Newbie 1116 -- Game Over

[Nobody Special]

I have sent bluepokemon1234 a PM, and am waiting on a response.

(Just in case you thought I wasn't doing anything about it.)

[Nobody Special]

Searching for a replacement for bluepokemon1234 per his request.

Given that a replacement may not be simple to find, and the sheer size of the game, there will probably be an extension of the deadline.

Not a week, though

.....we'll see.

[Grimmjow]

Searching for a replacement for bluepokemon1234 per his request.

Thank god.

Also, just a note. I'm keeping my vote on Cobblerfone unless someone can convince me otherwise. C'mon, people, let's get this game going.

[Nobody Special]

Zachrulez replaces bluepokemon1234 effective immediately.

[Zachrulez]

Hey everyone, how goes it?

Unvote:

Will have a look at the game, but at 31 pages I doubt I'll be able to get into too much detail in a read through, at least not with the amount of time left.

[Nobody Special]

Mod Note:

Extending the Day One deadline to July 5.

There will be no more extensions for Day One.

[VisceraEyes]

Spectacular...welcome to the game Zach. There's a LOT of uselessness in the 31 days, so it won't take as long as you think.

Thx host.

[VisceraEyes]

EBWODP:

*31 pages

[VisceraEyes]

Oh, and before I forget again...UNVOTE: bluepokemon1324

[The Fonz]

OK, on Workdawg's rebuttal to Tomie:

I did read every post before 99 when I made that post, and since I read every post ON MY PHONE, it was all a jumble of WTF. Try reading the thread without looking at player names and let me know how that works out for you. Cause that's practically what I had to do reading it on my phone. That's why I didn't have any real thoughts on people at that point. I commented on a few specific things I found interesting, but outside of that, I really hadn't had a chance to form opinions on anyone because no one else really stood out enough to look into further. I suppose it's easy to come in here 275 posts after it starts and act all high and mighty because you can jump right in and give reads on people.

You're exaggerating the difficulty of reading on a phone. I've done it before, and it's certainly harder than on a normal computer, but it's not 'impossible to see who posted what.' That 'a couple tips for the newbies' paragraph screamed 'helpful advice' to me- as I said with Cobbler, 'helpful advice' I often see as a way of generating the illusion of usefulness for scum. I see you actually agree with that, since your clarification on VE appears to be that you were accusing him of 'trying to look town.'

And it's not that post alone. The following three or four seem fluffy to me. Taking fencesitty positions on issues, without talking about who's scum, and asking an RQS question (and RQS is generally somewhat scummy) outside of the early part of the game (indicates desire to keep the fluffing going). Your posts up to 185 do not include a solid 'this is my top suspect' or vote. It all looks VERY active lurky. When I post from my phone, it tends to be short, to the point, and talks about who my top suspect is. IE, I'm more worried about taking positions and exerting pressure than 'being seen to contribute.' You seem to me to be doing the opposite.

In addition, I've read your previous scum game, and that looks pretty similar. Empty posts for a while, then a jump on a town wagon (and no, I am not insiniuating that I have inside knowledge of anyone's alignment here, so you can forget that line of argument).

Your response to Tomie about high horses etc felt uncalled for. He voted you for IIoA posting, which is legitimately scummy. If you're town, and it's not impossible, then learn that things aren't bad scumhunting just because

you

think you have an excuse. Likewise your 'I would expect better from an SE slot.' LOL. Your problem with my vote isn't that it's poorly reasoned, or newbish. It's that it's on you.

That said:

Now you seem to be twisting my words. I never said information was bad for town or that people shouldn't give there reads. I said that it is scummy to ask for everyone to give their reads and not give his own.

This is a decent point. One might even call it scummy. However your points on VE were votehopping (not a scumtell) and 'flipping his shit' which I thought looked PARTICULARLY town. Then you jump the playstyle wagon on cymru. And then, with deadline pending:

Blue has made a few suspicious moves, but he definitely seems more newb than scum to me (not ruling out newb scum, of course). I would be on-board with a his lynch IF it avoids a no-lynch. Otherwise I'd prefer to keep up the discussion as long as possible to see if we can't find someone better.

Distance from the wagon, unnecessary 'looking town' - saying you don't want a no lynch' and wanting to 'see if

we

can do something better, without making any really significant effort to rally people to a new wagon.

This is a good wagon. Join us. Failing that, the Cobbler wagon is better than the cymru one and I would support the former over the latter if it came to it. Al, Grimm, will you come into the light?

Basiscally, I'm extremely confident that VE and Zach are town. (Claiming scum should be auto-replace and blacklist, btw). I'm pretty confident on Cymru (his last bit about Miss JJ/me

screams

townie confirmation bias. Like, he knows his suspicion is irrational, but the omgus instinct just won't let it go). Also leaning town on Grimm (his confrontational style does not seem likely to come from scum -they'd be afraid of making enemies- and made good, original scumhunting points vs CF just when I was getting worried about him).

