(February 3rd, 2013, 03:11)Gazglum Wrote: Well, something I've not been crazy about is Ichabod's roleplay about copying 'the boss'' votes, or revenge voting if someone targets you. I do love Morte, and I'm enjoying Ichabod's rendition, but this also strikes me as a way Ichabod can later disclaim responsibility for his actions as partly roleplaying.
Let's review the situation. I voted for Gazglum just a bit before this post. Gazglum probably knows I'm a veteran player and a difficult lynch. I had one vote at the time, Bigger voted for me. So, what does Gazglum do? He throws a bit of suspicion at me, but doesn't vote. This is scum play, still not very confident scum play.
His argument is forced, of course. What does it matter if I follow Jkaen around? I don't see a problem.
1. Of course it matters if you follow someone else, as you make it impossible to get a read on you. Thats already what happened, as you got called on certain votes and stated "oh no, that was just fun following Jkaen".
2. Your whole retort here makes no sense. I have NEVER seen a wolf try to get someone specific lynched on D1. Why should they? And with flug there was a great D1 mislynch, no need for them to even try to lynch you.
And before you start that complaining about me shortening your post Ichabod, I did read the other part of this specific accusation. I just decided not to repost it to keep this shorter, as you just explained in list form again what you already wrote in lenghty sentences.
Ichabod Wrote:It was an obvious follow-Jkaen-joke-vote for anyone that already played Planescape: Torment and I especifically said that I was going to do that before. It was even a revote on Zakalwe, making everything more obvious. My gaspar vote was serious, but it was just to see what gaspar was going to do (and because his interactions with Meiz were a bit off to me).
Rowain already answered that, but just for emphasis: Why is your reader responsible to know when you make a joke-vote and when a serious one? Thats just a nice way for you to test the waters or make distancing votes and if someone calls you, call it a joke.
1. Did you realize yet that my only follow-Jkaen-joke-vote was clearly marked as such with a "Master calls" warning. That vote on Zakalwe was the only joke vote. I'll answer to all my other votes, good or bad.
2. The whole point of scum voting for a veteran on day 1 is because they know he won't be lynched, so you won't get heat by voting wrong. Gaspar, Zak, novice, me, Lewwyn, you... We won't be lynched on day 1. But any villager that makes a case against one of us will get townie points due to being "brave crusaders against the veteran players".
This is not how I think things should be, but this is how things are. I have a way higher chance of being nightkilled on day 1 than a new player and I have a way lower chance of getting lynched on day than a new player. This is common knowledge. A good wolf can take advantage of that and stay half the game voting for a player that won't be lynched. Lewwyn did this against me in that game where I was post-restricted and it worked perfectly.
You understood that I said that wolves would try to lynch me on day 1 as a game plan. That is not what I've said.
---
I repeat, Serdoa. You don't seem to be trying to lynch me because you find me very suspicious. You seem to be trying to prove a point. I think you are having a bad case of tunnel vision.
(February 2nd, 2013, 17:58)Bigger Wrote: Ichabod - having trouble making up your mind?
True, my bad, should have checked the timing Ichabod. Though Bigger did call you out already earlier, see above. Though I agree with you that he could have posted with more substance. Just doesn't change for me the fact that you acted pretty scummy.
(That said, I suspected zak the whole first and half of the second day of WW18 and came around to him being innocent BEFORE I knew that he got poisoned by waterbat. So I might still come around on you too. You could help that by giving me an explanation why you didn't go for pindicator and changed your mind just 1.5 hours after you asked if you should vote for him [and that question alone is considered scummy as you should know].)
There are 21 players in the game. There are several days to go. I had a small hunch on Pindicator and posted about it. But if you look closer, you'll see that I also pointed out that Pindicator made a very good point against Gazglum. I never said I was sure about Pindicator, not even close. I also never said I gave up on Pindicator. The more I read, the more scummy he looks.
Warning, this post is going to ramble b/c it's my last one of the day. So I'm gonna try to fit everything in it.
