Kingmaker II-Game Over

[Fritzler]

why am i not king?

vote: nightson

[pablito]

vote: LuckayLuck, olio

[KaleiÐoscøpe]

I'm curious to see your reasons there SV, especially after Glork hammered an assassin.

And what's with the "dead king"? Does that mean MBL was going to be crowned if he didn't die? (it seems the most logical reason).

In the meantime,

Vote: Pablito

.

[olio]

So, no more reasons for votes, eh?

vote: pablito

If Glork went off his LoE I could respect him more - even though his last post actually convinced me that he took his reign well and was actually trying to find scum. I am starting to buy his Pooky-Twomz wagon hypothesis somewhat valuable. But you know what, the fact that I'm saying this will probably fodder more discussion about how pablito's still trying to buddy up to Glork, so I need to shut up now.

Blatant attempt to save Pooky with "do this and I believe you, Glork". Contains also "Pooky-Twomz is scummy though" argument plus WIFOM in the last sentence.

If we don't work hard enough during day, we cannot expect the king to make the best decision possible. I'm sure that doesn't address any of your points, CTD, but I feel it needs to be known that it's all of our fault that Rosso was executed, it's just that certain people, like PJ (and likely me) are more accountable for it.

I carry the blame for D1 so I am trying to correct it by making sure thta we talk about people on and off the LoE.

From accuser to martyr.

vote: LuckayLuck

Defends Pooky in post 1007.
For post 1020, with defending Pooky with weak arguments. Also finds Twomz "not so scummy" when pushed by Yos2 and "easy pick" when voted by Mert.

vote: Nightson

Seeing things in 808.

[Zindaras]

[quote="KaleiÐoscøpe"]And what's with the "dead king"? Does that mean MBL was going to be crowned if he didn't die? (it seems the most logical reason).[/quote]

Dead

Rikimaru is King.

Vote: Yosarian2

Scum.

I'm utterly flabbergasted by the choice for Riki, though.

[KaleiÐoscøpe]

Do'h, of course

[petroleumjelly]

Well, I just finished a reread of the thread, even though I must admit my eyes were glazing over by about Page 30. In any case:

Vote: Phoebus

, I still haven't seen a reason (other than MoS's constant say-so) to have backed off of Phoebus. Reading over my own posts and his, I wish I had executed him over Rosso on Day One by this point, especially after reading his posts on Day Two, which (rather than contributing) simply asked for the day to end, and that Glork should "kill anybody".

I thought Twomz was fairly townish originally, but with the knowledge that Pooky was scum, I'm reading some undercurrents in his (and Pooky's) posts. He has apparently been replaced by Samus, so

Vote: Samus

. The posts in particular that made me double-think were:

vote: Crashtextdummie

to satiate (?) Fritzes violent tendencies. (and because I saw no reason not to vote him from his posts... although I didn't see anything specific that made me want to vote him by itself)

This only pinged slightly; voting with Fritz for the sake of voting with Fritz. The problem with this is that Twomz acted exceedingly similarly reverent towards Fritz in Kingmaker 1, so this may just be a playstyle quirk. Noted nonetheless.

Hey, are there even any Pros to outing the kingmaker? How does it help the town? Just curious.

I pointed out before in Post 194 that this tactic strikes me as a scum-tactic (it is in the middle of my post). Seeing as Twomz + Pooky both did the same thing draws a fair connection to me. The other connection is coming from the Pooky/Twomz conversation found starting with Post 67 continuing down to Post 72.

In addition, Twomz begins pushing for a premature List of Execution (so as to focus on fewer people):

PJ, could we have at least a preliminary LoE up by this coming Friday? I think it would help move the discussion along, and focus the analysis of the town, instead of spreading it out amounst 10 or so players.

Although, i still think we need to combine our efforts and

concentrate on 3-5 people...

I think it would help if PJ posted a LoE and we moved on from there. Hopefully that will boost discussion.

PJ... if there's no conversation at all and BMQ is forced to impose a deadline, then what are you going to do? I the last post I made (or maybe second to last) I asked for a LoE, because no one had posted at all... and since then, no real content has been posted...

Now, note:

Randomly accusing people is good, especially on day 1. You don't want to let them slip through the cracks,

you have to check everyone.

Posts 199 (and others) combined with 217 read together make me scratch my head. Twomz advocates narrowing down on 3-5 people, while also saying we "need to check everyone". I'm thinking Twomz (in post 217) was trying to fill up space with what I will deem as "townie rhetoric", or a post made intentionally containing words that generally seem "pro-town". The problem is that this stance directly conflicts with his constant call for a narrowed List of Execution. This looks like a pretty severe slip to me. Naturally, Twomz has been replaced so he can't explain it, but I would still like to see Samus' thoughts on it.

