Newbie 873 - Game Over.

[foilist13]

Absolutely not CSL. Voting is the single biggest way to get a read on a player. Looking at voting patterns is one if the most effective ways of figuring out people's behavior. Just choosing to not vote is a horrible idea. If someone quick hammers again then we'll lynch them preety much imediately day 2.

You and crummy just earned scum points, somewhat mitigated by the fact tht you're newbies.

[CSL]

Hey, begging got me lynched on Day 1.

[Crimmy]

So, you're saying we should just vote and get another quick-lynch, like last day?
No, sir.
This day is gonna be of simple talk, we've got to read in the most logic way how people react to simple talk. Otherwise, somebody might get vote-happy, and end up making a total catastrophe.

Once more, we're shouldn't vote just like that. Fingers of suspicion, however, could be the best way to get some reaction.

[CSL]

I really got to listen to those voices at the back of my mind.

FoS: Crimmy

for mentioning such a thing, and

FoS: Myself

for going along with it.

[Crimmy]

Hey, begging got me lynched on Day 1.

Maybe you didn't beg in the right way. Since you said begging is scummy, and you begged, I assume you're then scummy.

THAT is an instant rebuttal of you previous statement.

[CSL]

I haven't begged this game, haven't I?

[Crimmy]

I haven't begged this game, haven't I?

Therefore, you have.

(if you don't understand what I meant, re-read the sentence.)

[CSL]

I still don't understand.

[Crimmy]

You negated a negative. Thus, you have just said you have begged in this game.

[CSL]

I have not begged in this game.

There, any more clear?

[Crimmy]

As the Lt. Colonel Frank Slade would say:
"Calm down, Charlie, calm down."

[CSL]

Ok.

[Crimmy]

Good, now that we're cool, I suggest we wait until everybody else has had time to post and think a bit more.

[CSL]

Agreed.

[foilist13]

Vote happy? It takes 4 people to lynch. We are not going to get there quickly, unless someone chooses to act unbelievably scummy, which town are not going to do, and scum are not going to do either because (at least I'd like to believe) they are not idiots. FoS'ing is worthless. Probably about half of all players never do it, and HoS'ing is even more useless. Saying I suspect you is just as useful.

CSL, your idea is not a good one, but you seem genuine. Crimmy, you seem to be buddying. You aren't scum hunting, you're having a pleasant comrade-like discussion with Crimmy, which while it is not damning evidence it is something scum would try to do.

I still find you scummy from yesterday, so for now,

Vote: Crimmy

but I may change it after I finish my reread.

[MichelSableheart]

Withholding votes until the 27th is a terrible idea. It greatly risks us having immense troubles getting a consensus. Besides that, there is nothing wrong with reaching a lynch long before deadline. The only problem is a quicklynch when some players haven't really commented on the situation at hand. And players who quicklynch in that way are far more likely to be scum.

The nightkill of brother isn't that surprising to me now that I think of it. He wasn't under any suspicion whatsoever, but also didn't stand out at all. From a scum point of view, it seems unlikely that he is protected by a doc, and could be powerrole lying low. I doubt his interactions with Dimaba have anything to do with why scum chose to kill him.

CSL, your claim that you didn't tell Jack to hammer is completely ridiculous. Both #123 and #127 are strongly encouraging Jack to hammer.

I also find it extremely interesting that CSL places a FoS instead of a vote in #142. Crimmy hadn't brought up his "don't vote till just before deadline" argument yet. FoS'es are seldom used, unless there is a specific reason not to vote. Why didn't you vote there, CSL?

His argument that using the word "beg" is scummy is complete rubbish. There is no reason whatsoever why scum is more likely to use the word beg then town is, especially in that context.

foilist, I believe that CSL's behaviour is far more suspicious then that of Crimmy. Crimmy's early L-1 on you was poor, but not unheard of in new players, especially if they're used to fast games. His pressure on McGriddle day 1 seemed genuine to me, and he was not involved in the sudden lynch of McGriddle. In fact, he argued against quicklynching in post #111, and his behaviour there completely matches his view on only using FoS'es till one day before deadline.

CSL, on the other hand, was pushing the relative easy cases of Crimmy, McGriddle and Cades on day 1, using scumtells straight out of the book, without any indication of actually considering if behaviour was likely to come from scum. Also, something feels really of on his L-1 vote. It refers to a post, without actually explaining why said post is scummy. There also seems to be far too much emphasis on McGriddle claiming, and far too little investigation if McGriddle is actually scum. Then there's encouraging Jack to hammer, and at the beginning of day 2 an attempt to put the blame for the hammer completely with Jack.

