WW16: The Outlaws and The Olives

[Ichabod]

There goes more than an hour and I only was able to read the damn thread, not make any meaningful research of scum. It's just too hard to do it when trying to defend yourself and with so much players talking at the same time.

I'm tired, so I'm going to follow my heart. I'll vote for Gaspar and go with it. My justification is based on "Zak's case", because that's always right, right?

[novice]

novice, was that list prioritized?

Yes

[BRickAstley]

Official Lynch Vote Count

Ichabod - 5 - Lewwyn, Injera, novice, Serdoa, Gaspar
Sareln - 4 - Merovech, Mattimeo, Arromir, tasunke
uberfish - 4 - Twinkletoes89, Azza, Bigger, Waterbat
Twinkletoes89 - 3 - Pindicator, uberfish, Molach
Pindicator - 2 - Rowain, Sareln
Selrahc - 2 - Jkaen, Qgqqqqq
Qgqqqqq - 1 - Selrahc
Azza - 1 - Catwalk
Waterbat - 1 - Meiz
Gaspar - 1 - Ichabod

Players not voting: None

Official Mayor Vote Count

novice - 9 - Merovech, Rowain, Pindicator, Injera, Jkaen, Molach, Meiz, Mattimeo, novice
Lewwyn - 6 - Sareln, Qgqqqqq, Bigger, Azza, tasunke, Arromir
Serdoa - 2 - Twinkletoes89, Serdoa
Waterbat - 1 - Waterbat
b]Sareln[/b] - 1 - Catwalk

Players not voting: Gaspar, Ichabod, Lewwyn, Selrahc, uberfish

[Lewwyn]

Lewwyn et al., if Zakalwe was always right, WW games would be boring as hell. It's really annoying being attacked due to this flimsy justification over and over again.

Let me be clear about something. I actually did not rate you highly as a suspect last night. I also only really skimmed Zak's post originally because I was more focused on my own case against Catwalk. (Who I still find suspicious.) So my case has much less to do with Zak's read and MUCH more to do with your reaction to his post, you're original downplay of certain elements of his case and the rather forced connection to me saying I did the same thing as you.

Of the things you explain from Zak's post, (2)Gaspar was heavily suspected by Injera at the time (Maybe still is?), (3) you say "I tried to explain it better" which might have been interpreted as backpedalling, (5) not sure I understand reading those quotes how you have explained it, but that's less of a concern for me, (4) you are being more aggressive now but you were much more passive day 1 that's what he's talking about and I actually agree with that part.

I'll explain paragraph from paragraph of Zak's post (the ones you quoted):

1. What is an archetypical wolf Ichabod post? I don't know myself and Zak didn't explain himself. If you can explain what you understand from that, I can try answering, but without an explanation, I really can't say.

Again, passive, not as aggressive, noncommittal, multiple suspects, slightly off arguments.

I just went back and reread your bit about Gaspar not being a catherder when he plays villager... I think that's false.

***But, like I said earlier, that is not the main issue for me. That is not the core reason I am voting for you.

I was just pointing out that there was another player that did the same thing I was being accused of and no one cared. I already had admited that Zak's thoughts about the timing of my post made sense (it was a good wolf tell). In my case, it was a coincidence. In your case, I don't know. I thought about voting for you on day 2, due to not only that, but your general lack of meaningful participation. But I agreed with your comments on Catwalk and that looked like a better lynch.

Once again. I did not do the same thing as you. You keep saying it, but it doesn't make it true! I actually voted for thestick and I actually specifically said why I thought his post was scummy unlike you who said:

The vote against thestick seems like a nice one. I agree with the reasoning behind it, but those multi-quote posts aren't only a wolf thing. I tend to do them when I miss the thread for a long time and I have a lot of posts to read. Every interesting post during the time I'm reading gets quoted and later I comment on some/all of them. But, yeah, there wasn't much of a thread to read when he made that.

So, I wouldn't mind with a thestick lynch, but I don't want to vote for him right now.

The vote against thestick seems like a NICE one? WTF? You tell us you agree with the reasoning. Fine. You tell us you wouldn't mind thestick lynch. Fine. But in the end you didn't vote for thestick and you didn't vote for Gaspar. You didn't vote for anyone. You didn't do the same thing as me because I actually put my money where my mouth was and voted as I voiced suspicions.

