WW 18 Siege of the Dragon! (Game Thread)

[Lewwyn]

I'm about to go to bed, if you actually have some sort of case against me please post it in the next 5-10 minutes so I can actually defend myself against it.

You know, your job as a townie isn't just to sit around waiting for people to make accusations that you can defend against.

Burn. hammer

Also Azza why didn't you post anything at all before bedtime? Seems like a cop out to say I'm here but I have to go to bed. and I KNOW because I DID it in WW16. I was very specific about saying when I was going to bed in order to guilt people into not voting for me while I "couldn't defend myself" and in order to give an excuse for not posting.

[Ichabod]

I am always full of myself, thats because most of the time I am right

This statement makes no sense. Serdoa Please take this back or expand on it ichabod.

Joking aside I will switch to Ichabod mostly it is very strange for him to agree with me and then suddenly back out under the slightest pressure.

Qgqqqqqqqqqq. I have been going over this thread so Selrahc has not posted. There is also something called "who's posted?" that tells you this information right away.

I really don't like Serdoa still and uberfish is voting for him. So I'll go with the only other person with 2 votes. Bigger

I really don't know what to make of Qgqqqq at this point so I would not care so much if he dies or not. He might just not have anything to say and so is just spaming the thread to look good. He could just be a bad villager.

Fake edit:
Cross-posted with Selrahc. Will react to his post now.

Well, your point was good about Serdoa, that he had made a big case with little material to go with (early day 1). This could be explained by a wolf not wanting to be caught using a bad case, so he had to fabricate one. But it also could be a villager really trying to convince others to follow him (by showing more certain that he probably has). So I voted him to see his reaction, seeing as I was no-voting. It didn't give me much either way, but since I wasn't that certain to begin with, I switched my vote.

Oh - and as to the idea that I was setting up Serdoa for a fall - of course if qgqqqq flips innocent, I'm going to put some blame on his head. Also on the other easy q voters. The key to that is making q flip something. Not saying he HAS to be todays lynch, but we do lose some info if we get dragged in another direction.

That sounds odd on all parts.

Oh - and as to the idea that I was setting up Serdoa for a fall - of course if qgqqqq flips innocent, I'm going to put some blame on his head.

So you vote with Serdoa but shove off the blame on him in case Qg is innocent? What about your own responsibility?

Also on the other easy q voters.

Again all others are to blame but not you?

The key to that is making q flip something. Not saying he HAS to be todays lynch, but we do lose some info if we get dragged in another direction.

Hey lets rush to lynch Qg and don't look anywhere else. No need for another candidate to really learn abit. really. What are you trying here WB?
waterbat

Some good points by Rowain. The nest-quoted Waterbat post seems suspicious to me, mostly because I can't understand what's the point of those posts. They seem just for the sake of having posted something. Besides, this one sentence:

"So survivalist me might be tempted to vote off of qgqqqqq since a decent case was made putting suspicion on the Q voters, but I'm going to fight that urge to play that way this game".

I didn't see how Zak's case against qgqqqqq voters is decent. He just said people were following Serdoa's case (which he thought was bad) without any reasoning, just going along with it. It's hardly a strong case, it's just a basic thing. Instead of saying this, Waterbat could have just explained what was his reasoning for voting for Qgqqqq. The way things are phrased here make the post very suspicious, in my opinion.

Holding my vote for now until I finish reading the thread.

[uberfish]

Since we need to consolidate the votes at some point, my take on mattimeo is that I don't like his going into self-pity mode after picking up 2 or 3 votes and going "I shouldn't say anything because whatever I say will be used as evidence against me." I think that's anti-town. It could be a persecuted village reaction, but because it's non-interactive is very easy for scum to fake. Anyway Azza deliberately lurking until people actually vote him is worse.

slightly related to that I'll add that bigger breaking his "I'm going to not do much for a while" policy that he stated pre-game has me leaning village on him, it could have been a pre-planned scum move of course but that seems less likely to me.

[Azza]

A tally
Qgqqqq(3) – Waterbat, Uberfish, Azza
Waterbat(3) - Qgqqqqq Rowain Mattimeo,
Azza (3) - Zakalwe Lewwyn Bigger
Ichabod(2) - Slowcheetah, MJW
Mattimeo(2) - Pindicator Selrahc
Uberfish(1) - Novice
zakalwe (1) - Serdoa,

No vote (1): Ichabod

and a comment:

Absolutely no case was made against me, and that is still the case. There is literally nothing for me to defend against, to convince those who vote for me that I'm village.

