Mini 432 - RajÔÇÖs Freaktown IV (Raj's Ladies): GAME OVER

[IH]

IH that is a bad excuse, seeing how RAJ sent out multiple PM's telling people the game started. That same exact thing happened to me and Raj pmed me twice that the game had started. I didn't get the first one due to my inactivity on the site as a whole which is accredited to real life.

In short, that is bullshit IH. Unvote, IGMEOY: IH

Since the game started.
I added it to my watched list.
A fricking CRASH happened.
It was DELETED from my watched list.
So when I checked on my games it was not fricking on here.

Unvote IH, vote: Scotmany.
This doesn't mean I trust you, IH, the crash is over some time now, and raj sent an extra pm as panzerjager said. But I unvoted you because you actually did something, and scotmany basically said he didn't do anything yet on purpose, because he doesn't like the first pages.

and I didn't get one til Sunday, which is why I posted, because I remembered I was in this game. I had one which alerted me of the beginning, but I did not get a second one after the crash.

unvote, vote:Billy Twilight

Part of post 49 is crap.

Avoiding the random voting phase is ok, but not being aware of the game is not? It is not ok to avoid the random voting stage, as you're intentionally avoiding the game, if you're going to lurker hunt. I am mainly voting for you, because you said Scot's was completely ok, but threw suspicion on me, right after two players had expressed suspicion on me.

Panzer, Lurking isn't that great of a strategy when you get modkilled for it.

Which I believe is the problem with this game so far

vote ih

Why?

Also, there is something about IH's calm attitude, considering he's only made one post, that seems a little...too on top of things. I know that, in game where I play scum (a few meatworld games and a few on other sites or with friends) I tend to be more confident and in control than when I play town. Still, I don't want to appear to be OMGUSing him, so I'll leave the matter alone.

It wasn't that long of a read, I mean two pages? Meta, you clearly have never played a game with me ^_^

I feel there are way to many opportunistic players in this game....

Panzer and Lawrence jumping on someone for an excuse?
Billy following it up, going for the excuse the others disliked the most?
Logictus placing a vote on the other one.
and Baby Jesus coming in and slapping down a vote.

Panzer in 69, you say Logictus is distancing from me, when he voted Scotmany.

[IH]

I don't agree with Billytwilight, but not with Panzerjager either. Lynching lurkers is wrong indeed, but voting lurkers is good. Everybody is attacking someone who votes for a lurker here, that's stupid. Voting lurkers makes them post, and if they don't post they don't help the town either. So, my opinion: voting lurkers is good, as long as they don't get lynched without a chance.

unvote, vote: logicticus. You just act too scummy. At least act like someone who's on the town side if you want to defend yourself.

THIS IS WRONG. WRONG WRONG WRONG. Most likely, if someone is lurking, they are not looking at the thread. Therefore, votes on them aren't going to do anything, and a PROD is a more effective method of getting someone to post. If you put votes on them, you just are putting them open for a lynch. You are being stupid for voting them, and essentially distracting away from something else.

Yes I know that right now this is the main conversation, but it's more that we are having this, and someone just comes out of nowhere and votes for a lurker. "THEY'RE LURKING, LAWL, LET'S VOTE THEM!" That completely distracts away from useful conversation, as everyone under heat says "YEAH LETS DO IT!" until a sensible player asks for a prod.

Lurker voting/hunting=stupid unless said person is intentionally lurking, and you can't know that until the mod prods them. If they pick up their prod and still lurk, they are obviously intentionally lurking.

What I said after voting you has nothing to do with what I said before that in the same post (i understand if you thought so). I did not vote you because you voted a lurker, in that point we both agree. I'll clarify why I voted you:

-NOT because of who you voted, we both agree on the lurker-voting.
-because you just joined the discussion without saying why you were lurking yourself. (The others did say this.)
-because your posts are so short, they almost don't contribute to the discussion (although I hate those really long posts). This last post is an exception though.
-I just think your scum according to your behaviour. This was the most important reason why I voted you, but you only had 3 posts then, so this might change.

