Open 19 - Nightless (Over?) before 430

[Guardian]

Wait, was it aimee vs romanus day three when guardian was voting IH at deadline?


Omg!
Fos: guardian

no -- fos: IH.

[Guardian]

No, it just felt like caving, like I pointed out elsewhere in the post. Posting just to satisfy someone, while essentially keeping his stance.

I don't have the effort or desire to respond to your post in detail. But seriously -- I've "caved" in this game, and that's a point against me?

This game, you've attacked me constantly for BOTH not changing my opinion on you -- AND for changing my opinion too much.

BS attacks like this make it even LESS likely I am going to CONSIDER changing my opinion on you. If I did, I'd probably be caving .

[Guardian]

<snip>
Woah -- so you basically believe this?:

If a player votes someone else when someone who later turns up scum is also up for lynch, that player has the burden of explaining why he WASN'T voting for that scum post mortem?

You act as if this is an utterly ridiculous request.

It depends. It depends on your answer to the below. I want to see if you are being reasonable or not.

Thok, before I respond, in your opinion, did I have the responsibility of explaining why I wasn't voting Romanus at the time, before we knew his alignment, or only after, when we now do know his alignment?

Certainly you should be able to explain it after you know his alignment. It's possible you should also be able to explain why you weren't defending a person you believe to be a townie alternative is lynched.

Can you clarify here? I get that you are saying I should be able to explain it after -- should I be able to explain it during? The grammar of your sentence makes it confusing to me, and you aren't taking a definitive stance with the word 'possible'.

Should I have had to explain why Romanus was town while I decided not to vote him? What burden of proof are you implying that I (should have) had?

Practical question: supposing I am town, how should I go about determining whether your vote of IH during Aimee/Romanus (I mistakenly did Adel/Romanus above, sorry about that) and your vote during MOS/Oman arise from you mistakenly thinking Romanus/Oman is town as opposed to a delibarate attempt to keep Romanus/Oman from being lynched?

Read my posts and reasoning, and see if they are BS or if they are internally consistent and reasonable thinking. I didn't see your case on Romanus from my analysis of his day one play. I've explained that in detail once or twice, and obviously from my POV my distrust of the case made sense.

That's fair, to an extent. Whether or not players should have the impetus to do this, I *did* do this -- I re-read day one, and didn't see Romanus wagon shifting. I thought he was a townie trying to figure thing out.

I need to reread Romanus to see if this was a reasonable view to take of him. However, there were definitely massive sudden jumps that he made that weren't consistent from post to post.

Hindsight is 20/20. He definitely changed his opinions on things, but I didn't read that as scummy -- I read it as him changing his mind .

[Thok]

Thok, before I respond, in your opinion, did I have the responsibility of explaining why I wasn't voting Romanus at the time, before we knew his alignment, or only after, when we now do know his alignment?

Certainly you should be able to explain it after you know his alignment. It's possible you should also be able to explain why you weren't defending a person you believe to be a townie alternative is lynched.

Can you clarify here? I get that you are saying I should be able to explain it after -- should I be able to explain it during? The grammar of your sentence makes it confusing to me, and you aren't taking a definitive stance with the word 'possible'.

Should I have had to explain why Romanus was town while I decided not to vote him? What burden of proof are you implying that I (should have) had?

No, the sentence is poorly written. What I meant to say was "Why didn't you actively defending a person who was a lynch alternative to Romanus who you believed was a townie?" More concretely, it's me saying that you ought to be able to explain why you were willing to avoid the Aimee/Romanus conflict and vote IH when you weren't fond of an Aimee lynch, and that this is a reasonable question to ask you once Aimee was lynched and came up townie.

Read my posts and reasoning, and see if they are BS or if they are internally consistent and reasonable thinking. I didn't see your case on Romanus from my analysis of his day one play. I've explained that in detail once or twice, and obviously from my POV my distrust of the case made sense.

Fair enough (in terms of what you are suggesting I do). Of course, that merely pushes the question back to the level of "Was Guardian's analysis of Romanus BS or not?", which is getting close to a he said, she said level.

Hindsight is 20/20. He definitely changed his opinions on things, but I didn't read that as scummy -- I read it as him changing his mind .

This is the sort of thing that worries me. You read Romanus as changing his mind and found him protown for that even when he was attacking you. But when I've changed my mind, you've used that as a scum tell on me.

[Elias_the_thief]

I'd like to apologize for my tardiness guys...I;m in too many games, and this one is the largest and most difficult to keep up with. The good news is I should be out of one by tomorrow, allowing me to get caught up on this one a little bit.

[VitaminR]

VitR: What do you think of Setael moving off Tony and putting herself in danger to get a wagon going on IH?