So I think there's a damn good chance both scum are in WD, Al, Cobbler, Tomie. WD is still the individually scummiest.

[Cobblerfone]

The Fonz has convinced me both that he is town and that Workdawg

is

a good wagon. My

first

second impression seems to have been right.

VOTE: Workdawg

I just hope my realization was wrong.

[Workdawg]

You're exaggerating the difficulty of reading on a phone. I've done it before, and it's certainly harder than on a normal computer, but it's not 'impossible to see who posted what.' That 'a couple tips for the newbies' paragraph screamed 'helpful advice' to me- as I said with Cobbler, 'helpful advice' I often see as a way of generating the illusion of usefulness for scum. I see you actually agree with that, since your clarification on VE appears to be that you were accusing him of 'trying to look town.'

The difficulty is compounded by the fact that it was the beginning of the game and being unfamiliar with peoples styles and avatars. My "helpful tips" was helpful advice, but there's a difference between giving a few tips and making numerous statements IN ALL CAPS ZOMG. Not to mention the fact that my tips were general gameplay advice not specific to our game. I think that's an important distinction as well.

And it's not that post alone. The following three or four seem fluffy to me. Taking fencesitty positions on issues, without talking about who's scum, and asking an RQS question (and RQS is generally somewhat scummy) outside of the early part of the game (indicates desire to keep the fluffing going). Your posts up to 185 do not include a solid 'this is my top suspect' or vote. It all looks VERY active lurky. When I post from my phone, it tends to be short, to the point, and talks about who my top suspect is. IE, I'm more worried about taking positions and exerting pressure than 'being seen to contribute.' You seem to me to be doing the opposite.

I disagree that the "three or four" after #99 look like fluff. I provided my basic thoughts and posed a handful of questions to people. Just because you choose to be direct and short when you post from your phone doesn't mean that it's scummy not to. Post #99 was actually the last post from my phone anyway.

In addition, I've read your previous scum game, and that looks pretty similar. Empty posts for a while, then a jump on a town wagon (and no, I am not insiniuating that I have inside knowledge of anyone's alignment here, so you can forget that line of argument).

Your response to Tomie about high horses etc felt uncalled for. He voted you for IIoA posting, which is legitimately scummy. If you're town, and it's not impossible, then learn that things aren't bad scumhunting just because

you

think you have an excuse. Likewise your 'I would expect better from an SE slot.' LOL. Your problem with my vote isn't that it's poorly reasoned, or newbish. It's that it's on you.

I told you both why my contributions were lacking at the beginning of the game and I'm sick of trying to defend myself over that. If you don't want to believe it, then fine. Your points against me can be summarized as follows (up until now):

1. IIOA from post 99 (607)
2. Non-commital (607)
--- You claim to have only read up to page 17 by this point...
3. Thread padding (628)
4. Voting for someone YOU THINK is town (628)
5. Two "playstyle wagons" (628).

1. ... yeah
2. I made a case against a person and voted for them. I don't think that's non-commital.
3. Simply not the case, and everyone else I've seen comment on this agrees with me.
4. lolplz
5. My votes against cym and blue were both intended to try and pressure them into posting, but obviously that didn't really work on either one of them. I suppose my vote against cym is based on his playstyle. However my vote on blue was based almost entirely on his slip in which he pretty much says he's only claiming to be a newb.

So yeah... my problem with your vote against me IS that it's poorly reasoned.

That said:

Now you seem to be twisting my words. I never said information was bad for town or that people shouldn't give there reads. I said that it is scummy to ask for everyone to give their reads and not give his own.

This is a decent point. One might even call it scummy. However your points on VE were votehopping (not a scumtell) and 'flipping his shit' which I thought looked PARTICULARLY town. Then you jump the playstyle wagon on cymru. And then, with deadline pending:

Blue has made a few suspicious moves, but he definitely seems more newb than scum to me (not ruling out newb scum, of course). I would be on-board with a his lynch IF it avoids a no-lynch. Otherwise I'd prefer to keep up the discussion as long as possible to see if we can't find someone better.

Distance from the wagon, unnecessary 'looking town' - saying you don't want a no lynch' and wanting to 'see if

we

can do something better, without making any really significant effort to rally people to a new wagon.

My vote against VE was not for votehopping, it was because he seemed to be votehopping based on the reaction he was getting from everyone else (trying to please the masses, rather than sticking to his case)... non-committal, as you called it. We disagree on his freakout, and I don't think disagreeing with you on that is scummy.

