Open 302: JUNGLE REPUB nope game over! Party time!

LimMePls · Post Post #425 (ISO) » Sat May 14, 2011 7:05 am

neil, what good is this line of questioning doing?

HezLucky · Post Post #426 (ISO) » Sat May 14, 2011 9:23 am

Right we got some opportunistic scum on my wagon surely. Let's go from my last post and take it from there:

Last time on: JUNGLE REPUBLIC.

People wanted to lynch Empking, the fucking Seer. Idiots. I'm going to find someone who pushed that lynch hard and vote for
them.

Neil #396 - you're right. I love to OMGUS. But given where you are on my suspect list (as of last post) that has nothing to
do with you.

Magna #403 - Empking was tops on my scumlist yesterday too. Clearly you had many points against Empking. But you are
strawmanning here. Your focus on #309 was a frivolous attack. Your defense is even worse. Your method of discrediting my
arguments is I'm sure strongly effective, regardless of alignment. It's very easy to call someone's case on you "Rather
marginal" and just brush it off. It's not marginal. INVENTING SCUMTELLS IS NOT MARGINAL. Grandstanding? I was rigtht.
Actually, I wasn't. I thought Empking was scum. But I was right to unvote him.

LynchMePlz #410 - I can't believe you replaced Caboose, who was my strongest towntell by far. You are getting huge scumpoints
for this post. Not because you voted for me, but because MoI and Muffin are two of your top three townreads. Your case on
me is not only opportunistic, but you are inventing a scumlist to make it look like you are scumhunting. No one in their
right mind would find both MoI and muffin as town.

(sadly evenw ith this post the LMP/Caboose spot is still easily the most town in this game - but you look much worse for it)

And to respond to your question, the vote for Wicked was a RVS vote. He had posted recently, so I picked him.

Your case on deflecting re: myself not mentioning the MOI/neil/Empking? that's becaues I hate spamwalls. I hadn't read enough
of it to form an opinion. But my opinion is there in later posts.

The "things you like" (5 of them) is a smear campaign. #1 doesn't make me scum. #2 is great, because Empking does nothing but
unvote and vote in games I've seen him play, with no sort of explanation whatsoever. I almost PREFER Empking playing this way,
if only he could reduce his post frequency greatly. #3 Smear MoI? no way. My smear in MoI comes much later. #4 that's how I
interpreted it. :shrug: and #5 MoI and Empking can both be scum. There are two scum groups. Your case sucks, dude. Go out,
get some fresh air, and come back later when you learn how to play.

But whatever. The person you replaced in on looked so good to me, that I'll wait for more from you.

Deity #413 - you are so inconsistent it's not funny.

Muffin #421 - yes. I would like to hear this too. Because you are the current #3 on my scumlist and I'm going to make sure
either you or Magna gets lynched today. (DK? Man the guy is a VI. I admit I don't know how to read him)

Suspect List:
#1 - DeityKabuto (72/100) - huge VI.
#2 - Magna (69/100) - not a VI. Thus, way more comfortable with my vote.
#3 - Muffin (58/100) - still superscummy. Oh look, he's going to attack me. Note that I found him scummy long before his
"Wicked/Hez are scum" bit that he's trying to pull.
#4 - Sloth (56/100) - lurky mclurk
#5 - Neil - 51/100
#5 - Drum - 51/100 - trouble getting a read
#7 - Wicked (50/100) - apparently people think we're scum together. LOL. Sometimes a neutral read IS a neutral read. Sometimes
a lack of comments are a lack of comments. People seem to be basing any case on me on whether or not
I comment on someone. If I had a meta, I wouldn't be in this situation -_-
#8 - all others - 50/100 - whoever that is has been very quiet
#9 - LMP (formerly Caboose) - 45/100 - LMP is 55 caboose is 40 we add in mafia.

Vote: MagnaofIllusion

Lynch the scum.

Umbrage · Post Post #427 (ISO) » Sat May 14, 2011 9:54 am

Vote Count:

HezLucky (1) - LynchMePls
cjdrum (1) - Regfan
Wickedestjr (1) - DeityKabuto
MagnaofIllusion (1) - HezLucky

Not Voting: cjdrum, MagnaofIllusion, neil1113, Sloth, Wickedestjr, zMuffinMan.

