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

[Patrick]

Zindaras, do you plan on doing any analysis?

[Skruffs]

Patrick - do you think I am scum?
I do not think you are scum.

[Patrick]

You're not high on my list, no.

[CrashTextDummie]

Deadline hits in a bit more than 39 hours. No majority means no lynch.

Vote Count

:

Ripley

(1):

Skruffs

Not voting

(4):

Ripley, Patrick, Aimee, Zindaras

5 alive, 3 to lynch.

[Zindaras]

No detailed analysis, more of a general re-read. Anything's better than nothing.

I'm doing it now.

[Zindaras]

I'm just going to make some general notes now. I think any analysis is better than none.

Simenon's continued refusal to post his original tells on Jordan is rather scummy, especially since everyone's asking for it. This information isn't irrelevant, as he asserts. This is his original reason to suspect Jordan. If you take it away, all that Simmy's basically done is make a case in retrospect. That's bad stuffs.

So, I ask for those who are voting me for this- what exactly could I accomplish as scum by refusing to disclose my reasoning and what exactly is scummy about me doing so?

Isn't this exactly the kind of argument that made him think Jordan was scum?

I like Paradox's 118. His wording may be slightly off, but he gets the point.

My original reasoning is what we have argued about. I still like my vote for the rest of your posts.

No, we haven't, since you never posted it.

Starting a wagon on a townie is a nontell at worst, and at best an indication of someone being protown enough not to care about standing out.

Holy moly, this is so limited. You can't just say that starting a wagon on a townie is a null tell. There are way too many variables. You need to take into account the kind of player (there are a lot of players who don't give a rat's ass about starting wagons on townies, who, in fact, are expected to start wagons as their normal play style. But there are a lot of players who change their aggressiveness as they change alignments), you need to take into account his reasoning (bad reasoning=scummy), the timing (first wagon, counterwagon?), basically everything.

Again, I like Paradox's 131.

Regarding bandwagon discussion: this is a 7-player game, for Christ's sake. There aren't really any bandwagons in 7-player games. A bandwagon would equal a lynch.

I don't think Ripley's criticism of Paradox in 137 is warranted.

Eh, Aimee's 148 gives me bad vibes. Bad bad vibes.

Simenon finally explains in 154 and 157, I don't understand why he couldn't just reveal this earlier. I mean, it became irrelevant pretty early on. I think his reasoning is solid enough, though.

Ah, that sorry was becasue we know eachother from another game, and I think he's a good player.

I felt you would make a response along those lines.
That's part of why I strayed away from just blurting it out. It's so easy to respond to, it really doesn't make much of an effect.

Would you (or, well, since Simmy's not around anymore, anyone) think that Simmy's tell was in any way credible, taking into account the fact that this was a likely answer? Or was this thought up after Simmy already voted Jordan?

Aimee's 164 is bad, again. Narrow-minded focus on Paradox. Paradox's 165 also has some good points against Aimee.

Still thinking things through, but at present I'm leaning towards Jordan as the best lynch. 2 experienced players - they could both be scum, obviously, but the odds are against it - think he made a slipup, which is better evidence than we have on anyone else.

This is pretty much the most blatant, scummy appeal to authority I have

ever

seen.

Ripley's 166 gives me bad vibes. "I'm not very confident" and "I don't really like this lynch, but I'm going to vote for it anyway" are things that scum say a lot. Aimee's 179 is very unimpressive. The only thing I can really distill from it is that Paradox is scummy. Good post by Patsy in 182. Funnily enough, similar points are raised by Simmy and Ripley in consecutive posts (183 and 184).

My vote, if I had to cast it now, would go to Aimee. I see Patsy as solid town. I'm not sure about Ripley or Simmy.

I will continue this post when I get home, which is in a couple of hours.

[Patrick]

Waves hi. Mainly to show that Zindy and I are not scum together.

[CrashTextDummie]

I have decided to extend the deadline one final time in an attempt to salvage this game. I urge all players to make the best of it.

Final Deadline: Saturday, October 6th, 11:59 PM GMT+1

Aimee and Ripley have been prodded.

[Aimee]

Eh, Aimee's 148 gives me bad vibes. Bad bad vibes.

Reason?

Aimee's 164 is bad, again.

Can you explain why "a narrow view of Paradox" is so scummy?

I'm unlikely to vote for anyone but Zindaras today. His views on myself and Ripley, as well as IH's actions make him quite clearly the logical lynch target for today.

[Patrick]

Btw, Aimee/Patrick are not scumbuddies either

[Zindaras]

And neither are Aimee/Zindaras.

[Patrick]

Zindaras, please finish your readthrough as a top priority. We don't have much time. I'm weaker on the Aimee/Zindaras pairing now, mainly because Skruff's vote has been sitting on Ripley for 4/5 days without a lynch happening. Of course it's possible the inactivity of the game is just stopping them coordinating it, although both are online now.

[Patrick]

Heh. Simulpostage/

[Zindaras]

Reason?

And Paradoxombie is just baffling me. What have Patrick or Ripley done to deserve any real suspicion at this stage. I agree with Patrick here - you voted against Simenon without any real reasoning.

Buddying up to Patsy and Ripley, basically this is just bandwagoning.

Can you explain why "a narrow view of Paradox" is so scummy?

You're focusing way too much on Paradox. Your entire post is about Paradox and trying to set people up against him.

Narrow-mindedness is a scumtell because it leaves your opinion on other players open, something scum wants to do.

I'm unlikely to vote for anyone but Zindaras today. His views on myself and Ripley, as well as IH's actions make him quite clearly the logical lynch target for today.

