Open 53: Near-Vanilla - Game over!

[neko2086]

(AKA only ever prodding me, not people such as Killah Seven and RossWilliam who have been lurking like hell).

To be fair, I've been asking for prods on you as I've been incredibly interested in hearing what you've had to say.

I will contribute more on D2.

I hope so. It hasn't been the case so far, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and the chance to keep your word.

In your experience (although it is limited), what alignment do these "assholes" tend to be?

It seems to be townies trying to get strong reactions out of scum. Like I said, though, they can get the same reactions out of other townies, so I don't find it to be a helpful tactic.

What is your personal definition of "anti-town"?

Anti-town behavior, imo, includes active lurking, misleading town, distracting town, and other behaviors that deliberately hinder the town. I'm looking for intentional play and behavior that is not helping the town. Your play on D1 was not at all helpful. I didn't see you trying to help us find scum. You may not find it easy to pick up any information on D1, and I would agree that it's difficult. I think most people would agree. But, we need to get discussion going on D1, and get

everyone

in on it so that we have information on everyone D2 for discussion. Your refusal to participate, then, severely hinders us.

Doesn't the existance of neutral roles in some games tend to prove the potential existance of a null-tell?

I don't think I ever said there was no such thing as a null-tell. If I find a particular point doesn't point to either town or scum, then I'd say it's a null-tell. That seems pretty common sense to me, but if you have other thoughts on it, I'd like to hear them.

Aside from my lurking (boredom) and lack of content when I did post (more boredom), what exactly have I done that is anti-town?

Again, by

not

making an attempt to help the town, you're hurting us. We need participation from everyone.

Nobody

should be lurking, but unfortunately once one person lurks, others won't feel as bad about it.


Now, I think plenty has happened that can be commented on with a fresh perspective. I'm looking forward to hearing more from you.

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

If you disagree, fair enough, if you think that makes me scum, please explain.

There's certainly a middle ground in which I would prefer to get a reason why to agree. I don't see why you would not want to give a reason. I don't see why it makes you particularly scummy, as I can't really fathom why scum would not want to give reasons either.

[Thesp]

hjallti has me backing him up during his time of limited access.

Expect a vote count within 12 hours, and prods to any player who has not posted in the last 72 hours. If there is anything which needs immediate attention, please notify me by PM. Thanks!

[Crub]

You don't see the value of not being explicit? Do you not think that his OMGUS, followed by lurk has provided us with any further information?

[Crub]

I note your shift from apathy to antipathy toward the RW wagon. I will agree that it's obviously not the strongest reasons for a wagon, but I do think it seems a bit late to be jumping on a wagoner, especially seemingly randomly.

First post after lurky period, in regard to my voting him. Fair enough.

Secondly WTF is DS even a topic of discussion right now? He's about to be replaced. I think we can safely put DS's play down to his VI meta and hope he get's replaced by someone who isn't a VI.

I don't like this. First off, there was a DS discussion because korlash was recapping his opinions on the game. Also, I don't agree that you can excuse scumminess for meta and go on with it. And even more, this post seems like counter productive to discussion. It should never be the wrong time to discuss someone's behavior, and just because he is about to be replaced doesn't mean we can't do analysis on him.

But then followed by a healthy dose of OMGUS.

It is good to see a fresh analysis of past behavior, even if only to get some discussion going again...

Except that it wasn't fresh and there was no one around to respond to it in any case.

This got ignored. Why?

Crub: I didn't respond to that post after mine, because I felt that there was no good to argue that point.

Then he continues to lurk through the rest of the day. Comes back at the 11th hour to put a vote on. ie. He did absolutely the minimum he had to.

Day 2. He completely ignores my vote up until :

... is that all you're going to say?
I'm gonna

vote: crub

as well, because you're pointlessly wasting our time and there is a fixed deadline which is obviously getting closer and closer but discussion is not really picking up

Yeah I'm obv scum for committing to how I feel about someone's alignment.

also i don't frankly care whether my OMGUS makes you not feel better about my alignment because I have some actual basis behind the vote

And yet he doesn't explain. Hypocritical much? Oh and now back into lurk mode Yay for klebian.

I've got a two post reason to think he's possibly linked with Shanba, but it's not strong so I'm not posting it. Also a possible link with TSN (which is a higher possibility IMO), but I'm not elaborating until I see more.

Also I'll ask again.

If you think me avoiding giving any sort of analysis while committing to someone's alignment is scummy, please explain.

[JDodge]

Crub, quick question: Do you find me suspicious?

Neko, you have made several valid points. I see nothing more to dispute that would be in any way game-related.

[Crub]

Crub, quick question: Do you find me suspicious?

Nope.

[JDodge]

Crub, quick question: Do you find me suspicious?

Nope.

Yet you find kleb suspicious for many of the same things I am guilty of. Why is that?

[Crub]

Your bandwagon yesterday mainly, plus the lack of any (that I've noticed) links with anyone else.

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

I have to say, if someone accused me, and refused to give any reasons, I'd probably get a little OMGUSy myself. I don't think its particularly

scummy

not to, if only because I can't figure out any particular reason why scum would be any more likely to pursue the play than town, but its certainly not very helpful.

[Crub]

I have to say, if someone accused me, and refused to give any reasons, I'd probably get a little OMGUSy myself. I don't think its particularly

scummy

not to, if only because I can't figure out any particular reason why scum would be any more likely to pursue the play than town, but its certainly not very helpful.

Yeah but at this point I'd expect you to sit on the sidelines while trying to draw attention away from kleb.

There is no point to getting OMGUS'y if he think's I'm scummy enough for a vote at this point then bring on an explanation.

Also kleb + TSN = my top 2. Shanba is a possibility but I don't want to go there until we have a lot more.