I got the feeling she was trying to save herself at the time. She seemed way too eager to move onto IH. Also, she was casting a lot of distrust my way, yet seemed perfectly willing to vote along my lines. It seemed to me like it was aimed at me more than at anyone else. I could go either way on the implications for IH's alignment. I can see her doing it to get me into trouble and save herself, but I could also see her try to create a connection between IH and me and save herself by helping lynch scum.

Actually, with the whole "calling my bluff"-thing, that last scenario seems pretty likely. I hadn't seen it that way. That's a pretty strong point against IH. It makes sense for Setael to try to establish that I was bluffing when I said I'd vote IH would be if she knew IH were scum. IH turning up town would have been more of a point in my favour than against me.

Thok:
I think that Setael was trying to 'badger' VitR to do what she wants, in a way to give VitR an 'out' when IH turned up scum, because she could then turn the tables on GUardian instead.

Doesn't that sort of rely on IH being scum?

Skruffs, I don't think you're being at all balanced in your assessment of my part in this game. You FOS me because Romanus pretty much cleared me. Don't you think that that kind of absolutism may be a bit strange between scumbuddies? I think you would have FOSed me too if he had been less sure.

VitaminR has been almost defeatest since Setael's lynch. Very different change of pace. HE started strong, adn through Occult's lynch and up to John's lynch stayed strong. After John's lynch, he backed away from the game. Now, after another scum's even more so.

They've just coincided with busy weeks in my life. Even if that's not the case and what you're saying is true, I don't see how this is scummy.

Voting analysis didn't bring us anywhere in the last Nightless game. Granted, that was partly due to Stoofer playing an amazing game, but still.

I'm a bit tired of waiting for something to happen.

Vote: Oman

Everybody. Please note this. FoS:VitR

What's significant here?

I don't like IH's Guardian vote. It seems to mostly be based on Guardian changing his mind a couple of times and being willing to lynch YB as a compromise. There's nothing in there that I can't see a pro-town player doing.

I really think there's very little to that vote.

We need to be lynching IH.

[Skruffs]

So wait...
IH....
Guardian has been attacking me most of the game, right?
And if guardian is lynched, and turns up scum, I'm probably town.

Well...
Romanus attacked guardian/bm almost his entire game.
Doesn't that make Guardian more likely to be town?

Vitr, absolutism doesnot compute... Scum want to keept their buddies alive and kill townies.
Also, that theory was meant to mean ih IH came up town.

Is guardian now at -1? I understand the points behind his wagon, as well as him attacking me all game, as well as his flawed style re: voting accurately. I am not going to hammer him, yet, though.

[Thok]

Pretty sure Guardian is only at lynch -2 (me and IH), but I want to

unvote

anyways for the moment.

[Simenon]

Vote Count

IH (2)- VitaminR, Guardian
VitaminR (1)- Skruffs
Guardian (1)- IH

[IH]

Guardian has been attacking me most of the game, right?
And if guardian is lynched, and turns up scum, I'm probably town.
Well...
Romanus attacked guardian/bm almost his entire game.
Doesn't that make Guardian more likely to be town?

Well, were Romanus's attacks illfounded? Like if Guardian came up town/scum, I wouldn't expect to be cleared, in fact I'm willing to bet that no matter Guardian's alignment, I'll probably be lynched. Thats the problem with Guardian's play.

This is a hypothetical statement, before you try to use this as a slip Guardian.
If he's scum, it just looks like he's trying to get a buddy killed, because he looks like he knows to much.

If he's town, eh, I might not be lynched, but I doubt it as someone will probably say "OH EM GEE, LOOK AT THESE POINTS GUARDIAN BROUGHT UP!" If that happens, I will probably be pretty suspicious of said player, depending on the degree they push as such (assuming Guardian dies before I do)

I expect to not make it to the end of the game in other words.

You, on the other hand, have been repeatedly attacked by Guardian. "Skruffs is scum"
"why?"
"WHY DON'T YOU JUST GO BACK AND READ!?"
"It's your case you should know it"
"we need more IH lynch"

Thok I presume you unvoted because Skruffs post made you nervous?

[Thok]

Thok I presume you unvoted because Skruffs post made you nervous?

Partially that, partially Tony's "Why are you bothering to argue with Guardian" post, partially me wanting more time to look over various things involving Guardian.

[IH]

In case this was unclear...

Guardian-"Skruffs is scum"
IH-"why?"
Guardian-"WHY DON'T YOU JUST GO BACK AND READ!?"
IH-"It's your case you should know it"
Guardian-"we need more IH lynch"

[Guardian]

@Thok -- I reluctantly argued for Aimee's township and imo made a strong and valid argument.