The conclusion you take from my comment is a bad one and a pretty forced one. I pointed out that two similar behaviours were getting treated differently without any reasoning as to why (especially since I had mentioned that during night 1 and no one cared to look at it before voting for me on day 2). That statement is true and no one seems to care that a dozen players are getting a free vote pass by saying "zakalwe said it!".

I don't see how its forced. I do not see us as having done the same thing and while you might draw aspirations of similarity I simply don't see it. Thus all I see is you twisting arguments to draw a connection. And you yourself are saying NOW that you DID suspect me and you were sort of trying to implicate I'm a wolf by tying me to behavior that got you suspected.

Again, I say the same thing I said to Gaspar. I don't play this game thinking of other specific players, either with a wolf or a villager role. What sense would it make to connect myself to you as a wolf? Do you see this kind of strategy working if I'm a wolf? With 26 people talking a lot, do you think everyone would notice how you and me were connected and no one would point out the obvious "wolf would/would not do this" like always? This doesn't make sense...

What? Why wouldn't a wolf who is under fire try to draw similarities to someone they know is innocent in order to create an out for themselves? Yes, its classic a wolf would do that, but there's a reason a wolf WOULD do that. And if someone brings it up saying its wolfish, you get to say, "A wolf wouldn't do that!" So yes, it totally makes sense.


I feel like you have, in fact, once again, the same as you originally did with Zak's argument, dismissed relevant parts of my argument and focused on things you can more readily defend and easily repeat. IE: that we did similar things in a similar situation. But again, this is what bothers me most and what makes me feel that you are scum. Zak had his case, I have mine. His is based off of a Day 1 post you made, mine is based off of your Day 2 post. I acknowledge Zak's reads, but ultimately am voting for you based on personal reads due to the shiftiness of your arguments.

[Selrahc]

Exasperating afternoon. Was expecting internet installation, but they came and wemt before they were supposed to arrive and now I have to wait another week.

I'll fully admit to being pretty useless so far. It's going to continue like that until at least next Wednesday. Playing via phone really doesn't give me the liberty to properly analyze the thread or make substantive posts. I've mainly been trying to chip in if I notice something, but people are apparently finding that fishy. Ah well. What the hell.

If I'd known how long I'd be waiting for net, I wouldn't have signed up. Sorry for playing crap.

[Gaspar]

I'm short time at the moment, but Ichabod's defense did not sway me. He gets frustated obviously but it looks like he just threw a give-up vote on me.

I will vote novice mayor because I don't ever trust my read on Lewwyn. Eventually, I can usually suss out novice. Not that it matters all that much.

[Lewwyn]

Can you please explain this to the people that doesn't have your head? What Perpy from WW7 means to you??

In WW7 Gaspar was a myriad of things. In part I think because he was Perpy and was roleplaying it. But he was much more aggressive and boisterous. He was vocal about thoughts and he was also suspected there. Heavily. He was almost lynched and probably would have been if Jkaen hadn't name seered me SK. But he was also catherding as best he could in that game. And for me the key thing was he wanted to actively solve the puzzle.

Personally, Gaspar's been through some shit of late and it has been noticeably reflected in his WW gaming. Fatalistic as all get out. But I guess I also feel like he's being doing better and we're getting a bit more of the fire back from Gaspar.

Or maybe I'm projecting. But I think we're seeing a tiny bit of the old Gaspar.

And so I dub him Perpy of WW7.

[Lewwyn]

Anyway, I do have to sleep as its late here, and my wife is already in bed. Before I go though, Lewwyn for mayor!


Good luck guys!

[Ichabod]

Lewwyn, Zak accused me of trying to make a case against other player right about the time where thestick started to get traction. His attack had nothing to do with my thought s on thestick himself, from what I can tell. You did the same thing. When thestick started to get a lot of traction (you were voting for him), you switched to Bigger and Catwalk later. That's the same thing Zak accused me of doing, trying to find another lynch tarbet when thestick started to get traction.

