Open 290 - Double Day (Game Over)

[silverbullet999]

-Fur
So.. your willingly just going to ignore me. Without actually stating specifics why I've even been offensive. This heavily comes off as "running away". If it was curses I apologize (though you were no saint in that department either). If you continue to refuse me information i'm going to be deadlocked on you as scum. If your town you have nothing to hide... you have something to hide?

[silverbullet999]

Alright well it looks like fur isn't going to respond

Because of his posts and actions and I am calling for his lynch for day 0.5

I'll post a nice o wall later today (or tomorrow latest) with the case but simply put, fur has lied, exaggerated, acted offended and pissed, and now apparently has "calmed down" in order to control himself (I wouldn't be surprised if his whole big post was really a farce or that he second guessed himself with his big post and decided not to post as it wouldn't match up correctly and more evidence would be presented or something of the sort).

[Twistedspoon]

Because of his posts and actions and I am calling for his lynch for day 0.5

who, fur?

to me your arguments look kinda like town vs town (so far)

It's distracting from the mer case too.

forgot to do this before
VOTE: Meran

[silverbullet999]

even fur's recent posts/ refusal to state exactly what he found offensive/ still unanswered questions posted to him that he now has an excuse to not answer?

[Klazam]

Twisted- why jumping on the MeraWagon? You did not indicate a suspicion whatsoever of Mera.

[Twistedspoon]

forgot to mention it was for strawmanning

[Klazam]

Can you point out where the strawman was?

[Nobody Special]

So. I've played with Furc before, and while he's essentially a loose cannon, he's ... different this time. I'm not liking that.

However, I'm still sold on Number58.

@Number58, what's your view on the Furc/silver argument?

@Furc, what's your take on the Number58/Nacho thing with me?

@silver, don't worry about Furc. You're doing fine, AFAIC.

[DrBokchoy]

FOS Fur

Quote wars generally arent helpful. seems very defensive of himself. seems very aggressive and isnt gaining any town points from me

[Number58]

To this, I pose the opposite question: Why aren't you concerned about it?

Because he has no scum motivation for doing it. I have already told you that much.

There is clear cause for concern here - a player who has given no content, just lists of vague purpose and reasoning. The behavior is completely antitown, and needs to be ended. Your posts lately don't sound very good at all. You have a theory about the lists, yet you seem to have no issues with nacho. Regardless of if you have the lists cracked or not, you should still be concerned that nacho isn't posting any definitions.

Antitiown is not the same thing as scum. I can tell you people do idiot things when they are with the town a whole lot, and at times never do stop doing idiot things. THe list thing makes more sense as town than as mafia from nacho, as because as mafia, he will be getting attacked by people for posting not contribution, which will counteract the ammount of good he can muster by not having to contribute. If he kept doing that I would doubt he lives multiple days, so its a very bad move for mafia. Him doing it as town to see what people do in response, reaction fishing, is far more plausable. People act like fools more as town than as mafia, so odds say is is town.

What is more, you are actually deterring people from voting nacho to get information. You're point about the lists not being indicative of alignment has merit, I admit. However, your posts almost sound like you believe him to be town already, for no apparent reason. I can see two reasons for this: either you and nacho are scum together, and you are playing the antitown vs. scummy card as a way to get early votes off of him. Or, you could just be scum and him town, and you're using the scummy vs. antitown card as a way to appear knowledgeably protown without having to put as much effort towards scumhunting.

So you just said that you have no reason to see him as mafia. This means that you are either mafia with him trying to stop him from being lynched by not voting him, or are mafia trying to act helpful is righting the town players obvious shortcoming. Am I playing your game correctly? I already have stated why him doing what he is makes him town, what parts do you not agree with? You are actually not responding to anything that I am saying but am instead attacking me while avoiding having to respond to anything that backs up my position.

Confid is still mafia. He is attacking me while ignoring all justification that I have presented for him going at an easy target full on right off the bad. The "pressure" that he put on him is a fabrication, as once he voted he just shut up about it, leaving his vote just sitting there, which does nothing to put pressure on an indiviual. I am thinking this is a combination of nachos lists either having zeroed in on Confids partners, or him realizing that im going all out on defending nacho, so wants to get rid of me to allow him to return to pushing someone who is acting like an easy lynch.

If I had to vote someone else, it would be Merian, or DrBach. I do not have reason to think anyone is mafia.

[Nobody Special]

The flaw in your argument is that Nacho is not an idiot, and he is not prone to do idiotic things.

Also, can you answer my question, please?

