Open 186; Jungle Republic (Game Over)

[saberwolf]

Lynx: If your vote wasn't a policy vote, what would it fall under then?

[Budja]

@Lynx,
if you read two more sentances on that post you should see why.
But... I was wrong, I just assumed CKD was right and barely looked at the vote count .
Still since he is the latest vote on Saber and since the lying thing seems plausible, I see no reason to change.
---
Of the later pushes on Saber, bigmc and ML's are the only one that look possibly opportunistic.
---
Another note. This is not Saber's "generic playstyle". From the game I played with him (and marathon), he came off as a good player. The problem I have is that he is not really invested in this game.
---
@Scott,
Lynching lurkers is ok but its a bit early for that. Threatening to lynch lurkers is better but a lurker lynch < a lynch of someone I think is scummy.

[saberwolf]

@Lynx,
if you read two more sentances on that post you should see why.
But... I was wrong, I just assumed CKD was right and barely looked at the vote count .
Still since he is the latest vote on Saber and since the lying thing seems plausible, I see no reason to change.
---
Of the later pushes on Saber, bigmc and ML's are the only one that look possibly opportunistic.
---
Another note. This is not Saber's "generic playstyle". From the game I played with him (and marathon), he came off as a good player. The problem I have is that he is not really invested in this game.
---
@Scott,
Lynching lurkers is ok but its a bit early for that. Threatening to lynch lurkers is better but a lurker lynch < a lynch of someone I think is scummy.

Ok, I give you my word, right now, no gambits, all effort.

[Budja]

Awesome, you can consider me appeased.

[Lynx The Antithesis]

Lynx: If your vote wasn't a policy vote, what would it fall under then?

It's simple really threatening to hammer seemed like an excuse to any solid pressure. If everyone's just afraid to vote you because you might possibly kill yourself than that makes you dangerous. People will continue to just excuse your behavior as just being Saber By bringing up the times when you have played in that manner, it only solidfies my point. But this point is being hammered into the ground and I'd rather not foucs all my attention on you at the moment. Please, Saber, just play to meet your win condition and if you are town don't do anything too drastic to jeopardize the town's chances.

Thanks Budja I don't know why I didn't put that together along with your vote.

Unvote, Vote:Scott Brosius

for calling out the Saber wagon as anti-town, but failing to actually vote or specify even one of the wagoners for their "scummy behavior".

[Lynx The Antithesis]

excuse to avoid*

[Scott Brosius]

uot;]bigmc- This is how saber plays. It's completely null in my opinion. I am not sure why you keep pressing the issue though.

This is the exactly the attitude that simply excuses his play as "just saber." This is precisely what I am afraid of with Saber.

CKD- I think the continuing attempt to lynch saber on fairly weak ground is scummier behavior than the potential lie about the missed vote.

Then why aren't you voting one of the scummy wagoners on Saber?

What does everyone think about lynching lurkers? I'm usually against it D1 since if that person is town, there are limited interactions to go off of, but in this setup we have 5/12 people being anti-town. It is easier for us to hit scum aiming for lurkers by basic probability. I would be more willing to lynch a scummy lurker in this setup than others.

I'm very against this unless we have absolutely no other option such as being under a deadline. And who do you consider being anti-town?

1- I am not ignoring what saber is doing. I'm saying that voting strictly on that basis is poor. bigmc corrected that and attacked SW's content which holds more water than a null playstyle reason.

2- I was responding directly about bigmc for the question that CKD asked. I did not say the entire wagon was scummy, I said pushing it on grounds of playstyle was.

3. I used the term "anti-town" in this situation to refer to non-town players. There are 3 mafia and 2 wolves, hence 5/12 players in this game are not aligned with the town.

Unvote, Vote:Scott Brosius

for calling out the Saber wagon as anti-town, but failing to actually vote or specify even one of the wagoners for their "scummy behavior".

I would like you to quote where I called this wagon anti-town, or where I said everyone on SW's wagon is exuding "scummy behavior".

---
Another note. This is not Saber's "generic playstyle". From the game I played with him (and marathon), he came off as a good player. The problem I have is that he is not really invested in this game.

I think it has been since this "bet" started. Have you played with him since this bet started or was it awhile ago?

[Lynx The Antithesis]

think the continuing attempt to lynch saber on fairly weak ground is scummier behavior than the potential lie about the missed vote

Here's where you label the wagon scummy.

And you're right about the anti-town. I thought you were referring to the players on the saberwolf wagon as anti-town, not the actual number of scum. My fault on that one.

If you were specifically referring to one player on the wagon my points are ill founded and I will unvote after you tell me exactly who you were speaking of in that instance.

