Open 268: Raise the White Flag (Game Over)

[yabbaguy]

Vote: bvoigt

since andrew's prob. not gonna do that this game.

Hi, silverbullet. How do you usually approach D1?

[yabbaguy]

Thanks for not starting RQS everyone. Much appreciated.

^I like you^
Reason: ...

Unvote, Vote: silverbullet

more seriously. Why the urge to explicitly explain yourself?

[yabbaguy]

^I'm starting to find you interesting.. and also hating you^

Well

that's

vague on the other hand. You're implying me with this remark, you said?

Why are you so insistent on this answer? It doesn't seem like it would provide any reliable indications of silver's alignment.

I think it would.

What are you accusing andrew of? Being shotty's scumbuddy?
This is a pretty poorly thought out attempt at a vote, if you ask me.

You're completely missing the point here. You complain yourself that the game's started slowly (I agree). The problem here is that you're also squawking at chkflip for shoddy vote reasoning when there's really not a lot to go off of. He's actually doing a brilliant thing by trying to solve the issue you have with the speed of this game (by firing out a vote of some sort), and yet that's the very thing you're voting him over. It makes no sense.

[yabbaguy]

andrew, we're not policy lynching. It's categorically dumb.

Cookie, I see your question, and it's all about behavior compared to other games. One of the interesting things I gleam is that silverbullet was lurking through the RVS, hence why I asked the question. It's more a consistency check, because while it's not a surefire indicator, a different start-of-game behavior may possibly suggest a different role. The passage of time or perhaps just the will to experiment are two other confounding variables though, but I wanted to make sure he was involved somehow.

btw, 12 minutes is a nothing interval of time in this game. Don't panic yet.

[yabbaguy]

If you actually read silver's reasoning, you'd see it actually has nothing to do with the game. You just 'serious' voted someone for no reason.

But here's the thing, he says it in a very strange way, saying "Reason: blahblahblah". That's what irked me among the minimalism of the RVS, the fact that he had to somehow explicitly state why he did something, possibly in a bizarre effort to be as openly transparent as possible and cover his tracks. Not a standalone reason, indeed, but it's most certainly worth noting and most certainly relevant. In retrospect, it's not worth holding a vote over silverbullet's head, but I still want to know why he finds me "interesting" (if I'm understanding his post correctly, I think I am).

Unvote

I'll pass Striker as a newbie, but my presumption is that werewolf should know better than to add nothing to the game (notwithstanding the policy vote and not even having the courtesy to explain to me why he's doing it in the face of my outright adversity towards such behavior). Striker, if you insist on making sure everyone takes a turn with the "talking stick" before you get it a second time, the game's activity level is going to plummet and we'll go into apathy mode far too soon since we're going to be waiting on one person all the time. Don't ignore the lurkers, but don't make that the reason you're clamming up now.

[yabbaguy]

CN, that's the whole damned issue. Especially with the strange "oh" thrown on at the beginning of the line and the strange "confirm" when it should've been by PM, I'm going to claim that's deliberate. What do you lot reckon?

Vote: werewolf555

[yabbaguy]

Deliberate, yet careless I should've mentioned.

[yabbaguy]

andrew, the logic is clearly defying you.

-he crumbed cop (so we believe)
-there's no cop indeed
-thus he's scum who's just committed a major blunder

If you think that's a crumb, then vote him now.

[yabbaguy]

Even andrew's explicit explanation you missed? That's simply not believable.

What are you saying in #53?

[yabbaguy]

andrew mentioned "C-O-P" but didn't connect that to you being an obvious liar somehow. That was the gap.

[yabbaguy]

And I was

so

close to yelling at you for outing the crumb.

[yabbaguy]

I've seen bread crumbs happen before that were not actually noticed by said poster and were not even intended

[citation needed]

... and eh I feel that werewolf would be a bit oblivious to what he did and it was purely accidental. The growth of his wagon concerns me a little though.

If you want to call bullshit, post a link to prove it.

[yabbaguy]

Andrew, you outright believe he crumbed. IF YOU THINK SOMEONE FAKECRUMBED, YOU LYNCH THE LIAR.

