O299 - dh's mafia game of fun amazingness, for real (gaem)

[Thor665]

And away we go;

Vote: TheJakalope

For being part rabbit.

[Thor665]

Hey Admiral.

Unvote: TheJakalope
Vote: iamausername

[Thor665]

How about you bandwagon lynch instead, iamusername has two votes on him and knows he's busted scum which is why he's hiding from our righteous vengeance.

@Elsa - So...you're "good" with don's policy lynch now? Why are you still voting him then? I would currently support someone voting you so I could bandwagon in and justify leaving this sweet two vote wagon I'm currently on.

[Thor665]

Do you feel his belief in policy lynches strengthens, weakens, or doesn't effect your vote at all in this instance?

[Thor665]

Unvote: iamusername
Vote: Elsa Von Spielburg

Wagon, hooooo!

I am emotionally comfortable with the Sparx wagon, but tend to believe the Elsa one actually has a smidgen of meat on the bone and is thus, totally not RVS and I'm dead serious and we should speed lynch her now.

[Thor665]

My answer is Elsa - Elsa and TheJakalope.

Reason for Elsa - 'woe is me' post after having some votes on her. As though ending the RVS ever doesn't involve either starting a wagon on somebody or on yourself.

Reason for Jakalope - avoidance on commenting on anything worthwhile, he just looks too buddy buddy to Elsa, and despite his interpretation of chk's question he declines to answer it.

[Thor665]

Without using votes to generate pressure how do you foresee creating reactions and interactions you can then read so you have something to go on?

[Thor665]

Without using votes to generate pressure how do you foresee creating reactions and interactions you can then read so you have something to go on?

@Jakalope - I do talk to hear my beautiful words take form, but I also like my questions answered as well.

Actually like Elsa's shift to Sparx, though she is probably in a position to want to run up somebody.

Calling town vibes from DDDP and ThAdmiral.

Sparx and Jakalope are both now sliding down the scum scale and sit in the cloud right above Elsa.

[Thor665]

Elsa von Spielburg - 5 (ThAdmiral, Nobody Special, Thor665,

chkflip, Sparx

) L-2

I'm not sure I buy it as presented. The softsell while voting someone else is nice, but the VCA makes the back of my hands itch. I suspect it's not a pair.

[Thor665]

VCA?

Vote count analysis. Please refer to the quote in the relevant post for the reason I am uncertain on it as regards a chk/Sparx scumpairing.

[Thor665]

whats with the sparx wagon?

What's with the DDDP wagon? Didn't you see me call him a town read earlier? Either you should be after me for my blatant defense of someone scummy, or you should be after DDDP because he's acting scummy.

Sparx is scummy because he spent time bashing chk and then voted someone else. Plus he has a scummy face. What's your read of him?

[Thor665]

Given Elsa's demeanor, I'm happy with my vote on her.

What is the "demeanor" that is keeping her scum? Is it something new, or is it the original tell? If it's just the original tell why phrase it like this?

[Thor665]

@don

1. LOL
2. And...?
3. So, the plan is to not do anything with the RVS vote, since certainly an RVS vote isn't to get reactions that you can address or pressure people you're voting. Buh?
4. Scum motivation behind softly encouraging a wagon while not having to get on it yourself? That would be the motivation of getting town lynched and hoping to get other people to do it so as to protect yourself from VCA of course. I do not foresee him as buddies with chk as I've said twice - once when I said chk was a town read and once when I said, well, pretty much that I didn't see them as buddies. And, yes, I did say Sparx was sliding down the scum scale - what has that to do with the price of tea in China? If you read my posts it will help you follow my opinions.

So, how's that basically useless RVS doing for you? What are you planning to do with it, and how do you see it helping town currently?

[Thor665]

Oh, and you dodged actually answering what your read on Sparx was. I'd still like that.

[Thor665]

1. LOL

??

Defending an RVS wagon by the time people are starting to make scum/town calls is lolworthy, because at the very least you should be doing something to get yourself into a point where you are making town/scum reads. Failure to do so doesn't help town and looks scummy. Hence - LOL.

and what?

And draw some conclusions now that you know I called him a town read. IIoA isn't a town tell y'know.

its an rvs vote. not sure what you do with yours, but i am sufficiently satisfied with the game state at the moment. if

you

want to pressure ddd then join the wagon...

Herp - DDDP is a town read - derp.
I use my RVS to get reactions and catch scum. You apparently use it as justification for doing nothing with your vote. Whassup wit dat?

it would help if you phrase your answers in the form of answers. making them questions is not helpful to the communication atmosphere.

Seriously dude? It's called restating the question. Since I quite

literally

followed this restatement by answering the question and you quoted and responded to that answer the purpose of this was...???

my bad. i thought you were voting sparx.

