WW24: The Ashes of Brigdarrow: VILLAGE WINS

[Azza]

Well, I unvoted Brick because emotional defenses hit me and make me not want to vote for people.

I was sure Mattimeo would receive votes in sucession if he was village. It seemed like the perfect frame job. That didn't happen, so he may indeed be scum.

I also like this point from Ichabod. Given how spread the village was, Mattimeo would seem a good mislynch target. When Serdoa put the first vote on him, the spread was this (based mainly on Zak's #276 count).

Tally:

Mattimeo (1) - Serdoa
Gazglum (2) - Azza, Rowain,
Ichabod (2) - Slowcheetah, Gazglum
Rowain (2) - Jkaen, Zakalwe
Jkaen (1) - Mattimeo
Brick (1) - Lewwyn
Lewwyn (1) - Ichabod

Not voting (1) - Brick

We know Serdoa wasn't a wolf. I agree that at this point it would have been pretty easy for scum to swing onto Mattimeo. One scum would have made him equal first with momentum. The day was getting closish to end, some people were going to go to bed. Only Zak joined as I recall, and not imeddiately, and only briefly before hopping off. Given Mattimeo's play up till now, it seems a missed opportunity to get a wagon on him.

Anyway, I'm not pretending this is BIG EVIDENCE, but I thought it was worth keeping in mind.

It's non-evidence. Why waste such an easily manipulatable lynch on Matt, when you can remove a big fish like Serdoa with no counter?

[Lewwyn]

It's non-evidence. Why waste such an easily manipulatable lynch on Matt, when you can remove a big fish like Serdoa with no counter?

Didn't you say you voted for Serdoa as self-defense?...

[Azza]

It's non-evidence. Why waste such an easily manipulatable lynch on Matt, when you can remove a big fish like Serdoa with no counter?

Didn't you say you voted for Serdoa as self-defense?...

I thought Serdoa was probably town, but Im not going to risk a 1/3 chance of getting myself lynched to save someone whose alignment I don't know. Anyone in my position wouldve made the exact same move.

[Gazglum]

@ ROWAIN

I know that you try to forget WW17 as much as you can. But Serdoa did his 'scumhunting' there too. As said looking who is left or not made me think about Serdoa and his scum-play then. Not to mention that there was another (very small) hint increasing Serdoas scumchances.

Following up Brick's question - what was the second hint?

@ ZAK

My Rowain vote was a bit of a probe, but after seeing his reaction to it, I'm pretty happy with my vote.

Whom do you try to sell this BS? Either you are scum yourself (again) or your line about BRick and Tasunke is simple not true. Are you telling this story to yourself or only to us zak?

You're the one who was stretching to find reasons to justify the lynch, by calling him scummy.

You played (as I did) in the AitP-game where he was king and played it equally strange so yes I expected you do pick that up especially after I made it clear that it is not a pure policy-lynch for me.

I see what you're getting at here, and I guess I'll accept it as a somewhat credible reason for suspecting Tasunke based on his silence. That doesn't mean it isn't a manufactured reason, though. But it helps your case a little.

Great minds think alike. I was about to ask you "What about Serdoa?"

Your discussion got a little heated there for a while, only for you guys to join forces at the end. Had you completely come around to Rowain as town by the end of the day? What do you think about him now?

@ LEWWYN

Lewwyn, I understand your suspicion of Rowain/Zak after the Serdoa lynch. But after sparring with them both, you seem to have focused on Zak. DO you think Zak is much scummier than Rowain, or are you still focused on both of them?

[Lewwyn]

@ LEWWYN

Lewwyn, I understand your suspicion of Rowain/Zak after the Serdoa lynch. But after sparring with them both, you seem to have focused on Zak. DO you think Zak is much scummier than Rowain, or are you still focused on both of them?

Day 1 Zak was on Brick all day, but then moved to Tasunke in the last few minutes citing a policy lynch. I thought it was suspicious at the time because he hadn't voted for Tasunke before that. And he likes to talk about policy lynches when he's scum. Though I think he does that sometimes when he's village too, so maybe its a non-tell, but the way he's been switching about both days makes me suspicious.