Wickedestjr · Post Post #428 (ISO) » Sat May 14, 2011 11:50 am

Alright... After skimming the thread, it looks like I have a lot to respond to. Not going to get to it all today, as it is pretty late, but I'll see how much I can respond to before I go to sleep.

zMuffinMan wrote:Well, actually, I did, in the same post I voted TS.

When I first read it, it looked like you were avoiding taking a stance, but, after looking back and rereading the post, it now looks like you were saying you just didn't get any reads from the two players.

zMuffinMan wrote:Because your other reasons aren't actually reasons... I mean really, scum would want to fly under the radar so they are probably town...? I didn't take your other reasons seriously.

I do think they are good reasons. Scum's main goal is to survive, which means not getting lynched. Town doesn't worry about getting lynched or attracting attention. They just want to hunt scum. So, why would scum get into an argument with another player on page 3 of a game when they didn't know how others would react at the time? I understand that since there are two groups in this game, scum will probably want to scumhunt as well, but survival is still going to come as a priority which is why I had trouble seeing the argument involving scum. I use this logic all the time and it tends to work a lot of the time. I can even link you to a game where I use this point, if you want.

Why are you even questioning me about this? And if this is really something you find worth questioning, then why didn't you say something

before

I continued questioning you?

FoS: MzMuffinMan

I don't like this questioning at all. It looks like scum trying to deflect the attention on to me. Finally, I don't see where you are even going with this questioning.

zMuffinMan wrote:No, you didn't...

This is my post, and this is your catch-up post.

...you're right. I thought I had mentioned it earlier on. Guess I was wrong. Well, to answer your earlier question:

zMuffinMan wrote:Me not having a read on Empking/neil based on their argument. I'm interested in why you waited so long to bring it up.

The point was stronger when I mentioned it as opposed to immediately after the exchange had actually occured.

zMuffinMan wrote:Yes, you're not explicitly stating that you don't want HezLucky lynched, but that's how I read it.

I didn't want him lynched

day 1

.

zMuffinMan wrote:I'm considering the possibility you're attempting to chainsaw neil. This would explain why you think HezLucky is scummy but you aren't "happy" to lynch him today.

Did you mean to say that you think I might be chainsaw defending HezLucky?

Mod: I'm going to have limited access on Monday. I may not be able to make any posts that day.

DeityKabuto · Post Post #429 (ISO) » Sat May 14, 2011 12:10 pm

I am speaking my mind, and I don't really trust this HezLucky guy, I have been in games where scum actually contribute with wall post, so don't let that confuse your read on him. But, his posts seems interesting, and could give us some leads on where to start are search of past actions in Day 1.

cjdrum · Post Post #430 (ISO) » Sat May 14, 2011 1:14 pm

Catching up a bit at a time at the moment (bloody timezones), and so I stumbled upon this first:

Regfan wrote:
Werewolves, currently it's 5 v 3 v 2. If we mslynch today, and a VT dies tonight a situation arises where it's almost impossible for you to win therefore it's in your best interests to scumhunt with us today as well as aim for scum if we msylnch.

Actually that's wrong. If we mislynch today, it makes it 4 v 3 v 2, then them killing a Townie makes it 3 v 3 v 2 - which means that if we then lynch anyone but a Werewolf they win that night - because the Town consists of 50% Werewolves and at least one Townie.

If we lynch Mafia (with help of the Werewolves, apparently), then it's 5 v 3 v 1. Then they could kill the remaining Mafia and win, or kill a Townie and be extremely close to winning anyway.

If we lynch a Wolf, it's 5 v 2 v 2, which would be horrible for them - but they just play like scum does well (however that is) and have close to a 50-50 chance of winning.

Besides, in an Open setup with two scum factions, isn't it a given that they'll be looking for the other scum team to gain Town points? I don't understand why this needs to be said.

Anyway, I don't think Regfan is a Werewolf from this - if he were, he could have said it last night before they sent the kill. I just don't know why it needed to be mentioned.

Regfan?

