Open 226: Big Love - Game over! Town wins!

[don_johnson]

i approve.

also,

v/la until july 8

[Robocopter87]

You approve because hes defending you. His vote is misplaced, I never voted Don because of the question, my vote is on chi. I just was disturbed by the question.

Also, Millar, way to totally realize that your not my lover. That woulld be an awkward date. oops, sorry I'm not interested in you via my pm sent to me.

This will get votes but
"If you wanna be my lover!"
Song rocks, and you can't say crap about it.

[smashbro_of_the_SSS]

V/LA today until Friday

[yabbaguy]

@Zero-157:

By that logic Xite would be a better choice.

But Xite's posted content at least. I see NOTHING from SV. Granted, I see nothing from millar either, but he decides to maintain a meta of being a dumbass, even though he's CLEARLY not one.

@Robo-160:

Holy crap. That took five seconds. I don't know what Yabba was aiming for but that was extremly stupid and scummy. He hasn't done anything besides fluff and joke around. He's V/LA right now so keeping vote on Chiauahua.

COME ON. What the fuck do I have to do to convince you that's scummy, and why the fuck am I scummy for trying to scumhunt?

@Fidelis-167:

ISOing someone doesn't nearly have the same effect as voting them. An ISO may lead to a vote, or provide a reason for a vote, so asking to ISO with no reason is the same thing as asking them to see if there is a reason. Asking someone to vote without a reason is completely different. And at the time, you weren't giving a reason why even you voted.

No. It's still a pressure-FoS (so to speak), so really there is still the same effect of saying "he's scummy, but you figure it out yourself".

@Zero-168:

Infact, ISOing some other people has been quite revealing: Sanxion, Shattered, RS, Muthaa, youngminii, millar, and Sandman have all done the same. Pittbunny and Guthrie have only posted their confirmation and nothing else. I think we can safely assume that lurking here is a null tell (it's still not helpful in the least).

Mm, true. I guess the reason I got on SV in the first place was that he had

numerous

opportunities to contribute, yet hadn't done one thing.

@Don's Lover lynch question: nulltell. I think Xite's actually the lone person to call it scummy, which is curious.

@all: I've never played with millar, are his claims typically real, just usually at a bad moment, or is he usually full of bullshit?

@SV-199: There you go.

Unvoting

here, chihuahua's doing a strong job under pressure poking holes in theories. The AtE-ish "oh it sucks to be under pressure" is ridiculous and needs to die, it's obscuring my read. Stop jamming my radar, dammit.

Note: The pace of the game is probably throttling quite a few of the players right now (effect: they lurk as Zero mentioned)- so I'd avoid chatroom-esque arguments and overly substantive rants if possible. Give them a chance to breathe.

[Robocopter87]

Whoa Yabba. You misintrepreted what I said in that quote.

I meant Shattered was scummy not you. I was talking about his ISO. When I said that I don't know what you were aiming for was I didn't know why you wanted me to ISO.

[PaltryExcuse]

I'll catch up ASAP. Unlike my other two games, which are only a couple pages of newness plus I had played in them, I have done diddly in this game. Sorry, but basement flooding comes first, and I'll post when I can.

[yabbaguy]

Gotcha, Robo. I thought you were saying I was wildly contriving a case.

[Shattered Viewpoint]

@SV-199: There you go.

i voted robogroptgrrr because he's not leaving don_j alone.

It was an innocent question and doesnt deserve to be tunneled the crap out of like robo is doing. AGAIN.

thats why i voteded

Who is the "There you go." directed at? Me or robo?

And that explanation of mine is... unsatisfactory. I should not post in a game while drinking (I usually don't).

Okay, here's the deal: Robo is voting chihuahua for... policy voting. That's ...

@Robo: Can you explain your case (or, I don't know,

make one)

on chihuahua?

Also, Robo, can you explain why your devotion to the don_j lover fiasco is not worthy of a vote?

You, sir, are looking quite the scum to me at this moment.

My vote stays (now with coherent explanation!).

[yabbaguy]

Yeah, you. Consider it mock applause for posting something relevant.

Sobriety issue aside, this is not what I remember of you from our recent encounter.

