Open 30 - Fire and Ice (Game Over!) - before 470

[Glork]

Vote: Wizardcat

I'm likely going to be calling him lurkerscum anyway, so why not just pre-empt the whole thing?

[Glork]

We *do* need a sweet wagon.

Unvote, Vote: xyzzy

[Glork]

unvote, vote Mert, FOS xyzzy

Curious move. Explanation, please?

[Glork]

You're making a vote based on possible distancing in a game where we know there are only two groups of two?


I don't think you're giving either Xyzzy or Mert nearly enough credit here.

[Glork]

Fos: xyzzy

for the overreaction. I'd probably move my vote to you if I didn't want to avoid putting you at lynch-1 this early.
Stewie, why the AutumnEvenings vote?

Aversion to lynch-1 is for chumps and sissies.

Are you a chump or a sissy?

[Glork]

You didn't answer my question. And I'm not presenting a false dilemma. If characteristic X implies quality A or B and you have exhibited characteristic X, then you must be A and/or B. I would simply like to know which one(s) you possess.

[Glork]

There's still no deying that your reaction to my banter was rather over-the-top.

FoS: Sefer

... somebody seems rather jumpy and irritable.

[Glork]

No reason not to finish off Xyzzy now.

Mert, Sefer, and Crub are prolly the other three scums. We should definitely lynch all of them today.

[Glork]

FoS: MBL

"I'm going to put this guy at Lynch -1, but I don't have an intent to lynch. If he gets lynched, it's someone else's fault."

[Glork]

LmL, I believe that's what you would call a "buddy-up tactic" from CTD. Also, I mostly just looked at the player list and picked names upon answering CTD. The "no reason not to finish off Xyzzy now" was little more than a refernce to BJ-style play, but lo and behold, we find Xyzzy at L-1 a mere three days before deadline.

Unvote, Vote: CTD

, as I'm willing to follow LmL's lead for the time being. Complementary

FoS: MBL/Crub

for the timing and manner in which they joined the Xyzzy-wagon.

FoS: Sefer

from his overreaction earlier.

That's about the best I can give right now.

[Glork]

Here's a question for Glork:
How come it took LML to comment for you to take note of my "buddy-up tactics"?

You may accuse me of being a smartass, but I'd say it's probably because I didn't notice the first time around. Sometimes a little fresh perspective is a good thing.

[Glork]

Actually,

Unvote, Vote: Crub

... there really isn't a heck of a lot to go on, but I think that CTD could serve to be useful one way or another, regardless of his alignment.

[Glork]

Seriously. Anybody who honestly thinks that CTD and I are scum together is a complete moron.

[Glork]

Meh. I am in no danger of being lynched. Incidentally, I would find those who tack onto the bad attack more suspect than the bad attack itself.

A question for you, LmL: What, from my end, makes you believe that I am CTD's scumbuddy? Why do you feel that his posting could be indicative of scumbuddies rather than, as I suggested earlier, a simple buddy-up tactic?

Vendagoat, I would encourage you to answr the same.

[Glork]

And by the way, LmL, I certainly don't think I would qualify as "excellent scum." I'd say that I've only recently broken the threshold of "decent scum." Also, as aggressive as I am when pro-town, my internal tactics are far more conservative as scum. Gambitting has never been my style.... but then again, as I don't think you've ever played a forum game with GlorkScum, I wouldn't expect you to know/believe that anyway.

[Glork]

If you're asking why I didn't move to CTD until after LmL's post, I've already answered that question. Pay attention.

[Glork]

LmL: Mneme didn't unvote, though, so it didn't switch over.

Anyway, I won't be around much at all over the next two days.

Xyzzy: How many games have you played with me? How many games of mine have you read? What on earth could

possibly

suggest to you that I have a "pretty consistent" playstyle? What exactly *is* your meta towards me? How does playing differently than you're used to affect my chances of being scum?

All this game has been so far is "Make a shallow observation and decide X is scum." I will freely admit that I am guilty of such terrible tactics, but I am very unimpressed with the way D1 has progressed. Considering there can't be any crosskills, lynching scum is at an absolute premium. I would like to see significantly more input from several players, including (but not limited to) AE, MBL, Sefer, and Xyzzy. Guarantee that at least one undercontributer is scum... distinctly possibly two of them.

I would also like LmL to answer my question as to why he thinks CTD's buddying implicates me. I'm waiting, Lee.

