Mini 1505: N is for Normal (game over)

[N]

Vote Count 1.19

havingfitz

(0)

ICEninja

(0)

zakk

(1) Garmr

Garmr

(2) Skelda, Maxous

toolenduso

(0)

Sir Bastion

(0)

Slandaar

(0)

Thor665

(3) Slandaar, zakk, Albert B. Rampage

Elyse

(0)

Maxous

(0)

F-16_Fighting_Falcon

(0)

Albert B. Rampage

(5) Thor665, toolenduso, Sir Bastion, ICEninja, Elyse

Skelda

(0)

Not Voting:

havingfitz, F-16_Fighting_Falcon

With 13 alive, it takes 7 to lynch.

Deadline is in

(expired on 2013-10-23 18:36:35)

V/LA:

F-16_Fighting_Falcon until Friday

[Thor665]

But then again, it has been equally obvious that toolenduso has been scum since his first post in the game, so I suppose I should not be surprised.

I'm going to toss out an appeal to majority fallacy here.
But that said, there is a reason basically everyone in the game is now town reading Tool and it's not just because my beard is sexy.
He's town.
Yes, he's a little newb, but that is hardly a crime.

Also, you just called what ABR was doing as too obvious. I have previously expressed that his current tack is *trying* to look too scummy to be scum. Look at his play both prior to and post his admitting he

lied

made up (because that's different)

his case on me.
Notice that shift?
Yeah.
If you don't, then I'd love to hear about that too.

[toolenduso]

ABR: "Lynch Thor! Or Garmr! No, wait, lynch Elyse because she didn't unvote when I asked! No, wait, lynch Thor again!"

This is exactly the kind of "gimme" defamation that I'd expect scum to stoop to. It's too easy. It's too obvious.

Not sure what "gimme" defamation means, but if it's something scummy then here's some more examples I think fit into that category:

#147 is literally a piece of crap.

Nope. You're too bad. You are way, way too bad to be town. Oversimplification. Flat. Detached.

Bastion I'm sorry, but thats just plain stupid.

Can I just...not read any of Slandaars posts anymore?

contradicting yourself much?

We lynch you and you flip scum *oh noes who's town and who's scum the possibilities are endless, hell Thor might even be my partner bussing me to control town*

We lynch Thor and he flips scum *Well obviously we are town cause we told you so*

This is scum too.

'Only Sland push elsewhere lets lynch him!'

'I think this post should have just been a question'
'NO WAY YOU SCUM YOU CANT POSSIBLY THINK THAT'

Are we lynching Thor now or what?

....and countless others from Slandaar.

Oh, and my favorite;

"When I said I 'made up' something it is scummy for Thor to call that 'lying'...because, y'know...those are different things...also, there was no lie."

"I barely remember Thor"
"Thor is so good at scum he can make me have doubts"
"Thor is being so bad and oversimplifying, he is obv. scum."

Flail more.

...and many more from Thor. And then there's this one from you:

He seems to be crashing and burning and resorting to petty insults when he's been caught and tagged.

Now, zakk, I have a few questions for you. You first voted Thor over 400 posts ago. Since then, quite a bit has happened. Do you still think Thor is scum? Why or why not? Who else do you suspect and why? Any townreads? Why?

[ICEninja]

Just a reminder to those catching up, deadline is in 5 days. I really don't want to see D1 run right up to said deadline, so some thoughts sooner than later would be nice.

[Sir Bastion]

f16 is vla

havingfitz and skelda are catching up (and considering that slandaar blows his top if you fail to properly classify the misrep case then catching up is rather important)

everyone else has to (different levels) chimed in on today and for the most part have made their beds.

though I'd agree with tool that Zakk is very lacking overall.

So unless someone is able to pull out a fantastic new case we are stuck waiting on the catch up or the end of the vla (which is later today).

[havingfitz]

I hope to be caught up tonight. At the latest Monday as my RL weekend is pretty full.

