Mini #704: Hunchback of Notre Dame, Game Over

[Ramus]

Of all the gambits that I know of, the one I HATE, no, LOATH the most is Fong's gambit. It's not catching anyone. It's just bad play. And it also gives a good excuse for scum who do something scummy early on.

Vote for me if you think I'm scummy. The one think I loathe is whiny players who don't do anything.

What was whiny about what I said?

For one, you call my play a bad one, yet you haven't made any real play yourself. Secondly, you call sum while you're at it. VOTE FOR ME IF YOU'RE GOING TO CALL ME SCUMMY.

Ramus: What does colorblindness have to do with telling the difference between the female symbol and the male?

Well, I'm sorry

ma'am

for being both colorblind and having high screen resolution, but the fact that you're keeping your vote on me just for my attitude and a small typo shows a lack of ability for us to form a team relation and figure out who's scum. So I recommend you actually start to

think

and vote for people who you find scummy, not people you don't like.

To clarify my vote: Pressure is good. Therefore by voting you, I added a little more pressure; which by what was already pointed out, is good.

To clarify WHY I thought you needed more pressure: You seem to like to dodge questions, questions that should be answered. Therefore I felt that by putting another vote on you, you might answer the questions.

No offense Battousai, but it sounds a bit more like going with the flow than actually reasoning.

[ClockworkRuse]

This was two different experiments I tried to pull off. One being ending the random voting phase early, which was successful I guess. The second being Fong's gambit. I hoped to catch some scum off guard, didn't work though. However, I did find townie looking people.

Exactly. I was trying to get a wagon going on you (my vote was the second, after yours), to see how readily others would follow. My intent when I said "I'm going to call his bluff" was to throw some suspicion and see if anyone would quickly jump on that.
I'm kind of disappointed that you've decided to end this already, since there is still a player that hasn't really checked in yet (i.e., Puta Puta).
I personally find Clockwork's false excuse to not vote you as more suspicious than Batt's "Pressure good" comment, so

Unvote: Ramus
Vote: ClockworkRuse

Oh oh! Rhymes! Do another!

Maybe later.

So, you think because I'm not going to focus on someone that more than two or three people are focusing on is scummy? The rhectoric of 'false' excuse is also unnecessary, it's not even an excuse.

Would you rather I tunnel in on someone who already has two or three players firing questions away?

I'm more interested in why someone is defending him right now than his defense, what reason would ort have defending Ramus? Ramus is perfectly capable of responding to the questions and suspicions that are being thrown at him right now, so one would hope at least.

Ortolan, the point is that the town was applying pressure to him, and his reactions are important. You defending him detracts from his reactions, in my opinion, as you give him a safeguard.

Are you telling me that it's okay to self-vote because it's a fashion now?

@TheAdmiral, Why are you defending Ortolan? He is perfectly capable of responding himself.

[CarnCarn]

So, you think because I'm not going to focus on someone that more than two or three people are focusing on is scummy? The rhectoric of 'false' excuse is also unnecessary, it's not even an excuse.

Your reason for not voting ("there is adequate pressure") doesn't work well in light of Ramus' statement "I'm not feeling the pressure" (said before you voted). That leads me to think you are afraid to be seen taking an aggressive stance on someone this early, especially if that person ends up town. So you had to give some reason for not voting, even though he was acting quite suspiciously, and you figured you could get away with the "but I don't want to put someone at L-3 on page 3" excuse or something.

Would you rather I tunnel in on someone who already has two or three players firing questions away?

What's wrong with that?

[petroleumjelly]

Day One: Vote Count #4

3 ClockworkRuse (urielzyx, CarnCarn, Machiavellian-Mafia)
2 Battousai (Caboose, Ramus)
1 Caboose (Battousai)
1 Machiavellian-Mafia (MiteyMouse)
1 ortolan (ClockworkRuse)
1 Puta Puta (ThAdmiral)
1 Ramus (Mizzy)
1 ThAdmiral (ortolan)

With

12

alive, it takes

7

to lynch, and

4

to lynch at deadline. Deadline hits on December 1 at 9:59 pm CDT.

