Open 186; Jungle Republic (Game Over)

bigmc109 · Post Post #15 (isolation #0) » Sat Dec 05, 2009 2:44 am

vote: Lowell

because it's not bigmac!!!!

bigmc109 · Post Post #44 (isolation #1) » Sat Dec 05, 2009 6:09 pm

So uh....do you feel like it this time?

bigmc109 · Post Post #68 (isolation #2) » Sun Dec 06, 2009 7:44 am

unvote, vote:saber

I'm not gonna be able to take that kind of play. Plus it reeks of WIFOM

bigmc109 · Post Post #75 (isolation #3) » Sun Dec 06, 2009 8:43 am

curiouskarmadog wrote:whoa whoa whoa...

lets slow this down a bit and have some conversation...what is everybody's hurry?

BG did you know that your vote was putting him at -1? If so, why didnt you mention it? If so, why did you ask for a claim?

unvote.

I think this addressed at me....

If it is, no, I missed MR's vote on saber. Though, seeing as you unvoted, I'm keeping my vote on.

bigmc109 · Post Post #95 (isolation #4) » Sun Dec 06, 2009 4:28 pm

curiouskarmadog wrote:
dank wrote:
curiouskarmadog wrote:
dank wrote:twas L-2, ckd
if it takes 7 to lynch and he had 6 votes...what am I missing?
We had 5, check the vote count directly above your unvote post.

That said, bigmc's vote was not L-1. However, his assertion that he "missed" MR's vote is a bit suspicious, and could be a good excuse to put saber in a quick lynch position. Nonetheless, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt, since its early in the game, and most of us aren't being all that careful with our votes either (we're just out of rvs).
ahh, you are right, i counted MR's vote as two separate people when counted the votes....

so, he wasnt at -1.....but that being said, the I "missed" the vote seemed like a lie....if he was following the game and was worried about the vote count(ie wanted to get a claim first), he would have known the vote count...

instead he was just looking for a quick bandwagon.

You're voting me for misreading when you did the exact same thing? Saying that I was "worried" about the vote count is a misrepresentation of my position. While it's true that I wouldn't have voted him if I knew it would put him at L-1, I wasn't exactly scouring the topic double-checking every vote. I made a mistake, shish.

Now for some actual scum hunting. I'm not liking sabrewolf at all. In addition to the whole self-lynching thing, I don't like his two attacks. I think Lynx's posts have been very pro-town so far (see 77) and MR was early enough in the BW to not seem scummy going for the easy target. Though I will admit I wouldn't mind the attack on MR so much if he hadn't posted since then, so it might be a nulltell.

bigmc109 · Post Post #97 (isolation #5) » Sun Dec 06, 2009 5:02 pm

@SB: What issue? I attacked his arguments, not his play. I mentioned his lynch me thing as part of my argument against him, but his reads were my main problem.

As far as lynching lurkers goes....I just don't know if it would be that effective considering it's been said out loud.

bigmc109 · Post Post #114 (isolation #6) » Mon Dec 07, 2009 10:28 am

@ CKD: because SW seemed like the type of player that would need pressure to determine what he's going to do. I wouldn't have put him at L-1 because it risks him being lynched too fast. L-2 was perfect because there's little risk, but a lot of pressure (considering he had 5x as many votes as anyone else). That was the intent of my vote. And tbh, I think it worked, because as I've pointed out, he's said some scummy things since then.

bigmc109 · Post Post #116 (isolation #7) » Mon Dec 07, 2009 11:00 am

I already did.

bigmc109 wrote: Now for some actual scum hunting. I'm not liking sabrewolf at all. In addition to the whole self-lynching thing, I don't like his two attacks. I think Lynx's posts have been very pro-town so far (see 77) and MR was early enough in the BW to not seem scummy going for the easy target. Though I will admit I wouldn't mind the attack on MR so much if he hadn't posted since then, so it might be a nulltell.

bigmc109 · Post Post #119 (isolation #8) » Mon Dec 07, 2009 1:23 pm

I was reading everyone's posts. I read all the posts, though I was on my phone. When I got home later, I voted after reading the new posts and seeing no one else had voted for SW.

bigmc109 · Post Post #121 (isolation #9) » Mon Dec 07, 2009 2:23 pm

Really? Because I think you and CKD are trying a little too hard to make my mistake look like a scum move. Fishy? Maybe. Scummy on its own? Hell no.

