Mini 852- Crayola Catastrophe Game Over (Post 1158)

[semioldguy]

Vote: Chamber

Trying to appear townie by being concerned over a quick bandwagoning. I see no real reason to think of that as a threat at the point of his unvote. It looks to me like he is trying to gain townie points. Town shouldn't have to try to do that, it should come natually and his comment did not feel natural.

FoS: ChiboSempai

For seeming too willing to please or go along with others (both with his vote and his unvote).

[semioldguy]

Actually...

Unvote; Vote: ChiboSempai

I think he is a little more likely to be scum. Though I wouldn't mind either of those two being run up with a few more votes. Chamber, you aren't off the hook yet; I've got my eye on you.

[semioldguy]

Anyone who tries to vote for someone because they have an unreadable color will earn my vote from this point forward. There are much easier ways to deal with being able to read them (such as highlighting all their text with your mouse).

[semioldguy]

I'm just trying to avoid heat. You know, because I would MELT. Melting is bad.

I dislike it when people look like they are attempting to breadcrumb in an obvious way. It looks as if that's what you are doing, blatantly breadcrumbing something. Players shouldn't need to breadcrumb, if they ever should claim, then they way they play their role should dictate whether the claim is believable, not some looney post at the beginning of the game.

[semioldguy]

Vote semioldguy

High horses are high.

Your OMGUS and hypocrisy are noted. You seem strongly concerned with a wagon that builds quickly, yet now you seem to seek out to do the exact thing you ctiticize, build a wagon quickly with no case to support.

If chamber flips scum, GreenDude could be a likely buddy due to the different wagon reactions.

[semioldguy]

First, that was the second vote not the forth. Second that was for an arbitrary reason, my vote for you was note.

First, arguing which number it was doesn't address what the vote does or appears to be doing. Second, if you don't share your reason, then I have no reason to believe your vote on me wasn't arbitrary. And it's still OMGUS.

[semioldguy]

From the wiki:

OMGUS stands for "Oh My God, You Suck (for voting for me)!". it is sometimes used as a shorthand to indicate that you are voting for someone primarily because they voted for you.

Since my vote wasn't because you voted me at all it is in fact NOT an omgus vote.

Also I don't explain my votes, get over it.

If you don't explain your vote, then you can't explain that it wasn't an OMGUS vote.

[semioldguy]

Unvote; Vote: chamber

[semioldguy]

I'd put another two or three on there myself if I could. I agree with most of your points, you make yourself a little more detailed than I make myself, but it's prettymuch spot on with my thoughts. Except I don't agree with abrasiveness as being a scumtell. Though personally I'm not worried about getting over it, as he can just be lynched and then I don't have to get over it.

[semioldguy]

The only part in your most recent point I have disagreement with is that I think explaining votes can be pro-town, I don't think it is always pro-town, but that usually it is. Being abrasive isn't scummy though, as I already stated, and the number of votes shouldn't change a response, but an explanation to your responses could change your response based upon what you read and how you interpret it.

[semioldguy]

I'm liking Kirbyoshi.
Semioldguy, not so much.
Although both are on the chamber wagon, which I'm not against at this point.

Considering you still have your vote on me from what I thought was a random vote, what exactly don't you like?

[semioldguy]

Your vote didn't match my criteria specifically enough, as you voted for being readable color rather than unreadable. Though I considered voting for that anyway. Instead I ignored it and pointed out something I thought deserved more attention.

[semioldguy]

I thought it would look like I was stretching my original intent and that would look bad. I didn't want to make an additional excuse for a poor vote. Even moreso because I saw something that was more worthy of comment. So I commented on that instead as it would be more productive and progress the game/scumhunting

[semioldguy]

Actually I think it's L-1

Unvote

[semioldguy]

Vote: Budja

For misrepresenting L-1 as L-2. Could have drawn an accidental quick-lynch without the hammer knowing they hammered.

[semioldguy]

You guys are basically calling for a policy lynch on chamber, which is just as anti-town as the claims you have of him. Even players who play in anti-town ways will have tells that will out them when they are scum as opposed to town. Policy lynching avoids and ignores actual scumhunting.

