Micro 16 (Game Over)

[2birds1stone]

I'm prepared to call syndrome town, unless he's scum with kondi (who's pretty null).

I don't think Camilla's particularly scummy though, what am I missing?

[Camilla]

Kondi, are you going to explain why I'm scum or just scream for my lynch?

Syndrome, why the vote on me?

[kondi2424]

I'm going to scream for your lynch. With good reason.

[Camilla]

What reason?

[Seanald]

Shos is caught scum, don't read to much into it, caught is caught. I personally think Day 1 is the best time to find scum, they have had no time to find the groove in the game and therefore are easily found.

VOTE: Shos

[Seanald]

Vote: shos

Removing accountabilty with an obvious voting pattern. Is scummy.

Also

it *is* page 1 of the game tho...so I might just be too eager to start the game..

Yes, we all know that cases are piss weak in RVS, yet you felt that you needed to tell us all anyway. Once again strikes me as scummy.

^ figured I would repost this, because it explains it all.

[shos]

*sigh*, this game is unbelievable. THAT IS NOT REMOVING ACCOUNTABILITY. *NOBODY* FREKING STAYS WITH HIS FIRST RVS VOTE. that is starting to be an insult -_-

@2b1s, sorry for yesterday, but since I really find it hard to understand any of your points against me(except the idiotic point from above), can you still sort of compile them to me? I'll be fine with just a "post 6, 12, 90, and 160" response.

[kondi2424]

Nope. Shos is pretty obviously town, and you don't want him to get lynched today.

[2birds1stone]

Very well

*

Removal of accountability (with as much explanation as I can possibly provide)

: When you make an RVS vote, you say, I dunno, "Vote: 2B1S because he's a total nutjob" or something to that effect. In saying this, you have said "I am voting this person for no real reason of my own free will, and if they flip scum, I was either bussing them or being a good townie". Yes, that's a very broad statement, and seemingly worthless than "I vote this person because my pattern of voting the last voter says I must, and their flip has no bearing on my actions". You did the latter. Now, on the one hand, you have done a very good job of looking like this is a new concept to you; on the other hand, your join date suggests not.
*

Not voting in first post

: This is a small point, but it's a point of sorts. There was no notification sent out to the players when this game started; that gives scum a great chance to stall a few RL days off Day 1; eh, it's not much of an advantage, but it's a minor one.
*

Paranoia about L--2

: Self-explanatory
*

Assumptions about set-up

: Self-explanatory, especially when you admit you've never seen this sort of a game before and therefore shouldn't have any preconceived notions of what the scumteam should be.
*

Initially ignoring my serious vote

: Yes, you didn't freak out. That was good. However, any serious vote, however weak, is ultimately good for the town, and any townie should be relieved to see RVS over. You weren't.

Scum enough.

[ChannelDelibird]

Vote Count

Camilla - 3 - shos, kondi2424, syndromeofatown

shos - 2 - Camilla, Seanald
kondi2424 - 1 - FuDuzn
2birds1stone - 1 - Camilla
Seanald - 0
FuDuzn - 0 -
syndromeofatown - 0

Not voting - 0

With 7 alive, it'll take 4 votes to lynch.

Deadline: Saturday 1st September, 12:51pm BST

May I remind you of Rule 2 - there was a failure on my part to enforce it in the previous Vote Count which was corrected in the compiling of this one.

And before anyone asks, the font colour used to denote the leader in the Vote Count bears no reflection on this game in any way. It is for my personal amusement.

[shos]

Very well

*

Removal of accountability (with as much explanation as I can possibly provide)

: When you make an RVS vote, you say, I dunno, "Vote: 2B1S because he's a total nutjob" or something to that effect. In saying this, you have said "I am voting this person for no real reason of my own free will, and if they flip scum, I was either bussing them or being a good townie". Yes, that's a very broad statement, and seemingly worthless than "I vote this person because my pattern of voting the last voter says I must, and their flip has no bearing on my actions". You did the latter. Now, on the one hand, you have done a very good job of looking like this is a new concept to you; on the other hand, your join date suggests not.
*

Not voting in first post

: This is a small point, but it's a point of sorts. There was no notification sent out to the players when this game started; that gives scum a great chance to stall a few RL days off Day 1; eh, it's not much of an advantage, but it's a minor one.
*

Paranoia about L--2

: Self-explanatory
*

Assumptions about set-up

: Self-explanatory, especially when you admit you've never seen this sort of a game before and therefore shouldn't have any preconceived notions of what the scumteam should be.
*

Initially ignoring my serious vote

: Yes, you didn't freak out. That was good. However, any serious vote, however weak, is ultimately good for the town, and any townie should be relieved to see RVS over. You weren't.

Scum enough.

Very well indeed.