@Brick-
Yes, I missed my countdown timer on the last post. The post was a rushed one, and maybe I shouldn't have done it, because I was headed out the door for work and the deadline falls during the middle of the work day. (Posting this on my break.) That's also why I mistook my suspects, because I was writing it up too fast. I didn't put Ichabod in my top suspects until later in the day when Serdoa was making his case; but I certainly did not like Ichabod's comparison of my listing of suspects to Gazglum's post. I still don't; they're not similar.
@Novice-
If that's the impression I gave ("all zak has to do is speak and I'll vote elsewhere") then I failed with that post. True, flug's actions certainly made it hard to pick someone else over him - the only reason I didn't vote flug in the end is because I ended going on a long walk with a friend and didn't want to pick out my phone to play WW while we were talking. (Although I did mention the game since she's also a Portal fan.) RL aside, zak was suspicious to me at the time -- less so now, see two paragraphs down -- flug was very suspicious, and more so as he kept his silence; and ichabod was suspicious because I agreed with Serdoa's case. I like Ichabod a lot more by what he's done tonight. I didn't like Gazglum's post but I have not followed up on him although I plan on reading more of him when I get off work.
Who do you suspect now that flug flipped town? I see a lot of you asking questions on other people's cases but I'm not sure I understand who your suspects are.
One thing about zak, his tone is very different this game. He chided me for tone reading last game, but it was spot on with him and Bigger. Both of them read COMPLETELY different in tone than they did last game. Pretty big town lean just for that. And while it is definitely possible that they have adjusted their game and drawn scum again, I don't think it is as likely a reason for the different attitude from them.
@Ichabod-
I don't see Rowain saying that you have to catch a wolf, just that he wants to observe you another day and wait to make a judgment until then. I think it isn't bad advice, actually. Your reaction to Rowain i didn't like; it seemed like an over-reaction. I liked your posts tonight until then. So again, I like Rowain's idea of holding off on you so we can see more.
Okay just read your post where you're putting a case on me for not voting Gazglum or following up on him. I had three suspects besides him yesterday. It's not possible to chase all four at once. (See Leonard Nemoy, Hunting tech flavor text.) He's still on my radar, i plan on going through his posts tonight. But to me Gazglum made a lot more convincing case if flug flipped guilty- distancing from flug as well as casting suspicion on flug voters. I haven't followed him as close since but i agree he warrants more attention.
Am i right that the main suspicion on me is because i had multiple people i suspected day one but didn't push hard enough on the one you thought scummiest?
@Lewwyn-
Care to share some thoughts? Maybe I missed it, but you've seemed quiet.
Well, I like what I'm seeing from Ichabod so far. It's not easy to come up with valid suspects as a wolf, and I think he raises good points quite convincingly. I especially like this find from pindicator.
(February 4th, 2013, 13:57)Ichabod Wrote:
(February 3rd, 2013, 12:35)pindicator Wrote: As a friendly reminder from the Enrichment Center, symptoms most commonly produced by testing are superstition, perceiving inanimate objects as alive, and hallucinations. Which would explain why I see a talking skull and a whatever-the-hell Azza is.
@zak-
(February 3rd, 2013, 03:58)zakalwe Wrote: People are comparing flug to thestick and I think that's a poor comparison. Thestick showed pretty classical scumtells, revealing an underlying desire to have somebody else lynched. We're not seeing that from flug here. If he is scum I would rather compare it to Q's scum game, where he had me completely fooled by looking so much like a helpless, inept, villager. Flug isn't quite at that end of the spectrum, either, though. So I don't really have an issue with people voting to lynch him, but it still feels a bit too obvious to me.
What's similar to me is that both thestick & flug here have flailed around once they received some heat, accusing several people quickly. But what is more striking to me is that flug_auto has dodged all questions at explaining why he voted for the people he did. Well, he dodged the first and then he has disappeared. That disappearence looks scummy, because he's not trying to interact and help us understand what he's thinking, he's just hoping that we'll find other targets and it will go away. Which was very much like thestick
Flug_Auto has disappeared. First he dodged the question to explain his votes and now he has completely fallen off the map. THis disappearence when in the lead is the biggest newbie wolf tell I've seen out of him in a laundry list of them. Now you may have said the stuff before wasn't like thestick, but this is EXACTLY what thestick did when he got heat.
