Newbie 762 - OhGodMyVillage - Game Over

[Scien]

This is a bad time to go quiet, guys. Deadline is only a few days away.

About 5. Wednesday. Although yes, it is getting a bit scarey.

*groans* I will answer questions soon.

Good, my vote is not moving until you do.

Confirm vote: Santos

#215
Again repeats the same argument, then says his goal is to make people forget about those mistakes.

...as you said, my goal is to make people forget about Ub's mistakes...

WHOA. I don't know how I missed this before.

The goal of town is to root out and lynch scum. The goal of scum is to appear innocent. "make people forget about Ub's mistakes" = "appear innocent" to me. Wow.

Truth. Both in terms of "holy crap I missed that?" and in the terms that it sounds horrible. Henrz? Want to explain that post?

Yeah, Henrz was just doing the math here. He was basically taking a scenario where you, sirdanilot and I are all town, leaving scum the ability to lay two votes and hammer.

Meh, true, and it is a valid view. I still hold that a L-2 is not that scarey.

I don't think there's much to the majority of this case.

I agree. But this scares me a bit. I think my current list in order is Santos, Henrz, and Mitey. And with such a weak case against my #2 position, I must not have a good handle on this game. I guess another reread is in order. However he still gets that suspicion, if only due to how vocal Mastin was against him in day one, and Mastin ended up biting it night 1. I haven't brought it up, because its a null tell for the most part, and there is no way to prove or disprove it. Just enough to make me want to look at him a bit harder.

I'll post any more thoughts I have today after reread.

[sirdanilot]

I really think mm and henrz should reply at this point.

I should do a reread at some point, but because I am not on my own computer my time is limited. Right now I have only very little to add to the discussion. I

might

come up with a reread later today. Tomorrow I'll be away most of the time.

[Scien]

Here are things I found interesting when I was rereading Henrz:

[To Mastin] Your strategy is valid for a hypothetical one-man-game, since you know you are a townie.

This quote is a bit strange, the wording makes it seem like Ubaten was sure that Mastin was pro-town. Given although in that same train of thought he does say:

[...]you, who is (presumably) town.

You really will regret losing a town member though, weather it's me or the new Lleu, if Lleu is town of course

Hmm. This was uttered after Santos suggested either a Reckoner or Henrz vote near day end day 1. I get a funny feel from it, but am finding it hard to explain. At the very least he is buddying a bit with Lleu, even when he could have got his point across by defending just himself.

And why did you investigate Danilot?

Woah! Thats a good point that got glossed over. So far the only real response has been:

Also, do you think I am trying to clear Sirdanilot by saying I am a cop and tried to confirm a scum partner? Or that I am a scum claiming a cop and chose to 'fake' investigate Sirdanilot who is a townie?

No, assuming you are townie, why did you decide to investigate SirD? Why did you decide that he needed to be investigated? What went into your thought process? There had to be some logic there right? What was it?

[Scien]

To MM. I'm sorry about the being sick and hospital stuff. Sucks. However, do you think you could at least post your views so far on everyone? Or something. Going back and reading you really provides nothing, and even if its not your fault, it doesn't look good.

[Henrz]

About forgetting Ub's mistakes that was

one

of my goals, not my only, or main goal, and anyway, technically everyone wants to appear innocent, not just scum because if everyone thinks your scum, you're going to have a hard Scum Hunt. Right... Quotes in random order! Yay!

At the very least he is buddying a bit with Lleu,

If I was, which I didn't think I was, I'm defiantly not anymore.

even when he could have got his point across by defending just himself.

I probably could... But meh.

This quote is a bit strange, the wording makes it seem like Ubaten was sure that Mastin was pro-town.

But he was... :p

There had to be some logic there right? What was it?

He also says that "Or that I am a scum claiming a cop and chose to

'fake' investigate Sirdanilot who is a townie?

And if that was legit, then it was probably that he suspected him...

I really think mm and henrz should reply at this point.

Agreed.

[Papa Zito]

I agree. But this scares me a bit. I think my current list in order is Santos, Henrz, and Mitey. And with such a weak case against my #2 position, I must not have a good handle on this game. I guess another reread is in order. However he still gets that suspicion, if only due to how vocal Mastin was against him in day one, and Mastin ended up biting it night 1. I haven't brought it up, because its a null tell for the most part, and there is no way to prove or disprove it. Just enough to make me want to look at him a bit harder.

My order at this point:

Santos
MiteyMouse
Henrz
xRECKONERx
sirdanilot
Scien
Papa Zito (duh)

I put Henrz 3rd only because I get pro-town vibes from him without 215 and 233. I don't get any pro-town vibes from Mitey at all. If we were at deadline, I'd switch my vote to Santos, but since we still have a little (little) time left I'm leaving it with Mitey to encourage more posts.

[Papa Zito]

Ack, sniped.

About forgetting Ub's mistakes that was

one

of my goals, not my only, or main goal, and anyway, technically everyone wants to appear innocent, not just scum because if everyone thinks your scum, you're going to have a hard Scum Hunt.

Erm. I'll post the whole thing.

The first two, as you said,

my goal is to make people forget about Ub's mistakes

and why did I "Jump the gun" I was purely saying that if either of us, since I was referring to yourself aswell were lynched, and if you were townie they would regret an easy loss of a member. And maybe I was being a tad over cautious, but it's better to be cautious than miss something altogether.