[millar13]

irony of yabbaguy trying to distance from me lol...no i actually read my role pm

[DizzyIzzyB13]

Vote Count #5

• chihuahua0 (don_johnson, smashbro_of_the_SSS, Robocopter87, ZeroFang) 4 (L-6)
  Muthaa (Sanxion, Xite91, chihuahua0) 3 (L-7)
  Reverse Simplicity (Mr.Sandman) 1 (L-9)
  Robocopter87 (Muthaa, Shattered Viewpoint) 1 (L-9)
  Xite91 (youngminii) 1 (L-9)
  yabbaguy (Wacka Alpaca, millar13) 2 (L-8)

Not voting: Fidelis, Guthrie, PaltryExcuse, Pittbunny, Reverse Simplicity, yabbaguy

With 19 alive, 10 votes are required for a lynch.

V/LA: Wacka Alpaca (Tuesday, July 6th), don_johnson (Thursday, July 8th), smashbro_of_the_SSS (Friday, July 9th)

Deadline is Wednesday, July 21st at 8pm UK time.

Activity Check!

Guthrie and Pittbunny have failed to post since confirmation and have thus been prodded.

Muthaa, Reverse Simplicity, Sanxion and youngminii made their most recent posts on Friday. Given the holiday weekend, I'll give them a touch more leeway before prodding.

[Pittbunny]

Crap, I knew I forgot to bookmark something.

Reading.

[Robocopter87]

Though I dislike the question, it isn't enough to vote. I don't find Don scummy I just find his questions stupid. Big difference.

Policy voting is scummy. Chihuahua isn't doing anything but active lurking. Simple as that. And Active lurking is one of the most scummiest things in my book.

[Mr.Sandman]

I don't see why a lover would defend their partner to prevent themselves from death, especially at this stage.

Ummm why wouldn't a lover defend their partner? I mean they wouldn't do it openly of course, but still I'm sure no lovers are going to stand by and let their partner die.

If you're playing to win and you have no idea about your partners alignment then you've got no real reason to defend them. Come to think of it, the scum lover is the one with the main reason to defend their partner.

I don't think robocopter's questioning of don is a scum tell. Melodramatic, yes, but I don't see it as a particularly scummy thing to do

@Robo-160:

Holy crap. That took five seconds. I don't know what Yabba was aiming for but that was extremly stupid and scummy. He hasn't done anything besides fluff and joke around. He's V/LA right now so keeping vote on Chiauahua.

COME ON. What the fuck do I have to do to convince you that's scummy, and why the fuck am I scummy for trying to scumhunt?

[...later in the same post...]

Unvoting

here, chihuahua's doing a strong job under pressure poking holes in theories. The AtE-ish "oh it sucks to be under pressure" is ridiculous and needs to die, it's obscuring my read. Stop jamming my radar, dammit.

Note: The pace of the game is probably throttling quite a few of the players right now (effect: they lurk as Zero mentioned)- so I'd avoid chatroom-esque arguments and overly substantive rants if possible. Give them a chance to breathe.

What's prompting the sudden change in heart on chiauahuahuahua? I don't see any improvement difference in his/her play other than chihuahua's most recent post where he/she managed to stretch to more than 1 line

[chihuahua0]

Though I dislike the question, it isn't enough to vote. I don't find Don scummy I just find his questions stupid. Big difference.

Policy voting is scummy. Chihuahua isn't doing anything but active lurking. Simple as that. And Active lurking is one of the most scummiest things in my book.

I'm not lurking. I don't have 12-hour access to a computer.

And I don't like how Millar is acting:

TACTIC my friend!

Play along? Are you denying, your my love?

Ooops lol....my mistake....i was going to out my lover and then after your response actually checked my role and your that my lover; must have thought of u and marathon.

SCUM!

Claiming lovers isn't a good tactic. You are basically asking the Mafia to lynch/kill you along with your lover. Using love as a threat will not work. as even if you avoid being lynch, you'll end up dead by morning.

[millar13]

MAFIA HAVE LOVERS WHO ARE TOWN DUMB DUMB!

[Pittbunny]

Mafuyu hasn't finished reading but... isn't it kind of stupid to sacrifice two players at once for the disfavorable probability that you might nail scum?

[Pittbunny]

In this thread I boggle minds.

[Fidelis]

MAFIA HAVE LOVERS WHO ARE TOWN DUMB DUMB!

Only one mafia has a lover that's a town... all the rest are town-town pairs. And really, I don't understand why you would even be joking about being a lover. The only scenarios that this is possibly beneficial in are if you are mafia, you're the treacherous lover, or you're taking the off chance that your lover is the treacherous lover. That or you aren't a lover and you're just making pointless sarcastic posts...