No. And just in case you missed it I've also called DDDP and ThAdmiral town. I've called Jakalope, Sparx, and Elsa scum. And now I'm calling you scum based simply on a policy lynch decision. You're not helping town, so I'd be fine with you being dead at this stage as at least an alignment flip might serve a purpose. You can go just a skintch above Jak and Sparx on my scum list. Say hi to them when you get there.

not "obvscum". i thought the fact that i was inquiring as to "whats with the sparx wagon?" was kind of a giveaway that i didn't get it. i'll try to be more clear for you.

Okay...so now that the SParx wagon has been explained to you how about you react to it now as opposed to giving me a past tense answer. Do you find the wagon good/bad/burrito/what? What do you like about it, what do you hate. Go for the gold and comment on how other people are reacting to it too if you feel ambitious.

And get your vote off DDDP unless you are honestly calling him scummiest person in thread. If you want to keep your vote on him, claim that as so and offer whatever evidence you have (maybe at least assault other wagons as to why they aren't scummy/good). He's posted multiple times since you voted him without responding to that vote which proves the vote is about as useful as a one-legged man in the butt-kicking contest and looks like you're basically sidelining both your opinion and your vote.

[Thor665]

Anyway, thor, if you are pushing the sparx wagon so much why don't you jump on it?

Um...well;

1. Because I have a stronger scum read on Elsa.
2. Because my strongest scum read supports that wagon.
3. Because part of the support for the Sparx wagon comes from a theory about chkflip also being scum and I have a townish read on him.

I'm not fully against the Sparx wagon, and he is in my second tier suspects. But I'm not likely to go over there unless the Elsa wagon becomes dead in the water or I get a flash of town energy for her. Do you see some brilliant reason I should shift? I don't see Sparx as any more functional at a strategic level.

@don - the douchebag comment was uncalled for and strikes me as more personal than game related, which is uncool. The rest mostly doesn't seem worth replying to - you can stay on the scum list for the nonce. I look forward to you doing any scumhunting whatsoever and proving me wrong. Give me a call when it happens. Until then I'll keep mentioning you as a viable lynch every page or two.

[Thor665]

Don_johnson: you seriously want to lynch someone for intimidating you as a player? Sad. You're still town, though.

Could you deepen this read please? I've got a touch of town mixed with scum on the don, and I'd love to push him over the edge into one camp and at the moment the camp I'm leaning is not the one you chose. Need input.

And ThAd gut? Could you check with the spleen, it might have a different outlook.

[Thor665]

@Amrum - do you stand by your other reads? I mean, we can ignore that kinda sadly scummy looking blither-blather Don_j just posted if you're more nullish on him (listen to what I 'meant' not what I 'said') I'm fine with that. But if I was to ask you about explaining any of your other reads would they be more rock solid or are there a few other kinda soft positions in there?

[Thor665]

i find it comical that you're trying to write me off when you, in fact, neglected to respond to my earlier post and hid behind the "oh, that was a personal attack," excuse.

Quote the question I dodged please. I'll respond.

[Thor665]

i didn't say you "deodged" any questions. you simply failed to respond to my post. the one question that was directed at you was in regards to your statement about how you use your rvs vote. i pointed out that you actually did nothing with your rvs vote and asked you what you felt it accomplished. its not a big deal, i just don't feel i deserve the cold shoulder because i apologized.

1. You didn't make a case on me about my RVS habits so I saw little value in getting into a theory debate in thread.
2. I did do something with my RVS vote, I generated reads - but i'd already said that.
3. I am not giving you a 'cold shoulder' because I perceived you insulting me. I am calling you scummy because I perceive your actions as scum - I feel my posts reflect this. I'll toss in an apology accepted and no harm done commentary if it helps you refocus on treating my posts as purely game related. I am emotionally fine with you - I just find you scummy, and I really can't fault you for getting a role PM that I must destroy. That's the mod's fault.

I am indifferent about your attitude towards votes being justified - I find it a tell neither way. I do have issue with your 'take what I mean, not what I say' explanation which sounds very much like scummy repositioning of yourself into a less controversial position.

[Thor665]

no you didn't say that. what reads did you get from your rvs vote? why do you think i don't do the same thing but in a different way?

I generate reads because I use my vote as a blunt instrument and batter people about the head with it like a soccer hooligan. You made your vote, didn't get a reaction from the guy you voted, and sat there silently not asking the guy you voted anything.
Then you changed your vote to "even wagons".
So...basically your vote did nothing, and I asked you what your vote was doing for you and your answer was 'nothing, but at some future date the stars will align and somehow a tell will develop from this' which i personally don't expect to happen - I'll be excited to see it happen if it does, but I'd be willing to put money on it as a wager because I'm that certain it won't. Please prove me wrong at this later point.

if you think unreasoned votes are scummy, then why are you content to let almost the entire sparx wagon slide without so much as offering opinions? you are a walking contradiction in that respect. but whatever.

