WW 19 Game Thread - Mobster Mayhem - GAME OVER

[novice]

I killed Tasunke because there was no way he was going to live. It was obvious that ether Tasunke or Azza would have to hang because one of them was lying. I felt that there was no way that Tasunke could lose to Azza. The bad things that Azza has done where lurking and having a slightly scummy item. So I gave the town an extra lych with enough time to talk about it. If I were wolf I would wait to try and draw out the true vig (if tasunke was not it) and give less time from the town to talk about the lych. And if Azza somehow got himself lyched it would have been even worse for the village. (Unless both Azza and I are both scum but that seems unlikely for reasons waterbat pointed out.)

Serdoa, am I right that it is in the bolded sentence that you think MJW leaked information that only scum would have?

MJW (or anyone): What are the "reasons waterbat pointed out", that you're referring to?

Yes.

I don't think it's a slip in itself, but yeah, what he needs to explain is why he and Azza are unlikely to both be scum. If you accept that as a premise, his statement makes sense.

[MJW (ya that one)]

It's post Post: #981 novice. I might have misunderstood it or something, though.

What do you mean? You're basing your argument on it but you might have misunderstood it?

Why do you think yourself and Azza would be unlikely to both be scum, then?

He attacked me a bit after day 1. Also if both azza and I are both wolfs we know that Tasunke was lying in the first place. We would not have to do anything. We could just wait until the real vig showed up and take a free mislych. And expose the real vig. (unless azza really does not have the lock picks but that would cause different problems for the wolf team.)

Add this to the waterbat quote above and its very unlikely we are both wolfs.

[Serdoa]

Realised now when I read uberfishs post that actually we have several people who could either see my case on MJW (uberfish, novice) or had a scum-lean on him (zak). And uberfish agrees on consolidating votes. So why not vote MJW?

Btw: Pindicator, you questioned me a few things about the MJW-case. Did my answer get you to think about it? Any opinion on the matter?

@Qgqqqq

I think you wanted to vote for MJW in your long post but due to the wrong spoiler-tag I guess it will be overlooked. So if I am right, I think you should re-vote, just to be certain.

[zakalwe]

I don't think it's a slip in itself, but yeah, what he needs to explain is why he and Azza are unlikely to both be scum. If you accept that as a premise, his statement makes sense.

Just to clarify, the part that you have bolded isn't what I was referring to at all. So maybe I've misunderstood the case against MJW, after all.

[Qgqqqqq]

Again only up to 1140, I see it has grown an extra 2 pages in that time, but I'm not going to make these any longer then they need to be.

Q You are joking me right? You didnt read my 3 post long response aswell?

I dealt with this earlier, I'm not seeing a 3-post response.

Day 1, We all voted Tasunke to save Rowain. You do realize that I wrote that same reason with everyone else while you followed the Rowain wagon without providing any good reason besides what Novice and Uberfish said? It feels like you are describing your self more then my self im afraid. I already prooved to you that I dont restate points and I am sorry the fact that your are not catching up wont make me make me rewrite the three long posts I did responding to your earlier post.

I don't want to start this discussion again but it appears that now your just attacking me, not my arguments.
I provided decent reasoning on Rowain, and argued it mysself (as opposed to just copying novice et al as you appear to be implying). I had been on Rowain and openly questioning/suspecting him for a long time before the lynch.
I didn't hear you argvue asunke until lynchtime (although I may have lost it in the spam).
My point is that you push really hard for a lynch, to the exclusion of everything else (even IMO obvious scum [azza/tasunke face off]), and then swap it to a lynch which you don't even get associated with, due to not pushing it.

"In this way he a) makes sure he's on a target at lynchtime. b) avoids any responsibility for the lynch. and c) is seen as explaining himself without entering the discussion.."

