Open 20 - Pie E7 (Game over) - before 453

[IH]

How major can it have been, if nobody even thought it worthy of comment? Your argument seems to be that the wording Patrick used was strange and sounded like a scumbuddy coaching, and that even when this turns out not to have been true, you're suspicious of me for not commenting on it at the time. But nobody found it strange except you, either at the time or later when you've pointed it out. And you single me out repeatedly for this "ignoring Patrick pressing for a claim", as if this is a crime for me, but just fine for everyone else. The only difference I can see is that you believe that because I said I found Simenon's behavior following the claim a bit suspicious, I was somehow also obligated to find Patrick suspicious as well. Which doesn't really make sense. It's as if you've declared you're For Simenon, which means you have to be Against Ripley. You really seemed to be doing much the same as Simenon did, starting off from the assumption "Ripley is scum" and then scouring my posts for evidence to support it.

No it was more, you noticed something similar in nature, I'd assume you would have noticed this as well. I'm sorry you think I made a conclusion and then began looking for evidence.... but there were things that I thought got glazed over and NEEDED more attention. As you state, it was generally ignored, and I didn't like that. Not at all.

However, I have to say here that this game has in some ways reminded me of a newbie game I played with Simenon into which IH also replaced. The roles have been reversed to an extent, in as much as in the previous game it was IH who, immediately following his arrival, was making what I thought of as - let's say excitable, and not very coherent posts, with which I disagreed thoroughly. And Simenon was supporting him. Both turned out to be town. (I was town too.) So I do have to take into account that there's some history of these two genuinely agreeing with each other even when I disagree with every word of it.

Because Me and LFR are on a wavelength man. Waaaave Leeeength.

Even taking that into account, I still find IH's almost complete assumption of Simenon's innocence bizarre. I think Simenon's case against me was incredibly weak, and I tend to be more suspicious of someone who supports a weak case than of the person who made it in the first place. So IH is at least as suspicious to me as Simenon/Skruffs, and maybe more so.

As I stated, Simenon is sticking to his suspicions, as I stated, and not just jumping onto someone else. Of course this is invalid if I am scum, but the fact of the matter is I find it to be protown that he didn't just shift onto me, which he could have easily done.

Unopporunisticism=protown

in this manner anyways.

This is all still coming from Simenon's actions from yesterday btw.

The only thing I feel like I need to respond to in 342 is about the para/Jordan here. While it could be that he was trying to defend Jordan, I saw it as more trying to steer the conversation away from anything and everything.

I checked Day 1 posts, and IH made no reference to finding him so pro-town, something he has stated so vehemently today. If anything, you found him scummy - you FoSed him and called him "slightly suspicious" (although it was in the context of something much greater for Jordan).

Overall, I don't undertand why he is so pro-Simenon/Skruffs today.

End of day 1, already stated

I haven't disagreed with Skruffs so far.... but Ripley, why were you pushing Skruffs about "focusing on those two games exclusively"?

1.It would be logical to start metagaming as such (with the same setup as this)
2.After he explained it was a start, why did you continue to press it?

Patrick did notice this - questioned it - Ripley ignored it - and Patrick brought it to his attention again.but Ripley's response doesn't make ANY sense. Patrick seems to buy it though, and I wonder if this was some slight British distancing or something.

Skruffs wins this game

Skruffs, it's impossible for me to answer all of your post because you refer to things in vague terms without providing quotes or even a post number.

I wanna note this.

I'm just wondering what the point of this is. To admonish Skruffs? Just general information? Letting us know? Throwing off on Skruffs post?

With IH, it's the converse situation. He is treating Simenon/Skruffs practically as cleared today, claiming this is on the basis of his posts yesterday, though, as pointed out by Aimee, he didn't appear to think so at the time:

What's interesting is that it was a slight fos referring to not revealing his reasons, that you should know about, as i believe you commented on it. Then, when on a massive lurk fest, Simenon gave off what I believed to be a giant sign of a townie.

Ripley, I think it is possible IHscum would defend Simenon as town. I do think it may get too wifom to carry much weight, especially because as you've pointed out he might not have any particularly coherent or rational plan. Certainly he hasn't put alot into this game.