[silverbullet999]

Ok here's the wall... as to why I strongly believe fur to be scum... though it probably won't be all that big.
(At Finish) Holy Shit... wow... I think this is my biggest post of all time? Regardless... you should read it.

(Bolded are direct quotes from fur's posts with the exception of () (these are comments by me if any))

*Ahem*

It all started with Confid's misquote of fur with fur basically blowing up in post 96 and also asking the mod about it.
This heavily struck me as curious because to me, it really didn't seem like a big deal... Parama isn't in this game, and the quote stayed the same (it's not like it was a selective quote or was edited). Thus I ask him why he reacted like he did in post 102.

In post 108 he replies stating "

someone changed my fucking name in a quote, that is bullshit

". In the same post what also heavily catches my eye is his response to Confid admitting the mistake. The reply is "

So you are admitting to completely misrepresenting someone's word who had their vote on you? Cool story bro

". Now his reply to me still confused me as to why he was so angry about it. And I tell him this in post 112 because again, it's not like confid changed the actual quote. This also heightens my interest because he dead on claims that Confid "

completely misrepresented someone's (someone being him) word who had their vote on you

". I ask him to expand on the reasoning behind such a claim because frankly I don't see it.

In post 121 he responds to me with his own question. That being "

You tell me Silver_bullet, answer this before I answer you, are you done defending confidanon/attacking his attackers

? This question frankly alarms me because I consider it a double sworded question (whether I reply yes or no, I "claim" that I am/was defending confidanon/attacking his attackers.) and I don't find this true (as I'm not defending Confid's other actions nor am I attacking any of his other attackers) Thus he earns my vote and I state this and vote him in post 122 and I ask him to answer my question posted to him.

In post 141 he makes two responses to me. The first is in reply to post 122. He states "

You are doing that. I don't mind your vote on me, it furthers your chainsaw defense of him

. "The you are doing that" leads me to believe that he's stating that my question in post 112 is a double sworded question. Which is a broken claim since he answers it in his second reply.

The second reply is to post 112 (where I asked him to expand on how his word was misrepresented) "

? I don't give a fuck if there was a motive, it's something you just don't do. You don't misrepresent someone as someone else to make your response look different. It's improper. Why are you even focusing on this as a case of an overreaction? All you said is "you blew up" and then you defend confidanon, which I'm sure you're doing; you're chainsaw defending him, and you recently furthered it by voting one of his attackers (me)

His answer, completely ignores my question because he evades stating how the quote become misrepresented or made the response look different. He simply restates that it did and it was fucked up. He then continues to claim I'm just defending confidanon, and etc.

In post 145 I respond first to the first part. I comment on how his idea of a chainsaw defense is simply put... an exaggeration that I find scummy. I also ask how my question was double sworded and how if it was (as he said it was) why did he even bother answering it. In his second part I respond stating I still don't see where the response becomes different and I really start to think this kid is scum making a desperate move to get mod action going to get day 0.5 done (he is aggressive enough and seems to be enough of a loose cannon / power hungry to win that I can see him trying to pull such a tactic... especially since he STILL has not given any actual reason or evidence as to how the response became different)

In post 172 we have the power outage story (maybe true maybe not) where he had a nice big wall for me but lost it thus he decides i'm being way too offensive and i'm way out of line. Direct quote "

Silverbullet, I had a huge response typed out for you, and I am honestly glad that my computer died. Your play is offensive, and YOU are the one out of line here. This issue was between ConfidAnon and myself, and I am not going to respond to you whatsoever in this thread anymore if I can help it. Good day to you, sir.

He also claims that I should have stayed out of it (never a good sign) since the argument should have been between just him and Confid. He then states he is going to basically ignore me for the rest of the game.

First Off. I'll be the first to admit that I can be an asshole and go a little crazy... most of the time I do it intentionally in search of a reaction and apologize after or at the end of game. I have not done this intentionally here not have I meant to be offensive.

He also responds to my response to Pim "

I've read your posts, and not only are they bad, they are honestly offensive.

" Which is humorous in 2 ways. A. he's offending me B. He's butting in between a discussion... wait didn't he state that I shouldn't have done the same thing between him and confid?...

Anyway I respond in post 173 apologizing for any offense given and asking where specifically I offended him. His response in post 174 "

Just your general behavior/tone/wordchoice in and of itself. I don't want to delve into it and start a pissing contest, just know I'm not going to really respond to you a lot, and if I do, like this, it will be very concise.

" He doesn't want to give specific examples where I offended him.. probably because there were none. He's more or less making an excuse to not respond to any pressure I give him.

