Open 258 --- Night Watch --- Game Over

[nameloc1986]

...places suspicion on Jason after he answered his question???

First off, the intention of the question was to get Jason to give some opinions on other people. I didn't think jason would just vote shotty w/o a reason.

... didn't finish the thought.

Second off, why is it scummy to not like the reaction to a question, even if the question is yours?

Because the question felt more like a "friendly" question and then your response made me feel like you set him up for a trap.

Kinda of like:

"Hey do want to try this chocolate cake or this pound cake?"

"I think I'll try the chocolate."

"WHY THE FUCK DID YOU CHOOSE THE CHOCOLATE??"

-Exaggeration I know but the point is that he did what you asked in a sense. He jumped on a bandwagon. Then you jumped on him.

This is a false analogy. Also, it's an exaggeration to say that I "jumped on Jason."

I guess that does make Jason look more like a "follower" but being Day 1 and close to the RVS, I didn't think it was absolutely necessary to give a reason right then.

OK, well that's a matter of personal opinion.

It may be an exaggeration but you still were suspicious of him. And how is it a false analogy? You ask him to try a bandwagon out, he chooses a bandwagon, doesn't give a reason and then find him suspicious for it. That's pretty much what the analogy entails.

Let me ask you this question: Why did you ask him to join a bandwagon?

[Antihero]

Let me ask you this question: Why did you ask him to join a bandwagon?

To get him to give some opinions instead of talking about theory. I've repeated said that already. [/frustration]

[Antihero]

It may be an exaggeration but you still were suspicious of him. And how is it a false analogy? You ask him to try a bandwagon out, he chooses a bandwagon, doesn't give a reason and then find him suspicious for it. That's pretty much what the analogy entails.

You're acting like I rigidly presented him with absolute choices, and I didn't. If jason came back and said "I don't like either wagon, I'll vote this player for X reason" that would have been fine with me (provided X reason isn't scummy).

[PogoStick]

Hey joystick, when you do your readthrough, I'd like you to talk about this (esp. the italicized part):

unvote

my vote on Andrew was not serious, the fact he got to L-2 doesn't sit well with me, I'm looking at these bandwagons and why they formed,

I don't think Andrew is the day 1 lynch, even if he is scum.

He just is too easy a vote and mafia can hide in there without any worry about being FOS'd cause it's Andrew.

I'm eagerly awaiting the catchup post by CKD.

[/quote]
what do you want me to talk about?

Andrew is almost always targeted day 1, he mostly fake claims power roles as town, lynching him day 1 is too easy for mafia to jump on his wagon cause Andrew is always scummy.

acting scummy =/= scum.

[nameloc1986]

Let me ask you this question: Why did you ask him to join a bandwagon?

To get him to give some opinions instead of talking about theory. I've repeated said that already. [/frustration]

Sorry I see where you said that now.

[Antihero]

Hey joystick, when you do your readthrough, I'd like you to talk about this (esp. the italicized part):

unvote

my vote on Andrew was not serious, the fact he got to L-2 doesn't sit well with me, I'm looking at these bandwagons and why they formed,

I don't think Andrew is the day 1 lynch, even if he is scum.

He just is too easy a vote and mafia can hide in there without any worry about being FOS'd cause it's Andrew.

I'm eagerly awaiting the catchup post by CKD.

what do you want me to talk about?

Andrew is almost always targeted day 1, he mostly fake claims power roles as town, lynching him day 1 is too easy for mafia to jump on his wagon cause Andrew is always scummy.

acting scummy =/= scum.

What do you mean what do I want you to talk about?

You just declared someone off limits for lynching, even going so far as to say he shouldn't be lynched even if he's scum!

Playing the VI card for andrew here = yikes

[nameloc1986]

@DF: I really don't know if a no lynch would be beneficial at all in this type of set-up (probably not), but my point was that if there is not enough evidence for me to merit a vote, I will not vote. I stand by what I say in post 77 that a lynch will give us more info than a no lynch, but I don't want to vote for someone just because I HAVE to vote.

Alright, let's say that hypothetically that two people were at L-1 right before deadline. You don't have strong scum reads against either of them but your decision was key to making a lynch. What would you do?

[andrew94]

Andrew, you never really answered my original question about your attack on HOMJ. Why did you make such a half-hearted attack on what would have been a monumental scumslip?

ok so someone says 'so theres 2 scum left...' in an open game or 'im scum'
and your supposed to think 'OMG THATS TOO BIG SCUMSLIP therefore cant be scumslip.

no way, every little time counts.
i didnt make half hearted attempt, he hasnt replied to my last thing

[andrew94]

er stop with the insults or i shall start.
when i looked at your post 'minority' i thought instantly to 'uninformed minority' aka town, therefore i felt you were trying too hard to be town

i think it was this. he hasnt replied yet

[Zdenek]

Andrew, you never really answered my original question about your attack on HOMJ. Why did you make such a half-hearted attack on what would have been a monumental scumslip?

Do you think it was a scumslip?

