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

[Vendagoat]

Oy Glork, who should we lynch?

Oh thats not suspicious or anything, nope not at all.

[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.

[Guardian]

The first day of creation is nearly over (

Deadline in ~80 hours

), and the scumz are all still alive. The

townies

should really cast someone into darkness before the day ends...

Official Vote Count #4.

xyzzy [4] (Mert,Glork,Pbug,Crub)

AutumnEvenings{AE} [2](Stewie, CTD)
PBuG [2](Wiz, AE)
Mert [1](MBL)
Glork[1](Sefer)
Sefer[1](xyzzy)
Not Voting[1](Vendagoat)

With 12 alive, It will take 7 to Lynch.

---

Notes:

Hey, I'm back from vacation. The beach was great, thanks for asking.

YB, thanks, and good job while I was away!

I have prodded all those who have not posted in the last 100 hours, with especially nasty prods to those who have posted only once all game...

A few players, particularly a certain LoudMouthLee, are quite eager to get into the game, and if the players I prod do not contribute (or if they -- or anyone -- have lost interest and

want

to be replaced), that could certainly be arranged...

I remind the town that they are allotted exactly

one

one-week deadline extension for the entirety of the game, and that I will employ it if a majority of the players PM me asking for one.

[Stewie]

Well, there's only 80 hours left, and as much as I'd like to have more time to talk this through, it will probably be better to leave the extension for later in the game. So unless something happens to change my mind, I'll be switching my vote over to xyzzy soon, as he seems to be the best choice for today.

[Guardian]

PBug has requested replacement --

LoudmouthLee replaces PBug

, effective immediately! Thanks --

and

you're welcome -- LML!

Also: All prodded players have picked up their prod.

[Sefer]

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.

[Vendagoat]

Yes save the extension.

[MrBuddyLee]

vote: xyzzy

to get a wagon going quickly. This is not an indication of intent to lynch.

That is 6. If anyone else votes him, it's a lynch. So be careful, and discuss.

[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."

[Guardian]

3 ) If you wish to change your vote, bold an unvote for the player you were voting and vote for the new player you are going to be voting. For example,

unvote: Guardian, vote: YogurtBandit

. If you do not unvote in this format, your vote will not be counted.

It is likely that I will go with a player's intent if they unvote but do not say who they are unvoting. It is less likely that I will go with a player's "intent" if they do not unvote and try to place an additional vote.

Translation: Please remember to unvote .

[LoudmouthLee]

Okay, doing a quick skim / read and will make a substancial post within the next, say.. 2 hours?

[LoudmouthLee]

Word on the street has it that Glork has a firm and smooth butt.

IGMEOY: Glork's butt

Everyone voting for Glork is highly suspect. I mean, look at those magnificent buns!

Vote: xyzzy

This bothers me... especially when, on page 3, you say this:

Oy Glork, who should we lynch?

So.. there hasn't been a night. There is no masonry in this game.. and you've already made *2* references to Glork's innocence. Do you know something that I magically do not?

Next points....

unvote, vote autumn evenings

I'm still a subscriber to the "Third vote on the bandwagon is scum" tell a-la-Jeep... Sue me if you don't agree. You didn't post any rationale. None at all. When pressed, you give the weak response of:

(After a double check, MBL had already moved his vote and Stewie was #2 (but could have been #3) and CtD was #3 (could have been #4). This fits my thoughts perfectly.)

Stewie, care to elaborate?

Trying to get a reaction; didn't get it.

That's really weak, Stewie. Just my opinion, especially I believe (I could be wrong) that's a really weak reason to put a 3rd vote on someone. But CtD's next move absolutely BAFFLES me...

Unvote, Vote: AutumnEvenings

How's that for a reaction?

I absolutely do NOT understand this move. Stewie was looking for AE's reaction, and then, you vote her as well for even LESS of a reason that Stewie voted her!

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.

It absolutely bothes me when we disagree so fevereshly.

Vote: CtD

FoS: Stewie

IGMEOY: Glork

Glork didn't do anything wrong in particular, but just looking at CtD's relationship with Glork makes me wish to look at Glork a little closer.

[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.

[Stewie]

unvote, vote autumn evenings

1. I'm still a subscriber to the "Third vote on the bandwagon is scum" tell a-la-Jeep... Sue me if you don't agree. 2. You didn't post any rationale. None at all. When pressed, you give the weak response of:

(After a double check, MBL had already moved his vote and Stewie was #2 (but could have been #3) and CtD was #3 (could have been #4). This fits my thoughts perfectly.)

Stewie, care to elaborate?

Trying to get a reaction; didn't get it.

3. That's really weak, Stewie. Just my opinion, especially I believe (I could be wrong) that's a really weak reason to put a 3rd vote on someone. But CtD's next move absolutely BAFFLES me...

1. You yourself said later that it was actually the second vote, so I can't understand why you didn't delete it and start again, abandoning that point. It's not as if it was a simulpost, and I would have been the third but MBL beat me with the unvote, so it was the second. There were hours between his unvote and my vote.

2. Ok, next time I'll vote and then I'll say "I'm voting for you because I want to see if I get a reaction" and see if that works.

3. There wasn't much going on, and I wanted to get the game going. A reaction vote seemed like a good idea.

[Crub]

Fair enough you find it scummy for me to put the 4th vote on someone, but you've got to admit xyzzy hasn't been making much sense.

unvote xyzzy, vote glork

For someone accusing CTD for buddying up, you seem to be doing some buddying up of your own there glork.

[MrBuddyLee]

"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.

You can thank me tomorrow for giving you something to actually analyze from this terribly short day--if we're short on time, things have to happen quickly, and voila, they are.

vote: Crub

for quick protection of xyzzy.

