Newbie 1116 -- Game Over

[Grimmjow]

I would like to say thank you to VE for basically writing up my entire post for me XD

1) There's a case to be made against cymru. I mean, you need LITERALLY only look at his record, as you said.

The more he posts, the less sure I am that he's even a newb.

I find it interesting that bigAl spent almost the entirety of D1 voting for cy, but his case against me includes the fact that I'm voting for cy...

And I too was beginning to wonder this. Cy's playstyle just doesn't fit the noob feel for me. (Same actually could be said for blue, but that's inconsequential now)

2) Fonz' methods, while effective in making his points, can be viewed as unorthodox and...well, scummy. I don't see them as scummy myself, but I can absolutely see someone else thinking so, and I'm in NO position to disagree just because I think he's town. If someone else thinks he's scum, and someone else wants to vote for him, I'm not stopping them. But I'm not voting for him.

I agree that Fonz's methods are odd, and he does come off scummy to me. Do I think he's scum? No. During out little debate, once he mentioned looking at the whole of the sentence rather than just that part, I could understand what he was saying. I don't agree that the wording was... correct, but I can understand what he meant.

3) Really? 186?

Didn't you JUST vote for Grimm based on his 'old evidence'?

You're at L-1 bigAl. I suggest you claim.

Christ. I really don't like the idea of a possible lynch going down already. It's too early in the day, and we have almost ZERO evidence to support this lynch other than "faulty reasoning," "non-committal stances" (even though voting me has been committal), and "not contributing to scumhunting." Granted, yes, these are all valid points, but I'd prefer to see better/more evidence. I do think this could be a good lynch, but I'd rather check into some other things first. I've got a weird feeling based off some information that I was going over from D1, but it's too early to let that cat out of the bag. Granted, if Al flips scum, then all of that is null anyway.

You know what, no, I agree with VE. Al, I want a claim. If you flip scum, then we're down one scum and we're better off. If you flip town, during twilight, I can drop my thoughts real quick.

[The Fonz]

Damn it, I'm having trouble making any kind of decisions here. (I may be considered the IC, but I never claimed to be any good at this game...)

You must have at least known that town players were expected to scumhunt, no?

I'm going to look at voting patterns here for a sec and see if that leads to anything. Particularly for cymru96, Grimmjow, Workdawg and The Fonz (top suspects).

OK, so you've got four top suspects out of six players that aren't you. This says to me that VisceraEyes is one of your stronger townreads. He was coming under strong fire earlier today, why didn't you go to bat for him?

Some of the major cases among these people:
Fonz->Workdawg
Grimmjow->cy
Workdawg->(cy)
cy->JJ (aka Fonz), Workdawg, Fonz again

So Grimm is the only one who hasn't been voted for by these four. Of all the possible combinations, the only ones that remotely make sense are:

WD + Grimm
Fonz + Grimm
(WD + Cy)?

The problem for you here is, I'm not scum, and while Grimmjow is the weakest of my town reads, i find both Al-Workdawg and Al-Grimmjow more likely than Grimmjow-Workdawg.

Looking at Grimm's contributions today - his most significant post is a case against cy - the easy newb target?

Grimm covered this, but if Cy really is the easy newb target, then the person most guilty of pressing on his newbish rather than scummy acts is you.

Most of his points are old ones too. Also the whole thing about whether Fonz was intentionally misleading everyone about how scummy I was - I don't like his support of Workdawg there, further increasing the chances of a WD+Grimm scum team.

At least he had a fucking opinion. I don't think a scumpair would support each other that blatantly there.

[Nobody Special]

Votecount 2.08

L-1 bigAl - 3 - The Fonz, Zachrulez, cymru96
cymru96 - 2 - Grimmjow, VisceraEyes
Grimmjow - 1 - bigAl
VisceraEyes - 1 - Workdawg

Not Voting: ...

With 7 alive, it takes 4 to lynch.

Deadline: July 29 (expired on 2011-07-29 14:00:00)

[bigAl]

Al, are you really the MOST suspicious of Grimmjow? Like, in 41 pages of material, you literally refer back to the last 2 and one other post on a page in the teens somewhere as the most compelling case you can muster?