You try doing a reread with these long ass posts. Seriously.

The benefit you haven't mentioned here is the fact that he could buddy up to a townie (Simenon in this scenario) and gain their trust. In this scenario, that would make it harder to lynch IH if scum, and if that did happen, he may well have managed to create a connection to Simenon that would cause a mislynch the following day. I also think it's a bit simplistic to assume that merely going with the flow at that point would net IH the win.

I for one am naturally wary when everyone seems to agree so readily on one target, especially in lylo

. With no poweroles left, all we have is discussion, so any decent town is going to grill everyone hard and not just jump on the first target and lynch them.

Thought that was important. ++

I'm getting slightly concerned about the way Skruffs and IH seem to be acting around each other. With IH, it's been a chorus of "Simenon/Skruffs is THE most pro-town person in the game" rather obviously. With Skruffs it has been more subtle - as far as I can see, the only reference he made to IH in his post 403 is saying he was "happy" with a post where IH noticed Simenon, and says that he would rather IH would be lynched than himself.

What's funny was he did the same thing with aimee XD

I believe.... I would be most uncomfortable with a Patrick lynch. I find him increasingly more protown. I would say that the scum group at this point and time, as Skruffs has stated at least once, is Ripley/Aimee.

There are no distinct links, just by a process of elimination type standpoint. I think I'd also feel happier with an Aimee lynch....

Nice to see you again IH. When will you post?

Now. I apologize once again everyone. As I stated before, coming back from super extended absences is hard X_X I'm dying off from nightkills and games ending alot, so my pressure to post in games are getting lessened and I'm feeling free-er to post now.

[Ripley]

No it was more, you noticed something similar in nature, I'd assume you would have noticed this as well.

Of course I noticed Patrick asking for a roleclaim, but, like everyone except you apparently, I didn't think there was anything noteworthy about it. I still fail to see what was "similar in nature" between Patrick's requesting a roleclaim from a player facing a deadline lynch, and Simenon's moving his vote from his prime suspect to a player he'd said he thought was town, without waiting for counterclaims. If I've misunderstood, and these are not the things you believe were similar in nature, please explain. Unless you can do this, and explain, more convincingly than you have managed so far, why Patrick's actions should have stood out as suspicious, I don't think it's reasonable for you to keep singling me out for criticism for not commenting on an issue that nobody but yourself has found worthy of comment at any stage.

As I stated, Simenon is sticking to his suspicions, as I stated, and not just jumping onto someone else. Of course this is invalid if I am scum, but the fact of the matter is I find it to be protown that he didn't just shift onto me, which he could have easily done.

So is this the reason that you're treating Simenon as cleared today? If so, I'd like more details about this. Please specify, with quotes or post numbers or both, where it was that you thought Simenon passed over an opportunity to shift his vote to you, and also explain why this is so significant to you. Simenon's only votes were for Jordan and Paradoxombie (both town) - why is it such a big deal to you, if you're town, that he chose to vote those particular protown players and not you? Also: Nobody still alive voted you. In fact, if you exclude your predecessor's vote on Patrick, nobody still alive ever voted anybody other than Jordan/Paradoxombie, either. So why are you singling Simenon out at all, let alone to the extent of clearing him?

If there's more to it (your belief in Simenon's innocence) than that, please explain precisely what it was about his play at the end of Day 1 that has so convinced you.

The only thing I feel like I need to respond to in 342 is about the para/Jordan here. While it could be that he was trying to defend Jordan, I saw it as more trying to steer the conversation away from anything and everything.

This doesn't begin to explain what I asked about, which is: why, after all the negative things you had to say about Jordan, including (to Para) "While jordan scum scrambles, you unsubstantiate another player." you proceeded to completely ignore your own case against "Jordan scum" and go exclusively after Paradoxombie.

I haven't disagreed with Skruffs so far....

LOL - well, there's a surprise. Did you agree with what he said to Patrick (Post 403, paragraph 3) about Paradoxombie claiming being useless?

Ripley, why were you pushing Skruffs about "focusing on those two games exclusively"?

This has already been done to death while you were lurking. See posts 382 and 385, where I explained my views in detail already.

