WW20: Legend of the Undercity

[Ichabod]

Haven't read things yet, just looked around and saw a lot of walls of text that end up with votes on me. All these people are suspicious. Brick is suspicious too, I see his smallish post voting for me too.

Let's be honest, I'm the perfect place to park a scum vote. Probably not lynched, veteran player, playing awfully (I don't think i'm playing awfully, just don't want to hold people's hand and walk them to the right path - first, because I have no hands, duh - second, because I'm too occupied helping the big guy)... Clackity, clackity, clack -> vote for me and be happy scum.

Let's see, without reading the actual cases, here's what I think:

*Serdoa votes for me as often as I vote for Gaspar and Lewwyn - can be innocent
*Bigger is annoyed due to last game - can be innocent
*Rowain... Hm... Probably scum...
*BRick... Likely scum, I'd think

[Ichabod]

I'll wait to see a certain player reaction, than I'll give all of you the needed insight. It's up to you to follow, though... I can't di everything, see...

Ah, and the answer your looking for, Jkaen, is: "Don't trust the skull!"

Wait... That doesn't sound right...

[zakalwe]

Zak : Can you explain the flug ordeal? Its pretty confusing or I am not honestly noticing the point can you elaborate more? and The bigger thing. I honestly dont feel like this is how he would play if he was town.

I think Bigger likes to bandwagon and generally stir the pot on day one, to generate information. It's gotten him lynched before, which is why he had a stint of lurking on day one instead. I don't think he's out of character so far.

Not sure what to explain about Flug? I need a more specific question.

[Qgqqqqq]

I agree that Icha is just having fun with the game, and don't really see a strong case against him.
I'm likeing the BRick case though - it feels a lot like he's present but without actually saying anything.
brick

[Ryan]

To be honest : I just wanted your general feedback on why you guys voted flug cause it was lost to me while I was sick. I reread it now and it makes sense to me and it actually made me come to some points.

Reading the whole flug ordeal right now and you don’t make much sense on it Zak. You defended him and said he didn’t match what the stick did in a previous game then you ask Serdoa what he thinks of him and then you vote him? That just feels like a very random way to go from reading your posts. Were you panicking from Serdoa attacking you? And trying to change the focus by going against what you said earlier? I don’t like how you guys are voting flug which in my eyes there is nothing wrong with what he wrote. You are looking way too much into it compared to an older player. He is new and having all of you attack is very unnerving and I am saying this from my experience last game where I panicked a lot. He mentioned four names jokingly or just without evidence while Bigger did the exact the same in his votes as well. Are you letting a veteran Bigger off? And voting flug? It just seems really weird that if I write next to my vote "joke" this is considered evidence compared to when I just post names without writing “joke”.

The quote below is where you defended him. And followed by the one where you attack him.

This doesn't make much sense. It had already been stated by several that the town PM says nothing about who the bad guys are. Why would I then deliberately contradict that, as a scum gambit? My statement was clearly a joke. The smiley at the end of it should be a pretty strong hint in that regard.

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.

I have reread a bit and I still don't see Ichabod as particularly scummy. But you could be right, Serdoa. I'd say flug is a much better lynch than Ichabod, though. The chance that flug will rebound and gain widespread trust seems low. Ichabod could easily up his game, and I wouldn't be surprised to see him night killed if he is innocent.

I guess you (or was it Meiz) had a point earlier about Ichabod ridiculing the Meiz voters while himself voting for me.

[GaiusMarius]

Wow, a lot happens when you go to sleep

Anyways, I'm leaving my vote on flug, at least for the moment; so far there are the best reasons to vote for him. He's been acting scummy (even if that might only be him being new), and he's not posting (even in response to his neighbor.

I guess that I'll wait for Ichabod's divulgence of the "needed insight" before I pass judgement on him.

I'd go more in depth over what has transpired, but I have to go study for my orgo test with a friend now (yay...), but I should be back in a few hours, up till the deadline.

[novice]

Reading the whole flug ordeal right now and you don’t make much sense on it Zak. You defended him and said he didn’t match what the stick did in a previous game then you ask Serdoa what he thinks of him and then you vote him?

Zak never voted Flug, he's voting Azza.

[Flug] mentioned four names jokingly or just without evidence while Bigger did the exact the same in his votes as well. Are you letting a veteran Bigger off? And voting flug? It just seems really weird that if I write next to my vote "joke" this is considered evidence compared to when I just post names without writing “joke”.

Not the exact same thing. Bigger made some votes with little explanation. Flug threw out four names in one post.

As for joking, when you've caught heat for non-voting, and are being asked about your suspicions, joke voting is not an appropriate response.

[zakalwe]

Ryan, I haven't voted for Flug. But I'm strongly considering it. Better to mislynch him today than later. And maybe he is scum, too.

I also think Meiz and Ichabod might be on to something with Brick. And I guess I'm still willing to lynch Gaspar.

[Ryan]

@ Zak Vote was the wrong expression here.. I dont get why you attacked him still while you were defending him. also, you are willing to vote him when knowing it would result in a mislynch? to much information here?

@ Novice what explanation was mentioned? That it was a joke vote to gather information? or the rp reasons he mentioned? or was the i think you are scummy the way you write. Are you considering these reasons? What stops anyone from writing just random reasons then ? flug could have just written something random about each name. I still see him in the same boat as Bigger the way you guys are looking at it. With a bias to Bigger which is really evident the more this goes on.

[Serdoa]

Haven't read things yet, just looked around and saw a lot of walls of text that end up with votes on me. All these people are suspicious. Brick is suspicious too, I see his smallish post voting for me too.

Let's be honest, I'm the perfect place to park a scum vote. Probably not lynched, veteran player, playing awfully (I don't think i'm playing awfully, just don't want to hold people's hand and walk them to the right path - first, because I have no hands, duh - second, because I'm too occupied helping the big guy)... Clackity, clackity, clack -> vote for me and be happy scum.

Let's see, without reading the actual cases, here's what I think:

*Serdoa votes for me as often as I vote for Gaspar and Lewwyn - can be innocent
*Bigger is annoyed due to last game - can be innocent
*Rowain... Hm... Probably scum...
*BRick... Likely scum, I'd think

So, everyone voting for you giving reasons is suspicious. And everyone voting for you giving no reasons is suspicious too. Generally everyone is suspicious if he votes for you - did I get that right? That is pretty scummy in itself already. That is followed then by explaining how you are the perfect place to park a vote. I don't agree, especially on your reasoning. Veteran player is not equal to being lynchproof D1, even though wolves always try their best to make everyone believe in that, gives some security D1. Anyhow.

I am really surprised that you try to talk away your whole behaviour with "I don't want to walk people to the right path". Um, that has nothing to do with my vote and I don't think it is why the others vote you. I vote for you because you backed off, not showing in the slighest interest for your targets. You didn't care. I can understand when you explained the reasons for your vote, you get told off and decide that you don't want to engage in hour-long discussions why your reads are right. But thats not the case with you. It is not that you don't want to engage in discussion, it is that you don't care who gets lynched. It is that you don't even stay on your target - it is all the same for you, as long as it isn't a wolf that gets lynched.

Would I not be voting you already, this last post by you would imo be reason enough to do it now. You did nothing, except for telling us that everyone who votes you is scum and ride along the opening that zak gave you, telling us that you don't want to "walk people the right path". Honestly, thats part of the game. To convince others about your reads. But ok, you don't want to do that, you don't want to answer the accusations about you, you don't want to tell us your thoughts. You just want to scare us off by stating that only scum would vote for you.

You know what: I'll stay with my vote. When someone is defending himself like you do, chances are very high that he is a wolf.

Ichabod