[Yosarian2]

Vote: Yosarian2

Scum.

Nope. Try again.

Anyway,

vote:phoebus

,

vote:samus

[Yosarian2]

Seeing as Twomz + Pooky both did the same thing draws a fair connection to me. The other connection is coming from the Pooky/Twomz conversation found starting with Post 67 continuing down to Post 72.

And there's also the fact that they both sheepishly followed onto the birdwagon with craplogic together, the reason I was origionally suspicious of both of them.

[MrBuddyLee]

Good luck, town! *shakes fist at scummity scum*

[pablito]

So, no more reasons for votes, eh?

You could ask politely and I could be arsed.

And how surprising, a replacement votes me.

[olio]

How surprising, you actually don't think my reasons for voting you are worth answering. So, are you going to hide behind "he's just a replacement and possibly can't understand this game or my playstyle" or actually defend yourself?

[pablito]

How surprising, you completely ignore the fact that I was willing to show you reasons for my votes, but you so suddenly move to the other argument.

I say that's it completely justified for someone to vote me because all in all I appear scummy on first glance. However, when someone just does a read through and hasn't been following along with the game (which I'm assuming you had not been completely following along), a lot of things on me might get lost just because there are more alarming things I had done. The small things that can counteract the scummy vibes get lost.

As for the accuser to martyr thing. I'd been pretty loud about how the town failed to discuss things far enough in D1 and that a deadline had to occur. Ditto in D2. In 788, I actually make a long long post and yet you quote just a small bit. I did not intend to mean that I carried the SOLE blame for D1's lack of discussion. I, as part of the town, carried the blame for not discussing enough and not helping diversify the arguments. I think part of the fault for D1 was that we focused too heavily on certain people who acted awkward rather than trying to spread suspicion around - of course that's very difficult to do when there's lesser evidence than in future days. But in D1 after a certain point, we really didn't move away from the basic list.

olio, it's not like I was screaming at the top of my lungs, OH MY GOD, I'm HORRIBLE by supporting the execution of ROSSO CARNE. You take such an isolated sentence in such a long post and I think you're taking it way too far.

Furthermore, look at the quote you placed where I'm supposedly an "accuser". There are so many "we"s and "our"s but a complete lack of "you"s. When you said I was an accuser, it might have been in tone, but even in that post, I completely included myself as part of the town.

If

we

don't work hard enough during day,

we

cannot expect the king to make the best decision possible. I'm sure that doesn't address any of your points, CTD, but I feel it needs to be known that it's all of

our

fault that Rosso was executed, it's just that certain people, like

PJ (and likely me)

are more accountable for it.

And when I said PJ and me, that's because we were the only two (and Glork slightly as well if I remember off-hand), who advocated the Rosso execution. However, I still maintain that even though we were accountable and we practically signed our names on the document to have Rosso executed, it was still the fault of the town (and scum) in sitting idly during deadline and the rest of the day as well.

As for your other argument, well, I'd still like to be politely asked to answer. The above defense was just a favor since I'm voting you and all mostly based on your predecessor's actions. Plus it's a tougher argument and I'd have to think about it first.

[Glork]

Dear King Dead Rikimaru,

You should execute Yosarian2 today.

XOXO,
Glork

[Glork]

Also,

Vote: PJ

.

[pablito]

Agreed, I can go for that,

vote: PJ

[Zindaras]

Dear King Dead Rikimaru,

You should execute Yosarian2 today.

XOXO,
Glork

This man speaks wise words of wiseness.

[Glork]

Eh, my vote was more a placeholder, Pablito. I wanted to note that I had a few questions for PJ, but since my 3:00 class has been cancelled (yay, cancelling classes on Day 1!), I find myself with enough time to actually ask those questions.


So.... A few questions for you, PJ:

Not surprised that Pooky was scum...

What exactly do you mean by this? It seems to me that it's a bit inconsist with your stance on Pooky earlier, when you said this:

I would also like Pooky to finish his analysis. I can't recall the last game where I've seen Pooky hunt for scum, so I'm interested to see him in action.

Saying that you want to see Pooky hunt scum says, to me, that you at least trust that he's genuinely hunting scum (which would, in turn, imply that you believe him to be pro-town). I realize that in a later post, you called your stance on him "netural," but I still want to know why you find PookyScum "not surprising."


Could you clarify your stance on spectrumvoid? She voted me and said she'd have reasons for it soon. You put your vote back on her in response (which is not inconsistent with your stance towards her yesterday), but you add this:

that makes me feel that much better about this vote.

What makes "Spectrumvoid votes Glork" make you feel better about my vote. Did my execution of Pooky convince you that I'm pro-town... or did you slip-up and admit that you know I'm pro-town?


