Open 30 - Fire and Ice (Game Over!) - before 470

[LoudmouthLee]

I didn't "magically" not notice it. I get "HAY, LET'S FOLLOW GLORK" alarmingly often because people expect me to "magically" find scum out of nothing. When I first saw CTD's post, I figured it was mostly a joke, so I responded with a post that was mostly a joke. The possibility of buddying-up honestly didn't even cross my mind until you mentioned it. I can't offer any further explanation than that. Either you'll choose to believe me or you will not.

So.. CtD, a "strong" player, wouldn't make you do a double take when he says "HAY! LETS FOLLOW GLORK!"

Look, I remember having the Paragon title. It's NO blessing, but it doesn't excuse you from making scummy moves such as BLATANTLY IGNORING a possible buddy-up. I think it sort-of implicates the both of you. I would love to lynch you BOTH today.

[Glork]

No, it didn't, because of the nature of my feelings towards CTD. It is similar to (though not as strong as) the kind of allowance I might give to Fritzler or Twomz.

Also, to say that I "blatantly ignored" it is inaccurate. That implies intentional nonobservation. I merely failed to notice it, a purely accidental occurrence.

Mod: Could you prod MrBuddyLee and Mert, please?

[LoudmouthLee]

Also, to say that I "blatantly ignored" it is inaccurate. That implies intentional nonobservation. I merely failed to notice it, a purely accidental occurrence.

Well, as you said.. I'd eather buy it or not. I don't buy it.

[Glork]

That's apparent. If I were as unwilling to allow for simple mistakes as you, LmL, I'd be advocating your lynch, too.

[YogurtBandit]

@Mod:

Generally, when a replacement comes into a game, they are not responsible for the other person's vote. Was Meneme's vote not counted because of Wizard's previous vote?

Mneme didnt unvote.


Glork, they are prodded.

[mneme]

So I didn't.

unvote
vote: crub

What's the evidence that CtD's "who should we lynch today, glork" was buddying up rather than asking for an opinion?

And I ask again -- what's the meaning of this:

vote: Crub

for quick protection of xyzzy.

Probably not the smartest thing for me to do ... but if you're going to vote me you might want to unvote xyzzy first so that your vote actually counts.

I don't see crub's protection of xyz. But crub copped to it, which is even more curious.

[LoudmouthLee]

What's the evidence that CtD's "who should we lynch today, glork" was buddying up rather than asking for an opinion?

The fact that it's done on two separate times... and ignored twice

[MrBuddyLee]

unvote, vote: LML

for overly strident and disproportionate attack on CTD. I smell gamesmanship.

I will definitely be back before deadline.

[MrBuddyLee]

mFOS: xyzzy.

Two things:

1)

Glrok's defense is getting more unusual as the minutes pass. He has a pretty consistent style, and this isn't it.

This is the kind of loose comment scum design to avoid pinning themselves down on specifics while loosely encouraging others to scan the victim's posts for relative meta scumminess.

2) He referred to someone's question earlier as "a trap", indicative of a defensive mindset.

[LoudmouthLee]

unvote, vote: LML

for overly strident and disproportionate attack on CTD. I smell gamesmanship.

I will definitely be back before deadline.

Check your nose. When have you ever known me to not be stident and disproportionate?

[Mert]

I already stated that my reason for suspecting Crub was in the manner and timing of his vote for Xyzzy. To assert that I have not given any reason is an outright lie. If you wanted explanation of that reasoning, you could have just asked for it.

I'm asking for it. A number of people have been on and off the Xyzzywagon today, so I could say "I don't like the way they joined it" to pretty much anybody who has voted for him today. Please explain what it is about Crub's entrance that puts him above others.

Also, you FoS him for his manner of jumping on the wagon (which you're going to explain in more depth soon) but also do a lot of "not much to go on" type stuff. Then later, with little input from Crub, somehow this escalates to you having a case against him from previous posts. When I did a full reread a moment ago, this didn't occur to me, but when reading you in isolation it begins to look like you thought Crub could go fairly easily and came up with a case for why he's scummy afterward.