In that I'm at rather much of a loss for suspects, yes, I am most suspicious of Grimm. I'd put him at 55% scum, with everyone else in the 10%-45% range. Call me indecisive scum if you want, but it's true. I was mostly only addressing stuff that had come up on D2: so it's not 2 points in 41 pages, it's 2 points in 5 pages, (~10 posts for Grimm). I don't think that's out of line.

Grimm covered this, but if Cy really is the easy newb target, then the person most guilty of pressing on his newbish rather than scummy acts is you.

I was never for supporting his lynch. True, my vote was there for most of the day but I later discouraged the blue/cy choice for a lynch because I didn't think they were overly scummy. I spent a while pushing him to contribute with better reasoned posts, but not pushing to lynch him.

The problem for you here is, I'm not scum, and while Grimmjow is the weakest of my town reads, i find both Al-Workdawg and Al-Grimmjow more likely than Grimmjow-Workdawg.

So you're saying that I'm not totally out to lunch on a Grimm suspicion? If I get lynched today and flip town, what's your next best guess for scum pairs? (Good question for everyone for that matter).

OK, so you've got four top suspects out of six players that aren't you. This says to me that VisceraEyes is one of your stronger townreads. He was coming under strong fire earlier today, why didn't you go to bat for him?

As I said in #935, I think he's pretty town from early play, neutral from later on. It's mostly been Zachrulez who's been pushing for VE (if I recall correctly), who I also have pegged as town (mostly from blue's play). I'm guessing it's probably town vs. town here then, so expanding that argument further means that scum can sit back and let the town fight it out. Not good.

Do we have to jump to a claim the second someone gets to L-1? I'll claim tomorrow if everyone still wants me to.

[Grimmjow]

So let me get this straight: You're voting me based solely off D2 and a hunch during D1? You're completely ignoring all of D1 in your decision here?

[The Fonz]

Workdawg, where do you stand on big al vs cymru?

[Workdawg]

The obvious first question is, why is it only bigAl or cym? But with 7 days left and people already pretty significantly divided, I will indulge you.

bigAl

I got a lot of town vibe from bigAl yesterday. He was asking good questions and really the only thing that concerned me yesterday was his self-deprecating comments. It seems like an easy ploy for an IC to call himself out on scummy comments... "I should point out the scummyness here, cause I'm the IC." Cover up sneaky actions with the guise of teaching the newbies.

Today, I absolutely agree that he hasn't really done anything. He's poked his head in here and there... but he's avoided making any significant contributions until he was called out on it. Once he was, he posted an extremely weak (IMO) case against grimm. I should say that I'm also finding it hard to figure out who is the best lynch today, but I don't think it's Grimm.

cymru

All he's really done is continue with what he did yesterday. He seems to be attempting to contribute more, but there still isn't any real analysis in his posts. I just don't know how I feel about that. I could see an argument for active lurking, but he's been doing it consistently and hasn't slipped up yet if he is scum. I don't feel like there's enough reason there to lynch him because he hasn't made any really scummy posts that I recall. He's made a couple of "misstatements" that could be read to indicate he's scum, but I think they can mostly be explained by simply bad wording/typos.

---

So, I guess I'd be voting for bigAl if it came down to it.

[Workdawg]

Having just reread my post, I realize I sort of accused both of them of active lurking. So why bigAl over cym then? Because cym has done it the whole time and he's new. bigAl contributed yesterday and is the IC. He should know better and we KNOW he can do better.

[Workdawg]

Having gone back through today, I still feel that VE is a better wagon than either bigAl or cym. Since my short/basic case against him didn't really get much response, here are overall thoughts.

#1.

The flip out. This has divided thoughts, either extreme town or extreme scum. I'm of the mind that this was a scum play. He gets mad that people aren't listening to him and he gives up. I admit that this initial reaction seems more town then scum, but his immediate and complete 180 when he is called out on it SCREAMS scummy to me. It reeks of trying to earn the approval of the town after he realized he messed up bad.

#2.

He doesn't really take a firm stance against anyone. Aside from the case against Grimm early on in D1, he hasn't really stuck to a stance after facing adversity about it. He backs down to easily. This also indicates to me that he's just after the approval of the town.

#3.

