Mini #704: Hunchback of Notre Dame, Game Over

[CarnCarn]

Caboose is the worst offender since not only are his contributions just Mafia theory and minutiae, he has been much more active in other places than in this game. In his last 40 posts he has 1 post in this game, in his last 90 posts he has 2 posts in this game, etc. I consider lack of motivation to contribute to be very scummy.

Unvote ClockworkRuse, Vote: Caboose

Unvote: ClockworkRuse
Vote: Caboose

[petroleumjelly]

Day One: Vote Count #10

3 ClockworkRuse (urielzyx, Battousai, ortolan)
2 Battousai (Caboose, destructor)
2 Caboose (Machiavellian-Mafia, CarnCarn)
2 ortolan (ClockworkRuse, ThAdmiral)

With

12

alive, it takes

7

to lynch, and

4

to lynch at deadline. Deadline hits on December 1 at 9:59 pm CDT.

Not Voting – 3 – Axelrod, Mizzy, roflcopter

roflcopter replaces MiteyMouse, effective immediately. The deadline does not change according to Rule #5, since the current deadline is already three days away from today.

[ortolan]

I don't really see any reason not to put your suspicions all in one post, ort, so are you just not doing it to be belligerent to CR or do you have a real reason to refuse?

I'm not trying to be particularly belligerent but it is irritating that in the past when I tried to construct a case against him or respond to him rather than engaging in debate he makes smug, basically irrelevant remarks like

I'm interested in, if my attack is so unmerited, why you got so worked up over it.

Also he and Mizzy have blatantly tried to spread a mistruth that I was opportunistic in regards to attacking him solely because my *vote* came after everyone else's, and I'd somehow "parasited" off everyone else's cases.

Anyhow clearly town has interest in hearing my reasons for voting for CR again, and my refusal to reiterate has apparently been interpreted as scummy by some, so here it is, together with some new points (by a re-read of the game):

Firstly he asks me about my use of ##, which implies he has his attention on me from the start.

In Post 54 he votes for me with a question, not a case: "Why are you defending Ramus?" A common theme of his are "pressure votes"- which he openly acknowledges as such. Seems more like an excuse for voting without giving good reasons to me. Also basically acknowledging they're "pressure votes" at the time basically diminishes their effect.

In Post 70 I reply:

ClockworkRuse your reason for voting for me is horrible. It's almost become a fashion recently to self-vote- doing so and defending people who do so hardly seems scummy to me.

Thus

FoS: ClockworkRuse

Anyone accusing me of either OMGUSing or joining his bandwagon late should just read this post again. Not only do I express suspicion at an early point in the game (but didn't want to put him on L-3 so early), but I clearly state my suspicions derive from the *reason* for his vote for me, rather than the mere fact.

I also note at this point that Mizzy at this point says "she doesn't see the wagon on ClockworkRuse". No reasons though. She also continues to attack Ramus (but manages to avoid diverting her attentions from Ramus to me for the time being.)

In post 79 CR says:

So I'm trying to not to appear aggressive... As I'm going after someone else, which is most likely going to grow a little more intense on my part soon.

And I wouldn't mind putting someone at L-3 on page three. I just think it would be better to open the town to more than just one scummy play in a day. Tunneling kills townies, I can show you more that enough references for that.

Here he clearly states his intentions to "up the ferocity in his attack on me". Does anyone honestly think I did something scummy enough in the first 3 pages to warrant that sort of attention? It seems to me even if my vote for him did amount to OMGUS it seems fairly justified when someone is being as single-minded as he (I will not be pleased if you deliberately misinterpret this point again, CR). Immediately after this he tells us "tunneling kills townies". Priceless.

Post 89:

Do you think I did need to jump on that wagon? Why? What benefit would it be for scum to concentrate on someone else when someone is under heavy scrutiny?

There are many actually, including distancing self from townie misslynch or garnering favour with townies.

Alright Battousai, I'm alright with you voting me. But I'll tell everyone now, I don't really feel that much pressure from votes. If you are going to vote me, ask me questions.

This is clearly not true, you've made a big deal out of my vote for you (although you were trying to make a big deal out of everything I did before then).

Post 110:

This is pretty much dead wrong. If you haven't noticed, not everyone is voting Ramus because he self-voted. Look back and read over his answers, he has basically refused to explain himself. The fact that you defended him detracts from any reactions that we might get from him and at this point in the game, reactions are very important.

This isn't really a valid point because me defending him was based on the act of his self-vote in the first place, not the way he played having done so. Perhaps I should have allowed pressure to be applied to him but the fact was that the exact same act of self-voting had just occurred in another game I'm still playing in and it ultimately led to a large theory discussion which wasted time and got nowhere. I did not really want a repeat. And the arguments against self-voting themselves are pretty weak so I felt it best to pre-empt them. However, they way you've expressed it in this post amounts to a post-hoc justification for voting for me- the first actual justification you've given I think.

Post 131:

But defending someone before they've had a chance to respond detracts from hunting and that is scummy/anti-town. I won't support that kind of behavior.

Again, you reiterate your sole reason for voting for me- policy. You think defending another is inherently scummy. This is not at all consistent with your acknowledged tunnel vision in attacking me.

Then we have post 152 in response to his vote on me which I've already responded to and shown to be rubbish. Then we have crapposts 154 and 159, which both make the same point:

But, if you look back up, you'll see that the diction and the caps lock bits show that you got very worked up over something you consider insignificant.

Here he is criticising me for making convincing arguments. And suggesting I got worked up over something I consider "insignificant" (I don't see where either the idea that I got worked up or that I don't consider his attack on me as significant comes from).

170: again says I am being defensive and this is a scumtell. He also continues to fixate on his and Mizzy's OMGUS tangent (despite me having expressly denied this and it being a crap argument anyway). Also contributes this:

I'd also like to know what you thought of my post 159 regarding your diction and caps lock.

ThIS DoES NoT MeRiT A RePLY!

Then there's this bizarre question from CR about Fong's gambit which Mizzy seemed to think was addressed to me even if CR himself apparently didn't know. I honestly don't know what they were trying to pull there.

Anyhow for both bad play and scummy motives CR still tops my suspect list- if he is scum, Mizzy is a good contender for accomplice.

CR, Mizzy, ThAdmiral: I have answered your request in good faith. I would appreciate if you (CR in particular) could bring something more substantive to the table than for example "lol! you got worked up! how scummy!"