Not Voting – 1 – Puta Puta

I’m back! Thanks again to MafiaSSK for taking over while I was away. Puta Puta has been prodded.

[ClockworkRuse]

So, you think because I'm not going to focus on someone that more than two or three people are focusing on is scummy? The rhectoric of 'false' excuse is also unnecessary, it's not even an excuse.

Your reason for not voting ("there is adequate pressure") doesn't work well in light of Ramus' statement "I'm not feeling the pressure" (said before you voted). That leads me to think you are afraid to be seen taking an aggressive stance on someone this early, especially if that person ends up town. So you had to give some reason for not voting, even though he was acting quite suspiciously, and you figured you could get away with the "but I don't want to put someone at L-3 on page 3" excuse or something.

Would you rather I tunnel in on someone who already has two or three players firing questions away?

What's wrong with that?

So I'm trying to not to appear aggressive... As I'm going after someone else, which is most likely going to grow a little more intense on my part soon.

And I wouldn't mind putting someone at L-3 on page three. I just think it would be better to open the town to more than just one scummy play in a day. Tunneling kills townies, I can show you more that enough references for that.

[ThAdmiral]

@TheAdmiral, Why are you defending Ortolan? He is perfectly capable of responding himself.

I wasn't defending ortolan per say. I was rather defending one's right to defend someone else, and have that not be necessarily viewed as scummy.
If someone thinks an attack on someone else is fishy, then he should call the attacker on it/point holes in the arguments rather than just sitting back silently.
Imo.

[Machiavellian-Mafia]

Would you rather I tunnel in on someone who already has two or three players firing questions away?

I'm more interested in why someone is defending him right now than his defense, what reason would ort have defending Ramus? Ramus is perfectly capable of responding to the questions and suspicions that are being thrown at him right now, so one would hope at least.

But you can still address your concerns with other players and possibly using FOSes, IGMEOYs, etc while voting for Ramus. You are depicting a possible Ramus-vote in the worst light by suggesting tunneling.

I also see a contradiction in your second statement. Earlier you said "As I think there is adequate pressure on Ramus right now, I'm not going to vote him", which suggests that Ramus is your primary interest. Then in the post above you flip flop and say that the Ramus-defenders are your primary interests and Ramus is secondary.

[Battousai]

@TheAdmiral, Why are you defending Ortolan? He is perfectly capable of responding himself.

I wasn't defending ortolan per say. I was rather defending one's right to defend someone else, and have that not be necessarily viewed as scummy.
If someone thinks an attack on someone else is fishy, then he should call the attacker on it/point holes in the arguments rather than just sitting back silently.
Imo.

Actually, it would be best for the person to try and defend themselves first, AND THEN point out the flaws in the attack. That way you can gain info from the person being attacked.

Unvote: Ramus
Vote: ClockworkRuse

I feel you need more pressure. Also, I think you are acting scummy: The adequate pressure remark.

[petroleumjelly]

Searching for a replacement for Puta Puta.

[Mizzy]

Ramus: Actually, I'm keeping my vote on you for your lack of answering questions, dodging questions, and a slew of other things, not just your anti-town attitude.

[Caboose]

Of all the gambits that I know of, the one I HATE, no, LOATH the most is Fong's gambit. It's not catching anyone. It's just bad play. And it also gives a good excuse for scum who do something scummy early on.

Vote for me if you think I'm scummy. The one think I loathe is whiny players who don't do anything.

What was whiny about what I said?

For one, you call my play a bad one, yet you haven't made any real play yourself. Secondly, you call sum while you're at it. VOTE FOR ME IF YOU'RE GOING TO CALL ME SCUMMY.

There might be some people out there (ClockworkRuse for example) that might deserve my vote more than you. I'm still trying to determine that.