[F-16_Fighting_Falcon]

A few points I want to note on a re-read (mostly on the Thor/Slandaar/Albert interactions):

I mistakenly assumed that Albert initiated the pressure on Thor. A re-read shows that Thor was the one who called out Albert in post 60 and then follows it up with more questioning in 65, 67, and 70.

Simultaneously, Thor questions Slandaar in post 60 and 75 and it seemed as though Thor would push on Slandaar soon. Albert then comes in at post 83 and votes Slandaar. So, Albert here is following Thor indirectly by voting the player that Thor was questioning.

Thor continues questioning Albert in 150 and 153. The

only

time where Thor expresses agreement with Albert is in 201 and it was not forceful or enthusiastic in any way, just a simple agreement. I feel that Albert is blowing it out of proportion in 581 calling Thor the friendliest. Albert then takes a stance in 206 saying that Slandaar's exchange with Thor isn't scummy. This comes after a lot of tunneling from Slandaar and Thor on each other. Albert puts up a case in 219 saying Thor is scummy.

I feel that Albert's jump here was opportunistic. Thor had shown at least mild suspicion of Albert so it is not Albert who is initiating suspicion but rather reacting to Thor who was already suspicious of him. Add to that the fact that Thor was then completely busy attacking Slandaar and had his hands full. This shields Albert from immediate attacks from Thor since Thor was so busy trying to lynch someone else.

Elyse's 561 seals the deal for me. I find Albert's response to her post in 581 inadequate. It doesn't address the points raised and Albert tries to write it off as a disagreement. I also don't like 582 where he says "

You lynch me, and say I turn up scum. Who do you lynch then?

" That doesn't even make any sense. If he flips scum, good. We can work it out from there. Scum lynches trump lynching for information.

Albert's appeal to Slandaar in 254 and subsequent explanation is interesting. I'll quote it for reference:

Once he gets 4-5 votes, it's not the time to have second thoughts.

We might not ever build the necessary momentum to lynch him again, if we miss our chance.

This shows a good understanding of how wagons are formed and how they break down. Albert knows that if a charismatic player dodges a lynch, it would be quite difficult to get the votes back on them again. Based on that, I really dislike this post:

I will unequivocally represent a real and dangerous threat to scum, if left alive. If they don't lynch me now, it will be hard for them to do so later. Don't let them have this lynch.

As Albert himself shows, it goes both ways. If Albert is scum, it will be difficult to get a wagon back on him later on (possibly with Thor dead and Albert's detractors mislynched or killed). Albert's now a strong scumread. I want to lynch him today once Skelda and HavingFitz post their thoughts.

[Sir Bastion]

f16 most of your links are not working (actually all of them I think)

[F-16_Fighting_Falcon]

I just realized the reason why. The post numbers had a space after them which takes you to the first post of the game instead of the post referred to in the link. Fixed it here.

["In post 656, F-16_Fighting_Falcon"]

A few points I want to note on a re-read (mostly on the Thor/Slandaar/Albert interactions):

I mistakenly assumed that Albert initiated the pressure on Thor. A re-read shows that Thor was the one who called out Albert in post 60 and then follows it up with more questioning in 65, 67, and 70.

Simultaneously, Thor questions Slandaar in post 60 and 75 and it seemed as though Thor would push on Slandaar soon. Albert then comes in at post 83 and votes Slandaar. So, Albert here is following Thor indirectly by voting the player that Thor was questioning.

Thor continues questioning Albert in 150 and 153. The

only

time where Thor expresses agreement with Albert is in 201 and it was not forceful or enthusiastic in any way, just a simple agreement. I feel that Albert is blowing it out of proportion in 581 calling Thor the friendliest. Albert then takes a stance in 206 saying that Slandaar's exchange with Thor isn't scummy. This comes after a lot of tunneling from Slandaar and Thor on each other. Albert puts up a case in 219 saying Thor is scummy.

