Mini #597 - Swift speed: Werewolves (Game over)

[Mr. Blonde]

Korts?

Why you voted Phoebus?

Vote count

(2) Korts – clammy, Phoebus
(2) Phoebus – Chaosweaver, Korts
(1) Xanatos Roulette - SleepyPanda
(1) Killa Seven – donkeyz12212
(1) Shy Guy – Xanatos Roulette
(1) Chaosweaver – Shy Guy
(1) Jenter Brolincani – Mr. Blonde

(1) No Lynch – W!nt3r

Not voting:

Jenter Brolincani, killa seven

Deadline:

Tuesday 20 May 11:40 PM

[Korts]

Voting donkeyz on flimsy reasons.

Flimsier than any other reason used to get closer to a serious discussion? No.

[Korts]

Korts?

Why you voted Phoebus?

I voted because what he states are good reasons are nothing more than BS.

[Phoebus]

With 72 hour deadlines, this isn't a real big contradiction.

See...it all sounds a little bit hollow since you voted for donkeyz based on a contradiction.

Any contradiction is a contradiction. Big or small...how should it matter?
Especially if that is being used as a reasoning for your OWN actions.

Practice what you preach my friend.

And in my last post I clarified what I meant by OMGUS when I said it.
If you want to stick to technicalities and not read what I said - then sure, I'm a big dirty scumbag.

[Mr. Blonde]

Important establishment of time zone used

To me this post is registered as “Sat May 17, 2008 10:19 am” and that is the time zone I’ll be referring to when putting up deadlines. Someone suggested that this is CDT (I’ve got no clue since I’m in Sweden and the time by this post is actually 5:19 PM).

Check here people: http://treehouse.ofb.net/go/en/timezone/Sweden - I believe it's GMT/UTC +02:00 (taking into account summer time..)

[Phoebus]

Both of your previous posts korts - are based on your perception.

Bring me something empirical.
At least I'm backing up my claims with some posts/points.

You're calling it names and doing nothing else...

[Mr. Blonde]

Phoebus - why you voted korts (post 19)?

[Korts]

I'm sorry. By "not a real big contradiction" I meant that it wasn't, in fact, a contradiction at all. I get these sarcastic spasms sometimes. My point was that we only started, yet we have only 3 days left. Capisce?

My vote on you is because your whole argument against me was flawed. My vote on donkeyz wasn't OMGUS, since he didn't FoS me, didn't vote me, didn't even mention me at all other than replying to my accusation. My anxiety over the looming deadline is, I think, also explained by the fact that, compared to games where days may last for weeks, here, a day lasts for 3 days. And also, I don't remember actually taking sides in the quicklynch topic, yet you stated it like I did. Please, if you're reaching, at least have some borderline valid points.

[Mr. Blonde]

Phoebus, I have to add that besides telling us why you voted korts (post 19) please also list reasons that made you confirm vote him in post 45 - and what you mean by "confirm" vote?

[Korts]

confirming a vote means that he seriously wants to lynch me.

[Korts]

meaning that it's just a useless formality.

[Phoebus]

Blonde...read post 45 properly. There are three points there.
Read them. Understand them.

If you like, refer to my previous points where I have talked about those points.

Put those things together with my hunch/tell and I'm quite sure korts is scum. Therefore I confirm to emphasise this belief.

As far as reasons in post 19 go, I don't feel obliged to speak on that right now.

I'm going away from my desk. Let others weigh in with their decisions before I proceed.


korts - you make me laugh.

[Korts]

korts - you make me laugh.

nice one. I almost voted myself.

[clammy]

I feel uncomfortable that my vote is on this potential wagon, yet i don't like the way korts or phoebus are playing.

unvote; vote: Phoebus

- Mostly to make sure korts isn't quick-lynched.

[Mr. Blonde]

Korts: I prefer the people who make votes to tell why they do that.

Phoebus

A) First you jump votes quickly and OMGUS a fellow player. The reason you mention for this is being ironical and some rubbish about lynching being killing and such fluff.

Taken into account that this is a quick game I see no problem here. Voting back and forth could be a play style. Doesn't really convince me that korts would be a scum. Temperant maybe, scum... hard to tell.

B) You say you're jumpy because we just started AND deadline is looming.

Hmm... well, I don't see scummyness here either. Quicklynch can help us vote a scum, and with a deadline that weights.

C) Now you claim you're not worried about quicklynch but felt deadline looming previously?

