Open 289 - Hard Boiled - Game over.

[Krazy]

Well I obviously didn't start with the "Who isn't participating," I moved there when a bunch of people weren't participating. As for RVS, I always focus on one person first until I feel like I can get some relational tells out of them, which you continue to refuse to provide. Although it's true that I could focus on other people in the game, it's also true YOU could comment on the other players and actions in the game.

[Ythan]

If you'll wait just a moment you'll see, provided any of the three players I am iso'ing today raise my suspicions. Or you can focus exclusively on me while looking for relational tells, which by your own admission you're not finding.

[Krazy]

Well then I will wait just a moment.

Here, I'll even give you the benefit of the doubt.

unvote

[Ythan]

As it turns out, the quarter of the players whom I have committed myself to read today haven't aroused my suspicion. If I'm still in a Mafia mood when I've caught up all over the site I may read some more players tonight.

[Krazy]

....................

....................

Well when your mafia mood returns.

vote Ythan

[Umbrage]

Krazy, leave Ythan alone. Now. Keep your personal disputes out of this thread. I'm not having my game contaminated with your marital disputes. As of yet, I see no reason for a policy lynch. I do not see Ythan as lurking or otherwise not participating, at least not as much as some of the players here. You two better get along or replace out.

[Krazy]

I retracted the policy lynch days ago, Umbrage, and pressuring a lurker to participate is not at all out-of-hand. The preponderance of lurkers does not give one more sway than the others, and in fact a lurker who comes in to post only to say they are going to say something only to then not say anything is actually more scummy to me than a pure lurker.

Interesting that you want to characterize my critique of Ythan as a "marital dispute" though. Do you want to reward players for not participating? That's a wonderfully pro-town policy right there. Or are you only trying to distract from your own problems in this game?

[Abelcain]

36 - From Abelcain. I like most of this post. I don't like the reasoning of "saying something outrageous and making it sound serious" in order to "get a reaction". That seems like an easy way to backpedal on something you've been called on.

...

neutral on Abelcain given the "act scummy" tactic use.

You do realize you're thinking that I'm backpedaling about my attack on someone's

signature

right? I admit, I was hoping to see Krazy get nervous because his signature happened to contain the name of someone in this game completely by accident and it looked like I was taking it seriously. But at least in my next post I admitted that my comment was just a ploy and not in any way serious, unlike someone who assured us that he was really serious and told us much later that he was setting himself up as bait.

Really? What, exactly, could ConSpiracy gain that Snake couldn't?

Well, apparently now Snake wasn't trying to get reactions anyway. Apparently, he found me scummy because of... well, I haven't quite figured that part out yet.

It's nice that one of Snake's later posts gave you a way to avoid my question, but that still doesn't explain what you thought CS had to gain that Snake didn't when you originally posted that.

CS had two serious votes on him. Even if Snake didn't want to push on him, he hasn't even acknowledged the possibility that CS could be scum. He's too sure of himself.

CS's serious votes at that point consisted of the obligatory "Xth vote on anyone in RVS is scummy" vote and your seemingly-OMGUS vote. CS's vote on you was a deliberate third vote. Which one seems like it's more serious?

You just made my point for me, Snake never thought there was something up with the question. As it turns out, there was something up with it, CS didn't want my POV on things, he wanted reactions and a bandwagon. So there WAS an ulterior motive! But Snake never even considered that.

Nobody else thought there was anything up with the question either. The post was a bandwagon, not a setup. He got the reactions and wagon solely with his vote; the question had nothing to do with it. You're the one searching for a reason to say someone's trying to make you look scummy with an impossible question.

OH I'M SORRY FOR SCUMHUNTING WHILE YOU'VE BEEN PICKING YOUR NOSE. You clearly don't understand what you are talking about, because the very nature of the gambit I pulled means that I will have to attack the people who attack me. It is only OMGUS if you do not provide reasoning for your votes. I've provided reasoning every step of the way. The only reasoning you've provided is that I'm 'silly'.