By the way, some of these arguments count for BabyJesus too, who just votes without giving a reason. FOS: babyjesus

You might be right about the bandwagon though, I didn't realize you already had 2 votes on you, so I might unvote if you'd get in danger so you could try to defend yourself.

Panzerjager: I don't really understand this last post. Who is distancing who with who's vote? Of course I care who dies. But I admit I am changing my votes much now, but it's the beginning of D1 so I hope you don't mind that.

1)I don't believe anyone asked for explanations on why we were lurking (except for Billy asking about me), I personally volunteered one, which makes you and panzer shooting them down even more ridiculous.
2)You are essentially voting Logictus for a playstyle choice (AKA, short posts) this is stupid, and I disagree and will say he has been adding to the discussion.
3)Metagaming has some uses

I'm fine with LL's explanation for his vote. At first I though he was being a little hypocritical, but he had other reasons for voting for him instead of his lurkiness.

Dude, they're crap reasons.

[BillyTwilight]

A lot of discussion since I last posted. Here is my take on the current topics.

@ Lawrencelot: What is the point of voting lurkers if you state as a prerequisite that you wont lynch them for lurking? The vote becomes pointless if it has no teeth. Asking lurkers to post, asking for a prod, asking for a replacement accomplishes more to get a player to post than bandwagoning them and at the same time saying we won't lynch you even though we are voting you.

@Panzerjager: What evidence do you have that Lawrencelot is a SK, or the like? He has pretty much done everything that you have done except he uses votes instead of FoSes to apply pressure. He has done this to almost all the same people that you have, tbh. Also, why do you think logicticus is distancing from IH? Why not LL or yourself? or me? Or anyone else who has suspected IH? And why at this stage in the game would logicticus feel like he needs to distance himself from IH, considering there are no strong links between any players and IH is not currently in trouble of being lynched or even bandwagoned?

@BJ: I agree with scotmany; we are past the bulk of the random voting stage, and we need more explanation for a vote than you have given.

@logicticus: I'm gonna go out on a limb and bet that the discussion that has been generated since your vote of IH has been the discussion that you were intending when you explained your vote. I think that a lot of people have been voting you rather hastily to be honest. I am beginning to wonder about the bandwagon forming on you, and at least about some of the people on it.

@the general topic: I found logicticus vote to be hypocritical and slightly bandwagoning; his defense of the vote has been less than forthcoming, but not deserving of a bandwagon, imo. He had lurked and used lurking as a reason to vote IH. LL did the same thing with his original request to attack IH. But I want to hear more from IH and BJ before I really start looking hard at where my vote will go. I don't like to throw around votes as readily as some of you players. I am also going to be looking really carefully at the players who quickly switched their vote to logicticus.

I want to clarify my point on lurking and lurker hunting. Everything that I have said on the topic was meant to implicitly be about the random voting phase. I find it generally a bad tactic to attack players for lurking in the random voting phase, as I can see many reasons why players wouldn't get really into posting during that portion of the game. As we get into the meat of the game I think I swing more into the position that Panzer and LL have taken. Sometimes scum like to try and fade into the background when the discussion gets heavy, especially if someone town is in trouble, and it is bad play for the town to allow this when posting in the game becomes really important. I want to clear this up because undoubtedly someone will vote a lurker later in the game and you won't see me get really upset about it.

Before we can really start to think about a good lynch for the day (which is closing rapidly) I really want to hear more from BJ, IH, Mariyta, Mert, and Metatron.