Well... I don't see a horrible contradiction here. Deadline & quicklynch are 2 different things.

Phoebus, I think you are making this issue bigger than it is - and being able to "confirm" your vote based on these quite vague assumptions make you look suspicious.

---

clammy: hmm, unvoting korts for "making sure he isn't quick-lynched" makes sense, but why then vote Phoebus? Would you like to see him quicklynched?

[Korts]

Clammy, two things.

1) I wasn't anywhere near a lynch.

2) making sure I'm not quicklynched isn't a reason to vote Phoebus. Plus, I feel you're trying to connect to me. Strange. You've just jumped up on my scumlist to second place.

[Johoohno]

Mod note on voting

1. I will edit in vote counts on first post on the pages, as on this page (not all pages but here and there,the speed really is swift )

2. If two players have the equal number in votes when a deadline is reached I'll randomized who's actually lynched.

[Shy Guy]

unvote vote: clammy

defending Korts for no reason... BY wagoning Phoebous... is suspicious.

Phoebus, sarcasm was the most effective way to express what I wanted to express.

[killa seven]

wow this game is moving fast.. the korts wagon is dumb,ive seen him act like this in random stage and turn up town after a bw formed from random stage.

[Phoebus]

haha!!

I was almost tempted to ask clammy to put in his two cents, specifically, earlier. I resisted the temptation.

Unless this is ultra big major coincidence...

Here's my set of tells.
Some of you will believe me. Others won't.

These usually work. At other times, they don't.


My theory: clammy + korts = scum.


1. Clammy posted first (post 3) - mentioned it specifically - then went on to vote korts.
No random vote.
It is a tendency for scum to want to show participation. Very many times the first couple posts are scum - especially when expressly mentioned - and many of these many times - the first person voted for, is a partner.

Reason? So that if the said partner is under pressure later - they can be more "genuinely" bussed.
e.g. "Oh sure! I voted someone else but I knew something was wrong with X. See? I've voted him previously. Of course we can't be partners, eh?"


2. Post 6 is another happy, helpful, fuzzy look to be townie post from clammy.

3. korts ignores clammy in his first post ( 8 ) and goes on to say something about Chaos...which has no basis as I see it... I treat it as random on his part.

4.

donkeyz, by voting killa with the reason of stopping the killing, you yourself have fallen into a contradiction, since lynching killa will be an act of killing in itself. Minor plothole in logic.

Post 11 is donkeyz saying - "oh yea! irony!"

Then...

Hey, no problem. Glad to help.

Unvote, Vote: donkeyz

No reason given for switch.
The only interaction was the one about contradiction.
So...we have korts voting for this apparent contradiction. Correct me if I'm wrong.

This surmise would be strengthened by post 15


5. I come in at post 19 with all the thoughts I've mentioned above in my head and vote korts on a hunch. To see what kind of reaction it elicited from korts and clammy.

As I've mentioned in my previous posts -

korts reacted with:

--> asking a reason for my random vote
random? reason? don't compute together.

When I mention vote is now random (and now you know why)
--> asks for reason for not random vote.

Here's when I start seeing more things.
The jumpiness.

Next, he mentions the day starting and feeling the deadline looming.
I am aware that we have a 72 hour deadline but even the first 24 are not up.
How is it looming? Many people have not even weighed in with their thoughts.
Why the looming?

After I mention all of this and his contradictions, he uses sarcasm (always a tool for people who can't be witty and a minor scumtell) and votes me - confessedly OMGUS.

Then the sarcasm and name calling goes on.
Calling my theory BS
Talking about confirming being a useless formality.
Then the swipe about voting for himself because he made me laugh.

The icing on the cake is this post by clammy - WHOM I initially suspected as korts' partner:

I feel uncomfortable that my vote is on this potential wagon, yet i don't like the way korts or phoebus are playing.

unvote; vote: Phoebus
- Mostly to make sure korts isn't quick-lynched.

The mod has edited in a vote count at the top of this page

Before clammy voted me, both korts and I were on 2 votes.
Unwilling to vote on a potential wagon, he puts korts on 1, puts me on 3.

Whee!


korts - you wanted me to give you something to defend against.
Does this qualify?

Or is it still BS?

It's very easy to call something BS but prove it.
Perhaps what I'm saying is BS but I'm giving reasons - so at most you could call me wrong or misguided.

Yet, you refuse to rebut my arguments. Call names and generally not engage in discussion with me.

