Newbie 810 - Game over!

[geekalicious]

btw why would i want to kill reckoner? he was defending me more than trying to lynch me. and the case illini brought up wasnt very strong in my opinion, it just covered all the old pointers about me which we've all seen before...

I agree that illiniguy09's case against you wasn't the strongest and was based on content early in the game. But BlueRaven, you aren't giving us a lot of content to work with besides your 1-2 line posts....

[ronnieroo]

I'm currently looking at (in ABC order) Geek, illini (would help if he'd answer my Q's), and Raven.

By looking at them I meant suspicous of them...

[ronnieroo]

Unless you mean my reaction to Zach's lynch Monsieur?

[Monsieur]

I'm currently looking at (in ABC order) Geek, illini (would help if he'd answer my Q's), and Raven.

By looking at them I meant suspicous of them...

"If GreenMonkey is innocent then my suspicions would move over to either KittyMo or geek. Currently the contradiction and vote for no lynch naturally bring me to suspect you though GreenMonkey."

You wrote this. Why have you chosen to pursuit geek over kittymo?

[Vel-Rahn Koon]

Official Vote Count

illinguy09 - 1 (BlueRaven)

geekalicious - 2 (illiniguy09, Monsieur)

Not Voting - 4 (12Keyblade, geekalicious, KittyMo, ronnieroo)

4 to Lynch.

Deadline

is the end of Sunday, August 9 (Eastern, GMT - 4).

[KittyMo]

Back from my vacation. Sorry, I thought I'd be back on Friday, but then I got back pretty late, and didn't have the time and energy to read the thread. My bad.

Just woke up, and got my first prod... Prods are kinda scary. >_> I don't want to get one again.

I have another game to check in at, but then I'll be back for rereading & content.

xoxo KittyMo

[ronnieroo]

That was at that time. More has since come up that has caused me to rewrite my suspect list a bit.

And yes, I feel that Geek is more suspicous then KittyMo, at this moment in time at least.

[KittyMo]

Whoa, our replacement comes in with a bang! Welcome, Monsieur!

What I see here, is KittyMo accusing TFGM for spite-voting, yet you not giving that same warning to Key who had committed the same crime and in the same severity. KittyMo decided to only acknowledge how 'OMGUS is scummy' when she became involved in the voting process.

I'd have to disagree with you there, that the "crimes" are the same.

reverendpsycho votes 12Keyblade for a reason that makes no sense; 12Keyblade votes him.

TFGM does something scummy, I vote him, he votes me back, and I call OMGUS.

She even went to go so far as to call it "scummy". I'd like to know why these strong accusations were made to one, but not the other.

Do you not find OMGUS scummy? The way you twist my words is noted.

I'd also like to acknowledge that this is my first game.

Whoa, seriously? Your first game ever, or just on this site?

KittyMo: Posting style seems the same as Keyblade's if a tad less spammy

Awwwww, I don't deserve my own explanation? D: As for my read on BlueRaven: I don't find him neccessarily scummy, I just find it annoying that it's like pulling teeth to get him to contribute.

In regards to the night kill, which has already been mentioned, I was under the impression that it was an attack based on experience; there were no other benefits to killing him

because he could have been a vote wagon today.

I don't understand the bolded part. Care to explain?

[BlueRaven]

alright im back, i see we havnt moved much since i left... btw for now i'll

unvote

i dont think that my vote from before was clauseable... for now....

[12Keyblade]

Well, seeing as how discussion is stalling, I think I'll do a prodcheck.

12Keyblade: Thu Jul 23, 2009 5:58 pm
BlueRaven: Sat Jul 25, 2009 5:39 pm
geekalicious: Thu Jul 23, 2009 7:46 pm
illiniguy09: Sun Jul 19, 2009 5:16 pm
KittyMo: Sat Jul 25, 2009 4:17 pm
Monsieur: Fri Jul 24, 2009 1:26 am
ronnieroo: Sat Jul 25, 2009 2:15 pm

Mod: Prods on

12Keyblade

and geekalicious please?

[12Keyblade]

EBWOP:

I will

FOS: geekalicious

. This is for multiple reasons:

1. I've found his playstyle to be somewhat scummy.
2. It's possible his lurking can be attributed to panicking.
3. If I vote now, we might end up lynching a lurker without giving him a chance to speak.

