was most-likely town. Maybe just maybe you didn't cast your vote because by the time you realized it was a fake, you realized that you would not get any support for a kirby wagon. Either way we are just going in circles, and I have said my piece on the matter and so have you, so I think it is best if we just drop the matter.

Great. Fine with me. Especially considering I've already answered all those questions several times already.

Xvart and jenni please comment on the spyrex quote above.

I don't see how that observation makes charter town. Of course, there isn't any supplementary explanation as to why a townie would behave like that or how a scum couldn't emulate that if it was a solid town tell.

6

lol? I wouldn't hold too much stock in that opinion. If I had a certain town meta I would try and emulate it as best as possible as scum; the fact that Spyrex hasn't really contributed much in terms of actual scumhunting doesn't help his town case. Just because he is agreeing with you does not make him obvtown. I'm sure Spyrex is just as capable as both town and scum of speaking in riddles, playing games, and voicing apparent gut reads. If you think it is so great for townies to identify each other then what is the harm in explaining those town reads? Oh, because scum then will undermine those reasons? The problem with this "theory" is that a.)if the town read is so obvious then scum would be pretty scummy to try and undermine that; and b.)if the scum were stupid enough to try and undermine a town read they would expose themselves and waa-laa! Scum identified.

I should also add that undescribed "obvtown" reads are terrible for town in the event that the person stating someone is obvtown is actually town and the person they think is obvtown flips scum. It casts suspicion on the person who explicitly stated the confirmed scum is obvtown and then the person has to go back and justify that read after the fact, which will then be taken with a grain of salt since it will appear to be building a town case after the fact when they never took the time to do so when asked repeatedly at the time of the statement.

xvart.

[xvart]

I'm going back to reread now; expect a post in a bit. I'm almost thinking we should combine forces and lynch hiphop after his last post, but I'll explain my reasoning in my post.

xvart.

[xvart]

You never (obviously) responded to my over reacted comment and then you said this. Was the "RVS ring any bells to anyone" directed to me?

yes I believe so

You seem to have a good defense/justification of your comment (nothing scummy before that post) despite it allegedly being RVS shenanigans.

Sorry I am not that bright. To me it was more you downplayed rolefishing, but didn't delete it as a scumtell, so in reality it still could be just as scummy as what you pointed out with Charter.

It should have been pretty obvious that my explanation of my opinion on rolefishing (especially in the context of XScorp's rolefishing) would make it null or of limited scumminess compared to the case I had been strongly pushing on charter.

There is just bad commnication between you and me.

Do you think I have presented my case on you differently than I have presented my case on charter? I find it difficult to believe that you and I are having supposed bad communication while you think I'm making a good case on charter. I think you are trying to back off because you are worried that others might see your scum behavior. I am also tempted to think that your removal of vote to a lurker is a convenient excuse maybe appease me and hope I back off. Your unvote/vote Zang doesn't really fit with the rest of your post.

xscorp and charter as the two most popular bw's (the only ones at that) it is about time that you claim.

You want them both to claim? Even when neither of them are at L-1?

---

Looking forward to your full thoughts on the fourth response.

After reading XScorp again, I don't think he is being disingenuous. I don't think he is doing a particularly good job of "town-posting" but I don't see a scum flailing; especially considering I think most of the case on him has been rather weak.

3 days to deadline, and we're EVEN CLOSER to a no lynch.

The scums are sitting back and hoping that happens, but of course, trying to get a lynch is probably a scumtell in this game

Hiphop, you are enabling them to do this.

You really like to use the no lynch fear tactic, don't you? Three days and I'd say we're getting pretty close to a lynch. Seriously, (at the time of this post) you don't think you can round up 2 more votes on your wagon? It really feels like you are trying to play the "NL is terrible for town" to appear more town, especially since we aren't even close to a NL. At the time of your post we have two strong wagons.

Sure.
I am Trix. I am a one-shot vigilante.

Any flavor?

This is great. We can hopefully test this claim. With this new information I'm staying with charter and suggesting a hiphop vig kill.

xvart.

[xvart]

How and why can his claim look legit? Why should this save him from a lynch? Why does this erase his obvscumness? I don't think this should save him from the noose.

Because it is testable? It could possibly confirm him as town?

xvart.

[xvart]

Claiming isn't the "townie" thing to do. Are you daft? How many times have you seen scum not claim when threatened with a lynch?