[BRickAstley]

[quote][quote='Azza' pid='376247' dateline='1369724926']
Thinking I'm scummy for making short posts is like thinking Mattimeo is scummy for posting about meta, or Serdoa is scummy for pushing extremely hard for a lynch. Short posts is how I play. Just because I don't play identical to you doesn't make me scum.[/quote]

Well short posts isn't the issue of itself, it's more the feeling of being able to post shortly without justification. Like i've said before, I don't care about the amount of posts, or their brevity, but about the content, and your content compared to mine after you tried to call me out for brick throwing seemed rather slim to make such a claim.

[quote]There is a difference in quality of contribution, but the attack was based on quantity, and I rightfully called him out on that.[/quote]

And I would say quantity doesn't matter there as much as quality.

[quote]I was pissed off Friday night unrelated to the game, and that bled into my posts.[/quote]

Understood, I've been that way this game too. I'm not using emotion to try and fight you with.
[quote]
So it's just coincidence that the case against me started to lose momentum after that point?[/quote]

I'm not sure what you're referring to here?

[quote]It's right there in that post. I didn't realise people had missed that part of the joke. I'm not sure if you're even reading my posts when you're making this case?[/quote]

Yeah, I am reading your posts. I was meaning before post 125. And now I see that I missed that part of your posts, derp.

[quote]You're ignoring the context. Gazglum wanted Tasunke killed by non-lynch methods late in day 1. Early in day 2, everyone who's on Tasunke is potential scum. [/quote]

It sounded more like reaction to someone not participating, likely ill thought out, not trying to get cheap scum gains. What do you mean about the Early in Day 2? I don't see how that has anything to do with your post.

[quote]Yes, he's appearing to make an effort, but he's not pushing any cases. He'd been making passing remarks on established cases, going with the flow, and avoiding putting himself out there. It's classic scum play.[/quote]

Being on established cases? For the most part, yes. Not pushing them? I've seen a lot of legwork and investigation on his part.
[quote]
As I said, Gazglum hadn't really made a case. He mostly taken other cases and gone with them. I'm not accusing Gazglum of faking emotion, I have no doubt he was genuine in his condolences, however the way it was worded, and how it fit into his posts seemed very forced to me. If you don't agree, that's your prerogative, but that was how I interpreted it. [/quote]

I guess agree to disagree.

[quote]I'm not ruling out other possibilities. What I'm doing is keeping my vote on Gazglum because there's a tendency on RB for a case made early in the day to dissipate for no reason other than time has passed. It's ridiculous. [/quote]

I don't think moving your vote will completely kill a case any more than remaining the only person on that case will.

[quote]I have a different playstyle to most here, that doesn't make me scummy. The case you've created is based on misinterpretations, ignoring context, the occasional blatant falsehood and a flat dismissal of my Gazglum case for no reason other than you don't agree with it.[/quote]

It's not just your playstyle, it's your play this game. I've seen you in other games, and not been particularly caught up in red flags like I've been seeing here. I see your Gazglum case, and I see something that is weak and contrived, and those are the grounds I dismiss it on.

[Gazglum]

It's non-evidence. Why waste such an easily manipulatable lynch on Matt, when you can remove a big fish like Serdoa with no counter?

That's an interesting point, but given the Serdoa votes, does it to mean that you're on board the Zak and Rowain are a scum pair theory? (I won't ask you to self-incriminate to the jury).

[Azza]

It's non-evidence. Why waste such an easily manipulatable lynch on Matt, when you can remove a big fish like Serdoa with no counter?

That's an interesting point, but given the Serdoa votes, does it to mean that you're on board the Zak and Rowain are a scum pair theory? (I won't ask you to self-incriminate to the jury).

I wouldn't expect them to be a scum pair. It'd be an enormously risky move to have a scum pair jump on anyone right on the deadline. It clearly associates the two, it's guaranteed not to catch mafia, and draws unnecessary attention.

My gut says Rowain is scum, but I can't find any good evidence to back up my gut feeling.

[Lewwyn]

Brick what was that? Why are you so useless. You haven't posted any votes. You haven't posted any postions. Did I make a mistake are you still scum?

[Rowain]

My gut says Rowain is scum, but I can't find any good evidence to back up my gut feeling.

And how does that fit with the easy mislynch? And why do think that scum Rowain can move villager zak (that would be the setup in your assumption) to follow him? If anything I would rather say zak as scum makes sense in that scenario.

Following up Brick's question - what was the second hint?

Why am i writing posts if nobody reads them and asks the an already answered question again? Here