Mini 430: Villagers and Vampires (GAME OVER!)

[Snichkin]

confirm

[Snichkin]

vote: Yesterdays

(I described the reason before the downtime).

[Snichkin]

good you remind me? i dont remember it.

I don't like the way he's playing. for example (and this is only example after the downtime), posts 25-26 aren't useful at all. I don't exactly remember, but the posts that were lost weren't usefull also.

[Snichkin]

Anyone have any leads? It's been a busy week

how do it help us?

[Snichkin]

Do Not Put Yesterdays On L-1!!!

Yesterdays, you've been acting strangly. can you explain why you:

• 1) make random votes without voting anybody?
  2) make
  very
  unuseful posts?
  3) keeping voting kiil_Schmitty although you never said why and the first NotVote for him was random?

BTW, everybody, this:

Dang. Three votes against me. There is no way to prove my identity. However kill me, I dare you.

You'll find what I really am...

Isn't a scumy post. It can be posted by scum as well as by towny.

[Snichkin]

Yesterdays, you didn't answer my questions

[Snichkin]

1) the first question wasn't "why you make random vote?"
it was "why make random votes without voting anybody?" It's not usefull in any way to say that someone is suspicion in random.

2) To make an unuseful posts is what stucking the game. It's scumy thing to do

[Snichkin]

zchinque, if you want you can vote who ever you want to, I just didn't want we lynch yesterdays before he answer my questions.
I think we should have long day one and because of that I'll

unvote

. I still not happy with the answers Yesterdays gave me so I would

FoS: Yesterdays

.

[Snichkin]

great speak, Shanba. I'll start with you:
I think that although you had some mistakes in the beggininng of the day (math etc.) you are a towny (for now). You're last post is

very

correct. sorry that you're not posting enough.

[Snichkin]

I'm also a little worried about Phoebus, I'm going to watch him a little bit more carefully.

nice one scotmany.

unvote: aude omnia ; vote: yesterdays

this is due to aude's current posts + yesterday's weird posts yesterday (you know what i mean)

I think that Phoebus is just trying to look "right" by unvoting aude omnia and voting yesterdays. He did that just after scotmany post about watching him (and even added strange reference to scotmany).

vote: Phoebus

[Snichkin]

maybe but still.

[Snichkin]

aude aumnia, you're wrong. If you think that this discussion is leading no where you would be suprized to see the discussion in day 2 when there are 2 vampires trying to distruct us (and they would manage to do this). I still think that phoebnus is the scumy. The post that I already quoted (see above) is very scumy. He reaturned to the Yesterdays issue although we closed it already.

[Snichkin]

I didn't understand why you vote yesterdays

[Snichkin]

unvote, vote:Shanba

FoS: Yesterdays

for lurking

[Snichkin]

you had no real reason to vote yesterdays (at least I didn't saw enough reason in your explanaition post)

[Snichkin]

unvote, vote: Yesterdays

If we will lynch someone I prefer it would be someone who wasn't in the game at all

[Snichkin]

sorry Elias I wasn't here between your two posts. I compleatly agree with you. I don't think I saw anything useful from phoebus although he posted some posts. as for yesterdays I don't think that he is the vampire so I think no harm would be if he just won't play.

unvote, vote:Phoebus

[Snichkin]

Phoebus, if no one will unvote you, you will die so I sugest you would try to defence

[Snichkin]

@scotmany12
The only "helpful" things that he did wer to oppose no-lynch and change his vote. Although I agree with the first it's hardly enough considering that the second isn't really helpful.

mod: I second the request for an extension

[Snichkin]

@Elias
I think you over-reacting on scot's attack. He just pointed out something a bit suspicious

[Snichkin]

I can't realy add something to the discussion.
I agree with Elias on everything he said till now exept the way he said it. I think he can use less sarcazm and emotions in his attack. I think that phoebus diffense is scumy because of his appeling to emotions

[Snichkin]

@Shanba
What do you think about scot's vote changing?

[Snichkin]

The purpuse of the game is to enjoy. If someone not enjoying because of your style - I think it would be a good idea to change the style (at least for this game). Just try to be less ofending, please.
BTW, who is playing?

[Snichkin]

vote: scotmany12

posts 200 and 202 are scumy I will tell more later have no time.

[Snichkin]

first of all #200 is very suspicious. you thought that the vampire is amoung the active players and sugested to stake one of the lurkers? mis-lynch is

always

anti-town. #202 is WIFOM and the same anti-town sugestion. also there are Elias's reasons for suspect scot although I think they're weaker.
so:

vote: scotmany12

[Snichkin]

Shanba is confirmed towny so:

vote: Phoebus

now Suanba have to decide which one of us is scum. I'm going to sleep. will provide PBPA on Phoebus in 12-15 hours. Phoebus - please do the same on me and Shanba would decide which of them is better.

