Kingmaker II-Game Over

[Glork]

So next time you're going to say nothing, don't waste valuable pixel space, just say it and be proud damnit. No need to hide the fact that you're brave enough to stand up to King PJ and his attackdog Glork and not willing to knuckle under to their unreasonable demands.

How

dare

you insinuate that I am a subordinate of PJ. I've been cutting PJ's head off for six years. He's my play-toy, and he knows it.

[Glork]

And Pooky, I think you're missing the point of Twomz's posting genius. If you can spew a ton of words and not really make a point at all, you're doing GREAT. Wasting other people's time is both an art and a science. And it's one that must be constantly improved, lest our not-saying abilities fall.

"Nothing" gets the non-point across right away. If you just make a post that says, literally, "nothing," then you're not only saying nothing, you're not really saying anything at all. But if you can say

nothing

while appearing to say

something

, then you've really got it going on. People read your post, think that you're trying to say something, and then they realize that even though you've said something you've basically said nothing. Nothing at all.

[MrBuddyLee]

Wait, how did eleventy people post in the last three hours without referring to mr. box's box o' lies? That's physically unlikely and morally untenable!

I suppose one logical explanation is that the morning crew of chimps doesn't read.

[petroleumjelly]

Dear Glork and PJ,

Why are you "worried" about protecting the Kingmaker at this point? They're a vanilla townie who passes the role of Kingmaker on to another vanilla townie upon their death. What makes the vanilla townie who selected PJ as king any more worth saving from nightkill than the next vanilla townie down the line? PARTICULARLY this early in the game... Your tears for the lurking Kingmaker taste crocodile-flavored to me and thus your accusations reek of an attempt to cast wrongful aspersions upon a player with a better-than-average record of hunting scum.

That's a fair point actually: I was more thinking about the importance of the town protecting the Kingmaker from

last

game, and figuring the same principles ought to apply to this game. Still, the Kingmaker

is

a confirmed innocent (and the only one we're likely to have in the game, unless there is a failed attempt to execute the Hero), so obviating the Kingmaker seems like a silly thing to do in the first place when it is completely unneccessary for the town to know who the Kingmaker is. As others said against

me

in the original game, our priority should be to look for scum,

not

to narrow down the Kingmaker.

Dear PJ,

Why are you "outing" a strategy of mine which has proven helpful in nailing scum but which doesn't really work once it's broadcast to the members of a game?

I don't know that your

strategy

of purposely acting scummy has helped you nail scum: it's more your ability to catch scum that helps you catch scum. I doubt you acting 'purposely scummy' is not a very big factor in whether or not you get nightkilled in the first place. What

I'm

saying is that when townspeople (if you are town) purposely act scummy, it throws off

my

scumdar (and probably everybody else's), and can

distract

from finding actual scum. And of course, purposely acting scummy as town allows you to get away with acting scummy as scum. If me "outing" your strategy will get you to stop doing it, then I have no regreats. It might minimally help

you

, but it makes things much more difficult for everybody else.

***

That said, I actually agree with MBL's points on Post 58, and I am honestly surprised he is the

only

person mentioning this post at all so far.

A.) CBB latches onto the possible Glork/Pablito theory
B.) MrBuddyLee had voted for nobody, and there's nothing inherently

wrong

with asking others' opinions without giving your own (which was a false statement to begin with), although it is a little unorthodox
C.) I haven't decided what to think about the comment about Shadowlurker, but I really don't see a problem with voting multiple people (even randomly), especially early on in the game. Votes will not lynch anybody, so it does not put anybody in more danger than they otherwise were beforehand, although it likely would draw my attention to whoever is being voted.
D.) I tried to determine if the comment was made in jest, but the request to execute Pablito seems genuine. That post was only made on Page Three, and everybody hasn't even checked in yet. There's an extent to which people can be overeager, but this example I'm not exactly liking.

Unvote: MrBuddyLee, Vote: Cardb0ardb0x

.

[Twomz]

Actually, I try to say things, it's just that my reasons are usually flawed, or rely on gut feeling.

I made that post a few minutes before I went to class, I simply wrote down my thoughts about what I had read. I'm sorry if it was an "empty" post... but at least it was a post. I'd rather write 2 or 3 empty posts a day to show that i'm at least trying to participate, instead of never posting and just lurking behind the scenes. Sry if my lack of evidence or leads on Page 3 and subsequent "fluff" post was seen as offensive to you Pooky.