[Glork]

[quote="LmL"How strikingly odd, since agressive Glork would have called CtD on his buddying. Yet, you "didn't magically notice it."[/quote]I didn't "magically" not notice it. I get "HAY, LET'S FOLLOW GLORK" alarmingly often because people

expect

me to "magically" find scum out of nothing. When I first saw CTD's post, I figured it was mostly a joke, so I responded with a post that was mostly a joke. The possibility of buddying-up honestly didn't even cross my mind until you mentioned it. I can't offer any further explanation than that. Either you'll choose to believe me or you will not.

Well, now you are. People tend to use the power of suggestion... "I'm telling you that I'm in no danger of being lynched, so the weaker players won't even bother voting me." It makes me want to fight for you lynch harder...

*shakes head*
It's bad tactics to try to snuff the weaker players when I'd know that the stronger players would have equal incentive to vote. If I'm scum, does it matter if I convince the new/weak players not to vote me if somebody like MBL or CTD or Mert or AE ends up putting a lynching vote on me?
No. Not at all. Bad tactics.
Incidentally, I find it deliciously ironic that you can suggest that CTD/Glork are "excellent scum" pulling a gambit while also implying that I'd make a novice play scuh as this.

Well... I dont know if you guys are together, but the more and more I listen to you., the more and more sure I am that you (and / or CtD) is/are scum.

Funny thing, that. The more I listen to you, the more obtuse and arbitrary your reasons for suspecting me. While I can accept the "lots of small things add up to something bit" explanation in general (heck, that's how I do things myself when appropriate), I'm not buying it this time around. Perhaps you're strategically trying to push a lynch on me near deadline because you know it'd eliminate the strongest player in the game other than yourself. Sadly, it ain't gonna happen, sir. I suggest you go hunt for your mislynch elsewhere.


I already stated that my reason for suspecting Crub was in the manner and timing of his vote for Xyzzy. To assert that I have not given any reason is an outright lie. If you wanted explanation of that reasoning, you could have just asked for it.
Anywho... just after CTD removed a vote from Xyzzy, putting him back down to three, Crub put a new 4th vote on Xyz with this post:

unvote

vote xyzzy

Until you start making sense

Hardly a shining example of solid pro-town reasoning... and it put the pressure

right

back on Xyzzy for what had only been a completely pointless wagon.

Less than 24 hours later, and only five posts later, Crub's next post:

You guys do realise that this day is deadlined for a little under 3 days right?

...served to remind us that there was a deadline, and we needed a lynch. If that doesn't put us in a bandwagon mentality, I don't know what will. And, considering he had just put the spotlight right back on Xyzzy, it definitely made me wonder about Crub's intentions.

[Glork]

No, it didn't, because of the nature of my feelings towards CTD. It is similar to (though not as strong as) the kind of allowance I might give to Fritzler or Twomz.

Also, to say that I "blatantly ignored" it is inaccurate. That implies intentional nonobservation. I merely failed to notice it, a purely accidental occurrence.

Mod: Could you prod MrBuddyLee and Mert, please?

[Glork]

That's apparent. If I were as unwilling to allow for simple mistakes as you, LmL, I'd be advocating your lynch, too.

[Glork]

I'm asking for it.

Um... did you just not read the last portion of my post? I figured that somebody would ask about it, and I explained already:

Anywho... just after CTD removed a vote from Xyzzy, putting him back down to three, Crub put a new 4th vote on Xyz with this post:

unvote

vote xyzzy

Until you start making sense

Hardly a shining example of solid pro-town reasoning... and it put the pressure

right

back on Xyzzy for what had only been a completely pointless wagon.

Less than 24 hours later, and only five posts later, Crub's next post:

You guys do realise that this day is deadlined for a little under 3 days right?

...served to remind us that there was a deadline, and we needed a lynch. If that doesn't put us in a bandwagon mentality, I don't know what will. And, considering he had just put the spotlight right back on Xyzzy, it definitely made me wonder about Crub's intentions.

Minor FoS: Mert

for paying no attention whatsoever. Seriously. What the hell?

[Glork]

As I said, it was a throwback to BabyJesus (a former scummer who used to say that all the time), and a complete joke. Usually when somebody makes a throwaway comment like that, they don't expect three other players to agree and vote for that person. Defintie scum among Sefer, Crub, and MBL. I'd honestly wager one Fire and one Ice from that group of three.

Anybody care to take me up on that offer?

[Glork]

Because I don't think that two teammates would be that blatant in wagoning Xyzzy the way they did. However, it would seem perfectly ripe for one member of each team to jump onto Xyzzy the way they did.