1

You all are probably going to let him live, kill a townie (probably one of the few that has some damn sense) and then "confirm" him and lose. Scum are always eager to claim

²

, whether it's necessary or not, since they know that most people will lap up their bs like a cat with milk or "scared to lynch a power role". Maybe I have a reason for not claiming.

3

I'll give you a hint, ITS NOT BECAUSE I CANT THINK OF SOMETHING TO CLAIM.

4

I'm probably done, you all are gonna screw this up and this was gonna be a real easy game to win. If any of you actually look at the ridiculously poor arguments Jenniwren, XVart, and Hiphop are voting me on, you'd see why I don't even bother defending myself.

5

How does being able to kill confirm him as town?

6

I think I missed that part. Even if he hits scum (not going to happen, but we're going with theoreticals) HE COULD BE A SK

7

, OLOLOL LETS LYNCH HIM!1!11

I can't even begin to comprehend the insanity in this post; but I'll try my best.

1

WIFOM much?

²

Scum are always eager to claim? lol? You're right; scum are so eager to have a watchdog around them and be forced into playing a way that is fake and yield fake results (if they claim a PR) and have to be much, much more cautious with their play. This is simply insane.

3

I bet that reason is because if you actually claimed you would be auto lynched since goon or scum roleblocker doesn't really go over well when claiming.

4

lol? A little forced there, don't you think? I think the statement that you wouldn't claim because you weren't at L-1 with an intent to hammer would have sufficed.

5

Ohhhh... So

now

you have a reason to not defend yourself?

6

You're right, having the ability to kill does not auto confirm him as town; however, if there are two kills tomorrow we can be fairly certain that he wasn't lying about his ability to kill. Furthermore, if there are two kills and he claims one of them then we know he isn't mafia. If there is only one kill tomorrow and he claims RB'ed or shenanigans then we can debate lynching him tomorrow. Finally, if he is lying and we have another town vig then the actual town vig can kill him tonight since it is highly doubtful there are two town vigs in a mini game and the real town vig will know he is lying. Also, if he is scum then we get to semi-direct his kill N1. Scum won't be able to kill the most pro-town person or the person that is on to them because we can semi-direct the vig kill (if he deviates, we lynch him). The fact that you are still pushing lynching a potential town killing role is highly suspect.

7

Well if he is actually a SK then he just screwed himself because he can only kill once.

The point is, scum fake claiming vig is highly, highly difficult to pull off in the long term.

xvart.

[xvart]

In the meantime, MORE XSCORPION VOTES!

So you don't believe his 1-shot vig claim? Why not?

xvart.

[xvart]

SpyreX - much of what charter has said in his last few posts has been condemning claiming as anti-town and making not claiming pro-town, which is quite odd at best.

I'm not claiming, either.

Claiming isn't the "townie" thing to do. Are you daft? How many times have you seen scum not claim when threatened with a lynch?

I actually don't think I've ever seen anyone, regardless of alignment, not claim when threatened with a lynch. Unless, of course, they were V/LA or something like that.

Scum are always eager to claim, whether it's necessary or not, since they know that most people will lap up their bs like a cat with milk or "scared to lynch a power role".

Maybe I have a reason for not claiming. I'll give you a hint, ITS NOT BECAUSE I CANT THINK OF SOMETHING TO CLAIM.

I'll have access tomorrow morning, maybe tomorrow night, probably not saturday. I won't be claiming.

Even if we run you up to L-1 tonight and have an intent to hammer you still won't claim?

xvart.

[xvart]

I actually don't think I've ever seen anyone, regardless of alignment, not claim when threatened with a lynch. Unless, of course, they were V/LA or something like that.

There is no possible way I believe this, or that this can even be true. There's numerous situations where claiming as town is anti town, I don't believe that you've been on MS for a year and don't know this. Don't believe it one bit.

I'm serious. I don't recall ever a time when someone did not claim

something

with the threat of a hammer unless there was some other circumstance that prevented him/her from doing so. Can you give me an example of when it is pro-town as town to not claim when the threat of hammer is looming?

Because he doesn't need to live until the end? Maybe he's a mafia one shot vig?

A mafia team with a vig? In a mini? I know for a fact that I have never seen this before.

xvart.

[xvart]

That's gotta be the dumbest thing I've ever heard on this site.

That's cool. I've been in games with mafia 1 shot vigs. I've been a mafia vig. I'm sure others have as well.

