Open 304 - Hard Boiled, Game Over. Was DY's Dystopia saved?

[don_johnson]

i like the rc vote. but nameloc should go first.

toffee: not a whole lot of substance or "case" behind my suspicion of nameloc, but i'll try to flesh it out later. he just reads like maneuvering scum. rc is really making soft votes as if he's keeping a way to avoid accountablity.

[DeityKabuto]

@Deity:



no.

We've been waiting 3 1/2 pages for you to make clear concise reads based on evidence, by the way.

3 (1/2)?

You can't gather much evidence when the Day just begins, you can build up from "weak" points to why you think somebody is scummy, and if enough people agree, they will be lynched. That is what usually happens in some games, but how I want it is, lynching people once we've gotten "strong" evidence. Most votes in the RVS only give small clues, not that important.

[DemonHybrid]

That is what usually happens in some games, but how I want it is, lynching people once we've gotten "strong" evidence.

And that's why you're scummy. You can't get strong evidence unless you immerse yourself into the weak evidence to build cases.

[DemonHybrid]

Jeez, this is already turning into a Jets vs. Sharks type of deal. A nice even split of people who believe completely different things.

Does anyone else other than CK, Newman and I find Deity's line of questioning and desire for strong evidence before he lays down a single read scummy? Then come to the Sharks, homie.

[DeityKabuto]

Jeez, this is already turning into a Jets vs. Sharks type of deal. A nice even split of people who believe completely different things.

Does anyone else other than CK, Newman and I find Deity's line of questioning and desire for strong evidence before he lays down a single read scummy? Then come to the Sharks, homie.

It's called playing fair, the right way. You guys need to be more proper like me.

[DemonHybrid]

Jeez, this is already turning into a Jets vs. Sharks type of deal. A nice even split of people who believe completely different things.

Does anyone else other than CK, Newman and I find Deity's line of questioning and desire for strong evidence before he lays down a single read scummy? Then come to the Sharks, homie.

It's called playing fair, the right way. You guys need to be more proper like me.

No, it's called being lazy and creating a mirage of scumhunting when you aren't doing any at all.

[DeityKabuto]

Jeez, this is already turning into a Jets vs. Sharks type of deal. A nice even split of people who believe completely different things.

Does anyone else other than CK, Newman and I find Deity's line of questioning and desire for strong evidence before he lays down a single read scummy? Then come to the Sharks, homie.

It's called playing fair, the right way. You guys need to be more proper like me.

No, it's called being lazy and creating a mirage of scumhunting when you aren't doing any at all.

Right now this conversation is really biased, and we are just stacking sticks and stones upon ourselves. You are not scum hunting, you are just questioning my odd behaviors, which is just how I play.

[DemonHybrid]

Jeez, this is already turning into a Jets vs. Sharks type of deal. A nice even split of people who believe completely different things.

Does anyone else other than CK, Newman and I find Deity's line of questioning and desire for strong evidence before he lays down a single read scummy? Then come to the Sharks, homie.

It's called playing fair, the right way. You guys need to be more proper like me.

No, it's called being lazy and creating a mirage of scumhunting when you aren't doing any at all.

Right now this conversation is really biased

Biased? I presented a case against you. Your questioning is transparent and weak, and it's obvious you put up a veil of fake scumhunting in order to stay in the background and not have to do any work.

You are not

scum hunting

, you are just

questioning my odd behaviors

[Amrun]

Deity's most recent posts makes kittens cry.

[Surye]

That is what usually happens in some games, but how I want it is, lynching people once we've gotten "strong" evidence.

And that's why you're scummy. You can't get strong evidence unless you immerse yourself into the weak evidence to build cases.

I don't like this line of reasoning. And I don't like your line of posts DemonHybrid.

Don't like the Chesskid vote then recant.
Don't like the DeityKabuto case for asking questions to get scumhunting going. In the post he votes him, he essentially asks the same kind of question.

Never mind, forget Scott Brosius. This guy is so non-genuine, it hurts. He doesn't even have a scumread yet, so can we lynch him, please?

This is a thinly veiled request for scumreads... just like Deity did.

Jeez, this is already turning into a Jets vs. Sharks type of deal. A nice even split of people who believe completely different things.

This feels... wrong. Don't like it, but it's mostly gut.