How is that useful?

And like I said - perceptions differ from person to person. BS to you might be manure to someone else.

[Shy Guy]

Phoebus I don't disagree but clammy is more suspicious and should be voted, not korts.

[Korts]

I feel clammy is, indeed, trying to connect to me.

Phoebus, I'll adress only the points that include my own actions, if that's fine with you. In relation to the Korts-clammy connection, I can only say that there isn't one. Clammy is trying to buddy up to me, perhaps. I can't prove that I'm not connected to clammy, so there. Otherwise, it's my opinion that you shouldn't start pairing people up until you have at least one confirmed scum.

3. korts ignores clammy in his first post ( 8 ) and goes on to say something about Chaos...which has no basis as I see it... I treat it as random on his part.

My first post (where I voted Chaosweaver) I ignored clammy because his vote was random and nothing to address.

No reason given for switch.
The only interaction was the one about contradiction.
So...we have korts voting for this apparent contradiction. Correct me if I'm wrong.

The only interaction of any kind between players was the one about contradiction. The reason for the switch, I think, is obvious. I fail to see your point on this one.

korts reacted with:

--> asking a reason for my random vote
random? reason? don't compute together.

From my experience, it is customary to provide a reason of some kind (good/bad, logic/gut, etc.) to votes. Failure to do this will naturally arouse suspicion.

When I mention vote is now random (and now you know why)
--> asks for reason for not random vote.

Same as above, only this time the reason is presumably serious compared to a random vote.

Next, he mentions the day starting and feeling the deadline looming.
I am aware that we have a 72 hour deadline but even the first 24 are not up.
How is it looming? Many people have not even weighed in with their thoughts.
Why the looming?

Looming, as in much closer than to be expected at the beginning of a game. I wish you'd stop barking up this particular tree, this point's a dead end. Also, I didn't say we should lynch someone before everyone's checked in, I tried to start a discussion. Don't misrepresent me.

Then the sarcasm and name calling goes on.

I don't remember any name calling. I didn't say you're an idiot, a loser, a microphone-abuser, or any such thing. And I won't. Don't put words into my mouth that don't belong there.

Talking about confirming being a useless formality.

Isn't it? Technically a confirmed vote isn't any better than, or any different from a normal vote.

Yet, you refuse to rebut my arguments. Call names and generally not engage in discussion with me.

Let me quote myself.

Post 57:

My vote on you is because your whole argument against me was flawed. My vote on donkeyz wasn't OMGUS, since he didn't FoS me, didn't vote me, didn't even mention me at all other than replying to my accusation. My anxiety over the looming deadline is, I think, also explained by the fact that, compared to games where days may last for weeks, here, a day lasts for 3 days. And also, I don't remember actually taking sides in the quicklynch topic, yet you stated it like I did. Please, if you're reaching, at least have some borderline valid points.

I think that's called an argument, refuting your points, namely the "OMGUS" on donkeyz, the deadline thing, and the quicklynch topic.

Please. Don't misrepresent me, or try to paint a picture of me that is obviously false.[/quote]

[Korts]

Dammit. Ignore the quote tag at the end, I wasn't quoting anything there.

[Mr. Blonde]

Phoebus, I think you are making some statements that prove nothing.

For example

3. korts ignores clammy

People are randomly putting votes back and forth, so I don't see how one guy ignoring vote makes him a scum (nor townie). I think it proves nothing.

Very many times the first couple posts are scum - especially when expressly mentioned - and many of these many times - the first person voted for, is a partner.

First couple posts are scum - especially when expressly mentioned? This is not true

First posts are just that: people who got to reply/vote first. If you have checked out 500 games and give me statistics that clearly show the correlation, then I could think there might be some truth here... but for now - this just isn't going to cut it.

Phoebus I don't disagree but clammy is more suspicious and should be voted, not korts.

I agree that

clammy

's vote was seriously suspicious, but before I vote this guy I want to hear his reason for his actions (his post 63).

Like said earlier, unvoting korts for "making sure he isn't quick-lynched" makes sense, but why then vote Phoebus? clammy, Would you like to see Phoebus quicklynched?

[Korts]

Like said earlier, unvoting korts for "making sure he isn't quick-lynched" makes sense, but why then vote Phoebus? clammy, Would you like to see Phoebus quicklynched?

That, and why did clammy feel the need to unvote when I was at L-5. Did he feel the points against me were justified? If so, why didn't he leave his vote on me?