[semioldguy]

I don't think that a theme game will have just vanilla townies and mafia. There will be interesting roles and chamber might have something important.

And just because chamber is requesting a replacement doesn't mean he's scum, he might be an important townie who if lynched could ruin the town.

Why do you think it good to speculate about his role?

[semioldguy]

Not to mention the same argument could be made for someone who is scum.

[semioldguy]

Unvote chamber

. Not sure who to vote for now...can I get a summary of the case on Budja please?

I thought he was trying to draw a quick-lynch/accidental-lynch on chamber by misrepresenting the votecount as being L-2 when instead it was L-1. The other two votes on him look like they were just put there randomly.

[semioldguy]

I also don't like at all the role-fishing proposed by SocioPath in 77.

What rolefishing was that? This seems to me like a blatant misrepresentation. If anything, SocioPath was speaking against role-fishing, not trying to fish for roles himself. Explain your interpretation.

[semioldguy]

Unvote; Vote: ZazieR

Has a tendency to excessively lurk in every game we've played together as the game goes on (with the exception of one in which he was killed night one) and always to the detriment of the town. The lurking into oblivion after early spells of activity has not been enjoyable in any of those games and I don't want it to happen for a fourth time. I'd much rather just get rid of ZazieR now.

[semioldguy]

If the anti-town behavior is not posting, it eventually leads to not being able to scumhunt for that person because the posts aren't even there.

[semioldguy]

I'm not a policy lynch guy, as is evidence by many of my games, including the quote in this one. I am a pressure vote guy though, as you should know from previous games.

That quote should be on the previous page.

[semioldguy]

EBWOP: Actually it was page 4, Post 91

[semioldguy]

Unvote

Thate vote won't do any good placed as it is right now.

Vote: Budja

[semioldguy]

Mod: My vote is back on Budja

[semioldguy]

Kirbyoshi does seem a bit defensive there, jumping to conclusions, but aside from that little tidbit I have liked his posting thus far. I get a town feeling from him.

[semioldguy]

What's the point to all the self reminders and the "elaborate later" type comments? I don't like that at all. If you have something to say either say it now or keep it to yourself until it's relevant, hinting at it does the town no good and is only a distraction.

[semioldguy]

Post 27 – Why the ‘warning’,

SoG

?

Because I didn't want people making a useless vote for that reason. I thought it better to warn than to not warn. As if I didn't warn and just voted someone who said that it could be seen as an excuse to vote that person rather than an excuse to vote that reason. It's more difficult for people to try to frame or misrepresent me if I provide a warning declaring my intentions. It also ends the random voting.

Post 32 – Scummy from

SoG

for pointing out a possible breadcrumb.

In my experience I've seen more breadcrumbs from scum than I have from town. I am also against breadcrumbing entirely, for reasons already mentioned.

Post 60 – Though Kirby gave multiple reasons what he didn’t like about a certain post of Chamber. You,

SoG

, didn’t do so, but you do state that you agree with most of Kirby’s points. Why didn’t you point these reasons out then?
Also, can you re-phrase the last sentence?

I felt that I did, but that he just stated them better. As for rephrasing I thought it was pretty straightforward. He issued an ultimatum/challenge to the town, that in itself is scummy and was deserving of my vote. This was prior to the meta defense of chamber and the ultra-fast wagon.

Anyone who tries to vote for someone because they have an unreadable color will earn my vote from this point forward. There are much easier ways to deal with being able to read them (such as highlighting all their text with your mouse).

A silly blanket statement that can't be enforced.
You can't lynch someone based solely on them voting for a person over an off color.

Nor did you follow up on your apparently hollow threat. I voted you for an even more ridiculous reason, and yet you shrug if off as a random vote. I already made a random vote. And you were already calling out people with their random votes. And yet you ignore a blatantly obvious post that is right up your alley? Is that because it was targeted towards you? You didn't want to OMGUS yourself especially after calling someone else out on it with your NEXT post after my vote?