I mentioned yesterday that when both Twomz and Pooky bandwagoned bird1111 (now K-Scope, I believe?), several people voted for Twomz, and only a couple of people voted for Pooky. I also expressed that I felt this was a double-standard of sorts, and that I felt that the Twomzwagon would be used to distract us (or push through a bad lynch) and to protect Pooky. Now that Pooky has turned up scum, what do you think of my analysis of the counterwagon situation? Have you taken it into account, or are you basing your suspicions solely on the fact that they behaved similarly?

[olio]

How surprising, I misunderstood "I could be arsed" as "I could give a rat's ass". My bad. That aside, earlier people were craving for reasons behind votes, and yet when the morning dawned on D3, almost everyone suddenly started slacking. I think we can do without dozens of lines, all repeating the same question: "Why did you vote X?". That said, could you please explain your votes and answer my other argument?

In 788, I actually make a long long post and yet you quote just a small bit.

That small bit caught my eye after all the "we's and ours" in 563. All that text around that small bit actually gave me a feeling of masking, masking a planted message appealing to reader's emotions.

When you said I was an accuser, it might have been in tone, but even in that post, I completely included myself as part of the town.

I fail to see a sensible scenario where you would've acted otherwise; I mean you not including yourself as part of the town.

[pablito]

My primary reason for the vote on PJ lies on how his re-read turned out with such paltry suspects.

I'll get to your other argument olio, just not this post since I have to be off somewhere.

As for your last post, I just skimmed 788 earlier today, but I think I'll have to give it a re-read.

And I honestly don't understand what you're saying in

I fail to see a sensible scenario where you would've acted otherwise; I mean you not including yourself as part of the town.

I'd appreciate it if you or anyone else that gets it could re-word that.

[Yosarian2]

Dear King Dead Rikimaru,

You should execute Yosarian2 today.

XOXO,
Glork

Hey, just because you executed your scum buddy yesterday, dosn't mean people should listen to you today.

[Glork]

Hey, just because you executed your scum buddy yesterday, dosn't mean people should listen to you today.

OMGUS, coming from Yosarian?



Tsk. I expected better from you.

[petroleumjelly]

Not surprised that Pooky was scum...

What exactly do you mean by this? It seems to me that it's a bit inconsist with your stance on Pooky earlier, when you said this:

I would also like Pooky to finish his analysis. I can't recall the last game where I've seen Pooky hunt for scum, so I'm interested to see him in action.

Saying that you want to see Pooky hunt scum says, to me, that you at least trust that he's genuinely hunting scum (which would, in turn, imply that you believe him to be pro-town). I realize that in a later post, you called your stance on him "netural," but I still want to know why you find PookyScum "not surprising."

I meant exactly what I said: I am not surprised that Pooky was scum. I considered him middle-of-the pack for much of the game simply because of his non-postingness, but on Day Two he started leaning towards scummy (hence the vote). If you want a quick summary of "why I wasn't surprised":

1.) Pooky suggested to out the Kingmaker as a confirmed innocent to direct lynches, something scum also tried in K1
2.) Pooky defended me very early in D1 (which I had been wondering about for a while), a tactic I am finding he does as scum to get on my good side
3.) Pooky jumped immediately on the Bird-nutkicking theory, even though he had not expressed suspicion of Bird beforehand
4.) Pooky asked on a number of occasions that he be able to direct executions
5.) On D2, Pooky made a large string of defeatist (and overly sarcastic) posts, which I got a bad vibe from, as they seemed more designed to WIFOM Glork out of an execution more than anything

As for your other question, of course I wanted to see Pooky hunt for scum: I honestly cannot remember the last game where I have seen him make posts like that. All he's done in games I've been in recently is bandwagon with little explanation and lurk. Hence, I was intrigued to see what Pooky was thinking: I would like to think he didn't get his "best player" award for nothing. My thinking was that even if Pooky was scum (which he turned out to be), a finished "analysis" by a confirmed scum would be a good place to poke at later in the game (even though I myself have not read those particular posts in great detail as of yet). And of course, if he was town, there is all the more reason for him to finish his analysis. If I thought he was town, I would have unvoted him, instead of simply asking for him to finish his analysis.

Could you clarify your stance on spectrumvoid? She voted me and said she'd have reasons for it soon. You put your vote back on her in response (which is not inconsistent with your stance towards her yesterday), but you add this:

that makes me feel that much better about this vote.

What makes "Spectrumvoid votes Glork" make you feel better about my vote. Did my execution of Pooky convince you that I'm pro-town... or did you slip-up and admit that you know I'm pro-town?