[IH]

I want to clarify my point on lurking and lurker hunting. Everything that I have said on the topic was meant to implicitly be about the random voting phase. I find it generally a bad tactic to attack players for lurking in the random voting phase, as I can see many reasons why players wouldn't get really into posting during that portion of the game. As we get into the meat of the game I think I swing more into the position that Panzer and LL have taken. Sometimes scum like to try and fade into the background when the discussion gets heavy, especially if someone town is in trouble, and it is bad play for the town to allow this when posting in the game becomes really important. I want to clear this up because undoubtedly someone will vote a lurker later in the game and you won't see me get really upset about it.

But if you do this, then you allow scum to hop on an easy lynch too. It's better to prod them before voting, as the mod will (or should) inform you if they have picked their prod up, yes they can tell. ESPECIALLY when you get deeper into the game, you should ask for a prod before acting on a lurker vote, because if the conversation IS that valuable, you may be distracting away from a succesful scum wagon, and get someone lynched, when it would be better for them to be replaced.

[BillyTwilight]

unvote, vote:Billy Twilight

Part of post 49 is crap.

Avoiding the random voting phase is ok, but not being aware of the game is not? It is not ok to avoid the random voting stage, as you're intentionally avoiding the game, if you're going to lurker hunt. I am mainly voting for you, because you said Scot's was completely ok, but threw suspicion on me, right after two players had expressed suspicion on me.

IH, you are going to have to clarify this. First, you are on the record saying that the topic became unwatched during the crash. This happened, the topic was destroyed during the crash. However, after the crash raj sent a PM to me saying that the game was started. Did you not receive such a PM? I am going on the assumption that all players received this PM, and if so, then your excuse for not posting is illegitimate. I NEVER said that not knowing the game was starting was a worse excuse than not liking the random voting phase. I simply don't believe that you didn't know the game was started, unless freak missed sending you the PM. I asked you in post #49 if you received this PM, and you have yet to answer.

Secondly, you forgot to mention that in post #49 I specifically said that lurker hunting in the random phase was BAD, and I FoSed the two players who were doing it. I think most people would read that post and be dissuaded from voting you for lurking; I certainly never intended it to push more suspicion on you for lurking. I just wanted clarification from you on when you found out that the game had started.

As for post #78, I think we are arguing semantics. I agree with you that the best way to handle a lurker is to let the mod handle them. I just wanted everyone to know that I don't get as upset about people placing a vote on a lurker later in game as I do during the random voting phase, as some players (like MeMe) prefer to handle that situation.

[BillyTwilight]

Sorry, I missed that you said you did not get a PM after the crash occurred. If that is the case then you have no problem from me. However, I can't see freak sending some PMs to people

after

the crash and not to others. I'd like to know if any other players in the game did not get a PM after the crash alerting us to the beginning of the game.

[scotmany12]

IH that is a bad excuse, seeing how RAJ sent out multiple PM's telling people the game started. That same exact thing happened to me and Raj pmed me twice that the game had started. I didn't get the first one due to my inactivity on the site as a whole which is accredited to real life.

In short, that is bullshit IH. Unvote, IGMEOY: IH

Since the game started.
I added it to my watched list.
A fricking CRASH happened.
It was DELETED from my watched list.
So when I checked on my games it was not fricking on here.

Unvote IH, vote: Scotmany.
This doesn't mean I trust you, IH, the crash is over some time now, and raj sent an extra pm as panzerjager said. But I unvoted you because you actually did something, and scotmany basically said he didn't do anything yet on purpose, because he doesn't like the first pages.

and I didn't get one til Sunday, which is why I posted, because I remembered I was in this game. I had one which alerted me of the beginning, but I did not get a second one after the crash.

unvote, vote:Billy Twilight

Part of post 49 is crap.

Yeah. I'm pretty sure everyone got a message saying that the game has started after the crash. I know Raj sent me my role for the second time, and then he also sent one telling me that the game is on. I highly doubt that he will only send one to me and billy twilight. You are flat out lying to us.

Also, what is your reasoning for voting for BT? I looked over post 49, and it all makes sense to me. I see nothing wrong with that post.

