Newbie 580 - Game Over!

[backinblack167]

My Thoughts: Occult's agreement on the topic of the game needing a deadline isn't inherently scummy, but it isn't exactly the most helpful thing to town at the moment. I DO agree with JimSauce's assertion that it was kind of OMGUS. I would like to know this, though, Occult: Are you serious about WLC's page 2/page 3 "lie" being reason to lynch him?

In my mind, WLC's immediate jumping on him to put Occult to L-2 seems a little stranger in my book, but both of these posts could simply have been meant as catalysts for activity.

Official Vote Count

JimSauce - 1 (backinblack167)

Occult - 2 (preatorian, WeyounsLastClone)

Radio_Interference - 1 (JimSauce)
preatorian - 1 (BridgesAndBaloons)

WeyounsLastClone - 2 (Boggzie, Occult)

Not Voting - 2 (Amor, Radio_Interference)

5 to Lynch

[Amor]

Yeah, Occult's vote was pretty much OMGUS, and in my mind much more suspicious than the deadline thing.

I'd really like to hear from some of the people who have been lurking, especially Boggzie, who is an IC but hasn't posted any content yet.

[JimSauce]

FoS: Boggzie

, who has made 8 posts since his last here six days ago.

[BridgesAndBaloons]

Hi, I'm replacing ZaneWasHere

It's my first game. Woohoo!

Now to business,
I think we need to go ahead and lynch someone, it works in favor for us. (or at least thats what the general idea tends to be).

I think Occult wasn't helping the town with his deadline suggestion. His posts seem a bit scummy to me, but its my first game, so maybe I'm wrong.

he also voted for Zanewashere, who I am now, so it's kind of pay back.

Vote: Occult

This vote does not count. You did not unvote first - Vel

[JimSauce]

Welcome, Bridges!

Hi, I'm replacing ZaneWasHere

It's my first game. Woohoo!

Now to business,
I think we need to go ahead and lynch someone, it works in favor for us. (or at least thats what the general idea tends to be).

It works in favor if we have enough evidence of the person's alignment. Occult's posts aren't enough to warrant a lynch, though I think his approval of a deadline is very scummy. Days usually last weeks or months at a time. The more information in the thread, the better for the town.

I think Occult wasn't helping the town with his deadline suggestion. His posts seem a bit scummy to me, but its my first game, so maybe I'm wrong.

he also voted for Zanewashere, who I am now, so it's kind of pay back.

Vote: Occult

You're doing well so far. Be careful where you place your votes, and make sure you always know how many the player has before voting. There's always the risk of accidentally lynching a player or putting them at lynch-1, which allows the scum to hammer (unless the mafia are already voting for him).

Also, if you find anything scummy about Occult other than his deadline approval, you should point it out. It gives him something to argue against.

[BridgesAndBaloons]

I feel a little bad going all out to find Evidence against someone I'm not 100% sure is mafia, but for the sake of the game, and to let him defend himself, here we go:

From the get-go, Occult's behavior has been a little scummy. Mainly, he has stopped productive discussion and encouraged a deadline.
His first post was a random lynch, as he was trying to fit in as a townie.
In his second post, he gives a nonsensical reason for his vote, rather than the defending it and creating discussion: [...]

Zane gave me a wink and handed me I note written in blood that said....

*opens note*

YOUR ASS IS DEAD.

thats all the incentive I need to take him out.

[...]
In his third post, he just corrects an typo he could have resolved with typing. This may not prove anything directly, but it seems like he is trying to sidetrack usefull conversation.

In post four, he lynches RI just because of the way he types. He doesn't go on to explain if that behavior is scummy or not, he just seems to be getting rid of productivity.

In post five, six, and seven he sarcastically notes that the game is going too fast, implying that he wants a deadline. He pretty much asks for one in post seven. Deadlines are very scummy indeed.
Also in post five, puts a FoS: preatorian and doesn't explain his reasons. ( he claims that

After reading back I'm going to

FoS: preatorian

he seems to have the only real vote, and his reasons don't make any sense.

he doesn't explain what preatorian supposed reasons are, and why they don't make sense. Again, scummy.)

the 8th post is something very scummy:

[...]
That is a very idiotic reason to vote for someone, now I don't mind Idiotic voting, in fact, I encourage it [...]