LimMePls · Post Post #431 (ISO) » Sat May 14, 2011 5:44 pm

HezLucky wrote:Right we got some opportunistic scum on my wagon surely. Let's go from my last post and take it from there

WTF wagon are you talking about? I'm the only one voting you. Are you calling me opportunistic scum?

Your whole post is complete crap.

Wickedestjr · Post Post #432 (ISO) » Sat May 14, 2011 9:29 pm

neil1113 wrote:So I don't repeat myself, care to show me where you seem to be lost with my explanation above? I don't really see how you can not understand me here? I'm pretty clear in my explanation.

I just don't understand it.
1. Why did you say you want to ISO

DeityKabuto

Twistedspoon, but then say you didn't think he warranted an ISO?
2. Why did you feel the need to ISO

DeityKabuto

Twistedspoon if you didn't think he warranted a concern?
3. Why did you say you didn't think he warranted a concern despite also saying "I can definitely see him being scum." ?

neil1113 wrote:I think now that you'll read them how I said them, you'll understand them just fine.

Uh... no. I read the post 20-30 times and I still didn't understand it.

neil1113 wrote:The problem is, I don't think you've actually read my posts, and are just looking to cast suspicion that isn't there, onto me and make me look suspicious by branching off someone else's case, which has already been cut down if I'm not mistaken.

No. I read your posts, but your defense didn't make any sense to me. I'm not going to ignore a possible point against you just because the player that brought it up stopped attacking you for it. Also, is there a problem with me "branching off someone else's case"?

neil1113 wrote:And here's with the problem comes, because if you say you did read that and understand now then this post of yours:

Wicked wrote:I also don't like the quote from him that Regfan pointed out where it looks like he is trying to appear like he's scumhunting.

shows me you aren't actually reading my posts.

...but I have read it and still

don't

understand it. So, this point is meaningless.

neil1113 wrote:First of all. When did I ever mention my vote there because he didn't want to lynch the seer?

You didn't say that and I never said that you did.

neil1113 wrote:Are you blind then? Or purposely ignorant to follow through with your desire to make me look scummy, no matter how far from the truth it really is?

neil1113 wrote:Secondly, in the main points that I gave to my vote, where in that did I ever mention my suspicion there because of his unvote specifically, and not because of the WIFOM that was stated in his unvote?

You said this:

neil1113 wrote:
I don't like the WIFOM scenario HezLucky
created with his unvote
, and I've understood that HezLucky has seem to had little to no pressure this day, skating by with a "get out of jail free" pass and nobody's really giving him any pressure.

Which I interprated as you saying you thought the vote was suspicious. However, I can see how I would've misinterprated this.

neil1113 wrote:Why would scum have no motivation to use WIFOM to get them in a comfortable position of not voting anyone, and thus not initially causing any suspicion onto themselves?

...because they could just say 'I'm unvoting because he claimed seer.' which is a perfectly acceptable reason. I think (from memory) a few players had also given this reason for unvoting prior to his unvote.

neil1113 wrote:In fact I understand the burden of proof is on me, so I'll show you why. 1. It creates a comfortable position for them to lurk, by not voting anyone. 2. It creates a position in which they aren't really voting anyone, so they don't have any big stances they need to defend, which means people's eyes won't exactly be focused on them.

HezLucky could have put himself in this position without bringing up the WIFOM if he had just said 'I'm unvoting because Empking claimed seer.'

neil1113 wrote:2.1a.
[1: Since when was a pressure vote any less effective the minute you say it is?]

[2: It's still a vote, that can still lead to a lynch,]
in which can still lead to ultimate death in whatever game you're in? The only difference is, you know it's a pressure vote. It doesn't mean I'm going to remove it now, because you're not responding. If anything, if you don't respond to my accusations, or ignore me, it'll cause me to push even harder. In fact, coming from a Psychology background, that's human nature. We hate being ignored. Care to argue this too?

1:

The whole point of a pressure vote is to get a better idea of the player's allignment. By saying it is a pressure vote, you are implying that you don't have a strong scum read on him, which is something he doesn't need to know. Why did you feel the need to say that it is a pressure vote?

