Mini #553: Over!

[destructor]

Almost Ten Pages Vote Count!

Votes required:

7 to lynch

4, Matt_s

-

massive, Khelvaster, Coolbot, Talitha

1, Coolbot

-

ting =)

1, Eljcko

-

Destructor

Not Voting:

6, Qman, Petunho, Matt_S, eljcko, crazy_vlad, Imat

My questions about the name-claim had more to do with site rules. A name-claim being something that technically shouldn't happen in a normal game. I was wondering about replacements too. If it wouldn't be breaking any rules, I think it

may

be useful.

[shaka!!]

My questions about the name-claim had more to do with site rules. A name-claim being something that technically shouldn't happen in a normal game. I was wondering about replacements too. If it wouldn't be breaking any rules, I think it

may

be useful.

Rules are in the second post mate.

[ting =)]

mod:

If a name claim occurs, would you reveal if the replacements had names and what they were?

[massive]

Can we move on from this name claim nonsense? No one was for it the first time around, and no one wants to do it now. Geez already.

On a related note, however, Matt_S does not claim "unnamed" until after the theme gets pulled. Up until that point, he had merely said there was something in his PM that only vanilla townies would know. Can you read and infer that he's saying "we have no name?" It's possible. But it's also possible that he was hedging his bets and hoping that no one would keep pushing.

[crazy_vlad]

talitha: I prefer to miss out all the dragggging out of nothing and just head straight to the lynching of the hapless townie (or the hapless scum, if we get lucky.)

really?

FOS talitha

[CoolBot]

The mass claim was always a bad idea, and it should be dropped. Why bring it up again, khel?

I don't see why ting is having such a hard time coming to terms with named townies outside the Fellowship. There are dozens of characters to choose from. There no reason the mod would restrict himself to just the Fellowship. In fact, this was one of the first arguments against the mass claim.

crazy_vlad, could you explain your last post a bit? It makes no sense. Skipping a whole bunch of nothing sounds fine to me. Several players have unvoted only because the bandwagon was getting large enough to accomplish something. That sort of play only drags things out.

[Matt_S]

On a related note, however, Matt_S does not claim "unnamed" until after the theme gets pulled. Up until that point, he had merely said there was something in his PM that only vanilla townies would know. Can you read and infer that he's saying "we have no name?" It's possible. But it's also possible that he was hedging his bets and hoping that no one would keep pushing.

Truth. I was trying too hard to catch scum. I didn't want to give scum too many clues. But I did say this:

If you got the same pm as me, it should be obvious why having everyone say their name wouldn't work at all.

In other words, a name claim won't work because vanillas were unnamed(or so I thought). The more people seemed to have no idea what I was talking about, the more I hinted at it. And unless my memory has failed, nobody else has actually claimed unnamed either. It's always been my worry that the mod was screwing with me.

What, have I gotten a different PM than everyone else or something?

A little later I PMed the mod to confirm that I wasn't supposed to have a name. He confirmed that I was nameless.

I don't have anything else to say to defend myself because I never thought I'd be the one under suspicion.

[Khelvaster]

@Khel.
A name claim might be good. But with all the confusion and with all the talk of non-fellowship names, it'd be easy for scum to just fake claim a non-fellowship name. It might clear some things up, like the actions of coolbot, but it might also muddy the waters.

Yeah, but there is also named non-fellowship. If I see someone claim Erkenbrant or Arwen, that's so obscure it was most likely a scum making it up. If a scum tries something like Tom Bombadil, we might actually have someone who was named Tom Bombadil, who will counterclaim.

[ting =)]

@coolbot. I've come to terms with it. I originally thought you were unnamed, from your first post about not being in the fellowship. I misinterpreted it. You never corrected me on it till recently though.

[CoolBot]

Just to clarify, I haven't said either way, yet, because I think that gives too much information to scum.

[destructor]

I feel I need to reread again, just because this game isn't sitting well in my head. But in the mean time, here are my reasons for voting eljcko.