Reading through Diety in ISO, I don't like his meta case, but he is not pushing it hard, and only early. I do think his "odd behavior" comment is legit, he's trying to pull his own meta in, which while annoying (I hate meta), I don't find it as scummy as Demon does....

So I don't like Diety's posting, but I REALLY don't like how Demon is attacking it.


So, the proper current wagon is VOTE: DemonHybrid

[DemonHybrid]

So I don't like Diety's posting, but I REALLY don't like how Demon is attacking it.

What?

You have a bunch of lines of "I don't like this." "It feels wrong." "This is a thinly veiled *thing that I clearly explained I was doing*."

You know, not once have you explained WHY you don't like the reasoning.

That post (and it's your first...whew) is ALL kinds of scummy and I'm willing to erase SB from my scumreads to put you on there.

I mean:

I don't like this line of reasoning. And I don't like your line of posts DemonHybrid.

Why?

Don't like the Chesskid vote then recant.

Why? It was a valid RVS vote.

Don't like the DeityKabuto case for asking questions to get scumhunting going.

You didn't even read my case. I'm voting him because he's doing no scumhunting. He's asking worthless questions in an attempt to look like he's scumhunting, and either you're his scumpartner or you bought it.

This is a thinly veiled request for scumreads... just like Deity did.

I don't care whether or not Kabuto has scumreads. It's clear that his reasoning for his questions and his delay to wait for more information is bullshit, so I'm not interested in his reads because I feel they won't be genuine. He missed his chance ever since his first post.

This feels... wrong. Don't like it, but it's mostly gut.

Gut.

Reading through Diety in ISO, I don't like his meta case, but he is not pushing it hard, and only early. I do think his "odd behavior" comment is legit, he's trying to pull his own meta in, which while annoying (I hate meta), I don't find it as scummy as Demon does....

Back and forth, back and forth back and forth but wait, Demon is scummy for trying to make sense of it. Yeah.

You've explained nothing except a possible "you're being a hypocrite by asking for scumreads" which is wrong and is something I wasn't even doing in the first place.

[DemonHybrid]

Speaking of dog pictures, I will use dog pictures to explain my scumreads. I feel that's the post potent way to get my message across.

DeityKabuto:



toffee:



Surye:



These speak a thousand words, I feel.

[Surye]

It's my first post because I was V/LA this weekend getting trashed in Vegas, you did not want me posting then

[smashbro_of_the_SSS]

Does anyone else other than CK, Newman and I find Deity's line of questioning and desire for strong evidence before he lays down a single read scummy? Then come to the Sharks, homie.

Suspicious of Diety, but not convinced of anything on him yet. I don't mind him wanting strong evidence, but I would like a read right away to give us an idea of where he is at. I see where you're coming from Demon, about him taking a backseat while other people do the work, but I want to see how the rest of the day plays out before I definitely call him scum.

VOTE: DeityKabuto

He needs to explain his chess read and if it's an ongoing game, he needs to come up with something better.

Um. I said my reason for chesskid, it wasn't really a serious vote. Right now, I am building up a list of suspects who I find scummy by their words/actions.

alright, deity, right now you have your vote on chess, if i'm not mistaken. if you think he is scum, why? if not, why leave your vote there?



also, not quite convinced on nameloc right now, have someone else i want to build a case on but dont have time now (i might not post tomorrow, but thursday I'll be on), and kinda interested in the Demon case, would really like to see reasons from you Surye. for now, i'm happy with my vote on red

[DeityKabuto]

Does anyone else other than CK, Newman and I find Deity's line of questioning and desire for strong evidence before he lays down a single read scummy? Then come to the Sharks, homie.

Suspicious of Diety, but not convinced of anything on him yet. I don't mind him wanting strong evidence, but I would like a read right away to give us an idea of where he is at. I see where you're coming from Demon, about him taking a backseat while other people do the work, but I want to see how the rest of the day plays out before I definitely call him scum.

VOTE: DeityKabuto

He needs to explain his chess read and if it's an ongoing game, he needs to come up with something better.