FoS: CKD & Dank

bigmc109 · Post Post #175 (isolation #10) » Wed Dec 09, 2009 12:08 pm

A day without posting does not qualify as being really quiet, CKD. And considering SW's play since my last post, I'm very happy with my vote. The only defense I'm seeing for SW is that his play is too anti-town to make him scum, and that is one of the worst WIFOM defenses I've seen.

bigmc109 · Post Post #204 (isolation #11) » Fri Dec 11, 2009 9:19 am

There are two main reasons I'm supporting a saber lynch:

1. His play thus far has been incredibly anti-town. All his attacks so far have been OMGUS, and (I think at least) he's trying to WIFOM his way to not getting lynched by the "lynch me argument". Saying lynch me is scummy, bottom line, bet or no bet. There are times where townies say it when there is no hope for them, and times during the RVS, but other than these two instances, I've seen it almost always be scum using a WIFOM argument. How anyone can have the thought process of "he wants to be lynched, obv town" is beyond me.

2. No matter how he flips, an examination of D1 should easily lead us back to lynch scum. He is such an easy target that I can't imagine scum from the other faction (or both, if he is town) not slipping up while trying to get him lynched. I also can't imagine his buddy/buddies not slipping up trying to think of a way to protect him.

He's anti-town, he's scummy, and his lynch provides A LOT of information. What else can we ask for?

bigmc109 · Post Post #208 (isolation #12) » Fri Dec 11, 2009 3:09 pm

@ CKD: Fishy is something odd that gets your attention, but is a null tell. It just makes you pay more attention. For instance, if you're a cop and someone keeps touching their coat pocket, it's fishy.

Scummy is something that you look at as being a scumtell. It makes you think "this person is probably scum". For instance, if you're a cop and someone speeds away during a routine traffic stop, it's scummy.

And way to avoid my first point. My second point was meant to say he provides

more

information than any other lynch, as well as being a good choice from his play. I don't think it was that hard to miss.

I don't think the fact that you're tunneling me says everything, but I do think the fact that you're dead set on not lynching saber is. How is his play not scummy? You say it's not scummy, that it's a null tell, but you never say WHY.

bigmc109 · Post Post #246 (isolation #13) » Sun Dec 13, 2009 4:07 am

I think the fact that MR requested a replacement speaks volumes. He wasn't under that much pressure; a townie probably wouldn't have cracked that easily. I guess he was going after SW opportunistically after all.

Unvote, Vote: MR

bigmc109 · Post Post #248 (isolation #14) » Sun Dec 13, 2009 7:29 am

I have already heard what MR had to say, and while I don't think it was as scummy as what SW said, I think asking for a replacement while under pressure is a scumtell for a newbie. Just because someone replaces him doesn't change his alignment or what he said/did before. Why the hell would I go for an information lynch over a lynch that I now think will result in lynching scum?

bigmc109 · Post Post #249 (isolation #15) » Sun Dec 13, 2009 7:32 am

Sorry, hit post too soon.

Do I think SW is scummy? Yes. Do I think MR was particularly scummy before he asked for a replacement? No, I had a null read on him. But the fact of the matter is he flaked as soon as he had a load of pressure on him, and that is scummier than SW's hot-and-cold play thus far.

bigmc109 · Post Post #273 (isolation #16) » Tue Dec 15, 2009 11:05 am

The reason I voted MR was because he replaced under pressure. This seems scummy to me, but if its universally recognized as not scummy, I guess I should change my vote....I don't know, I'll decide later.

bigmc109 · Post Post #290 (isolation #17) » Wed Dec 16, 2009 8:59 am

SB: If replacing out under pressure isn't considered a scumtell, then my vote shouldn't be there because it was based off my assumption that it was a very clear scumtell. I guess I'll switch my vote back, then. SW's play isn't excused even if it was meant to be disruptive.