WOW. That was a lot too take in. First and foremost,

unvote

. Ting made pretty good defense and I can't really argue too much about it. I still don't trust you though, still fishy behavior IMO.

This was just odd. Backs off on his vote on ting, but leaves a foot in the doorway.

eljcko noted two explanations of Matt's behaviour:

He seems to know a lot about the townie PM, but there is no townie PM posted by Shaka. Two possibitites strike me right away.

1. Matt S is vanilla townie
2. Matt S is scum with the safe claim of vanilla townie. (i.e. knowing what the townie PM is)

He continues, saying that he'd been leaning towards 1 for most of the game but then "Matt_S started digging himself a grave," referring to the bandwagoning case that had recently been bought up, essentially rehashing the arguments that had already been stated. I found it ironic that eljcko accused Matt of bandwagonning, when that seems to be exactly what eljcko is doing.

Vote Matt_S

This is not my final vote, I am still not 100% on you. If you give me a solid reason to not vote for you, I'll unvote.

So similar to his unvote of ting, just that it's a vote this time. He's unashamedly non-committal, essentially saying, "I'll unvote if you can respond and shake this bandwagon off."

If we go back to eljcko's two explanations of Matt's vanilla claim, it would seem that he's discarded reason 1 and now believes 2 is the case - that Matt is scum with a vanilla townie safe-claim. I'd like to know if eljcko still believes this is the case. That's a question I'd like to ask everyone on Matt's wagon. Given the reaction we've seen to Matt's claim, I have doubts to how 'safe' his claim was, whether town or scum.

I didn't like, most of all, eljcko's non-committal hop on the Matt wagon, his grudging unvote of ting and the loose ends he's left with regards to Matt's claim.

[eljcko]

I feel I need to reread again, just because this game isn't sitting well in my head. But in the mean time, here are my reasons for voting eljcko.

WOW. That was a lot too take in. First and foremost,

unvote

. Ting made pretty good defense and I can't really argue too much about it. I still don't trust you though, still fishy behavior IMO.

This was just odd. Backs off on his vote on ting, but leaves a foot in the doorway.

eljcko noted two explanations of Matt's behaviour:

He seems to know a lot about the townie PM, but there is no townie PM posted by Shaka. Two possibitites strike me right away.

1. Matt S is vanilla townie
2. Matt S is scum with the safe claim of vanilla townie. (i.e. knowing what the townie PM is)

He continues, saying that he'd been leaning towards 1 for most of the game but then "Matt_S started digging himself a grave," referring to the bandwagoning case that had recently been bought up, essentially rehashing the arguments that had already been stated. I found it ironic that eljcko accused Matt of bandwagonning, when that seems to be exactly what eljcko is doing.

Vote Matt_S

This is not my final vote, I am still not 100% on you. If you give me a solid reason to not vote for you, I'll unvote.

So similar to his unvote of ting, just that it's a vote this time. He's unashamedly non-committal, essentially saying, "I'll unvote if you can respond and shake this bandwagon off."

If we go back to eljcko's two explanations of Matt's vanilla claim, it would seem that he's discarded reason 1 and now believes 2 is the case - that Matt is scum with a vanilla townie safe-claim. I'd like to know if eljcko still believes this is the case. That's a question I'd like to ask everyone on Matt's wagon. Given the reaction we've seen to Matt's claim, I have doubts to how 'safe' his claim was, whether town or scum.

I didn't like, most of all, eljcko's non-committal hop on the Matt wagon, his grudging unvote of ting and the loose ends he's left with regards to Matt's claim.

First of all, yes, I do believe Matt_S may have a vanilla townie safeclaim, its very plausable (SP?).

I backed off on my vote on ting because he started sounding more pro-town (he came across as scummy right of the bat). I now feel that ting is one of the most pro-town players in this game currently. I leave my foot in the door as a warning of sorts to say I am still watching you.

And, my thoughts on Matt_S's role remain undecided. He may be vanilla, he may be scum. He shows flashes of both.

[shaka!!]

mod:

If a name claim occurs, would you reveal if the replacements had names and what they were?