[IH]

IH, you are going to have to clarify this. First, you are on the record saying that the topic became unwatched during the crash. This happened, the topic was destroyed during the crash. However, after the crash raj sent a PM to me saying that the game was started. Did you not receive such a PM? I am going on the assumption that all players received this PM, and if so, then your excuse for not posting is illegitimate. I NEVER said that not knowing the game was starting was a worse excuse than not liking the random voting phase. I simply don't believe that you didn't know the game was started, unless freak missed sending you the PM. I asked you in post #49 if you received this PM, and you have yet to answer.

That's what happened. I just got one Sunday, or else I accidentally deleted it.

Like it even matters though, if I was wanting an "excuse" I would have just said "hey I forgot about this game" instead of explaining what happened. = |

As for post #78, I think we are arguing semantics. I agree with you that the best way to handle a lurker is to let the mod handle them. I just wanted everyone to know that I don't get as upset about people placing a vote on a lurker later in game as I do during the random voting phase, as some players (like MeMe) prefer to handle that situation.

No, there is clearly a difference. If you didn't grasp my other posts, what you are doing are distracting away from more important things when you move your vote.

[BillyTwilight]

So you think placing a lurker vote is scummy? All I am saying is that if someone places a lurker vote down the line I won't automatically FoS or vote them for it. I am more cautious with someone who goes lurker hunting the first week and a half of the game. I understand your point, and I myself don't place lurker votes because I think letting the mod handle it is better, but I don't think putting a vote on someone for lurking in the middle game is a scum tell; that's all that I am trying to say on the matter.

For everyone else, I don't really know what to make of IH's claim of not getting a PM to start the game. However, if IH were scum then he was undoubtedly in touch with his partners in the night phase, or if he was a SK then he would have had to send in a kill; using the reason he has for not posting in the start of the game would then be incredibly stupid. I think that at this moment a vote for IH is a vote for his stupidity, and for the record I don't think IH is dumb. I am therefore inclined to believe him.

Now, back to the rest of the game. BJ, Mert, Mariyta and Metatron, we need more substantial input from you. The day is closing quickly, and I don't want to see a lynch without everyone in the game having some significant contribution. BJ, why is your vote currently on scotmany? Metatron, why are you still holding your random vote? The same goes for you Maryita. Mert, you were supposed to be back in town yesterday. We need input, guys.

[scotmany12]

I still do not believe IH. I find it very hard to believe that raj didn't send a pm to him until Sunday when the game started last Monday. I'm not buying it. I still think log is the way to go today.

Also, Raj has not updated the time in a while. Anyone have any idea what time we are at in the game?

[Metatron]

Sorry for being absent lately, but I've been dividing my time between 2 other games and upcoming finals, and the activity in this game literally took off when I wasn't looking. That aside...well, I'm a little lost with everything that's happened in the past 48 hours, but right now, I'd say that there is at least one scum for sure hiding among the Lukers, and one is among the active players. If I had to vote right now, I'd vote for Scotmany. I agree with BT about the Logicitus Bandwagon forming very prematurely, though it was probably what Logicitus intended. Scotmany seems to have been trying to cast suspicion on the lurkers, when he himself is one. I don't know how I feel about his playing. IH...I don't know if I trust him or not. Really, the question of whether or not I think he's scum is what I make of his personallity. Time will tell. LL...has thrashed around a bit, but if he's scum, he's really poor scum. Either way, I'm not quite ready to vote yet.

[Lawrencelot]

I was planning to say: "let's stop the lurkervote discussion, because scotmany, ih and logicticus are posting now", but now there are others who don't post much, like mert and maryta. So this discussion still is important. I still think placing a vote or 2 on a lurker is good, as long as not everybody will jump on them causing a quicklynch. I voted 3 lurkers, Ih, scotmany and logicticus, and now they are all posting, whether it is because of the votes or not you have to admit that.

