Mini 488 - Killings in Clich├®-town - Game Over!

[d3sisted]

If the mason know each other to be town, and have no other abilities, they can all roleclaim and vouch for one another without ramification right? Or have I misconceived the mason role?

Vote: Eyceking

My spidey senses are tingling.

436 was a noob mistake.

[d3sisted]

Whoa, didn't realize SPAG was playing.

For taking so long to get Mini 490 started (ironically named Speed Mafia):

Vote SPAG

[d3sisted]

Try this: 1d12SEEDSTART1195082933SEEDEND[/dic3]
Replace the 3 with an e, obviously.

[d3sisted]

Jenter, you forgot to bold your vote.

Vote: The Deepfried Ninja

I'll BW vote you to hell.

[d3sisted]

Vote: Janter

Bandwagoned, bitch.

[d3sisted]

Vote: Head_Honcho

You better start talking.

[d3sisted]

Vote: Paradoxombie

for neglecting the bold faced type.

[d3sisted]

Nonetheless, I'd really like for the activity to pick up in this thread.

Let's see if I can spark some discussion here:

Unvote; Vote: Headbanana

Go ahead, call me scummy.

[d3sisted]

Unvote

FoS: Trumpezia

Didn't like the idea of you popping in all of a sudden to slap one on IH. He didn't understand Jenter (neither did I, for that matter). Since when was ignorance scummy?

[d3sisted]

Why are you so anxious for the day to end? Can't wait to use your NK,

scum?

And since you're not exactly contributing anything here, how do you expect us to get moving?

Vote: Head_Honcho

[d3sisted]

I don't know about the other two, but mine is already cleaned.

[d3sisted]

And for those insular bastards out there, that was a joke.

[d3sisted]

Welcomeness.

[d3sisted]

Mod, you've got Jenter as 2 persons, both voting for himself.

[d3sisted]

Vote: Head_Honcho

for his comment about everything "being so hard".

You took him seriously even with the gun-cleaning witticism in there?

Unbelievable.

Unvote; Vote: Eyceking

[d3sisted]

[quote="Head_Honcho"]I'm inclined to agree, but was worried about getting accused of OMGUSing. Well, if I'm not the only one that finds it fishy.

Ok, right now I'm ridiculously suspicious of Eyceking. First there was his post 41, and now this? Some explaning is in order here.

Unvote; Vote: Eyceking

[d3sisted]

EBWOP: Bah, what in the fuck am I on. Lemme rewrite that post.

I'm inclined to agree, but was worried about getting accused of OMGUSing. Well, if I'm not the only one that finds it fishy.

Ok, right now I'm ridiculously suspicious of Head_Honcho. First there was his post 41, and now this? Some explaning is in order here.

Unvote; Vote: Head_Honcho

[d3sisted]

Sorry guys, just woke up.

Man...

Unvote; Vote Head_Honcho

[d3sisted]

1) That was random.
2) I've changed my vote quite frequently.

[d3sisted]

No, I quoted Head_Honcho to back up my vote on him, but accidently voted for Eyceking instead. Then I proceeded to fix my error.

[d3sisted]

I explained in the post immediately succeeding it, read the thread please.

[d3sisted]

As much as I hate to say this, I'm not convinced you're the lynch for today.

Unvote

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The votecount at the top of the page is updated periodically until a new page is reached.

Votecount:

as of post 99, end of page 4

IH -

2

(

Trumpezia, Kison

)
Trumpezia -

2

(

IH, Paradoxombie

)
Head_Honcho -

1

(

Eyceking

)
Eyceking -

1

(

Head_Honcho

)
Jenter Brolincani -

1

(

D3sisted

)
Slash -

1

(

SPAG

)

Not Voting -

TheDeepFriedNinja

Gatorguy91, Slash, Jenter Brolincani

With 11 alive, it's six to lynch.

I am not infallible. If I make a mistake in the votecount, correct me.

