Mini 432 - RajÔÇÖs Freaktown IV (Raj's Ladies): GAME OVER

[scotmany12]

If he voted for someone else, I would still be this cautious about it. He jumps into the game and simply votes me with no explanation at all. If that is a random vote, he should not have done that as we are past the random voting stage when he did voted. If it was not, I think that every vote should be accompanied with some sort of explanation.

[logicticus]

well, dont expect anything rational from bj.

it just looks very defensive on your part

[IH]

scot, why are you so concerned about one vote?

Perhaps because there was no reasoning in the first place? We've all asked it from him.... I don't find it being overdefensive though.

[PJ.]

Because I really don't care beacuse both Logi and LL are scum. Why does it matter which scum we lynch first. I'm positive and will beat life on this. I wish I could double vote.

[rajrhcpfreak]

Don't Forget Your Day Restrictions Post Count: (3:55PM)

Lawrencelot: 4 (logicticus, Mert, Panzerjager, IH)

BillyTwilight: 1 (Mariyta)
logicticus: 1 (scotmany12)
scotmany12: 1 (BabyJesus)
Mert: 1 (Metatron)

Not Voting: (BillyTwilight, Lawrencelot)

6 to Lynch

Just to remind everyone, you don't get a night action if you don't do your day restrictions. and if you make it a habit, i WILL mod kill you.

[BabyJesus]

Also, babyjesus. Can you provide some reasoning in voting for me? I think we are past the random voting stage now, so you must have some reason.

yes

[BabyJesus]

If he voted for someone else, I would still be this cautious about it. He jumps into the game and simply votes me with no explanation at all. If that is a random vote, he should not have done that as we are past the random voting stage when he did voted. If it was not, I think that every vote should be accompanied with some sort of explanation.

pretty sure vig needs to take care of our scotmany problem tonight if we don't lynch you

[Metatron]

mm. Nice work Billy. That sounds rather plausible.

[Lawrencelot]

Lawrencelot wrote:
My suspicion goes to... (snip) mert and mariyta, who don't post much content.


You must have missed the bit where I said I was away. I only got back yesterday and have been trying to catch up.

Lawrencelot wrote:
Topics that don't need that much attention in my opinion: whether IH recieved his pm or not, he is posting now so it doesn't matter.


Erm, it was only you and Panzer that seemed interested to begin with, if memory serves.

You see, the best thing is that you have loads of posts saying "lurker hunting is wrong" but your posts don't appear to have much content that doesn't involve lurkers in some way.

Post 38 - "Lets vote for lurkers"
Post 48 - "I don't trust IH, the crash has been over for ages"
Post 67 - "Lynching lurkers bad, voting lurkers good"
Post 70 - "You didn't say why you were lurking like the others did"
Post 86 - "Let's stop the lurker conversation; here're some lurkers I don't like"

You've made eight posts in this game in total. One was a random vote, one was a slight addendum via-EBWOP, one was a question and the remaining five were about lurkers in some way or another.

Seems to me like you're lurking in plain sight, a far worse crime than your garden-variety lurking.

I didn't know you were away indeed. Ok, it's true I have only been talking about lurkers/lurking, but that's because that was the main discussion going on. You looked back at my posts and concluded it was all about lurking, but have you looked back at other's posts? The main discussion was about lurking, so I gave my contribution to it. Something that cannot be said about everyone.

LL, initially you wanted everyone to vote for IH. As soon as he posted and FoSed you, you backed off. Why? You pretty much have done that for everyone you've voted for: placed the vote, waited to see if any real pressure would build up against that player, then moved it as soon as it looked like things weren't going to get hard for that player.

Panzer, you are guilty of the same thing, but even more so with your most recent vote switch. Like Mert, I want to know what the "hat" was that dropped and made you switch your vote to LL.

Both of you are really getting by skin up. Panzer, you tried to change a point I made against you and twist it into an argument that I wasn't trying to make, LL you are flighty as a bird with your votes. Neither of you seem to be willing to really scum hunt, but just jump on the closest bandwagon and hop off again as soon as said bandwagon starts to evaporate.

That was my whole point. I was voting for the lurkers to get them posting, I gave my opinion on that too often. I voted 3 lurkers: IH, scotmany and logicticus, they weren't posting then but after my votes they were posting, so I unvoted. Whether or not they posted because I voted them, the lurker-voting was a succes. For me, it had nothing to do with bandwagoning.

Now please let's end this discussion about lurker-hunting, because by now there are no more lurkers I think. And babyjesus, you still didn't give much reasoning behind your votes.

[Mariyta]

Lawrence, you should do something to help yourself. I'm going to put you at -1.