" he jumps onto the candidate. Read his reasoning - first he uses it as a chance to attack selrahc (already mentally rehearsing his I told you so speech) then he blatantly ignores the actual discussion around the topic (he was convinced by serdoa. yet never offers anything further to the discussion"

You forgot to mention I attacked both Selrhac and Waterbat during the night and day... Waterbat responded poorly and thats why I changed my vote to Waterbat. Waterbat claimed gas can AGAIN i was on of the first to change vote cause of that. Then I went back to the target i orignally attacked Selrhac. Serdoa caught MJW in a way that is extremely convincing. I said I will vote for MJW due to Serdoa's argument. Pindicator said why am i doing this? I explained why which is the context behind that post that you entirely ignored. And I even asked what you guys thought am I reading something wrong? ". I am not 100% surre pindicator if you have anything contradictory to what I am saying or If i am missing something speak now or be forever silent (tongue)".

You are trying to lynch me way to hard. First your saying I am not following the group and making a name for myself and THEN now you are accusing me of following people blindly? Are you even looking at what you are typing one after an other? and Why should I enter a discussion that I have nothing to provide to.

Yes I know you'd attacked selrahc, and I know why you couldn't stay on waterbat, my point is that despite not going asfter selrahc you still used it as a chance to attack him.
I am not trying to lynch you hard, (in retrospect it would've been better to save this for the night) I am merely trying to point out your scummy side.
I don't see a contradiction, you don't raise people but you latch onto other peoples arguments, and try to make them your own in this way, without actually mKING youir own arguments.

Q you made two points contadictory against me. You voted me without even reading the response to the first claim you did versus me THEN you did a second claim completely different to the first one . You are trying to lynch me to hard and you know what heres my vote after those 2 claims you just made Qgqqqqq

I'm not claiming anything, nor do I see the contradiction.

...

He did this yesterday as well, champion his targets all day, never missing a chance to ttack them - but when it comes to time to lynch , he jumps onto the candidate.

Onto which candidate? The one to get lynched? I don't understand.

a candidate up for lynching that he has not previously voiced any strong objection to (tasunke) or one that he has ignored all day (MJW).

"Not defending - a wonderul argument to be sure, and one that no one can defend against." - Um, well, I guess with defending you'd actually go a long way to defend against that particular argument.

Yeah I f**ked that up .

In this way he a) makes sure he's on a target at lynchtime. b) avoids any responsibility for the lynch. and c) is seen as explaining himself without entering the discussion..

Is that not our job to be on a target at lynchtime? Or do you mean that he attacked all day a scum-buddy but changed shortly before deadline to lynch a villager? Wouldn't it make more sense to vote to lynch Selrahc in that case? I mean, if Selrahc is not scum, your whole argument falls apart and it seems there are quite a few people still voting him.

No I'm not basing this on Selrahcs lynch, I just mean it feels out of character as earlier he ignores viable candidates to fixate on his target, and then doesn't associate himself to the lynch as he doesn't actually arue for who he's votinh for, he just stays passive (until me of course ).

@Serdoa His claims make absoultely no sense. Read the one before it that I responded to. It is a 100% different then what he just wrote. Dont yoy think thats wierd? He didnt even read a response to that claim and jumped to an entirely different one.


Continuationg of my rant vs Q : If I was against bloody Selhrac why was I the one to start the Selhrac lynch wagon today ? are you crazy?

Ya your keeping my vote.. man . Wtf ..

What are you talking about?
I don't change my argument (though I am raising different points) and I'm not saying you're against a se,rahc lynch.

@Ryan

Q has misread your post imo. He thinks you attacked MJW for not defending when you attacked Selrahc for it. And you delivered good reasons for attacking him imo. So I guess that is a misunderstanding. Get that clarified - calmly. Helps the village more than a screaming match between the two of you.

Yes I misread that part.
However my point is not that he did not have good poiunts - just that the good ones are not his own.
And yeah, we don't want an argument - I think maybe we should drop this till nightfall.

@Serdoa

Im keeping that vote on him until I understand where he was going with this. I wanna understand from him what caused the 180 degrees shift on his cases versus me. Why is he making cases , ignoring my responses and then making a completely different case. It might be just me being new to this game but it just feels heavily far fetched and just a despreate a chain of events to chain me. If he had the time to read my post vs Matt, He had the time to read my response to his case versus me.