@ Glork: Yeah, the only problem is that whatever I say, no matter how much content (or even none at all) I put in a post, it's always read as scummy. Is some games I almost want to just stop posting, but I never do, and it usually just digs me into a deeper hole .

Now, I have an hour til my English class, I shall do a brief (nonfluff) summary of what I think is of import so far. (I hate the comp lab keyboards, the keys stick, and none of the spacebars are really anygood... i'll try to keep it short, less I kill myself before I submit this post).

1) The rules have changed. But, the main points in the change are...
- If the kingmaker dies a new one will be selected.
- The kingmaker may select the same player consecutively if there are less than 7 players.
- We may or may not have a hero, and the hero may or may not be told that he's the hero, and the mafia may or may not know if there's a hero. (:(, speculating on which parts are true is pointless, so i suppose if we're making a plan, we're going to have to make contengencies(sp?) for all the options)

2) PJ is the king.
- Much WIFOM insues on whether the kingmaker was in the last game or not.
- PJ has knowledge of how the scum functioned in the last game (as he pointed out in his first post), so, if he is protown, he'll be a strong force for the side of town.

3) PJ is continuing the List of Excecution system.
- If you want details on what he changed and how he's doing it, see his post.

4)

Well, random voting seems a bit pointless, so I'll just be content with saying hi.

No random voting for me.. i find it pointless. I'm up for a wagon though!

Yup I donaugh think I will be random voting either.. seems kinda pointless...

And now begins my masterful plan of finally playing through an entire game without voting. Unless I become king, lol.

Hi everyone. No point in random voting since the King is the only one right?

There is no reason not to random vote, or just to vote (even for large swaths (<-is that a word?) of people. I'm suspicious of all the above for trying to stay off the charts (especially MoS), i'm not sure if that's everyone, but I think it is.

5) Glork/Pablito
- I'm not sure what to take from this... buddying up, obv distancing, WIFOM, just joking around....

Vote Glork

for wanting the king dead

Ah, the Macbeth manoeuver.

LOL, not really a point, but nice zinger (sry for the belated gratz)

6) Cbox, accuses both Pab and Glork of being scum, but doesnt' vote Glork. Also falsly accused MBL (after checking over his posts, i found this to be true)... maybe he got MBL mixed up w/ someone?

7) Fritz and Phoebus are the only one's who haven't posted yet. (I don't really expect either of them to lurk, so things are looking up so far, we just have to wait for them to notice that the game's started.)

8) (yes i'll say it again) Lots of players are pointing fingers... but I can't decern which ones are scum and which are town just from that. So far several long lists of accusations against players have been formed, but the only really pressing one i've seen is MBL's assessment of Cbox... btw

UNVOTE: GLORK/PABLITO, VOTE: CBOX

(<-capped for mod). I'll decide after more information comes in whether I want to persue a case against pabs/glorky.

huggle: pooky and bmq

sry for the empty post pooks .

[ChannelDelibird]

Wow, lots of posts in a short space of time.

First off,

Vote: Cardb0ardb0x

for double standards. So your theory is that both pablito and Glork are scum, but you only vote for one of them, despite making it clear that you're aware you can vote for multiple people? Sure, maybe you're not sure they're both scum - but you should at least put some pressure on them both to test the theory.

Also,

CBB

That's going to get confusing.

[Vaughn]

Er... Wow.. that's an amazing amount of posting in that short timeframe.

Anyways, King PJ, I do beleive I shouldn't be on that list for my previous post was nothing more than introduction.

We all know that wagoning doesn't provide results in this type of game. My post should've been taking tongue-in-cheek.

However, I do like how you're running our town, but I'll return with a more productive post, come monday.

[Twomz]

CDB, yeah, the CDB/CBB thing is going to be annoying.

Vaughn, be prepared for 6-8 pages of random crap to read when you get back.


I have a feeling that this is going to be a great game (so far, no real lurkers, as long as Fritz and Phoeb pick up the pace and post) and lots of contribution and arguing.

[Glork]

Seriously, someone wake me up when this day ends. PJ's gonna make this think last, like a month or something.