[Crub]

vote: Crub

for quick protection of xyzzy.

Probably not the smartest thing for me to do ... but if you're going to vote me you might want to unvote xyzzy first so that your vote actually counts.

[CrashTextDummie]

So.. there hasn't been a night. There is no masonry in this game.. and you've already made *2* references to Glork's innocence.

I did?

The first reference was to Glork's butt, and nothing else. It's called random voting.

The second "reference" was a question directed at Glork on who he wants to lynch considering we're facing a deadline. Nothing more.

You know as well as I do that Glork is a difficult fellow to read, and I've decided to do a little probing in his direction in an attempt to get an idea of where he stands.

I absolutely do NOT understand this move. Stewie was looking for AE's reaction, and then, you vote her as well for even LESS of a reason that Stewie voted her!

Actually, I did have a reason, I just neglected to share it until now.

I found it odd that she addressed Stewie's "reaction vote", yet completely ignored MBL's, and her Post 51, particularly the first paragraph, had a weird vibe to it.

Quite obviously, I was looking for a reaction myself, from Stewie and from AE. Stewie seems indifferent, and interestingly enough, so does AE herself, considering it was the 3rd vote on her.

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

[LoudmouthLee]

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

That question is seconded.

The first reference was to Glork's butt, and nothing else. It's called random voting.

Sorry, but I believe we had this conversation before, CtD...

*METAGAME TIME*

When someone plays as scum, they sometimes say things out loud that they do not mean to say. For instance, a scum member would say out loud that they need mod clarification of their role.

I feel very strongly about this following tell, especially when the previous quote was placed in front of CtD....

Everyone voting for Glork is highly suspect.

As for Stewie...

1. You yourself said later that it was actually the second vote, so I can't understand why you didn't delete it and start again, abandoning that point. It's not as if it was a simulpost, and I would have been the third but MBL beat me with the unvote, so it was the second. There were hours between his unvote and my vote.

2. Ok, next time I'll vote and then I'll say "I'm voting for you because I want to see if I get a reaction" and see if that works.

3. There wasn't much going on, and I wanted to get the game going. A reaction vote seemed like a good idea.

#1) The point still stood. It wasn't that you were exactly the third vote, but you were the third person to vote for AE. Once a person votes for someone, they do not have the same hesitation to vote for them again. I can only speak for myself. Once a case has been made that I agree with, I am more apt to vote for that person, whether or not my vote is currently there.

#2 and #3) So.. you prefer the "Reaction Vote" over the "Make a Case" idea. Very interesting. Sometimes, the cases overanalyze... But I feel much more comfortable making a case and seeing how they respond to allegations rather than a simple vote.

@CtD: Talk me into voting Glork over you. I will be on a massive campaign to lynch one of the both of you. I'm feeling Stewie, too... but.. c'est la vie. I feel less strongly on him than the both of you.

[CrashTextDummie]

Sorry, but I believe we had this conversation before, CtD...

*METAGAME TIME*

When someone plays as scum, they sometimes say things out loud that they do not mean to say. For instance, a scum member would say out loud that they need mod clarification of their role.

You're severely underestimating me.

This is not scumchat, you'd have to look

very

hard to ever see me slip as scum on the forum (let alone in my first post of the game), and even then you'd probably come out empty.

You may not be inclined to believe me, but I was about as deliberate as I could get when I posted my first post of the game. I had formulated it pretty much verbatim

before I even got my role

, just based on the fact that the game had Glork in it, and I <3 him, and I wanted to see his reaction. I was actually considering waiting on posting because he only had one vote at the time, but figured it was enough for the joke to work.

I know you're fond of analyzing the random voting stage, but I'll tell you flat out that you got it wrong.

@CtD: Talk me into voting Glork over you. I will be on a massive campaign to lynch one of the both of you. I'm feeling Stewie, too... but.. c'est la vie. I feel less strongly on him than the both of you.

Considering I'm not convinced about Glork at this point myself, I'll kindly pass on that offer. You'd be wasting your time if you campaigned to lynch me, but I'm pretty sure we'll be able to lynch someone else without your help.

[LoudmouthLee]

You may not be inclined to believe me, but I was about as deliberate as I could get when I posted my first post of the game. I had formulated it pretty much verbatim before I even got my role, just based on the fact that the game had Glork in it, and I <3 him, and I wanted to see his reaction. I was actually considering waiting on posting because he only had one vote at the time, but figured it was enough for the joke to work.

I heart quite a few people in this game, yourself included, but that doesn't change the fact that you have, twice, buddied up to Glork through various methods. You can tell me that you've had that post formulated for numerous days, but the truth of the matter is that i can only go with what's in front of me.

I'm dully unimpressed with the Xyzzy wagon. Can someone summarize it besides we're "Lynching Uncle Xyzzy because he's Uncle Xyzzy"?

And, CtD, you are not being underestimated. Even the best players (and I consider you one of them) are capable of making severe D1 slips. Especially in the Random Voting part of the game, where Scum tend to make their worst mistakes...

I know the town could lynch others, especially couples with the fact that we have so precious little time left in D1, but unless someone could give me anything remotely solid (read: as solid as my case in CtD) I have no reason to change my vote and I implore the rest of the town to look at CtD or Glork here.

[CrashTextDummie]

Let me see if I get this straight:

You think I'm scum with Glork and subconsciously let that slip in my very first post of the game by making multiple references to the quality of his behind and how no one should vote for him because of it. Is that about it?

I'm a bit confused, because "buddying up", in the traditional sense, is not something done between two scum players on the same team.

[xyzzy]

I, also, have no idea how a wagon started on me. I think it's because no one understands my ludicrously awesome tactics.

CTD, you're not getting the point.

[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.