WW 18 Siege of the Dragon! (Game Thread)

[Lewwyn]

I need to clarify. When I started writing my above comment it was confusing, but as I worked through it, it became more clear. In the end this is just another example of Mattimeo trying to push suspicion of of him with a reactionary, sarcastic comment that does not address the issue.

[Mattimeo]

Logic last game:
No idea who the hell to lynch, and people don't seem to like it when I don't express an opinion.
Well, I suppose there's this really flimsy argument to be made against Tasunke, so lets go with that and hope it gets me by 'til someone comes up with something better that I agree with.
Get jumped on by Serdoa, defend, more people jump on, get backed into a corner, lynched.

Logic this game:
People don't seem to like it when you show up to say you're around, but don't vote. But I hate this section of the game 'cause I don't actually have any reasons to vote someone. random.org it is.
Well, that's awkward, only person to give me any reason to actually vote them is the person who my random vote ended up on, and people are thinking I have an ulterior motive in that placement. Guess I'd better make an attempt to justify or they're all going to jump on me again.
Proceed to get jumped on anyway.
Start slightly distrusting the main person to agree with the tiny doubt I had on my target at the time.
Attempt to find someone actually worthy of suspicion.
Get jumped on again.


Fuck this, I'm going back to not saying anything 'til called on such, and voting some time from halfway through the day 'til ~5 hours before deadline. Seems to keep me alive longer, and werewolf is no fucking fun when you're dead.

[Mattimeo]

oh, whoops, missed the snide comment along the lines of my logic in the last game definitely being superior to this. eh, I'm sure you're capable of working out the approximate positioning it should be in that.

[Serdoa]

@zak and others

STOP trying to make it sound as if I had pushed hard to get Q lynched. I made a long post so that everyone could understand what I found suspicious till that point and thats it. I have never pushed Q. Since that post I am in a constant explaining mode, because somehow several people who normally are quite apt at understanding seemingly like to misunderstand every single word I wrote.

@Bigger

Am I in some way obliged to follow your lead? Do I have to keep my mouth shut when you are on something? Really, I am deeply sorry that I destroyed your convincing strategy of voting without reason. I am sure it was only a matter of minutes that Azza would have cracked under the sheer pressure and would have confessed everything.

More seriously, if it is anti-town that I laid out my reasons for why I vote, then I certainly have not understood this game. No it is not anti-town to explain one reasons. And no it is not anti-town to vote differently then you. You wanted to apply pressure? Fine, do that. But on D1 when I see something that I find suspect, I will point it out.

@Lewwyn

I am unfortunately in explaining and getting insulted mode since my starting post, not that I am certain for what reason. It somehow has gone from "good post Serdoa" to "Oh, you are the most suspicious thing ever" and I actually don't see that I have changed anything. What of course means if you want to look at suspicious behaviour, ask yourself

- why zak is adding his weight in favor of Q without even reading my points first (he needed more then half a day and two reminders to actually realize that I had more points than just the word useless)
- why novice is chiming in on that stuff, without adding anything at all. It is not "mystique novice" it is just plain "Oh, I'll drop a comment"-novice
- why Mattimeo is stating I would push the Q-case as I pushed his last game (which zak seemingly agreed with, so maybe you ask him as well) when I actually have not pushed the Q-case at all

And I am sure there is more, but thats the most obvious one. In general, I find it very suspicious that the last 10 pages are mainly about "my case on Q and how I pushed it", when all I did was what I always do. Point out suspicious behaviour in ONE (!) post. If you ask me what else I found suspicious, I'd suggest you ask yourself why a few other players decided to make that the main discussion point for half a day. Even if one does not agree with me, does someone want to tell me it is normal behaviour for D1 to push one of the few people to actually hunt wolves? And I deliberately don't say "makes a case", because I didn't. I hunted wolves. Thats it.

[Serdoa]

Serdoa, you recognized what we were doing, you even mentioned in your vote analysis that you understood the votes by me, Zak, and Uber. As well you should - I spelled it out to you in our mason thread when I was doing the same thing to thestick in ww16. That worked out pretty damn well for the village. If you understood what we were doing, why did you feel it necessary to white knight Azza? Why not keep your mouth shut and see what develops? The dogpile completely dissipated thanks to you coming to his rescue, before we could get any information at all from Azza. I can't think of any pro-town motivation you could possibly have for helping Azza out.