If the replacements wish to know whether there role was named or not they can pm me.

[massive]

In other words, a name claim won't work because vanillas were unnamed(or so I thought). The more people seemed to have no idea what I was talking about, the more I hinted at it. And unless my memory has failed, nobody else has actually claimed unnamed either. It's always been my worry that the mod was screwing with me.

True, but we can also say you are thinking, "Now that no one's come out as vanilla townie to support me, I can claim the mod is screwing with me!" It's WIFOM. Paying attention to your "hints" is just distraction, in my opinion, because the revelation of the "meaning" of the hints always seems to come after someone comes along to tell you what is factual (ie, Coolbot and the non-Fellowship, then The Mod and the unnamedness).

[Qman]

For the record, I'm really having a hard time sorting the name claim crap out from real substance in the game, as a normal mini. I'm trying. Just isn't all that easy for me.

[Talitha]

I concur with eljcko's post:

And, my thoughts on Matt_S's role remain undecided. He may be vanilla, he may be scum. He shows flashes of both.

So let's lynch him (Matt_S) and find out.

[eljcko]

I concur with eljcko's post:

And, my thoughts on Matt_S's role remain undecided. He may be vanilla, he may be scum. He shows flashes of both.

So let's lynch him (Matt_S) and find out.

You seem very adament on lynching Matt. Why?

[Matt_S]

I concur with eljcko's post:

And, my thoughts on Matt_S's role remain undecided. He may be vanilla, he may be scum. He shows flashes of both.

So let's lynch him (Matt_S) and find out.

You seem very adament on lynching Matt. Why?

Yeah, why?

[Talitha]

If either of you two have a better candidate, I am all ears.

[ting =)]

I was mildly suspicious of gsgold who has been replaced by petunho, and spindax, who has been replaced by qman. The problem is, gsgold and spindax made so little posts that I can't be sure of my suspicions, and since they've been replaced they now have a clean slate. How are you two doing on your reread by the way? Are you guys done yet?

[massive]

ting

: What was it, in GSGold and Spindax's "so little posts" that made you suspcious of them to begin with?

[CoolBot]

I don't see what we gain by stopping the wagon on Matt. He hasn't really explained his actions, nor has he claimed. All we know is he doesn't have a name, but beyond that, it's speculation. Surely, he's part of a group like Gondor or Rohan. At the very least, we should hear what it is before moving on.

[shaka!!]

Pentunho has requested a replacement, I will start looking for one.

[Matt_S]

I don't see what we gain by stopping the wagon on Matt. He hasn't really explained his actions, nor has he claimed. All we know is he doesn't have a name, but beyond that, it's speculation. Surely, he's part of a group like Gondor or Rohan. At the very least, we should hear what it is before moving on.

Sorry if I'm a little behind on this, but what actions have I yet to explain?

And I did claim when I explained my position on the name claim. Unless you mean I haven't claimed a power role, in which case I find it pretty twisted that you're pushing my wagon just for that.

[ting =)]

@Coolbot. What makes you think he's in a group like Gondor or Rohan if he's unnamed?

@Massive. Nothing concrete enough that I felt the need to bring them up.

With gsgold, it's the fact that he voted for khel simply for the reason of a wagon. To me, voting just to wagon and then saying it's 'just to spark discussion' is cheap. A vote meant to spark discussion has as much weight as a vote that hammers. Saying, 'but I only voted for discussion, I didn't do it to lynch' is stupid. Personally, I don't vote except to random vote, and when I honestly find someone suspicious. You don't need to vote to start discussion. It's not a major scumtell though, just something I don't agree with personally.

With spindax, it's the fact that his two posts went, 'it's a trap!' and then 'oh wait, i misunderstood, false alarm.' I'm not sure how he misunderstood khel's post, it explicitly asked for a name claim. He could have meant that he misinterpreted khel's intent, but with two posts, I'm not sure. The thing is, with so little posts, I can't tell what he meant, so it's not a suspicion worth bringing up.