The wagon switch. Up until post 804, VE had no voiced any significant suspicion of cobbler. Then in 804, "[he's] starting to get a queesy [sic] feeling about cobbler." He states he's willing to put cobbler at L-1 if everyone else is willing. (More trying to please the town). So he goes from really nothing to I'll put him at L-1 if we want? This is 5 days to the deadline, FYI. My thoughts on this are that he's trying to distance himself from the wagon, but get in on it at the same time. He'll vote if we want him to... giving him leeway to deflect blame when cobbler flips town.

Zach also speculated, and I agree, that he was doing this to try and avoid a wagon on himself. When Zach posted his thoughts and vote against VE. Grimm and I both posted that we were suspicious of VE as well. This seems to almost prompt VE to change his vote to cobbler.

On D2, when he votes back to me (post 923), he says himself that "... [he] was far more suspicious of Workdawg anyway"... if he was far more suspicious of me, then why did he switch votes with 5 days left? There was plenty of time for the wagons to shift my way if he had stuck to it, but he didn't. More evidence to indicate that his switch to cobbler was not genuine.

#4.

VE's reaction to Zach's case. Post 854. VE write's a decently long post, and most if it as attacking Zach rather than defending himself. Instead of telling Zach why he's not scum, he analyzes Zach's post and tries to make it seem like a scum move to even accuse him, deflecting.

#5.

Vote for Cymru. What's this all about? Two strikes for cyms questionable play? He elaborates more on his vote in post 967 at Zach's request, but it's still pretty weak. Just smells like he's trying to pick on the newbie. Note that he's second on the wagon too, breaking up the 4 way tie at 1 vote that he was complaining about before.

An interesting note... asking for a claim with a whole week left?


--------

So there you have it.

[Grimmjow]

Al, I find it interesting that your only significant post today was against me, complete with a vote. Yet when I turn around and post my defense, you say nothing about it. You do, however, speak to someone else. Are you trying to avoid having to deal with my defense, and instead use someone else's posts on me so you don't have to deal with what you are actually talking about, namely how scummy you find me? Do you just not feel like it's a good case and if you actually had to deal with my defense/scrutiny that you'd come off showing your true colors? It's also interesting to note that last night I posed a question to you, yet you logged on this morning and didn't respond to it at all. I also think it's interesting that someone asked for your claim, and I even turned around to ask for one as well, and your response was "Do I really have to?" That reads incredibly scummy to me. Like you're trying hard to not have to come up with a claim. There's only one case that I can think of that I would immediately believe your claim, but would still scrutinize your posts to see if it were true.

@Workdawg: I've noticed that many newbie games don't actually make it to the 3 week deadline. So I don't see a problem with someone being at L-1 (specially based on the fact that he's done next to nothing) and asking for a claim. My first game had a lynch within 2 weeks each day, for example.

Unvote

As for Al, I'm hesitant. I don't see anything overly scummy with his play except for active lurking. I can see where he's trying to come across as town, but I'm still hesitant. I will not be the hammer vote on this unless I go back through his ISO/play and find something solid or someone else does the same, which I wont be able to do until tomorrow since I wont be home tonight. But with the limited evidence that we have on him, I don't like his lynch right now.

[VisceraEyes]

Having gone back through today, I still feel that VE is a better wagon than either bigAl or cym. Since my short/basic case against him didn't really get much response, here are overall thoughts.

#1.

The flip out. This has divided thoughts, either extreme town or extreme scum. I'm of the mind that this was a scum play. He gets mad that people aren't listening to him and he gives up. I admit that this initial reaction seems more town then scum, but his immediate and complete 180 when he is called out on it SCREAMS scummy to me. It reeks of trying to earn the approval of the town after he realized he messed up bad.

#2.

He doesn't really take a firm stance against anyone. Aside from the case against Grimm early on in D1, he hasn't really stuck to a stance after facing adversity about it. He backs down to easily. This also indicates to me that he's just after the approval of the town.

#3.

The wagon switch. Up until post 804, VE had no voiced any significant suspicion of cobbler. Then in 804, "[he's] starting to get a queesy [sic] feeling about cobbler." He states he's willing to put cobbler at L-1 if everyone else is willing. (More trying to please the town). So he goes from really nothing to I'll put him at L-1 if we want? This is 5 days to the deadline, FYI. My thoughts on this are that he's trying to distance himself from the wagon, but get in on it at the same time. He'll vote if we want him to... giving him leeway to deflect blame when cobbler flips town.