[geekalicious]

Sorry, guys, I'll get back on the posting ball soon. I've been sick the past couple of days...

[geekalicious]

This (with bold added):

12Keyblade: Thu Jul 23, 2009 5:58 pm

BlueRaven: Sat Jul 25, 2009 5:39 pm

geekalicious: Thu Jul 23, 2009 7:46 pm

illiniguy09: Sun Jul 19, 2009 5:16 pm
KittyMo: Sat Jul 25, 2009 4:17 pm
Monsieur: Fri Jul 24, 2009 1:26 am
ronnieroo: Sat Jul 25, 2009 2:15 pm

Coupled with this:

2. It's possible his lurking can be attributed to panicking.

12Keyblade, you hadn't posted in the thread since about the same time I had, but I'm the one lurking and "panicking." Uh. Huh. However, I note going through your post history that you were posting in other places such as General Discussion and the Queue after that time. Were you the one "panicking" in this thread?

[12Keyblade]

12Keyblade, you hadn't posted in the thread since about the same time I had, but I'm the one lurking and "panicking." Uh. Huh. However, I note going through your post history that you were posting in other places such as General Discussion and the Queue after that time. Were you the one "panicking" in this thread?

Short answer: no.

Long answer: I was waiting for others to post their opinons and answer the questions directed at them. You and KittyMo had been away for a bit, so I was waiting to hear their opinions, particularly on our new replacement.

[Monsieur]

@ Ronnie: Please explain why you've come to the conclusion that KittyMo is less suspicious than geekalicious when at that post, geekalicious has contributed far more to the discussion in terms of posting frequency than Kitty. I am not holding that against her, I am wondering how you came to the conclusion about Kitty because for me, silence should arouse suspicion.

@ Kitty: Yes, it is my first game ever. Thanks for the warm welcome!

I don't seem to see what I am missing, but what geek and you see. If a player votes another player, and that player votes them back in retaliation, shouldn't they both be considered OMGUS? Both of them are spite-votes, yes? I also don't see where I've twisted your words, I stated "she even went to go so far as to call it scummy." which you did. All I see is that I've stated facts that can be referred to through your post history.

Do I find it scummy? Yes and no. Sometimes it's a frustration vote, sometimes it is a poor excuse to back up a vote, but other times it's a reaction tester -- there are many reasons why it could and could not be scummy.

I would think that Zach and Reckon's argument would've caused some eyes to turn in their direction. Prior to that argument however, there were already some suspicions about Reckoner, so I was under the impression he could be a wagon should he be alive right now.

@Keyblade: What does EBWOP stand for?
I'd like to know why you think geekalicious' playing style is scummy, with examples and references if possible.

[Monsieur]

In addition to my previous post, I'd also like to know from

KittyMo

what her thoughts are in the case of Zach's allegations.

For reference:

Zach's allegations was that geekalicious was scum-buddying to KittyMo.

[KittyMo]

I don't seem to see what I am missing, but what geek and you see. If a player votes another player, and that player votes them back in retaliation, shouldn't they both be considered OMGUS? Both of them are spite-votes, yes?

My definition of OMGUS is similar to the Wiki's.

it is sometimes used as a shorthand to indicate that you are voting for someone primarily because they voted for you.

That's how I use the term.

I also don't see where I've twisted your words, I stated "she even went to go so far as to call it scummy." which you did. All I see is that I've stated facts that can be referred to through your post history

I just felt like the way you paraphrased my words was blowing them out of proportion. "Twisting my words" wasn't a very good explanation for that; my apologies.

In addition to my previous post, I'd also like to know from KittyMo what her thoughts are in the case of Zach's allegations.

For reference:

Zach's allegations was that geekalicious was scum-buddying to KittyMo.

Eh, I think Zach tended to put too much weight in nulltells that seemed to him to be scumtells. Assuming that could be classified as buddying, I don't think we will neccessarily be able to tell if he was doing it on purpose, unless we learn his alignment. I also just in general don't really see how stating that a longer and more well-thought-out case is longer and more well-thought-out makes him buddying up to me.

You're a heck of a lot better at this game than me when I was as a newbie to the game, Monsieur. In fact, in some ways, you're probably better than I am now!