. Here he encourages idiotic voting! this is super anti-productivity.

He spends the rest of his posts trying to undo the damage he has done. But it's too late. He has come off as really scummy.

The more I look into his posts, the scummier he seems.

What to watch out for:

1) He retaliates by trying lynching me later on (a couple of changing votes later)
2) He shifts the focus to the debate whether a deadline is scummy or not, or otherwise sidetracks the conversations
3) More scummy behavior?

[Occult]

Firstly'

UnVoTe

I deem BnB's post moronic, but seeing as its the best piece of discussion to respond to........ (My responses are in bold)

I feel a little bad going all out to find Evidence against someone I'm not 100% sure is mafia, but for the sake of the game, and to let him defend himself, here we go:

*Whistle*.

From the get-go, Occult's behavior has been a little scummy. Mainly, he has stopped productive discussion and encouraged a deadline.
His first post was a random lynch, as he was trying to fit in as a townie.
In his second post, he gives a nonsensical reason for his vote, rather than the defending it and creating discussion: [...]

Zane gave me a wink and handed me I note written in blood that said....

*opens note*

YOUR ASS IS DEAD.

thats all the incentive I need to take him out.

[...]

a few things with this part. 1) stopped productive discussion? How? My deadline approval is THE ONLY THING in this game that has gotten any discussion. I also attempted to start conversation b4 by pointing out flaws in the only relevant vote in the game (it was small, but an attempt to get something started) you can't accuse me of being anti-discussion.

Next, my first two posts were in a part of the game where every post is random, you point to one post on that first page that was not random, both were screwing around.

In his third post, he just corrects an typo he could have resolved with typing. This may not prove anything directly, but it seems like he is trying to sidetrack useful conversation.

If you haven't noticed the edit button is unavailable in game threads, i was correcting a mistake I made. All that proves is that I like to correct my mistakes

In post four, he lynches RI just because of the way he types. He doesn't go on to explain if that behavior is scummy or not, he just seems to be getting rid of productivity.

I haven't lynched anyone yet.... plus thats when the game was still at a stand still. In my experience any posts (even random ones) can get something going

In post five, six, and seven he sarcastically notes that the game is going too fast, implying that he wants a deadline. He pretty much asks for one in post seven. Deadlines are very scummy indeed.

You and clone are overly obsessed with my asking for a deadline. I have enough experience to see when the game is going downhill and this game was slipping away. Deadlines help with that also the fact that DEADLINES ARE REMOVABLE, there's nothing scummy with them

Also in post five, puts a FoS: preatorian and doesn't explain his reasons. ( he claims that

After reading back I'm going to

FoS: preatorian

he seems to have the only real vote, and his reasons don't make any sense.

He put a real vote on me without any reasoning, thats what I'm suspicious about. He claimed my RANDOM VOTE (keyword is RANDOM folks) was scummy. I find that attacking random votes is just scum grabbing for easy reasons to give a vote. Kinda like what you did in the first half of you post *wink*

he doesn't explain what preatorian supposed reasons are, and why they don't make sense. Again, scummy.)

He didn't have any thats why I FoSed him, i was looking for reasons, I wasn't going to make them up

the 8th post is something very scummy:

[...]
That is a very idiotic reason to vote for someone, now I don't mind Idiotic voting, in fact, I encourage it [...]

. Here he encourages idiotic voting! this is super anti-productivity.

No. I'm just more on the random side of play style, I came to this site from playing IRC, chat and live mafia which are much quicker and more random then what goes on in here. Its just a much more relaxed play style

He spends the rest of his posts trying to undo the damage he has done. But it's too late. He has come off as really scummy.

??? You saying that defending myself and discussion is scummy? Do you even know how to play this game?

The more I look into his posts, the scummier he seems.