1. I seriously do not understand what the difference is between "I vote him because he's stupid" and "I vote him because he RVS voted her". seriously, you said that my vote was 'because I must' instead of 'because I want' - in order to remove responsibility - but nothing dictated me to vote that way, in fact, nothing even dictated me to post; I really see no water in this jar of yours.

2. ....... .........this is so forced. seriously. I can go right now back to the board index and get back here with no less than 50(increase that numbers as you'd like) game which started in a post without a vote. are you seriously accusing me of stalling the game on post 1? and even furthermore - look at the damn post:

so many people, damn. people should be notified that the game started, I think

"there was no notification sent out to the players when this game started" - IN CASE YOU DID NOT NOTICE THAT IS WHAT THE POST IS ABOUT. if I wanted to stall the game I wouldn't post that. SO forced.

3+4. I can't see any reason for my setup spec and the fear caused by it to be a scumtell, not to mention self explanatory. I gave you my not-so-unlikely analysis of the game(yes, without investigating alllllll the ways a 7p game can go) and gave you very specific reasons on how and why being in L-1 is dangerous. Just the fact that Camilla has been like that for a while now makes me sure that she is scum. If you think this is a scumtell, you are welcome to correct me; analyse the setup yourself. tell me everything.

5. that was not a vote to come out of RVS. eventually it was meaningful since it promoted this discussion, but at the time, I coulda sworn it wasn't serious. the reasoning behind it was just about as stupid as any RVS vote you can find. Now that you elaborated, it might look a tad less stupid, but still it is SOOO forced that even if this happened again in another game, I'd react exactly the same.

next please. tell me what you think of Camilla, and the two other voters on her wagon.

[FuDuzn]

Shos appears very defensive to me, but I could myself reacting the same way to a seriousl vote that, let's be honest, displays poor logic. To me it looks like 2birds is trying to find reasons that shos could appear scummy instead of actual reasons that he is scummy.
UNVOTE:
VOTE: 2birds

[shos]

I could easily see a Camilla/2B1S scumteam here. oh yes, that is 2 scums...ooh and another assumption on the setup..

@Fuzudn: I always get defensive eventually >< I'm pretty sure that in each and every game I played you can see that.

[syndromeofatown]

2birds case is hilariously bad, but not necessarily scum motivated

camilla's sheep onto shos DOES look scum motivated though

[Camilla]

Like your sheep onto me?

Shos was the only player who did something scummy, so I moved my vote over to him.

[kondi2424]

What the fuck I just realized you're not soad

Who are you?

[shos]

lol I keep confusing them too kondi

Camilla, your sheep of a nonexistent case is not legitimate. that is why you have so many votes.
and now - you're posting, but no content. what's your reads? thoughts? what do you think of the case you're sheeping?

[Camilla]

It's page 3. What are your reads?

I think you are scum. The case on you isn't great, but it's better than anything else out there.

[shos]

so generally you think I am scum but you can't back it up.

my reads are currently:
scum: Camilla and 2bird1stone
townguys: Kondi, fuduzn(both only slightly)
rest are null.

[syndromeofatown]

What the fuck I just realized you're not soad
Who are you?

No that's me, just changed my name to confuse you. I like this name better; it fits in with the theme of the website and doesn't offend anyone. I'm going to start playing games on this account now.

[Camilla]

No, I think you are the scummiest player right now. I'm not 100% confident in you being scum.

[shos]

please do tell me then why you think I am the scummiest.

Syndrome - I always wanted to say SOAD but then there was no D lol, it'll take time to get used to it

[2birds1stone]

Right.

VOTE: Shos

Shos appears very defensive to me, but I could myself reacting the same way to a seriousl vote that, let's be honest, displays poor logic. To me it looks like 2birds is trying to find reasons that shos could appear scummy instead of actual reasons that he is scummy.
UNVOTE:
VOTE: 2birds

Is this a chainsaw I see before me?

Page three. Page three, and you're worried that a case isn't that great. I'd also like to add that the way Shos has responded to it wasn't particularly townie up until post sixty. The way you've handled this is different to everyone else, FuDuzn. Most of the players called the case bad and ignored it as an attempt to break RVS. You took it a step further and voted me for it.

If Shos flips scum, I know who's going down next.

[FuDuzn]

2birds, my main issue isn't the poor logic to vote him, it is my second sentence there. You are nitpicking his responses to your vote on him and finding ways to make everything he says as some sort of scum tell. And here you are trying to discredit me in the same manner. At least you are consistent.

[2birds1stone]

It's hardly nitpicking. It's not like I picked a tiny sentence out of a wall of text and span an entire case around it. These are fairly obvious transgressions, you can call them minor, or even go as far to argue that they're not scumtells (though I obviously disagree), but it's most certainly not picking nits.