2:

When we were a few days from deadline and he only had one vote, it was unlikely that he would get lynched and I think he knew that.

neil1113 wrote:To rephrase this to make it... more accurate to my actual statement, we'd say "With such a close deadline, it doesn't make any sense for Neil to be pressuring an appearing active lurker that isn't being pressured by anyone else." With this, I ask: Why? A deadline is approaching... so what? It's not here. It's still 6 days away. If I want to pressure someone for a few more days, what's wrong with that? Basically, I'm scummy because I'm not specifically following the crowd and instead I'm going on my own intuition? (See, I can speculate a completely unrelated reason too!)

So that's all your points I believe. Anything else?

Was HezLucky your top suspect at the time of your vote?

Wickedestjr · Post Post #433 (ISO) » Sat May 14, 2011 10:13 pm

HezLucky, can you please explain your town read of Caboose? Thanks.

Regfan wrote:He saw an opportunity to drawn attention towards a particular player on something that is relatively unallignment based and took it, doing so means discussion is tained from the get-go, doing so is a scum-tell.

I don't think it was unallignment based. Empking was saying that neil1113 was scum and MoI was a scumbuddy blatantly defending him on page 3. I had trouble believing that he actually believed they were connected if he was town and I don't see how it isn't allignment related.

Regfan wrote:Wicked - What experience have you had with MoI prior to this game? Have you spectated other of his games? If so what conclusion have you drawn about his playstyle?

I have played with him in, I think, three games, but in one of those games we didn't interact with each other hardly any if at all. All three of those games he was town, so I'm not very familiar with his scum meta. From memory, he is pretty aggressive and tends to say a lot of things that I disagree with. His behavior here seems similar, but I dislike his plan to lynch Empking if he's alive tomorrow. Does that answer your question?

DeityKabuto · Post Post #434 (ISO) » Sun May 15, 2011 12:11 am

Wickedestjr, you are ignoring post #420.

Wickedestjr · Post Post #435 (ISO) » Sun May 15, 2011 12:50 am

zMuffinMan wrote:I have a slightly scummy read on Wicked based on him constantly trying to find things that simply aren't scum tells and calling them scummy. I think he's trying to make it look like he's scum hunting by throwing accusations at everyone, but he's not actually doing it for good reasons. I think a lot of his suspicions are poorly reasoned,

Where have I done this?

zMuffinMan wrote:...and his recent posts are extremely inconsistent.

How?

zMuffinMan wrote:e.g. His case on neil at the moment revolves around him thinking that HezLucky is scum and neil is his partner... But he wouldn't be happy with a HezLucky lynch, just a neil lynch, and he's made no real mention of why he thinks HezLucky is scummy, he's just said he thinks it.

Nice misrep. First of all, no, my case doesn't revolve around HezLucky being scum. It's a possibility, but I found neil suspicious for the vote regardless of HezLucky's allignment. Secondly, I never said I wouldn't be happy with a HezLucky lynch. I just said that I didn't want to lynch him

day 1

. Finally, I don't have any solid evidence against HezLucky. My suspicion of him is combination of gut and POE (but mostly gut).

@DeityKabuto - I haven't ignored it, but I'm just responding to posts in order.

Wickedestjr · Post Post #436 (ISO) » Sun May 15, 2011 2:04 am

@MagnaofIllusion - Why have you been ignoring my posts in response/directed to you?

LynchMePls wrote:This is scummy.
[1: The point has already been made (by MOI) and it doesn't really need expanding, but Wickedestjr feels the need to get in on it himself.]

[2: The question is ridiculous and pointless.]

[3: Wickedestjr is trying to drive a mislynch.]

[4: Also the question to MOI was completely pointless too.]

1:

Why not? Was I just supposed to ignore it? Also, can this point against me also be applied to MOI post #412?

2:

Explain. I don't think so.

3:

In the pregame?

This

point is ridiculous. Do you honestly think I'm stupid enough to think I could pull that off?

4:

FoS: LynchMePls

So... Let me get this straight. Asking MoI why he said Caboose was eager to vote was a pointless question? If that's the case, then why did you feel the need to comment on it here:

LynchMePls wrote:
MOI wrote:Someone's eager to lay down a vote before the Mod officially starts the game ...