[ClockworkRuse]

I don't really see any reason not to put your suspicions all in one post, ort, so are you just not doing it to be belligerent to CR or do you have a real reason to refuse?

I'm not trying to be particularly belligerent but it is irritating that in the past when I tried to construct a case against him or respond to him rather than engaging in debate he makes smug, basically irrelevant remarks like

I'm interested in, if my attack is so unmerited, why you got so worked up over it.

Also he and Mizzy have blatantly tried to spread a mistruth that I was opportunistic in regards to attacking him solely because my *vote* came after everyone else's, and I'd somehow "parasited" off everyone else's cases.

Anyhow clearly town has interest in hearing my reasons for voting for CR again, and my refusal to reiterate has apparently been interpreted as scummy by some, so here it is, together with some new points (by a re-read of the game):

And you blame me for misinterpreting?

Firstly, I never denied you had been

following my wagon since the beginning.

Secondly, putting someone at lynch-1, which I believe you did, without much of a case before hand, is opportunistic. And it seemed like you were making it an OMGUS.

Firstly he asks me about my use of ##, which implies he has his attention on me from the start.

Actually, this was more me wondering if there was some kind of post restriction with-in your role. I had just come out of day one of Scum O' the Seas and we had a post restriction in that game. I was in that kind of mind set.

In Post 54 he votes for me with a question, not a case: "Why are you defending Ramus?" A common theme of his are "pressure votes"- which he openly acknowledges as such. Seems more like an excuse for voting without giving good reasons to me. Also basically acknowledging they're "pressure votes" at the time basically diminishes their effect.

In Post 70 I reply:

ClockworkRuse your reason for voting for me is horrible. It's almost become a fashion recently to self-vote- doing so and defending people who do so hardly seems scummy to me.

Thus

FoS: ClockworkRuse

Anyone accusing me of either OMGUSing or joining his bandwagon late should just read this post again. Not only do I express suspicion at an early point in the game (but didn't want to put him on L-3 so early), but I clearly state my suspicions derive from the *reason* for his vote for me, rather than the mere fact.

My original reason for voting you was pressure with reason. I saw you doing something I considered anti-town/scummy and attacked. Now then, just because you FoS'ed me doesn't mean you are cleared of the OMGUS. Why do you think it does?

I also note at this point that Mizzy at this point says "she doesn't see the wagon on ClockworkRuse". No reasons though. She also continues to attack Ramus (but manages to avoid diverting her attentions from Ramus to me for the time being.)

This is for Mizzy to reply to, not me.

In post 79 CR says:

So I'm trying to not to appear aggressive... As I'm going after someone else, which is most likely going to grow a little more intense on my part soon.

And I wouldn't mind putting someone at L-3 on page three. I just think it would be better to open the town to more than just one scummy play in a day. Tunneling kills townies, I can show you more that enough references for that.

Here he clearly states his intentions to "up the ferocity in his attack on me". Does anyone honestly think I did something scummy enough in the first 3 pages to warrant that sort of attention? It seems to me even if my vote for him did amount to OMGUS it seems fairly justified when someone is being as single-minded as he (I will not be pleased if you deliberately misinterpret this point again, CR). Immediately after this he tells us "tunneling kills townies". Priceless.

So you can justify an OMGUS because I was "tunneling"? And this is not a deliberate misinterpretation, if you don't want me to take what you are saying at face value be clearer in what you are attempting to say.

Tunneling does kill townies. But at the same time, I've yet to see a reason to unvote you.

Post 89:

Do you think I did need to jump on that wagon? Why? What benefit would it be for scum to concentrate on someone else when someone is under heavy scrutiny?

There are many actually, including distancing self from townie misslynch or garnering favour with townies.

Ramus was no where near being lynched and obviously I didn't gain any favour with the rest of the town. So once again, why did I need to jump on that wagon and how does it make me scum for looking somewhere else?

Alright Battousai, I'm alright with you voting me. But I'll tell everyone now, I don't really feel that much pressure from votes. If you are going to vote me, ask me questions.

This is clearly not true, you've made a big deal out of my vote for you (although you were trying to make a big deal out of everything I did before then).

You were saying something about misinterpretations? You're vote is a bigger deal to me than Batts, although Batts is inherently scummy. [And I'm getting to that.] You not only tried to push aside the OMGUS factor of your vote, I watched you feed off of the points of everyone else on my wagon, you were willing to put me at L-1 but "not comfortable with lynching me" and you were becoming overly aggressive/defensive.

Post 110:

This is pretty much dead wrong. If you haven't noticed, not everyone is voting Ramus because he self-voted. Look back and read over his answers, he has basically refused to explain himself. The fact that you defended him detracts from any reactions that we might get from him and at this point in the game, reactions are very important.

This isn't really a valid point because me defending him was based on the act of his self-vote in the first place, not the way he played having done so. Perhaps I should have allowed pressure to be applied to him but the fact was that the exact same act of self-voting had just occurred in another game I'm still playing in and it ultimately led to a large theory discussion which wasted time and got nowhere. I did not really want a repeat. And the arguments against self-voting themselves are pretty weak so I felt it best to pre-empt them. However, they way you've expressed it in this post amounts to a post-hoc justification for voting for me- the first actual justification you've given I think.

I've given plenty of justification for keeping my vote on you. A larger scale post is on it's way, actually. But for now; this was a valid point. The initial suspicion started with the self-vote, which you defended. The votes stayed there because of his refusal to answer questions after you gave him a defense. Which was part of his supposed gambit, I believe.

Post 131:

But defending someone before they've had a chance to respond detracts from hunting and that is scummy/anti-town. I won't support that kind of behavior.

Again, you reiterate your sole reason for voting for me- policy. You think defending another is inherently scummy. This is not at all consistent with your acknowledged tunnel vision in attacking me.

It's not my sole reason. It was my initial reason to

pressure.

Then we have post 152 in response to his vote on me which I've already responded to and shown to be rubbish. Then we have crapposts 154 and 159, which both make the same point:

But, if you look back up, you'll see that the diction and the caps lock bits show that you got very worked up over something you consider insignificant.

Here he is criticising me for making convincing arguments. And suggesting I got worked up over something I consider "insignificant" (I don't see where either the idea that I got worked up or that I don't consider his attack on me as significant comes from).

Diction is not insignificant. The way you handled yourself in those posts were extremely defensive and aggravated. It's not because you were making "convincing arguments" [which must not be so convincing as my wagon breaks off]. When SOMEONE starts talking LIKE THIS I take it as a sign on anger. Netiquette dictates that it is shouting.