Zach also speculated, and I agree, that he was doing this to try and avoid a wagon on himself. When Zach posted his thoughts and vote against VE. Grimm and I both posted that we were suspicious of VE as well. This seems to almost prompt VE to change his vote to cobbler.

On D2, when he votes back to me (post 923), he says himself that "... [he] was far more suspicious of Workdawg anyway"... if he was far more suspicious of me, then why did he switch votes with 5 days left? There was plenty of time for the wagons to shift my way if he had stuck to it, but he didn't. More evidence to indicate that his switch to cobbler was not genuine.

#4.

VE's reaction to Zach's case. Post 854. VE write's a decently long post, and most if it as attacking Zach rather than defending himself. Instead of telling Zach why he's not scum, he analyzes Zach's post and tries to make it seem like a scum move to even accuse him, deflecting.

#5.

Vote for Cymru. What's this all about? Two strikes for cyms questionable play? He elaborates more on his vote in post 967 at Zach's request, but it's still pretty weak. Just smells like he's trying to pick on the newbie. Note that he's second on the wagon too, breaking up the 4 way tie at 1 vote that he was complaining about before.

An interesting note... asking for a claim with a whole week left?


--------

So there you have it.

1) I'm an emotional player...I'm working on that, but I'm not going to apologize for it anymore. If that's appears scummy, your vote is well placed.

2) What exactly constitutes a firm stance? A big long post that everyone complains about having to read? I'm actually altering my play based on Zach's assessment of 'cases', which I agree with. I'd never thought of it that way before and I'm trying something new. I'll gladly write up a case against cymru if that's what you want, but it seems like everybody already KNOWS why I'm voting for cymru, so it seems like a waste of time to me.

3) I like how your reasoning is so that I can deflect blame if Cobbler flips town, but when Cobbler flips town, I took just as much responsibility for it as everyone else. So I guess that rules that out, huh? I noticed Zach was SHOCKED to find that I was 'decrying' that wagon, when in fact I had posted that I'm just as responsible as everyone else.

Your point about the timing of my switch to Cobbler is valid. I can't explain that other than the fact that Cobbler's posting had taken a serious dip and YOUR posting was actually improving.

4) Zach's points were ridiculous, they were just external musings of the newly replaced-in player rehashing events that, while controversial at the time, were no longer at bar. AND he voted based on them, in spite of us having a very real possibility of scum between the two candidates ALREADY ON THE TABLE. It's very anti-town to come in with a new candidate in the eleventh hour, regardless of how scummy you think he is. It adds to the risk of a No Lynch, which as far as I can tell on these forums is ABSOLUTELY TABOO. You're right, there were 5 days left. If he didn't agree that I shouldn't be a lynch candidate, he should've actually tried to convince people. But what did he do? He hammered Cobbler. Yes, I was attacking Zach. Zach's posts regarding me were mostly accurate, but A) weren't taking all the facts into account and B) were horribly timed given the circumstances. If he were just going to hammer Cobbler anyway, why not just wait until d2 to raise his points on me?

5) I've expressed several concerns about cymru96. His Appeal to Emotion was the last straw for me, but I'm in no way 'picking on the newbie.' Actually, I notice that you left off the part where I actually stated IN THREAD that I suspect cymru isn't even new. But this whole nonsense has got me thinking...

bigAl seems genuinely at a loss to who to vote for. There are two players, though, who know EXACTLY who they're going to push.

UNVOTE: cymru96

Let me offer this up as an alternative that not many are suggesting.

Workdawg + Zachrulez

Zach's posts against me seemed very WELL timed if he were trying to save someone on the present lynch docket. The only people being considered when he replaced in were Cobbler and Wordawg. Cobbler flipped town.

All of Workdawg's suspicions of me seem based on Zach's reasoning.

The most Zach has done today was call out for bigAl to participate. Hi kettle! I'm pot. Nice to meet you. YOU'RE BLACK!

VOTE: Zachrulez

Tentatively. I'm advocating a lynch of either one of these two players. If it looks like Workdawg is going to be lynched first, expect me on that wagon.

[Zachrulez]

*ahem*

Yeah, I didn't go with group think in finding Workdawg scummy. That's scummy... because I was supposedly trying to save him? O....K?

