Newbie 384: All over 'cept the finger-pointing!

[truncator]

Anyone who proclaims them self a genius, especially in an area in which I am also a genius, deserves to be lynched, guilty or not.

Vote: pickemgenius

[truncator]

Lynch minus one early isn't the worst thing in the world, guys. If anyone were to drop the hammer, and pickemgenius showed up innocent, the player who dropped the fourth vote would almost certainly be newbie scum, and a surefire lynch the next day. And there's always the 2/7 chance of him being scum.

Not that I'm condoning putting three votes on people for no reason at all, nor am I saying that it's good play, but I'm just saying that it's not as completely negative as people might think.

There was more to it than that as well. Sorry about the unconventional move. I thought it helped and no one died.

[truncator]

Truncator, did you know you were putting him at -1 when you voted?

Yes. I also knew that someone would change their vote and I hoped it would be before the 4th vote came in. I wanted to see who was quick to change. It may have been risky, but you don't always get the information you need by sitting on your thumb.

[truncator]

If you KNEW you were casting the third vote, then WHY DIDN'T YOU SAY SO at least???

Why state the obvious?

[truncator]

If you KNEW you were casting the third vote, then WHY DIDN'T YOU SAY SO at least???

Why state the obvious?

I don't know that it was that obvious. Your vote just looked like another random vote, and I might not have noticed he was at lynch -1 until the next votecount.

Basically, putting someone at lynch -1 that early in a game where we lose where we lynch wrong twice is a bad idea no matter what. In any case, if you are going to put someone at lynch -1, you should generally point out that you're doing so, just so no one accidently lynches him without noticing the current votecount (or, conversly, drops the hammer and then later tries to say "hey, I didn't notice he was at lynch -1!"). It was a very dangerous play, and the fact that you didn't even point out that you were putting him at lynch -1 makes it more dangerous. Because anyone who wasn't paying attention to the game very closely would have probably just mistaken this post for a random vote and not noticed the danger:

Anyone who proclaims them self a genius, especially in an area in which I am also a genius, deserves to be lynched, guilty or not.

Vote: pickemgenius

Again. Sorry for the unconventional move. I didn't realize it would upset you, the one who wasn't -1, so much. It happened. No one died. Nothing you can do about it. I'm sure you can expect more from me that you might not agree with in this game. Unless you (or they) get rid of me early. Throw out the SOP book and just roll with the flow, man. At least now I have a pretty good idea of where you stand. Unless you're just jacking with me to look pure.

All that said, I wouldn't have a problem doing it again.

[truncator]

All that said, I wouldn't have a problem doing it again.

This last statement from your quote is an interesting point. So overall you're happy with what has happened as a result of that vote, even though a lot of the discussion involved suspicion and questioning of you?

Sure, I don't have a problem with it. It got things rolling and opened up quite a bit of discussion. It's okay if people want to be suspicious about me and my actions. I'm not hiding anything and this game has to make progress somehow.

[truncator]

Could you please answer my questions, truncator?

I didn't realize I still had unanswered questions with you. You keep bringing up the same points.

[truncator]

EBWOP:
Albert, on a quick re-read of the game, it appears you've completely avoided the truncator issue, besides seconding my question of truncator in post 95. Instead, you have cast suspicion on

Yosarian

. Any reason for this avoidance? What are your thoughts on truncator at the moment?

Maybe he's quiet because he is enjoying watching the paranoid town mob jump on the Lynch Truncator bandwagon and accomplishing his dirty work in the meantime. Put me at -1 and whomever casts the 4th vote, remember them. Remember the 3rd vote as well.

[truncator]

Right now, I think my vote needs to stay on pickemgenius. He is working awfully hard to rally folks against me and possibly give the scum the edge by Day 2.

I have faith in windfish and Albert right now, but I think Albert still needs to be watched.

I think thedocsalive is ok, but I continue to read his posts as narrated by Keanu Reeves. That's kind of strange.

[truncator]

If you don't try to actually defend yourself/answer questions/state who you think is scum very, very soon, we WILL lynch you.

Did you not see post 108 right before you posted this?

[truncator]

I don't see how I'm acting "scummy" on purpose. I told y'all how I felt about things.

[truncator]

Truncator, why the faith in WindFish and Albert? Is it to do with your 3rd vote?

yes. still not sure about Albert though. I'm not sure why, but something isn't all right.

[truncator]

I don't see how I'm acting "scummy" on purpose. I told y'all how I felt about things.

Truncator: Isn't that what you said, right here?

EBWOP:
Albert, on a quick re-read of the game, it appears you've completely avoided the truncator issue, besides seconding my question of truncator in post 95. Instead, you have cast suspicion on

Yosarian

. Any reason for this avoidance? What are your thoughts on truncator at the moment?

Maybe

he's

quiet because he is enjoying watching the paranoid town mob jump on the Lynch Truncator bandwagon and accomplishing his dirty work in the meantime. Put me at -1 and whomever casts the 4th vote, remember them. Remember the 3rd vote as well.

You said you were not answering the questions because you wanted "the paranoid town mob" to "jump on the lynch trucator bandwagon", on the theory that would give information based on who the 3rd and 4th votes are. That sounds like you were claiming you were refusing to answer the questions because you WANTED to look scummy so people would vote for you, which, like I said, makes absolutly no sense.