Um. I said my reason for chesskid, it wasn't really a serious vote. Right now, I am building up a list of suspects who I find scummy by their words/actions.

alright, deity, right now you have your vote on chess, if i'm not mistaken. if you think he is scum, why? if not, why leave your vote there?



also, not quite convinced on nameloc right now, have someone else i want to build a case on but dont have time now (i might not post tomorrow, but thursday I'll be on), and kinda interested in the Demon case, would really like to see reasons from you Surye. for now, i'm happy with my vote on red

I am experimenting, you see. Since a couple people have votes on chesskid, chesskid will try his best not to screw up, if it appears that he's trying to hard, and appears a bit lurky, then he's scum.

[chesskid3]

I've no time for this game today as I have a final tonight

[toffee]

If Deity is scum, so is toffee.

How, please?

I happened read a game with Deity as player, I think this is just his style.

"It's his style."

Um....











no. That's a red herring and that's also as transparent as polished glass. Never blame something legitimately scummy like that on "I think it's his playstyle".

Deity's play is odd, I realize that, it made my scumdar tingling too, but from my meta I also found out if he's a newbie who still in search on his own best-style in finding scum.
If every time Deity's oddness were forgiven by me just because I think he's a newbie, this could back stab me hard if in the end he turned scum, newbie scum.
But what I do isn't like that, when reading his posts, I carefully analyzing of what would the benefit for scum / town with what he's doing. And o yeah! This definitely isn't easy.

That is what usually happens in some games, but how I want it is, lynching people once we've gotten "strong" evidence.

And that's why you're scummy. You can't get strong evidence unless you immerse yourself into the weak evidence to build cases.

I got a feeling this is exactly what you're doing with Deity's case... :p
Reading you debating Deity's by paraphrasing his words, just causing me a headache. Or you're just simply scum who likes building cases on weak symptoms, like you said.

[toffee]

i like the rc vote. but nameloc should go first.

toffee: not a whole lot of substance or "case" behind my suspicion of nameloc, but i'll try to flesh it out later. he just reads like maneuvering scum. rc is really making soft votes as if he's keeping a way to avoid accountablity.

Well if after you flesh him out and you found his case not as good as rc-scum, you should help us and vote rc, is that sounds good with you?

[nameloc1986]

I am experimenting, you see. Since a couple people have votes on chesskid, chesskid will try his best not to screw up, if it appears that he's trying to hard, and appears a bit lurky, then he's scum.

If you say that the reason of your vote is to put pressure on someone, it kinda beats the purpose. That's why I waited a while before I gave my reasoning for my early chess suspicion. You didn't even give him a chance to respond before you say what you're looking for from him.

With you there is something not adding up:

Vote chesskid3

You trolled part of the Superhero mafia, lulz.

[quote="DK #78]My only suspects are chesskid, because of a meta in a different game.[/quote]

Um. I said my reason for chesskid, it wasn't really a serious vote. Right now, I am building up a list of suspects who I find scummy by their words/actions.

Why is it that chess is your only suspect, but later you say that the only reason you voted for him isn't serious? Explain please!

@HellloooNewman

What I'm thinking now is that we are both just townies who feel suspicion against each other. I have been put in the position you are in as how a townie gets really upset or defensive when attacked innocently. But in the game that I was like that, I only made myself look worse and nobody believed me. I am not saying that you are scum or anything, I am just saying that we should both try to scumhunt now.

This is the weakest defense I believe I have ever seen. I can see scum motivation all over the place here.

@toffee: Your defending of DK is noted. I love also how you say: "If every time Deity's oddness were forgiven by me just because I think he's a newbie, this could back stab me hard if in the end he turned scum, newbie scum." If DK ever flips scum, it won't look good for you.

I don't understand the RC wagon.

@don: If you ever decide you don't want to tunnel me, I would like to hear if you have any other suspicions.

[nameloc1986]

QUOTE FAIL LOL!! Gotta love it. It should look like this:

With you there is something not adding up:

Vote chesskid3

You trolled part of the Superhero mafia, lulz.

My only suspects are chesskid, because of a meta in a different game.

Um. I said my reason for chesskid, it wasn't really a serious vote. Right now, I am building up a list of suspects who I find scummy by their words/actions.

Why is it that chess is your only suspect, but later you say that the only reason you voted for him isn't serious? Explain please!

Lesson learned: if you make a detailed post, hit preview before before submit!