[ronnieroo]

@ Ronnie: Please explain why you've come to the conclusion that KittyMo is less suspicious than geekalicious when at that post, geekalicious has contributed far more to the discussion in terms of posting frequency than Kitty. I am not holding that against her, I am wondering how you came to the conclusion about Kitty because for me, silence should arouse suspicion.
(...)

The content of KittyMo's posts vs. the content of Geek's makes me less suspicous of KittyMo. Granted, Kitty isn't a first time player and thus has more expirence wording things.

[Vel-Rahn Koon]

Replacing illiniguy09.

[geekalicious]

Short answer: no.

Long answer: I was waiting for others to post their opinons and answer the questions directed at them. You and KittyMo had been away for a bit, so I was waiting to hear their opinions, particularly on our new replacement.

So why couldn't I have been doing the same thing instead of "panicking"? Granted, I was sick, but what led you to jump to the conclusion that I was lurking?

@all: I've noticed that in general you seem to think BlueRaven is newbish and not scummy. However, based on the lack of content that he posts, how are we to judge whether or not he's scummy?

I decided to do a word count for him and found that he's posted a total of 1013 words in the thread (excluding places where he quoted, of course). For comparison purposes, Monsieur who has only been in the game for several real life days has already posted 1095 words! The lack of content from BlueRaven over the course of the thread is ridiculous and seems just plain scummy and lurker-ish to me.

BlueRaven, I'll give you that your earlier quick vote on KittyMo may have been a newbish mistake. However, coupled with your lack of real content when you have posted throughout the rest of the game....

Vote: BlueRaven

[KittyMo]

Replacing illiniguy09.

I just was about to ask how the Mod could be the replacement of a player.

[geekalicious]

@Keyblade: What does EBWOP stand for?

EBWOP = Edit By Way of Post

(since, you know, once we post, we can't go back in and edit the content).

[12Keyblade]

OK Mon, here's your info:

Post 53: Begins the long chain of overanalysing my random vote for reverendpsycho.
Post 64: Places the second vote on BlueRaven. He also placed the second vote on TFGM, so either he's on at all the wrong times, or he likes to be second on bandwagons.
Post 157:

I'm not following others. I look at the person's actions, I look at points that others have brought up about them, and then I take the action I see fit.

And yet, in both cases where you were vote #2 (and the only votes you had placed up to that point), there was little to no content between your vote and the first one.
Post 395: Places the second vote on Zachrulez because of his case on ronnieroo. To me, ronnie seems town, but geek's blatant defense puts me on edge. Also selectivly quoted Zach to make him seem scummier.
Post 440: Possible, maybe, not really, but kinda buddying to Kitty. I may have said the exact same things, which is why it's not a big deal for me.
Post 495:

Oh great.... Both of our IC's are dead.... >_<

This falls along the same lines as "Good job Doctor!" or "Darn, our cop is dead." IMO, a null tell, but to some it's a light-up billboard.
Post 510: A post from ronnie, which I just noticed, which may be returning the favor of geek defending her.
Post 523:

The only commentary that I can make is that I think that at least 12Keyblade and/or ronnieroo is cleared from being scum since they were both on V/LA during the period of time when night actions needed to be submitted. That means that at least one scum (or perhaps both) was definitely in town during the period to submit a night kill.

Never. Ever. Metagame. The. Night. Don't forget it.
Posts 529 and 530: Please read these loverly posts from our new player Monsieur for more detail than what I've put here.
Post 569:

So why couldn't I have been doing the same thing instead of "panicking"? Granted, I was sick, but what led you to jump to the conclusion that I was lurking?

I wasn't aware that you were sick, and as such, I apologize.

So unless anyone (besides the accused) is against it, I will vote for geek after illin's replacement shows up and offers his opinion, unless that manages to sway me in the extreme.

[Monsieur]

I will not hold it against anyone for the content or lack thereof that they are contributing because you have to understand people's personalities and tendencies. This requires knowing people and their idiosyncrasies.

BlueRaven is not like us, her contributions are more of

analyzing the reactions that surround her.

She isn't the type to post long analysis posts such as myself.

I can understand the use of content as a reference, but I don't believe it should be a key factor in determining on whether or not a person is scummy because it's a null tell at best. We all have different styles on how we play.

This holds true to anyone playing this game.

[Monsieur]

villa lean
keyblade
blueraven

purgatory
illiniguy

wolf lean
kittymo
geekalicious
ronnieroo