Yay for OMGUS.

[Skruffs]

Please, I have to urge that someone vote someone. I will hammer either of Aimee or Ripley if that's what it comes down to, but, I'd prefer Ripley, and I am for sure not wanting to lose by default.

We have NINE HOURS.

Mod : Please prod everyone

[Zindaras]

Yo, Skruffs.

I have decided to extend the deadline one final time in an attempt to salvage this game. I urge all players to make the best of it.

Final Deadline: Saturday, October 6th, 11:59 PM GMT+1

Aimee and Ripley have been prodded.

[Zindaras]

I urge you to unvote, by the way. With Aimee's lurking, I'm not 100% sure Patsy/Aimy is impossible.

[Patrick]

I'm not entirely sure Zindaras/Aimee is ruled out either. However Zindaras asking for a Skruffs unvote probably makes it less likely.

[Skruffs]

My vote seems to be safe there.
ZIndaras, you ignore the game fore a week or so and then place a post

mostly

against my predecessor and try to get me to unvote Ripley? Fossy, fossy.

[Aimee]

Reason?

And Paradoxombie is just baffling me. What have Patrick or Ripley done to deserve any real suspicion at this stage. I agree with Patrick here - you voted against Simenon without any real reasoning.

Buddying up to Patsy and Ripley, basically this is just bandwagoning.

Care to explain why this is actually scummy?

I welcome you to justify Paradoxombie's FoS on Patrick and Ripley, but I'm not comprehending how you will manage to gauge a reason out of such a silly action which had absolutely no justfication.

Can you explain why "a narrow view of Paradox" is so scummy?

You're focusing way too much on Paradox. Your entire post is about Paradox and trying to set people up against him.

Narrow-mindedness is a scumtell because it leaves your opinion on other players open, something scum wants to do.

... Whilst this would make sense in a large post analysis, the fact is my post was merely

several

lines, and was an observation about Paradox. Since it's pretty obvious that was the entire point of the post, I still fail to see how it's narrow-minded.

I'm unlikely to vote for anyone but Zindaras today. His views on myself and Ripley, as well as IH's actions make him quite clearly the logical lynch target for today.

Yay for OMGUS.

Quite clearly your definition of OMGUS is flawed. IH has basically been my top suspect for the entire day. You come in and accuse me, and when I reaffirm my position you simply fling out OMGUS?

[Patrick]

AIMEE/PATRICK NOT SCUM TOGETHER

[Patrick]

Aimee, if Zindaras is scum, who's his buddy?

[Zindaras]

My vote seems to be safe there.
ZIndaras, you ignore the game fore a week or so and then place a post

mostly

against my predecessor and try to get me to unvote Ripley? Fossy, fossy.

I was busy for most of the week. And, yeah, there's quite a bit of stuff regarding Simmy in my post there, yes. But even the word mostly is hugely overdone here. And note that it was quite an important subject at the time.

As far as unvoting Ripley goes: this game isn't over yet. I'd hate to see it end by quicklynch.

Reason?

Care to explain why this is actually scummy?

Buddying and bandwagoning are scummy. Do I seriously have to explain that?

... Whilst this would make sense in a large post analysis, the fact is my post was merely

several

lines, and was an observation about Paradox. Since it's pretty obvious that was the entire point of the post, I still fail to see how it's narrow-minded.

It was the only suggestion you made in all your posts up to that point? That's all you had to say about the entire game up to that point, pretty much.

Quite clearly your definition of OMGUS is flawed. IH has basically been my top suspect for the entire day. You come in and accuse me, and when I reaffirm my position you simply fling out OMGUS?

You are aware that I haven't read anything from the second Day? I am completely unaware of current suspicions.

[Patrick]

Aimee, I've seen you online and posting in other threads. This close to deadline in lylo is absolutely not the time for lurking. Please answer my question.

[Ripley]

OK, so I got a very nicely worded PM from the mod requesting that I do my best to get the game finished despite my own lack of interest at this stage. I respond well to nicely worded PMs. So...

Can I point out that there were long periods in Day 2 particularly where I worked hard at this game (providing lengthy, detailed responses to Skruffs and to IH), but others were not willing to do so and effectively stalled it for weeks that turned into months. As a result my own interest eventually dwindled. I've accepted I'll never get those lost hours back that I put into the game, and moved on. The game now means nothing to me and I'm not willing to lose more hours of my life to it.

I am, though, willing to help on a limited basis. I'll answer questions provided that I can do so immediately and without the need to re-research old pages. I won't answer questions I've answered already.

I see Patrick/Aimee/Zindaras have been doing the dance of ruling thselves out in all possible pairings due to being online at the same time and not lynching me. However, any of these posts could just as well be a message to a scum partner: "I'm still here... Skruffs isn't around, let's go for it." Though nobody did, maybe too cautious, maybe uncertain if Skruffs was actually there and waiting to pounce. (Does Skruffs' name appear in the registered users list when he's online?) Though I think the possibility of Skruffs being scum has increased; it's quite likely that the remaining scum is waiting to see if a townie will vote for me, which would explain the lack of action.

I had seen Zindaras's early attacks on me as paving the way for getting me lynched, since Skruffs was clearly willing to vote for me and now done so twice. My theory was that Zindaras (scum) was using Skruffs (misguided innocent) and playing up my guilt to keep Skruffs as anti-Ripley as possible. Well, sure enough another Ripley vote appeared from Skruffs, but if my theory had been right Zindaras and his scum partner would likely have taken an opportunity to lynch me now.