[MrBuddyLee]

Check your nose. When have you ever known me to not be stident and disproportionate?

I've never played a full game with you. I have seen you be strident, but I do feel you took a stab at cooking a case on CTD there. Perhaps ok fodder for D1 conversation, but it felt like you were willing to follow through on it.

So Glork's more likely to be scum than CTD now?

[LoudmouthLee]

Check your nose. When have you ever known me to not be stident and disproportionate?

I've never played a full game with you. I have seen you be strident, but I do feel you took a stab at cooking a case on CTD there. Perhaps ok fodder for D1 conversation, but it felt like you were willing to follow through on it.

So Glork's more likely to be scum than CTD now?

Good morning. Nice that you've arrived. Some tea, perhaps?

Looking at CtD's and Glork's reactions (my case on Glork is heavily documented), I like the Glork lynch paramount today.

[Glork]

I'm asking for it.

Um... did you just not read the last portion of my post? I figured that somebody would ask about it, and I explained already:

Anywho... just after CTD removed a vote from Xyzzy, putting him back down to three, Crub put a new 4th vote on Xyz with this post:

unvote

vote xyzzy

Until you start making sense

Hardly a shining example of solid pro-town reasoning... and it put the pressure

right

back on Xyzzy for what had only been a completely pointless wagon.

Less than 24 hours later, and only five posts later, Crub's next post:

You guys do realise that this day is deadlined for a little under 3 days right?

...served to remind us that there was a deadline, and we needed a lynch. If that doesn't put us in a bandwagon mentality, I don't know what will. And, considering he had just put the spotlight right back on Xyzzy, it definitely made me wonder about Crub's intentions.

Minor FoS: Mert

for paying no attention whatsoever. Seriously. What the hell?

[Crub]

As I said already I thought that xyzzy was acting strange, it wasn't until the next day that I realised that we were close to deadline, and that we should probably start real discussion as opposed to the current xyzzy bandwagon. My intent by pointing out that deadline was approaching was not to lynch xyzzy but rather to promote discussion.

I find it strange that someone so concerned with the quick bandwagon on xyzzy you would come out and say this :

No reason not to finish off Xyzzy now.

[Glork]

As I said, it was a throwback to BabyJesus (a former scummer who used to say that all the time), and a complete joke. Usually when somebody makes a throwaway comment like that, they don't expect three other players to agree and vote for that person. Defintie scum among Sefer, Crub, and MBL. I'd honestly wager one Fire and one Ice from that group of three.

Anybody care to take me up on that offer?

[LoudmouthLee]

Anybody care to take me up on that offer?

Sure.. especially I now believe that one of them is your partner.

Who are you trying to bus, Glorkie?

[Sefer]

I'll take that bet, Glorky. What are we wagering?
My vote had nothing to do with you. I stated the intention to vote well before you'd made that comment (or really said anything of importance in the game, for that matter). While I agree that there's nothing that suggests CTD and you are scum together, I wouldn't be surprised if Xyzzy and you were.

[Crub]

So I didn't.

unvote
vote: crub

What's the evidence that CtD's "who should we lynch today, glork" was buddying up rather than asking for an opinion?

And I ask again -- what's the meaning of this:

vote: Crub

for quick protection of xyzzy.

Probably not the smartest thing for me to do ... but if you're going to vote me you might want to unvote xyzzy first so that your vote actually counts.

I don't see crub's protection of xyz. But crub copped to it, which is even more curious.

That's not the post where I'm supposed to be protecting xyzzy thats the post where I'm pointing out that if MBL can't read the mod's unvote/vote policy on that same page, then I'm not putting much stock in his opinion of the rest of the thread.

Anyway whats wrong with protecting xyzzy? Theres only something wrong with protecting someone if theres a good case the person you're protecting is scum and theres not much of a case against xyzzy at the moment.

[MrBuddyLee]

I'd honestly wager one Fire and one Ice from that group of three.