Patrick did notice this - questioned it - Ripley ignored it - and Patrick brought it to his attention again.but Ripley's response doesn't make ANY sense. Patrick seems to buy it though, and I wonder if this was some slight British distancing or something.

Skruffs wins this game

Until and unless Skruffs explains these comments of his, which he's been asked to do, the "game" is one to which he alone knows the rules. Do

you

understand what he meant? Or did this just strike you as a promising remark by Skruffs that quite probably meant something or other, so you just decided to throw a cheer in its direction, in line with your policy of blindly supporting everything said or done by Simenon/Skruffs, most especially if it attacks Ripley?

I'm just wondering what the point of this is. To admonish Skruffs? Just general information? Letting us know? Throwing off on Skruffs post?

If I don't explain any occasion where I fail to answer every word of a post it gets used against me. Skruffs' tendency to describe events with his interpretation of behavior, rather than description of the actual events, combined with his decision not to use quotes or post numbers, made it impossible for me to reply to all of his post. I therefore stated this at the start of my reply.

What's interesting is that it was a slight fos referring to not revealing his reasons, that you should know about, as i believe you commented on it. Then, when on a massive lurk fest, Simenon gave off what I believed to be a giant sign of a townie.

Sorry, don't understand this, though the end seems to refer back to the reason for your belief in Simenon's innocence. So, please elaborate.

You try doing a reread with these long ass posts. Seriously.

Really, you make life difficult for yourself by disappearing for long periods. I don't think this is a difficult game to keep up with.

OK, on to other things.

Patrick, you mentioned Tapioca Mafia earlier. In a way that game was the converse of Pie C9 2, where I thought Skruffs was innocent, and am thus having more trouble with his behavior in this game than you. You thought he was scum in that game and say that's caused to to recalibrate your expectations of him. In Tapioca, you had Aimee pegged as town but I was suspicious of her. And now in this game you're finding her suspicious. Maybe because I didn't get the strong protown vibe you did from her in Tapioca, I'm not noticing the same difference as you are.

Aimee has agreed with me on almost everything today, which perhaps explains why I'm struggling to see the scumminess everyone else seems to. Because apparently at this stage everyone but me would place her in their top two suspects, and two of you (Patrick, IH) have her as their top candidate for a lynch. (Though I don't think anybody has made much of a case against her. IH in particular seems to have picked her out by a process of elimination.) Anyhow, I need to think about this.

[Patrick]

Aimee has agreed with me on almost everything today, which perhaps explains why I'm struggling to see the scumminess everyone else seems to.

(Shrug) this is true, but if you're protown, it's not as if it's especially hard for scum to just agree with everything you say, and soften you up by telling you you look protown. You've had a ton to say about everyone else, and very little about Aimee, other than agreeing with me about a few things like under the radar, lacking in curiosity etc. So just one scenario is that she's scum and is slipping past you by telling you what you want to hear. Another is you're scum with her and favouring her (generally little commentary or opinion on her, not much on scumpairings with her in other than saying you think IH/Aimee is unlikely). However, I'm definitely not convinced she's scum, and don't want to blindside myself, which I have done before on certain people.

She's apparently not in your top two, which means she's more town than scum from your perspective. Are there any posts in particular by her that look protown to you?

Basically I think she was low under the radar on day 1, some posts trying to appear more active (I think the post where she talks about everyone was the main one standing out). She was more reactive than proactive, that is, posting mainly when mentioned. Protown players want to find scum, whereas scum have to view every post they make as a potential risk that could incriminate them later. So, some scum will only react and not take the initiative.

Her first post of today bothered me, already talked about that. Her first post with content was ok, except the whole paragraph addressed to you is slightly worrying, because she asked you something that you've just made lengthy posts explaining to me. Skimming at that point maybe? Yes, others appear to do this as well at times.

Post 391, I think she's trying to hard to push the IH/Skruffs connection. If Skruffs analyses the whole game and doesn't mention IH at all then ok, but it seemed at that point Skruffs was just doing little things here and there, and hadn't fully read up. I don't think it was reasonable to see IH and Skruffs as more likely scum together because of that. She then stated that Skruffs didn't like the way I asked Jordan for a claim (which was false, IH was the one pushing that).