Unvote, Vote Lawrence

[Lawrencelot]

And why? I hate those people voting without giving any reasons, and you even put me at -1. I gave my defense, what should I do to help myself? Roleclaim? If you let me roleclaim, it will only help the mafia.

In case this is my last post, you should watch out for logicticus. But please don't vote me because of a bandwagon, like mariyta did. I gave a reaction to every accusation if I'm right, so I don't know why I'm the target. It's just a scummy bandwagon. Lynch the bandwagon starters, not me!

[Mariyta]

Not because of a bandwagon, but nice try. It's common practice to at least try to defend yourself at this point, instead of crying.

[BabyJesus]

vote mariyita

pretty sure she is scum at this point. I also like web crawlers, blogs, fish, pizza, and javascript. Ninjas rock.

[scotmany12]

Also, babyjesus. Can you provide some reasoning in voting for me? I think we are past the random voting stage now, so you must have some reason.

yes

Care to provide that reasoning then?

If he voted for someone else, I would still be this cautious about it. He jumps into the game and simply votes me with no explanation at all. If that is a random vote, he should not have done that as we are past the random voting stage when he did voted. If it was not, I think that every vote should be accompanied with some sort of explanation.

pretty sure vig needs to take care of our scotmany problem tonight if we don't lynch you

Why do I have to be vigged? Cause I was not active during the random stage? Or was it something that you found in that post? Please enlighten me.

[scotmany12]

FoS: BabyJesus

Two votes, no explanation for each. Scummy in my book.

[IH]

Now please let's end this discussion about lurker-hunting, because by now there are no more lurkers I think. And babyjesus, you still didn't give much reasoning behind your votes.

Scummy mcscummer scum trying to distract away from the issue at hand. One of the biggest issues with him is his 'views' on lurkers and lurker hunting. So if we end the discussion, then we end the discussion of the suspicion on you.

[Mariyta]

Stop spelling my name wrong!!

[BillyTwilight]

Well, short one tonight, just to catch up.

Don't really like how pressure came off of logicticus so quickly. One thing Panzer had said earlier was that logicticus has earned his vote. I want to know more about why the vote switched to LL.

I don't like Panzer's reasoning for voting LL, seems like he's leaving himself open to jump right back on the logicticus bandwagon if the tide turns again. I still want to know from you what distinguishes your behavior from LL's so much, seeing as you both pretty much went after the same people until LL came under fire.

Don't really like Mariyta's vote at this point, mostly because I like to see more reasons from people for a vote, especially for a L-1 vote on a wagon that formed in about 24h RL.

vote mariyita

pretty sure she is scum at this point. I also like web crawlers, blogs, fish, pizza, and javascript. Ninjas rock.

Well I hate piano recitals, dried asparagus, green cherry nougat, prom night, very small rocks, and soul-suckin ancient Egyptian mummies. Ask-a-ninja Ninja rocks.

I really want more information from BJ on his vote choices; what about Mariyta's actions have triggered your radar? I take it from your personalized title that I am probably asking for answers I won't get. Oh well. Don't like the mention of a vig kill. We don't know if we have a vig, and a SK could use those kinds of posts to their advantage later in the game.

I think maybe it's time we start making lists (sorry for those of you who hate list makers and long posts... your probably going to hate me by the end of this game).

Mod, can we get an updated vote count please?

.

[BabyJesus]

Also, babyjesus. Can you provide some reasoning in voting for me? I think we are past the random voting stage now, so you must have some reason.

yes

Care to provide that reasoning then?

not particularly

[BabyJesus]

FoS: BabyJesus

Two votes, no explanation for each. Scummy in my book.

really? how so?

[scotmany12]

You so far has done very little in this game. The only 2 things you have done is vote for me and Mariyta, without explaining either one of them. And then you say you have reasons for voting for me, but you don't want to reveal them. You are slowly becoming one of the scummiest players in this game.

[Lawrencelot]

Not because of a bandwagon, but nice try. It's common practice to at least try to defend yourself at this point, instead of crying.

I defended myself often enough. Now I even proposed to roleclaim, which would only help the mafia, and no one responded so I won't do it. How can I defend myself if you vote me without giving a reason? IH does accuse me, as quoted below, so I can defend myself from that.

Lawrence wrote:
Now please let's end this discussion about lurker-hunting, because by now there are no more lurkers I think. And babyjesus, you still didn't give much reasoning behind your votes.



Scummy mcscummer scum trying to distract away from the issue at hand. One of the biggest issues with him is his 'views' on lurkers and lurker hunting. So if we end the discussion, then we end the discussion of the suspicion on you.