Funny that you happened to pull a gambit that makes every single one of your posts look like OMGUS. Especially since your "reasoning" seems to be... well, you like falsely quoting people, right?

See guys, I came up with this awesome gambit where I get people to attack me, and then, get this, I attack them back! It's totally not OMGUS because it's part of my gambit though.

NO!!!!!!! WRONG!!!!!!!!!!! SNAKE EYES SAID THAT HE FOUND ME SCUMMY!!!!!!!!! I HAVE PROVEN IT WAS NOT A GET-OUT-OF-RVS BANDWAGON!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! YOU HAVEN'T EVEN BEEN FUCKING READING THE FUCKING THREAD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Why would anyone

ever

do something like this in a game of Mafia? If you were frustrated in reality you might be having trouble controlling the volume of your voice, but projecting that into a typed format is pretty classless. And the profanity was totally unwarranted.

That being said, you've "proven" absolutely nothing. All you've gotten Snake to say is that he found you more scummy than ConSpiracy - specifically, that he had no scumreads on CS while you were acting pretty scummy. It's also nice to say that your "serious vote" on CS wasn't really serious and you just said it to lay bait for a trap, but that would mean you saying that your vote was serious was also a lie. "Lynch All Liars" is a popular policy for a reason.

I retracted the policy lynch days ago, Umbrage, and pressuring a lurker to participate is not at all out-of-hand. The preponderance of lurkers does not give one more sway than the others, and in fact a lurker who comes in to post only to say they are going to say something only to then not say anything is actually more scummy to me than a pure lurker.

I think it's hilarious that Krazy's argument is basically "I'm not focusing on Ythan anymore. Instead I'm going to focus on someone with a name that starts with a Y and ends with than."

@Krazy, can you give us any reads or information you have to contribute on anyone

other than

Ythan?

[Krazy]

Honestly it is REALLY hard to make sense of Umbrage. He completely ignored my query about Ythan, which makes him tunneling already if nothing else, and although often I have seen CAPSRAGE posts coming from flailing town, Umbrage seems to be taking it to the next level with a relatively early wagon on him.

Scum-flailing to appear as badly-written town-flailing or just really bad town-flailing? In any case, he is coming off as the biggest troll in the thread, which is making me think he's town LOOKING FOR SOMETHING TO GRASP AT.

So, grudgingly, Umbrage is hovering "greenish" in my view. But I don't think the wagon on him is unjustified, at least not wholly, which again is pushing me toward the lurkers, who with the wagon on Umbrage have absolutely no reason to participate until Umbrage has flailed himself into a dead-lock vote, at which point they can join the wagon more or less without question.

But then, it also hasn't been THAT LONG, so although the lurkers (yes, including Ythan, but Quaroth, Xtoxm, and TBL too) are lurky, once they start posting my suspicion of them will likely change. However, until they get some relational tells that won't just make them nk-bait if they aren't scum, all four of them are at the top of my list.

But, Abel, why are you asking ME this, and not Ythan, who REALLY has engaged no one else except to dismiss my case against him? Not saying you shouldn't ask me, but why one and not the other?

[Ythan]

....................

....................

Well when your mafia mood returns.

vote Ythan

I read over a quarter of the players in this game in iso for today. Quit tunneling me and do something useful.

[Ythan]

He completely ignored my query about Ythan, which makes him tunneling already if nothing else..

Ironic.

Scum-flailing to appear as badly-written town-flailing or just really bad town-flailing?

Ironic.

I can do this all day. You don't know shit about lurking because you're tunneling me too hard to have room in your head for what words really mean.

[Krazy]

You can SAY you have read isos but without you posting something not in direct reaction to me I have no relational tell on you and thus I don't care how IRONIC I am being.

[Krazy]

And WHAT words mean something that I am not picking up?

[Ythan]

What do you think relational tell means?

[Krazy]

That is not a post that is not in direct reaction to me.

Why do you pop in only when I address other players, Ythan? Who is the one tunneling here? You QQ about me tunneling you then only respond when I start to address other players. What's up with that? What is YOUR take on Umbrage, since apparently you have read their iso and have rich thoughts on the subject?