Someone's eager to imply scum motivations where there is none.

?

LynchMePls wrote:Keep on scumming it up.

Elaborate.

LynchMePls wrote:
[1: So you agree with the wagon, and vote it but at the same time you attack others reasons for voting the wagon?]

[2: And then the reasons you give for voting it aren't even all that stellar?]
Scummy as hell. Most likely distancing from Regfan.

1:

Yes. Am I not allowed/supposed to do that for some reason? Please elaborate. There

are

two scum teams in this game. And even if there was only one scum team, just because I vote somebody doesn't mean I can't question the reasoning of other votes for the same person.

2:

I thought the reasons were good ones. After reading your catchup post, I don't believe you are qualified to criticise me here.

LynchMePls wrote:Things I don't like about this post:

1) Complains about not liking walls.
2) Says he is happy that people have prodded Empking into more activity, and will do so in future games. Nevermind the fact that this has produced a number of massive walls from Empking.
...
5) Despite previous "something off" about MOI, suddenly agrees whole heartedly with him and votes Empking.

1) Your point?
2) Your point?
5) Your point?

Regfan wrote:That reaction to the death completly contradicts your play throughout yesterday especially given your willingness to lynch a seer claim.
Vote: Cjdrum

Cjdrum's reaction to the death, itself, wasn't very suspicious imo, but Regfan brings up a good point here. His reaction is inconsistent with his previous play.

FoS: cjdrum

DeityKabuto wrote:From reading the past few pages, Wickedestjr was the main driver of TwistedSpoon's case, explain yourself, please. You didn't have "strong" evidence for actually wanting him lynched.

I believe the evidence was good. He was lurking, ignoring accusations, and wasn't scumhunting AT ALL. That's pretty good evidence. I don't even care that he flipped town. He needed to die for such terrible play. Town couldn't afford to have him around very long. Why am I the only player that is suspicious for voting him? Five other players agreed with the reasoning.

zMuffinMan wrote:In neither of the first two scenarios do mafia automatically win because it would take 4 to lynch and they wouldn't have a majority (3 v 2+1 is not a majority and neither the werewolf team or town team is going to hand over the game tot he mafia team at that point, I'd assume), and the third scenario isn't exactly accurate either.

Wrong. Check the mafia win condition. They win if they make up half the town and there is a townie alive. So, in this situation, mafia

would

win.

Wickedestjr · Post Post #437 (ISO) » Sun May 15, 2011 2:19 am

Alright. I'm not finished catching up, but I have work to do. So, here are my thoughts:

LynchMePls - Scum. Didn't like the catchup post.
Regfan - Town.
DeityKabuto - Town.
HezLucky - Neutral. (Looks a little bit better after reading his last big post in day 1.)
cjdrum - Scum.
MagnaofIllusion - Town.
neil1113 - Neutral/Scum (His reaction to my suspicion of him looks a little bit townish, but there are still a few questions I need answered.
Sloth - Scum.
zMuffinMan - Neutral/Scum

I'd like to read my scumspects in ISO later as well.

Wickedestjr · Post Post #438 (ISO) » Sun May 15, 2011 2:20 am

EBWOP:

MagnaofIllusion - Neutral

@Mod:

You've still got Empking listed in the votecount.

DeityKabuto · Post Post #439 (ISO) » Sun May 15, 2011 7:00 am

Wickedestjr, regarding your most recent post, I would feel more safe having neil lynched instead of ZMuffinMan. He was the main person on Empking's case, and I could easily seem him telling his scumbuddies to lynch Empking.

Unvote
Vote neil1113

neil1113 · Post Post #440 (ISO) » Sun May 15, 2011 7:27 am

Just a response to questions right now, currently working on my reads.

LynchMePls wrote:neil, what good is this line of questioning doing?

What good is you posting just to ask me this question doing? (Yes, I avoided the question to prove a point. If you didn't get it, I'll gladly explain it to you.)

HezLucky wrote:Neil #396 - you're right. I love to OMGUS. But given where you are on my suspect list (as of last post) that has nothing to
do with you.