As for my thoughts on blue... I stand by that. Would you prefer a no-lynch? I'd vote for pretty much anyone who's even mildly suspicious to avoid a no-lynch scenario on D1. As for not making a case against any else, I intend to do that today/tonight. I was busy at work last friday... and then also busy most of the weekend. I just haven't had a chance to go back through the thread.

[Nobody Special]

Votecount 1.14

Workdawg - 2 - The Fonz, Cobblerfone
Zachrulez - 1 - cymru96
Cobblerfone - 1 - Grimmjow
cymru96 - 1 - Tomie Uzumaki

Not Voting: bigAl, Workdawg, VisceraEyes, Zachrulez

With 9 alive, it takes 5 to lynch

Deadline: July 5 -- (expired on 2011-07-05 11:00:00)

V/LA: ...

[cymru96]

ok... another quiet day.
Welcome to Zachrulez, I think you could be scum. I didn't know if Zihark was scum but I suspected BluePokemon. That saying, his style of play was so weird it was impossible to tell so I will give you the benefit of doubt.

The Fonz- after the whole JJ thing I dunno because I seem to be on a one man crusade so I may have to let it drop at this stage.

Wordawg- People seem to think that your scummy but I'm not sure either way.

Unvote: ZachRulez

Vote: BigAl

- You havent really done much for a while and I have nothing that makes me say town and I get some scum vibes.

[VisceraEyes]

Concerning bigAl:
ISO reveals mixed results. He's called out a lot due to his A)IC status, and B)obvious experience that exceeds most everyone else. As a result, he's FORCED to defend himself more than analyze, which is okay...because his analysis seem fairly spot on and logical.

So in order to foster discussion, I'm going to make a statement and I'd like bigAl, Tomie and Cobbler to respond, at the very least.

I think that Workdawg is scum. I've posted my thoughts on him myself, and I agree with a lot of the points that The Fonz makes in his case, except for the thread-padding point.

I went back and reread some of WD's interactions with everyone. While he DOES post content, the MAJORITY of his posts are defending his points to anyone who disagrees...rather than picking up and looking at someone else, he focuses. This reads scummy to me, or at least how I would play scum. This taken with his tendency to defend himself pretty powerfully when attacked...

VOTE: Workdawg

@cymru96
I'm exceedingly pleased with your attempt to make better posts. Keep it up. You dropping your tunnel for the time being is a very town decision to make, even if the timing of it is not.

[Workdawg]

I'm in the process of doing ISOs and typing up my thoughts, but let me pose this questions quick.

Which would be more scummy, to ignore the cases people bring against me, or to defend myself against them? Should I just ignore the huge walls that are brought against me and scumhunt instead? I would find that a lot more suspicious looking on from the outside. When no one is making a case against me, I scum hunt, but lately there have been quite a few cases against me that take up my time.

[cymru96]

in answer to wordawg's question. Balance is key. Defend yourself and then make a counter accusation/suspicion.

[Cobblerfone]

So in order to foster discussion, I'm going to make a statement and I'd like bigAl, Tomie and Cobbler to respond, at the very least.

I think that Workdawg is scum. I've posted my thoughts on him myself, and I agree with a lot of the points that The Fonz makes in his case, except for the thread-padding point.

I'm assuming the second part is the part you want us to respond to. I'm not really sure how any of us are supposed to respond to it, except by double-checking your ISO.

Which would be more scummy, to ignore the cases people bring against me, or to defend myself against them? Should I just ignore the huge walls that are brought against me and scumhunt instead? I would find that a lot more suspicious looking on from the outside. When no one is making a case against me, I scum hunt, but lately there have been quite a few cases against me that take up my time.

It's best to be able to defend yourself with brief answers and scumhunt at the same time. Though it is a hard thing to do and it takes practice. Basically what cymru said.

[Workdawg]

So what would you call all the posts that AREN'T defending myself? Just because the posts that are in my own defense are the biggest ones does not mean the others are worthless.

[VisceraEyes]

@Workdawg
If you feel the accusation has no merit, you can say such and be done with it. Especially if you're too busy scumhunting. So in response to your question, I feel that it depends on HOW you ignore it and HOW you defend yourself. What I was suggesting was that the MANNER in which you defended yourself was scummy, not that defending yourself alone is scummy.

Preview Edit:

You'll notice in my voting post that I drew specific attention to the fact that you DO post content. I never said it was worthless, nor did I agree that it's fluff.

@Cobbler
Well, from you I'd probably expect to see agreement or disagreement. From Tomie, I expect to see "he's attacking someone...VE is scum" . From bigAl, I'd probably expect an ISO and then agreement or disagreement. I expect to see some sort of reaction to me placing Workdawg at L-2 as well.

I expect that most everyone is eagerly awaiting to see what Zach has to offer (I forgot about that guy, and he should be on my list of people I want to hear from on the matter.)

[Workdawg]

Part One, of many, hopefully.