Sounds pretty common. Can you link these games or a game with a mafia vig? Has anyone else in this game seen a mafia vig? Even so, now you are backpedaling because before you said there was no way the claim was real and now the role could be real but the alignment false?

Can you give me an example of when it is pro-town as town to not claim when the threat of hammer is looming?

Just about every time you're a vanilla for starters. Go read some MD. It'll explain.

I've actually been reading that MD thread; and it doesn't say anything that I recall about it being pro-town to not claim as VT. The premise of the discussion is how not lynching a claimed VT is bad.

xvart.

[xvart]

Wrong thread.

I thought you were referring to a current one. You also neglected to see in that thread that a pro-town player should do everything to convince others that they are town, which you haven't done to the slightest. In fact, the opposite:

I'm probably done, you all are gonna screw this up and this was gonna be a real easy game to win.

If any of you actually look at the ridiculously poor arguments Jenniwren, XVart, and Hiphop are voting me on, you'd see why I don't even bother defending myself.

As for games I've been in with mafia vigs, off the top of my head I remember these.
http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=11495 (oh look, we even lynched a mafia one shot vig day one )
http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... 07&start=0

Pretty sure I've been in mini's with them, but I can only remember a few memorable specific minis.

Great. Two large games, one with two mafia factions. I would be extremely interested in seeing the mini games with a mafia team vig.

Extremely

interested because that sounds way too overpowered for a mafia team to get two kills in one night.

So who should we put on the possible vig target list? I suggest hiphop, and if in the unfortunate cirumstances we get a no lynch, charter should be on the list. Who else? We definitely need to at least guide the vig but we should not say only "target X." I would be open to discussion about adding our lurkers to the list, but I'm not sure that is the best course of action.

xvart.

[xvart]

Jenniwren is not scumhunting at all.

Was this a joke? Coming from you?

My updated vig suggestions:
If charter happens to flips town: hiphop, zang, yourself (if you can), or me (from everyone else's point of view).
If charter flips scum: hiphop, SpyreX, or Kirby (based on his last post).

xvart.

[xvart]

I tried to vig Confid (he was useless and didn't do anything yesterday). But bouncy was all AWWW you were prevented from killing anyone tonight, but you are free to try again on a later night.

Can anyone confirm if this is typical mechanic practice that a blocked one shot retains his one shot because he was vigged?

And as I said yesterday:

I should also add that undescribed "obvtown" reads are terrible for town in the event that the person stating someone is obvtown is actually town and the person they think is obvtown flips scum. It casts suspicion on the person who explicitly stated the confirmed scum is obvtown and then the person has to go back and justify that read after the fact, which will then be taken with a grain of salt since it will appear to be building a town case after the fact when they never took the time to do so when asked repeatedly at the time of the statement.

SpyreX's obvtown read on someone so scummy is very disheartening to me. I also am not inclined to believe that this and this were genuine posts because of this very reasoning.

xvart.

[xvart]

First off, thank you Benmage and Equinox for replacing. Looking forward to both of you posting contents.

QFT; although I was hoping to see a scum RB flip in there to help us through last night's actions.

Alright, I still have suspicion for HipHop but I'm not really feeling a scummy feeling towards him anymore. I just can't see him being scum.

Hello scum.

I really wish charter would have taken me up on my offer to lynch hiphop now. I still think he is most likely scum in the game. His play yesterday was extremely scummy, full of attacking the player and not the argument, backpedaling, etc. And now with Robo's little hiphop is scum but he's not scum comment I could see a connection there. I'm thinking there was something else between those two (like a vote for townie, FoS the other type thing) but I'll have to go back and look for that.

I would be up for either hiphop or robo lynch right now; but since hiphop is more likely scum independent of robo, I think he is the best pursuit right now.

VOTE: hiphop

xvart.

[xvart]

In short, Robocopter87 needs to die.

I'm in complete agreement now that Robo has said he has no scum reads. I'm starting to believe that Robo is trapped: he can't say he has any scum reads because he doesn't want to out his partners and can't really pull a good bus right now and he doesn't want to falsify a read because if that person flips town he is on the block.

I HAVE to have a scum read? Well.

No, you don't; but if you were town you would. Depending on your perspective from any town point of few I cannot possibly see having absolutely no scum reads in this game. The town is incredibly divided and not being able to at the very least associate with either side is highly suspect.

UNVOTE:
VOTE: Robocopter

xvart.

[xvart]

Hmmmm I'd be willing to switch to hiphop.

Xscorp can Vig Robo if he wants.