[Zachrulez]

Workdawg + Zachrulez

Zach's posts against me seemed very WELL timed if he were trying to save someone on the present lynch docket. The only people being considered when he replaced in were Cobbler and Wordawg. Cobbler flipped town.

Clashing with groupthink is not inherently scummy.

All of Workdawg's suspicions of me seem based on Zach's reasoning.

Him using my reasoning makes ME scummy? WTF?

The most Zach has done today was call out for bigAl to participate. Hi kettle! I'm pot. Nice to meet you. YOU'RE BLACK!

And trying to lynch you, don't forget that. Unfortunately no one else seems particularly interested in doing that outside of Workdawg.

VOTE: Zachrulez

Tentatively. I'm advocating a lynch of either one of these two players. If it looks like Workdawg is going to be lynched first, expect me on that wagon.

So are your posts against me a well timed effort to save BigAl? Your attack on me above cuts both ways you know.

[VisceraEyes]

While it's true that you threw a couple of barbs my way, I wouldn't say you 'tried to get me lynched'. You didn't even 'try to get bigAl lynched'. You haven't tried to get ANYONE lynched really. Mostly just throwing out 'feeler posts' - barbs at me, prods of bigAl - which I interpret as testing to see who you WILL try and get lynched...based on popularity of the candidate. YMMV.

If you'll recall, I'M the one who 'scummily' called for bigAl's claim. Does that sound like I'm trying to save him?

[Zachrulez]

Anyone can ask for a claim. What's your point?

You shouldn't even be asking for one if he's not one of your top suspects.

[VisceraEyes]

Zach, he was at the time. I asked for his claim because I was preparing to hammer...as I understood, that's what calling for the claim indicates. His response made it clear to me that he's just basically at a loss...hence his inactivity and weak suspicions. This didn't make him LESS suspicious, but Workdawg's assessment that my call for claim was scummy made me rethink some things...in conjunction with basically saying that he has no suspicions of his own. But you're right about one thing. The fact alone that he's using your reasoning doesn't make you scummy, your actions d1 did. But I'm more suspicious of Workdawg, so

UNVOTE: Zachrulez

VOTE: Workdawg

When Workdawg flips red, I'm confident we can hit you up tomorrow.

[Nobody Special]

Votecount 2.09

L-1 bigAl - 3 - The Fonz, Zachrulez, cymru96
Grimmjow - 1 - bigAl
VisceraEyes - 1 - Workdawg
Workdawg - 1 - VisceraEyes

Not Voting: Grimmjow

With 7 alive, it takes 4 to lynch.

Deadline: July 29 (expired on 2011-07-29 14:00:00)

[Workdawg]

2) What exactly constitutes a firm stance? A big long post that everyone complains about having to read? I'm actually altering my play based on Zach's assessment of 'cases', which I agree with. I'd never thought of it that way before and I'm trying something new. I'll gladly write up a case against cymru if that's what you want, but it seems like everybody already KNOWS why I'm voting for cymru, so it seems like a waste of time to me.

Sticking with your case after someone pokes holes in it. Interesting that you voted for Zach and then flipped over to me already.

3) I like how your reasoning is so that I can deflect blame if Cobbler flips town, but when Cobbler flips town, I took just as much responsibility for it as everyone else. So I guess that rules that out, huh? I noticed Zach was SHOCKED to find that I was 'decrying' that wagon, when in fact I had posted that I'm just as responsible as everyone else.

That was just a random thought, what I would have done if I were scum I suppose. But there was much more to point 3 than that.

4) Zach's points were ridiculous, they were just external musings of the newly replaced-in player rehashing events that, while controversial at the time, were no longer at bar. AND he voted based on them, in spite of us having a very real possibility of scum between the two candidates ALREADY ON THE TABLE. It's very anti-town to come in with a new candidate in the eleventh hour, regardless of how scummy you think he is. It adds to the risk of a No Lynch, which as far as I can tell on these forums is ABSOLUTELY TABOO. You're right, there were 5 days left. If he didn't agree that I shouldn't be a lynch candidate, he should've actually tried to convince people. But what did he do? He hammered Cobbler. Yes, I was attacking Zach. Zach's posts regarding me were mostly accurate, but A) weren't taking all the facts into account and B) were horribly timed given the circumstances. If he were just going to hammer Cobbler anyway, why not just wait until d2 to raise his points on me?