Anybody care to take me up on that offer?

Why not two fire or two ice?

unvote, vote: Glork

[Glork]

Because I don't think that two teammates would be that blatant in wagoning Xyzzy the way they did. However, it would seem perfectly ripe for one member of each team to jump onto Xyzzy the way they did.

Anyway, I seem to be on the threshold of being the one lynched today. Unfortunate that this should happen. I am

the

Doctor. Now unvote me, you fools, and go lynch actual scum.
(See, Lee, I had a different intent when I said I was in no danger of being lynched. I was trying to hint to you to get off of me because I'm the game's Doc. Yet you once again chose to interpret my words in the light that would make me look as bad as possible.)



Crub and MBL are *DEFINITELY* my top two picks for scum right now. I'd be perfectly happy lynching either. I would seriously encourage everybody to go back and actually look at the bandwagon on Xyzzy as it developed. It's going to be full of good info, yet several players seem to have chosen to play Follow-the-Lee in going after me. MBL and Crub both joined the Xyzzy-wagon at very opportune times for scums to push lynches, and they both jumped my wagon as well.



Another note on MBL:

"I'm going to put this guy at Lynch -1, but I don't have an intent to lynch. If he gets lynched, it's someone else's fault."

No, I have faith in this town not to do that. And it'd be 2nd-most my fault if it in fact did happen.]/quote]....the last time I saw somebody say "the town is good enough to make up for my intentionally bad/scummy play" was CES in Face-to-Face. He was scum then. Definite minus-points for MBL.

Also, MBL, your initial vote for Xyzzy was "to get a wagon going." Considering he was at Lynch -2 and had at least two votes more than anybody else, I'd say there was already a wagon going. I want you to further explain your vote for Xyzzy. It sure as hell doesn't make sense to me from a pro-town perspective. What possessed you to put him at Lynch -1?

I'd completely forgotten that we had static deadlines in this game.

Unvote, vote: xyzzy

for his earlier overreactions and more recent jumping about. I agree that we should save our extension for later on.

Sefer, please explain the rationale for your vote much more clearly. For a Lynch-2 vote, this is terribly shoddy reasoning.... there wasn't very much to go on against Xyzzy, IMHO. Yet considering FIVE different players had voted for him at this point, for next to nothing, I do not see his response as being an "overreaction." What did Xyzzy overreact to? What makes his "jumping about" lynchworthy, in your opinion?

[Glork]

And, a note, LmL: I am

SEVERELY

disappointed in your play so far. You concocted this idea that I'm scum based on your own chosen interpretation of my play, completely choosing to ignore/disbelieve the truth. I'd really expected you to be open to the possibility that I just didn't think about CTD's posting as being buddying. I haven't yet decided if your chosen interpretations are scummy, or just an indication that you're playing poorly this time around, but there is *SO MUCH GOOD INFO* all over the place, and you've just tunnelled on me. Bad LmL. You should be more observant.

FoS/IGMEOY: LML

. Everyone, keep a very scrutinizing eye on this guy. He could very well be scum, too. LML, if you

are

town, hopefully this will serve as a wake-up call.

[MrBuddyLee]

unvote

Glork, the game needed ACTION, and fast. Putting someone at L-2 wasn't enough. I needed to place that vote to serve as a catalyst for immediate action--an unvote by someone, a hammer by someone, several immediate FOSes and votes on others. You can argue the vote was unnecessary, and I'd agree-yes, in a longer game it'd have been unnecessary.

vote: xyzzy

for the defensive mindset that had him calling a simple request a trap.

[Glork]

Nope. You've tried to become the tipping point on Xyzzy, who I firmly believe is pro-town, and now me, and I *know* I'm pro-town, both under the guise of needing to do something before the deadline. I would be very happy to lynch you today.


What are your current thoughts regarding the following:
LmL
Sefer
Mert
CTD
Vendagoat
?

[YogurtBandit]

Deadline in about 12 hours. Vote count is coming.