My vote on logicticus was mainly because of his attitude, not revealing much information and such, but that was after 3 posts of him. Now he's more open, I'll unvote him for now.

Unvote: logicticus

. However I still don't like his attitude, (it's not very townie-like) I admit I can't give a really good reason to keep my vote on him.

My suspicion goes to babyjesus, who doesn't give any reasoning for his votes, and mert and mariyta, who don't post much content either.

Topics that don't need that much attention in my opinion: whether IH recieved his pm or not, he is posting now so it doesn't matter. And whether or not it's up to the mod to handle lurkers, because the people who lurked/are lurking didn't lurk that much to ask help of the mod.

[Metatron]

Oh, and in response to what IH said to me earlier...It was just a hunch, really. I don't really strongly suspect you, but something about your first post seemed...constructed. Like something a politician would say. Don't pay it much mind. It's not even a

FoS

. More of a

IGMEOY

.

[Mariyta]

There were a lot of long posts... I don't read long posts.

That would be an awesome role in a game: The Mari role. No posts over 3 lines.

[Mert]

My suspicion goes to...

(snip)

mert and mariyta, who don't post much content.

You must have missed the bit where I said I was away. I only got back yesterday and have been trying to catch up.

Topics that don't need that much attention in my opinion: whether IH recieved his pm or not, he is posting now so it doesn't matter.

Erm, it was only you and Panzer that seemed interested to begin with, if memory serves.

You see, the best thing is that you have loads of posts saying "lurker hunting is wrong" but your posts don't appear to have much content that doesn't involve lurkers in some way.

Post 38

- "Lets vote for lurkers"

Post 48

- "I don't trust IH, the crash has been over for ages"

Post 67

- "Lynching lurkers bad, voting lurkers good"

Post 70

- "You didn't say why you were lurking like the others did"

Post 86

- "Let's stop the lurker conversation; here're some lurkers I don't like"

You've made eight posts in this game in total. One was a random vote, one was a slight addendum via-EBWOP, one was a question and the remaining five were about lurkers in some way or another.

Seems to me like you're lurking in plain sight, a far worse crime than your garden-variety lurking.

[Mert]

Actually,

Unvote, Vote: Lawrencelot

[PJ.]

Strong FoS: LawrenceLot and Unvote

. This could trun into a vote I still want my vote on Logiticus, wait

Strong FoS: LL, Vote:Logicticus

This vote could go to LL at the drop of a hat but right now logic has earned it.

[rajrhcpfreak]

Afternoon Nap Post Count: (3:43PM)

BillyTwilight: 2 (Mariyta, IH)
Lawrencelot: 2 (logicticus, Mert)

logicticus: 1 (scotmany12)
scotmany12: 1 (BabyJesus)
Mert: 1 (Metatron)

Not Voting: (Panzerjager, BillyTwilight, Lawrencelot)

6 to Lynch

[IH]

Mert=Protown atm

I don't like the feel from Panzer's last post at all.....

I kinda want to bring up the metatron thing again, as it was lost in all of the lurker talk.

So...just to start discussion, There's something bugging me about Vel-Rahn Koon's death. Who is this Alex, that she was supposedly hanging out with. If we find out, I'd bet we'd find our second mafia

This has no truth whatsoever to it, and I consider it rolefishing.

Not to mention his other post, which I already mentioned.

...Did we hit Mafia night 1? Awsome. And...is that a cult Leader? Hopefully, this will go quick enough. It should, at least. There are prolly two other people in the Mafia, but we seem to have a Vig, or at least a serial Killer, killing people off, so with two kills per 24 hour period...well, we'll see, I suppose.

This is along the same lines, I believe he would have continued to only speculate on night if the lurker issue had not arisen.

I think Billy has satisfied my concerns

unvote, vote:Lawrence

I <3 Mert's points

[Metatron]

Mert=Protown atm

I don't like the feel from Panzer's last post at all.....