I like this argument that Socio used in Post 77. SoG’s post that follows doesn’t explain this as he didn’t change his vote at all in the post that he’s describing. Why didn’t you do so,

SoG

?

This was already explained. I said that I would vote for the next person to do X. SocioPath didn't do X, he did Y. Therefore, I did not vote for him. Yes, X and Y are very, very similar, but they are not the same.

I thought it would look like I was stretching my original intent and that would look bad

. I didn't want to make an additional excuse for a poor vote. Even moreso because I saw something that was more worthy of comment. So I commented on that instead as it would be more productive and progress the game/scumhunting

Regarding the bolded: Seems somebody is scared to get attention.

If that were true, which it isn't, then why would I point it out and bring attention to it myself?

[semioldguy]

Pointing out a breadcrumb isn't scummy. Scum would benefit more from keeping quiet about it and just silently killing that person during the night.

[semioldguy]

Please elaborate now. You took the time to make the post take the time to validate your claim.... Statements without reason do nothing for the town.

I agree completely.

[semioldguy]

Vote: ZazieR

[semioldguy]

Sorry,

Unvote; Vote: ZazieR

[semioldguy]

Why only an FoS ChiboSempai?

FoS:

ChiboSempai

The only time I like to see FoS'es are when your vote is already somewhere else that you like better or in special circumstances such as LyLo or at an L-1 wagon, etc. Neither of those apply to your FoS on me and I've caught scum this way before. I think you are afraid to look OMGUS-y from my suspicion and vote on you early in the game because you might be scum.

[semioldguy]

I only said at one post that I'd elaborate further later in case Kirby, at whom the post was aimed, wanted to respond first.

I don't know what you want me to respond to, as the post to which you referred was made by Manzcar, not me.

Also, another point against SOG:

What's the point to all the..."elaborate later" type comments?

Misdirection, as Zazie only made one "elaborate later" comment.

You omitted the part of the sentence that makes it plural. Looks like the misdirection is on you.

[semioldguy]

In response to the part of Kirby's three arguments against Chamber -

SoG

, with which of those did you agree?

All of his points minus the part that he thought abrasiveness was a scum tell. I already said this. You should read my posts.

Yes, I think it is potentially scummy that Josh Lyman might have breadcrumbed. I stand by my opinion that scum would be better off not bringing up potential breadcrumbs. If you think scum benefit from talking about it (I don't think this) then why do you keep bringing it up? That seems like a contradiction to me. If you were town and thought this then you would just request to have the subject dropped.

Chamber's explanations were good, yet despite that his wagon and lynch support continued to grow. Yes I am suspicious of his wagon, as evidence by my reason for voting Budja and my case against him.

The questions you are asking almost all have already been answered if you go back and actually read my posts.

[semioldguy]

@people not voting
Why aren't you voting? Who would you vote if you had to place a vote right now?

[semioldguy]

Post coming later.

@

SOG:

Do you not think this is scummy? It's one of the things you called Zazie out on.

Depends. I don't ever like it, but I don't always find it scummy. It looks like it may have been in response to a prod. In which case an "I've received my prod and will catch up and post as soon as I'm done" is acceptable. Looks like that is more or less what happened.

However, I find Pomegranate's smattering of "I don't really know" reads on practically everyone in the game to be scummy.

[semioldguy]

Then you still need to explain how come you didn't mention the first argument Kirby used yourself.

Ah... but I did mention it myself, he just said it better than I did, which I already explained to you. please see the following:

This is a pretty juicy scum post. First, you give a dictionary definition for something that I think at least has come to mean more than that. Basically, from my limited experience, it doesn't have to be a vote; it could be anything the OMGUS-ee does/says that the OMGUS-er doesn't like--not thinks is scummy, just doesn't like.

Semi Said: "And it's still OMGUS."

Then you go on to say you don't explain your votes. This is anti-town at the very least, and most of the time a pretty strong scumtell imo (of course, that's without any sort of metagaming involved).