My decision not to try and lynch Romanus, who I also thought was much more likely town than IH, doesn't mean I didn't try and defend Aimee.

And honestly, maybe I messed up. I've admitted this many times -- it wasn't an "obvious" decision. But I had about 15 minutes on vacation to think about it, and I figured that if I was wrong and Aimee was scum, last minuted deadline lynching Romanus, who I thought was not at all surely scum, would have basically ruined the game.

I'm going to bold this:

people don't seem to give me any credit that I admit it was a close decision, nor do they give me credit that I didn't know Aimee's alignment; I thought she was town, but lynching a townie and having her lynched tomorrow because no one else thought she was town doesn't help anything

.


Thok, I'm still not liking how you want me to explain now, but do not take the firm position that I shouldn't have had to explain then. If I didn't have to explain then, it almost seems like you are asking me to make things up after the fact, I really don't like this .


In terms of he said she said on Romanus, if there is something I wrote you disagree with, bring it up and I can try and respond to it. You at least seem to be trying to be reasonable, unlike IH. I'm done trying to convince IH. He's so obviously scum, and also isn't even pretending to try and grasp back and forth.

Maybe I'm being like that with him too, but he definitely is, and forget that, I am done trying to "win him over".



Thok, my finding you scummy isn't cruxed around you chaning your mind. That analogy isn't fair.

I understand the points behind his wagon

You agree with them?

as well as him attacking me all game

Wait -- me attacking you is a good reason to attack me?

as well as his flawed style re: voting accurately

Explain this. I don't agree at all that I haven't been voting "accurately".

I am not going to hammer him, yet, though.

YET? WTF? Explain.

No, it just felt like caving, like I pointed out elsewhere in the post. Posting just to satisfy someone, while essentially keeping his stance.

I don't have the effort or desire to respond to your post in detail. But seriously -- I've "caved" in this game, and that's a point against me?

This game, you've attacked me constantly for BOTH not changing my opinion on you -- AND for changing my opinion too much.

BS attacks like this make it even LESS likely I am going to CONSIDER changing my opinion on you. If I did, I'd probably be caving .

I'd love to have y'all see if IH can respond to this. Answer: he can't.


@IH's fake dialogue with me and Skruffs... All i can say is wtf.


VitaminR, thank you for being a voice of reason in the game .


For the record, in terms of levels of reasonableness in this game:
Me
VitaminR
|small gap|
Thok
|gap|
Elias
|big gap|
Skruffs
Tony
|grand canyon|
IH

This isn't necessarily scummyness, but the people near the top at least are trying to seem reasonable.

Skruffs is like more towards the middle of town-ness... but in terms of making sense, I really don't get him.

[IH]

And honestly, maybe I messed up. I've admitted this many times -- it wasn't an "obvious" decision. But I had about 15 minutes on vacation to think about it, and I figured that if I was wrong and Aimee was scum, last minuted deadline lynching Romanus, who I thought was not at all surely scum, would have basically ruined the game.

I'm going to bold this: people don't seem to give me any credit that I admit it was a close decision, nor do they give me credit that I didn't know Aimee's alignment; I thought she was town, but lynching a townie and having her lynched tomorrow because no one else thought she was town doesn't help anything.

Of course you don't seem to take the fact in that Romanus turned out to be scum. Or that you even entertained that notion when making your decision... because you thought that either way Aimee would be lynched anyway.

In the bottom half of his post, Guardian is responding to things as he reads them, ala responses to Skruffs.

Who else does things like that?

Thats me, btw.

Guardian, caving, in this sense, is not you changing your stance. It's just making an offhand comment just to get a player off of your back, which means you didn't actually mean your first original statement. Just saying things you

think

are protown. I'm trying to be as clear as possible here.

IH=\=coherencey I think ;_;

[TonyMoonshine]

Pretty sure Guardian is only at lynch -2 (me and IH), but I want to

unvote

anyways for the moment.

This is becoming a trend. Start a wagon on Guardian and before it gets to lynch -1 unvote.

Why do you do this?

[Skruffs]

...
Guardian, you are crazy, you know that?
Guh.

[Thok]

This is becoming a trend. Start a wagon on Guardian and before it gets to lynch -1 unvote.

Why do you do this?

Because I want to rethink my case on Guardian and think about what he's done and see if checks out with his interpretation of stuff.

Are you actually going to do something, or are you planning to stand on the sidelines, snipe about the lack of the Guardian lynch, and promise to do things but never actually contribute?

[Thok]

Thok, I'm still not liking how you want me to explain now, but do not take the firm position that I shouldn't have had to explain then. If I didn't have to explain then, it almost seems like you are asking me to make things up after the fact, I really don't like this .