(emphasis mine) These are two different things. If you had said "one of my goals is to make people forget about Ub's mistakes" that would be okay, because explaining a prior player's actions is (unfortunately) the burden a replacement carries. But it's not what you said, you said "my goal" singular. Now it's up to everyone to decide whether this was a scum slip or an innocent mistake/typo/brainfart.

[Scien]

This quote is a bit strange, the wording makes it seem like Ubaten was sure that Mastin was pro-town.

[1] But he was... :p

There had to be some logic there right? What was it?

[2] He also says that "Or that I am a scum claiming a cop and chose to 'fake' investigate Sirdanilot who is a townie? And if that was legit, then it was probably that he suspected him...

Well in response to [1], thats kind of the point. Ubaten seemed to

know

at that point in the game. No one but scum would

know

at that stage of the game.

In response to [2], right. And I understand that. I want to hear the logic

assuming

Santos is townie. If the logic doesn't make sense that should be easy to see. If it makes sense then maybe that helps his case a bit. I believe that this might be a question that he would even

like

to answer from me. It has a possibility of clearing his name a bit, if he is indeed telling the truth.

So again, do you remember the logic that went into who you chose for that investigation Santos?

[xRECKONERx]

#211
His main defense of himself is still "just because Ub replaced out doesn't mean I'm scum". Then he says he's not going to vote because he doesn't really suspect anyone.

Henrz didn't address this point, but that's okay because I agree with him on both counts. Replacing in shouldn't make you suspicious, and withholding a vote until you suspect someone makes perfect sense.

My point is that Mastin was already putting Ubaten under the gun... so when you replace into a game and you're replacing someone who is under the gun, you need to jump in, and quick. Henrz pretty much just coasted along and didn't say anything, making people forget about Mastin's case.

#215
Again repeats the same argument, then says his goal is to make people forget about those mistakes.

...as you said, my goal is to make people forget about Ub's mistakes...

WHOA. I don't know how I missed this before.

The goal of town is to root out and lynch scum. The goal of scum is to appear innocent. "make people forget about Ub's mistakes" = "appear innocent" to me. Wow.

Exactly. This plays right along with "I find scumhunting hard". Yeah, it's hard, that's the point of the game. So his goal isn't to scumhunt because it's too hard... it's to make people forget about the mistakes he/Ub made?

#233
Henrz jumps the gun with the whole "You're going to regret losing a townie" bit before any votes are even really thrown his way.

and why did I "Jump the gun" I was purely saying that if either of us, since I was referring to yourself aswell were lynched, and if you were townie they would regret an easy loss of a member. And maybe I was being a tad over cautious, but it's better to be cautious than miss something altogether.

You didn't address his point, Henrz. His point was that you posted this without being voted. Paranoia is a scumtell.

Thank you.

#237
Leaps on the Philly lynch under "lynch all lurkers" rules. Why not lynch me, then, since Lleu had been far more inactive than Philly?

Because:
a) You had just replaced in, and if you replace in, in my opinion, things like lurking and stuff they would be put to one side for a bit, though Mastin would've disagreed with me and.
b) There was a Case against Philly, but not you at that point, so Lynch all Lurkers was just an extra reason.

The situation here was in the waning hours of Day 1. Like with sirdanilot, I don't think you can condemn him for voting under duress. One interesting tidbit: Henrz' vote was the hammer. I'm not sure if this is significant or not.

Lynch all Lurkers wasn't an extra reason for Henrz. As far as he stated in the post, it was the

best

and

only

reason.

#246
Doesn't contribute, doesn't take a stance, just says "I guess it is..." responding the question of "Is that the lynch?"

That was a stupid thing to bring up since I was just answering a simple question of if it was a lynch.

Agree 100% with Henrz here.

I didn't mean he was posting this, I meant his wording was odd. "I guess it is..." is very neutral, like he's not trying to take a side either way to avoid suspicion. Just my .02.

#263
Plays the newbie card. Then explains his logic from a previous post... only to immediately unravel his own logic with its flaws in the same post.

I said my logic which I used, then afterwards in that post I had realised my mistakes and said them aloud, which helps me not do them again, so basically, part one was what I did, and part two is what I should have done.

I'll buy this. Admitting a mistake isn't scummy.

But backpedaling is.

#275
"Don't give them ideas..." seems like another post by him which doesn't add anything at all. It's just a post for the sake of posting.

#278
Defends his "don't give them ideas" by saying that scum wouldn't have thought of it on their own. Then asserts that I was suspicious of him because it was a one-liner/because I liked his avatar...oh look! A smiley face at the end of his post! Surely I can't be suspicious of a smiley face! >.>

My don't give them ideas was exactly that, because Scum could now use that if they didn't think of it and I didn't say they 100% wouldn't of thought of it, I'm just saying they might not have thought of it. The avatar phrase which you were writing about was something called a "joke".

This kinda rings odd to me. You hope they don't notice but then you draw attention to it. But this is probably much ado about nothing.

And yeah, jokes seem to fall flat around here. It's like playing in a morgue.

Exactly why the post struck me as odd. If you don't want to give them ideas, then why point it out? Especially if the idea has already been posted. Just another useless/contentless post. In fact, probably a little anti-town if anything since it did draw attention to it. AND I JOKE JUST FINE THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >.> I just think reverting to jokes and smiley faces when under pressure usually indicates scum. I guess it's just my experience.