[d3sisted]

His anxiousness for the day to end is what makes that post scummy.

[d3sisted]

Ok, Jenter, you can take that vote off yourself now. I'm more than convinced you're just trying too hard to act town ("Oh look! My vote was still on myself! What a silly town thing to do, as scum would never do that.")

I was going to mention it earlier, but thought I'd wait a while longer.

Unvote; Vote: Jenter

Right now I'm convinced at least one of the following is scum:
trumpezia, Jenter, Kison, Eyceking

[d3sisted]

Btw, Jenter, I asked the mod to change that double vote on yourself as a reminder that you still had a vote on yourself in the first place. I started suspecting you when you didn't immediately realize it and unvote.

[d3sisted]

I said, and I quote myself, "I'm

not

convinced you're the lynch for today." i.e. I do not think you are scummy enough to be lynched.

As for Kison, don't like the way his reason for BWing IH, the way he plays it off like it's a random vote.

Trump, for lurking.

[d3sisted]

Yes I have been rather jumpy, but I think my most recent vote on Jenter is here to stay.

[d3sisted]

I think we can all assume it was a scumkill...

>.>

Unless of course you're implying we have a doc/roleblocker.

BTW, I'm not sure I fully understand what you're saying about 'distancing from the night kill' when N0 kills are largely randomized anyway.

[d3sisted]

Damnit to hell, SPAG, get Speed Mafia up and running!

[d3sisted]

Nice of you to join in, slash. Now, are you going to contribute some content, or should I just vote you the fuck out because I'm tired of the lurking and inactivity.

[d3sisted]

EBWOP: That goes for slash and Head_Honcho.

[d3sisted]

I dunno about the Eyceking BW. It faded as fast as it built.

[d3sisted]

Hi,

The thing about d3sisted is not his vote hopping. The problem I have with him starts with this post :

As much as I hate to say this, I'm not convinced you're the lynch for today.

Unvote

So let me get this straight : an early game vote had you somewhat convinced that Head Honcho was the lynch for the day, but after a 1-liner rebuttal, you are from that point on no longer convinced of this?

The way he goes after Jenter is pretty stupid, too, but more annoying is this :

Right now I'm convinced at least one of the following is scum:
trumpezia, Jenter, Kison, Eyceking

You hardly have a case against any of the people you listed. You said this during

page four

of the game. How can you be

convinced

that one of the people you named is scum? We're not anywhere near far enough into the game for you to be convinced of anything. If you magically are, please give a decent reason for it. As far as I recall, I myself only made one post up until this point. If that's damning evidence, along with whatever you have against the other two, then I'd be a wonderful scum killer in all of my games.

Unvote

Vote : d3sisted

Just because I didn't provide reasons, doesn't mean I changed votes because of his one-liner rebuttal. Don't get presumptuous here.

Those 4 make up the player list minus the pro-town ones. I don't see the need for bringing up cases unless I'm backing up a vote.

Ok, I think "convinced" was the wrong word to use here. There's a lot less certainty than it sounds. I don't really know a good word for that.

BTW, I know you're just trying to mimic Jenter's 80 so you can blow it way out of proportion.

Aside from that, Jenter and Gator's posts didn't sit well with me at all. It seems like they're getting ready to pounce onto the wagon soon as it hits the 2 or 3 mark.

[d3sisted]

Nope, not liking paradox at all right now.

[d3sisted]

Thankye Skruffs!

Nope, not liking paradox at all right now.

If you're going after me for changing votes that seems extremely hypocritical.

You said you're voting him for being opportunistic. I'm

FoS

ing you for hypocrisy.

[d3sisted]

@Head_Honcho: He pointed an FoS. Far from as serious as you make it sound.

[d3sisted]

I don't like how d3sisted is playing. It's the classic conflict of whether his style of play is newb scum or newb town.

Fos: D3sisted

Wow Jenter certainly does look opportunistic. Like he's trying to establish suspicion with absolutely no actual substance.