How about you convince with your play? With trying to find wolves instead of lurking in the backyard hopping on whoever seems convenient? With sharing your thoughts on the various cases? Trying to leave no trace whatever will most likly get you lynched this game so if you are villager start to participate.

@Bigger: What about refreshing the pressure on Azza now? Or do you intend to stay on Serdoa?

It couldnt hurt. It seems I'm the only one voting for Serdoa atm anyway. Maybe I was premature in aborting the effort, I guess its not too late to get Azza to actually participate.

I'm about to go to bed, if you actually have some sort of case against me please post it in the next 5-10 minutes so I can actually defend myself against it.

I want you to post to leave clues. its not so much a case against you right now today as a general suspicion of your "stay out of the limelight by barely ever posting" style of play. it would help if you commented on others play, other than occasional one liners when prodded. A lot has happenned between now and the last post you made, surely there's something you find interesting or suspicious.

crossposted with Rowain who says the same thing with different words.

Day 1 is a clusterfuck of bad and useless information. What exactly is the point in adding more bad and useless information to the almighty gushing of day 1 crap? There is so much shit to wade through that I simply can't be fucked doing so until I have a specific idea to investigate, which won't happen until day 2 when I know the alignments of some other players.

I'm about to go to bed, if you actually have some sort of case against me please post it in the next 5-10 minutes so I can actually defend myself against it.

You know, your job as a townie isn't just to sit around waiting for people to make accusations that you can defend against.

My job as a townie isn't to have baseless accusations on me that have no reason other than "hurr durr you dont post much and fooled us last game" either.

I'm about to go to bed, if you actually have some sort of case against me please post it in the next 5-10 minutes so I can actually defend myself against it.

You know, your job as a townie isn't just to sit around waiting for people to make accusations that you can defend against.

Burn. hammer

Also Azza why didn't you post anything at all before bedtime? Seems like a cop out to say I'm here but I have to go to bed. and I KNOW because I DID it in WW16. I was very specific about saying when I was going to bed in order to guilt people into not voting for me while I "couldn't defend myself" and in order to give an excuse for not posting.

I was playing Civ or at cricket training most of the evening. Decided to check here before going to bed, and now I'm staying up way longer than I intended as a consequence.

I merely meant to state that if you're putting votes on me to get me to talk, then that will stop working very shortly. I will try to be online for the deadline, but don't be counting on it. Don't be stupid and vote me to death because I'm not spamming as much as others.

[Lewwyn]

Day 1 is a clusterfuck of bad and useless information. What exactly is the point in adding more bad and useless information to the almighty gushing of day 1 crap? There is so much shit to wade through that I simply can't be fucked doing so until I have a specific idea to investigate, which won't happen until day 2 when I know the alignments of some other players.

That bad and useless information that won't be useful until you know some alignments does just appear out of thin air! We have to actually participate in order to create that information that becomes useful in the future. So the point of adding to the "day 1 crap" is to provide baselines and actual things to investiagte.

Don't be stupid and vote me to death because I'm not spamming as much as others.

You aren't "spamming" at all. I voted fr you because with only a few hours left you had 3 votes, the lowest amount of all the players. And you wouldn't have posted if we hadn't voted for you.

Your attitude right now is reminiscent of last games, "don't lynch me because I'm lazy."

[Rowain]

Day 1 is a clusterfuck of bad and useless information. What exactly is the point in adding more bad and useless information to the almighty gushing of day 1 crap? There is so much shit to wade through that I simply can't be fucked doing so until I have a specific idea to investigate, which won't happen until day 2 when I know the alignments of some other players.

Why are you sure that all you do is only bad and useless information? If everybody does like you we would have no information on day 2 and later. Everything you do or post is information. Denying it is a scum-thing.

[Serdoa]

As a foreword, I'll get to all the other posts, you don't need to remind me, I have them in a table already to answer one by one. But as a starter I looked into zakalwe as I was having a nagging feeling already about him and the way he acts against me. Here it goes:

As a useless early vote Azza for last game.

As much as your reasoning and timing grates me here, I'm not going to revenge vote this time. Mostly since almost everything you do looks suspicious to me.