Other than you deciding I must agree with Elsa's accusation on you - where is my contradiction? Please try to use words I've actually said.

elsa cherry picked the bolded and ignored the context of the statement. so i clarified what i meant. in fact, this post is entirely consistent with my "clarification". if you disagree, then please explain all of your unreasoned votes today and why they shouldn't be seen as scummy. see how that works. its called logic. you can't have it both ways.

1. I do disagree that it's entirely consistent. You went from unreasoned votes are not scummy and scummy votes involve BS logic to - unreasoned votes 'can' be scummy but this one isn't. That's a change of tune. It might be a clarification, but it might be scummy backtracking, and I know which I feel was there more than the other.

2. I don't think I've made an unreasoned vote since maybe my first few games, but your definition of what a scummy vote is defined as is drastically different from how I would define a scummy vote and also has changed somewhat, so I'd like to make sure I understand your question so I can answer it properly. I'm going to work through this a bit;

You appear to define "unreasoned" as lacking a reason to vote - which doesn't even pare up with your own actions as you had a reason.
I guess you mean unreasoned is lacking a developed case?
I don't see any issue with lacking a developed case to vote, and have never said as much, and I don't see why me disagreeing with the scumminess of your wordplay has to do with me justifying votes that lack a developed case. That's sort of like telling me - oh, you hate milk? Then stop drinking orange juice! Yeah, they're both liquids that people can drink but...
Double check your logic and get back to me on this one. You lost me and you still look scummy.

[Thor665]

so i will stand by my statement that rvs can be beneficial later in the game.

Oh, RVS certainly is. Your vote...not so much.

start with explaining your first two votes in this game, neither of which had a reason attached to them.

You functionally asked this question three times - I'm answering this one as the most 'complete' of the questions. I do find the way my RVS worked to be different from yours.

Vote 1 - I am the first player posting in the game, I place a vote on a player, my intent is to start a bandwagon on someone in order to bring the game out of RVS.
Vote 2 - Now with other votes out there I bandwagon on the very first vote that isn't on me. I have now created a wagon and a situation for people to respond to so I can get reads on them as well as the player I'm voting.

no. "unreasoned" is a vote without a reason attached. my vote had a reason. it just wasn't the type of "reason" that was being asked for, which is what you are now defining as "reason". in other words, i may have mispoke, but it then becomes a semantics argument.

Oh boy...you do realize now that your "clarification" now includes two different definitions for reason, don't you? Double check the meaning of clarification and get back to me (but, in all honesty, don't, I don't want any more clarification on this topic)

what is your issue with my posting? is it that i am not elaborating enough. i see where your issue is now, our definition of "reason" and i realize i may have misspoke, but my "logic" is sensible:

My issue was the engines reverse "oh, let me clarify, it's not quite what you thought I meant" answer.
I'll also now add to this that in your responses to me you're now indicating that Elsa was misrepping you by taking things out of context. Your 'here's a clarification' is not the answer I would expect if that's what you thought she was doing.
Both of the above showcase how you keep changing and fluttering around in your story and the perceptions you want others to have, and that is what I'm calling scummy. Nothing more, nothing less...well, a little more for the RVS vote sidelining/lack of scumhunting, but those two things are the only 'more' to my issues with you.

evening wagons is a perfectly ok "reason" to vote on day 1. agree or disagree?

Depends. I generally accept that competing wagons are good. I do find the washing of one's hands of needing to actually call one of the wagons kind of scummy as well. I'm not fond of the play in general, but speciically if I didn't already have an issue with you as a player I think is avoiding giving reads and scumhunting I would probably not find it scummy.

votes without "reasons"(however you choose to define "reason") must be read in context in order to determine whether or not they are scummy. agree or disagree?

The way *I* define reason - no votes are without reason, and all votes do need to be read in context to discover scum/town motivations to them.

[Thor665]

Aw man, if I hadn't doubted myself, this would have been a 100% perfect game. Sorry for letting you get you killed, Thor.

I feel better about my issues with don Day 1 - I was a flippin' idiot about chk though, derpy-doo.

[Thor665]

They may have been thrown off by obv. town Thor talking about how confirmed DDDP was, when I flipped Doc they were probably like 'whew, tagged that one'. We did have a dual stroke of awesome brilliance Night 0 (though, my brilliance was sorta a random guess, but, hey, I'll call it brilliance).