Unvote, Vote: Jenter

It's interesting to see how Paradoxombie criticized me, then follows up by taking up the same views I have on Jenter.

Furthermore, upon seeing the Jenter wagon go literally nowhere, he unvotes. That's pretty scummy to me.

Unvote; Vote: paradox

[d3sisted]

FTR, Jenter is still quite high on my scum list.

[d3sisted]

Welcome

[d3sisted]

Well think about it: Your criticism of me would implicitly accuse me of being scum; which means I would be voting for a mis-lynch. It would then be illogical for you to follow suit and vote the same person I was voting for, if you really thought I was scum.

[d3sisted]

Ok, so if you supposed I'm bussing scum, why didn't you mention it?

[d3sisted]

Activity in this thread is dismal...
I'mma

Unvote; BW Vote: IH

to see if it will spark any discussion. I invite anyone else to follow; maybe we can get something out of this.

And HeadHoncho, SPAG seems to have gone AWOL so I don't think pressuring him at this time will do any good.

[d3sisted]

Alright, then suggest a viable alternative to generate discussion.

[d3sisted]

So most of your points are about me seemingly "trying to sound scum".

What I'm curious to know is, where did you draw the line between genuine and fraudulent? Because clearly you imply that my statements are townie, so what exactly is tipping you off to make you think I am pretending?

Unless you just plain disagree with my statements, in which case I implore you to state a valid case.

[d3sisted]

Yeah.

[d3sisted]

...and vollkan comes to the scumbuddy's rescue with the bandwagon vote.

[d3sisted]

I've noticed that IH is getting pretty tense about those pressure votes, including his case against me, which I see as an OMGUS response. What I mean is, I put a vote on him, and he instantly tries to deflect suspicion back onto me. Coupled with his post above, this is a very odd response I'm seeing.

[d3sisted]

Both of you, look back at the post where I vote IH, it's explained quite sufficiently why it's there.

[d3sisted]

Maybe I randomly vote and happened to hit scum. IH gets nervous for being put L-2 so quickly, and you leap onto a rival wagon.

I'm definitely liking what we're getting out of this pressure wagon.

In response to an earlier question, I consider IH to be nervous/apprehensive because he overreacts to a pressure vote, thinking it's a permanent vote and that I have reasons to back it up.

[d3sisted]

@Vollkan: Which question are you referring to?

I'm hardly bringing a case on IH; 151 is in response to his case on me, to which I feel I am fully permitted to respond.

When I put a pressure vote down to extract information, expect me to be analyzing the results. By calling it "throwing accusations around with no basis", you try to condemn this process, something I find to be incredibly ironic seeing as how you've effectively defeated the entire purpose of pressure voting.

I placed the pressure vote, then I looked at the responses and saw that IH is getting tense. This is arguably quite significant, so I commented on it to bring it into the light, and open it up for discussion. In no way am I using this to maintain momentum of the wagon (as you insinuate). I have explained why I see IH "getting tense", so if you still don't see it, that's hardly my problem.

Why do you suggest that I mimic Puffin's actions? I have my own thought process, I make my own decisions. I am liking the results of this pressure vote, thus I will keep my vote in the hopes that it will generate yet more discussion. If the case against IH builds strong enough, my vote will become permanent, but that's quite far off.

[d3sisted]

How definite a statement for page 4.

I'm also unsure of your first string of logic of trying to seem town.

Yet here you say the opposite, don't you? Or are you trying to force a statement that,

to intentionally look like town,

I said "what do you mean by masons?" Just curious to how that is scummy.

I just realized this is in response to Trump, so doesn't apply.

Untrue, majorly. You are suspicious of them. WHY are you suspicious of them? unvote, vote:Desisted I'm just assuming you're just trying to either

A.Cast suspicion on someone, or B.declare suspicion on someone so you can say you've been suspicious of them.

Hey, isn't [establish suspicion without actual substance] what desisted did?

Bolded parts.