OMGUS is very rarely a townie minded thing to do purposely in my experience.

Wicked's response to Muffin wrote:Why are you even questioning me about this? And if this is really something you find worth questioning, then why didn't you say something before I continued questioning you? FoS: MzMuffinMan I don't like this questioning at all. It looks like scum trying to deflect the attention on to me. Finally, I don't see where you are even going with this questioning.

If this doesn't look like scum paranoia, I don't know what is. You're overly defensive, and you appear to be trying hard to discredit the case and the person making the case.

LynchMePls's post here sums up HezLucky's posting so far this game in a very accurate description.

Wicked wrote:I just don't understand it.
1. Why did you say you want to ISO Twistedspoon, but then say you didn't think he warranted an ISO?
2. Why did you feel the need to ISO Twistedspoon if you didn't think he warranted a concern?
3. Why did you say you didn't think he warranted a concern despite also saying "I can definitely see him being scum." ?

1. My overall view of his posting up to that point, without the proper ISO, made me think he didn't have much content or posts to really look at. So I was saying I want to ISO him, though I'm not too sure if I'll find anything. Basically it was a "don't expect for me to come off the ISO with a hard view on him one way or the other.

2. I admit, I didn't mean that the way it sounds out of context. It was a "I can see Twisted being scum, indefinitely. I haven't ruled it out. However, for a Day 1 Lynch so far, I don't see what he's done that's warranted much of a concern up at that point for people to be considering him for a Day 1 lynch."

3. Explained above.

Wicked wrote:(1.) Uh... no. I read the post 20-30 times and I still didn't understand it.
(2.) I'm not going to ignore a possible point against you just because the player that brought it up stopped attacking you for it. (3.) Also, is there a problem with me "branching off someone else's case"?

1. Well thank you for attempting then.
2. This is a misrepresentation of my posts to you. I don't appreciate you stretching what I've said. Did I ever say, specifically or implementally, that you should ignore any posts, mine or not?
3. Yes, because you use their foundation for your case and it's very easy to create fluff cases, with no real content of your own. It's a scum tactic in my opinion, that gives you easy oppurtunity to look like you're scum hunting without much actual hunting on your part.

Wicked wrote:...because they could just say 'I'm unvoting because he claimed seer.' which is a perfectly acceptable reason. I think (from memory) a few players had also given this reason for unvoting prior to his unvote.

This is the problem with WIFOM, is that the only answer you can really give, is WIFOM. -__-

Wicked wrote:1: The whole point of a pressure vote is to get a better idea of the player's allignment. By saying it is a pressure vote, you are implying that you don't have a strong scum read on him, which is something he doesn't need to know. Why did you feel the need to say that it is a pressure vote?

2: When we were a few days from deadline and he only had one vote, it was unlikely that he would get lynched and I think he knew that.

(3.) Was HezLucky your top suspect at the time of your vote?

1. You didn't answer how it becomes any less effective. Instead you just gave a definition on what a pressure vote is. And I felt the need to say that, so that others when reading my vote, should they so choose, they can also hop on the pressure wagon. The point of pressure, is when a wagon forms it causes someone to respond. See? <<< I can do it too.

2. Does that stop me from placing the vote? If not, of what importance is this point?

3. Was he more of a suspect then anyone else at the moment? Yes but not by much. Did I have a "top suspect" that really stood out above everyone else, no.

Deity wrote:Wickedestjr, regarding your most recent post, I would feel more safe having neil lynched instead of ZMuffinMan. He was the main person on Empking's case, and I could easily seem him telling his scumbuddies to lynch Empking.

Uh, what? I really don't know what to say, or how to respond to this? You would feel more safe having me lynched, why? What would my flip do for you / the town? Yes, I was a main person on Emp's wagon. Did you not find Emp scummy? You had your vote on him, so while I did indeed pressure him a lot, he obviously appeared scummy to others so is my pressure on him more scum-motivated then town? If so, is everyone else who was on the wagon scum?