No, I don't "know" if you are pro-town. I only strongly suspect it. As for the SV vote, two things occured to me with her vote:

1.) After I misexecuted D1, spectrumvoid said I was town (and this was still

after

SV had said things like "I should learn from PJ" and "I admire his analysis in K1")
2.) After you correctly executed D2, spectrumvoid said you were scum

Now, I checked to see why SV would think I was town and Glork scum, and reading through her posts, I noticed her last two posts which mention me are:

I have no clear read on PJ other than the RC issue, no read on Mert, CTD, SC and whoever else is lurking.

PJ: I don't like how you're disagreeing with CTD on the basis on you having played with Mert. That's blatent meta-gaming. And you've only played one game, I don't think it's sufficient to get a good grasp on a person's playstyle.

Overall, I just not understanding why SV has been going after you, and seemingly shying away from me. It has crossed my mind a couple times that since SV's last experience with me ended up being complete routing of scum (see: Leper Mafia) while she was scum herself, that she is therefore trying to continually stay on my good side

this

game. Seeing her go again after you at the start of D3 - immediately after you executed scum - while largely ignoring my misexecution on D1 just seems (for lack of a better word) wrong. It was a post that just made me scrunch up my face and go "wha?".

I mentioned yesterday that when both Twomz and Pooky bandwagoned bird1111 (now K-Scope, I believe?), several people voted for Twomz, and only a couple of people voted for Pooky. I also expressed that I felt this was a double-standard of sorts, and that I felt that the Twomzwagon would be used to distract us (or push through a bad lynch) and to protect Pooky. Now that Pooky has turned up scum, what do you think of my analysis of the counterwagon situation? Have you taken it into account, or are you basing your suspicions solely on the fact that they behaved similarly?

I only vaguely remember that post, so I am going to have to find it.

And... I can't find it. Your post was probably deleted in the first crash, as well as the Pooky/Twomz wagon. My notes on votes do not have the missing posts, so the only voters I see (not including unvotes) are:

On Pooky: Glork, Mert, Bird1111, PJ, Stallingchamp, Pablito
On Twomz: Bird1111, Nightson, Yosarian2, CTD, Glork

The Pablito vote on Pooky came rather late, but even not counting that vote, the "counterwagon" does not look too substantial with a peak 5 votes when 22 players were alive. If there was a counterwagon at all, my notes indicate that there may have been one on Ubertimmy: he received four votes in a row immediately after the crash. I do not remember who voted Twomz during the crash, so I can't tell if anybody was trying to protect Pooky, to be honest. To directly answer your question, however, no: I did not take that into consideration while making my post.

[Glork]

Alright, I can accept those answers for now.

Unvote PJ

I think my post (and the Twomzwagon) got lost in the crash as well. Also, I want to point out that a wagon of even 5-7 voters, given the context of the players' behavior (read: the lack of willingness to vote for other people) is probably significant. I mentioned towards the end of D1 that the reason nobody could get to a majority of votes is because nobody seemed willing to just stick their necks out and

The reason I want to look at people on Twomz' wagon (such as Nightson and Yos2) is because I believe, at this time, that Twomz/Samus is pro-town. Nevertheless, I would like Samus to respond to PJ's inquiries in some way, and I would also like to hear something fairly substantial from Samus today. She's not one of the "I definitely think that this person is pro-town" players, but I don't currently think that she is scum.


Nightson is also on my list for having failed to do his homework, despite multiple promises to do so.

Yos is still on my list for... well, that whole "gut" thing. Not gonna lie, I think part of the reason I was onto Yos yesterday is because I was so certain that Pooky was scum, I already felt the Yos-Pooks connections. I still recall when Yos suggested lurker-lynching D1 and brought up Vaughn, and I pointed out why Pooky was a better choice. Yos didn't respond to that, and looking back on it, I wish I had pursued that at the time and forced a reply out of him one way or another. The OMGUS he just posted earlier this evening does not help his case. Sounds like someone's getting a little scared. I love how he's even insinuating that people shouldn't listen to what I have to say. I don't claim to be the end-all of scumhunters, and I don't necessarily want peopel to blindly follow me. Nevertheless, I find the way Yos chose to respond very interesting. I'd like him to elaborate a little more on what he meant in his most recent post.

After skimming over the thread, I'm still wavering a bit on Phoebus. I think that his play has been bad/scummy so far, but I still remember the D1 wagons against him, and how they almost completely dropped off on D2. As I mentioned earlier, that may indicate that the wagon was all steam and possibly scum-driven. Having read the posts, I just don't get a "distancing" vibe from people wagoning him.
I also think that if the people wagoning Phoebus D1 were all leigt, they would have stuck with him on D2. I don't know how much decline/variation there was between the two days' Phoebus-voters, but I seem to recall it being substantially less on D2. That's something I want to go back and re-read more closely later on.

[Nightson]

Back, will reread and post.