[Ythan]

That is not a post that is not in direct reaction to me.

Then you don't know what that term means. It has a specific use on this site that you might not be aware of.

Why do you pop in only when I address other players, Ythan?

Is that an accurate characterization of when I "pop in"? No. I'm having issues with my OS right now and I'll pop in as seldom as I please.

Who is the one tunneling here?

That would be you. If you're attempting to call me on tunneling based on that line preceding this one then you don't know what tunneling is either.

You QQ about me tunneling you then only respond when I start to address other players.

This is still incorrect. You would have saved yourself some text by waiting until I told you that you were mischaracterizing my activity and that you didn't know what tunneling was before getting this far.

What's up with that? What is YOUR take on Umbrage, since apparently you have read their iso and have rich thoughts on the subject?

Do you know what a quarter is? It means one fourth. One fourth is not the same as four fourths, which would be everyone.

[Krazy]

Then what is tunneling? What is lurking? Define both terms please, if you're going to accuse me of not knowing what they mean. And while you're at it, why don't you explain what a relational tell is.

Or instead of doing that, why don't you catch up on Umbrage OR ANYONE and give an actual opinion on anyone other than myself?

[Ythan]

Tunneling is focusing on one player to the exclusion of others, whether or not you have a good reason (you don't).

Lurking is reading a thread without contributing.

I'm not going to read every player in iso right this second just for you. Nor do I have to. If you have a problem with that, go cry about it to someone who thinks I'm obligated to spend more than enough time on this game for the sake of your lack of patience.

[Krazy]

And you know that the three people with less than two votes are AFK and not lurking because?

I did not ask you to read every player in iso. I did not ask you to read ANY player in iso. I asked you to make some contribution to the game other than responding to whatever I say to you. I asked you to play the game, since apparently you have the time to respond to me.

I notice that you didn't actually disagree with my assessment of Umbrage either, instead you merely called it ironic. Why don't you kick it up a notch. Am I scummy for saying those "ironic" things? Since you seem to refuse to respond to Umbrage himself, what about my assessment of Umbrage?

[Ythan]

Good news and bad news Krazy. The good news is I'm reading further. Bad news is you're the first player on my list I feel like commenting on.

vote Yhtan

Trust me, this game will be so much better if we get a policy lynch in here right away. I mean, come on, it's Ythan.

Seriously suggested a policy lynch in his first post.

Ok. Since I now realize that explaining my reasoning for a policy lynch would require me to talk about an ongoing game, I will now retract my reasoning for my vote on Ythan as being a policy lynch.

Now my vote on Ythan is because he did not join in RVS and has not voted yet.

Realizes that he's being hypocritical and can't talk about ongoing games either. Comes up with another reason for his first post policy vote. Not participating in RVS (explained in my post) and not casting a vote (equally meaningless).

I like this guy already.

Thanks for sharing. Considering there's so much discussion as to whether Xtoxm was contributing by only answering the questions, what do you make of Ythan only answering the questions and not voting? Are you letting Ythan off the hook because you find him amusing?

Questions a third player on me (specifically) doing something that I'm not the only one doing. This is tunneling. He's not really interested in the behavior, only how he can tie it to me personally.

Do you have a problem with my current vote on Ythan? You have no problem with him not voting? Are you now ignoring both non-votes or being selective?

Attempting to characterize players who criticize his tunneling in the context of his made up reasons for voting.

As for the RVS, he popped in, answered the RQS, and bolted. No vote. No commentary on anyone else's votes. Absolutely no position to be held accountable for at any point in the rest of the game. Yes, I think that's scummy, in addition to being really uninformative for the town.

Made this post right about 24 hours after my previous post and yet attempts to characterize me as lurking. His next two posts are an attempt to have me (and only me) prematurely prodded and realizing that he was in the wrong.

Wow shit you're right, TBL has made 1 post this whole game?!?!?

And Quaroth has never done anything since RV?