Sure. What ever you like to write

What to watch out for:

1) He retaliates by trying lynching me later on (a couple of changing votes later)

Its how the game is played. When youre town its to your advantage to lynch Scum if you seem like scum i will try to lynch you (Though I'm much more cautious with REAL VOTES (REAL is the key word in that one) ).

2) He shifts the focus to the debate whether a deadline is scummy or not, or otherwise sidetracks the conversations

What are you stupid? You're going to attack me for being scummy over the deadline and not expect me to defend myself?

You also say that you'll allow me to defend myself up top, but all of a sudden it scummy for me to defend myself?

3) More scummy behavior?

Bah.

Question for you:

You attack my first posts for being random in the voting. Yet your first post is a OMGUS for voting your replacement. You also had no problem at putting me at L-2 in a random vote. Why the double standard?



*Transmission out*

[BridgesAndBaloons]

I don't think you need to be so defensive calling me "stupid" "Do you know how to play this game" and "moronic" Either
A) you're being a jerk
B) you're being a little defensive since you are Mafia,
C) you're being a little defensive since you are not Mafia.

Obviously, (and unfortunately) I wasn't able to learn too much from your response. The only thing I learned is that you're able to defend yourself well. To tell you the truth, I was randomly voting for you. Then when JimSauce asked me to explain, I decided to see if there was any grounding behind the vote. I looked at your posts and picked them apart and wrote what seemed skummy.

You are right, random votes produce conversation. That's what I did, that's what you did.

You defended yourself valiantly and persuaded me very well. I would be shocked if someone attacked me so strongly.
I'm trying to generate discussion, and maybe by attacking someone so personally was a strange way of doing it, it elicited a response from you, which is a good direction.

The difference between our "random votes" is that I have now revealed my reasons (to get a response). I'm sure you have stated your reasons somewhere here, but I seemed to have missed them. Was there some back reason behind your "random votes" or were they simply random people? (Again I'm sure you have mentioned this somewhere. My vote wasn't random in the fact that you seemed to be actively involved in this thread and I knew

you

would reply somehow.)

I don't want you to get lynched without enough evidence. I'm only trying to find more evidence whether you are pro-town or not.

I feel bad for saying so much against you.
So, here's a reason Occult may be good to keep around: he is IC, and he can generate more productive conversations than we can if he is pro-town.

After all of this,

Unvote: Occult

I have no other vote right now.

[Occult]

I don't think you need to be so defensive calling me "stupid" "Do you know how to play this game" and "moronic" Either
A) you're being a jerk
B) you're being a little defensive since you are Mafia,
C) you're being a little defensive since you are not Mafia.

: P, please don't take it personally, I just find that aggression gets the best reaction out of people. I just view it as a game play choice, not a personal attack (I like your response, btw)

Obviously, (and unfortunately) I wasn't able to learn too much from your response. The only thing I learned is that you're able to defend yourself well. To tell you the truth, I was randomly voting for you. Then when JimSauce asked me to explain, I decided to see if there was any grounding behind the vote. I looked at your posts and picked them apart and wrote what seemed skummy.

Defending yourself is part of the game and since I'm the one under attack Im the one defending

You are right, random votes produce conversation. That's what I did, that's what you did.

Yes. Now that you agree why attack me for it?

You defended yourself valiantly and persuaded me very well. I would be shocked if someone attacked me so strongly.
I'm trying to generate discussion, and maybe by attacking someone so personally was a strange way of doing it, it elicited a response from you, which is a good direction.

I see we're on the same page there

The difference between our "random votes" is that I have now revealed my reasons (to get a response). I'm sure you have stated your reasons somewhere here, but I seemed to have missed them. Was there some back reason behind your "random votes" or were they simply random people?

Random, means random there's no reason behind it

(Again I'm sure you have mentioned this somewhere. My vote wasn't random in the fact that you seemed to be actively involved in this thread and I knew

you

would reply somehow.)

....., of course I would respond

I don't want you to get lynched without enough evidence. I'm only trying to find more evidence whether you are pro-town or not.

: )

I feel bad for saying so much against you.
So, here's a reason Occult may be good to keep around: he is IC, and he can generate more productive conversations than we can if he is pro-town.