Unvote, Vote:Saberwolf

bigmc109 · Post Post #315 (isolation #18) » Sat Dec 19, 2009 3:16 am

Sorry for lack of posting, been busy. Will catch up later today.

bigmc109 · Post Post #320 (isolation #19) » Sun Dec 20, 2009 3:57 pm

I'm sorry again for posting little content, but I'm dealing with some personal things right now (negative things and holiday-related things). If it really becomes a problem, I'll ask for a replacement, but hopefully that won't happen. Unfortunately, I'll be

V/LA until Tuesday

. I'm only a couple pages behind, so I will try to read those in-depth asap (I've only skimmed them briefly).

@Paradox: To answer your question real quick, I had the idea in my head that replacing under pressure is commonly thought of as a scumtell. I was obviously wrong, hence my unvote. This is my first game as town in which someone has replaced in after the first few days, so I don't have much of meta with it, but I do tend to think that there are game-related motives for requesting a replacement. It's just my mind set.

bigmc109 · Post Post #321 (isolation #20) » Sun Dec 20, 2009 4:01 pm

Oh, btw, this mind set came from the end result of my first game, in which scum successfully used fake V/LA's to avoid suspicion (he claimed he was V/LA for the entire night and thus could not be scum; it didn't work, but it did keep him alive for quite awhile longer). So when it comes to out-of-game situations, I do tend to think there might be an in-game motive. If I found MR a bit more suspicious, I probably would have stuck with him.

bigmc109 · Post Post #336 (isolation #21) » Thu Dec 24, 2009 4:46 am

OK, finally caught up. Here are my current thoughts:

*Flav's vote on me seems purely OMGUS or just trying to vote the second vote leader. Also, I think it's a little odd that his only comment on Lowell was "Why no reasons for your first vote?". It just seemed like he went through the other players who have contributed fairly thoroughly and just skipped out on Lowell....I don't know what it means, just thought it was odd. I'm still happy with my vote.

*I don't like CKD's comment about "voting someone scummy and not just an ass". SW was scummy, and Flav is scummy; you have to at least be willing to admit that.

*I'm having trouble reading everyone else, mostly because I'm pressed for time.

Also, I'm sorry to say that I have family coming for the next few days and an important meeting/event the day they leave. Thus, I will be

V/LA

until the 31st. Yes, I realize it's interesting timing. Get over it. It's the holiday season and the start of the 2010 election planning. I might be able to get a post or two in during the time frame, but don't count on it.

@Sanhora: Can you give me the post # of your first analysis post? I might be able to respond to it later tonite, but I really don't have enough time to even find it right now. Sorry.

bigmc109 · Post Post #346 (isolation #22) » Sun Dec 27, 2009 12:38 pm

I managed to find a free few minutes to catch-up and post.

@Sanhora: That's what you wanted me to answer? Haven't I answered this like five times already? Dank's quote said I was taking advantage of a situation and being ignorant. Was I being ignorant? Clearly. Was I taking advantage of a situation? No, I was being ignorant. In fact, "being ignorant" was a perfect description of my vote there. I'm relatively new, I was wrong, move on. And to be honest, I still think it's possible that MR-scum flaked under pressure, but it's such an evidence-less possibility that I'd rather go for Saber who has been scummy throughout the game.

I'd also like to note that the deadline is in 3 days and we need a majority to lynch. I don't know if no lynch is any good at all in this sentence, but I don't think it's something we should do unless

no one

seems scummy. It shouldn't happen just because more than one person seems scummy.