I feel that Albert's jump here was opportunistic. Thor had shown at least mild suspicion of Albert so it is not Albert who is initiating suspicion but rather reacting to Thor who was already suspicious of him. Add to that the fact that Thor was then completely busy attacking Slandaar and had his hands full. This shields Albert from immediate attacks from Thor since Thor was so busy trying to lynch someone else.

Elyse's 561 seals the deal for me. I find Albert's response to her post in 581 inadequate. It doesn't address the points raised and Albert tries to write it off as a disagreement. I also don't like 582 where he says "

You lynch me, and say I turn up scum. Who do you lynch then?

" That doesn't even make any sense. If he flips scum, good. We can work it out from there. Scum lynches trump lynching for information.

Albert's appeal to Slandaar in 254 and subsequent explanation is interesting. I'll quote it for reference:

Once he gets 4-5 votes, it's not the time to have second thoughts.

We might not ever build the necessary momentum to lynch him again, if we miss our chance.

This shows a good understanding of how wagons are formed and how they break down. Albert knows that if a charismatic player dodges a lynch, it would be quite difficult to get the votes back on them again. Based on that, I really dislike this post:

I will unequivocally represent a real and dangerous threat to scum, if left alive. If they don't lynch me now, it will be hard for them to do so later. Don't let them have this lynch.

[/quote]

As Albert himself shows, it goes both ways. If Albert is scum, it will be difficult to get a wagon back on him later on (possibly with Thor dead and Albert's detractors mislynched or killed). Albert's now a strong scumread. I want to lynch him today once Skelda and HavingFitz post their thoughts.

[toolenduso]

Actually zakk, could you specifically talk about Albert? I'd like to hear about your thoughts in general, but mostly I'd like to hear what you think about ABR.

[Sir Bastion]

still not working f16 from 150 onwards

I think at this point just let the players go look themselves. If they cant be arsed then its their own fault

[F-16_Fighting_Falcon]

FIXED

A few points I want to note on a re-read (mostly on the Thor/Slandaar/Albert interactions):

I mistakenly assumed that Albert initiated the pressure on Thor. A re-read shows that Thor was the one who called out Albert in post 60 and then follows it up with more questioning in 65, 67, and 70.

Simultaneously, Thor questions Slandaar in post 60 and 75 and it seemed as though Thor would push on Slandaar soon. Albert then comes in at post 83 and votes Slandaar. So, Albert here is following Thor indirectly by voting the player that Thor was questioning.

Thor continues questioning Albert in 150 and 153. The

only

time where Thor expresses agreement with Albert is in 201 and it was not forceful or enthusiastic in any way, just a simple agreement. I feel that Albert is blowing it out of proportion in 581 calling Thor the friendliest. Albert then takes a stance in 206 saying that Slandaar's exchange with Thor isn't scummy. This comes after a lot of tunneling from Slandaar and Thor on each other. Albert puts up a case in 219 saying Thor is scummy.

I feel that Albert's jump here was opportunistic. Thor had shown at least mild suspicion of Albert so it is not Albert who is initiating suspicion but rather reacting to Thor who was already suspicious of him. Add to that the fact that Thor was then completely busy attacking Slandaar and had his hands full. This shields Albert from immediate attacks from Thor since Thor was so busy trying to lynch someone else.

Elyse's 561 seals the deal for me. I find Albert's response to her post in 581 inadequate. It doesn't address the points raised and Albert tries to write it off as a disagreement. I also don't like 582 where he says "

You lynch me, and say I turn up scum. Who do you lynch then?

" That doesn't even make any sense. If he flips scum, good. We can work it out from there. Scum lynches trump lynching for information.

Albert's appeal to Slandaar in 254 and subsequent explanation is interesting. I'll quote it for reference:

Once he gets 4-5 votes, it's not the time to have second thoughts.

We might not ever build the necessary momentum to lynch him again, if we miss our chance.