I'm also interested in her response to my 414, which I thought I'd get yesterday (real life, not game day). I'm still intrigued as to what she thinks her attitude towards Simenon/Skruffs today is if it's not attacking him. I was suprised that she'd prefer to debate the precise definition of an attack rather than maybe defend the actual content of the attacks she made.

Like I said, I'm not fully convinced she's scum, but I think she needs looking at.

I will actually concede that Skruffs lurking is bothering me more than before, mainly because I know he's around, have spoken to him, and he posts in other games. I can't see why town would be avoiding the game at this point, he's got a load of questions to answer at the very least.

IH, you are really pushing the Patrick asking Jordan to claim thing to an insane level. Please explain, in one concise reply why it's so notable.

Can you talk me through why Aimee replaced Ripley at the top of your list? Also, what makes me protown suddenly?

[Ripley]

I agree it's possible Aimee's been using me.

You've had a ton to say about everyone else, and very little about Aimee, other than agreeing with me about a few things like under the radar, lacking in curiosity etc.

You've been looking a bit more closely at Aimee lately, but prior to that

nobody's

really had much to say about her, and yet everyone but me has her as a leading suspect. I think my position's actually more consistent. I do agree she's been under the radar and I'll reread thoroughly this weekend.

Another is you're scum with her and favouring her (generally little commentary or opinion on her, not much on scumpairings with her in other than saying you think IH/Aimee is unlikely).

I don't think that's fair. My doubts about Patrick/Simenon and Aimee/IH arose from the voting yesterday. My other comments about pairings (post 407) arose from your theorising about IH and are all about IH pairings. It happens that the same Aimee pairing arises in both. I don't think I've talked about pairings anywhere else in the thread, though I'm keeping notes all the time.

Incidentally: you said early in Day2 that you thought Ripley/Simenon highly unlikely following our early disagreements. You've since noted that Aimee has been attacking Simenon/Skruffs today in a way you find "a tad opportunistic". Do you now think these two now also make an unlikely scum pair?

Most of the rest of your post should be answered by Aimee, so I'll leave it at that. I think there needs to be a lot more posting from people other than us two.

One more thing, and IH,

I would really like you to read this

. I made a note following your posts of July 17/18. that from your POV it lmust look like I could only be scum with Patrick. Now you've popped up and said you think I'm scum with Aimee, I clearly needed to take another look at this. My reasoning: I assumed you'd rule me out as scum with Simenon/Skruffs for the same reason as Patrick did, even if you weren't treating Simenon as innocent. Meanwhile, you kept repeating as part of your case against me that I was trying to shift the vote away from Jordan/Paradoxombie at the end of Day 1. You quote this post:

Patrick, would you be up for lynching IH or Aimee if the votes could be got together in time? You said a while back you thought you were more suspicious of Aimee than of Paradoxombie.

If you believe, as you say you do, I was actively trying to shift the lynch here, you must surely see how wildly unlikely it is that I'm scum with Aimee. If so I'd be trying to shift the vote from a townie towards my scum partner, shortly before deadline.

Skruffs, you also have Aimee/Ripley as your first choice, and Patrick thinks it's a good possibility. Whether or not you believe I was actively trying to shift the vote here, don't you think that's a pretty unlikely post for me to have made if I were scum with Aimee? (Incidentally, IH has never managed to explain convincingly how he thought it was scummy of me to be shifting the vote away from Jordan and Para, but that's another question...)

[Guardian]

Y'all are doing a pretty good job of posting content and being active. It almost brings a tear to my eye. I hope you keep it up when CTD returns in a few days. Don't get lazy just because the mod is nicer or whatnot.

At risk of people saying I'm going soft, I am gonna go ahead and say that you, as a whole, have done a good job. As a reward, I'm gonna do a vote count for you. You definitely should be grateful, as I don't do these things lightly... but you've earned it.

---

Vote Count

:

Not voting

(5):

Ripley, Patrick, Aimee, Skruffs, IH

---

Keep it real.

[Patrick]

You've been looking a bit more closely at Aimee lately, but prior to that nobody's really had much to say about her, and yet everyone but me has her as a leading suspect. I think my position's actually more consistent. I do agree she's been under the radar and I'll reread thoroughly this weekend.