[cardb0ardb0x]

yo buddy lee, my bad. I was writing down everyone's votes and I accidentally wrote down the people you were just kind of talking about iin the category where I put people's actual votes. I'd like to say sorry, completely unintentional... I guess where I got it from was in your first post (Post #35) you said

"I think ubertimmy, ChannelDelibird and pablito are scum based on what I've read so far." I should have written that down as "suspicion" or something. But I wrote it down as a vote.

To address ChannelDeliBird's concerns-

"First off, Vote: Cardb0ardb0x for double standards. So your theory is that both pablito and Glork are scum, but you only vote for one of them, despite making it clear that you're aware you can vote for multiple people? Sure, maybe you're not sure they're both scum - but you should at least put some pressure on them both to test the theory."

PetroleumJelly also expressed similar concerns. I'm not latching onto the theory. I was making logical statements and trying to contribute to the game, rather than just kind of milling around and not doing anything.

The reason I'm not voting for Glork at this point is that the only situations suggested to me by their actions are that either both of them are townies, pablito is scum and glork is townie, or both are scum. Is it all right if I just kind of FOS Glork at this point? Actually, I'll

Vote: Glork

for presure, and then take it off

Likewise, as people have told me I shouldn't vote for someone because they vote without explanation (because, apparently, votes don't matter at this point), it seems a tiny bit hypocritical to get on my back because I made a vote *with* an explanation. Should I just not give explanations for my votes? That actually seems a better route for me at this point.

Please just realize I'm just playing like an idiot. A scum probably wouldn't say something blatantly false, for whatever reasons.

I may have missed some points made about me, so please let me know if there's anything else I need to address. Again, sorry MBL. My mistake.

Lastly, to clarify things (CBB and CDB sounds tough) it would be simpler just to refer to me as "box."

[cardb0ardb0x]

Please note that I'm used to real-life mafia, if that makes any sense...

[Glork]

Ha! Pressure votes against Glork are a joke.




Seriously. A joke!

[cardb0ardb0x]

Bah... I knew it. Just doing what I'm told at this point... I only have like a zillion votes on me.

[bird1111]

Come to think of it, I did go too far with my joke votes

Unvote Glork

Unvote Pablito

[pablito]

As for the discussion topics,

1) LoE is fine with me, but I'm all for the King exerting independent thought instead of always following the will of the town. Nonetheless, more structure is better than less structure.

2) I'd be willing to follow those suggestions.

3) No, I don't find it worthwhile to discuss size of the scum group, especially since there's enough suspicious actions for us to talk about already.

1) It’s possible that both pablito and glork are scum. The idea is that pablito is the over-eager mafia, trying to support his pal. Glork knows how to play, and therefore doesn’t want the obvious attention and association, whether he is scum or not.

Therefore, Vote: Pablito
.....
4) Also, I’m just generally suspicious of anyone who uses flattery. I forget who did it though.

So, overall, I would suggest executing pablito, and if he is confirmed scum (is their role revealed when they are killed?) i guess glork would be next. Obviously I'm not completely sure about any of them.

That is just filled with bad observations and reckless suggestions. Nonetheless, I'd be willing to discount it as newbie behavior rather than anti-town scumminess (assumption based on join date).

I agree with some of cardb0ardb0x's statements, but the whole tone of that post is assuming that immediate action needs to be taken. I can forgive that mistake from a newbie, nonetheless someone like MBL shouldn't have. MBL's comments on cardb0ardb0x just make me feel awkward.

vote: MrBuddyLee

Also in looking at cardb0ardb0x's statements. I'd like to point out that Dead Rikimaru first introduced the concept of the Pablito-Glork distancing and cardb0ardb0x was the one that took it much further. Dead Rikimaru didn't even bother vote in that post. That would be an amazing scum move if it Dead Rikimaru just wanted to plant a little seed to get further. But right now I think that the Pablito-Glork distancing was something that any lot of people could have introduced. A lot of people were probably thinking it before Dead Rikimaru got to say it, so I won't vote Dead Rikimaru, yet.

*Oh sheeesh, everyone's already commented on cbox before I got to post, so an

FOS

on those that just voted him.

[Fritzler]

pj will you kill crashtext dummie for me?