And basically that's it. I make one more post in 175 that he has yet to answer and will assume he will ignore.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TL:DR: This is my first legit wall in quite awhile.. I'd urge you to read the whole thing but simply put.. Fur makes accusations to Confid that he cannot back up. He get's scared when I call him out on it and says I'm chainsaw defending Confid and attacking all his attackers. He continuously ignores my key question as to how Confid's mistake = a changed response. He then asks me a double sworded question that I again call him out on. He claims I did the same yet still attempts to answer (without actually answering) the double sworded question. I call him out on this and the lie that my question was a double sworded question. He then says I'm offensive yet refuses to list specific things that offended him. He also proceeds to offend me. He then states that he's going to basically ignore me.

This just screams SCUM. We have Double Days and Day 0.5 NEEDS to end with Fur dead.

I'm just gonna go sit in a corner now while this is completely ignored... -_-

[ConfidAnon]

Confid was scummy because he FoS'd me for no reason. He later explains that it's because I'm confusing. Since when does confusing=scum? Not many times.

. . . I didn't realize I'd have to clarify this, but that was an RVS, not serious, post. I was fairly sure that the little tongue sticking out emoticon made that clear, but from now on I'll be clearer.

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

Like I mentioned in my previous post, Number58, I do not disagree that antitown =/= scum. That is not the point of the argument.

If what you said is true, about town being far more likely to do irrational things, then the optimal scum play would be to do exactly what nacho is doing. Therefore, using the fact that town are more likely to do crazy things does not hold merit as a case. Reaction testing, as well, is not purely a town trait. Scum's job is to appear protown to survive. Why wouldn't a scum consider doing that?

So you just said that you have no reason to see him as mafia. This means that you are either mafia with him trying to stop him from being lynched by not voting him, or are mafia trying to act helpful is righting the town players obvious shortcoming. Am I playing your game correctly? I already have stated why him doing what he is makes him town, what parts do you not agree with? You are actually not responding to anything that I am saying but am instead attacking me while avoiding having to respond to anything that backs up my position.

No, you did not play the game correctly. Because you broke the rules, you must move your pawn backwards three spaces. Unfortunately for you, that made you land on a "skip your next turn" space. Let me show you how its done.

I'm not actively encouraging people not to vote him. I'm not lauding Nacho's play as OBVTOWN, nor am I calling for his lynch because I find him OBVSCUM. By questioning everyone's votes for Nacho, and trying to paint the lists as something inconsequential, you were defending him. I am not defending Nacho. Nor am I claiming that a vote on Nacho is invalid, as you seemed to be doing. Therefore, both of your situations are incorrect.

I'm not responding to anything you're saying? I disagree. Both this post and my previous one are nearly entirely based on what you have been saying.

Confid is still mafia. He is attacking me while ignoring all justification that I have presented for him going at an easy target full on right off the bad. The "pressure" that he put on him is a fabrication, as once he voted he just shut up about it, leaving his vote just sitting there, which does nothing to put pressure on an indiviual. I am thinking this is a combination of nachos lists either having zeroed in on Confids partners, or him realizing that im going all out on defending nacho, so wants to get rid of me to allow him to return to pushing someone who is acting like an easy lynch.

First part is false. I have explained why I was targetting Nacho.

Second part, you are stating my rationale for the Nacho vote, and then promptly yelling "NO YOU'RE LYING" without giving any solid reasoning as to why you believe I am. The only reasoning you've given is that I didn't repeat myself. I see no need to make multiple posts stating the same thing - it would just clutter the thread.

A Number58 lynch is still a good first lynch.

PREVIEW EDIT: Will read silver's case later tonight.

[Number58]

Scum's job is to appear protown to survive.

You are bad scum then.

Why wouldn't a scum consider doing that?

Because as you saw, most people dont even stop to think, and those that do get ignored.

I'm not actively encouraging people not to vote him. I'm not lauding Nacho's play as OBVTOWN, nor am I calling for his lynch because I find him OBVSCUM. By questioning everyone's votes for Nacho, and trying to paint the lists as something inconsequential, you were defending him. I am not defending Nacho. Nor am I claiming that a vote on Nacho is invalid, as you seemed to be doing. Therefore, both of your situations are incorrect.

Sure you are, you are still calling him scum. Name one post where you have actually said you have no read on him, since your last few sure say he is scum. Now you are trying to pass off the bad vote on him as something it is not.