170: again says I am being defensive and this is a scumtell. He also continues to fixate on his and Mizzy's OMGUS tangent (despite me having expressly denied this and it being a crap argument anyway). Also contributes this:

I'd also like to know what you thought of my post 159 regarding your diction and caps lock.

ThIS DoES NoT MeRiT A RePLY!

Smart-ass. See the above. It does merit a reply and dodging the question does not make you look better in my eyes.

Then there's this bizarre question from CR about Fong's gambit which Mizzy seemed to think was addressed to me even if CR himself apparently didn't know. I honestly don't know what they were trying to pull there.

It was for the entire town. I was questioning the intent of Ramus' self-vote, as it seemed he was flawing the gambit by asking for pressure. Then again, he stated it was his first time attempting the gambit so I am willing to chalk that up to inexperience with the gambit.

Anyhow for both bad play and scummy motives CR still tops my suspect list- if he is scum, Mizzy is a good contender for accomplice.

CR, Mizzy, ThAdmiral: I have answered your request in good faith. I would appreciate if you (CR in particular) could bring something more substantive to the table than for example "lol! you got worked up! how scummy!"

It's not just "lol Youse got workz up! Scum!" As you will see.

[CarnCarn]

Not liking the tag-team attack on ort. Seems to be a big reach on CR's part especially.

In post 79 CR says:

So I'm trying to not to appear aggressive... As I'm going after someone else,

which is most likely going to grow a little more intense on my part soon.

And I wouldn't mind putting someone at L-3 on page three. I just think it would be better to open the town to more than just one scummy play in a day. Tunneling kills townies, I can show you more that enough references for that.

Here he clearly states his intentions to "up the ferocity in his attack on me". Does anyone honestly think I did something scummy enough in the first 3 pages to warrant that sort of attention? It seems to me even if my vote for him did amount to OMGUS it seems fairly justified when someone is being as single-minded as he (I will not be pleased if you deliberately misinterpret this point again, CR). Immediately after this he tells us "tunneling kills townies". Priceless.

I bolded for emphasis. That part struck me as odd when I first read it, as well. I didn't know who he was referring to at the time, but it makes much more sense now. What

are

you planning CR, and why would you announce it like this?

Also, more Caboose wagoning please.

[ClockworkRuse]

Re-Read:

## Vote: ThAdmiral

because I voted him in another game also and I like to be consistent

There was just an extremely lengthy theory discussion in another game I am playing based on self-voting. It was agreed, as Ramus said, that it's subjective and there's nothing inherently scummy about self-voting. It would be nice if the people voting/FoSing him actually gave some reasons as to why self-voting in the *random* stage of the game suggests one is scum?

So here is where I first took note of Ortolan because of his defense of Ramus.


I’d like to address this little bit of TheAdmrials 102

Actually, it would be best for the person to try and defend themselves first, AND THEN point out the flaws in the attack. That way you can gain info from the person being attacked.

Maybe, but sometimes when you let just two people attack and counter-attack each other it is far less effective than if other people chime in with their opinions as well. Furthermore it makes it less likely that the town as a whole will start looking at the only two arguing people as viable lynches, narrowing the town's potential scope.

Essentially, this is what the wagon on me became and no one defended me for quite some time. And I’m not saying let two people just go back and forth. When player A places suspicion in player B, player B should answer the suspicion first. That way, the entire town gets to see player B’s reaction. Then the town can dissect both player A and B.

Ortolan’s post 105

Ortolan, the point is that the town was applying pressure to him, and his reactions are important. You defending him detracts from his reactions, in my opinion, as you give him a safeguard.

Are you telling me that it's okay to self-vote because it's a fashion now?

@TheAdmiral, Why are you defending Ortolan? He is perfectly capable of responding himself.

Self-voting is fundamentally a null-tell. I defended it as such. You had no basis for voting for Ramus for it, and you had no basis for then voting for me. Furthermore you rebuked ThAdmiral for defending me. Your first action had no merit and the two actions which stemmed from it also, consequently, had no merit. I see it as quite possible you are aiming for a devil's advocate-type playstyle (ironically much like Ramus also seems to be doing) but this doesn't excuse you from the onus of providing valid arguments for your votes and assertions.

You accuse me of not providing valid arguments for my votes and assertions yet you have ignored both of Batt’s “pressure is good” votes. I have to take this as tunneling. I did have a basis for voting you, you just don’t agree with it. The reason I voted you wasn’t scummy.

Ortolan’s 136

My bad, that is still a remnant of my initial random vote.

I would feel most comfortable about lynching ClockworkRuse. Obviously I am biased due to his vote on me, but I feel his case was genuinely without merit.

Not only do I still believe I was defending a null-tell by Ramus and thus was in the right (objections aside), but CR's vote on me still seems to amount to voting-by-proxy.

Unvote

Vote: ClockworkRuse

First, I have to retract my previous comments about this being L-1. This was L-2. Now then, I’m going to try to explain, once again, why this feels like an attempt to push aside an OMGUS.

The words “Obviously I am biased due to his vote on me” mean that my vote has some affect on the way Ort would vote, which to me spells OMGUS.

Not only has Ort practically admitted to voting me as an OMGUS jesture and then the case that others have been pushing, he's contradicting himself to give destructor an answer he thinks sounds town.

So you openly admit that this vote is an OMGUS?

What about my vote on you has ANY affect in how you vote? I get your second point about the "voting-by-proxy", which is a ridiculous point in itself as I was going after who I felt scummy, but how does that make you biased?

Here you're just taking a ridiculous interpretation of what I said. Saying "obviously I am biased" was not "admitting I was OMGUSing" at all. In fact it was to pre-empt people accusing me of OMGUSing. It was saying "obviously this looks like an OMGUS, but here are my reasons". EVEN APART FROM THIS, there is nothing inherently scummy about an OMGUS vote ANYWAY, so this argument has absolutely no substance.

Secondly, you can hardly say my "voting-by-proxy" point is ridiculous- both Battousai and TheAdmiral said exactly the same thing- you voted for me to avoid visibly adding to the Ramus wagon.

So, you aren't comfortable lynching me, you'd like more discussion, but you are going to put me two votes away from a lynch. Oh and I'd like to point out, and keep this in mind this quote is literally two posts before this, that Ort said this; "I would feel most comfortable about lynching ClockworkRuse." This contradiction seems kind of important.