This part I didn't like, my being an IC shouldn't be lynch-repellent.

After all of this,

Unvote: Occult

I have no other vote right now.

I feel pretty good about BnB, he is the least scummy in my book for now.

[WeyounsLastClone]

Wow, BaB makes a great entrance .

His first post seemed a bit scummy to me, directly voting for someone for where there already was discussion if putting him on L-2 was a good thing or not. And even admitting it was a 'payback' vote. But his second and third post seem well-argued and pro-townie.

[Amor]

I'm honestly not sure how to take BAB's posts. He came out very focused on getting Occult, to the extent of flagging obvious joke posts as scummy, and then quickly backed off. This could be scumminess or it could just be newbness.

This is also why I'm cautious about things like lynch-2. If I hadn't taken my vote off Occult, and BAB had quickly voted the way he did, the mafia could have hammered him. (This is assuming that the mafia weren't voting already and Occult is town.)

BAB, if you're new I would reccomend reading through some of the games on here to get a feel of how things work. That's what I did.

[Boggzie]

FoS: Boggzie

, who has made 8 posts since his last here six days ago.

Are you serious?

We're on like post 61 of Day 1.

You're seriously so desprate to point fingers you're counting up my 8 entire posts over six days versus the last one here? There were ten entire posts yesterday and I think one was a vote count. I can understand your boredom, but is it seriously so bad you're meta'ing that deep already?

I have no logical defense except to say the other game I was in was a pretty rough battle, and the St Patrick's weekend got the better of me.

At the risk of OMGUS, but you do appear desparate so I expect it,I have to say you appear to be reaching

awful

hard there, Jim.

[Radio_Interference]

krrrrzzzt...

...one does not simply rock into mordor...

[Statement]

Boggzie, there may have only been 10 posts yesterday, but they actually moved the game along, something that wasnt happening last time you posted. I would like to see your opinions/general thoughts myself, regardless of how scant they may or may not be.

[Random]

Occult, honestly I was planning on FomS'ing you in my last post simply because of how ridiculusly agressive you were acting, I found it excessive. Regardless, I forgot to add it in, and I looked at a few games you've played in before and am glad I didnt. Although I think you're acting a bit more agressive then what I've seen in other games I'm now relativly certain you're town.

[Thoughts]

Looking back through, I want preatorian to cast his thoughts. He hasnt said anything on any of the contraversies that have come up, even though he posted after the 33-36 incident.

*Transmission out*

[Boggzie]

Just because the Radio asked so nicely in his annoying ozone-smell way.

I don't really find anything to delve into there (32-36), I see it as lack of content. O wants the game to move along, maybe wrongly, but it's understood, and WLC maybe had his page settings to 5 rather than 10? I dunno. I think everyone's dying for something to key on and latch to as "scummy", and with the limited amount of any content whatsoever they're keying on uber-minor tells. Not that I have contributed anything more, but frankly I have been busy, and was in a rough battle in another game. I keep checking in here and haven't seen anything to say; "oh - that's interesting". A lot of mountains where molehills should be so far.

By the way -

unvote

, since it was random.

I don't like how Amor called me "lurking"; this early it's hard to tell if anyone's lurking, and really

everyone's

been lurking to an extent or we wouldn't have 3 replacements and such a slow day. Typically the first three to four pages seem to have a few lurkers. It's mainly due to wrapping up other games, mostly in cases of ICs.

With Jim's join date, he should know this - I don't like how Jim didn't evaluate the line, he just FoS'd, going so far as to meta the hell outta me. Which, he would then also know I was caught in a heated battle elsewhere, and perhaps it was tough to get a good read here, yet he mentioned it anyhow.

I'm not saying either of these are scum tells, I'm calling them out on bad play. I literally don't like the two assertions in terms of play, not as tells. Although - Jim was quite quick to agree, eh? Maybe that is interesting.

[JimSauce]

You're seriously so desprate to point fingers you're counting up my 8 entire posts over six days versus the last one here? There were ten entire posts yesterday and I think one was a vote count. I can understand your boredom, but is it seriously so bad you're meta'ing that deep already?