#293
Henrz's first real contribution to the game is essentially an OMGUS against me for casting suspicion against him.

I could say the same to you, except the OMGUS part. Anyway I do admit that it was basically my first post of content but I will try to do more soon, including my last two.

Okay then, moving on...

What? He basically admits to an OMGUS

and

not posting any content... since when did

admitting

your scumminess = being town?

#327
Comes to defense of Danilot against Santos. In posts before this, he was still hammering on Santos about the cop issue. Plus that defense of Danilot was very easy, and was pretty much waiting for him.

That was the post and if you would please point out where I was hammering on Santos, I would be much obliged. And even if I was hammering on Santos, it would even make sense that I go against him! I think you really haven't thought this part of the post through, and I thought that Santos wasn't looking at the obvious, and therefore decided to point it out to him.

You were questioning Santos at the time, though I'll be the first to admit that he deserved to be under the microscope for his bizarre posts. The second part of this is pure WIFOM.

Sure. I can buy that he was questioning Santos... but it wasn't even HIS scumhunting. Someone else cast suspicion on Santos, and Henrz jumped right on the questioning bandwagon.

#348
Another contentless post. Just a "How ironic" to me because I cast suspicion his way again.

(No response from Henrz on this point) I disagree that it's without content - it's a minor callout for being hypocritical. The problem is that it's not hypocritical, since you've been scumhunting - namely, Henrz. The problem on the flipside is that Henrz has been hunting Santos.

Henrz has

not

been hunting Santos. He's been parroting cases on Santos and not adding anything to the hunt. So it might be a call-out for being hypocritical, but it's blatantly wrong, and my vote stays on Henrz.

I'm not twisting much. When I "build cases" in this game I tend to point out every single post (just for quick referencing back), then building on the posts that appear the most scummy. So I pointed out

everything

, despite some of them not being scummy/scummier than others, etc. Due to the cop claim, I'm willing to overlook Santos for now. Mostly because it'd be a rather ballsy move by scum to claim cop when they don't know if a cop is really out there or not.

[Papa Zito]

Mini pyramids ahoy!

#211
His main defense of himself is still "just because Ub replaced out doesn't mean I'm scum". Then he says he's not going to vote because he doesn't really suspect anyone.

Henrz didn't address this point, but that's okay because I agree with him on both counts. Replacing in shouldn't make you suspicious, and withholding a vote until you suspect someone makes perfect sense.

My point is that Mastin was already putting Ubaten under the gun... so when you replace into a game and you're replacing someone who is under the gun, you need to jump in, and quick. Henrz pretty much just coasted along and didn't say anything, making people forget about Mastin's case.

Mastin's case wasn't all that great, honestly. I think his coasting is a null tell.

#215
Again repeats the same argument, then says his goal is to make people forget about those mistakes.

...as you said, my goal is to make people forget about Ub's mistakes...

WHOA. I don't know how I missed this before.

The goal of town is to root out and lynch scum. The goal of scum is to appear innocent. "make people forget about Ub's mistakes" = "appear innocent" to me. Wow.

Exactly. This plays right along with "I find scumhunting hard". Yeah, it's hard, that's the point of the game. So his goal isn't to scumhunt because it's too hard... it's to make people forget about the mistakes he/Ub made?

Absolutely agreed. This post bugs the heck out of me. And it sounds

especially

bad when you combine it with Ub's "good intentions" stuff.

#237
Leaps on the Philly lynch under "lynch all lurkers" rules. Why not lynch me, then, since Lleu had been far more inactive than Philly?

Because:
a) You had just replaced in, and if you replace in, in my opinion, things like lurking and stuff they would be put to one side for a bit, though Mastin would've disagreed with me and.
b) There was a Case against Philly, but not you at that point, so Lynch all Lurkers was just an extra reason.

The situation here was in the waning hours of Day 1. Like with sirdanilot, I don't think you can condemn him for voting under duress. One interesting tidbit: Henrz' vote was the hammer. I'm not sure if this is significant or not.

Lynch all Lurkers wasn't an extra reason for Henrz. As far as he stated in the post, it was the

best

and

only

reason.

So I went back and reread it...

Phily then? Lynch all Lurkers or just in general?In any case I'll go with the Lurkers one.

Vote: Phily

... and you're right. Again, I dunno how I missed this, let alone twice.

#246
Doesn't contribute, doesn't take a stance, just says "I guess it is..." responding the question of "Is that the lynch?"

That was a stupid thing to bring up since I was just answering a simple question of if it was a lynch.

Agree 100% with Henrz here.

I didn't mean he was posting this, I meant his wording was odd. "I guess it is..." is very neutral, like he's not trying to take a side either way to avoid suspicion. Just my .02.

Eh, I can't see anything wrong here.

#263
Plays the newbie card. Then explains his logic from a previous post... only to immediately unravel his own logic with its flaws in the same post.

I said my logic which I used, then afterwards in that post I had realised my mistakes and said them aloud, which helps me not do them again, so basically, part one was what I did, and part two is what I should have done.

I'll buy this. Admitting a mistake isn't scummy.

But backpedaling is.

Oh come on. You're not allowed to be wrong when you're town? That's hardly fair.