There's no 180 degree shift - yes I was relatively positive to you and now I'm raising yopu as scum, but there's no contradiction in my attacks.
You didn't really respond to me, I did miss it (because you refuse to make points like @Q to help me realise this), but I still don't judge it as responding to my points.
Why on earth would I be desperate?
I'm not a lynch candidate, and neither are you. As I said, I should probably have left this till nightfall, as its relatively irrelevant to the current lynch.

Well, I do that myself sometimes. I make a case against someone, he come up with answers which are ok but I don't really like them. If that happens, I often will read his posts in even more detail and find stuff to go against. That doesn't mean I haven't read his answers on my first case, only that I still consider him scum.

And hey, questioning and suspecting others is part of the game. You shouldn't get mad at someone for doing that. And tbh, if I were you, I would consider that it is very unlikely that someone is trying to get you lynched. Wolfs do that sometimes (I did that to Mattimeo for example) but there has to be some overarching reason for that and hope for success. I mean, you don't do that as wolf just out of fun because your name will always be related to the lynch of a villager. The only reason I could see right now would be to get votes off of MJW. Which worked. Think about that.

Yeah calm down dude, Serdoa and I got pretty mad last game but we got over it. (mostly...)
And I'm sorry for drawing attention away from MJW, I probably should've saved this case for later.

Again only up to 1140.
I've taken ages with this so I've probably fallen behind and missed heaps, but I'll try to catch up by lynch time.

[Ryan]

I cant believe your making me go back that many posts to proove that you are wrong and I am taking peoples quotes for my self:

No, he was not. He was advocating that we lynch the one with the card IF there is no one better showing up.

Rowain wanted to get rid of the card in a way that focused on the card as the issue. He then changed to wanting to lynch me. That is unrelated. That doesn't mean his initial stance wasn't still based primarily on the existence of the card.

The idea I'm talking about is not asking for someone to be lynched on the basis of the card. It is a proposal to get rid of the card as the result of a lynch. It is an exact inversion of what Rowain was discussing.

I don't see the difference to what Rowain said and it feels like you are twisting his words. Firstly the lynch was going to remove Novice a suspect of being scum plus the card. Which what you were saying since in a same way you are relaying on the fact that wolves aren't influencing the votes and that town lynch. Secondly you mentioned in a very early post that you prefer Vigi not shooting so it doesn't fall into scum hands why the change of heart ? Thirdly I am still waiting for you to respond to the argument that Serdoa and Rowain made against you and uberfish that you both ignored responding to . I cannot link it right but it disproved the reason of you and fishes vote against Rowain . You didn't respond to that but choose to switch your point of view on the Vigi shot. All of these are increasing the level I was doubting you pretty heavily .

Vs Selrahc and note You are claiming that Lurking is the only thing I am using.

@Waterbat You have posted barley at all and provided close to now explanation for your votes or anything. At first you said this :"lynching novice seems to have the least net downside to it (absent other useful data)." and then your vote was finally set to "this lso seemed like something was off there with Zakalwe its thin" I dont understand that change vote or the reason for that change in fact I barley got anything from your posts except ideas already mentioned just to escape a convorsation. Looking at your posts its about scrapper and thats it. You provided zero information and the stuff you wrote is basically filler in my eyes.

@mattie and bigger , Well I think we shouldnt let them off for this, but meh life can get you busy. and Mattie :P

@ Selrahc this is the quote I wanted to link earlier :

Qgqqqqq Wrote: Sorry x-post with 375.
I'm explaining my reasoning.
Yes I do find Rowain suspicious but its no because I don't agree with him, its because of the way he is driveing his train - not for the sake of catching wolves but a veritable policy lynch where he basically says "we have to lose a villager, why not this one."


Yeah, that argument was brought now so often, but I still wait for someone to show me when Rowain actually stated that. Oh wait, pindicator found it:

(Today 13:13)pindicator Wrote:

(Today 03:44)Rowain Wrote: I'm still the opinion that it better to lynch a villager with the card than to lynch a villager without it.
So who has a good enough chance to be scum to outweight the risk of lynching a villager? Our back and forth has drawn too much talk so far (which makes it in itself already a good move for scum) but I think there are some names worth a closer inspection.