@Serdoa-
Serdoa seems to enjoy testing as much as I do! I find his test results quite fascinating... (Testing = Scum Hunting for all intents and purposes.)
Do you want to join on zak? Or should I join you on ichabod
(February 3rd, 2013, 07:53)Serdoa Wrote: 2. Because he didn't follow it up but backed off as soon as Lewwyn called him. Not because he agreed with anything weakening his case though, he clearly stated that he just backed off of pindi because no on shared his suspicion. How is that not non-committal? How is that not trying to appease to Lewwyn by backing off of a target as soon as he gets fire for it. I mean, have you read the thread Jkaen or are just posting this to defend Ichabod? Have you at least read my post on Ichabod himself or again, are you just here to defend him?
Not only that, he did it very quickly. I think it was two or three posts later.
Serdoa, you have a supporter here. I agree with you on Ichabod and I think zak has looked shady today as well. But flug_auto seems the best lynch to me. Perhaps he is "low hanging fruit" to other people but to me he is "most likely scum". Squirming and dodging under pressure and then disappearing altogether instead of answering a very simple question: "why did you suspect who you suspected?" Molach's reveal raises more questions: why hasn't flug posted in the neighbor thread? He definitely posted in this thread after molach made his post.
Fake Edit: Well, cross post with Molach saying that flug is talking in the neighbor thread. Can he talk here as well? Would be good to hear his reasoning.
What am I at now? 5?
Pindicator didn't comment anymore on his good case against Gazglum, prefering to keep bashing on Zakalwe, while making a very bad mixture between suspecting Zakalwe because he talks about flug and suspcting flug too. Very contrived post, if you sum it up with his other posts. Forgetting Gazglum is pretty telling, IMO. I'm getting very suspicious of Pindicator.
(February 3rd, 2013, 13:27)pindicator Wrote: I just realized I never voted flug. Whoops, that fake edit timing threw me.
Serdoa, I will join you on ichabod. But I may very well switch to flug if I don't like what he does from here on out (for example, doing nothing)
I'm going to step out for a while. Should be able to see what's up before deadline, and to see if I need to switch to flug or not.
@Ryan
It's pretty obvious that I'm counting, isn't it?
3
Pindicator's confusion gets even more obvious. To me, confusion regarding who you are voting for and why is a scum trait. If you suspect someone, you don't forget. If you create cases out of thin air, you tend to forget/make mistakes afterwards. This is pretty similar to the mistakes I've made on WW7 playing a wolf.
Main points being him completely dropping Gazglum, despite others voicing suspects towards him as well. And I agree it's very odd to forget who he is voting for, when concidering that ~20 minutes before he asked Serdoa if he'd like to vote Zak with him. Like Ichabod said, villagers hardly forget who they are voting for. Actually these are from the same post:
"Do you want to join on zak? Or should I join you on ichabod"
"Serdoa, you have a supporter here. I agree with you on Ichabod and I think zak has looked shady today as well. But flug_auto seems the best lynch to me."
and next post 20 minutes later was: "Well, considering right now I think flug_auto to be the best lynch, then yeah I would like it if Serdoa joined me."
I'm trying to keep my energy for the game so I decided to largely take the night off. My sort of off-the-top of my head assessment of the night is that I feel better about Ichabod as village. I didn't get too deep into anyone's cases against anyone else, so sorry for the eloquent words spilled, mostly I just read everyone's posts to evaluate the poster, rather than the target of their suspicion.
Re: Meiz - it was an early game tell. Better stuff came along and I focused on that. I haven't forgotten about him, he's just not at the top of my lists. I didn't really see anything else suspicious after the original overreaction. Feels like a modern-day Meiz game so far - not as engaged as early days Meiz but dances to the beat of his own drum. Of course, that's produced scum games as well so...
I've got some dirt on my shoulder, can you brush it off for me?