AND I JOKE JUST FINE THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >.>

XD. I wasn't pointing to you, just the vibe that the forum has in general.

#293
Henrz's first real contribution to the game is essentially an OMGUS against me for casting suspicion against him.

I could say the same to you, except the OMGUS part. Anyway I do admit that it was basically my first post of content but I will try to do more soon, including my last two.

Okay then, moving on...

What? He basically admits to an OMGUS

and

not posting any content... since when did

admitting

your scumminess = being town?

Eh, sorry, I was vague. He readily admitted it so I didn't feel the need to comment further. I agree, he's basically admitting to lurking here.

#327
Comes to defense of Danilot against Santos. In posts before this, he was still hammering on Santos about the cop issue. Plus that defense of Danilot was very easy, and was pretty much waiting for him.

That was the post and if you would please point out where I was hammering on Santos, I would be much obliged. And even if I was hammering on Santos, it would even make sense that I go against him! I think you really haven't thought this part of the post through, and I thought that Santos wasn't looking at the obvious, and therefore decided to point it out to him.

You were questioning Santos at the time, though I'll be the first to admit that he deserved to be under the microscope for his bizarre posts. The second part of this is pure WIFOM.

Sure. I can buy that he was questioning Santos... but it wasn't even HIS scumhunting. Someone else cast suspicion on Santos, and Henrz jumped right on the questioning bandwagon.

I can see both sides. For example, Scien's been on Santos quite a bit, and I've stayed out of it because frankly Scien doesn't need my help. But I can also see someone chiming in on a point that they think someone may miss.

#348
Another contentless post. Just a "How ironic" to me because I cast suspicion his way again.

(No response from Henrz on this point) I disagree that it's without content - it's a minor callout for being hypocritical. The problem is that it's not hypocritical, since you've been scumhunting - namely, Henrz. The problem on the flipside is that Henrz has been hunting Santos.

Henrz has

not

been hunting Santos. He's been parroting cases on Santos and not adding anything to the hunt. So it might be a call-out for being hypocritical, but it's blatantly wrong, and my vote stays on Henrz.

Eh, I disagree, for basically the same reason as above. Santos is kind of an easy target sure and Scien is already on his case, but having two people on you at once is good added pressure.

I'm not twisting much. When I "build cases" in this game I tend to point out every single post (just for quick referencing back), then building on the posts that appear the most scummy. So I pointed out

everything

, despite some of them not being scummy/scummier than others, etc. Due to the cop claim, I'm willing to overlook Santos for now. Mostly because it'd be a rather ballsy move by scum to claim cop when they don't know if a cop is really out there or not.

After this your case on Henrz looks better to me, certainly enough to put him over MiteyMouse. Now I'm torn between Santos and Henrz.

[Henrz]

Pyramid!

#211
His main defense of himself is still "just because Ub replaced out doesn't mean I'm scum". Then he says he's not going to vote because he doesn't really suspect anyone.

Henrz didn't address this point, but that's okay because I agree with him on both counts. Replacing in shouldn't make you suspicious, and withholding a vote until you suspect someone makes perfect sense.

My point is that Mastin was already putting Ubaten under the gun... so when you replace into a game and you're replacing someone who is under the gun, you need to jump in, and quick. Henrz pretty much just coasted along and didn't say anything, making people forget about Mastin's case.

Mastin's case wasn't all that great, honestly. I think his coasting is a null tell.

Null tell? I wasn't going to ignore it, just no one bothered to question me about it. If it was a case against you would you bring it up pointlessly? If someone questioned me about it, I'd look at it more. But there was no point in doing it.

#215
Again repeats the same argument, then says his goal is to make people forget about those mistakes.

...as you said, my goal is to make people forget about Ub's mistakes...

WHOA. I don't know how I missed this before.

The goal of town is to root out and lynch scum. The goal of scum is to appear innocent. "make people forget about Ub's mistakes" = "appear innocent" to me. Wow.

Exactly. This plays right along with "I find scumhunting hard". Yeah, it's hard, that's the point of the game. So his goal isn't to scumhunt because it's too hard... it's to make people forget about the mistakes he/Ub made?

Absolutely agreed. This post bugs the heck out of me. And it sounds

especially

bad when you combine it with Ub's "good intentions" stuff.

I never said my goal was not to scum hunt, I just find it hard, ONE of my goals IS to make people forget about Ub's mistakes because THAT was what started you questioning me and being suspicious of me in the first place. Right now I would of given you another game where Ub's playing style was strange... But there aren't any... But I assure you it IS his playing style. Don't say you're not twisting my words now, or adding your own ones on to what I said. "forget about the mistakes he/Ub made" I said forget about the mistakes UB MADE not myself, I can account for my own mistakes, mistakes people have made before me I can hardly account for. You can't say (for example) Q "Why were you lurking before you were replaced!" A "I don't know I don't even know him" Q "OMG you must be scum you don't know why you were lurking." It may be completely irrelevant but the fact remains, I want people forget Ub's mistakes and concentrate on my own. Which seems to be happening at the moment...

#237
Leaps on the Philly lynch under "lynch all lurkers" rules. Why not lynch me, then, since Lleu had been far more inactive than Philly?