Wow, you're really clutching at straws now. Firstly, putting you "two votes away from a lynch" means absolutely nothing. Saying the "n-1" or "n-2" vote on a bandwagon is somehow dangerous or scummy is just not true, unless it's an obvious attempt at a quicklynch, which mine clearly wasn't. If anyone hammers without good reason they will come under heavy suspicion. So your first point has no merit.

On your second, point, Congratulations! You caught me using the term "comfortable" in two completely different contexts and now cite this as an inconsistency. I firstly said "I would feel most comfortable lynching ClockworkRuse"- meaning: you are my prime suspect. destructor then took this out of context and said "would you be comfortable lynching CR right now?" and I replied "I am not 'comfortable' lynching him so to speak". NOTE THE INVERTED COMMAS AND THE FACT THE FIRST USAGE WAS QUALIFIED WITH "most". As such you can interpret my position as being "he is whom I find most suspicious but I would like more discussion first".

Also note, that Ort has to use the cases brought against me by others and has little to nothing to add to my case. In other words, Ort has been sitting around and waiting for a reasonable case to build.

This is so ridiculously untrue it's not funny. Reread the thread- I have been attacking you since post 70 (Page 3!) In fact EVERY one of my posts since then has been in reference to you. You may be referring to the fact that the first time I *voted* for you was Post 136. I think if anything you should be thanking me for holding out for that long- I certainly see no reason to unvote you now.

I would like to know how comfortable everyone would be in lynching me today.

Even more comfortable than I was before, after your latest completely meritless attempt to attack me.

This is where I feel Ort begins to get overly defensive, and it is. It is also admitting to tunneling me, [Oh no, I’m taking that out of context! I’m going to get yelled at again.]

The attack wasn’t meritless, there was a contradiction between your posts because you weren’t clear enough.

That's not what I said. You have every right to defend yourself. But, if you look back up, you'll see that the diction and the caps lock bits show that you got very worked up over something you consider insignificant.

When did I say I consider being attacked by you insignificant? I think you're scum and I'm not going to sit back and let you construct ground-less cases against me. I consider that I thoroughly refuted every single one of the points in your last post and in response it seems you've resorted to suggesting I got "worked up", as though I am "paniccing scum".

EVEN APART FROM THIS, there is nothing inherently scummy about an OMGUS vote ANYWAY, so this argument has absolutely no substance.

Actually, I don't agree fully with this sentiment; I feel that an OMGUS vote is scummy because it is an easy vote to make that doesn't take thought, doesn't utilize logic or a case, and in general, is anti-town. Anti-town != scum, but it does = scum

my

.

I also don't like that ort does, indeed, seem to have been waiting around for others to make his cases for him.

Also waiting for an answer to #155.

Strong FoS: Mizzy

for this post. To your first point: if you've done debating you'll know about the technique of "even if"- "even if so and so a point of yours is right, then...". Me saying "even apart from this" was an example of this. I firstly denied that my vote on ClockworkRuse amounted to an OMGUS. I then said even if it was, it's not a scumtell. You suggested that OMGUS may in fact be a scumtell, but did not address the fact that I intentionally denied my vote amounted to an OMGUS in the first place. This is not my reason for voting you however- it is your second claim, that I was "waiting around for others to make cases for me". This is just a parrot of the point ClockworkRuse already made and ignores the fact I already thoroughly refuted that this was the case (see my posts 70 and onwards). Either you haven't been reading and took ClockworkRuse's word for gospel or you had been reading and deliberately ignored the fact this point was blatantly untrue. Neither is forgivable at this point in the game.

...And I just went to reply to you, destructor and realised you've made exactly the same incorrect OMGUS accusation.

Why do you think a player making a weak case is a good enough reason to think they're scum?

If you read my posts you'd realise my case against him is far more substantial. Even take his last response to me, which amounts to trying to defer suspicion onto me because I "took too much effort in replying". I have felt his arguments against me since I've been actively voting for him have been even more horrible than those he made prior.

And on your comment on Battousai; while I certainly won't deny the possibility he's scum I don't like how you've been singling in upon him since your very first post of content. He openly conceded that his pressure vote was exactly what it was when he made it. I personally don't think scum would make such an attention-drawing move.

Also; destructor, I am suspicious of how aggressive your approach has been ever since you replaced in. I also dislike your justification for trying to divert suspicion from ClockworkRuse.

FoS: destructor

Both of the people Ort FoSed defended me and it was over a vote easily read as OMGUS.

This quote “And on your comment on Battousai; while I certainly won't deny the possibility he's scum I don't like how you've been singling in upon him since your very first post of content. He openly conceded that his pressure vote was exactly what it was when he made it. I personally don't think scum would make such an attention-drawing move” is also pretty ironic. Seems we both have something like that, eh? More about the “I don’t like how you’ve been singling in on him since your very first post of content.”


After re-reading, I’ve feel as though I’ve just been tunneling extra heavy on Ortolan, which is what I meant about the intensifying the attacks. But, this said, I still don’t feel as though he pro-town. But tunneling even more on him is going to just lead to a vicious spiral of attacks.

Unvote

IGMEOY Ort

Now then, to the Batt.

Batt’s votes all follow the same trend. Let’s spot it;

UNVOTE,
Vote: Ramus

Pressure good.

Mizzy: Ramus might have thought those questions were rhetorical, as I did. When you ask someone why they are so stupid, the person usually doesn't tell you he was dropped on his head a lot as a kid. Usually. But Ramus has also not answered questions from Machiavellian-Mafia as well, so Ramus might be intentionally stopped answering certain questions.

@TheAdmiral, Why are you defending Ortolan? He is perfectly capable of responding himself.

I wasn't defending ortolan per say. I was rather defending one's right to defend someone else, and have that not be necessarily viewed as scummy.
If someone thinks an attack on someone else is fishy, then he should call the attacker on it/point holes in the arguments rather than just sitting back silently.
Imo.

Actually, it would be best for the person to try and defend themselves first, AND THEN point out the flaws in the attack. That way you can gain info from the person being attacked.

Unvote: Ramus
Vote: ClockworkRuse

I feel you need more pressure. Also, I think you are acting scummy: The adequate pressure remark.

Now then, look for the common factor. Pressure.

Now, even after I told Batt that I didn’t feel the pressure and he needed to ask me questions, he largely ignored me and lurked. Then he came back saying;

Destructer: Pressure votes can do more than just make someone post... Now CR may act differently with x amount of votes than x-1. I also feel there is a good chance CR is scum. I'm just getting the same feeling from him this game as the last game we were in (he was scum, obviously). I didn't really want to say that as a reason of why I feel he is scum since you can't defend yourself from it.