[Snichkin]

I'm writing PBPA on Phoebus right now. It could take some time

[Snichkin]

PBPA on Phoebus

the text in red is all the scumy things

first Phoebus post is very logical and understandable:

vote: yesterdays

Why are you posting and not voting? What good is your "input" at this point in time?
Do you think we care what your RNG says if you're not going to act on it?

Put out or shut up!

then was the downtime and everything got confused. that why it was hard to understand this post:

I think I graduated from that ^^ to aude omnia

unvote: yesterdays ; vote: aude omnia

later he explained that he voted aude for suggesting no lynch. I think that it is more logical that such a suggestion is a mistake than it is a scumy thing.

elias notice that and said it

and then Phoebus started to be over deffensive:

I can't resurrect posts lost in the crash. Sorry.
If the loss starts a new timeline for you, with nothing committed to memory, I can't help you.
My vote is based on what I remember.

and then he continued to be over deffensive with the attack on aude, using the same arguements in different way

(the comments are mine):

you just seem bent on misrepresenting my intentions.

IIRC, he mentioned/defended his position at least on three occasions before the crash.
I concede that he has called it "poorly thought out" now but apart from that, he hasn't done anything else*, (nor has anyone else for that matter) for me to consider removing my vote.

there is no such thing as a mislynch today. who're you going to out? The head vampire at best.

now you seem to be using the lack of posts (i.e. the ones lost in the post) to build a tenuous "case" against me**.

where is this coming from?

*what else do you want him to do?
**over deffensive

then was yesterday's strange posting (#59, #61 & #63) which was noticed by Phoebus:

i'd be worried about that post ^^^ if the game didn't state there was no informed minority at this point in time...

this strange posting started an interesting discussion (#69-#81)

in which Phoebus didn't participate.

afterwards started a discussion about lynch/no-lynch and "what we should do now?" (#82-#91)

in which Phoebus didn't participate although his vote on aude was based on this issue.

Phoebus's next post was

a week

after his previous post:

nice one scotmany.

unvote: aude omnia ; vote: yesterdays

this is due to aude's current posts + yesterday's weird posts yesterday (you know what i mean)

in this post he voted for yesterday although he already noticed the things yesterday did and didn't do anything about it, and aude was doing the same thing he voted for him in the first place.

there was no new reasons for changing the vote.

this was a beginning of a

lurking period for Phoebus

. his next post was after 5 days without anything new:

Modalicious:

Vote count?

and then after 3 days without anything new, and then after 3 days without anything really new although it looked like discussion (he already said all of it before):

I don't think enough people realize that if we mislynch, that's 2 townsfolk lost-- 1 to death and 1 to the vampire.

I find this point appealing but I would still rather take a chance on getting the scumlynch and a day 1 victory.

If that doesn't work, there are always connections to work on.

I will not switch back to aude yet since his reasoning is slightly appealing but his insistence is rather appalling. In my view, it does not help that he was willing to to vote someone else and then switched back.
With such (apparently) well thought out rules, I'd stick to my guns about a NL in your place. In the same way, I am sticking against a NL at this time.

the next post with something

a bit

valueable was after 8 days:

I take exception to being called a lurker.

I have been active where it was required.

This is day one. I have said all I have to say because there are no other stimuli for me to react to other than Yesterday and Aude Omnia.
both have been attended to by me and my opinion is known.

I don't care to add too much spam to an unremarkable day, making it difficult to analyse later.

actually he just saying: "I'm not a lurker" although he is

then was the longer post ever in this game:

I have been unable to come online for a couple of days.

If you'd like to meta game, please check the whole forum for activity levels over the last couple of days.

I don't see what I have to defend here.

My opinion has been unequivocally clear.

I am

not

lurking in plain sight, I have said all that I have needed to say.

1) I voted Yesterdays for reasons already outlined.
2) I voted Aude Omnia for his insistence on voting no lynch. While his explanations behind his actions were decent enough, I have mentioned that we might as well make use of a chance of catching the vamp on day 1. If that is not successful, then we can look for connections later, which will appear regardless as people get recruited.
I told Aude to stick to his guns, as I did to mine in voting yesterdays.

Consistency is the key. It avoids people from getting manipulated.


Given the amount of lurking in this game, there has been

absolutely

no one

else

on whom to focus.

Given the fact that I have already stated my opinions on Aude and Yestedays (and I'm repeating myself here) who are my

only

subjects, I see no reason to be accused of lurking in plain sight.