So me wondering why you're randomly on a wagon is nervous.

I've quite explicitly told everyone I bandwagoned to generate discussion. Yet you still think I'm on for real so rather than try to assist the discussion, you try to use it against me as evidence.

Also I was never at lynch minus two. It's 6 to lynch.

My mistake, L-3. But that just contributes to what I said earlier.

I'm not being tense, I'm playing this game.

Then justify it. Denial won't get you anywhere. Turn off the tunnel vision and tell me why Poppinpuffin's 144 is cleared, yet I'm in the spotlight.

[d3sisted]

unsure why you just bolded parts of my posts.

To answer your question.

Well. You're staying on it. You have no reasons. We're not in the random stage. You act like you have a case. You don't.

Already explained.

no it detracts from it.

Negative. Being at L-3, you had one less reason to be nervous.

Because she never claimed to have a reason.

This indicates you made a case against me and voted me for a good reason, and for me to avoid that case I deflected suspicion onto you. But I didn't deflect anything, because, well, there was nothing to deflect from. I'm just plain suspicous of you.

For the sake of avoiding redundancy, I'm not going to go over this one again.

[d3sisted]

My vote is staying on d3sisted as well. L-2 is serious stuff and it is not a scumtell for a person to get nervous, particularly when the wagon is at L-2 (It is FIVE (5) to lynch not six; IH you said 6 before) and where there is no actual argument to rebut. How can you refute pressure?

I mean, d3sisted's logic appears to be: I'll place IH at L-2 for pressure. Then, when IH gets nervous I will accuse him of being scummy for getting nervous.

This tactic is NOT scum-hunting. It is placing people in a ridiculous situation where they should rightly be exceedingly nervous in order to create a case for suspicion.

My vote stands.

Lies and fallacies. All of it.

1) It is indeed 6 to lynch.
2) Not once did I suggest that IH was expected to refute a pressure vote. That in itself is just plain silly.
3) I placed IH at

L-4

. Poppin came in and put him at L-3, which is as far as IH ever got.
4) This is nowhere

near

as "serious" as you make it out to be.
5) Poppin has long since removed her vote, and IH stands once again at L-4. Tell me again why you're both so anxious for me to remove an L-4 vote. Apparently, putting someone at L-4 is tantamount to L-2. (This is in response to IH as well.)

Finally, something tangible has emerged from my pressure vote.

Unvote; Vote: Vollkan

[d3sisted]

1) Doesn't matter who is wrong with this one. The required votes is 6, so what you previously said about L-2 no longer applies.
2) The only reason you would complain that there is no argument to rebut (and subsequently use this to invigorate your case against me) is because you are expecting a rebuttal.
3) Firstly, my vote put him at L-4. Why you wish to continue pursuing a point based upon a fallacy is beyond me. Secondly, why would I unvote when absolutely nothing has emerged from it yet? Why should I fear the pressure I sought? You're basically asking me to do wishy-washy voting. Thirdly, once again, you're ignoring the fact that all your observations point to Puffin being scummier than I. Why you continue to push pressure onto me is beyond me.
-Only when I call you for it do you start putting some weight on Puffin. That FoS was purely to appease me, to silence the case. Notice that by calling Puffin's vote scummy, you have indirectly condemned all instances of pressure voting.
4) Stop being secretive and point out the behaviour that you found scummy upon readthrough. And stop continuing to further your "opinion" that L-4 is suspect.
5) By suspecting me for keeping my vote on a pressure wagon for as long as I have, as well as expressing disapproval of said vote, the connotation is that I was to remove my vote, as that would've been the "townie" thing to do according to you. Post 169:

Puffin has unvoted upon discussion restarting but you seem intent on keeping it going, and it's looking like you are doing so in order to keep attention off yourself.

Which means that you are now officially flipflopping on your stance.

And what exactly is "the issue" that I am so keen to dodge?