[curiouskarmadog]

You're voting me for misreading when you did the exact same thing? Saying that I was "worried" about the vote count is a misrepresentation of my position. While it's true that I wouldn't have voted him if I knew it would put him at L-1, I wasn't exactly scouring the topic double-checking every vote. I made a mistake, shish.

different situation. I misread a vote count posted by the mod. you voted before the mod's vote count. I didnt vote someone who had a ton of votes on him either...the fact you didnt go back and check after the flurry of votes against saber, is telling.

why is it true, that you wouldnt have voted him if you knew it would have put him at -1? IF you think he is scum, he deserves your vote...that wasnt my problem with your vote.

also I didnt say you were worried (quite the opposite)...I said IF you were worried about the vote count, you would have acted differently.

What does everyone think about lynching lurkers? I'm usually against it D1 since if that person is town, there are limited interactions to go off of, but in this setup we have 5/12 people being anti-town. It is easier for us to hit scum aiming for lurkers by basic probability. I would be more willing to lynch a scummy lurker in this setup than others.

I usually hate lynching lurkers...but I have been in 3-4 games back to back, where scum have been the lurkers in that games (for various reason)..that being said, I think I am on a scum trail right now....so, the lurkers can wait.

[hewitt]

Nonetheless, I dont like how you're sitting on the sidelines, not voting anyone, yet throwing out silly accusations like putting someone at L-2 is "basically" putting someone at L-1. Do you think this was scummy? If so, why aren't you voting them? Why aren't you voting anyone?

I don't really care if you think I'm sitting on the sidelines and I've already answered why I'm not voting yet. But I'll restate it since you apparently missed it, I don't vote until I think I've found scum. Very simple.

That said, bigmc's vote was not L-1. However, his assertion that he "missed" MR's vote is a bit suspicious, and could be a good excuse to put saber in a quick lynch position. Nonetheless, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt, since its early in the game, and most of us aren't being all that careful with our votes either (we're just out of rvs).

What is with your constant defense of saber? Why do you want a player who's going to probably act anti-town in this game anyway?

[dank]

Nonetheless, I dont like how you're sitting on the sidelines, not voting anyone, yet throwing out silly accusations like putting someone at L-2 is "basically" putting someone at L-1. Do you think this was scummy? If so, why aren't you voting them? Why aren't you voting anyone?

I don't really care if you think I'm sitting on the sidelines and I've already answered why I'm not voting yet. But I'll restate it since you apparently missed it, I don't vote until I think I've found scum. Very simple.

That said, bigmc's vote was not L-1. However, his assertion that he "missed" MR's vote is a bit suspicious, and could be a good excuse to put saber in a quick lynch position. Nonetheless, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt, since its early in the game, and most of us aren't being all that careful with our votes either (we're just out of rvs).

What is with your constant defense of saber? Why do you want a player who's going to probably act anti-town in this game anyway?

The case on saber was weak. I've no problem with pressuring him to focus on this game with a few votes, but seriously pushing a saber lynch this early using this weak a case on him is borderline scummy.

Also, i'm against lynching lurkers just for lurking, i think thats just common sense. We've got plenty more to go on than that.

Would you like to lynch saber for the sole reason that he's "going to probably act anti-town in this game anyway"?

[dank]

Nonetheless, I dont like how you're sitting on the sidelines, not voting anyone, yet throwing out silly accusations like putting someone at L-2 is "basically" putting someone at L-1. Do you think this was scummy? If so, why aren't you voting them? Why aren't you voting anyone?

I don't really care if you think I'm sitting on the sidelines and I've already answered why I'm not voting yet. But I'll restate it since you apparently missed it, I don't vote until I think I've found scum. Very simple.

That said, bigmc's vote was not L-1. However, his assertion that he "missed" MR's vote is a bit suspicious, and could be a good excuse to put saber in a quick lynch position. Nonetheless, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt, since its early in the game, and most of us aren't being all that careful with our votes either (we're just out of rvs).

What is with your constant defense of saber? Why do you want a player who's going to probably act anti-town in this game anyway?

The case on saber was weak. I've no problem with pressuring him to focus on this game with a few votes, but seriously pushing a saber lynch this early using this weak a case on him is borderline scummy.

Would you like to lynch saber for the sole reason that he's "going to probably act anti-town in this game anyway"?



Also, i'm against lynching lurkers just for lurking, i think thats just common sense. We've got plenty more to go on than that.

[hewitt]

If I wanted to lynch saber I would be voting him. I don't think we should be putting pressure on saber because it's A) annoying B) is going to take up a large part of the day probably and C) means that any player that has a reputation for acting anti-town (zwetschenwasser, Empking, Mastin) should be pressured like this and it's honestly going to do nothing to help or progress the game in a healthy manner.