Because:
a) You had just replaced in, and if you replace in, in my opinion, things like lurking and stuff they would be put to one side for a bit, though Mastin would've disagreed with me and.
b) There was a Case against Philly, but not you at that point, so Lynch all Lurkers was just an extra reason.

The situation here was in the waning hours of Day 1. Like with sirdanilot, I don't think you can condemn him for voting under duress. One interesting tidbit: Henrz' vote was the hammer. I'm not sure if this is significant or not.

Lynch all Lurkers wasn't an extra reason for Henrz. As far as he stated in the post, it was the

best

and

only

reason.

So I went back and reread it...

Phily then? Lynch all Lurkers or just in general?In any case I'll go with the Lurkers one.

Vote: Phily

... and you're right. Again, I dunno how I missed this, let alone twice.

Ok, maybe I said it wrong, but it didn't really matter my reasons on that lynch, he was on his way out anyway. If I didn't lynch him, you, for example might've finished it off, then this may have played out differently.

#327
Comes to defense of Danilot against Santos. In posts before this, he was still hammering on Santos about the cop issue. Plus that defense of Danilot was very easy, and was pretty much waiting for him.

That was the post and if you would please point out where I was hammering on Santos, I would be much obliged. And even if I was hammering on Santos, it would even make sense that I go against him! I think you really haven't thought this part of the post through, and I thought that Santos wasn't looking at the obvious, and therefore decided to point it out to him.

You were questioning Santos at the time, though I'll be the first to admit that he deserved to be under the microscope for his bizarre posts. The second part of this is pure WIFOM.

Sure. I can buy that he was questioning Santos... but it wasn't even HIS scumhunting. Someone else cast suspicion on Santos, and Henrz jumped right on the questioning bandwagon.

I can see both sides. For example, Scien's been on Santos quite a bit, and I've stayed out of it because frankly Scien doesn't need my help. But I can also see someone chiming in on a point that they think someone may miss.

In my opinion, I was helping along, not joining in questioning, sort of like a spell checker, helping along, not doing the main bulk or typing or anything massive.

#348
Another contentless post. Just a "How ironic" to me because I cast suspicion his way again.

(No response from Henrz on this point) I disagree that it's without content - it's a minor callout for being hypocritical. The problem is that it's not hypocritical, since you've been scumhunting - namely, Henrz. The problem on the flipside is that Henrz has been hunting Santos.

Henrz has

not

been hunting Santos. He's been parroting cases on Santos and not adding anything to the hunt.

So it might be a call-out for being hypocritical, but it's blatantly wrong, and my vote stays on Henrz.

Eh, I disagree, for basically the same reason as above. Santos is kind of an easy target sure and Scien is already on his case, but having two people on you at once is good added pressure.

Please read the above answer and:
Well, it's not really wrong, it's not like you added anything either you only started at around post 350 with this

[quote="xRECKONERx]
Also, see what I did there? Both Ubaten and Lleu were being quite unhelpful, though Lleu was on V/LA until I replaced in. Henrz has added a bit more than Ub, but

not nearly enough to clear him by me.

[/quote]

At that point it was a dead statement because it was because of Ub I was put on your radar, so I'm blaming Ub... Which doesn't help So basically we've both started posting stuff on eachother; at the same time... Just you started it and you haven't had a predecessor to damage you, or had really posted much.

I'm not twisting much. When I "build cases" in this game I tend to point out every single post (just for quick referencing back), then building on the posts that appear the most scummy. So I pointed out

everything

, despite some of them not being scummy/scummier than others, etc. Due to the cop claim, I'm willing to overlook Santos for now. Mostly because it'd be a rather ballsy move by scum to claim cop when they don't know if a cop is really out there or not.

After this your case on Henrz looks better to me, certainly enough to put him over MiteyMouse. Now I'm torn between Santos and Henrz.

If he's scum it's a very clever move if they have no role blocker, and they killed the doc and now know the Cop barrier is 100% for Santos. And my dilemma is, I could
a) Do what Mitey is doing, post very little with nothing in it, but just enough to stay alive.
b) Post so much content it's not true, build a massive case find scum ect...
c) Be (Possibly) destroyed and maybe Lynched.
d) Work it out, eventually realise I'm not scum
e) Replace out.

B is the ideal world where we all get along, and scum say "Ooh I'm scum!" So that's basically off the list.
E, I don't really want to do.
So this is what we have left:
a) Do what Mitey is doing, post very little with nothing in it, but just enough to stay alive.
b)

Post so much content it's not true, build a massive case find scum ect...

c) Be (Possibly) destroyed and maybe Lynched.
d) Work it out, eventually realise I'm not scum
e)

Replace out.

It's your call, and I've now worked out why it's hard to go for inactives, because you cannot get a case on them, that's what Mitey is doing... I would be suggesting going for her. But I really aren't in the best position to suggest stuff like that.

Itz so easz to not pozt and ztuff liek tht so pl0x cmon and post sum mor pl0x MiteyMouse.

Poll: Do you:
A) Like walls of text
B) Dislike walls of text
C) Don't really care
D) Have no opinion because you are not alive.

I'm just posting random stuff

[Henrz]

Gah, stupid speech mark quotes...

[Papa Zito]

Mastin's case wasn't all that great, honestly. I think his coasting is a null tell.

Null tell? I wasn't going to ignore it, just no one bothered to question me about it. If it was a case against you would you bring it up pointlessly? If someone questioned me about it, I'd look at it more. But there was no point in doing it.