Justifying his vote for pressure with his gut now.
It should be noted that this same event, me getting wagoned very early in the game [or as soon as I replaced] has happened twice. Once with me as scum and once with me as the doctor. I believe I have acted the same in both games and could find links for anyone interested in it.

Batt admits that he hasn’t looked over the game with me as a doctor here;

Destructer: Pressure votes can do more than just make someone post... Now CR may act differently with x amount of votes than x-1. I also feel there is a good chance CR is scum. I'm just getting the same feeling from him this game as the last game we were in (he was scum, obviously). I didn't really want to say that as a reason of why I feel he is scum since you can't defend yourself from it.

And what would that feeling be?

What are you expecting here? I already said I felt you were scum.

And I'd like to note, last game you got this feeling I was just attacking a claimed doctor and lurking. Am I doing either at the moment?

You can't do the exact same thing every game....

ortolan's response to me (and Mizzy, I guess) is... more OMGUS?

Destructer: Pressure votes can do more than just make someone post... Now CR may act differently with x amount of votes than x-1. I also feel there is a good chance CR is scum. I'm just getting the same feeling from him this game as the last game we were in (he was scum, obviously). I didn't really want to say that as a reason of why I feel he is scum since you can't defend yourself from it.

So... how has your vote changed the dynamics of his play?

That's like asking what would have happened if you went to the mall instead of the movies. You can only speculate on how he would act.

What have you learnt through your "pressure" vote on him?

From what has been said, I don't think CR has done anything worth being lynched yet. But maybe being at L-2 he has kept up being active.

"I'm just getting the same feeling" means gut?

Yes, that's why I haven't really listed it as a reason for the vote, since you can't defend against gut.

How is his play similar as a game where he was scum? Do you know that he hasn't played the same as town?

I get the same feeling I had as the game I was in when he was scum.

And I don't buy into this whole idea that you can call something a "pressure" vote and it will automatically mean anything. Your vote on CR is doing nothing but increasing the chances of him being lynched, not because it's outing him as scum, but because of cold and impartial game mechanics. You haven't made a case on CR and I see your reasoning - "pressure" - as an excuse to jump onto his wagon.

Destructer: Pressure votes can do more than just make someone post... Now CR may act differently with x amount of votes than x-1. I also feel there is a good chance CR is scum. I'm just getting the same feeling from him this game as the last game we were in (he was scum, obviously). I didn't really want to say that as a reason of why I feel he is scum since you can't defend yourself from it.

I'd also like to point out that this is almost the exact same situation as the first Newbie game I played with you.

How does my play here add up to my play there?

Honestly, I haven't looked back at that game at all

This was also the last post by him.

Vote Battousai

For consistently joining wagons without reasoning and consistently adding nothing to those wagons.

I have skimmed. Apparently I replaced a guy with a stick up his rear.

First impressions are that I think I approve of this CR wagon we are having and Mizzy comes across as pretty townie. The way Destructor is defending CR comes across as weird and I don't think I like him either.

Battousi seems all right. As does MM.

Unvote

I realize that doesn't tell anyone much of anything yet. I'll probably come back and make a real "case" on someone later.

Death-Millers are totally bogus also.

Apparently we also have a rapidly approaching deadline, so in the interests of moving things along I'd like to suggest to CR that he maybe go ahead and claim if he's got something to claim.

Why do you approve of my wagon?

[ortolan]

I'm rather worried that someone opportunistic or simply not reading properly might find either of your last two posts a convincing attack on me, CR.

Firstly; I put you at L-2, not L-1. Even though you corrected it in your subsequent post this mistake is hardly forgivable (especially considering how much of a big deal you make of it) considering it's already been discussed and there is a vote count on every page. I also dispute that there is anything wrong with putting someone on L-2, especially when the case against you is as strong as it is.

And it seemed like you were making it an OMGUS.

This doesn't even make sense. Why would I deliberately make my post something you consider a scumtell? I deny both that it was OMGUS, and that an OMGUS is scummy, in that order. Most of your ensuing posts still concern this dead-end OMGUS accusation so I shan't deal with them individiually.

I've given plenty of justification for keeping my vote on you. A larger scale post is on it's way, actually. But for now; this was a valid point. The initial suspicion started with the self-vote, which you defended. The votes stayed there because of his refusal to answer questions after you gave him a defense. Which was part of his supposed gambit, I believe.

Actually in that following post you seem to have distanced yourself from the attack on me and voted for someone else. I don't think I'm ready to reciprocate just yet.

Also about diction: You're saying my diction suggested I was overly defensive. I disagree. What else exactly do you expect me to reply with?

It's not just "lol Youse got workz up! Scum!" As you will see.

Um, well it appears to be, as you seem to have decided I'm not even worth voting for anymore.

The words “Obviously I am biased due to his vote on me” mean that my vote has some affect on the way Ort would vote, which to me spells OMGUS.

Again; I already addressed this thoroughly in Post 153. It was intended to mean "obviously it looks like I'm biased, but here are my reasons". I consider I have backed it up adequately for it not to amount to OMGUS, so I won't deal with this again.

About Battousai: I've reread his posts and I do see the case against him. Unfortunately I'm not aware of his meta and so am not sure whether his slim posts and fairly slim justifications are a constant or not. I still prefer the case against CR- he has consistently demonstrated more thought and more argument in his attacks. And I've disagreed strongly with almost all of it. I see his approach as being more calculated; whereas I'm not sure what to make of Battousai at this point.

[ClockworkRuse]

I'm not going to quote that all of that. I decided that I need to step away from you, Ort, and gain some perceptive. I've really just been tunneling on you and this re-read made me more suspicious of Battousai.

But I am going to ask about this; "I still prefer the case against CR- he has consistently demonstrated more thought and more argument in his attacks. And I've disagreed strongly with almost all of it. I see his approach as being more calculated; whereas I'm not sure what to make of Battousai at this point. "

So you can see where I've been coming from, but you disagree with it?

If that isn't the case, can you please reword that.

[ortolan]

Um, you're not the only person making a case against Battousai. But yes, I see the argument that he is scum based on what others as well as yourself have said. This does not mean I don't think there's a higher likelihood you are scum at this point.

[Battousai]

First off, like I said, I don't want CR lynched today so

UNVOTE

The following quotes are all from Destructor:

Battousai wrote:
destructor wrote:
So... how has your vote changed the dynamics of his play?