How gloriously ironic... you just did exactly the same thing. Less than a week to the lynch, two established wagons, and you vote for someone with no votes. (I did too, obviously, but I didn't think it was scummy). Is it still scummy now that you did it?

Zach's posts against me seemed very WELL timed if he were trying to save someone on the present lynch docket. The only people being considered when he replaced in were Cobbler and Wordawg. Cobbler flipped town.

First of all, when he voted for you, it was 3 for cobbler and 2 votes for me. If he wanted to save me, don't you think he would have just jumped on cobbler's wagon and put him at L-1 and left me in the rear view?

[bigAl]

Al, I find it interesting that your only significant post today was against me, complete with a vote. Yet when I turn around and post my defense, you say nothing about it. You do, however, speak to someone else. Are you trying to avoid having to deal with my defense, and instead use someone else's posts on me so you don't have to deal with what you are actually talking about, namely how scummy you find me? Do you just not feel like it's a good case and if you actually had to deal with my defense/scrutiny that you'd come off showing your true colors? It's also interesting to note that last night I posed a question to you, yet you logged on this morning and didn't respond to it at all. I also think it's interesting that someone asked for your claim, and I even turned around to ask for one as well, and your response was "Do I really have to?" That reads incredibly scummy to me. Like you're trying hard to not have to come up with a claim. There's only one case that I can think of that I would immediately believe your claim, but would still scrutinize your posts to see if it were true.

You started your response post with "Well, VE said most everything I was going to", so by responding to VE, I figured I was also responding to you. Not all your points perhaps but still. The reason I didn't post this morning? Cause I had about thirty seconds to read the thread before I left for work. I said from the start that I can mostly only post evenings/weekends.

As far as not wanting to claim - this is not scummy. If I claim, everyone will know my role (including the scum out there). If I don't claim and you guys lynch me, everyone will know my role anyway. If I don't claim and we manage to find a better target for today instead, then the scum has no info going into the night. Better for us. It's not like coming up with a fake claim would be difficult to do as scum here (especially with ~75% of the town vanilla townies), so I'm not just stalling for time to try to come up with something. What "case" are you talking about here?

So to answer your question:

So let me get this straight: You're voting me based solely off D2 and a hunch during D1? You're completely ignoring all of D1 in your decision here?

I'm not ignoring it, I just didn't mention it much at the time. Ugh, I don't have the energy to slog through all of blue's chatter again tonight so I'm going to save it for the morning.

[bigAl]

Since you asked, I read through Grimm's iso again and picked out some day 1 suspicions:
- Excessive application of "lynch all liars".
- "I do not in the slightest believe that was just a typo", and casts suspicion on VE for believing it is a typo.
- Excessive application of "lynch all liars". (again) - accusations against cy even before there was any evidence of lying
- Excessive accusations against VE ("MULTIPLE oversights/misinterpretations/exaggerations/whatever") for a very minor mistake.
- Long, emotion-filled posts that end up hiding most of the meat of the content (which is kind of no good anyway)
- "Good catch" on VE's "don't vote Zihark until he posts more"

Then we have a bunch of fluff posts with blue.

That brings us up to Grimm's first hundred posts, gotta run for now. I'll finish reading the rest of day 1 tonight.

[The Fonz]

]I was never for supporting his lynch. True, my vote was there for most of the day but I later discouraged the blue/cy choice for a lynch because I didn't think they were overly scummy. I spent a while pushing him to contribute with better reasoned posts, but not pushing to lynch him.

Meh, I'm always leery of 'I didn't really mean it' defences. You were voting him most of the day - that means he was the guy you most wanted to lynch. If someone else was scummier, then vote them. To spend most of a day voting someone and then say you didn't really suspect them just makes my scumdar scream.

O I think he's pretty town from early play, neutral from later on. It's mostly been Zachrulez who's been pushing for VE (if I recall correctly), who I also have pegged as town (mostly from blue's play). I'm guessing it's probably town vs. town here then, so expanding that argument further means that scum can sit back and let the town fight it out. Not good.

Well, no. 'Sitting back' is exactly what you did do. The time it makes MOST sense to argue with someone is when you think they're town and wrong. You're not going to convince scum that they're scum. If one of your top two town reads (although you have actually described me as being town or townish more times than VE, I think, which is another reason I think your 'top suspects' list is disengenuous) is attacking the other, a town player should be trying to convince him to look elsewhere.