Anyway, I seem to be on the threshold of being the one lynched today. Unfortunate that this should happen. I am

the

Doctor. Now unvote me, you fools, and go lynch actual scum.
(See, Lee, I had a different intent when I said I was in no danger of being lynched. I was trying to hint to you to get off of me because I'm the game's Doc. Yet you once again chose to interpret my words in the light that would make me look as bad as possible.)



Crub and MBL are *DEFINITELY* my top two picks for scum right now. I'd be perfectly happy lynching either. I would seriously encourage everybody to go back and actually look at the bandwagon on Xyzzy as it developed. It's going to be full of good info, yet several players seem to have chosen to play Follow-the-Lee in going after me. MBL and Crub both joined the Xyzzy-wagon at very opportune times for scums to push lynches, and they both jumped my wagon as well.



Another note on MBL:

"I'm going to put this guy at Lynch -1, but I don't have an intent to lynch. If he gets lynched, it's someone else's fault."

No, I have faith in this town not to do that. And it'd be 2nd-most my fault if it in fact did happen.]/quote]....the last time I saw somebody say "the town is good enough to make up for my intentionally bad/scummy play" was CES in Face-to-Face. He was scum then. Definite minus-points for MBL.

Also, MBL, your initial vote for Xyzzy was "to get a wagon going." Considering he was at Lynch -2 and had at least two votes more than anybody else, I'd say there was already a wagon going. I want you to further explain your vote for Xyzzy. It sure as hell doesn't make sense to me from a pro-town perspective. What possessed you to put him at Lynch -1?

I'd completely forgotten that we had static deadlines in this game.

Unvote, vote: xyzzy

for his earlier overreactions and more recent jumping about. I agree that we should save our extension for later on.

Sefer, please explain the rationale for your vote much more clearly. For a Lynch-2 vote, this is terribly shoddy reasoning.... there wasn't very much to go on against Xyzzy, IMHO. Yet considering FIVE different players had voted for him at this point, for next to nothing, I do not see his response as being an "overreaction." What did Xyzzy overreact to? What makes his "jumping about" lynchworthy, in your opinion?

[Glork]

And, a note, LmL: I am

SEVERELY

disappointed in your play so far. You concocted this idea that I'm scum based on your own chosen interpretation of my play, completely choosing to ignore/disbelieve the truth. I'd really expected you to be open to the possibility that I just didn't think about CTD's posting as being buddying. I haven't yet decided if your chosen interpretations are scummy, or just an indication that you're playing poorly this time around, but there is *SO MUCH GOOD INFO* all over the place, and you've just tunnelled on me. Bad LmL. You should be more observant.

FoS/IGMEOY: LML

. Everyone, keep a very scrutinizing eye on this guy. He could very well be scum, too. LML, if you

are

town, hopefully this will serve as a wake-up call.

[Glork]

Nope. You've tried to become the tipping point on Xyzzy, who I firmly believe is pro-town, and now me, and I *know* I'm pro-town, both under the guise of needing to do something before the deadline. I would be very happy to lynch you today.


What are your current thoughts regarding the following:
LmL
Sefer
Mert
CTD
Vendagoat
?

[Glork]

Glork, why the HELL would you think xyzzy was town this game? Read his posts. And did you even bother for an instant to analyze the main reason I voted for him--the tone of his "it's a trap" comment?

Scum fear traps, not town... I think it's a legit slip by scum.

Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. Wrong.

PJ in Space Monkey. He said my "Are you a Gorilla or a Space Monkey?" question to both him and Masterchief sounded like a trap. He was the only person to bring this up, and he was definitely pro-town.

Incidentally, I *ALSO* thought that Mert's question could have been a trap. It was basically asking Xyzzy to OMGUS somebody, which does not sit well with me.



Also, you still have not given me your thoughts on that list of players that I posted. I want them before this day ends. If you get lynched as town, it would be good to know what your thoughts are... because I am *certainly* willing to switch to you before this day ends.

[Glork]

First off, stop being condescending. I play my game my way. Instead, if you're really the doctor, you played in such a way that you GARNERED suspicion. My case on you was a good one. In other words, if someone ELSE would have made that case, I would have jumped on it. It was a strong case. You were the one playing poorly, not me.

It was not a "good one." It was based

entirely

your choosing to interpret my actions in one very specific way, when there was an equally reasonable alternative. You simply chose to believe that I was scum in spite of my explanations.