That's like asking what would have happened if you went to the mall instead of the movies. You can only speculate on how he would act.

You've just said that his play is unpredictable. So, if you couldn't know what CR was going to do, how would his reactions to the pressure have been meaningful? That is, what was the point of pressuring CR, again?

You don't understand what I said. My analogy applies to EVERYONE. No one knows how someone will react or if they will, or how if they didn't do it, how they would have played without that vote. Now to answer the question, if CR was scum, I felt he may out his partner unintentionally, or confirm another player, or maybe confirm his guilt.

Battousai wrote:
What have you learnt through your "pressure" vote on him?

From what has been said, I don't think CR has done anything worth being lynched yet. But maybe being at L-2 he has kept up being active.

You're sending mixed messages here. You don't think CR's done anything lynch-worthy, but you think he's playing like he does as scum. If he's playing like he's scum, shouldn't that be enough to lynch him?

No, I usually do not lynch someone with such little reasoning backed up with gut.

Battousai wrote:
"I'm just getting the same feeling" means gut?

Yes, that's why I haven't really listed it as a reason for the vote, since you can't defend against gut.

...
How is his play similar as a game where he was scum? Do you know that he hasn't played the same as town?

I get the same feeling I had as the game I was in when he was scum.

So... the point here would be for you to quantify your gut. You're claiming that your gut is based on CR's meta. If this is your claim, you should be able to back this up and show us where CR has played the same as scum.

Your confusing FEELINGS with actual posts.

FoS: Axelrod

, asks CR to claim. Why so interested in the claim, when you have only skimmed the thread and haven't really looked into the CR Wagon or cases.

It would be nice if the people voting/FoSing him actually gave some reasons as to why self-voting in the *random* stage of the game suggests one is scum?

I don't think he's scum for self-voting. Remind me to give my reasons for voting later (i.e., after the random stage).

Reason?

Oh, and by the way, I took the original question to be "Why did you self-vote?" The answer to that is not "It's subjective." I want an answer to why he decided to self-vote.

Because I felt like doing it.

So why, exactly, couldn't you have just answered that in the first place? Why did you have to be purposely vague and unhelpful?

Loaded question

Alright, so far I don't see the wagon on Clock, and Ramus' self-important, "Whateva, ah do whu' ah want!" attitude is enough for me to keep my vote on him for the time being. Teamwork is crucial. It also bothers me that he didn't read my post well enough...he asked me to explain something I already had.

So you keep your vote on Ramus because he wanted Caboose to form a case instead of just whining? Do you believe he was trying Fong's Gambit? Does it make sense as he had hinted at it and not answering questions is extremely obvious?


Only half way through rereading the day, but I have to go. Right now I'm leaning on Mizzy, CarnCarn, and/or thAdmiral as scum with Ort more likely town. Since I'm not done reading, I will not vote or put a case on any of the three I listed as leaning scum.

[ClockworkRuse]

Um, you're not the only person making a case against Battousai. But yes, I see the argument that he is scum based on what others as well as yourself have said. This does not mean I don't think there's a higher likelihood you are scum at this point.

That's not what I meant. I'm just confused by this sentence;

"I still prefer the case against CR- he has consistently demonstrated more thought and more argument in his attacks. And I've disagreed strongly with almost all of it. I see his approach as being more calculated; whereas I'm not sure what to make of Battousai at this point. "


Please elaborate.

More on Batt later.

[ortolan]

As in I see your posts are more deliberate and thoughtful than his and I find them just as, if not more scummy.

[ClockworkRuse]

As in I see your posts are more deliberate and thoughtful than his and I find them just as, if not more scummy.

Thank you, that clears things up a bit.

[ThAdmiral]

hmm...

unvote

your response was measured and explained things well ortolan.

I feel bad doing this but

vote: caboose

.
I think it's probably the most favorable lynch at the moment.

[Axelrod]

ugg, I am so behind.

I'm not very interested in getting into quote wars, as that tends to really bog down threads, so I'm

trying

to be concise.

I disliked CR early on from post #54 (where he lends support to the Ramus wagon but goes and votes someone else). It is always suspicious to me when someone expresses suspicion of one person, but, in the very same post, votes for another person. And in this case, the alleged reason for the vote was quite weak "Why were you defending Ramus."

I find ortolan more sensible at almost every point during those long back and forth post wars they were having.

There appears to be genuine frustration in post #125 where CR snipes that people are giving Destructor a pass for doing the same thing that he supposedly did - but is also very careful to say he doens't think what Destructor did was scummy.

I also found post #155 to be a strange piece of mis-direction, when seemingly out of the blue CR goes back to Ramus and asks (paraphrase) "Hey, wasn't what he did scummy?" CR goes back to this several times (without ever voting for Ramus - it's like he's just trying to stir up suspicion).

I really, really hate attacking someone for being "overly defensive." That is one of the most over-rated "tells" in the book. And, incidentally, impossible to "defend" oneself against, as they just accuse you of being even

more

defensive every time you defend yourself. Makes me want to pull my hair out at times.

More recently, after calling ort. scum in almost every post, CR Unvotes. What? He says he

still

doesn't think Ort. is pro-town, but says he's "tunneling" too much, so apparently he is just going to give up and try and find his #2 suspect.

What this

appears

to be is an attempt by CR to diffuse the situation between himself and Ort., to try and get the focus off himself and onto someone else. He goes for Battousi, who admittedly hasn't been the most sterling of posters, but in this context might be seen as something of an easy target.

The reason for asking for a claim is because, you know, DEADLINE, which is now coming in 2 days. If we want the prospective lynchee to have any time at all to claim and for us to respond to it, then it needs to happen sooner rather than later.

I'm conflicted about CR claiming that his posting in this game is different from other games where he was scum. On the one hand, that's almost the very definition of WIFOM. On the other hand, it's actually not all that easy to change one's playstyles on a dime. Particularly going from being a "lurking" scum to a very aggressive/attacking scum. It's certainly possible though, and it's more possible if one is

aware

of one's prior tendencies as scum (which CR clearly is) so, even assuming it's true, I don't think I'm going to give him huge points for it.

Frankly, the deadline is very annoying, because there

are

other people worth looking at. In re-reading, I don't like the Admiral very much, and Uriel has been a huge non-entity. Caboose I haven't got many thoughts on but what MM pointed out about the lurking here as opposed to other games is definitely concerning. (basically, I agree with MM in #175).