[yabbaguy]

You're making the game regress, chkflip. We've looked at that and determined that it's highly unlikely he could've missed andrew's explanation of "there's C O P in the first letter of each line". I mean, I looked at his post and found C-O-P straightaway once bvoigt flagged the potential crumb.

If indeed I'm right, and werewolf is in this position, he has to try

something

to try to cover up the blunder. His reaction, first confrontational and then confused, strike me as odd because I would expect that he'd have something to say about the likelihood that he actually made a crumb (in other words, refuting our claims that the idiosyncrasies in his post were nothing more than just that and not a deliberate effort to crumb)

[yabbaguy]

I'm not sure where the misrep is. The fact that you would even consider hammering on page 4 is scummy to me regardless of everything else.

The pace of the game has been extremely accelerated by this fakecrumb allegation. Of course a hammer is permissible, that's why votes are even coming down in the first place since it both says "votee is scummy" and "I want the Day to end". I am absolutely happy for the Day to end right now. Maybe it's due to newbieness, but you need to now wrap your mind around the fact that if you believe wolf's crumb is fake, you should vote him. I'll say this as often as I have to, you either agree with the alleged fakecrumb case or you rip it down. Cookie, you're doing neither and you're driving me up a wall.

@andrew: Why is chkflip's *ahem* flip of opinion a concern? Is he not allowed to change his mind? Also, are you somehow thinking that I'm a manipulative sort of teacher, seeing as you're surprisingly confrontational about it? I'm absolutely being dramatic, but I'm basing this all off of the fact that wolf's likelihood of a scum flip is very high right now. Which of my games did you read?

silverbullet, is it the "SWITS" crumb, or something else? I didn't have much time to read your example game thoroughly, so I'll get to that in a sec.

[yabbaguy]

I'll demonstrate the logic chain again, andrew. I think this has been discussed already though, and the more you drag my past arguments out of the recycle bin, the more the game regresses, and the more I think you're scummy.

• If you believe there was no deliberate crumb, then you don't vote werewolf. That's what you believe is the case though, so we proceed.
  
• werewolf is either Town or Mafia
  
• If werewolf is Town, but he's made the crumb, there really is no explicable reason for it. To do so would be nothing but deliberately anti-Town. Therefore we dismiss the possibility.
  
• If you believe the crumb is fake, this leads to the conclusion that he's not Town. Now we look at the Mafia motives, and we find that they're strange as well, but plausible. Especially considering the last White Flag that was run consisted of an Inadvertent Mountainous set of Town power roles (power roles whose abilities actually have no effect on the game), perhaps werewolf-scum overlooked the fact that this was explicitly Mountainous (no power roles) this go-round. The fact of the matter though is that if you believe werewolf has deliberately crumbed Cop, you must therefore assume that he has deliberately concocted a lie in the thread. There is zero Town motive, and while you have to bank on the fact that werewolf made a blunder, I could see that being the case.

Essentially, the accidental oversight comes in not seeing that a Cop never existed. The claim here, and the SOLE BASIS for making this decision, is whether or not you believe that the crumb was deliberate. If that's a crumb, it was NOT an accident that werewolf decided to lie about his role.

Yes, it's a wicked high-speed wagon. It's very rare that you get such allegedly damning evidence on the early side of D1, but fast isn't opportunistic.

[yabbaguy]

Cookie, could you

please

weigh in on the fakecrumb issue? Thanks.

[yabbaguy]

My bet is that I would've succumbed to the chkflip wagon but would've initially played at andrew. I don't know why his logic got twisted in the bunch, but I think it became null the moment werewolf flipped Town. Had it been scum, I would've def. gone after Andrew next had I been left in. I probably would've succumbed to the chkflip wagon.

chkflip self-hammering to prove a point was pathetic, it must be said again. I have zero respect and it should be deemed blatantly anti-wincon and an autoloss even if Town had gone to win. I'm adamantly of that belief.

I believe I was pretty sure about rekirtS-scum though...

Ugh. CN has been a town read the entire game but I'm getting super paranoid right now.

...you gotta be careful with comments like these. This remark was unprovoked IIRC- so it's a scummy reversal of stance.

Another loss for me, not so much my fault at least, but the nightmare still continues. I'm now on 5-16 as Town. :\