[Fritzler]

Vote Glork

for wanting the king dead

Ah, the Macbeth manoeuver.

i like this guy

[CrashTextDummie]

Come to think of it, I did go too far with my joke votes

Unvote Glork

Unvote Pablito

"Joke votes"? Very interesting. Let me add you to my scummy votecluster.

vote: bird1111

I'm having a good feeling about box.

[Fritzler]

pooky is also good guy in this game

[Fritzler]

Come to think of it, I did go too far with my joke votes

Unvote Glork

Unvote Pablito

"Joke votes"? Very interesting. Let me add you to my scummy votecluster.

vote: bird1111

I'm having a good feeling about box.

see pj?

exactly what i was talking about

KILL KILL KILL

WITCH

[pablito]

While I wrote my last post, everyone finally commented on box before I submitted.

I admit that adding that vote to Glork was extremely scummy and that was backpedalling and succumbing to town pressure. I do not think that not voting Glork was especially scummy in the first place as I had been the more visible aggressor in the previous exchanges. But adding Glork after all of that does look scummy.

However, box isn't used to some players' playing styles and FTF mafia does require more urgency and a need to comment immediately rather than later. So I still see that cbox's post 58 seems consistent with his thoughts and does not suggest scummy behavior. The only vote on box that I find scummy so far (aside from MBL...although this is waning) is CDB's. The others seemed to justify their votes enough but CDB went so far to challenge cbox to test his theory. cbox may have had different intentions when he originally voted me. After getting flak for everything, he's forgotten what his original intent was and added the Glork vote.

So

vote: ChannelDelibird

I realize I'm taking a big risk in defending cardb0ardb0x, but at this time, I don't feel he's scummy and this quasi-wagon is very opportunistic.

And bird1111's joke votes - just so wrong and very scummy. Anyway, what prompted you to unvote Glork and I? You had decent reasons for voting us in the first place...

[ChannelDelibird]

While I wrote my last post, everyone finally commented on box before I submitted.

I admit that adding that vote to Glork was extremely scummy and that was backpedalling and succumbing to town pressure. I do not think that not voting Glork was especially scummy in the first place as I had been the more visible aggressor in the previous exchanges. But adding Glork after all of that does look scummy.

However, box isn't used to some players' playing styles and FTF mafia does require more urgency and a need to comment immediately rather than later. So I still see that cbox's post 58 seems consistent with his thoughts and does not suggest scummy behavior. The only vote on box that I find scummy so far (aside from MBL...although this is waning) is CDB's. The others seemed to justify their votes enough but CDB went so far to challenge cbox to test his theory. cbox may have had different intentions when he originally voted me. After getting flak for everything, he's forgotten what his original intent was and added the Glork vote.

So

vote: ChannelDelibird

I realize I'm taking a big risk in defending cardb0ardb0x, but at this time, I don't feel he's scummy and this quasi-wagon is very opportunistic.

And bird1111's joke votes - just so wrong and very scummy. Anyway, what prompted you to unvote Glork and I? You had decent reasons for voting us in the first place...

I think you've misinterpreted my "but you should at least put some pressure on them both to test the theory", and this is probably because in retrospect perhaps I should have put the word 'have' after 'should'. However, it's fairly obvious that the entire paragraph was written in the present tense describing something in the past, and therefore that 'have' shouldn't be necessary for you to realise that I was suspicious of what he didn't do at the time, rather than asking him to finish the job in the future.

And yeah, he's added the Glork vote, AFTER I voted him for not doing it. That makes my vote more sensible than you make it out to be, and also reflects badly on him.

[ShadowLurker]

Is it all right if I just kind of FOS Glork at this point? Actually, I'll

Vote: Glork

for presure, and then take it off

BAD.

Confirm Vote: CBB

[cardb0ardb0x]

OMGUS: ShadowLurker, although I understand where you're coming from.

[MrBuddyLee]

I agree with some of cardb0ardb0x's statements, but the whole tone of that post is assuming that immediate action needs to be taken. I can forgive that mistake from a newbie, nonetheless someone like MBL shouldn't have.

MBL's comments on cardb0ardb0x just make me feel awkward.

Can you please explain why my points against box make you feel awkward? At least one other person found them well-founded.