I am less happy than him in just going after the lurker at deadline, however. I'd rather see CR at least put in a claiming position.

Vote: ClockworkRuse

I'm not a big fan of Destructor either. People I do like right now are CarnCarn, Ort. MM, and Mizzy. They are coming off as the most "townie" sounding.

[Machiavellian-Mafia]

hmm...

unvote

your response was measured and explained things well ortolan.

I feel bad doing this but

vote: caboose

.
I think it's probably the most favorable lynch at the moment.

When you say "most favorable", do you mean the lynch is the one most likely to happen or the one you support the most? And in either case, do you have additional reasons for voting caboose?

@Axelrod: I assume you meant #195 when you said "basically, I agree with MM in #175"?

[Caboose]

Sorry I haven't posted in a while, this game has kind of been neglected by me.

I hope to fix that.

Looking at the CR and ortolan arguement:

If you haven't noticed, not everyone is voting Ramus because he self-voted. Look back and read over his answers, he has basically refused to explain himself.

This.

The same goes for TheAdmiral, defending someone else detracts from the answers we can get from your reactions. These aren't "unmerited", these are my beliefs about the game. Defending someone else makes it too easy for scum to get away from questions and pressure.

Wait a second, since when did defending someone become a scumtell? I'm going to have to disagree here. Defending is a reaction in and of itself.

And second, the fact that you thought I voted Ramus tells me that you aren't reading the thread completely.

No wonder. All the postage that I read has always made my eyes roll back in my head. As you can probably tell from my short writing style, I don't have that long of an attention span and can't read big blocks of verbage.

To me, I feel that he was just saying "Yah, Ramus is scummy, but I don't want to place a vote on Ramus because Ramus is feeling pressured." I believe he was coming up with a reason to NOT vote Ramus. The scum reasons I can see are that CR may not want to vote his partner OR CR didn't want to appear scummy by jumping on a bandwagon to just add pressure OR wants to stay away from a growing bandwagon in case it comes to fruitation and Ramus is revealed as town.

That makes sense to me.

@ battousai: I'd say something in response to that, but that would be defending...

Why do you act like everyone's out to get you?

I feel bad doing this but vote: caboose.
I think it's probably the most favorable lynch at the moment.

Please define "most favorable."

I'll attempt to wade through the postage a little later. Sorry.

[CarnCarn]

Unvote

Caboose, I see you're still keeping your early vote on Batt. Did you mean to do this?

[Caboose]

Unvote

Caboose, I see you're still keeping your early vote on Batt. Did you mean to do this?

Completely forgot about that.

Unvote

I would like to keep my vote on someone. And TheAd jumping on my bandwagon with little reasoning makes me a little suspicious, but I'll let him defend himself before placing a vote.

[ClockworkRuse]

@ Caboose; For the... tenth, possibly eleventh time. I have no problems with defending someone AFTER, and I think I'll bold that,

AFTER

they have given a response.

The amount of information you can get from both the question and the answer greatly benefits us. I also never said it was a scum tell, it just gets me interested when anyone starts defending someone who hasn't had a chance to answer for themselves.

[Battousai]

So, you think because I'm not going to focus on someone that more than two or three people are focusing on is scummy? The rhectoric of 'false' excuse is also unnecessary, it's not even an excuse.

Would you rather I tunnel in on someone who already has two or three players firing questions away?

I'm more interested in why someone is defending him right now than his defense, what reason would ort have defending Ramus? Ramus is perfectly capable of responding to the questions and suspicions that are being thrown at him right now, so one would hope at least.

Ortolan, the point is that the town was applying pressure to him, and his reactions are important. You defending him detracts from his reactions, in my opinion, as you give him a safeguard.

Are you telling me that it's okay to self-vote because it's a fashion now?

@TheAdmiral, Why are you defending Ortolan? He is perfectly capable of responding himself.

Here you take Ort's defense of self-voting out of context and make it sound much more scummy than it was (wasn't scummy at all). You make it sound as if Ort is defending all of Ramus's past actions, which he wasn't since Ort only defended the fact that self-voting is a null-tell and subjective as Ramus ALREADY said.

You then call TheAdmiral on defending Ortolan, for I believe, to (I don't know how to explain it) think that you are really against defending others and to strengthen everyone's belief in that you are going after Ort for something you find pretty scummy. But why did you vote Ort here and did not post a FoS, or anything on TheAdmiral?

So, you think because I'm not going to focus on someone that more than two or three people are focusing on is scummy? The rhectoric of 'false' excuse is also unnecessary, it's not even an excuse.

Your reason for not voting ("there is adequate pressure") doesn't work well in light of Ramus' statement "I'm not feeling the pressure" (said before you voted). That leads me to think you are afraid to be seen taking an aggressive stance on someone this early, especially if that person ends up town. So you had to give some reason for not voting, even though he was acting quite suspiciously, and you figured you could get away with the "but I don't want to put someone at L-3 on page 3" excuse or something.

Would you rather I tunnel in on someone who already has two or three players firing questions away?

What's wrong with that?

So I'm trying to not to appear aggressive... As I'm going after someone else, which is most likely going to grow a little more intense on my part soon.

And I wouldn't mind putting someone at L-3 on page three. I just think it would be better to open the town to more than just one scummy play in a day. Tunneling kills townies, I can show you more that enough references for that.

So you say the reason you didn't want to “tunnel” in on Ramus because you didn't want to appear aggressive. You then give the reason why you didn't want to appear aggressive as “ As I'm going after someone else, which is most likely going to grow a little more intense on my part soon.” I don't understand, please clarify because to me, it sounds like you are going out of your way to appear townie.

FoS's and IGMEOY's suck and I try to keep my use of them to a minimum.

I've played with you, what 5 times? From those games I believe this is a true in case anyone was interested. In two of the games I looked at (1 scum, 1 town) he didn't use any the entire game.

How is your case strengthened by the fact that I felt there was adequate pressure on Ramus? Even if I felt like his pressure was lacking, I wasn't going to go after him over you. As I've already said, in my eyes defending someone before they can give a response is scummy.

Again, misrepresenting Ort. Ort defending self-voting as subjective after Ramus already said the same thing. I'm starting to think you had no case on Ort at all.

@ battousai: I'd say something in response to that, but that would be defending...

^Copout.

No, it was a shot at me that I wasn't going to respond to.

And I love how everyone ignores destructor for doing... pretty much the same thing I did? I don't find this scummy, but I'm going to call the wagon on it if they don't attack it consistently. What about this quote;

I think there is/are scum on the CR wagon. I think Batt may fit the description. I'd vote for Batt right now, but Caboose is on his wagon already.[/b]

qualifies a passing glance when mine is almost exactly the same?