And to your last part: "I could easily see him telling his scumbuddies to lynch Emp".. what?

zMuffinMan · Post Post #441 (ISO) » Sun May 15, 2011 7:50 am

Spoiler: Hez

Spoiler: Wicked

Wicked wrote:Where have I done this? [re: bad reasons for suspicions]

Well, you've been doing this a lot, IMO. Apart from TS, who actually was playing in a scummy manner, I haven't seen a suspicion from you so far that was well-supported. The whole neil+Hez thing is an example of this.

Wicked wrote: How? [re:inconsistency]

I can't remember off the top of my head why I said this but I assume it had to do with your posts near the end of D1 and I might have specifically been referring to your actions surrounding Hez. I will have to go back and read again and try to remember what I was talking about here.

Wicked wrote:Nice misrep. First of all, no, my case doesn't revolve around HezLucky being scum. It's a possibility, but I found neil suspicious for the vote regardless of HezLucky's allignment. Secondly, I never said I wouldn't be happy with a HezLucky lynch. I just said that I didn't want to lynch him day 1. Finally, I don't have any solid evidence against HezLucky. My suspicion of him is combination of gut and POE (but mostly gut).

Sorry, you said you think neil is bussing, and you think (or thought) Hez is scum (but now you're apparently null on him), so I just connected the dots here... Although it is true that your case on neil revolved entirely around his vote on Hez initially, because prior to that you supposedly had a town read on him.

zMuffinMan · Post Post #442 (ISO) » Sun May 15, 2011 8:01 pm

OK, no new posts in 12 hours, was kind of hoping there'd be some feedback or criticism or anything by now, but whatever.

I just checked Hez's meta. There aren't many games, but his playstyle is different in the games he's flipped town. There's none of the complaining that he's doing in this game, and when I was reading through his posts in games he was town I didn't get the same feeling that his posts were forced and insincere like I'm getting in this game. His votes in other games actually make sense, and he pushes his stances rather than just putting votes out and coasting along like in this game. Also, just a side note, he hasn't done a RVS vote like in this game in any of the games he's town, so this just reinforces my opinion that there was some meaning behind it, although it could just be pure coincidence.

VOTE: HezLucky

Regfan · Post Post #443 (ISO) » Mon May 16, 2011 5:30 am

Wow. Alright, I've got an exam I've been studying for on tommorow, I'll catch-up then.

MagnaofIllusion · Post Post #444 (ISO) » Mon May 16, 2011 5:58 am

Ok, that re-read was rather painful.

I think Neil, Wicked, Regfan and Muffin all had interactions and reasoning surrounding Empking that they aren’t on the top of my suspects lists.

In looking at ISOs Cjdrum and Sloth’s votes for Emp look the worst.

--

@LMP

– I’d like to see your revised reads list after you factor in the Night flip.

@Hez

– I second the question : Please explain your Town read on the Caboose slot.

--

DK at 413 wrote:I wanted Empking dead, he turned Pro-townie, but he wasn't helping much of the town at all, imho TwistedSpoon looked very innocent. I will be looking into who started TwistedSpoon's case and cast my vote on them.

DK at 402 yesterday wrote:I hate the fact that nobody wants Empking lynched anymore, but since Twistedspoon is at L-1, I guess this is what the town wants.

Unvote
Vote TwistedSpoon

This should at least provide us with more information which ever way he flips.

DK at 420 wrote:Vote
Wickedestjr

From reading the past few pages, Wickedestjr was the main driver of TwistedSpoon's case, explain yourself, please. You didn't have "strong" evidence for actually wanting him lynched.

1. DK hammered Twisted, a player he stated in 413 he had a Town read on. We were not at deadline when this happened.
2. DK wants to find the players who started the wagon and lynch them. He doesn’t say he wants to find the players with the worst votes on the wagon.
3. The dreaded “will give us information” reasoning for the hammer is suspect. Especially since he attacked Wicked for not having “strong evidence” to vote Twisted.

VOTE: DeityKabuto
--

CJ would be me second vote if I had one. I agree with Regfan’s assessment of CJ at 419. Furthermore Cj’s absolute unwillingness to commit to reads of other potential scum candidates is in line with scum-motivated play.

--

Wicked wrote:@MagnaofIllusion - Why have you been ignoring my posts in response/directed to you?