Cobbler

- Says he's suspicious of bigAl because of IC status.
- Doesn't like the "this could be WIFOM" stuff that bigAl says, but then uses the exact same thing in post 427.
- The power roles discussion, because "ignore this if you want" is a justification for saying something scummy.
- Seems to really like buddying up to bigAl despite being "extra suspicious" of him due to IC status and previously mentioned things. Multiple posts looking for affirmation or recognition from bigAl.
- He stretches two votes, two FOS and one "I would lynch him" into intent to lynch when he accuses me of being opportunistic in my vote against cym. (One of those FOS was from blue... so that's hardly even worth counting.) I skimmed the thread looking for a "would lynch" list, but I didn't find that either. Maybe he was referring to his own "Less sure of now" reads, but he's got half the players in there.
- His vote for The Fonz is suspicious as outlined earlier... he agrees with the Fonz numerous times, then votes for him. Then unvotes when I call him out on it.
- When Grimm made a case against Cobbler, Cobbler's response was extremely sarcastic. I can understand getting defensive over things, but Cobbler doesn't actually give a reasonable defense, just a bunch of caps lock.
- Seemingly opportunistic vote against blue. Blue put himself at L-1 and forcing me to unvote him, then Cobbler comes in with a vote afterwards. Cobbler has barely expressed any feeling of scumminess towards blue up to this point. Blue continues his scummy behavior and this causes Cobbler to unvote...
- The Fonz comes back with a case against me and Cobbler jumps all over it. Interestingly, the reason Cobbler unvoted Fonz (he was going to explain the scum team speculation) was not satisfied when The Fonz posted up his case, but Cobbler seems to have forgotten about that.

I picked cobbler for my first ISO/analysis because he's made a few questionable moves recently. I have to say that I didn't notice anything that makes me think ZOMG scum, but a good player wouldn't. He has made quite a few questionable decisions/posts though. His initial suspicion of bigAl is perfectly acceptable (even if his initial reasoning was sketchy). But he continues to post suspicions of bigAl, and at the same time he seems to be looking for bigAl's approval. If you think he is scum, why would you care what he thinks? It makes me wonder a little bit if there is a scumteam there. But speculating about scumteams is futile until we have a flip to go off of.

The power roles discussion. The general consensus around here is that practically ALL discussion of power roles is scummy, and I agree with this. The town's ONLY secret in this game is the power roles; scum hold every other card. There is NO reason to discuss power roles in the thread unless it's done by the player holding the role and it's absolutely necessary to save the town. Preempting his comments with an "ignore this if you want" only seems to try and make it look innocent IMO. I find it interesting that his suggestions had to do with bigAl and they were the main people in that discussion.

"The The Fonz Situation" this has been covered before and it's still pretty suspicious to me. His excuse for the whole thing is missing a line of text that he himself had quoted, and that his read on me is "VERY swingy". Smells VERY fishy to me. The first part is that The Fonz mentioned a couple potential scum teams and said he would elaborate on them. Apparently Cobbler missed the "I'll elaborate later" part and voted Fonz because of the (at the time) unjustified scum teams. Interestingly, when The Fonz returns, he puts up another case against me, but leaves out the scum teams again. Cobbler doesn't care and literally just jumps on the wagon with nothing more than a "You are right The Fonz!"

@Cobbler

In your post 760, you vote for me and then say "I just hope my realization was wrong."... implying that you hope I flip town. Why would you ever hope the person you are voting for flips town?


I will reserve my vote until I have a chance to review other ISOs, but right now Cobbler is my top choice.

[Workdawg]

In RE post 769 by VE. Why are you answering the question for him? You wanted a response from him, and then you tell him what to say? That doesn't do any good.

[VisceraEyes]

@Workdawg
He asked me what I expected to see...while simultaneously avoiding giving me any comment on the matter...rest assured, it did NOT go unnoticed.

[Nobody Special]

Tomie Uzumaki has been prodded.

[Cobblerfone]

I expect to see some sort of reaction to me placing Workdawg at L-2 as well.

L-2 isn't that bad. But that runs the risk of this turning into a theory debate.

He asked me what I expected to see...while simultaneously avoiding giving me any comment on the matter...rest assured, it did NOT go unnoticed.

I use rhetorical statements (is that even a thing?) like, "I don't get it," all the time. I'm not used to responding to statements that don't really have any meat to them. Neither am I used to being asked to respond to statements instead of questions. Also, you've told Tomie and bigAl how you expect them to answer now.

- Seems to really like buddying up to bigAl despite being "extra suspicious" of him due to IC status and previously mentioned things. Multiple posts looking for affirmation or recognition from bigAl.

I was offering advice on stuff that hadn't been brought up. But since I'm inexperienced and it's usually the IC's job to give advice I wanted his stamp of approval on them.