On Grimm, bear in mind that 'If you flip town' is a significant caveat. I really don't think you will. Workdawg's last couple posts have been better, and that pretty much leaves you head and shoulders ahead as pe no 1. If you would, I don't see really see Viscera as scum with Cym or Workdawg. I'm not sure grimmjow/cymru makes that much sense either. The thing is, that two-man wagon on Cymru put him in serious danger - assuming that Al would be willing to vote anyone else rather than get lynched himself, then if Workdawg had come out and said he preferred a cym lynch, then despite Al being at L-1, it would have been Cymru and not Al who was the presumptive lynch. That's why I didn't think you needed to claim before, but now I think it's a good idea. So I think we're looking at either Viscera/Grimmjow, Workdawg/Grimmjow, or Workdawg/Cymru inthat scenario. I'm pretty confident Zach is town in all scenarios. Workdawg is the individually scummiest, and in two of those three combos, then it's a question of whether Grimm's possibilities of being in more scum combinations is stronger than VE's greater individual scumminess in terms of who is second suspect.

Do we have to jump to a claim the second someone gets to L-1? I'll claim tomorrow if everyone still wants me to.

No, but now we know WD would vote for you, you are the presumptive deadline lynch. So I'd appreciate a claim.

[Grimmjow]

Hungover and about to go to work, I'll get to this tonight, but I happened to come across this and figured I'd respond to it.

What "case" are you talking about here?

I'm not going to answer this. Nice attempt, though, to get me to tell you what I thought so that you could then say "yes, that's true, I'm not scum!"

[bigAl]

Meh, I'm always leery of 'I didn't really mean it' defences. You were voting him most of the day - that means he was the guy you most wanted to lynch. If someone else was scummier, then vote them. To spend most of a day voting someone and then say you didn't really suspect them just makes my scumdar scream.

I voted him to prod some activity, and then failed to find any strong suspects so I never bothered to change my vote. Anyone can look back and see that it wasn't like I was harping on his lynch the whole time my vote was there.

I'm not going to answer this. Nice attempt, though, to get me to tell you what I thought so that you could then say "yes, that's true, I'm not scum!"

I wasn't attempting anything tricky here - just asking. I'm a vanilla townie.

So I think we're looking at either Viscera/Grimmjow, Workdawg/Grimmjow, or Workdawg/Cymru inthat scenario. I'm pretty confident Zach is town in all scenarios. Workdawg is the individually scummiest, and in two of those three combos, then it's a question of whether Grimm's possibilities of being in more scum combinations is stronger than VE's greater individual scumminess in terms of who is second suspect.

This seems reasonable, if you throw in a "Fonz+Grimm/Workdawg/cy", which obviously Fonz isn't going to suggest himself.

If it comes down to lynching me or someone else, I'd support a cy, Workdawg or Fonz lynch (assuming I don't get the support for Grimm I'm hoping for). Come on guys, if you look at my play overall - I know I've been terribly non-committal this day but I honestly didn't realize that it had been two weeks since the day started. Been a busy couple weeks. When the issue first came up I was about to post "hey, it's only been five days, so what if I haven't voted yet" but then I checked the date and turns out it was two weeks ago. I'm not scum trying to avoid scumhunting here, it's just poor play. /me's desperate last defense.

[Grimmjow]

Come on guys, if you look at my play overall - I know I've been terribly non-committal this day but I honestly didn't realize that it had been two weeks since the day started. Been a busy couple weeks. When the issue first came up I was about to post "hey, it's only been five days, so what if I haven't voted yet" but then I checked the date and turns out it was two weeks ago. I'm not scum trying to avoid scumhunting here, it's just poor play. /me's desperate last defense.

It's not just being non-committal today, it's just poor play the entire game. You haven't really done... anything. You've voted Cy most of D1, you voted me D1 and made a very weak case against me today, and you've pretty much just sat back and let us do our own thing, only really popping in to sprinkle in some helpful little IC posts.

I'm not supporting your lynch... yet. I feel like there are other people out there who could be scum, and I'm going to go back through the entire thread and peoples' ISO (god, my head's hurting already) and I'll come back with thoughts.

[cymru96]

The game's died again (partly my fault I know).

The sooner Grimm gets back to us the better