Lol same

I dont get ur problem with this though - what better reasoning could i have, random.org (or maybe last to signup :rolleyes: )??
Oh you wont revenge vote how nice, care to explain why you wouldnt revenge vote against the 4(?) other people on you? Not supporting revenge voting, but you go into such detail on me, and then ignore the rest?
To me that smacks of wolf focusing on an easy mislynch (Imho at least)

This was what drew my interest to Q in the first place. His first vote goes to Azza, Azza responds to it and conveniently Q finds something “non-random” to confirm his useless early vote.

Now, I got fire for this from zakalwe, because of my argument being bad. Lets see, what was his reasoning for his vote on Mattimeo:

and random.org says Qgqqqq for now.

1. I don't like how you randomly select someone to vote for, and then immediately find something non-random to confirm your vote. A bit too convenient.

Bolded by me. And it seems for me zak that you accused Mattimeo of exactly the same thing I accused Q of, making a pointless throw-away vote and immediately afterwards conveniently finding something to confirm it. Why is it in my case a bad argument and not in yours? Maybe because of the other arguments you brought up? Well:

On the other hand, this just smacks to me of pretending ignorance:

@Tasunke: how do you define a passive role (for the purposes of revealing)?
Is it just one that doesn't have to send in a pm?

Definitely not married to my current vote, though. Anybody comes up with something more convincing than "Azza fooled us last game" or "Pindicator just because" and I'll be glad to decide its merits...

2. That accusation against Q also feels a bit contrived, in general. I don't think scum with a passive ability would feel the need to bring up the subject, at all.

3. I don't think anybody explicitly said they were voting Azza because he fooled us last game, or Pindicator "just because". I don't like how you're putting words in people's mouth there.
Mattimeo

For the second point, why not? It makes you appear active AND some players might believe that as scum you would have asked in your quicktopic instead. So, I see reasons why to bring that up, even and especially as scum.

And the last point? That’s a funny one. What was said about the votes on Azza and pindicator:

and of course pindicator

Sounds awfully like “just because” to me. Especially as it is to be found on page 1…

As a useless early vote Azza for last game.

Azza for last game – I guess the “he fooled us last game” can easily be seen implied there.

So, your argument against Mattimeo was at best as bad as mine against Q, but imo you simply lied, especially in point 3. That’s why you did put “I don’t think…” in front, so that if someone points out that this was indeed said you can point back and just say “Oh, my bad, I’m sorry”.

And you know what, after I dug through this, I thought I should look through your vote history:

Voting for Azza, without reason
Voting for Mattimeo because he voted Q
Voting for waterbat (basically because he doesn’t bring up new suspects but votes Q)
Back to Mattimeo who hadn’t switched yet, no reason given.
Voting for me because I brought up and voted Q
Voting for Azza as a lurker-lynch (and conveniently getting people away from Q of course…)

Nearly your whole Day 1 consisted of voting against people who voted for Q. And your argument was basically everytime the same: But he voted for Q, he has to be scum. And thats why I vote for your currently. You guys want to lynch Azza, go ahead, I don't care. I even agree with it tbh, because Azza certainly has played the same lurking-game as ever. But my argument, against Q as well as against zak, has nothing to do with Azza himself or his alignment. I don't know it. But I know that Q reacted angry right from the start (read his reaction to Azza) and zak has certainly played to save Q more than to actually hunt wolves imo.

[Serdoa]

Serdoa I've been thinking about your response to my question when I realized you never really answered my question. See:

@Serdoa do you suspect anyone besides Qg? I mean you seem to be focusing pretty entirely on Qg. Your earlier post suggested you suspected me and Mattimeo as well, but since then you haven't really stated what you thought beyond retorts to others.

You didn't really answer my question at all.

Guess this is answered now Lewwyn? I’m not really good to point out any other suspects right now, as I simply have focused mostly on defending against zak and Q unfortunately. I do have seen some points I didn’t like, but nothing I can really put my finger at. I don’t like those agreeing with zak for the reasons I explained in my last post. If I can see what he is doing, I am not sure what to think of those that do not. But then, I am getting attacked, so I am certainly biased there and probably read that stuff more thoroughly than the others.