[d3sisted]

2) Where in that post, or in any of my posts did I ever state I was looking for a reaction specifically from IH?
3) Indeed, something did emerge from this wagon; I caught you flipflopping, didn't I?
5) How am I expected to justify a random pressure wagon?

I'm still unsure how I became nervous.

Desisted, could you quote where I 'became nervous'? Instead of just me posting and catching up?

Mostly because you saw my vote on your and ricocheted an entire case on me. Then you kept asking why my vote was on you, when I felt it was quite clear it was a random pressure vote.

[d3sisted]

Errr, why would you put a random pressure vote on someone when the game had already gotten going? Thats the whole point.

The game was at a standstill. Two days had elapsed since anyone last said anything, so I felt something had to be done to rekindle the thread.

Also the case wasn't the result of your vote. It was the result of me catching up.

Ok.

[d3sisted]

Not all of the time, of course, but in some instances they can definitely be helpful.

[d3sisted]

Only from your perspective.

[d3sisted]

Well I'm back, but nothing much has happened...

Maybe it is because I am a replacement, but I see the player who has looked most scummy to me throughout jumping onto a seemingly pointless wagon. Of course I am going to attack that player. Can somebody explain to me what is wrong with me doing that?

What's wrong is the "bandwagon" i jumped onto consisted of only 1 vote, and the bandwagon you refer to (and continually insist I take the blame for) is poppin's vote.

[d3sisted]

EBWOP:
Well I'm back, but nothing much has happened...

Maybe it is because I am a replacement, but I see the player who has looked most scummy to me throughout jumping onto a seemingly pointless wagon. Of course I am going to attack that player. Can somebody explain to me what is wrong with me doing that?

What's wrong is the "bandwagon" i jumped onto consisted of only 1 vote, and the bandwagon you refer to (and continually insist I take the blame for) is poppin's vote.

[d3sisted]

Jenter, your posts this game have hardly given us anything. Then, you leave for 10 days and that's all you can manage to contribute?

Same goes for TCS: is that all you've come up with on your readthrough? That there's nothing to comment on and that I'm the best lead you have? This is just disgusting.

[d3sisted]

Didn't like his earlier post, and now his 229 makes it obvious he's just trying to go with the flow/bw. I may consider voting him in the near future, but I kinda like my vollkan vote right now.

For IH's reference:
Open 28 - Doctor (lynched)
Mini 490 - Vanilla Town (lynched)
Mini 491 - Vig (Town win)
Mini 436 - Vanilla Town (scum win)
Mini 460 - Vanilla Town (scum win)
Open 35 - Vanilla Town (nked)

I've also got power roles in Mini 471 and Newbie 443 (roleclaimed in both of them too), so check those out if you want.

[d3sisted]

Vote: Janter
Bandwagoned, bitch.

Awfully keen on BWing.

Firstly, a second vote hardly makes a serious bandwagon. Secondly, when the first vote on you was your own vote on yourself, then meh...

Vote: Head_Honcho. You better start talking.

Was this a joke? It's pretty darn agressive fo a pg1 question about why he keeps second voting.

Still in the random/joke phase. Should've been obvious when post proceeding it is another random vote.

Nonetheless, I'd really like for the activity to pick up in this thread.

Let's see if I can spark some discussion here:
Unvote; Vote: Headbanana

Go ahead, call me scummy.

Um... why will another random vote in the middle of page 2 make activity better?

3rd consecutive BW vote ought to have been looked upon as scummy, thus generating discussion.

wtf? He gives a point against Trumpezia and FoSes, then actually votes for a rather offhand comment? Bias sees I here.

I FoS, then if I see someone acting scummier, I swap onto him. Pretty basic.

Eyceking wrote:
Vote: Head_Honcho for his comment about everything "being so hard".

You took him seriously even with the gun-cleaning witticism in there?

Unbelievable.

Unvote; Vote: Eyceking

Hmm interesting. He failed to remove his vote on H_H for 2 posts after the gun cleaning witticism, then next page turns round and calls it unbelievable that someone took it seriously.