However, I do understand why people would put pressure on saber, he is acting anti-town. But just because I understand it does not mean I agree with it.

[Scott Brosius]

I was only addressing bigmc in that post not the entire wagon. I did not place a vote on him because he bolstered his case with SW's content, not just style.

I'm not going on a Lynch All Lurkers platform here, just suggesting that in this setup, I think it's more of a scumtell than in other setups.

[bigmc109]

@ CKD: because SW seemed like the type of player that would need pressure to determine what he's going to do. I wouldn't have put him at L-1 because it risks him being lynched too fast. L-2 was perfect because there's little risk, but a lot of pressure (considering he had 5x as many votes as anyone else). That was the intent of my vote. And tbh, I think it worked, because as I've pointed out, he's said some scummy things since then.

[saberwolf]

@ CKD: because SW seemed like the type of player that would need pressure to determine what he's going to do. I wouldn't have put him at L-1 because it risks him being lynched too fast. L-2 was perfect because there's little risk, but a lot of pressure (considering he had 5x as many votes as anyone else). That was the intent of my vote. And tbh, I think it worked, because as I've pointed out, he's said some scummy things since then.

please point those scummy things out, don't just say they exist.

[bigmc109]

I already did.

Now for some actual scum hunting. I'm not liking sabrewolf at all. In addition to the whole self-lynching thing, I don't like his two attacks. I think Lynx's posts have been very pro-town so far (see 77) and MR was early enough in the BW to not seem scummy going for the easy target. Though I will admit I wouldn't mind the attack on MR so much if he hadn't posted since then, so it might be a nulltell.

[saberwolf]

I already did.

Now for some actual scum hunting. I'm not liking sabrewolf at all. In addition to the whole self-lynching thing, I don't like his two attacks. I think Lynx's posts have been very pro-town so far (see 77) and MR was early enough in the BW to not seem scummy going for the easy target. Though I will admit I wouldn't mind the attack on MR so much if he hadn't posted since then, so it might be a nulltell.

1. So are you saying that if I act scummy an then make just one pro-town post, I become obvtown?

2. Position doesn't matter when it comes to alignment. I've seen scum be the first steadfast vote on a scum wagon. I've seen town hammer. Everyone else inbetween matters on how and why they vote. Just because MR voted in Xth place, doesn't credit them town points at all.

FoS: bigmc109

[GinzkeyPlatz]

whoa whoa whoa...

lets slow this down a bit and have some conversation...what is everybody's hurry?

BG did you know that your vote was putting him at -1? If so, why didnt you mention it? If so, why did you ask for a claim?

unvote.

I think this addressed at me....

If it is, no, I missed MR's vote on saber. Though, seeing as you unvoted, I'm keeping my vote on.

how exactly did you miss the vote?

calling bullshit on this statement..you read enough to think saber is WIFOMing it up, but did read enough to catch a vote that was very obvious.

first lie here, children

vote bigmc109

It might be the case that he either chose not to read other people's posts or that he cared more about adding to the wagon than knowing how many votes were on it. There was enough time between MR and bigmc's posts for him to have read it, and there wasn't much to read.

bigmc, were you reading everyone else's posts or only saberwolf's? Were you reading them or just skimming them? And why?

[bigmc109]

I was reading everyone's posts. I read all the posts, though I was on my phone. When I got home later, I voted after reading the new posts and seeing no one else had voted for SW.

[dank]

I was reading everyone's posts. I read all the posts, though I was on my phone. When I got home later,

I voted after reading the new posts and seeing no one else had voted for SW.

really? Within the 50 minutes prior to your post, MR placed a very bad looking "lets see you hammer yourself vote on saber" taking him to L-2, and minutes before your post, I unvoted because I felt the wagon was growing too much for just pressure, and said I wasn't too happy with it.

And yet, nothing happened before your post?

My issue isn't that you may have simply not been paying much attention at the time; like i said before, few people are careful throwing out votes at that stage of the game. What's caught my attention is how you're trying to make excuses for it that are backfiring, and refusing to admit that you simply weren't paying attention and it was a bad move. You're trying a bit too hard to cover up and qualify the mistake, like you're overly concerned with looking town.

fos

[bigmc109]

Really? Because I think you and CKD are trying a little too hard to make my mistake look like a scum move. Fishy? Maybe. Scummy on its own? Hell no.

FoS: CKD & Dank

[curiouskarmadog]

what is the difference between fishy and scummy?

[Lowell]

unvote saber, vote bigmc

115 and 117 are good. I have the same vague dissatisfaction from 114 that saber does.

[Budja]

^ Good posting.

@Scott, who's your #1 scummiest then?