But this reaction (quoted above) to chihuahua's post is more than a little odd. I'm sure you were aware that there are town-town lover pairs. So the only reason you would think chihuahua's claim is so ridiculous is if you are almost completely assured that "claiming" lover will have no negative effect on you. This leads me to believe you are the treacherous lover.... VOTE: millar13 unless someone convinces me I'm misinterpreting.

[Robocopter87]

I said ACTIVE lurking. Meaning, you post so you don't get prodded and your posts have no content.

I'll even have examples.
Here have a list in ISO#s.

Wow. I just went through your ISOs and realized you haven't posted enough to even have a long list of ISO #s of active lurking. So you know what? I am going to go PBP and show what you've done. I forget who asked me for a case but here goes.

ISO#0
Confirm- Null

ISO#1
Fluffy question of Nulliness

ISO#2
Re-quotes Fluffy question, why not just state in your other post? O right, you need to have something to post, instead of nothing. This is known as active lurking. Which is scummy.
First scumtell.

ISO#3
I don't understand this one at all. He says me and Yabba arguing is a scumtell. Then votes me.

ISO#4
People call him out on the above point. He replies in this post by saying that he was afraid to be called out on bandwagoneering. If you thought Yabba was scum and he had votes, why not try and advocate for his lynch? Then go for me the next day. He also said in this post that it was a random vote. No, it wasn't. So you lying and lying is scummy in almost every occasion including this one with a few rare exceptions.

ISO#5
Says he got in trouble again because of what he said. Fluff. Active lurking. Then changes the subject to lovertells. Scummy. More active lurking.

ISO#6
Hate this. Policy vote. SCUMMY.

ISO#7
Don wants more Chihuahua votes, don't blame him. Says Don offended him. Which is a load of crap. FoS's, which do nothing in this game. Then says he had some defined reason for policy vote. Which never happened... Scummy...

ISO#8
You know what, this is townie like for the most part I guess. I'll give you that.

ISO#9
Never really understood what he was talking about with people calling him zero.
Actually answered Don's question but I'm not going there.
This post handled the situation right. This one was townie.

ISO#10
Last post.
Says he wasn't lurking. I meant active lurking, so that is why I made this post.
Though Millar is doing it wrong, he's confusing the Mafia. If he is Town, the Mafia are deciding whether or not hes bluffing. If he's Mafia, the better for us! So whatever Millars doing, its not too bad though it is kinda annoying.

[Robocopter87]

Though hes starting to clear up and straighten he still has been more scummy than Town. I'm leaving my vote here for now until something important comes up.

[Sanxion]

I see a few people who look slightly town, I don't get much scum reads right now, but Millar has me confused on how to react. I really wanna just say he's trolling.

[chihuahua0]

MAFIA HAVE LOVERS WHO ARE TOWN DUMB DUMB!

That's it. He's a bigger noob than I am:

UNVOTE:
VOTE: millar13

[chihuahua0]

MAFIA HAVE LOVERS WHO ARE TOWN DUMB DUMB!

Only one mafia has a lover that's a town... all the rest are town-town pairs. And really, I don't understand why you would even be joking about being a lover. The only scenarios that this is possibly beneficial in are if you are mafia, you're the treacherous lover, or you're taking the off chance that your lover is the treacherous lover. That or you aren't a lover and you're just making pointless sarcastic posts...

But this reaction (quoted above) to chihuahua's post is more than a little odd. I'm sure you were aware that there are town-town lover pairs. So the only reason you would think chihuahua's claim is so ridiculous is if you are almost completely assured that "claiming" lover will have no negative effect on you. This leads me to believe you are the treacherous lover.... VOTE: millar13 unless someone convinces me I'm misinterpreting.

Good point. He could be the treacherous lover. As I said, claiming lovers is dangerous, for more than one person.

Millar's either likely a:

1. Lover
2. A Townie, posing as a lover.
3. The Treacherous Lover


The chance's of him being a doctor is low, since he's attraching too much attraction with ALL THOSE CAPS. If he's a Mafia Goon, he being alive in the morning would increased the chances of a lynch death. Even if he's not a Treacherous Lover, he's plain annoying with all his one line caps posts.


Looks like I'm getting better.

[yabbaguy]

...but is he noobscum or are you policy voting again?

Oh yeah, one key difference: he's not a noob.