I started off, even today, not paying much attention to her. I've since decided to correct that. It's not actually quite as clear cut as you say that she's my leading suspect, but you get the idea.

I don't think that's fair. My doubts about Patrick/Simenon and Aimee/IH arose from the voting yesterday. My other comments about pairings (post 407) arose from your theorising about IH and are all about IH pairings. It happens that the same Aimee pairing arises in both. I don't think I've talked about pairings anywhere else in the thread, though I'm keeping notes all the time.

Hmm ok, I think you maybe thought I was putting alot of emphasis on the last bit about pairings. I'm merely pointing out that she hasn't appeared much on your radar, and listed two possible reasons why that might be the case.

Incidentally: you said early in Day2 that you thought Ripley/Simenon highly unlikely following our early disagreements. You've since noted that Aimee has been attacking Simenon/Skruffs today in a way you find "a tad opportunistic". Do you now think these two now also make an unlikely scum pair?

It's not quite the same in my opinion. Clearly it would be too naive for me to assume that any two people who attack each other in lylo can't be scum together. I do think the way Aimee just nudged the Simenon pressure forward like that, especially by just saying Simenon is acting weird, is certainly something I'd expect from scum seeking an easy mislynch. It could be busing though, so I haven't ruled it out, even if it's not the highest on my list.

The arguments between you and Simenon seemed more heated to me, and Simenon struck me as more frustrated townie than scum. Not that you actually sounded insincere, but you don't generally seem to post on the cuff, so there's less emotion in any of your posts, regardless of alignment. I suppose it could have been a very deliberately arranged fight, though I can't say I've seen scumbuddies act in that way before in similar situations. So if it was a prearranged fight, it was done quite well, and enough to throw me off the scent.

Most of the rest of your post should be answered by Aimee, so I'll leave it at that. I think there needs to be a lot more posting from people other than us two.

I couldn't agree more.

[Patrick]

Mod

could be get a prod on Skruffs please?

[Guardian]

Mod

could be get a prod on Skruffs please?

Skruffs has been

summarily executed

prodded.

[Ripley]

Skruffs has been

summarily executed

prodded.

Vote: summary execution

I'm starting to wonder if the scum are hoping to force a deadline by posting no more than the bare minimum necessary to avoid replacement, and hoping everyone else will become too fed up to carry on posting in their absence. Mod: please don't fall for it.

[Skruffs]

Gimme a day ehre, I was spending the weekend with loved ones.
Loved ones OTHER than Patrick

[Skruffs]

THis is a very dry game and I've been workign outside - which I have written on the bottom of my thread. I would post something in depth now but to be honest I have not been able to kleep up. This game, posting on it, requires almost full mental power in forming responses, mostly because of all the tension there was just upon my replacement.

I do like Ripley's not so subtle pushing for an 'execution' though, which would result in instant scum win without any townies having misvoted. Dare I hope he's just slipped up?

More in a bit, i am at work an d all that jazz.

[Skruffs]

Okay, this is not a full response, and please don't say "Why are you ignoring this or that because again, this is only a partial response. I have three of the four players who aren't me asking me questions.

Please allow me to reiterate my position in this game. You all have been here since the beginning and your opinions and views have been guided and sculpted by what happened- and how it happened, in real time. I am getting everything all at once in a high pressure end game situation. I don't understand why I am being fossed for pointing out that I see something curious, the same thing I saw in the second game.

I didn't say much about Aimee in my review, perhaps, but there's not a lot to say. She was on a bad wagon, she made a player post, and she came on another bad wagon this morning. She's playing under the radar, as town or scum - which leaves less to be said. Saying that talking about 40% of the players more than one other player doesn't mean anything. If the Ripley/Patrick connection is a possible scum group, I'm going to explore it until I decide what it is.

Regarding IH defending Simenon, if I was scum, I would definitely defend a townie. If nothing else, if I wound up getting lynched, it puts a lot more suspicion on the townie that I was defending, which helps my partner. Secondly, four people on one person means at least one of them is scum and Probably two, so by defending a townie, he actually makes it look like the two are more likely scum buddies. In a sort of reverse psychology, that actually goads the other townies into wanting to lynch the townie more. This has probably been said before.