You'll also notice that I'm not going to call destructor on defending anyone, Admiral, because I've already had the chance to speak for myself.

Again, trying to strengthen your case on Ort by letting Destructor's defense of him go since he has already had the chance to defend himself.

@ battousai: I'd say something in response to that, but that would be defending...

^Copout.

That was obviously a joke, yet you take it as him being serious. Trying to make something scummy when it's not.

@ battousai: I'd say something in response to that, but that would be defending...

^Copout.

I agree. ThAd, spill the beans; ClockworkRuse probably won't mind as long as you're defending

him

.

Same as Mizzy, but I believe you weren't making it scummy but trying to get info.

Mizzy, I don't think your vote on Ramus is doing much. Last I remember, it's on him more for being snide than anything scummy he's done. Your first gripe with him, and it was a good one, was that he was being evasive. He's since answered for his early play so far as I can tell. So, why is your vote still on him?

Because a) it's for him being emotional, unhelpful, and scummy, not just for being snide, and b) no, he never fully answered everything and when he did answer at all it was because of pressure to answer, and c) there's no better place for it in my mind at the moment.

A) How was Ramus acting scummy and how is being emotional a reason to vote?
B) So you don't believe in his Fong Gambit
C)Why not just unvote? See below quote

destructor:

How is not voting at all productive? I am reading everything that gets posted very carefully and I have no questions to ask anyone at the moment. So it's either vote Ramus for the time being or no one, and having my vote somewhere is better than no where.

That's your answer to C, yet later in the day (close to deadline) you unvote, but do not place another vote. Isn't this a contradiction of sort?

Also note, that Ort has to use the cases brought against me by others and has little to nothing to add to my case. In other words, Ort has been sitting around and waiting for a reasonable case to build.

Ort voted you, I believe, for attacking him with a baseless case. I believe everyone else voting for you at the time did not bring that up. Therefore I believe you are degrading Ort's case against you as opportunistic or lazy with OMGUS added in. The OMGUS is, true, the opportunistic/lazy is not. Also, I believe the OMGUS is not scummy in this scenerio since I agree with Ort that the case brought against him by CR is bunk.

I'm interested in, if my attack is so unmerited, why you got so worked up over it.

Oh, sorry, next time you make bad arguments I'll just let them stand.

That's not what I said. You have every right to defend yourself. But, if you look back up, you'll see that the diction and the caps lock bits show that you got very worked up over something you consider insignificant.

Well it looked like you basically just made up things he's done and used lies to form a case (the contradiction was taken out of context). If it was me, I would get worked up over it as well.

EVEN APART FROM THIS, there is nothing inherently scummy about an OMGUS vote ANYWAY, so this argument has absolutely no substance.

Actually, I don't agree fully with this sentiment; I feel that an OMGUS vote is scummy because it is an easy vote to make that doesn't take thought, doesn't utilize logic or a case, and in general, is anti-town. Anti-town != scum, but it does = scum

my

.

I also don't like that ort does, indeed, seem to have been waiting around for others to make his cases for him.

Also waiting for an answer to #155.

Seems to me, you're the one waiting around lately. Did you come up with Ort waiting around on the word of CR?

And no, I have been reading, and simply agreed with his point against you. Again, just because you feel like damning me for agreeing with something, doesn't make the thing I agreed with wrong or scummy. It's my opinion, one that happens to be shared. I felt like that before he said it, too.

Ok, so it's not possible that Ort is the same way here? He couldn't have thought what he was accused of instead of just waiting for someone to make a case?

How was I to know that a question which seemingly has nothing to do with me was in fact addressed specifically to me?

Because it was addressed to you, and we even reminded you several times after the fact that it was addressed to you.

Wrong. CR addressed this to no one in particular (I assumed to Ramus since it was Ramus's gambit) in a seperate post. When you "reminded" him, all you said was "waiting on an answer for 155." That reminder wasn't addressed to anyone so I thought it was addressed with who I thought it was originally addressed to (Ramus). I find it completely plausible Ort was not dodging questions (which you seem to subtly suggest as dodging questions).

Before I go through the posts, the Fong's Gambit question wasn't just to you, Ort. It was to the entire town.

That's not what Mizzy seems to think. You both reiterated it as though it was addressed to me, and as though I was somehow to have already known that. But this is a fairly pointless train of discussion.

Please post your more reasons to vote. I would love to see a case summary from you.

I have already done so, I have little of substance to add at this point.

Then please reiterate your suspicions into one post.

Why don't you do the same, even though you are not voting him anymore?

Ok, my opinions after rereading the entire thread is that I believe Mizzy is scum, ThAdmiral could be scum, and CR might be scum. I feel CR really went at Ort prematurely and tunneled in with bad logic, which is scummy (but I can see town doing it as well, so I am hesitant to say with too much certainty of his alignment). A CR lynch today might lead to some interesting information for D2, but I feel a Mizzy lynch would lead to more since I feel she is scum, thus:

Vote: Mizzy

[petroleumjelly]

Seeing as this was Thanksgiving weekend and roflcopter has not yet been able to post, I will be extending the deadline until December 4, 9:59 pm CDT. It will not be extended again unless another replacement is necessary. Apologies for any inconvenience this may cause.

[ClockworkRuse]

Batt, I did make a post with my suspicions. I also admitted that I needed to back off and gain some more perspective.

[Mizzy]

I just got home but there is a huge chance I won't be able to catch up until Monday. I will try for tomorrow but Monday is the more likely choice.

[ThAdmiral]

@ battousai: I'd say something in response to that, but that would be defending...

Why do you act like everyone's out to get you?

that was a joke.

I feel bad doing this but vote: caboose.
I think it's probably the most favorable lynch at the moment.

Please define "most favorable."

the lynch i would most like to see happen.

now that you're back though

unvote

.

I mainly voted because the deadline was coming up and I don't like not voting at the end of a day.

with the time extension i should hopefully be able to choose a better target and not just a lurker.

hmm...

unvote

your response was measured and explained things well ortolan.

I feel bad doing this but

vote: caboose

.
I think it's probably the most favorable lynch at the moment.

When you say "most favorable", do you mean the lynch is the one most likely to happen or the one you support the most? And in either case, do you have additional reasons for voting caboose?

see above, and no i didn't have anything to add. it was a lurker vote.