[2003041]

@DF: I really don't know if a no lynch would be beneficial at all in this type of set-up (probably not), but my point was that if there is not enough evidence for me to merit a vote, I will not vote. I stand by what I say in post 77 that a lynch will give us more info than a no lynch, but I don't want to vote for someone just because I HAVE to vote.

Alright, let's say that hypothetically that two people were at L-1 right before deadline. You don't have strong scum reads against either of them but your decision was key to making a lynch. What would you do?

I don't know whether in this setup if a no lynch wouldn't hurt town or not. Even if I don't have a strong read on a player as scum, it would be very difficult for me to hammer. I would probably do a re-read and look at all the evidence and make a choice based on that. If a no lynch has a negative impact on the town in any way, I would vote, but not before looking at the cases presented.

Also, I apologize for not posting much. I've been running around everywhere recently. I'm hoping that either tomorrow or wednesday I can do some isos and get some questions out there.

[PogoStick]

Hey joystick, when you do your readthrough, I'd like you to talk about this (esp. the italicized part):

unvote

my vote on Andrew was not serious, the fact he got to L-2 doesn't sit well with me, I'm looking at these bandwagons and why they formed,

I don't think Andrew is the day 1 lynch, even if he is scum.

He just is too easy a vote and mafia can hide in there without any worry about being FOS'd cause it's Andrew.

I'm eagerly awaiting the catchup post by CKD.

what do you want me to talk about?

Andrew is almost always targeted day 1, he mostly fake claims power roles as town, lynching him day 1 is too easy for mafia to jump on his wagon cause Andrew is always scummy.

acting scummy =/= scum.

What do you mean what do I want you to talk about?

You just declared someone off limits for lynching, even going so far as to say he shouldn't be lynched even if he's scum!

Playing the VI card for andrew here = yikes

do you know he is scum? cause I sure don't and I have seen andrew lynched day one for being scummy and he is town. If you guys want to lynch andrew have at it but personally he is just an easy target for scum to get away unsuspected.

@andrew - my comment about minority was not referring to this game it was referring to this site in general, people have problems lynching VT claims on day 1 and I understand that, that is why i have dropped it and moved on. That was my RVS/RQS conversation and am now in the game and don't really wish to discuss it anymore.

if you woud like to debate the issues of lynching VTs, we can start a thread somewhere and discuss it, right now nobody in this game has even come close to claiming, so no point it discussing the pros and cons of lynching VTs just yet.

[jasonT1981]

I don't really think Anti-Hero 'jumped' on me as it has been put. He asked a question of me nothing more, however I explained my reasons.

Andrew, out of all these games you have been lynched on day 1.... whats your scum/town ratio IE how many times have you been scum and how many times have you been town.. And how many times have you fake claimed, as town?

[PogoStick]

I am still wondering when shotty is going to come and participate, he has questions directed towards him and no response from him yet

[nameloc1986]

I don't really think Anti-Hero 'jumped' on me as it has been put. He asked a question of me nothing more, however I explained my reasons.

Yeah yeah, this has already been addressed and I already admitted to exaggerating.

I am still wondering when shotty is going to come and participate, he has questions directed towards him and no response from him yet

search.php?author_id=13944&sr=posts

He's been online the past couple of days, but only on this game to vote andrew and then he invited him to a marathon game. Since then he's been doing a couple of marathons (never finished the one he started) but has had time to post in other games. Granted I'm not sure what this says.

[PogoStick]

Disinterest or hiding

[jasonT1981]

hiding? you think he could be waiting out the slight heat on him, waiting on focus to turn elsewhere? hmmm, scum tatic?

[PogoStick]

Tbh inactivity can be used by both sides

[nameloc1986]

I wouldn't take shotty's inactivity as that big of a shock. I did some further checking on him and he's in at least EIGHT FRICKIN GAMES currently. I think the best thing to do is ask the mod for a prod on him and move on.

@mod: can you prod shotty?

I know it may seem early for a prod but I don't want to play with someone who's not going to have time for this game!

[jasonT1981]

8 games, jesus....

hmmm, interesting..with the above post nameloc1986 seems to have defended both Shotty... and Andrew now.. the two most talked about people in the game currently.

[nameloc1986]

There's no defending shotty at all in that post. I'm merely pointing out facts and saying we should maybe focus on someone else UNTIL shotty comes back or gets replaced.

[jasonT1981]

it seemed like you were making excuses for him in your last one, maybe im just looking into it far too much.

[PogoStick]

Is it me or is this game being played by the same 5 or 6 people

[Zdenek]

I don't like what I've seen from Joystick so far. I agree with Anti-hero, that the comment about Shotty overreacting is a little scummy. He hasn't done much scum hunting (except for being concerned about Shotty putting Andrew at L-2), and he has put a lot effort into defending Andrew, who, while I have to agree is an easy day one lynch, has given us no reason to think that he is town.

[andrew94]

I don't really think Anti-Hero 'jumped' on me as it has been put. He asked a question of me nothing more, however I explained my reasons.

Andrew, out of all these games you have been lynched on day 1.... whats your scum/town ratio IE how many times have you been scum and how many times have you been town.. And how many times have you fake claimed, as town?

all town, once scum.

fakeclaimed about the same amounts as davidparker