Semi Said: "First, arguing which number it was doesn't address what the vote does or appears to be doing. Second, if you don't share your reason, then I have no reason to believe your vote on me wasn't arbitrary."

And finally, you make a statement that reads as follows: "get over it." This is very abrasive, and a scummy GTFO move. I'll have to check the votes before I see how much pressure you were under, or if I want to vote you, but it's probably coming.

This is the part I didn't agree with.

Thanks for telling that you thought it was scummy of Josh. Noted that you only pointed it out, but didn't continue persuing it. Also, at Death Note Mafia, I stated that I wanted Misa Misa dead. How come Josh's opening post here contained a 'breadcrumb', but my post at Phables wasn't to you?

There are better things to pursue than Lyman right now, who I happen to think is the most likely to be town player at this point. I don't like having to keep too many cases at once, but rather put pressure on the best one or two. In DeathNote this was also the case, yours was not the best case to pursue there either.

As for your accusation, I don't think it was a breadcrumb and I don't like how you're attacking him for that post. I'm keep bringing it up, because I think it shows that you are scum.

In case you haven't noticed, which you clearly haven't, I am no longer attacking him, nor have I been since that single post. It makes you look like scum to continuously be dragging up issues that no longer matter and distract from what is currently going on in the game.

As for the part about Chamber, the meta defence was made before you unvoted. And you did post after that explanation. As for the second reason given, you are not allowed to complain about it as you stated that if you could, you'd have voted him 2 or 3 times more.

The first reason given also applies to the second reason given as the wagon was still being pushed after the meta defense. You could also be ChiboSempai's partner because he seemed to want to push the wagon onto the replacement before even seeing the replacement come in and then as soon as you post seems to change his mind.

Last, but not least, this post contains an unanswered question in the first paragraph. Please answer.

It depends on the circumstance. You need to give your question better context.

If I am lynched the rest of the town should force you to address every single self reminder you've been noting in the thread. In fact, you should probably address them all now so we can lynch you and save the town from my mislynch.

I don't find where SoG is scummy. Could someone write out the case on him?

Probably because there isn't a decent case on me. Every point brought up against me has been explained, and in many cases was already explained before the question was brought up. There are no scum motivations behind my actions. The "case" on me reeks of BS

If SoG is townie, then the scum most likely have their vote on him but aren't saying anything to keep the bandwagon moving. At least that's what I think.

Scum can have their vote either on or off me at this point and it wouldn't really matter. Enough of the town finds me scummy enough that they don't need to commit themselves. Look for the person who seem to be leaning toward my lynch without pushing it too hard; the one trying to convince others without having to put his own neck on the line for lynching a townie.

[semioldguy]

Not to go off topic, but I really like how colorful this game is. It makes walls of texts not as groan-worthy.

[semioldguy]

Hi, SoG

Hi. The answers are there pretty clearly if you look for them (though probably not in that same post). You seem a little over-concerned with this vote on you considering the attention you are giving it despite that it is the only one you've gotten.

SoG

, why nothing against Post 36?

I thought I'd responded to this one in my last big post, but I guess I deleted that part accidentally. What it said was something like "Why would I? He didn't vote for a color being unreadable."

Also, I've been a big fan of semioldguy's aggressiveness; let's not forget who brought us out of the RVS, shall we? I'm getting a pro-town read from him simply because he doesn't seem afraid to mention what looks scummy, nor does he seem to tunnel on anyone; when he sees something scummy, he questions it.

SoG

, your opinion of this quote please.

Looks good to me

[semioldguy]

This is a bad wagon right now. We need to run up a counter wagon to get some responses.

Unvote; Vote: Pomegranate

[semioldguy]

Hi, SoG

Hi. The answers are there pretty clearly if you look for them (though probably not in that same post). You seem a little over-concerned with this vote on you considering the attention you are giving it despite that it is the only one you've gotten.

You can still restate them and where you posted those reasons. Because as said, this vote is a hypocrite vote to me. You attacked Chamber for not explaining his vote and you're doing the same in the post with the second vote.