[HellloooNewman]

I am experimenting, you see. Since a couple people have votes on chesskid, chesskid will try his best not to screw up, if it appears that he's trying to hard, and appears a bit lurky, then he's scum.

If that is what you are doing, then WHY DID YOU TELL EVERYONE?!?!? Kinda defeats the purpose if you tell CK what you are looking for, wouldn't you say?

[RedCoyote]

Don't discuss ongoing games

He's not being specific but...

Especially ones in which you have flipped and I haven't, tyvm.

If this is true, DK, you're being unfair.

can we all stfu about analyzing potential softclaims kthx?

You started it.

---

Cause I'm blonde and I just realized this game didn't have a Night 0 start.......and I got the detective psychologist confused.

Uh, if this had a N0 start, and you were a PR, you'd have submitted an action (I hope). You're digging yourself into a bigger hole, I think.

---

I don't understand this, I read you're thinking chess as town but at the same time you're voting him. Scum alarm activated.

What I'm saying is that he's straight less likely to be a PR. Because of that, as I said to SSSS, if we end up lynching a VT at the end of today with no other claims, that's not the worst scenario we can come across. I don't necessarily mean I think he's scum or not. Obviously I don't know either way.

Then in post #53 you're saying if it's better to hunt an anti town VT because it's D1 and all, I just can't understand the logiiiiiiiiiiiiiccccccccc

I'm not acting like a "hero", so let's get on the same foot here. I don't know where you got that idea. I'm just saying, to SSSS, that, especially in this game, night actions are so vital for the town.

Today it would be better to lynch a VT and not out any of our PRs than lynch a scum an out several of our PRs. Do you agree with that?

---

This guy is so non-genuine, it hurts. He doesn't even have a scumread yet

I agree with you.

---

I'm not one of those players that votes/invites/revotes like it is going out of style. When I place a vote, I like to think it means something, rather than "just cause".

I'm asking you whether or not you prefer to be voting nobody. You're dodging the question by anticipating my answer.

He has asked me 2 questions and both of them I felt to be dumb "I'm active but not really doing anything" questions.

So you wont answer him then?

---

i like the rc vote.

I don't. don, you won't let them get rid of me, will you?

---

Does anyone else other than CK, Newman and I find Deity's line of questioning and desire for strong evidence before he lays down a single read scummy?

Yes.

[DeityKabuto]

Unvote
Vote nameloc1986

I have a gut feeling that is scum, I will explain why later.

I am experimenting, you see. Since a couple people have votes on chesskid, chesskid will try his best not to screw up, if it appears that he's trying to hard, and appears a bit lurky, then he's scum.

If that is what you are doing, then WHY DID YOU TELL EVERYONE?!?!? Kinda defeats the purpose if you tell CK what you are looking for, wouldn't you say?

He asked why.

[AdumbroDeus]

Votecount 3:

smashbro_of_the_SSS [0] -
toffee [0] -
don_johnson [0] -
DemonHybrid [1] - Surye,
Surye [0] -
RedCoyote [2] - smashbro_of_the_SSS, toffee,
chesskid3 [1] - RedCoyote,
Amrun [0] -
Scott Brosius [1] - chesskid3,
nameloc1986 [1] - DeityKabuto,
DeityKabuto [2] - DemonHybrid, nameloc1986,
HellloooNewman [0] -

not voting: Scott Brosius, don_johnson, HellloooNewman, Amrun,

A deadline has been set for May 20th at 0400 hours

Note:

There was exactly one legal vote for nameloc1986.

Vote: Scott Brosius

stupid rule is stupid

Actually, votes like yours are exactly the reason why I have the rule in place. It is the duty of the mod to provide as predictable as possible outcomes with only knowledge of the ruleset required to know what these outcomes will be in terms of game processes. I do not wanna be the mod that has to call whether a boarderline vote is an actual vote in order to decide a game, because how do I know for sure whether it was intended as a vote or a lylo gambit? So instead of doing that, I set a strict standard for what counts as a vote and let the players check.

[DemonHybrid]

That's a bit too strict, in my opinion. If it's obvious, let the vote count. If someone votes for "SB", it'd be understandable that they could either mean smashbro or Scott Brosius, but "Scum Brosius" isn't allowed? That just interrupts the flow of the game.