When players don't post for five or six days, I'll look up their posts to see if they are posting in other games (which means they're ignoring this one, i.e. lurking) or just absent, in which case I'll be more lenient (this assumes they are in more than one game). Once again, I look up posts all the time, and you can check that. Also, that wasn't deep meta'ing. I skimmed the dates on your last posts.

I don't like how Amor called me "lurking"; this early it's hard to tell if anyone's lurking, and really everyone's been lurking to an extent or we wouldn't have 3 replacements and such a slow day. Typically the first three to four pages seem to have a few lurkers.

A six-day absence fits my definition or lurking.

With Jim's join date, he should know this - I don't like how Jim didn't evaluate the line, he just FoS'd, going so far as to meta the hell outta me.

Please don't exaggerate. I looked up your last posts without reading them.

Far

from meta-ing the hell outta you. Also, what line did I not evaluate?

I'm not saying either of these are scum tells, I'm calling them out on bad play. I literally don't like the two assertions in terms of play, not as tells. Although - Jim was quite quick to agree, eh? Maybe that is interesting.

You think it's bad play to FoS someone for a six-day absence, while posting elsewhere? Or is there something more?

[Boggzie]

::

le sigh

::

You're seriously so desprate to point fingers you're counting up my 8 entire posts over six days versus the last one here? There were ten entire posts yesterday and I think one was a vote count. I can understand your boredom, but is it seriously so bad you're meta'ing that deep already?

When players don't post for five or six days, I'll look up their posts to see if they are posting in other games (which means they're ignoring this one, i.e. lurking) or just absent, in which case I'll be more lenient (this assumes they are in more than one game). Once again, I look up posts all the time, and you can check that. Also, that wasn't deep meta'ing. I skimmed the dates on your last posts.

On Day 1, page three, that's deep meta'ing, Jim. You can classify however you like to make yourself, or others here feel better, but that's deep for D1,PG3. Feel free to disagree.

I don't like how Amor called me "lurking"; this early it's hard to tell if anyone's lurking, and really everyone's been lurking to an extent or we wouldn't have 3 replacements and such a slow day. Typically the first three to four pages seem to have a few lurkers.

A six-day absence fits my definition or lurking.

This is cute, because it doesn't even fit, it's just you talking and wanting to underline the fact you feel I'm lurking. Just say; "Boggzie, you're lurking." Don't try to make it look like you're making the rules here. It's bad form, and can bite you later.

With Jim's join date, he should know this - I don't like how Jim didn't evaluate the line, he just FoS'd, going so far as to meta the hell outta me.

Please don't exaggerate. I looked up your last posts without reading them.

Far

from meta-ing the hell outta you.

I reiterate - D1PG3, you're bored and looking for crapola. You're meta'ing for no reason this early. Feel free to sell your sack of shit to everyone here like it's a box of gold, but don't expect me not to tell you it's just a bag of shit.

Also, what line did I not evaluate?

You didn't even look into Amor's assertion that I was 'lurking', you immediately posted up your FoS based solely on lurking.

1- Lurking is a shit scumtell. It can be used as a tool to pressure folks, but your FoS is all lurking, and that's shit. You and I both know it.
2- You can't come right out and blatantly agree with someone on D1PG3, without someone calling you on it. It may be the subject you two are questioning, but someone had to call attention to it.
3- You've been here long enough to know ICs get busy because typically they're involved in multiple games because there's a drought of us willing to play in newbie games so we get slow. It was interesting how you provided no deference to that at all.
4- If you're going to toss out a shit FoS you have to at least have

something

in the tank remotely scummy, which you don't. Keep digging.

I'm not saying either of these are scum tells, I'm calling them out on bad play. I literally don't like the two assertions in terms of play, not as tells. Although - Jim was quite quick to agree, eh? Maybe that is interesting.

You think it's bad play to FoS someone for a six-day absence, while posting elsewhere? Or is there something more?