Well, probably good you called me out on that, because i didn't read this thoroughly the first time. I took the bolded bit and glossed over the rest, so boo on that example. But this later one is the one i had in mind:

(Today 05:23)Rowain Wrote: Yes getting rid of the card trumps lynching a random villager. Are you of different opinion? You rather want the card in play and lynch a villager?


So it could just be a lazy re-writing of the first point. Enough that i don't think that is his guilt all in one.


Serdoa : "Well, so we agree that he never stated what 4 people provide as reason to vote for him? Thats great. If now only those people, like Qgqqqq, would actually start to reread themselves instead of simply latching onto a wagon because it is so much easier that would be great. "
----------------------------------------------

End of quote.

Btw: Thanks pindi, I was getting unsure myself now what Rowain had actually written, but I was certain that I would remember if he actually really had stated that we have to lynch a villager anyway. Of course, one can construe the posts you quoted above as that, but I'd consider that ill-intent, because it seems obvious that is was meant differently, as you point out. I also understand that you have other reasons which let you lean more to him than to Selrahc. Not sure I agree with them, but at least it feels honest and not something you make up just to vote for him as I get the feel with some of the others.

Also, I agree with you that we should not put too much trust in the seer-scans. Thats a good stance to take. Hopefully that will be kept as soon as the first screams that he found a wolf. "

Ya i am waiting for the response.

Clearly I am focusing on Waterbat lurking and nothing else. I am not linking stuff Selrhac said , I am not focusing on other points . Lurking is the basis of all my votes and arguments and the rest are based off other people.

These 2 posts were during the night and NO ONE made any claims similiar to this.

5 mins from night deadline, right?

Waterbat I asked you and Serdoa asked you with my quote a couple of hours ago. You are definitely avoiding confrontation and hiding something aswell as answering vaguely with really general comments the stuff you do answer.

@ thanks Novice but this is my first game and I prefer using what I am having infront of me rather what you guys claim is normal play which I have heard a million times .

Water bat dodging my questions with stuff out of the conversation. Yep lurking.

Finally someone agrees about waterbat... That guys did not answer a single question against him properly or he ignored the questions. Just watch Tasunke and Azza and get someone who isnt in the open.

Vs water bat.. Again Must be lurking.

So basically Waterbat I am not convinced with your counter arguments and your explanaton on why you are lurking. Also, I dont think what your saying or your claims are valid. You dodged novices question which included mine. I think lynching you today is better and let the vigi and any other seer, item owner actually speak tomorrow. Since thier item passes would be complete. and then we could question Azza etc.

again vs waterbat.

@uberfish What do you think about Selrahc escaping from answering a lot of questions or arguments vs him?

Back to Selrhac while my vote was on Waterbat.

@waterbat Thats the thing is your saying that I take everything you post as including me while saying you didnt mention the lie in response to me. I just quoted and prooved that was wrong and your just quiet about it?

And I said here : " either have the choise between listening to what you veterans are saying and what I am noticing from my point of view. I prefer my point of view and learning that away then being forced to play the way you guys want me . I posted since the night why I think Water and selrahc are good lynches and I wrote earlier in this post why I think it was a better idea then Tas or Azza.

I really think that scum influenced or helped influence moving the votes to about Tasunke and Rowain day 1. I let that happen and voted for Tasunke day 1 just because other people where. I am not repeating that mistake to please the crowd. "

This was more towards why I didnt vote on Tasunke or Azza I should have seprated them better my bad.

To move to the point on why the scum would do that. Why wouldnt they influence a discussion that moved the focus away from them and gave them free time not getting caught. and us fighting together?

You fit in being extremely aggressive. I can understand now why you didnt respond , because the way I mentioned my argument was as statments not questions but I expected you to atleast say something and not ignore it as if confirming that my doubts are correct and you trying to let it die. You lied , your reasoning is wierd in my eyes. Your lurking again in my eyes in a way that yes you are participating yet minimilay , contributing nothing and you give the feel of hypocrisy.