The point in doing it would be to dispel it early so that it's not brought up anymore.

Null tell means I don't think it signifies town or scum. I'm guessing you came in and were a bit overwhelmed by the massive early posts. I know I was.

I never said my goal was not to scum hunt, I just find it hard, ONE of my goals IS to make people forget about Ub's mistakes because THAT was what started you questioning me and being suspicious of me in the first place. Right now I would of given you another game where Ub's playing style was strange... But there aren't any... But I assure you it IS his playing style. Don't say you're not twisting my words now, or adding your own ones on to what I said. "forget about the mistakes he/Ub made" I said forget about the mistakes UB MADE not myself, I can account for my own mistakes, mistakes people have made before me I can hardly account for. You can't say (for example) Q "Why were you lurking before you were replaced!" A "I don't know I don't even know him" Q "OMG you must be scum you don't know why you were lurking." It may be completely irrelevant but the fact remains, I want people forget Ub's mistakes and concentrate on my own. Which seems to be happening at the moment...

How can you assure me of his playing style without having seen him play in another game?

You never said your goal was not to scum hunt, but you never said it was either. And I'm not twisting anything, I'm directly quoting what you said.

Like I said before, the unfortunate burden is that you have to account for the player you placed in for. People aren't going to forget Ub's mistakes, you have to try to explain them the best you can. The problem is that you seem to have compounded them by doing similar things. And your strawman in the second half of your post doesn't help.

Ok, maybe I said it wrong, but it didn't really matter my reasons on that lynch, he was on his way out anyway. If I didn't lynch him, you, for example might've finished it off, then this may have played out differently.

Blinkblink. Your reasoning behind the lynch didn't matter? I'd argue it matters more than anything else. And the only thing it would change would be this single point.

In my opinion, I was helping along, not joining in questioning, sort of like a spell checker, helping along, not doing the main bulk or typing or anything massive.

That's where I was going, yes.

Please read the above answer and:
Well, it's not really wrong, it's not like you added anything either you only started at around post 350 with this

Also, see what I did there? Both Ubaten and Lleu were being quite unhelpful, though Lleu was on V/LA until I replaced in. Henrz has added a bit more than Ub, but

not nearly enough to clear him by me.

At that point it was a dead statement because it was because of Ub I was put on your radar, so I'm blaming Ub... Which doesn't help So basically we've both started posting stuff on eachother; at the same time... Just you started it and you haven't had a predecessor to damage you, or had really posted much.

So you're saying he's being hypocritical then? I'm not sure where you're going with this.

I'm not twisting much. When I "build cases" in this game I tend to point out every single post (just for quick referencing back), then building on the posts that appear the most scummy. So I pointed out

everything

, despite some of them not being scummy/scummier than others, etc. Due to the cop claim, I'm willing to overlook Santos for now. Mostly because it'd be a rather ballsy move by scum to claim cop when they don't know if a cop is really out there or not.

After this your case on Henrz looks better to me, certainly enough to put him over MiteyMouse. Now I'm torn between Santos and Henrz.

B is the ideal world where we all get along, and scum say "Ooh I'm scum!" So that's basically off the list.
E, I don't really want to do.
So this is what we have left:
a) Do what Mitey is doing, post very little with nothing in it, but just enough to stay alive.
b)

Post so much content it's not true, build a massive case find scum ect...

c) Be (Possibly) destroyed and maybe Lynched.
d) Work it out, eventually realise I'm not scum
e)

Replace out.

I kind of like the second half of B.

It's your call, and I've now worked out why it's hard to go for inactives, because you cannot get a case on them, that's what Mitey is doing... I would be suggesting going for her. But I really aren't in the best position to suggest stuff like that.

Then put your vote on her? What's stopping you?

Itz so easz to not pozt and ztuff liek tht so pl0x cmon and post sum mor pl0x MiteyMouse.

Poll: Do you:
A) Like walls of text
B) Dislike walls of text
C) Don't really care
D) Have no opinion because you are not alive.

I'm just posting random stuff

lulz

[Papa Zito]

Ack. I hit submit instead of preview and left an extra quote in there. Oh well.

[xRECKONERx]

Null tell? I wasn't going to ignore it, just no one bothered to question me about it. If it was a case against you would you bring it up pointlessly? If someone questioned me about it, I'd look at it more. But there was no point in doing it.

There's always a point in defending yourself. Especially after one of the two people questioning you

flips over as townie

.

I never said my goal was not to scum hunt, I just find it hard, ONE of my goals IS to make people forget about Ub's mistakes because THAT was what started you questioning me and being suspicious of me in the first place. Right now I would of given you another game where Ub's playing style was strange... But there aren't any... But I assure you it IS his playing style.

Then how can you assure us it IS his playing style?

Don't say you're not twisting my words now, or adding your own ones on to what I said. "forget about the mistakes he/Ub made" I said forget about the mistakes UB MADE not myself, I can account for my own mistakes, mistakes people have made before me I can hardly account for.

For all intents and purposes, you ARE Ub now. So clearing his mistakes

is your responsibility. Don't try and make it look like I'm twisting anyone's words. I was merely implying that you and Ub are the same role, and therefore, the same person in this game.