Now, is there some reason you're refusing to answer my questions?

Yes, I said that. But I don't talk about myself in the third person. I'm not a professional athlete. haha

He=Albert from the post I was quoting. I can see why you thought I was trying to act scummy by avoiding a question while giving a smartass answer. But that's not what I was doing.

[truncator]

I could see a pro-town person intentioanlly trying a risky play just to shake things up and see how different people respond, but if you were trying to shake things up, why make it look like a meaningless random vote instead of making it more clear that you were bandwagoning?

I really didn't think I would have to spell this out, but why make a big deal about it? I achieved the same effect while playing it cool. More so than I ever dreamed. I really didn't expect this much reaction out of it. I'm not much of a bold type yeller anyway.

I really just wanted to see who was paying attention and how everyone would react. All said, I think we got on the right track by luck. I still think pickemgenius is scum.

[truncator]

Actually, I believe you should watch the 4th vote. pickem's vote is in for me already and he is trying to rally a 3rd vote so his scum buddy can pounce. Probably Albert or even yosarian. I don't have a good read on either of them anymore. I trust no one!

[truncator]

Ok. Why do you think pickemgenius is scum?

Naturally, I didn't think pickem was scum in the beginning. But since that time he has been constantly prodding on me and trying to round up more votes to lynch me. I believe he is doing so because he knows I'm in a unique spot with everyone eyeing me and he knows I'm pro-town because he is scum.

I really wish windfish would remove his vote for me. I still think we are on the same side. I've had 2 votes long enough now that I think one of the two current votes are scum. It wouldn't seem so suspicious anymore if 2 more scum votes came along and lynched me. 1 has voted for me, the other is waiting.

[truncator]

I didn't ask him to unvote me. I made a statement.

[truncator]

OMGUS

You go from poetry to this. Classic.

[truncator]

Albert's play has been inconsistent to me. He casts accusations, pursues aggressively, then swings around and says he has faith in people.

Solid effort, WindFish, that's pretty much what I was trying to say. Not only that, but he hasn't made a substantial post for a long time. With no votes on him, I think it's pretty safe to

vote: Albert

. Although it might not be scummy behaviour, it also might be. Might as well look into it.

Albert/pickem - not albert/trunc

trunc is good. good for the soul. good for the mind. not so good on the body unless you like tequila.

[truncator]

Albert's play has been inconsistent to me. He casts accusations, pursues aggressively, then swings around and says he has faith in people.

Solid effort, WindFish, that's pretty much what I was trying to say. Not only that, but he hasn't made a substantial post for a long time. With no votes on him, I think it's pretty safe to

vote: Albert

. Although it might not be scummy behaviour, it also might be. Might as well look into it.

Albert/pickem - not albert/trunc

trunc is good. good for the soul. good for the mind. not so good on the body unless you like tequila.

Holy crap, I just talked in third person. That killer game of golf must be getting to my head! Help me tom cruise!

[truncator]

Albert's play has been inconsistent to me. He casts accusations, pursues aggressively, then swings around and says he has faith in people. I don't suppose that's necessarily scum behavior, but inconsistent behavior means it's 50/50 to me that your playing for the mafia. So just a

FoS: Albert

for now.

So this is me you are talking about?

Well, the folks I have faith in and the accusations I cast are not for the same folks, are they? Is it inconsistent to accuse one and have faith in another?

pickem/Albert = bad
trunc = good
everyone else is good as far as I can tell right now.

[truncator]

So this is me you are talking about?

No, just the "faith" part was you. The other parts about inconsistency still apply to Albert.

Right on.

[truncator]

Nothing to add. Just an I'm still here post.

[truncator]

All right. We can't afford to no-lynch, which is what will happen if the voting stays as it is. I might as well vote for the person I currently find to be most suspicious.

vote:truncator

ANd eveyone needs to get in here and post, all right?

That's a really bad move. I'm not scum.

Unvote

VOTE: LlamaHunter

[truncator]

If you are voting for me at this point, I believe you to be scum. But if it's between me and Llama Hunter, I don't want to go down first.

[truncator]

All right. We can't afford to no-lynch, which is what will happen if the voting stays as it is. I might as well vote for the person I currently find to be most suspicious.

vote:truncator

ANd eveyone needs to get in here and post, all right?

Can you afford to kill a town-folk over a no lynch? I guess we'll find out.

[truncator]

pickem, you are the scum.

[truncator]

All right. We can't afford to no-lynch, which is what will happen if the voting stays as it is. I might as well vote for the person I currently find to be most suspicious.

vote:truncator

ANd eveyone needs to get in here and post, all right?

Can you afford to kill a town-folk over a no lynch? I guess we'll find out.

YOU NEVER EVER

WANT

A NO LYNCH IN SUCH A SMALL GAME!!!!

There are a few extreme situations where it is a good play, but it's for sure usually not a good idea.

While it is very bad to lynch someone who is pro-town, we get connections and get a better view on where everyone stands for later Days.

Well then, lynch me. Lose another tonight. And then see where you stand in the morning. 3-2.

And quit yelling. sheesh. OMGUS!!!

[truncator]

Unvote

[truncator]

Y'all are dumb. pickem and his buddy just keep riding me to throw off suspicion on themselves. You'll see.

VOTE: pickem

This game is lasting unbearably long anyway.