I agree that Paradoxombie should have claimed to keep himself getting lynched, but the way Patrick phrased it was not really leading up to that. Jordan was asked to claim, I don't remember how much time Paradox had to claim before he was lynched. I'd like to insinuate that some people may not have wanted him to claim, but I'll have to relook to really see who would have benefitted from that. IH-scum, probably , since he was the other wagon, and IH's scum partner.

what started as a decent scum tell seemed to be being exploited into an unnecessary case,

A) Can you explain what you mean here?
B) Where and how did it change from a decent scum tell to an exploited, unnecessary case?

and Simenon is, ugh, Simenon.

C) and can you clarify this?

Jordan's guilty conscience tell over Simenon, asking him if he was the cop, was I think pushed a bit further than it needed to be. I don't know, it was the first wagon of the game. I Wasn't even there so I can't complain about how it was handled.

Simenon, LookingforReality, etc, is Simenon. He's not a well manicured paragon player, but he is trying to make a distinctive mark for himself too in the community. So he plays sometime sin ways that are unconventional. He out thinks himself a lot. He's like Wile E Coyote (only not evil), which is probably why he always hammers me in IRC chat regardles of if I am town or not. Anyways.

[Guardian]

Just posting, for the record, that I have passed the torch back to CTD. Enjoy guys .

[Skruffs]

If you guys want, Simenon could replace back in. I don't know why he left but he told me he could replace back in, if you all want.

[CrashTextDummie]

I am indeed back. Hope my backup wasn't

too

hard on you guys.

Carry on.

[Patrick]

So, is Simenon replacing back in? I don't mind if he does if it helps solve the inactivity problem. Our biggest problem seems to be lack of continuity -- the only person I can have a normal exchange with seems to be Ripley. Everyone else takes about a week in between each post.

[Simenon]

I'm not really sure.

[Ripley]

So, is Simenon replacing back in? I don't mind if he does if it helps solve the inactivity problem. Our biggest problem seems to be lack of continuity -- the only person I can have a normal exchange with seems to be Ripley. Everyone else takes about a week in between each post.

Agreed.

Requesting prods on IH and Aimee.

Aimee told us she would be able to post during her month's absence, but has not done so.

IH made a single post under pressure 5 days ago, having posted no content for over a fortnight before that, and has not yet followed through by dealing with the responses. There was a previous period where his announced 1 week of absence stretched on into 2 and beyond, this unannounced extension covering the deadline period on Day 1. I think he needs to consider, honestly, his level of commitment to this game, and whether there's any realistic prospect of his making regular useful contributions in future.

[IH]

Of course I noticed Patrick asking for a roleclaim, but, like everyone except you apparently, I didn't think there was anything noteworthy about it. I still fail to see what was "similar in nature" between Patrick's requesting a roleclaim from a player facing a deadline lynch, and Simenon's moving his vote from his prime suspect to a player he'd said he thought was town, without waiting for counterclaims. If I've misunderstood, and these are not the things you believe were similar in nature, please explain. Unless you can do this, and explain, more convincingly than you have managed so far, why Patrick's actions should have stood out as suspicious, I don't think it's reasonable for you to keep singling me out for criticism for not commenting on an issue that nobody but yourself has found worthy of comment at any stage.

Ok Ripley, why do i seem to be singling you out? Because I find you an observant player. Usually you don't miss a thing.

What I also found strange, was that the request was seemingly ignored. The request went ignored. The lack of answering the request went ignored. just the general.... not... acknowledging it... at all... by any player.

So is this the reason that you're treating Simenon as cleared today? If so, I'd like more details about this. Please specify, with quotes or post numbers or both, where it was that you thought Simenon passed over an opportunity to shift his vote to you, and also explain why this is so significant to you. Simenon's only votes were for Jordan and Paradoxombie (both town) - why is it such a big deal to you, if you're town, that he chose to vote those particular protown players and not you? Also: Nobody still alive voted you. In fact, if you exclude your predecessor's vote on Patrick, nobody still alive ever voted anybody other than Jordan/Paradoxombie, either. So why are you singling Simenon out at all, let alone to the extent of clearing him?

When you're in as many games as IH is in, you have to pick and choose when you leave for a week. I am in another game that IH is ignoring.