And just becaue it annoys the hell out of me: WHEN and WHERE did I white-knight Azza? Excuse me, I pointed out suspicion on a different target. Really sorry that this player also voted for Azza. Since when is it considered that someone is innocent just because someone else acts suspicious against him ON DAY ONE!

[waterbat]

Fuck this, I'm going back to not saying anything 'til called on such, and voting some time from halfway through the day 'til ~5 hours before deadline

indeed.

I was going to post something similar. we've got one person stating that voting off of a target at the slightest pressure is a scum tell and another saying not voting off someone at pressure is a scum tell. i guess that is the nature of this stupid stupid game.

But - I do disagree with your point that survival is paramount. I very much would like more to see a village win (finally) than to survive long.

It doesnt matter that i said we don't have to lynch my candidate - i certainly want to explore other possibilities- its day 1 - how sure can we be positive this far in the game?

but anyway, after 2-3 weeks of slow moving family flu, i woke up to a killer sore throat this morning - during a time when i have no choice but to work ridiculous hours. i'm a bit pissed at the world at the moment - it may be coloring my attitude.

[Selrahc]

Selrahc is posting even less and its been too long for the timezone agrument to really be that plausible.

You realize you said that at 3:10am my time, right?

Selrahc, what is your reasoning behind the slowcheetah vote? Also, I'm going to take your word on MJW acting as his normal self.

At the moment, I'm planning to swap my vote to someone closer to the deadline when it matters, at the moment probably Mattimeo. I'm using it to emphasize that I have challenged Slowcheetah to a mini-game.

If Slowcheetah refuses to engage or respond though, I'll find that suspicious. I can imagine Wolves trying to get out of weird situations by non-engagement.

[Lewwyn]

Fuck this, I'm going back to not saying anything 'til called on such, and voting some time from halfway through the day 'til ~5 hours before deadline. Seems to keep me alive longer, and werewolf is no fucking fun when you're dead.

You do realize that only two people are voting for you? And while Zak has voted for you before, you've never had more than two people on you? I have even said that we likely won't lynch you today, but I'm willing to stick on you for now and see what happens. And what happens is you fly off the handle. I do feel bad that you seem to get lynched early in these games, but you WERE scum in 16, in 17 you got RailRoaded by scum on day 2. I don't see it as you being persecuted unfairly in every game.

[zakalwe]

@zak and others

STOP trying to make it sound as if I had pushed hard to get Q lynched.

I'm not trying to make it sound like that. I think it's a bad case, and I'm disliking the momentum it got. But you're right that it would be unfair to blame that solely on you. You just stated your case, and then others followed. So I'm not holding the "attracted followers" part against you. But I don't think it's unfair to hold you accountable for the bad case.

It somehow has gone from "good post Serdoa" to "Oh, you are the most suspicious thing ever" and I actually don't see that I have changed anything.

I just want to point out that I was never in the first camp. Maybe this perceived shift in public opinion is more a case of different people chiming in at different times? Some people may have been changing their minds about you, but I've been quietly suspicious of you all along.

- why zak is adding his weight in favor of Q without even reading my points first (he needed more then half a day and two reminders to actually realize that I had more points than just the word useless)

This isn't true. I read all your points the first time, and discounted them because they didn't appear suspicious. I am sorry if you feel I made a poor summary of your case, but I have to say this particular retort feels more like a tactical counterattack rather than a genuine suspicion.

Thanks for sharing your suspicions on Novice and Mattimeo. What about the others who followed you on Q? Personally, I always find myself questioning the motives of the people who agree with me. (Even if the idea is often floated that I've got some kind of blind spot there.) How about you? Are you still so confident in your case against Q that you only suspect those trying to "derail" his lynch? (Yes, this is an invitation to honest dialogue.)

Cross-posting a bit.

[Serdoa]

zak, I am at work, but in short, if you want a honest dialogue, why do you post something like this:

"Are you still so confident in your case against Q that you only suspect those trying to "derail" his lynch?"

When was I so confident in my case that I only suspected those trying to derail his lynch in the first place? I don't see it. Thats exactly what I mean when I say that you make it appear that I pushed hard for his case. I never pushed even once.

And again, why are you voting for me zak? You have explained that you find others suspicious and that those additionally also vote for Q. Why are you voting for me then? You could vote them, wouldn't that make more sense?