My own vote on H_H was completely irrelevant. In fact, the vote came before the witticism. Just because he cracked some joke, means he should be cleared from all suspicion?

Head_Honcho wrote:
I'm inclined to agree, but was worried about getting accused of OMGUSing. Well, if I'm not the only one that finds it fishy.

Ok, right now I'm ridiculously suspicious of Head_Honcho. First there was his post 41, and now this? Some explaning is in order here.

Unvote; Vote: Head_Honcho

Then turns back round and says post 41 was suspicious again.

When did I ever say 41

wasn't

suspicious? There are two separate posts involved here, 41 and 43. Get those straight.

As much as I hate to say this, I'm not convinced you're the lynch for today.
Unvote

Fails to elaborate on why not or indeed and somewhat more importantly why he 'hates to say' it.

As he explained, I had misrepresented both of his posts, so I unvoted him.

Ok, Jenter, you can take that vote off yourself now. I'm more than convinced you're just trying too hard to act town ("Oh look! My vote was still on myself! What a silly town thing to do, as scum would never do that.")

I was going to mention it earlier, but thought I'd wait a while longer.
Unvote; Vote: Jenter

Right now I'm convinced at least one of the following is scum:
trumpezia, Jenter, Kison, Eyceking

Why did he wait a while longer? Why not reveal things he had noticed that would in his opinion be helpful to town?

So that you can't escape by saying "Oh, I didn't get the chance to unvote".

Yes I have been rather jumpy, but I think my most recent vote on Jenter is here to stay.

Right so now he says he's 'locked on' as it were. On page 4 in a 12 man game? eh wut?

And why wouldn't I want to vote off the scummiest player in my eyes? If you'll also notice, I never quite lived up to that commitment, so I don't know what you're trying to argue here.

Nice of you to join in, slash. Now, are you going to contribute some content, or should I just vote you the fuck out because I'm tired of the lurking and inactivity.

He then says he is considering BWing lurkers... BAAD. There's such thing as a prod ya know...

Did you see me vote him for it?

I will here quote Kison on two very good points;

The thing about d3sisted is not his vote hopping. The problem I have with him starts with this post :

d3sisted wrote:
As much as I hate to say this, I'm not convinced you're the lynch for today.
Unvote

So let me get this straight : an early game vote had you somewhat convinced that Head Honcho was the lynch for the day, but after a 1-liner rebuttal, you are from that point on no longer convinced of this?

Quote:
Right now I'm convinced at least one of the following is scum:
trumpezia, Jenter, Kison, Eyceking

You hardly have a case against any of the people you listed. You said this during page four of the game. How can you be convinced that one of the people you named is scum? We're not anywhere near far enough into the game for you to be convinced of anything. If you magically are, please give a decent reason for it. As far as I recall, I myself only made one post up until this point. If that's damning evidence, along with whatever you have against the other two, then I'd be a wonderful scum killer in all of my games.

And the reply;

Just because I didn't provide reasons, doesn't mean I changed votes because of his one-liner rebuttal. Don't get presumptuous here.

Those 4 make up the player list minus the pro-town ones. I don't see the need for bringing up cases unless I'm backing up a vote.

Ok, I think "convinced" was the wrong word to use here. There's a lot less certainty than it sounds. I don't really know a good word for that.

BTW, I know you're just trying to mimic Jenter's 80 so you can blow it way out of proportion.

Aside from that, Jenter and Gator's posts didn't sit well with me at all. It seems like they're getting ready to pounce onto the wagon soon as it hits the 2 or 3 mark.

a) Why didn't you provide reasons? TOWNIES HAVE NOTHING TO HIDE FROM THE TOWN.
b) Try 'I think' or 'I believe'or similar.

Right back atcha there. Why does the sus come before the pbpa? In fact, ChronX even had to call you on it before you bothered. Got something to hide?

[d3sisted]

Bah, what a crappy ending to the day...

Go town!