(February 4th, 2013, 12:23)Ichabod Wrote: posted from me, you took the joke out. Why was that? It seems a pretty deliberate edit to my post.
I have included your 'joke ' in my first accusation post but I have little interest to always quote the whole post. Here I did cut it because it doesn't add anything to the point in the discussion and this is your strange way to accuse me. Which yioou did didge now again and try to deflect.
(February 4th, 2013, 14:16)Ichabod Wrote: 2. The whole point of scum voting for a veteran on day 1 is because they know he won't be lynched, so you won't get heat by voting wrong. Gaspar, Zak, novice, me, Lewwyn, you... We won't be lynched on day 1. But any villager that makes a case against one of us will get townie points due to being "brave crusaders against the veteran players".
Absolute nonsense. Anyone reading through the games here nows that a player attacking one of novice&zak will get lynched. No matter if they are right or wrong no matter if they are villagers or not (Best example me last game. villager thinking about a novice lynch -> pang dead with idiotic reasons and lies to boot). So your theoryhow wolves would play is not true. Again a thing both novice and zak do know.
Why do I have a feeling you three are happily bounding together. Everyone of you defending the other till in the end you win as wolf-team. were you just bored with rolling wolf again to and decided to spice things up a bit?
(February 4th, 2013, 12:35)zakalwe Wrote: Seriously? Since my case didn't gain any traction yesterday it doesn't deserve to be taken seriously? So by not staying with my lone vote on Azza yesterday, I somehow forfeited my right to chase him today? My case against Azza was largely predicated on flug_auto being innocent. It's perhaps understandable that people were reluctant to accept that premise yesterday. But now that we actually know flug_auto was innocent, don't you think it's worth taking another look at it?
It is. But see above. The absolute blind eye you and novice turn to anything that Ichabod does makes me question your alignement.
(February 3rd, 2013, 10:09)BRickAstley Wrote: I have to head out and might not be back for lynch. With Bigger's recent showing, and reading of cases, I feel like Ichabod is the best lynch candidate, for many of the same reasons as Serdoa and others say. Hopefully I'll be back before deadline though.
No new reasons to vote for me.
Sorry, I forgot that every time I vote for someone, I have to completely state my case the moment I vote even if I have other places to be, and that it has to be entirely original reasoning as to why they are guilty even if other people have good points.
I suppose I'll just stop trying to offer reasoning since if anyone else were to agree with it, it would be a scum tell so there's no reason to offer it, and I'll never add any reasoning on after my vote because if it's not there at the start it makes my vote stupid.
Even so, with everything you're saying, I think it's more likely at this point that we are just two villagers that are being foolish and butting heads while scum cackle on gleefully. You asked for a day to prove a point, okay, go ahead, I'm listening. Just use some sense will ya?
(February 3rd, 2013, 10:09)BRickAstley Wrote: I have to head out and might not be back for lynch. With Bigger's recent showing, and reading of cases, I feel like Ichabod is the best lynch candidate, for many of the same reasons as Serdoa and others say. Hopefully I'll be back before deadline though.
No new reasons to vote for me.
Sorry, I forgot that every time I vote for someone, I have to completely state my case the moment I vote even if I have other places to be, and that it has to be entirely original reasoning as to why they are guilty even if other people have good points.
I suppose I'll just stop trying to offer reasoning since if anyone else were to agree with it, it would be a scum tell so there's no reason to offer it, and I'll never add any reasoning on after my vote because if it's not there at the start it makes my vote stupid.
Even so, with everything you're saying, I think it's more likely at this point that we are just two villagers that are being foolish and butting heads while scum cackle on gleefully. You asked for a day to prove a point, okay, go ahead, I'm listening. Just use some sense will ya?
Brick, my man, I was not accusing you in that post. But I was responding to accusations and, in that post where you voted for me, you said that the reasons to do it were similar to those of Serdoa and previous voters. Since I already adressed those, I just pointed out that there wasn't any new reasons to vote for me in that post, so I wouldn't be defending myself again. It wasn't a critic or anything, just a note.
Damn, I feel like I'm stepping in people's toes with every post I make. And that's not even possible...