So my view on lurkers is why everybody voted me(even you didn't say it in the post where you voted me)? If they had just said that, I could defend myself. Alright, let's keep this discussion until the deadline then. Although I just keep telling the same thing over and over again:

I voted lurkers to get them posting. I didn't want to lynch them, and I always planned to unvote when they did post, except when they posted really scummy things of course. I voted three lurkers, and they all posted after my vote, although that might not be the reason why they posted, but it worked, so I unvoted. After I vote a lurker I will unvote if they post, or unvote if they get in danger.

Now, I've said this multiple times and no one told me why this view is wrong, so actually some of you don't have the right to vote me.

IH: your vote on me didn't include a reason, although you probably told the reason in different posts. Here's my reaction (above), now please say that it's wrong or unvote me.
Panzerjager: you voted me without any reason given in the same post, and billy mentioned some points about it so now you have to give a reaction.
Mert: the reason why you voted me is different from the others, it's because I was only mentioning lurkers, now look at what IH does when I want to end the discussion about lurkers... I also gave a reaction to you btw.
Mariyta: is this defense good enough? If not, tell me why.

I think I forgot some people, but that will come later.

[Mariyta]

Not a fabulous defense, but meh. I voted you because you were pushing so hard for people to attack lurkers, then decided against it after you were wagoned, asking people to stop. Seems pretty scummy. But I'll give you some breathing room.

Unvote

[BillyTwilight]

BillyTwilight's Fun With Lists!

BJ: He's - Surprise! - not very helpful so far in the game. Although I won't call the votes he has placed so far scummy, I would like to see more reasons for voting those players. His play style is going to make it very hard to get a read on him. I think it will take several game days and a longer voting record to get a real read on BJ.

IH: I am ok with his posts so far. I think he slightly misinterpreted some of my arguments in the lurker discussion, but I don't think it was intentional and I think it was more of an argument over game theory that has little to do with the specifics of this game.

Lawrecelot: Not sure of what I think of his defense. Didn't particularly like the bandwagon that formed against him so quickly, but I

really

don't like when players quasi-claim, saying they something to the effect of "If I claim it only helps the mafia" or the like. Other than that he has been vote hopping a lot, claiming that he is lurker hunting, which I find disturbing this early in the game. However, this could be his playstyle; I've seen others who pretty much forgo FoSes and other tactics in favor of just putting their vote on who they want to pressure.

logicticus: Very uneasy feel about him, mostly due to his vote of IH; when lurkers put votes on other players for lurking I get really nervous. The fact that he says he wanted to get discussion started bothers me; it's easy to vote someone with that reason, and I find it worse when players who do that don't bother to ask specific questions or otherwise contribute to the "discussion" that they wanted to foster - until forced to do so.

Mariyta: Don't like how fast she jumped on the LL bandwagon, or how fast she came of it again, especially since she left it open that she could vote him again without hesitation, leaving room open to get back on the wagon if someone else starts leaning his way.

Mert: Like Mert's posts so far. The only thing I tend to disagree with him about is LL's propensity to discuss lurking in his posts. Considering conversation from most active players at the time centered on the merits of lurker hunting and how best to get lurkers to post, I think you would find a large percentage of the players posts to contain something about lurking.

Metatron: Not sure about Metatron. Don't agree with IH that his early posts were rolefishing, seemed to me to be more of a discussion on what the events of N1 mean to this game, which is relevant. Like me, he seems to be a player who likes to hold his vote, but I haven't seen much from him in bold at all yet, which might be him trying to avoid stepping on toes and staying off center stage, so to speak. Metatron, you are still holding your Random Vote. Why?

Panzerjager: Right up there with LL in my book. Don't like his vote flopping at all, or speculation about logicticus distancing himself from IH, considering there was nothing linking the two in the first place. He twist the meaning of my original anti-lurking argument and asked a question that I find to be very scummy. He is bandwagonning a lot as well, though using FoSes and the like which keeps him from jumping his vote around as much as LL has. Also, he left himself room to jump right back onto logicticus if the momentum swings back that way.

scotmany12: Ok with his posts so far. Don't really agree with him that BJ looks scummy, mostly because I think BJ has a reputation for playing the way he has been playing this game, which means that currently we have little info to draw scummy conclusions from BJ yet.

Scummiest players currently: Lawrencelot and Panzerjager, followed closely by logicticus and then Mariyta.

Most town players: scot and Mert, followed by IH.

Wild cards: Everyone else.

I currently have FoSes on LL and Panzer. Would like to add

IGMEOY: logicticus, Mariyta

.

[Metatron]

Well, you see, in the last game I was in, I did alot of voting and it cost the town the game, so yeah, I've been rather hesitant. Right now, I'm devided between Scotmany and LL. Scotmany is someone who I feel is more likely to be scum than LL, but maybe LL just is poor scum, and I'm worried that if I end up deviding the vote between scotmany and LL, then we'll end up not lynching anyone today, and that'd be bad. That's been my thinking, anyways.