Yes. Lurking is not a scumtell. Underlining that point is lurking by an IC, obviously involved another game, perhaps at a tough timeframe. I explained all this, but again you seem like you want to present some big case you don't have. (i.e. - your def. of lurking) I hate to break it to you, man, there's no "ah-ha" Columbo moments on Day 1. To add to that - we've had three replacements and we're on PG3 - LoL! Everyone's lurking, Sherlock - you're an IC you should be helping to underline that pragmatic standpoint - not exaggerate it. That's quite troubling.

[Occult]

UNVOTE

(if I need it)

vote Bog

I don't find lurking scummy but I do find your posts scummy as hell.

[JimSauce]

On Day 1, page three, that's deep meta'ing, Jim. You can classify however you like to make yourself, or others here feel better, but that's deep for D1,PG3. Feel free to disagree.

Sure. But I was pointing out the fact that I look up everyone's post record anytime there is an unexplained absence.

This is cute, because it doesn't even fit, it's just you talking and wanting to underline the fact you feel I'm lurking. Just say; "Boggzie, you're lurking." Don't try to make it look like you're making the rules here. It's bad form, and can bite you later.

I thought

"A six-day absence fits

my

definition or lurking."

would make it very clear that I wasn't trying to make any rules. And I did say "Boggzie, you're lurking." in #52. I just added some 'deep meta' to add weight to it.

I reiterate - D1PG3, you're bored and looking for crapola. You're meta'ing for no reason this early. Feel free to sell your sack of shit to everyone here like it's a box of gold, but don't expect me not to tell you it's just a bag of shit.

My interpretation of 'deep meta-ing' was off. I thought 'deep' referred to what you looked for in their posts elsewhere, not at what point in the game you decided to meta them. Also, my reason to meta this early was to check if you were posting elsewhere, which would confirm if you were unable to post or if you just didn't post in this game.

You didn't even look into Amor's assertion that I was 'lurking', you immediately posted up your FoS based solely on lurking.

Of course I looked into it. He triggered my 'deep meta' comment.

1- Lurking is a shit scumtell. It can be used as a tool to pressure folks, but your FoS is all lurking, and that's shit. You and I both know it.

My FoS

was

used to pressure you out of lurking.

2- You can't come right out and blatantly agree with someone on D1PG3, without someone calling you on it. It may be the subject you two are questioning, but someone had to call attention to it.

What's wrong with agreeing that you haven't posted for six days?

3- You've been here long enough to know ICs get busy because typically they're involved in multiple games because there's a drought of us willing to play in newbie games so we get slow. It was interesting how you provided no deference to that at all.

I'm not going to be lenient with an accusation of lurking because you're an IC. Sorry. Also, in almost every Newbie game I've played with an IC, they've been more active than everyone else.

4- If you're going to toss out a shit FoS you have to at least have something in the tank remotely scummy, which you don't. Keep digging.

Refer to #1.

Yes. Lurking is not a scumtell.

Wow. Suddenly, contrary to my several other newbie- and mini-games, lurking is not a scumtell. We can now drop this portion of the argument, and for this game I will assume that lurking does not indicate alignment. (I'm being serious.)

I explained all this, but again you seem like you want to present some big case you don't have. (i.e. - your def. of lurking)

You said you weren't lurking. I said you were because you didn't post for six days. I only mentioned it again because you argued against Amor's claim. Also, do you classify #52 as a 'big case'?

I hate to break it to you, man, there's no "ah-ha" Columbo moments on Day 1.

You consider an

"ah-ha Columbo moment"

to be JimSauce pointing out something he finds suspicious. >_>;

To add to that - we've had three replacements and we're on PG3 - LoL! Everyone's lurking, Sherlock - you're an IC you should be helping to underline that pragmatic standpoint - not exaggerate it. That's quite troubling.

Everyone's lurking? Everyone except you made a post relatively close to #52, which is why I excluded them.

UNVOTE (if I need it)

vote Bog

I don't find lurking scummy but I do find your posts scummy as hell.

Also, if you find anything scummy about

Occult

Boggzie ... you should point it out. It gives him something to argue against.

[Amor]

I don't like how Amor called me "lurking"; this early it's hard to tell if anyone's lurking, and really

everyone's

been lurking to an extent or we wouldn't have 3 replacements and such a slow day.