How's this sound?

Sounds good to me. I would be more than happy to go on a hiphop wagon.

So what, they're just going to randomly roleblock someone instead of the CLAIMED PR?
Are you even thinking about this game?

The mod said that I was prevented from killing anyone, not that confid was protected. And why the hell would a doctor protect confid? That makes no sense.

I'm starting to doubt XScorp's claim with this post. People generally aren't told that they were roleblocked. Why would you need to tell someone they were roleblocked when they would find out the next day anyway?

hiphop, why are you "continuing the test"? I understand Ben wanting to make sure I wasn't an insane dayvig or something, but why would you do it AGAIN?

Because he wants to appear as town as possible, being that he is more likely to be scum right now.

xvart.

[xvart]

So Xvart you also willing to string up scorp?

I'm not as certain with him, but I would vote XScorp at deadline to prevent NL. I think hiphop is the best alternative; actually I think he is the best lynch today.

UNVOTE:
VOTE: hiphop

I would be fine with a Robo lynch also, and will be online tomorrow to switch back if necessary.

Hows about you pair of chuckleheads give me a real reason for jenni being town.

Because she seems to be following the same train of thought that I am and I am town.

xvart.

[xvart]

NO.

STAY ON MY WAGON DARNIT XVART.

WE HAVE TO LYNCH SOMEONE AND BY SWITCHING TO A WAGON THATS NOT GOING TO HAPPEN YOU"RE SCREWING US OVER.

Didn't I say I would switch back if necessary? If this wagon is going to go through I think hiphop should hammer.

Hiphop I completed the test by showing that the mod would interact with flavor in the game. Yours was pointless.

Actually no it wasn't. When I saw your "test" post, I thought that you made it because you wanted to see Kirby dead. Yet you voted xscorp. Even after the mod posted the flavor, I still had no inclination of what you were trying to do until Kirby posted. I however wouldn't mind seeing you dead, because even now you have yet to provide any sort of reason as to why certain people are scum and certain people are town. So clearly you are just being a space filler, kind of like robo.

Isn't this almost exactly the same reason I provided you when you were all up and on me about the flavor of the first fake daykill? Can we string this dude up now?

xvart.

[xvart]

I have no idea what to think of Robo now. His softclaim isn't really adding up with his recent claim. Lynching hiphop is still the best move. He isn't really a powerrole and it is more likely to be false than an actual protective role, and even so both of our so called protective roles are already outted.

xvart.

[xvart]

Welp... So much for the hiphop lynch.

UNVOTE:
VOTE: robocopter

xvart.

[xvart]

This game was a disaster for the town. I take my share of the responsibility for keeping XScorp alive on D2. But seriously, hiphop should have been instalynched after his claim:

Guys, now that I do not have a role, it is safe to say that i was only a One-Shot. Don't think it would be useful to keep it hidden any longer. Last night i saved myself.

I was planning to vote xscorp as soon as the day was started, but something happened. The mod told me my action was successful. The pm startled me, and made me rethink about whether xscorp was scum or not. If the mod is willing to say if my action was successful or not, then mod will no doubt do the same thing for anybody else including xscorp and his night 1 action. This of course makes for interesting dilemma. 1.If xscorp is mafia, he would know that the mod does this if he makes the kills, however so would xscorp has town when he tried to kill night. 2. Did the mafia target me last night and xscorp killed too, or did the mafia target xvart. The former would make sense, being mafia targets the protective role, except so does Wifom. That is all the info I have. I am not sure what to believe at the moment.

Nurse playing backup to a bulletproof? And him protecting himself and getting a response from the moderator? And XScorp's reasoning for killing me was almost as terrible.

The Dead QT (AKA my dead rage): http://www.quicktopic.com/44/H/m5ggKY5d5HyVX

xvart.

[xvart]

Yeah, Benmage. I thought you were coming on strong and going to be the voice of reason in all the madness.

xvart.

[xvart]

I was really surprised that there was really no questioning of the JK of SSBF claim and no discussion on whether or not SSBF might have been the target.

Scum QT?

xvart.

[xvart]

Like I said in the dead QT, I had an underlying suspicion of SpyreX but I don't think I could have put a case together that would have made a difference; especially with my focus on charter and hiphop. I wanted to push it but I think I was second guessing myself since I haven't played but maybe one game with SpyreX and kept telling myself that I didn't have the clout in this game to go up against him with what I thought might have just been a difference in playstyle preference.

xvart.