You haven't answered all my questions. In fact, you keep dodging questions. When I ask "don't you wonder why people followed you on Q" you reply that I'm trying to twist your words, instead of just answering the question. I even rephrased the question because the first version apparently offended you, but still no reply. Also, I'm not painting you as trying to push Q. I'm just saying that your case on Q is weak. I believe I already clarified this. I also said that pushing him wouldn't be a scum tell anyway, so the whole point is moot.

No, I don’t wonder why people follow me on Q, because we have Day 1 and I am expecting that some players will just follow. That’s how we always play. Someone makes an argument, the others follow if it is decent (what it was imo, otherwise people wouldn’t have followed). The accused either makes a good counter-argument, explains your argument away or puts his foot in his mouth and gets lynched. That’s it.

Your reaction to Zak's accusations is just a topper. I can see why you might get angry at Q - his posts are frustratingly difficult to comprehend and he called you an idiot for some reason.

Happy that at least one seems to understand why I get pissed.

But Zak hasn't insulted you and his argument is quite coherent - in fact he is being quite reasonable. Your anger towards Zak seems misplaced, I guess, and out of character.
Also, if I'm not mistaken, me and Zak are still the only ones voting for you, so it seems quite paranoid and defensive, which seems like a scum tell to me.

And that’s were we differ. I don’t find his argument coherent. See my last post. That’s why I get angry.

I did (and do) like Serdoas first post. His points vs Qg aren't bad IMO. All in all I did read Serdoa as town first. His outraging and wrath OTOH are IMO over the top. Afterall one that dissed him was Qg who he himself has attacked quite hard (and in case of the handy-posts rather unfairly). This

...., thats because most of the time I am right

nearly made me choke. I fstil remember him vigshototing villagers twice because he doesn't learn from mistakes and other glorious actions by him In short for that BS I would like to see him lynched but then he and I do have some history.
In short I don't like Serdoa, my personal opinion of him differs 'a bit' from his selfpicture but I do think that his first post has some merit.

I have to say that I quite honestly don’t see how I attacked Q unfairly when I told him that I don’t understand why I have to read his handy-posts. I probably am stubborn about this, but as much as those who speak English as their mother-language might laugh at it, I always try to be as correct as possible in order to be understood, even though that means that I am writing sometimes several hours for long posts. And it is not even that I didn’t answer him, I did. But I personally felt a need to tell him that he could take a little bit more time so I would actually understand what he means. Has nothing to do on what device he has to work and I am thoroughly sorry for him that his computer broke, but still, if I can’t decipher a post because it is riddled with errors than chances are I will overlook it. Not because I hate the person behind, but because I need awfully long to comprehend what was written anyhow, even without having to guess about it.

I am sorry that it obviously came off pretty harsh, I’m like that unfortunately. But I am not sorry for generally expressing my expectation that everyone tries his best to make it easy for his readers.

Lastly, you didn’t take my sentence there about most of the time being right serious, did you Rowain? I mean I know you have a low opinion of me, but I thought it was obvious that this was an exaggeration meant to be understood as a joke. Guess I really don’t understand the English language or rather how to use it. Sorry.

Any questions left I forgot?

[novice]

This was what drew my interest to Q in the first place. His first vote goes to Azza, Azza responds to it and conveniently Q finds something “non-random” to confirm his useless early vote.

Now, I got fire for this from zakalwe, because of my argument being bad. Lets see, what was his reasoning for his vote on Mattimeo:

and random.org says Qgqqqq for now.

1. I don't like how you randomly select someone to vote for, and then immediately find something non-random to confirm your vote. A bit too convenient.

Bolded by me. And it seems for me zak that you accused Mattimeo of exactly the same thing I accused Q of, making a pointless throw-away vote and immediately afterwards conveniently finding something to confirm it.

Serdoa, you say that's what "drew your interest to Q". Did you actually share this sentiment with us before, though? I imagine that your statement here is rephrased from what you wrote earlier, so I'd be interested to see a quote of how you originally justified your Q vote. Your case against Zak is kind of dependent on that.

[Bigger]

I have to say, I agree that Q's post are extremely frustrating and lazy.. I find myself just skimming them because its painful to try and decipher them. Q can you at least actually quote posts you are responding to instead of "p167 bla blah p 173 bla bla p 192 bla bla"?

I don't consider that a tell in any direction, though, as he's done that in past games as well.