I kinda want to bring up the metatron thing again, as it was lost in all of the lurker talk.

So...just to start discussion, There's something bugging me about Vel-Rahn Koon's death. Who is this Alex, that she was supposedly hanging out with. If we find out, I'd bet we'd find our second mafia

This has no truth whatsoever to it, and I consider it rolefishing.

Not to mention his other post, which I already mentioned.

...Did we hit Mafia night 1? Awsome. And...is that a cult Leader? Hopefully, this will go quick enough. It should, at least. There are prolly two other people in the Mafia, but we seem to have a Vig, or at least a serial Killer, killing people off, so with two kills per 24 hour period...well, we'll see, I suppose.

This is along the same lines, I believe he would have continued to only speculate on night if the lurker issue had not arisen.

I think Billy has satisfied my concerns

unvote, vote:Lawrence

I <3 Mert's points

1. I didn't know Alex was the Mod. I figured if someone named Alex was hanging around the confirmed scum, hitting Alex would get us one of her partners.

2. My second post was simply celebrating the success of the first night. Besides, I was surprised. I hadn't played in a game with a Night start that went like that, so to see it go like this was interesting.

[PJ.]

Vote:Lawrence

I like this a lot.

[Mert]

Panzer, what happened since your [91] that changed your mind on Logicticus having "earned it"? What was the proverbial hat that dropped?

[BillyTwilight]

Here are the major actions of the two players that are working their way to the top of my list:

Lawrencelot:

Post #38: had already voted IH in random phase, but asks that we pressure IH after mid-day prod with more votes

Post #48: Unvotes IH, Votes Scotmany

Post #67: Votes Logicticus

Post #70: FoSes BJ

Post #86: Unvotes Logicticus, asks for pressure on BJ, Mert, Mariyta



Panzer:

Post #42: Unvotes, IGMEOY - IH

Post #44: FoSes Scotmany

Post #50: FoSes BT

Post #63: unFoSes Scot, maintains FOS on IH, votes logicticus

Post #91: FoSes LL and maintains vote on logicticus

Post #95: Unvote, Votes LL


Fist of all, I want to ask Panzer what he has seen in LL's behavior that made him move his vote so quickly. It appears to me that the two of you have tended to follow each other in who you are currently interrogating, with you using FoSes and LL more often using votes. Is there something else in LL's behavior that you have picked up on, because to me it looks like both of you have followed a similar pattern of voting and casting suspicion on people.

I don't like either of these players right now. Both went lurker hunting after the mid-day prod (or hunting lurkers with "bad excuses for lurking," anyway), which at best is not helpful and can be scummy. Both have been quick to throw their hat into a forming bandwagon; each started in on IH, moved on to scotmany and then to logicticus. Now Panzer has seen the tide turning against LL and has thrown his vote into that quickly forming wagon as well.

LL, initially you wanted everyone to vote for IH. As soon as he posted and FoSed you, you backed off. Why? You pretty much have done that for everyone you've voted for: placed the vote, waited to see if any real pressure would build up against that player, then moved it as soon as it looked like things weren't going to get hard for that player.

Panzer, you are guilty of the same thing, but even more so with your most recent vote switch. Like Mert, I want to know what the "hat" was that dropped and made you switch your vote to LL.

Both of you are really getting by skin up. Panzer, you tried to change a point I made against you and twist it into an argument that I wasn't trying to make, LL you are flighty as a bird with your votes. Neither of you seem to be willing to really scum hunt, but just jump on the closest bandwagon and hop off again as soon as said bandwagon starts to evaporate.

[scotmany12]

^Nice Post Billy. Very well thought out. I now have LL up there with log right now for the most scummiest. Panzer is a close third(I'm in a lot of games with panzer, and so far this just appears to be his normal play style). I am really interested, however, in BJ's(lol BJ) explanation for his vote against me.

[logicticus]

scot, why are you so concerned about one vote?