I'm not responding to anything you're saying? I disagree. Both this post and my previous one are nearly entirely based on what you have been saying.

I said why he is town, you say nothing in defense of that yet continue to call him scum. I say why he is town, then you RESPOND DIRECTLY to that. This is where you are failing and why you are scum, you are attacking the player instead of attacking the idea.

First part is false. I have explained why I was targetting Nacho.

Right, you said pressure, which there is no way what you did was pressure. Pressure is aggressive, not standing in the corner trying to look as invisable as possible. You threw a vote and walked away, which is not pressure, thats bandwagoning.

Second part, you are stating my rationale for the Nacho vote, and then promptly yelling "NO YOU'RE LYING" without giving any solid reasoning as to why you believe I am. The only reasoning you've given is that I didn't repeat myself. I see no need to make multiple posts stating the same thing - it would just clutter the thread.

When no one is paying attention, and you are voting for "pressure" its good.

A Number58 lynch is still a good first lynch.

You do realize your entire case is that I defended a player correct? As I said, you are either bad mafia by your own definition, or extremely bad town by anyones definition. You get lynched a lot I bet. If I get lynched in order to get you lynched next, I will do so in an instant, since a 1-1 trade is a great thing.

Nobody Special - as implied by my past post, I have no good read on silver. I would say leaning town.

[ConfidAnon]

This reply will ignore the insults and other comments that detract from the actual game:

Because as you saw, most people dont even stop to think, and those that do get ignored.

I don't understand this. Could you please clarify?

Sure you are, you are still calling him scum. Name one post where you have actually said you have no read on him, since your last few sure say he is scum. Now you are trying to pass off the bad vote on him as something it is not.

My Post 161 mentions both the possibility of him being scum, and the possibility of him being town. Even though I do not explicitly say "no read on Nacho," I do not support one over the other. My Post 187 expresses the same line of thought. The only other post where I mention Nacho is my pressure vote post, which has already been explained.

I said why he is town, you say nothing in defense of that yet continue to call him scum. I say why he is town, then you RESPOND DIRECTLY to that. This is where you are failing and why you are scum, you are attacking the player instead of attacking the idea.

Ummm . . . huh?

Right, you said pressure, which there is no way what you did was pressure. Pressure is aggressive, not standing in the corner trying to look as invisable as possible. You threw a vote and walked away, which is not pressure, thats bandwagoning.

How was my original post not aggressive?

Also, this is the same thing you said last time. If this is going to become both of us repeating our stances over and over in response to each other, I'm going to begin ignoring it, because that just makes the thread more difficult to read.

You do realize your entire case is that I defended a player correct?

If you oversimplify everything, yes. And I'm totally fine with that as a case.

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

silverbullet

- Why would ScumFurcolow be more likely to react in this way than TownFurcolow? I don't see anything - all I see is him getting mad because of my typo. While the legitimacy of that is debatable (not trying to start up an argument with that), there's nothing indicative of alignment there. I think you're getting your confusion at his anger mixed up with his alignment.

However, the effort put into that feels Town.

[silverbullet999]

-Confid
It's his claims (how your typo somehow changes his actual response for instance) and refusal to actually explain these claims when asked that has me feel that he was more or less A. trying for mod action (something I feel scum would be more inclined to do) B. trying to justify his attack on you by being over dramatic C. trying to get me to back off with shouts of chainsaw defense and that I'm attacking all your attackers and then lastly D. Acting like I've offended him heavily yet can't even quote specific examples and uses this reasoning to justify why he will no longer respond to any further questions I have.

As I said it really just screams scum to me cause it seems like he's trying to hide something with his refusal to actually state any reasonings or justifications.

[Hiraki]

FOS Fur

Quote wars generally arent helpful. seems very defensive of himself. seems very aggressive and isnt gaining any town points from me

Could you answer my question on why you're randomly going after different people after I pointed out that you're tunneling Nacho hardcore?

Also, could you post a decent post? Two liners

really

aren't helping my case on you.

I'm going to skip #186 for now because it's 1 AM, and I'm not in the mood for quote searching. I'm leaning that it won't change my attitude of Fur though.

. . . I didn't realize I'd have to clarify this, but that was an RVS, not serious, post. I was fairly sure that the little tongue sticking out emoticon made that clear, but from now on I'll be clearer.

But you still FoS'd me. There was something serious in that post.

[singersigner]

Ok, so unless silver does something ridiculously stupid, he won't ever be getting a vote from me. CA's right; the effort put into the case on Furc was too much to be from scum, especially on D1.