Simenon was a winner here. He didn't join in on everyone saying that I was lurking while posting elsewhere.

<3

Also I don't believe I see the motive in a scum mentioning this. perhaps there is an extremely wifom one, which I just don't think is plausible. Possible, but not plausible. Especially by Simenon.

This doesn't begin to explain what I asked about, which is: why, after all the negative things you had to say about Jordan, including (to Para) "While jordan scum scrambles, you unsubstantiate another player." you proceeded to completely ignore your own case against "Jordan scum" and go exclusively after Paradoxombie.

probably got carried away, and by the time someone pointed out, I was AFK.

LOL - well, there's a surprise. Did you agree with what he said to Patrick (Post 403, paragraph 3) about Paradoxombie claiming being useless?

Patrick: You are the most experienced player in this game, and you know precisely how this game works, but you complained about PAradoxombie not claiming. You earlier pushed for Jordan to claim. Claiming is, as I thought you knew, useless to power roles in this game because mafia have the ability to stop both roles from being able to be used. Paradoxombie would have been a 'partially cleared' cop day two with no result if he had claimed, and the doctor would still have died. Or vice versa.

yes and no. While it is important to claim, it is then only on the realms of guesswork we go along, because if they claim, and there is no counterclaim, we procede to lynch someone else, presumably and hopefully scum. Though, the power role claiming to save himself is pointless, since they will be killed that night.

So
Power role claiming to save himself for the night-Useless
Power role claiming to stop a mislynch-useful

This has already been done to death while you were lurking. See posts 382 and 385, where I explained my views in detail already.

I'm finding Skruff's approach a bit eccentric. I don't mind metagaming along the lines of "X has been more likely to do such-and-such in games where he's been scum", but Skruffs seems to be limiting his research to this particular setup (Pie C9), which is in my view far too narrow a field to be of any use whatever, considering that there are only 2 previous games using this setup in existence. Moreover, only two of us have even played in one (and only one of us has been scum in one). I doubt that anyone has a detectable style as scum or town within a particular setup, and even if they did it would take a much larger sample of games using that setup to form any meaningful theories about it.

So do you think that looking at them would be completely useless? That there is no use. I don't understand your point to be honest, because he never said he was just going to limit himself to those games, though you claim as such when he mentions them....

Until and unless Skruffs explains these comments of his, which he's been asked to do, the "game" is one to which he alone knows the rules. Do you understand what he meant? Or did this just strike you as a promising remark by Skruffs that quite probably meant something or other, so you just decided to throw a cheer in its direction, in line with your policy of blindly supporting everything said or done by Simenon/Skruffs, most especially if it attacks Ripley?

Oh I was mostly supporting the statement "British Distancing" Silly Ripley. When I say "he wins this game" it's like "He wins this thread" from something humorous being said.

If I don't explain any occasion where I fail to answer every word of a post it gets used against me. Skruffs' tendency to describe events with his interpretation of behavior, rather than description of the actual events, combined with his decision not to use quotes or post numbers, made it impossible for me to reply to all of his post. I therefore stated this at the start of my reply.

I just don't understand why it was necessary......

What's interesting is that it was a slight fos referring to not revealing his reasons, that you should know about, as i believe you commented on it. Then, when on a massive lurk fest, Simenon gave off what I believed to be a giant sign of a townie.

"IH IS SUSPICIOUS OF SIMENON!"
When my FoS on him was a

slight fos

against him. In my replacement reread. That you commented on. In which I thought it was only slightly suspicious.

Can you talk me through why Aimee replaced Ripley at the top of your list? Also, what makes me protown suddenly?

nothing specific, just some vibes you're throwing off, and just how some of your ideas come out. I'd say you were town.

[CrashTextDummie]

So, is Simenon replacing back in?

No.

[Ripley]

IH, please can I get your response to the second half of Post 428, starting where it says "One more thing". This was addressed to you.

Simenon was a winner here. He didn't join in on everyone saying that I was lurking while posting elsewhere....

Also I don't believe I see the motive in a scum mentioning this. perhaps there is an extremely wifom one, which I just don't think is plausible. Possible, but not plausible. Especially by Simenon.