If you can point me to post numbers where you feel I am ignoring your post and you expect response from me please let do so and I’d be happy to respond.

Umbrage · Post Post #445 (ISO) » Mon May 16, 2011 7:29 am

Vote Count:

HezLucky (2) - LynchMePls, zMuffinMan
cjdrum (1) - Regfan
MagnaofIllusion (1) - HezLucky
neil1118 (1) - DeityKabuto
DeityKabuto (1) - MagnaofIllusion

Not Voting: cjdrum, neil1113, Sloth, Wickedestjr.

DeityKabuto · Post Post #446 (ISO) » Mon May 16, 2011 8:27 am

MagnaofIllusion, that made my feel a bit more scummy about you, your logic for voting me is a bit confusing, so please explain again. :/

MagnaofIllusion · Post Post #447 (ISO) » Mon May 16, 2011 8:40 am

DeityKabuto wrote:MagnaofIllusion, that made my feel a bit more scummy about you, your logic for voting me is a bit confusing, so please explain again. :/

Aha the threat - "Suspecting me made you seem more scummy". Noted.

It's quite simple logic.

You hammered TwistedSpoon. In that hammer post you say "This is what Town wants" as your explanation for your vote. We were far from deadline.

First thing after night you state that "Whoever started the vote on Twisted is scummy because I had a Town read on him"

Town players don't hammer Townreads outside of absolute deadline to avoid a No-lynch and twice try and shift the blame elsewhere (saying it is Town's will in your hammer post and then trying to say those who started the wagon were scum).

Furthermore you distanced yourself strongly from every bad vote (Empking and Twisted) on Day 1 today.

DeityKabuto · Post Post #448 (ISO) » Mon May 16, 2011 10:05 am

MagnaofIllusion wrote:
DeityKabuto wrote:MagnaofIllusion, that made my feel a bit more scummy about you, your logic for voting me is a bit confusing, so please explain again. :/

Aha the threat - "Suspecting me made you seem more scummy". Noted.

It's quite simple logic.

You hammered TwistedSpoon. In that hammer post you say "This is what Town wants" as your explanation for your vote. We were far from deadline.

First thing after night you state that "Whoever started the vote on Twisted is scummy because I had a Town read on him"

Town players don't hammer Townreads outside of absolute deadline to avoid a No-lynch and twice try and shift the blame elsewhere (saying it is Town's will in your hammer post and then trying to say those who started the wagon were scum).

Furthermore you distanced yourself strongly from every bad vote (Empking and Twisted) on Day 1 today.

Me saying that I wasn't for the Twistedspoon vote isn't scummy at all, a scum wouldn't think like that, I simply voted him before the "deadline" (which I had ignored) because I trust the towns and that was what the majority wants, either way we still have information. I really wasn't a big part of the whole Twistedspoon case in Day 1, so I really can't do much but go back and review his case to find any suspicions on anyone. Now, in Day 2, what the majority wants isn't a wise decision since there are 2 Werewolfs still alive, and 3 scum. I am just letting you guys know. Unlike me, who stated my actions in Day 1, a scum would want to go by unnoticed or convincingly which means they would never state what they'd done / their though process in the past. I highly doubt that is the "mindset" of a scum. Right now, I am getting sort of a Town read from you, but I don't trust much of anyone as of what recently happened in Day 1, but you are trying to scum hunt, but try not to limit your options to I alone, and make any drastic decisions, their are plenty of others. The people who I really do not trust are neil1118, ZMuffinMan, and Hez Lucky. I only am getting a 100% town vibe from Regfan. His posts are wise, and he is posting kind of like a Pro-town.

neil1113 · Post Post #449 (ISO) » Mon May 16, 2011 10:53 am

DK, why do you not trust me? What have I done that made me seem to have broken your trust?

You have a 100% vibe from Regfan because his posts are wise and he's posting like a pro-town individual. Which of my posts are not wise, and which of my posts make me seem anti-town? In fact, do you have any cases on anyone of us? Your case against me to say the least was less then satisfactory to be placing your vote there considering the others in this game. Make a case, and actually look like you're trying in this game, or my vote will be switching over to you. I don't care if your case is on me, just make one.