I like the points about Furc's reactions (especially after I told you not to worry about it as he's an emotional player, but you wanted to delve--this is apparently why, lol); however, I think your points about him being a "dick" (so to speak) are invalid. Like I've said, he's an emotional player.
I wouldn't ever mind his lynch unless it's mylo/close to it, but at this point, I think the emotion-tells you've pointed out are null.

I'll catch up tomorrow when I'm not running on 40 hours and let you know if I still agree with myself.

From what I know/have heard from Nacho: he's a very strong town player. I've only played with him as scum/third party, and there were definitely no gambits like this one. For the life of me I can't figure out where he's going with it, though...

[Starbuck]

Vote Count

Meransiel - (5) bvoigt, Hiraki, Klazam, Furcolow, Twistedspoon
ConfidAnon - (2) singersigner, Number58
Furcolow - (2) Meransiel, silverbullet999
Number58 - (2) Nobody Special, ConfidAnon
Hiraki - Pim
nachomamma - DrBokChoy

Not Voting: HWAG, boberz, Nachomamma8

With 16 alive, it takes 9 to lynch.
The current deadline is Monday, April 4th, 8PM EST.


Adding boberz to the "will be replaced" list.

[Meransiel]

@silver's justification: Seems clean and to the point. While I'm not really sure it stands, it does make silver look pretty pro-town to me.

Now, the Confid case is something else. Insisting on voting somebody due to a role restriction that says NOTHING about alignment, and that I would see more likely applied to a town than a mafia, is stupid to say the least. And very anti-town.

@TS: I have already explained why that was NOT strawmanning. If you're too lazy to look it up, here and here. You jump too easily on wagons. As such, I'm getting a slight scum read on you.

@Hiraki and singersigner: I actually have a problem reading this two chaps. They both have a...way of posting, that I don't know whether I should attribute to personality or alignment. Hiraki is being overprotective of himself, immediately questioning everyone that shows even the sightliest suspicion of him. Short fuse, scumminess, I have no idea. Singer, at the other pole, seems very clean and logical in absolutely everything that he says, I I honestly can't tell if that's just him being himself or him posting very carefully to cover up slips.

My reads so far:

Twistedspoon - neutral, leaning town
Hiraki - town, leaning scum (yeah, I know it sounds weird)
Signer - town, leaning...I have no idea
silver - town
fur - neutral, leaning scum (yes, my suspicion of you has reduced)
confid - scum, leaning neutral
Nobody Special - I have no idea
bvoigt - town, leaning neutral
Number58 - pretty much town
Nacho - town
Pim - no idea
boberz - is he even playing?

[Meransiel]

FOS Fur

Quote wars generally arent helpful

. seems very defensive of himself. seems very aggressive and isnt gaining any town points from me

Also, this right there. It's a null tell, but just out of curiosity, I want to know what made you think that.

[Starbuck]

Apokalyptika replaces Hazard With a Glove.

Stepho, can you please update the first post?

[ConfidAnon]

Now, the Confid case is something else. Insisting on voting somebody due to

a role restriction

that says NOTHING about alignment, and that I would see more likely applied to a town than a mafia, is stupid to say the least. And very anti-town.

This is a mountainous game, so the bolded is invalid.

But even with that - I have no clue what this means. Would you mind restating?

[Apokalyptika]

Hi guys! Glad to be playing with you all.

From initial readings, I get a fairly null read on Furc (null leaning scum, though). Silverbullet gets townie points for how he responded. I'm not liking Meransiel, mostly for focusing on one little facet of furc's argument. For the record, I don't think it was that weak; in general, voting someone is more town than not voting someone. That being said, I'm not inclined to put her at L-3 right now. Nacho's lack of content is thoroughly irritating, and I think it's a way to get by without making any useful comments. I have enough respect for him as a player to think that he could get away with it, so I'm going to

Vote: Nacho

. Also,

FoS: bvoigt

, because his posts 1 and 2 really seemed like trying to trap someone into agreeing with him. Also, I think that the point was a quite reasonable one.

[Hiraki]

@Hiraki and singersigner: I actually have a problem reading this two chaps. They both have a...way of posting, that I don't know whether I should attribute to personality or alignment. Hiraki is being overprotective of himself, immediately questioning everyone that shows even the sightliest suspicion of him.

You should try it more often. Especially if the other person can't bring up any reason. It's a nice way to find easy scum.

I don't like Apokalypitka's first post. Especially the part where he votes Nacho, and then he FoS' bviogot. You wanna know the problem here? He completely misses all the little elephants in the room.