Are you using "winner" here in the same sense as "Skruffs wins this game"? Because I didn't understand your explanation of that.

You are completely wrong to say that "everyone" said you were lurking while posting elsewhere. Of the 6 players alive at that time other than yourself, precisely one player (me) said this (in Post 254). And btw, it was true. Are you seriously telling us you've cleared Simenon on the basis of his making an excuse for you not posting in this game? Have you never, in all the games you've played here, seen a scum try to get on somebody's good side before? I really find that hard to believe. And if he is scum and you are town, look how well it's worked! One brief aside excusing your lurking, which cost him absolutely nothing, and he's cleared, to the extent that you're apparently willing to excuse or attempt to explain away absolutely anything else said or done by him or his successor. I find it really strange that in that situation you would not even be looking at that possibility.

While it is important to claim, it is then only on the realms of guesswork we go along, because if they claim, and there is no counterclaim, we procede to lynch someone else, presumably and hopefully scum. Though, the power role claiming to save himself is pointless, since they will be killed that night.

So
Power role claiming to save himself for the night-Useless
Power role claiming to stop a mislynch-useful

This is just rambling. There was a clear reason for him to have claimed: to try to avoid the mislynch. Moreover, the doc had already been outed, so Para, the cop, would

not

be killed that night and, if we managed to lynch the roleblocker instead, would also have an invcestigation result. Is there any part of that you disagree with? Or are you just trying to muddy the waters?

What's interesting is that it was a slight fos referring to not revealing his reasons, that you should know about, as i believe you commented on it. Then, when on a massive lurk fest, Simenon gave off what I believed to be a giant sign of a townie.

Please be careful with your quotes. You have quoted me here as saying something that was actually said by you.

IH comes across to me at this stage as willing to bend over backwards to the point of dislocatiing vital joints, in order to defend or explain away anything said by Simenon/Skruffs, whereas with me it's the precise opposite; he bangs away and away at the same few points, no matter how often I reply, repeating "I don't understand it" or, in the case of his ongoing Patrick/Jordan/claim fixation, that it was strange, and that I alone should have noted it as such, and am therefore suspcious for not doing so. Jordan was innocent and IH claims to believe Patrick is innocent too; it's completely bizarre how he's continuing to try and single me out as somehow implicated by this. For not commenting on an interaction between two presumed innocents that turned out to be nothing and that nobody else thought was anything at any time. Bizarre.

nothing specific, just some vibes you're throwing off, and just how some of your ideas come out. I'd say you were town.

This is just impossibly vague. IH, this is a lylo situation; you have to do better than that. Please try and give at least one example of Patrick's posting that has led you to the belief that he's town.

[Skruffs]

Ripley, I find it kind of... obtuse of you to bring Simenon's voting pattern (both players being confirmed town) into play in regards to switching his vote to IH - if I remember corerctly, the only 'vote trail' you left was a hammer on a town player.
I also seem to recall that Aimee only voted twice yesterday - once for Paradozombie, and then again, for paradoxombie, while fossing Jordan and Teffc (who is now IH).


Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

[Ripley]

Skruffs, can you please give me a quote explaining what you're referring to here? It's clearly nothing to do with the post I just made, unless you've completely misunderstood something. With the speed at which this game is crawling along, it's getting even more necessary to use quotes unless you're referring to very recent material.

[Aimee]

I`m really sorry about this. On Monday I should have more time to answer this, but I`m about to go to a restaurant, and the family I am living with don`t have a computer. Sorry for the inconvenience, but I really do not wwant to be replaced.

[Skruffs]

Please specify, with quotes or post numbers or both, where it was that you thought Simenon passed over an opportunity to shift his vote to you, and also explain why this is so significant to you. Simenon's only votes were for Jordan and Paradoxombie (both town) - why is it such a big deal to you, if you're town, that he chose to vote those particular protown players and not you?

This is the post I was referring to.

I've noticed that your cool facade from yesterday seems to have cracked. You seem to be upset at IH for suggesting I am town - even saying that I am buddying up to him as scum to make him see things my way, but when I suggested a similar thing about you and PAtrick you pretty much tried to slap the idea to the side.

Again, there is a lot more, but I am in a foul mood, so it will wait.