P.S Dude you were really nice and helped me around but I dont understand that angry , Fuck off aggressive tune. I did not say anything that would invoke that and ur putting me from this game when I feel I did nothing wrong or rude towards you.

Waterbat claiming Gas can actually makes sense with that play in my mind atleast.. atleast for today. then We have selrahc, Matt, Merovech that I personally have no read on. Well id by lying if i said have no read on selrahc I think hes scummy but people arent sharing that idea. Il think about my vote I guess.. If I can let Waterbat live today since if he is saying the truth we need that gas can. But there is no garantee that the gas can started town with him. It also feels like he may have just made up that story or he truly has it and will pass it to the other scum if he was scum.

That was the first post to remove the vote vs waterbat due to him having the gas can.

------------------- Now lets go your points. You were doing a read on me and said that i was most likely trying to sepreate my self from the different groups and not following thier arguments.. and then you made the claim that I was just taking peoples words and claiming it as my own. I just prooved to you that lurking wasnt my main faill point why are you failing to under stand this? I used lurking mainly on day 2 because I did not see any point in lynching for items until day 3 and I wrote why and i am not going back to find that and I said I prefer focusing on the people we have zero leads on and I confronted Selrahc and Waterbat with that in mind and I used different arguments all linked here since you are to lazy to even look. "yet I would heasitate to say you had contributed to the case on him, all I ever heard from you until others mentioned it was his lurking." I am sorry thats wrong and I can link to you even more posts then what I have here. I used him lying, I used him reacting angirly, I used him not clarifying his day ones posts and changing them without explanation . Are you that blind to what I am saying or are you just trying to act blind? Dude I am gonna go for the 2nd option that you are a lier that has been trying to lynch me for 4 times now with a differnent reason every time.

"I struggle reading this - what point are yopu trying to make?" That my ideas are my own and not taken from others which are you making again WITH ZERO PROOF. I provided you with proof a million times, I linked you posts you are obviously either a lazy town that is unable to read my posts or you are a scum trying to vote me.

Just for your readins sake . Compare these two lines : "The rest is just conjecture mentioned by others, and yet ryan tries to pass it off as his own." vs "but if another thing that feels scummy is his pushing outlets at any cost - not only is he clearly distinguishing himself from any such group," Make up your god damn mind. If you use the i am using a conjecture of other peoples posts again . and Ignore and act like you dont understand what I am saying . I am ignoring your posts and I will lynch you. Because the amount of bullshit your writing and the amount of lazziness in your claims is to much.

P.S if the spoilers dont work I am sorry. I never used them.

[novice]

I don't think it's a slip in itself, but yeah, what he needs to explain is why he and Azza are unlikely to both be scum. If you accept that as a premise, his statement makes sense.

Just to clarify, the part that you have bolded isn't what I was referring to at all. So maybe I've misunderstood the case against MJW, after all.

I agree with your differing perspectives description, and I think it started with the slip above.

Uberfish, which side of the fence do you land on when it comes to MJW?

[Qgqqqqq]

...

Made an obvious formatting error here.
There's supposed to be two spoilers encomap[assing a few responses.

[Ryan]

Q :"I don't see a contradiction, you don't raise people but you latch onto other peoples arguments, and try to make them your own in this way, without actually mKING youir own arguments." Ya no proof while I am providing my own and your latching onto that theory. An attempt to lynch me four times in the same day. Q
and thats my final vote. No point arguign vs liers.

[Qgqqqqq]

Realised now when I read uberfishs post that actually we have several people who could either see my case on MJW (uberfish, novice) or had a scum-lean on him (zak). And uberfish agrees on consolidating votes. So why not vote MJW?

Btw: Pindicator, you questioned me a few things about the MJW-case. Did my answer get you to think about it? Any opinion on the matter?

@Qgqqqq

I think you wanted to vote for MJW in your long post but due to the wrong spoiler-tag I guess it will be overlooked. So if I am right, I think you should re-vote, just to be certain.

Ah yes MJW