Vote: CSL

[Crimmy]

Vote happy? It takes 4 people to lynch. We are not going to get there quickly, unless someone chooses to act unbelievably scummy, which town are not going to do,

and scum are not going to do either because (at least I'd like to believe) they are not idiots. FoS'ing is worthless. Probably about half of all players never do it, and HoS'ing is even more useless. Saying I suspect you is just as useful.

CSL, your idea is not a good one, but you seem genuine.

Crimmy, you seem to be buddying. You aren't scum hunting, you're having a pleasant comrade-like discussion with Crimmy, which while it is not damning evidence it is something scum would try to do.

I still find you scummy from yesterday, so for now,

Vote: Crimmy

but I may change it after I finish my reread.

So, you're basically saying that waiting is bad, but voting fast is also bad.
It's either one or the other, so take your pick. Remember that if you want to start making

logical

conclussions, you need something to base it on, and that means we need more talk to analize, not just voting.

You say Fingers of Suspicion is worthless, right?
Soo... your post 100 says:

"Im going to unvote because Crimmy is no longer my top suspect. That honor now belongs to McGriddle, but only just. I'm not ready to put him at L-1 yet though, so I'll be content with putting him at the top of my scum list. ".

Foilist, I ask you: What's the difference between that post and FoS'ing?
Not to mention the fact that you said "Saying I suspect you is just as useful", in a context where you mean it's useless.

So, care to say which of those is you?
Both? You, my boy, are making such big mistakes, contradicting a lot.
First, at Day One twilight, you didn't even care about the death of McGriddle, yet, the next morning you go against what happened, and call CSL a hypocrite. That's one big contradiction, too.

You either don't give a ship about it, or you feel it's wrong, or you go in favor. As far as I remember, I was against voting him

yet

, and that gives me a reason to keep going against it.

You? You are contradicting yourself over and over.

[Zorblag]

Vote count 2.1

The numbers by the voters indicate the order in which the vote was cast. If two or more players are tied for the most votes to lynch at the deadline the tiebreaker will be the player who has the earliest active vote.

Crimmy: 1: foilist13 (1)
CSL: 1: MichelSableheart (2)

Not Voting: cades, Crimmy, CSL, dimaba, Jackabomb

With 7 alive it takes 4 to lynch. Currently Crimmy would be lynched at deadline. Deadline is 5:00 PM EST/2:00 PM PST on Monday, December 28th.

-Zorblag R`Lyeh

[foilist13]

My my my Crimmy.

ok,

1) Contradictions on game policy are not scummy, nor did I make any. Contradicting yourself as far as your opinions or previous arguments is.

2) FoS'ing is stupid. "Finger of Suspicion" is a childish and dramatic way of saying "I suspect you," which is exactly what I did. The real purpose of an FoS is essentially to say "I would be voting for this person, but I'm not, either because I am voting someone else, or there is some reason for me not to vote, i.e. he's at L-1 or some similar situation." No one uses it that way. They use it the way I first stated, which is stupid.

3) Voting is good. Quicklynching is bad. Voting does not equal lynching. Voting 4 times by 4 different people does. Both me and Michael are in agreement on this, and I can assure you that this is the wide consensus of the people on this site. I did not contradict myself.

4)

First, at Day One twilight, you didn't even care about the death of McGriddle, yet, the next morning you go against what happened, and call CSL a hypocrite. That's one big contradiction, too.

I have no idea what you are talking about.

@Michael - Your argument is sound, but Crimmy's last post is giving me pause. I'm going to leave my vote here for now, but I'm keeping my eye on both Crimmy and CSL very closely.

[Crimmy]

What do you mean, contradictions on game policy?

[foilist13]

If I said FoS'ing was stupid then FoS'ed someone, that wouldn't be a scummy contradiction. If I said I never wanted someone lynched when I clearly stated that I did, that would be a scummy contradiction.

[CSL]

You mean if I say "FoSing is stupid." and did this, "

FoS: Crimmy

" would that be scummy?

[foilist13]

No, I said that wouldn't be scummy, it would just be stupid.

[CSL]

Oh. Ok.

By the way, that FoS did not count. I was using it as an example.

[Jackabomb]

...not that FOS's count for anything anyway. Honestly, I haven't really payed a shred of attention to a single FOS in this game, be it on me or anyone else. Unfortunatly, grades are rather bad right now and I've been restricted from computer access until further notice. Even if I can get a post in or time to read the thread once in a while, won't mean I'm back for good until I say I am.