Wrong. I did provide explanation for my vote, just not when I voted. Which you would also see is a point of view I hold from a previous post in his game where I defended the possible reasons to initially conceal the reason for a vote as long as the reason is eventually revealed. Mine has been; chamber was going on as if his never was going to be. This is a misrepresentation by you. You are reaaallly reaching ZazieR

SoG

, why nothing against Post 36?

I thought I'd responded to this one in my last big post, but I guess I deleted that part accidentally. What it said was something like "Why would I? He didn't vote for a color being unreadable."

Which brings me to this again:

As for the last bit of that first quote, it's easy. It has to do with SocioPath's vote. Because his vote could also be defined as 'useless'. Yet, you didn't vote him. Why is the 'useless' vote regarding unreadable colour vote worthy, but not SocioPath's 'useless' vote towards your colour?

So please explain. Also, anything you want to say regarding Post 249?

You are blatantly ignoring me. And in multiple places. It is noted.

Did I say that I would be voting for anyone who made a useless vote? No. I didn't say that. Why are you constantly drawing that conclusion despite multiple times me having said that it is not the case? This is more blatant misrepresentation from you. It is beyond ridiculous at this point. You haven't correctly characterized anything I've done this game.

[semioldguy]

This is a bad wagon right now.

We need to run up a counter wagon to get some responses

.

Unvote; Vote: Pomegranate

Elaborate on the bolded

No.

It is not always pro-town to come forward with reasoning first. I'll elaborate after it happens. If you disagree with something that doesn't come with a reason, you should post your reason for why you think it would be bad to do that.

HoS: ZazieR

[semioldguy]

I have reads on players and suspects other than you ZazieR, which (again) if you actually read my posts, you would be aware of. however, I know that you can't possibly be reading many of my posts because otherwise I wouldn't believe that you could get so many things wrong. This is scummy because scum have less motivation to read the whole thread, or if you have read the thread then you are lying in an effort to misrepresent me and create an easy mislynch. It makes sense to push the lynch of the player I find the most scummy. Just because it's you doesn't mean that I'm tunneling.

You are just as guilty of OMGUS as your predecessor by the way.

[semioldguy]

Because I suggested, and believe, that the town could benefit from a counterwagon against my own. Since it seems obvious to me that won't happen with ZazieR, I chose to vote Pomegranite, whom I am also suspicious of as suspect number two and wouldn't mind seeing run up and/or lynched.

[semioldguy]

I find it suspicious that she has time to come on and see questions posed to her and make a post about it, yet needs until Wednesday to be able to answer the questions. Doesn't make sense to me if she's town. It gives scum time to fabricate an believable response.

Also her reads on most people in the game being along the lines of "I'm not really sure about ___" does not seem protown to me. I have been able to see many things from most of the players in the game that have been helping me get reads and this has been one of the easier games to do so I believe since a lot of things have been happening. Her reads don't seem sincere to me.

[semioldguy]

How would it not be pro-town to give reasons for why you think something? This game is built on reasoning, and if you're not willing to state it, it makes you look pretty scummy.

I never said I wouldn't give reasons. I just said I wouldn't do it first. If you don't think my reasons later match up with what they should have been now or if I refuse to give reasons later, then that's different.

[semioldguy]

I've answered each accusation with a solid explanation, and have been pointing out all the jumps to conclusion and misrepresentations in my attacker's arguments. My wagon is scum-backed, and not only for the sloppy case against me, but for other suspicions which I have been pointing out as well all along.

[semioldguy]

So SoG is at L-1?

Tell me SoG, what is your reasoning for voting Pomegranate? Make it a good one.

I don't think I am at L-1 yet, Snow_Bunny should read rule 14 again. Though a vote count would clear up any of that easily.

I have given my reasoning for voting Pomegranate. I have given multiple good reasons. Perhaps you should go back and read them.

[semioldguy]

@ChiboSempai
Please see post 287.

[semioldguy]

I had fun!

I also had fun as a spectator after day one.