While it's true that there hasn't been much activity, you stood out as somebody who wasn't posting. When I posted that everyone except for you and preatorian had posted recently. And your existing posts were both one-line joke posts. Your posts today are almost entirely defending yourself against the lurking accusation, which isn't the most helpful thing either. (If, as you maintain, lurking isn't a scumtell.)

I don't really find anything to delve into there (32-36), I see it as lack of content. O wants the game to move along, maybe wrongly, but it's understood, and WLC maybe had his page settings to 5 rather than 10? I dunno. I think everyone's dying for something to key on and latch to as "scummy", and with the limited amount of any content whatsoever they're keying on uber-minor tells. Not that I have contributed anything more, but frankly I have been busy, and was in a rough battle in another game. I keep checking in here and haven't seen anything to say; "oh - that's interesting". A lot of mountains where molehills should be so far.

You said yourself that there are no Columbo moments on Day 1. I think that we need to examine the small things -- Occult's request for a deadline and BAB's agressiveness certainly aren't things to lynch them over, but discussing them can help reveal things that are. It's a lot more useful than sitting back and waiting for something big to happen.

When I said you were lurking, I wasn't using it to imply you were scum, I just wanted to hear your read of the situation. I thought that as an IC you could help move the game along and offer some insight.. However, the way you responded -- vigorously defending yourself against charges of lurking while still not commenting on anyone else -- is suspicous.

[Boggzie]

UNVOTE

(if I need it)

vote Bog

I don't find lurking scummy but I do find your posts scummy as hell.

HA! And voting with nothing for the votee to even defend against isn't?!?! You're hilarious. You keep your vote right on me, I'll answer to it when you've earned enough respect for me to care. You'll also note I was one of the people (if not the only person) to even mention you may still have an even keel because you condoned a deadline. But, you know, if you desparately

want

to look scummy, far be it for me to bail you out any further.

However, the way you responded -- vigorously defending yourself against charges of lurking while still not commenting on anyone else -- is suspicous.

I think you'll find I defended lurking did not equaling a guilty alignment. I offered my only excuse for 'lurking', according to you and Jim, as being busy with the another game, and busy in general. Also, I commented on you and Jim - that's why you quoted and responded, so did he. I also commented on O and WLC earlier in response to Radio. So, you appear to still be reaching a little.

@ Jim - as far as 'deep meta' or whatever. My comment was on the gameplay overall, it wasn't an 'in character;, or game related post. It was a commentary on not agreeing with the gameplay. If you use meta play like that to get guilty or innocent reads, then it is what it is, however if you're going to trust in it enough to use it as your only evidence to drop and FoS it would behoove you to look into what exactly the posts content away from this game were. I probably will end up being the most active player (re: IC most active comment), however it wasn't possible to as active here as I would have liked.

oh, and

Vote: Occult

for shits, giggles, and whiplash.

[Occult]

UNVOTE

(if I need it)

vote Bog

I don't find lurking scummy but I do find your posts scummy as hell.

HA! And voting with nothing for the votee to even defend against isn't?!?! You're hilarious. You keep your vote right on me, I'll answer to it when you've earned enough respect for me to care. You'll also note I was one of the people (if not the only person) to even mention you may still have an even keel because you condoned a deadline. But, you know, if you desparately

want

to look scummy, far be it for me to bail you out any further.

However, the way you responded -- vigorously defending yourself against charges of lurking while still not commenting on anyone else -- is suspicous.

I think you'll find I defended lurking did not equaling a guilty alignment. I offered my only excuse for 'lurking', according to you and Jim, as being busy with the another game, and busy in general. Also, I commented on you and Jim - that's why you quoted and responded, so did he. I also commented on O and WLC earlier in response to Radio. So, you appear to still be reaching a little.