[Mizzy]

Of all the gambits that I know of, the one I HATE, no, LOATH the most is Fong's gambit. It's not catching anyone. It's just bad play. And it also gives a good excuse for scum who do something scummy early on.

Vote for me if you think I'm scummy. The one think I loathe is whiny players who don't do anything.

What was whiny about what I said?

For one, you call my play a bad one, yet you haven't made any real play yourself. Secondly, you call sum while you're at it. VOTE FOR ME IF YOU'RE GOING TO CALL ME SCUMMY.

There might be some people out there (ClockworkRuse for example) that might deserve my vote more than you. I'm still trying to determine that.

There is also a difference between thinking someone is scummy and thinking someone is

scum

.

[urielzyx]

Of all the gambits that I know of, the one I HATE, no, LOATH the most is Fong's gambit. It's not catching anyone. It's just bad play. And it also gives a good excuse for scum who do something scummy early on.

Vote for me if you think I'm scummy. The one think I loathe is whiny players who don't do anything.

What was whiny about what I said?

For one, you call my play a bad one, yet you haven't made any real play yourself. Secondly, you call sum while you're at it. VOTE FOR ME IF YOU'RE GOING TO CALL ME SCUMMY.

There might be some people out there (ClockworkRuse for example) that might deserve my vote more than you. I'm still trying to determine that.

what about FoS and IGMEOY?

[Caboose]

Of all the gambits that I know of, the one I HATE, no, LOATH the most is Fong's gambit. It's not catching anyone. It's just bad play. And it also gives a good excuse for scum who do something scummy early on.

Vote for me if you think I'm scummy. The one think I loathe is whiny players who don't do anything.

What was whiny about what I said?

For one, you call my play a bad one, yet you haven't made any real play yourself. Secondly, you call sum while you're at it. VOTE FOR ME IF YOU'RE GOING TO CALL ME SCUMMY.

There might be some people out there (ClockworkRuse for example) that might deserve my vote more than you. I'm still trying to determine that.

what about FoS and IGMEOY?

FoS's and IGMEOY's suck and I try to keep my use of them to a minimum.

[ClockworkRuse]

Would you rather I tunnel in on someone who already has two or three players firing questions away?

I'm more interested in why someone is defending him right now than his defense, what reason would ort have defending Ramus? Ramus is perfectly capable of responding to the questions and suspicions that are being thrown at him right now, so one would hope at least.

But you can still address your concerns with other players and possibly using FOSes, IGMEOYs, etc while voting for Ramus. You are depicting a possible Ramus-vote in the worst light by suggesting tunneling.

I also see a contradiction in your second statement. Earlier you said "As I think there is adequate pressure on Ramus right now, I'm not going to vote him", which suggests that Ramus is your primary interest. Then in the post above you flip flop and say that the Ramus-defenders are your primary interests and Ramus is secondary.

Ramus wasn't my primary interest, that's just how you are reading into it. I agree that his responses to fairly simple questions have been scummy, but at the time I felt that the amount of people concentrating on him was adequate, I didn't need to jump on that wagon. And you're telling me that I'm scummy because I didn't bother to FoS him or tell him I was going to keep my eye one him?

Do you think I did need to jump on that wagon? Why? What benefit would it be for scum to concentrate on someone else when someone is under heavy scrutiny?

Alright Battousai, I'm alright with you voting me. But I'll tell everyone now, I don't really feel that much pressure from votes. If you are going to vote me, ask me questions.

[CarnCarn]

Of all the gambits that I know of, the one I HATE, no, LOATH the most is Fong's gambit. It's not catching anyone. It's just bad play. And it also gives a good excuse for scum who do something scummy early on.

Vote for me if you think I'm scummy. The one think I loathe is whiny players who don't do anything.

What was whiny about what I said?

For one, you call my play a bad one, yet you haven't made any real play yourself. Secondly, you call sum while you're at it. VOTE FOR ME IF YOU'RE GOING TO CALL ME SCUMMY.

There might be some people out there (ClockworkRuse for example) that might deserve my vote more than you. I'm still trying to determine that.

what about FoS and IGMEOY?