Unvote Crub, Vote: MBL

so that at least somebody is at four. I may yet choose to move this vote elsewhere before the deadline. But a lynch must happen one way or another.

[Glork]

LmL's right. Note that the scum win condition is to have everyone else dead. If it comes down to 1 Fire vs 1 Ice, or 2 Fire vs 2 Ice, nobody will win.

Fire has to try to lynch Ice, and vice versa. And we, as a town, need to use this to our advantage.

[Glork]

Now. MBL, give me your thoughts. Even if you're part of one scum faction, you can help lead us to the other faction in future days. Mush!

[Glork]

Yes. Forcing somebody under that much pressure for no reason to commit to calling somebody most likely to be scum doesn't make sense. I know I'd have a hard time picking which scums were on my wagon, and I think I'd be slightly uncomfortable with that kind of question. It's hard enough to pick scum out of a group anyway... I realize that Mert said "based on what little we've seen," but still... it doesn't sit well with me.

Anyway, I've already posed the scenario in which MertScum wants to force Xyzzy, already in an uncomfortable position, to take a stance against one of the players voting for him based entirely on that player's vote for him. Forcing OMGUS out of somebody else is a Bad Thing. That's pretty much the definition of a trap.




You're still avoiding my inquiries. Why?

[Glork]

AE: The reason I could see CTD as being useful is because, as I just pointed out, Fire and Ice need to get each other

LYNCHED

in this game. CTD is a very capable scumhunter; the probability that he is scum buddying up to me is small enough that I am unwilling to lynch a player of his caliber based solely on what

could easily have been nothing more harmless than a joke.

Simply put, CTD is good, and I wasn't nearly confident enough to lynch him. I'd rather go after somebody whom I think is equally or more likely to be scum.

Regarding the following bad attacks thing: If you hadn't noticed, I was taking a shot at the people who were already implicitly going "I agree with LmL." LmL's chosen depiction of me was bad enough. People such as Crub and Vendagoat were disturbingly eager to sheep that reasoning.

[Glork]

Ugh, AE, you're missing my point entirely. I

DON'T

think he's scummy enough to lynch. I think that the cases against Crub, MBL, and even Vendagoat are better, and I think that the cases against LmL and Sefer are equally strong. There isn't enough compelling evidence to say "I think CTD is scum and I want him lynched."

[Glork]

GLork--uncounterclaimed doc who [choice words about the deterioration of Glork's scumhunting skills redacted]

Mmmmm, ad hom.


You also horribly mischaracterized my "Aversion to L-1" and my reason for FoSing you. In the first case, a player expressed desire to lynch but refrained because of fear of L-1. In the second case, a player expressed non-intent to lynch yet put the L-1 vote on and simultaneously attempted to shift responsibility to the rest of the town (which, as I mentioned earlier, I've only ever seen CEScum do before).


If you want to lynch somebody, you shouldn't fear putting them at L-1. That is the point of the first post.
If you don't want to lynch somebody, you shouldn't put them at L-1 while trying to mitigate the importance of your vote. That is the point of the second post.

Two completely different lessons here. Reading the

context

of those posts should make that apparent. Instead, you chose to mischaracterize my statements while throwing in ad-hom attacks of my gameplay... and all this on a claimed Doc who has gone uncountered by at least seven other players, by my last count.

Confirm Vote: MBL

[Glork]

V/LA

[Glork]

(surprisingly) a Glork lynch

You really are thick. Given that we know there is *EXACTLY* one Doctor in the game, it is prudent to save me until tomorrow, even if you think I am scum anyway. If everybody checks in and does not counter, you will save yourself from what would've been a certain mislynch.


As Mert said, I am definitely NOT the play today, regardless of any player's individual opinion on me.

[Glork]

Saying you still think I am scummy is COMPLETELY different from saying you'd prefer to lynch me over

anybody

. Even if you were 95% sure that I was scum based on gameplay, I should still not be a preferred lynch over anybody. You don't lynch an uncountered power role in an open setup. Period.

[Glork]

Meh. I'd go in for a Goatlynch.



We'd still need one more.

[Glork]

Unvote, Vote: Xyzzy

ONLY

to put him at Lynch +1 to guarantee that we get

some kind of

lynch today. I still find him somewhat unlikely to be scum. *shrug*

[Glork]

So, Glork... talk to us.

Who did you protect, Sirrah Glork?

I don't see why I should be divulging that information at this time.

Why aren't you dead?