[JDodge]

Your bandwagon yesterday mainly, plus the lack of any (that I've noticed) links with anyone else.

What do you mean by my bandwagon yesterday?

[Thesp]

Official Vote Count

klebian

: 1 (Crub)

JDodge

: 2 (killa seven, TheSweatpantsNinja)

killa seven

: 1 (RossWilliam)

Crub

: 2 (Korlash, klebian)

Not voting

: 5 (skitzer, JDodge, neko2086, Shanba, Justin Playfair)


With 11 alive it takes 6 to lynch before deadline.

Fixed deadline: This day will end not later than apr 4th, CET 10.00 am.

Prodding all players who haven't posted in the last 72 hours, replacing non-responders.

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

So, in other words:
Crub: kleb is scum.

Town: Why?

Crub: Because I say he is.

Me: No, for serious, why?

Crub: What, you don't agree with my stunning logic? You

and

kleb are scum.

[neko2086]

That seems like an incredibly simplified version of Crub's suspicion of you.

Also a possible link with TSN (which is a higher possibility IMO), but I'm not elaborating until I see more.

I'd like to know what this link is. I think I see the shanba link you're talking about, but it seems incredibly weak to me. I hope you have a better one here.

Crub, your case against klebian seems fairly valid, but I have to say that your point in post 277 was a statement that didn't seem to be expecting a response. I can't say that I would have responded to it either, really, just because it would have led to an unnecessarily nit-picky argument. I'd say this is one of your weaker arguments.

Can I just ask what you were hoping to gain by delaying this case against klebian for so long? Was it to see if he would lurk, or to see how he would react?

You don't see the value of not being explicit?

Generally, this is done to gauge reactions. For awhile though, it seemed that you would never reveal your reasons for suspecting klebian, and in that case, how do you expect the town to react? If you're town, and you suspect somebody to be scum, we would expect that you'd want other people to suspect him to be scum as well, and presenting an argument is the only way to do that, imo. Perhaps you have different feelings on this.


JDodge, thank you for responding and contributing. I think after D2 we'll have a better sense of your alignment.

On a related note, killa seven, TSN, how do you feel about your votes?


Korlash, you're avoiding my question:

If none of those were serious suspicions, whom do you suspect now?

Skitzer, do you still think Crub is "trying to help the game"? You didn't see the point on Crub, you asked Korlash why he suspected Crub, Korlash gave you a pretty weak answer ("I don't like Crub's tunnel vision.. And thats about it really..."), and you seemed OK with it. Would you agree, then, that Crub had tunnel vision, and is that helping the game? I'd just like you to clarify your position on Crub, because I'm confused.

[TheSweatpantsNinja]

I'm feeling. . . ok about my vote. I'm considering crub at this point, it seems like he's being intentionally useless, which was about all we had on jdodge in the first place.

[killa seven]

im ok with my vote, ill have to go back and see if anyone else looks more smunny at the moment 2 change my vote

[Crub]

Your bandwagon yesterday mainly, plus the lack of any (that I've noticed) links with anyone else.

What do you mean by my bandwagon yesterday?

You don't remember the town having to choose between you and MM yesterday?

So, in other words:
Crub: kleb is scum.

Town: Why?

Crub: Because I say he is.

Me: No, for serious, why?

Crub: What, you don't agree with my stunning logic? You and kleb are scum.

Hahah lulz.

[RossWilliam]

sorry, just got prodded. Well, i'm still content with my vote on killa.

[klebian]

Crub: you have made an explicit case against me and i appreciate this
I will make a similarly detailed response tomorrow if possible

[JDodge]

Your bandwagon yesterday mainly, plus the lack of any (that I've noticed) links with anyone else.

What do you mean by my bandwagon yesterday?

You don't remember the town having to choose between you and MM yesterday?

You know that I meant why is my bandwagon significant. Stop dancing around the issue.

[skitzer]

neko: I feel Crub's tunnel-vision did not help the game, which did give a somewhat reasonable reason for Korlash's vote, but I don't get why you asked someone to answer a question after another. Explain.

[Shanba]

I've got a two post reason to think he's possibly linked with Shanba, but it's not strong so I'm not posting it. Also a possible link with TSN (which is a higher possibility IMO), but I'm not elaborating until I see more.

You've been name dropping a possible link between me and klebian for a while now. I don't care how strong it is - now you've mentioned it, it has no more value as information to keep to yourself anyway (if I were scum with him, I would already know that I had to avoid further links of any kind). As such, I want you to explain now so the issue doesn't fester. Moreover, such a discussion will help me get a better read on your alignment.

You know that I meant why is my bandwagon significant. Stop dancing around the issue.

To be fair, I read it the same way Crub did.

[neko2086]

I don't get why you asked someone to answer a question after another

Are you talking about why I asked you two questions in a row? Your position on Crub didn't seem very solid. On one hand, you said you didn't really see a case against him:

I'm not sure I see the big point on Crub. He may have been analysing something that needed this retrospect. If he's trying to help the game, let it be.

but when you asked Korlash why he suspected Crub, Korlash said:

I don't like Crub's tunnel vision.. And thats about it really...

to which you replied "Oh ok." Now, for somebody who thought Crub was trying to help the game, it seems to me that you gave Korlash a pretty easy pass on a, imo, pretty weak argument. I mean, Korlash didn't even elaborate on it.

So, the point in my asking those questions was to see what you

really

think of Crub. Do you still think he's trying to help, or have you changed your mind?

If that's not what you wanted me to explain, then please rephrase your question.

[skitzer]

Well if he's "recuperated" from his tunnel-vision, then I don't see it as much more then something to note. The "oh ok" was because his remark concerning curbs.