FoS's and IGMEOY's suck and I try to keep my use of them to a minimum.

IGMEOY: Caboose

[Caboose]

Of all the gambits that I know of, the one I HATE, no, LOATH the most is Fong's gambit. It's not catching anyone. It's just bad play. And it also gives a good excuse for scum who do something scummy early on.

Vote for me if you think I'm scummy. The one think I loathe is whiny players who don't do anything.

What was whiny about what I said?

For one, you call my play a bad one, yet you haven't made any real play yourself. Secondly, you call sum while you're at it. VOTE FOR ME IF YOU'RE GOING TO CALL ME SCUMMY.

There might be some people out there (ClockworkRuse for example) that might deserve my vote more than you. I'm still trying to determine that.

what about FoS and IGMEOY?

FoS's and IGMEOY's suck and I try to keep my use of them to a minimum.

IGMEOY: Caboose

Any particular reason?

[urielzyx]

What benefit would it be for scum to concentrate on someone else when someone is under heavy scrutiny?

That no one thinks you are scum?

[ClockworkRuse]

What benefit would it be for scum to concentrate on someone else when someone is under heavy scrutiny?

That no one thinks you are scum?

Elaborate.

[urielzyx]

Well, if scum doesn't gain anything by focusing on somebody else , but does gain a lot by focusing on the same guy, then focusing on somebody else will make it so that no one thinks you are scum.
I know that up until here it looks stupid, but once you give an excuse as to why you are doing the non scummy thing(as you did) then people will start thinking you are scum...

[CarnCarn]

WI-FOM (noun):

Well, if scum doesn't gain anything by focusing on somebody else , but does gain a lot by focusing on the same guy, then focusing on somebody else will make it so that no one thinks you are scum.
I know that up until here it looks stupid, but once you give an excuse as to why you are doing the non scummy thing(as you did) then people will start thinking you are scum...

still, your point is noted.

[petroleumjelly]

Day One: Vote Count #5

4 ClockworkRuse (urielzyx, CarnCarn, Machiavellian-Mafia, Battousai)
2 Battousai (Caboose, Ramus)
1 destructor (ThAdmiral)
1 Machiavellian-Mafia (MiteyMouse)
1 ortolan (ClockworkRuse)
1 Ramus (Mizzy)
1 ThAdmiral (ortolan)

With

12

alive, it takes

7

to lynch, and

4

to lynch at deadline. Deadline hits on December 1 at 9:59 pm CDT.

Not Voting – 1 – destructor

destructor replaces Puta Puta, effective immediately.

[ClockworkRuse]

Well, if scum doesn't gain anything by focusing on somebody else , but does gain a lot by focusing on the same guy, then focusing on somebody else will make it so that no one thinks you are scum.
I know that up until here it looks stupid, but once you give an excuse as to why you are doing the non scummy thing(as you did) then people will start thinking you are scum...

So I'm scummy... for doing something that is not scummy, if I understand what you are saying.

[urielzyx]

Well, if scum doesn't gain anything by focusing on somebody else , but does gain a lot by focusing on the same guy, then focusing on somebody else will make it so that no one thinks you are scum.
I know that up until here it looks stupid, but once you give an excuse as to why you are doing the non scummy thing(as you did) then people will start thinking you are scum...

So I'm scummy... for doing something that is not scummy, if I understand what you are saying.

no, the thing is, that you did something that doesn't look scummy over something that only slightly looks scummy, now that wouldn't be a problem normally, but you gave a pretty lame excuse to not doing one of them, that means you would have done it if you didn't have that excuse, thus, since the excuse is lame, I believe it was an attempt to cover for a different excuse, the real excuse is you didn't want to look scummy...

[Mizzy]

urielzyx:

Please stay away from WIFOM whenever possible; you're not making a whole lot of sense (to me at least) and you are muddying the waters with circular logic. If you think you have a valid point against someone, express it without WIFOM so I (and others) might consider it.