At this point in time I will

unvote: Yesterdays ; vote: Elias the thief

You can call this OMGUS if you like.


I have been around all day.
You have disappeared for a while, to return conveniently, near a deadline and using my presence to persecute me. Talk about hypocrisy.

I have already stated my opinions.

They are out there. They have been made about the only people on whom judgment could be passed by me since the rest of the lot are lurking.


How many times must this be repeated before it permeates through to you?


If we didn't know this game started with one scum, I'd say Snichkin was your mate for falling in line (again) so quickly. In fact, I would almost rather vote Snichkin over Elias, except for the fact that Snichkin had pointed fingers at me earlier with the same pathetic excuse but he has been around and not dropped off, only to come back with ridiculous accusations.


At least now I have three suspects as opposed to your one (i.e. me) who you are going after on the most tenuous of arguments.

Give me a break!

What else do I say?

I have been around.
I have been voting.
I have aired suspicions.
I have been unable to log on but that is across the board.

How is this lurking?

In which he practicly said many times: "I'm not a lurker"

based on post which he posted a

month

ago

afterwards there was the second deffence for elias's attack (after another 5 days):

Wow.


Talk about a tenuous case.
From what I read of Elias' case file, I get a sense of grasping at straws.

Part One of the case

Look here. I've said this earlier, repeated it earlier and repeating it again.
I do not speak more than what is necessary.
I have outlined my suspicions against people.
They were Aude Omnia and Yesterdays.
I do not see where it requires you to have a certain minimum number of suspicions in any given time frame.

One I had stated my opinions, I don't see why I need to post anything else.
You are using this "lack of content" to persecute me?
Of course it makes an "impressive" case when thrown against me in a supposed PBPA but the fact remains.
When you look at my posts, their content and your case in the proper context, I have done nothing "suspicious".

I have posted suspicions, voted, and contributed where it was necessary.
That is what is required of a mafia player.

Being a post whore, is not.

If there are no more suspicions in my mind at this time, where do I bring them from?

Pulling something out from my ass (especially when not required) is liable to get me into more trouble than stating my opinions and sticking to them.

Add to this the fact that there is only one evil person in this game at this time.
There are no allegiances to detect at this time, no connections between multiple people to ferret out.
How are multiple suspicions possible at this time?

Also, with terrible activity, there is nothing to pick up on.
I am a victim of actually being interested in playing the game, and not lurking?
That's really ridiculous.

Part Two of the case

This should be read in conjunction with the last two paragraphs above.
With only one scum, limited activity and no connections to look for, how is voting for only two people suspicious?

Part Three of the case

You're wondering why I am upset about you?


You have given tenuous reasons for voting me.

You have called me dumb multiple times.

You have used sarcasm in your attack against me.

You are picking nits where lice don't even exist.

You are painting me a villain on false grounds.

I repeat. I have stated my arguments. They are limited. Fine. Since when is that a crime?


Put yourself in my place.
What would you do?


Given these points, I'm fine with my current vote.

mostly appealing to emotions and repeating previously arguments

Well...the modkills throw my theory out of the window.
Both people who were my suspects are dead and proven innocent in their deaths...


Having read over somewhat, I'd agree with Shanba about Snichkin.
Originally I read into his ramblings more as a function of his English but taking a closer look at his posts makes it seem to me as well that he was looking for a place to hang his vote and wherever the tide was flowing, he was happy to go...


In all honesty, my vote on Elias earlier was slightly OMGUS. I was frustrated by his faulty insistence that I was lurking in plain sight...


scot's post just before the mod did his thing was a little reminiscent of reverse psychology but I'll let it slide for the time being...

vote: Snichkin

the first thing that he said on day 2 was to agree with shanba (without adding new arguements) and voting me (

which put me on L-1

).

Also he admit that the vote on elias was OMGUS (which is not good in that state of the game)

and finally the scumier thing ever:

put me on L-1 when we are at LYLO without either enough discussion or enough arguements

list of acusations:

1) voting only 2 players although one of them was just stupid noob (yesterday) and the other just made a little mistake (aude)
2) being over deffensive
3) lurking
4) jump on bandwagons (for example: yesterdays wago)
5) appealing to emotions
6) repeating the same argument over and over
7) seems only care for staying alive (OMGUS vote is an example of it)
8) put me on L-1 when we are at LYLO without either enough discussion or enough arguements

so, actually he did the same things he accusing me in and did other scumy things to.

[Snichkin]

newbie 287

[Snichkin]

the game is over you have notime to explain. I was towny

[Snichkin]

Elias don't blame yourself you did great job. Sorry I wasn't enough townish