@ Jim - as far as 'deep meta' or whatever. My comment was on the gameplay overall, it wasn't an 'in character;, or game related post. It was a commentary on not agreeing with the gameplay. If you use meta play like that to get guilty or innocent reads, then it is what it is, however if you're going to trust in it enough to use it as your only evidence to drop and FoS it would behoove you to look into what exactly the posts content away from this game were. I probably will end up being the most active player (re: IC most active comment), however it wasn't possible to as active here as I would have liked.

oh, and

Vote: Occult

for shits, giggles, and whiplash.

Thanks for confirming my vote, i guess.

[Boggzie]

UNVOTE

(if I need it)

vote Bog

I don't find lurking scummy but I do find your posts scummy as hell.

HA! And voting with nothing for the votee to even defend against isn't?!?! You're hilarious. You keep your vote right on me, I'll answer to it when you've earned enough respect for me to care. You'll also note I was one of the people (if not the only person) to even mention you may still have an even keel because you condoned a deadline. But, you know, if you desparately

want

to look scummy, far be it for me to bail you out any further.

However, the way you responded -- vigorously defending yourself against charges of lurking while still not commenting on anyone else -- is suspicous.

I think you'll find I defended lurking did not equaling a guilty alignment. I offered my only excuse for 'lurking', according to you and Jim, as being busy with the another game, and busy in general. Also, I commented on you and Jim - that's why you quoted and responded, so did he. I also commented on O and WLC earlier in response to Radio. So, you appear to still be reaching a little.

@ Jim - as far as 'deep meta' or whatever. My comment was on the gameplay overall, it wasn't an 'in character;, or game related post. It was a commentary on not agreeing with the gameplay. If you use meta play like that to get guilty or innocent reads, then it is what it is, however if you're going to trust in it enough to use it as your only evidence to drop and FoS it would behoove you to look into what exactly the posts content away from this game were. I probably will end up being the most active player (re: IC most active comment), however it wasn't possible to as active here as I would have liked.

oh, and

Vote: Occult

for shits, giggles, and whiplash.

Thanks for confirming my vote, i guess.

riiiight, whatever you say, man. Anytime you feel like adding anything productive that doesn't set off everyone's scumdar you feel free to chime in.

[Boggzie]

ooop too late.

[BridgesAndBaloons]

Has anyone not voted for occult at some time?

Ok I would like to explain my seemingly awefull point here:

he is IC, and he can generate more productive conversations than we can if he is pro-town.

This part I didn't like, my being an IC shouldn't be lynch-repellent.

What I meant was that he can generate conversations. That means that if he is pro-townie, he will discuss very well. If he isn't, we should be able to see him not be as productive as an IC should be.
Another thing, ICs have a developed style of playing. Though they might be better at hiding, they have patterns that they stick too. Newbies, like myself, are still figuring out how they want to play, and do not get as easier to read through time as IC's might be. That's only my thoughts, its not to say that IC's aren't going to be scum, its just that IC's that are not scum are going to be very good for the town in the long run.
Statistically it makes more sense to lynch a newbie in the first round.

HOWEVER, THIS ARGUMENT IS VOID IF AN IC DOES SCUM-LIKE BEHAVIOR!!!

(the rule only applies for ties)
If you look at Occult's response here, he says that "IC shouldn't be lynch-repellent." he's clearly trying to help the town with this post. If he is trying to help the town in the long run or not, we have to see. I have gained alot more trust for Occult with this post, but you never know.

I feel that I have been focusing alot on Occult, I shall analyze someone else soon. (evil voice:

none are safe... muhahaha

)

Also, Radio Inteference: Your style of posting is very entertaining.

[Occult]

Well I'm glad to see that Bogs schedule has cleared up....


I can't put my finger on it, but maybe its the paragraph upon paragraph of repetitive and useless gibberish that you have been posting, that I find scummy.

LURKING ISN'T BAD, ITS NOT SCUMMY, I HAVE EXPERIENCE GODDAMN IT. ICS SHOULDN'T POST AT ALL IF THEY'RE DOING IT RIGHT.

WHY SHOULD I POST? I'M AN IC!

OMGUS VOTE OCCULT

.
MORE USELESS POSTING.

I'm questioning my sexuality.

ooop too late.

So.... I'm going to need you to post something useful.

*TRANSMISSION OUT*