This shows a good understanding of how wagons are formed and how they break down. Albert knows that if a charismatic player dodges a lynch, it would be quite difficult to get the votes back on them again. Based on that, I really dislike this post:

I will unequivocally represent a real and dangerous threat to scum, if left alive. If they don't lynch me now, it will be hard for them to do so later. Don't let them have this lynch.

As Albert himself shows, it goes both ways. If Albert is scum, it will be difficult to get a wagon back on him later on (possibly with Thor dead and Albert's detractors mislynched or killed). Albert's now a strong scumread. I want to lynch him today once Skelda and HavingFitz post their thoughts.

[Thor665]

Looking over Al in ISO I kind of feel like he's willing to state anything as long as it serves him at that moment. He has contradicted himself in addition to

lying

making things up

and it also all started after he started pressing this too scummy to be scum thing. He's either melting down or playing a game, either way looks like a scum lynch to me because town would either tend to admit to frustration or wouldn't be lying about what they believe.

[Thor665]

To stave off the question before it is asked;

the contradiction that immediately springs to mind is that he says he is a bad lynch due to lack of info while also advancing the idea we should lynch a lurker (the definition of a non-info lynch) because they are the most dangerous scum. Also, then Thor is a good lynch for info.

No me gusta.

[toolenduso]

the contradiction that immediately springs to mind is that he says he is a bad lynch due to lack of info while also advancing the idea we should lynch a lurker (the definition of a non-info lynch)

Do you mean that ABR said he's a bad lynch because of a lack of info we'd get by lynching him, or he's a bad lynch because we lack info about him? And if it's the latter, could you provide a quote, because I didn't see that in Albert's ISO.

[Thor665]

It's the former.
And since you apparently found that in his iso...

[ICEninja]

Hey look, Thor665 got the 665th post.

[Thor665]

I have now won the game.

[Thor665]

Twelve hours and no posts.

The people sitting quietly on 'not-Albert' wagons and the lurkers are all, functionally, endorsing either an Albert deadline scramble lynch or a no lynch.

Not so fond of either. I'd rather people buy into the wagon or oppose the wagon.

[Thor665]

Eh, I'll give fitz a semi-pass on that whine as long as he shows up Monday.

[F-16_Fighting_Falcon]

Maxous and Slandaar seem to oppose it. I've been pretty clear I support it. Skelda and HavingFitz need to catch up and post. I think Garmr supports it as well based on his posts and just doesn't want to put Albert at L-1 before the replacements catch up. I'm assuming you are talking about Zakk.

[Thor665]

Max and Slandaar also fall into the pool because they are not actually advancing their opposition of it.
Zakk certainly is in the pool.
Garmr wanting 'opinions' from replacements while not actually pressing them for what he wants opinions on falls into the pool as well.
You supporting it while not voting it falls into the pool deeper than Garmr.
Frankly, Al opposing it while shutting up like a clam and walking away is an issue on a conceptual level - though I think that supports my take of what is happening.

But, yes, other than that I have no issues.

[Thor665]

Just to call out Max and Slandaar some more;

Max's current case is "gut" and he's been quiet. Yeah, that'll stop an ABR lynch...nope, actually that's supporting the lynch but without actually saying so.
Slandaar has like half the players in the game yelling at him every time he posts - I would like to think that he should puzzle out that if he wants to advance his agenda he needs to do something different (an aspect he's using as a scumtell against me) instead he keeps on keeping on. Yes...how pro-town.

It's more than stating your beliefs. It's doing something with them so it looks like you believe them.

[Maxous]

No, I'm not supporting the ABR wagon but lynch him if you want.

My case on Garmr is'nt gut, he's scummy. We can lynch him D2 or w/e

[Thor665]

If you oppose the ABR wagon and you support a Garmr wagon why are you not working hard to clarify your case and demanding that people respond to it?

Functionally I just insulted and diminished your entire case and minimized its importance and you aren't even stepping up to show how I'm wrong, you are right, and your case has validity and should be listened to.
Look at the vote count, look at the only other person voting the way you are - your case is going nowhere and it's doing it at lightning speed. Why are you okay with this?