You can't say (for example) Q "Why were you lurking before you were replaced!" A "I don't know I don't even know him" Q "OMG you must be scum you don't know why you were lurking." It may be completely irrelevant but the fact remains, I want people forget Ub's mistakes and concentrate on my own. Which seems to be happening at the moment...

"It may be completely irrelevant". Yes, yes it is. Nobody asked you that question really, nor did you respond that way. And if Ub is the same role as you, then why would you want people to forget about his play? If you're his role, you should be able to explain it away.

Ok, maybe I said it wrong, but it didn't really matter my reasons on that lynch, he was on his way out anyway. If I didn't lynch him, you, for example might've finished it off, then this may have played out differently.

Far from true. He wasn't "on his way out" until you hammered. And stop throwing in possible but not even remotely able to be proven true scenarios. It didn't play out differently.

In my opinion, I was helping along, not joining in questioning, sort of like a spell checker, helping along, not doing the main bulk or typing or anything massive.

Yeah. Aka what scum tries to do.

Please read the above answer and:
Well, it's not really wrong, it's not like you added anything either you only started at around post 350 with this

[quote="xRECKONERx]
Also, see what I did there? Both Ubaten and Lleu were being quite unhelpful, though Lleu was on V/LA until I replaced in. Henrz has added a bit more than Ub, but

not nearly enough to clear him by me.

At that point it was a dead statement because it was because of Ub I was put on your radar, so I'm blaming Ub... Which doesn't help So basically we've both started posting stuff on eachother; at the same time... Just you started it and you haven't had a predecessor to damage you, or had really posted much.[/quote]

NO. I never said it was solely because of Henrz that I was on your ass. In fact, if anything, your recent posting has made you

more

of a target than Henrz ever was.

If he's scum it's a very clever move if they have no role blocker, and they killed the doc and now know the Cop barrier is 100% for Santos. And my dilemma is, I could
a) Do what Mitey is doing, post very little with nothing in it, but just enough to stay alive.
b) Post so much content it's not true, build a massive case find scum ect...
c) Be (Possibly) destroyed and maybe Lynched.
d) Work it out, eventually realise I'm not scum
e) Replace out.

B is the ideal world where we all get along, and scum say "Ooh I'm scum!" So that's basically off the list.
E, I don't really want to do.

Yeah. Replacing out is a bitch move, and posting point B would just be straight

retarded

.

So this is what we have left:
a) Do what Mitey is doing, post very little with nothing in it, but just enough to stay alive.
b)

Post so much content it's not true, build a massive case find scum ect...

c) Be (Possibly) destroyed and maybe Lynched.
d) Work it out, eventually realise I'm not scum
e)

Replace out.

It's your call, and I've now worked out why it's hard to go for inactives, because you cannot get a case on them, that's what Mitey is doing... I would be suggesting going for her. But I really aren't in the best position to suggest stuff like that.

No. What you're doing is swinging and missing, because someone has potentially caught onto you/Ub's scumminess. Replacing in can create problems if you're a town and your previous poster was lurking: however, it can also create BIGGER problems if you're SCUM and your previous poster was lurking, which is IMO what we're experiencing now.

Itz so easz to not pozt and ztuff liek tht so pl0x cmon and post sum mor pl0x MiteyMouse.

Poll: Do you:
A) Like walls of text
B) Dislike walls of text
C) Don't really care
D) Have no opinion because you are not alive.

My opinion, C. D is just a stupid option to include. And I don't know why you're completely

derailing the scumhunt

by asking fruitless "WHAT DO U PREFER" questions. It doesn't matter what people prefer. At all.

I'm just posting random stuff [/quote]

[Henrz]

My opinion, C. D is just a stupid option to include. And I don't know why you're completely derailing the scumhunt by asking fruitless "WHAT DO U PREFER" questions. It doesn't matter what people prefer. At all.

God you have no sense of humour at all...

if anything, your recent posting has made you

more of a target than Henrz ever was.

Huh, I am Henrz...

Yeah. Aka what scum tries to do.

He didn't need my help massively, I just pointed out things he didn't see or emphasizing on a certain point.

Far from true. He wasn't "on his way out" until you hammered. And stop throwing in possible but not even remotely able to be proven true scenarios. It didn't play out differently.

Yes he was, don't lie. We were against the deadline with no one else to go for, if I didn't do it, someone else would've.

"It may be completely irrelevant". Yes, yes it is. Nobody asked you that question really, nor did you respond that way. And if Ub is the same role as you, then why would you want people to forget about his play? If you're his role, you should be able to explain it away.

I don't have a clue why he'd post something like that though, I'd never dream of doing something like that, that's why I can't explain his post. And that's why I'm in such a difficult position. The only thing I can really think of is him thinking that everyone will think he's scum if he doesn't random vote or something...

For all intents and purposes, you ARE Ub now. So clearing his mistakes is your responsibility. Don't try and make it look like I'm twisting anyone's words. I was merely implying that you and Ub are the same role, and therefore, the same person in this game.

Yes but if it was me making mistakes, I can account for them, know my frame of mind, know why and for what reasons I did it, but for Ub, I don't know how he thought. I can hardly even guess what he was thinking.

Then how can you assure us it IS his playing style?

Because I KNOW I'm not scum, it must be his playing style... Unless we got a different role email, which I extremely doubt.

There's always a point in defending yourself. Especially after one of the two people questioning you flips over as townie.