Game full of f'n lurkers.

But yes, I was focused on Ythan because he has 0 content AND no RV, although really TBL's solo vote no content isn't really better at all.

Someone first calls him on tunneling and he backpedals to broaden his criticisms. He clearly had not considered the same behavior in anyone else. Tunneling.

....................

....................

Well when your mafia mood returns.

vote Ythan

I have explained my method of reading players. He wants me to put four times as much effort in. Effort that nobody else is replicating at all. Not to say that nobody else is active, everyone's doing their own thing, but he's trying very hard to find a reason to stay on me. Tunneling.

Honestly it is REALLY hard to make sense of Umbrage. He completely ignored my query about Ythan, which makes him tunneling already if nothing else, and although often I have seen CAPSRAGE posts coming from flailing town, Umbrage seems to be taking it to the next level with a relatively early wagon on him.

Even his discussion of other players is based around me.

[Krazy]

EBWOP "people with less than two votes" = "people with less than two posts"

@Ythan thank you for at least calling SOMEONE scummy today.

[Ythan]

I notice that you didn't actually disagree with my assessment of Umbrage either, instead you merely called it ironic. Why don't you kick it up a notch. Am I scummy for saying those "ironic" things? Since you seem to refuse to respond to Umbrage himself, what about my assessment of Umbrage?

I remember your play from the last game. You could be scum. Or you could just be tunneling awfultown again. You're acting the same way. You're certainly anti-town. But I'm not going to pretend the things you are doing are scummy or struggle to hold together a case on you. Because I know how to play Mafia with a head on my shoulders.

[Ythan]

@Ythan thank you for at least calling SOMEONE scummy today.

Thank you for not addressing it.

[Krazy]

Not participating in RVS (explained in my post) and not casting a vote (equally meaningless).

Is RVS meaningless, or just not participating it? Why do you break this up into two parts?

Questions a third player on me (specifically) doing something that I'm not the only one doing. This is tunneling. He's not really interested in the behavior, only how he can tie it to me personally.

I questioned Umbrage because he chose to characterize you in that way but not comment on your behavior. This read as positioning.

tunneling

You're trying to characterize me as tunneling when you haven't posted anything that was not in direct reaction to me this whole game. All I asked you to do was to participate in the game or provide some commentary on any player other than me, something you still have not done.

Made this post right about 24 hours after my previous post and yet attempts to characterize me as lurking. His next two posts are an attempt to have me (and only me) prematurely prodded and realizing that he was in the wrong.

You yourself just characterized lurking as reading the thread but not participating in it.

Yes, the prod attempt was stupid and probably the only good justification for characterizing me as tunneling you have. Next please?

Someone first calls him on tunneling and he backpedals to broaden his criticisms. He clearly had not considered the same behavior in anyone else. Tunneling.

As I mentioned, this is true, insofar as in this regard I was partly tunneling. Next?

I have explained my method of reading players. He wants me to put four times as much effort in. Effort that nobody else is replicating at all. Not to say that nobody else is active, everyone's doing their own thing, but he's trying very hard to find a reason to stay on me. Tunneling.

This is not tunneling. You said you read four players, but did not provide any commentary for the isos you did read, despite the fact that you apparently cleared them. You chose to read four isos that is apparently not me and not umbrage; excluding yourself and the lurkers, that's basically every active player in the game. But apparently asking you to share any thought on any player is tunneling.

Even his discussion of other players is based around me.

Very astute, and true, since that was is where my vote is. If there is a player being ignored, then I tend to focus on them to draw them out. Although there are several players not posting much, some people were at least commenting on Xto. TBL and Quaroth at the time hadn't posted much, but the length of time still hadn't been that great, so I chose you since you also chose not to participate in RVS.

Your current criticisms are that I am tunneling. Very good, and as I mentioned, at least partly true.

Thank you for not addressing it.

lolwat? You can go the whole game saying jack shit but you can't wait 10 seconds for me to type up my full response?

[Krazy]

So are you going to ever address any player other than me or is this just going to be a quote war?