You completely switched focus now, talking about the fact I pointed thestick as a nice target and you voted for him. That was not what zak pointed out, at least not in my opinion. By the way, go back and read how my post regarding thestick was made on the early parts of day 1. I wasn't certain of thestick guilt and I was trying to find other leads

---

I don't own your head to undersatnd what it's the most relevant parts of your argument. To me, all you said was that Zak case was good and bolded parts of it, which I tried to explain (why would you emphasize those lines if they weren't the relevant parts - how am I supposed to know that?).

And you also selected parts of my post to ignore in your new attack, including ones where I make direct questions to you. I also see you twisting things to fit your arguments. That's because our heads work differently and from a bunch of information, we consider different parts of it more relevant. You say i do it on purpose, because I'm a wolf, but that's just normal human behaviour.

---

Now you come and say that you have your own case against me, not only repeating Zak. Go and read your first post to see if it isn't possible for me to understanmd that you were only quoting Zak (look at that "this one is for you, Zak" comment, for example). Now go and find all other votes against me and you'll see that EVERYONE JUST QUOTES ZAK. Can't you see how this makes me angry?

Maybe I answered bad to your suspicions, but that was only because I didn't understand them as you wanted me to. But at least you tried to voice your suspicions. Everyone else just followed Zak. You are wrong about me, the same way Zak was (and he was a villager). The fact that you came forward and made your case makes you look better as a villager in my eyes. But can't you see that everyone else is just sailing? You made your case 1 whole day after Zak's case and NO ONE ELSE HAS SAID ANYTHING AGAINST ME OTHER THAN ZAK'S CASE! You are burrying yourself here, Lewwyn. Look at the whole picture and you'll see just a bunch of sailers. And you have to admit that your case stands strongly on the fact that I mentioned you in my early defense to Zak (which wasn't just a coincidence, because I suspected you way more than I suspect you know than). So it's a bunch of sailers + your personal reasons. This is a classic mislynch. Seriously!! We should look at the sailors.

Please, go and read my comment about Gsapar, the one that make Zak suspicious of me, without the hindsight of knowing that thestick is guilty. And taking into account that it was extremely early game. I was fishing for suspicious in that post. There was a lot of noise, a lot players. Can't you see that my gut against Gaspar is just the same as Zakalwe's gut against thestick. But he was considered a hero due to that and I'm going to be lynched.

After that I went away for the weekend. That's why my comment about thestick looks so bad. BUT I WAS AWAY!!!! I LOST THE VOTE DEADLINE!!! Seriously..... CAN'T YOU SEE HOW BAD THAT MADE ME LOOK!?!?!?! I WOULDN'T DO THAT IF I WAS A MAFIA, BECAUSE I CAN'T PLAY BADLY WHEN I'M ON A TEAM, THAT WOULD MAKE ME FEEL VERY, VERY BAD WITH MYSELF!!!! GASPAR KNOWS THIS, HE POINTED THAT OUT IN ANOTHER GAME AND THE FACT THAT HE FORGOT IT NOW IS VERY SUSPICIOUS!!!

Of course I got agressive after those posts... It was not agressive, but indignant, since I was being wrongly accused. First by Zak, who hardly changes his mind. But before I could try to make him change his mind he was killed and I had to put up with everyone just quoting him and not reading my defenses.

Than you make a case (the first one after Zak) and I had trouble finding out what was the important bits of it (that's entirely possible). That's it!!!! It's not a devious scheme to get you killed or whatever. If you make me a question I'll answer, I won't run from it. But you can't expect me to just know...

---

This is my whole game explained until now. Hope it makes things more clear.... Sorry that this was written in a rush...

[Ichabod]

I'm short time at the moment, but Ichabod's defense did not sway me. He gets frustated obviously but it looks like he just threw a give-up vote on me.

I will vote novice mayor because I don't ever trust my read on Lewwyn. Eventually, I can usually suss out novice. Not that it matters all that much.

I woudln't expect my defense to sway you and the other sailers. But rest assured that if you are scum you are going down after I die and revealed as a villager. And if you are a villager, start trying a bit harder for the rest of the game, because you are also in the list of Zak suspicions, so I guess you won't be following it until than, right?

Now I read that you went through some stuff, so I'm sorry if I'm being offensive. But I really don't know how to act when I don't know if people are doing things because they believe in them or because they are trying to fake it...