Because neither scumgroup targted me last night.

Unless the mafia targeted you, of course, and you're in the opposite faction. Makes for high drama, eh?

FoS: Glork

for.. well.. not dying.

Again... unless somebody openly counterclaims, you have

NOTHING

against me.
MBL, Mert, mneme, Crub, Vendagaoat, AE have all openly stated things that specifically indicate that they are not the Doctor. Sefer is dead, Xyzzy died as scum.

You have repeatedly gone on and on about how you are still suspicious of me in spite of the Doctor claim. I honestly worry, LmL, that you are scum who is trying to heavily hint-drop at a counterclaim for the future. However, since it would clearly be to the town's advantage for hypothetical LmL-doc to counterclaim hypothetical GlorkScum today (either the Fire Mafia would be wiped out entirely, or each faction would be down to one player remaining), I am going to ask you straight-up:

Are you the Doctor?

If you say yes, I'll agree to be lynched today, and then you can be lynched tomorrow (as I will most certainly die as the Doctor). If you say no, then the issue of what you think of Glork-not-dying is completely moot unless Stewie or CTD were to counterclaim me. But I want to snuff out any chance that you'll save your "counterclaim" for later. It would clearly be the optimal play today... so if you've got it, go ahead and spill it.

[Glork]

CTD, on the other hand, placed the first vote on XYZ during the random phase, but unvoted once he'd gotten a handful of votes and voted me instead, to give Stewie his reaction. (Which, yeah.) He left his vote there the rest of the time. It seems like they could be partners. So

FoS:CrashTextDummy

.

Didn't you do exactly the same thing? Putting the 2nd random vote on xyzzy and then unvoting when he was at L-2. Also your 2nd vote for xyzzy was made at a time when he was safe from a lynch. But as the wagons changed you couldn't unvote xyzzy without setting up a no-lynch.

FoS: AE

But AE was the one who, at the end of the day, expressed a perference to lynch Xyzzy multiple times. If she were Xyzzy's scumbuddy, she could have made a "well, I'm reluctant to do this, but Unvote; Vote: MBL" type of post. MBL would have died, and Xyzzy would have lived.

I pretty much agree with AE's assessment. Part of me wonders if LmL was attempting to get a really late push against Vendagoat to either A) protect one of Xyzzy/MBL; or B) try to get a no-lynch by getting people to swtich aruond their votes. I am also very, very concerned about his continued obsession with calling me scum. It really looks like he's trying to set up a counterclaim, and as I know he can't legitimately counterclaim me, that significantly raises the likelihood of LmLscum in my eyes.

Vote: LoudmouthLee

for the time being. There's definitely something going on here; I just can't quite figure out what it is.

[Glork]

LmL: Under your current theory, if you think that AE is an IceScum, that would mean that one of the people attacking her is Fire who targeted her last night. I'd like you to analyze each person who has posted suspicon of AE, and I'd like you to explain which among them you think is most likely to be our final FireScum.

[Glork]

So Mert. All this talk about how you'd feel if this were a normal setup is grand and whatnot, and your musings on why I'm not the play are certainly appreciated.....



....but given that this is Fire and Ice Mafia, and I am not going to be lynched in this game, I'd like to know who you think is scum right now? Who is the last Fire? Who are the Ices?

Minor FoS: Mert

for making a lengthy post that amounted to virtually no useful, original insight as to who we should be lynching today.

[Glork]

AE comes up on the list as Ice more than I'd like

Why wouldn't you like AE on the list as Ice?

[Glork]

It strikes me as suspicious that you admit that the xyzzy lynch was a lucky shot in the dark, and then you try to incriminate someone for shooting elsewhere. Your point about Vendagoat FOSing xyzzy but not voting, however, is valid, since it implies that Vendagoat did not think that xyzzy was a shot in the dark.

I think you're missing the point. If there was really such a little case on Xyzzy, then the people who lynched him more or less got lucky (according to CTD). However, Xyzzy's partner would have known that Xyzzy was scum, and they would very likely have been actively pushing elsewhere, whether they were distancing from Xyzzy (with an FoS) or not.



Also, Stewie and CTD: It would be helpful if you could both claim "not-doc" so that we can finally put a rest to all of this nonsense with LmL taking every other post to call me suspicous. Thanks.

[Glork]

Bah, go town, etc.

[Glork]

She was an obvious kill choice, and I hadn't yet decided whether she was scum. *shrug*


MBL is delusional if he thinks I'd protect him.