Wha? I think you misunderstood me. I was meaning not to bring it up with no reason when there was no case against me, since that would just be stupid.

Then put your vote on her? What's stopping you?

Fair point. [But it's just I don't really think it will help much getting her out and posting with the hospital stuff and all...

So you're saying he's being hypocritical then? I'm not sure where you're going with this.

Me being hypocritical, explain?

Blinkblink. Your reasoning behind the lynch didn't matter? I'd argue it matters more than anything else. And the only thing it would change would be this single point.

Ok, my reasoning was, we were against the deadline, we had to lynch someone, and just to say, it wasn't just me going with Lynch Lurkers: (Post 217)

k. PhilyEc's last post on the site was today, namely 17th of April, in some mishmash topic. His last post in this game was 10th April

unvote Papa Zito vote PhilyEc

This ridiculous amount of active lurking is absolutely unacceptable. Normally I don't agree to lurkerlynches, but the fact that he has done this twice now (posting on the site but not here) means that I am going to vote him.

(Post 238)

Basics are always good: Lynch all Lurkers.

You CANNOT just blame me for Lurk Lynching. Breathe down their backs for doing the same thing? Haven't seen that. As I said before, even if I didn't do it, Miety might've done it, instead of me, it didn't play out that way, that's fair enough, but to blame me for Lurk Lynching when others were clearly going by that logic aswell.

Null tell means I don't think it signifies town or scum. I'm guessing you came in and were a bit overwhelmed by the massive early posts. I know I was.

Ok, and yes, I was.

You never said your goal was not to scum hunt, but you never said it was either. And I'm not twisting anything, I'm directly quoting what you said.

I don't think most people have clearly said: "My goal is to scum hunt and find scum at all costs". Or something like that.

How can you assure me of his playing style without having seen him play in another game

Because, as I said in answer to Reckoners post. I am town, not scum, so I know it must be his playing style.

I think that's all. Please repeat things if it isn't.

[Santos]

Lynch me. Then lose. Or in the mafia players' case WIN WIN WIN.

This page makes my eyes bleed.

[Santos]

Oh, before I die by the rope, I think Scien, Henrz and Reckoner are the top suspects.

[Santos]

Forgot to vote.

Vote: Santos

Good job scum team. You deserve the win.

[Henrz]

Wait what, why? Santos?

[Papa Zito]

Then put your vote on her? What's stopping you?

Fair point. [But it's just I don't really think it will help much getting her out and posting with the hospital stuff and all...

Yes, the hospital stuff makes Mitey complicated. But you don't know what she'll do unless you try.

This point will be rendered academic with my next post though.

So you're saying

he's

being hypocritical then? I'm not sure where you're going with this.

Me being hypocritical, explain?

(emphasis mine) He = xRECKONERx

Blinkblink. Your reasoning behind the lynch didn't matter? I'd argue it matters more than anything else. And the only thing it would change would be this single point.

Ok, my reasoning was, we were against the deadline, we had to lynch someone, and just to say, it wasn't just me going with Lynch Lurkers: (Post 217)

k. PhilyEc's last post on the site was today, namely 17th of April, in some mishmash topic. His last post in this game was 10th April

unvote Papa Zito vote PhilyEc

This ridiculous amount of active lurking is absolutely unacceptable. Normally I don't agree to lurkerlynches, but the fact that he has done this twice now (posting on the site but not here) means that I am going to vote him.

(Post 238)

Basics are always good: Lynch all Lurkers.

You CANNOT just blame me for Lurk Lynching. Breathe down their backs for doing the same thing? Haven't seen that. As I said before, even if I didn't do it, Miety might've done it, instead of me, it didn't play out that way, that's fair enough, but to blame me for Lurk Lynching when others were clearly going by that logic aswell.

Er, no. Santos agreed with Scien's case.

Yep. I believe Phily is the best choice. That's why my vote is on him. I just don't see any good reason to lynch Lleu/Reckoner. And I also don't see any really good reason to lynch Ubaten/Henrz. Which I have posted before and no one has come up with a convincing case since.

True.

Unvote


Vote: PhilyEC

Santos already has enough heat on him anyway.

The sirdanilot quote is actually a curious one though. Yesterday he lynches Philly for lurking and says it's unacceptable, but today he's not sure what to do with Mitey.

You never said your goal was not to scum hunt, but you never said it was either. And I'm not twisting anything, I'm directly quoting what you said.

I don't think most people have clearly said: "My goal is to scum hunt and find scum at all costs". Or something like that.

I think it's implied that everyone's goal is to scumhunt,

except

you came out and said something completely contradictory to that. That's where the problem lies.

How can you assure me of his playing style without having seen him play in another game

Because, as I said in answer to Reckoners post. I am town, not scum, so I know it must be his playing style.

Well, you're asking me to take the fact that you're town at face value then. Which I'm sure you understand is something I can't do.

[Papa Zito]

Forgot to vote.

Vote: Santos

Good job scum team. You deserve the win.

Ugh.

unvote

vote: Santos

I think we've let this ride long enough.

[Henrz]

I don't want to lynch Santos until he's given an explanation why.

[xRECKONERx]

I don't know why he's self-voting if most of the debate is between me/Henrz right now, either.

[Henrz]

Before that it was Scien/Santos though, and that's ongoing.