I guess what I really meant to say is that it's much more meaningful to use your reaction to Aimee/Romanus as a scum tell after we know one of the alignments of the person in question. I'm also not convinced this conversation is actually accomplishing anything, as it's unclear to me that reasonableness and townieness necessarily have that much correlation. If we were using that standard, we'd have to lynch some players in every game.

Thok, my finding you scummy isn't cruxed around you chaning your mind. That analogy isn't fair.

I'd claim that one of the major reason you find me suspicious is that I keep attacking you, when I hadn't been before yesterday.

(I'm starting to suspect that the other one falls under something like a "Thok and Guardian have very distinct play styles, that don't match up well with each other".)

[VitaminR]

Guys, we need to get off this Guardian hang-up. Yes, his logic can be weird, he's too sure of himself (to the point of being unhelpful), but he hasn't actually done anything that's really scummy. Being illogical isn't really helpful as scum.

On top of that, if you look at the games in which he was scum, he's never this hung up on one player. He is, however, like that when he's town.

If we lynch him today, he's going to turn up town.

(Here you go, Skruffs, another thing to FOS me over. )

[VitaminR]

Thok, what do you think of IH's case against Guardian? Do you feel he has good arguments?

[VitaminR]

I'd like to see Elias & Tony answer the same question. Skruffs can too if he wants to.

[Thok]

Thok, what do you think of IH's case against Guardian? Do you feel he has good arguments?

I feel that IH's case on Guardian is very IH-y. I don't necessarily expect that his mass PBPA are all well thought out. I can point out a series of posts by IH in Board Games, where as town he misread stuff.

I can flip the question and ask you if you think Guardian's case on IH has good arguements. You've of course, already preempted that argument by claiming that you don't care whether or not Guardian's arguments are well-founded.

That said, I also feel you're flat out ignoring stuff that Guardian has done (the MOS/Oman situation is notable and it's weird that you are completely ignoring it). I feel your argument on IH is somewhat circular (he's scum for attacking Guardian, who's town for attacking IH). I realize it's not totally circular, because your arguing that Guardian is town for his style of attack, and not just his choice of attack, but then that begs the question of why you aren't trying to analyze IH's play by looking at his style.

(One quick comment: I do find it unlikely that VitR and Guardian are scum together, as VitR has been defending Guardian way too much for that to make sense.)

[Guardian]

VitaminR, you're right but... it is kind of amazing how you are so sure when many are so suspicious of me .

(I'm starting to suspect that the other one falls under something like a "Thok and Guardian have very distinct play styles, that don't match up well with each other".)

I think I might agree with this... I disagree that my attack on you is OMGUS, I haven't ever liked how you sound so sure of... everything.


Skruffs, how am I crazy? Also, do you have any response to my post 1662 where I quote you a lot?


If anyone else wants me to respond to something from IH, let me know... He's scum and really I don't feel like going back and forth with him, it isn't like he's going to agree with me.

fos: Tony & Thok connection

if IH is somehow town. I really don't like how Tony was trying to imply a me-Thok connection with his last post...

[Guardian]

Also, VitaminR kind of stole my thunder on the IH-Setael thing. That was pretty much exactly how I interpreted it.

Oh, and I agree with Thok that VitaminR and I aren't scum together .

[Thok]

(I'm starting to suspect that the other one falls under something like a "Thok and Guardian have very distinct play styles, that don't match up well with each other".)

I think I might agree with this... I disagree that my attack on you is OMGUS, I haven't ever liked how you sound so sure of... everything.

You basically never expressed suspicion of me until I started attacking you yesterday. So pardon me if I see a significant amount of OMGUS. The "Thok sounds confident " seems like a bit of a cover to attack me, especially since if you analyze my voting record, you'll see I haven't been confident about stuff.

fos: Tony & Thok connection

if IH is somehow town. I really don't like how Tony was trying to imply a me-Thok connection with his last post...

I got more of a "Tony is trying to push the Guardian wagon without getting his hands dirty by voting" vibe. Obviously, that's filtered partially by the fact that I know his role, but Tony also tried to push a you-IH connection earlier today.

My problem with the IH-Setael connection interpretation of her play is that it ignores the Tony wagon that was the leading wagon at the time. It's unclear to me why Setael scum wouldn't try to save herself by putting more pressure on Tony, as opposed to do the convoluted maneuver to IH you suggested. Tony being fellow scum suggests a solution to this. (Of course it may be that Setael likes complicated maneuvers, which would also explain her behavior with respect to you and me at the end of the day.)

Guardian-looking over Oman's early posts I noticed he had a fairly chatty tone with you (specifically he called you his top suspect initially, but also asked you not to sweat that comment). Is there anything from the previous games with the two of you that would explain why he would act that way?