WW 46: Wolves Return to Realms Beyond

[Lewwyn]

El Grillo: He's really putting some good thought into his questions and his tone isn't overall totally scummy. If he's not a major then he's a detective at least from the way he interacts.

Man you can't determine a specific role like detective from someone's posts. In fact he's acting as innocent as possible which is the opposite of what a detective with a night power would do. Random villagers should be the ones doing the day hunting. And don't call people out for wolves to target unless you're a wolf.

All I see from El Grillo is questions without much thought about the answers. That's one of the best ways for a wolf to appear active and engaged without actually putting forth something that can be pinned down and used against him.

I looked through his PB threads and he has way more personality there than here. Here its overly formal and blank slate.

I want to believe that you're sincere about your suspicions of me, but that last line stands out, as well as the whole argument about my posting style. I don't know about you, but PB reporting is me adopting an online persona for fun and effect, just as playing forum Mafia is. Does it really concern you that they turn out to be different in tone? For me, part of signing up for this game is specifically getting to wear a different hat in a different setting. I understand that you're trying to encourage everyone to make a read on me for later analysis, but you can do it more thoughtfully than that.

Oh, and if you're going to look through my PB threads, at least leave me a passing comment. I'm feeling terribly lonely in PB54 without a dedlurker to keep me company :P

Sure everybody gets to wear a different hat, I just think your hat is furry here. I'm aware that tone reading is inexact. If I'm wrong, I'm wrong and I'll change my mind. I don't think my actions have been thoughtless at all. Much of what we do on Day 1 only matters after Day 1. In fact I think the first 24 hours so far have been mostly successful.

I cross posted with you, so what do you think of Comm's new post since you are voting for him?

[Meiz]

Also, reading Chev's long participant rundown post, I realized there's special vote tags we can use (I was just making my text bolded and red), so Lewwyn

Bob, could you please give us a little more reasoning about this vote? You were another player I had noted as not having posted much substance so far, and from your other overnight post you sound like you have some experience in this meta. So why vote for Lewwyn like this? He's already been contributing plenty to the discussion, so it's not just a prod, but you gave no reasoning at all, so it also can't be an earnest effort to lynch him. Are you saying that you read him as scummy, and if so why?

That post was only a test for the tags and reinforcement of his Lewwyn vote from here

Indeed, and the reasoning was quite ok. So once more, how seriously did you suspect naufragar originally, Lewwin?

[Serdoa]

Oh Serdoa, you come back and it’s like you’ve forgotten all about me. To recap: I needled Lewwyn and you jumped to his defense:

I think Lewwyn and I have a special bond. I would vote him back but I don't like what that would do currently.

Notice two things: You don’t yet find my question scummy. In fact, you consider it valid and defend Lewwyn from it. Second, you have this weird non-sequitur about how a “normal” Serdoa would react in a vacuum but there’s circumstances preventing it (specifically, you don’t want to put Lewwyn in the lead).

I didn't vote you for your question towards Lewwyn tough. I voted you because you called my self-vote fishy but had not acted on it. You tried to explain that away by first saying you were just parking a vote on a vet (namely pindicator), and later you explained that you didn't want to double up on me.

But the point stays: You found it fishy. And then called Lewwyn out because he voted me but did not mention it. But again did not act on it. I called you out for your behavior, for words that did not match actions.

Honestly, I've re-read our exchange because I thought I might have missed something as I was more dead than alive yesterday. But I haven't missed anything. You just didn't actually post it and my reasoning and instead singled one of my posts (that had nothing to do with my vote) out and make it sound like it is contradicting anything, when it really isn't at all.

Then GKC votes for me for being defensive while Rowain comes at me for a more substantive reason. This is when you go in on me. I give an explanation here. You don’t like it, so you keep at me, ending with:

I get the feeling that you know very well who is a wolf and who not. It's hard to argue with someone when you know your arguments and explanations are lies, isn't it?

The second sentence, the ad hominem calling me an inept liar is whatever. The first sentence was bothering me for a long time and I couldn’t put my finger on it. You think I’m a liar, fine. You think I’m a wolf, ok. Why in the world do you make the jump from attacking me for my arguments to me getting tripped up on insider scum knowledge. I can’t find the reason for this leap; I think you’re projecting.

And here you again ignore everything I posted as the actual reason for my vote. Instead you complain that I insulted you as liar - in a game that is about finding out who is lying! Really? That's your defense? Serdoa is a baddie because he accuses me of the very thing that is at the core of this game? Or is is only the inept part? That's not really an insult though... would you rather be a good liar?

But lets look at the other part of that "argument". You again take what I wrote and simply misinterpret it to the point of it being not remotely what I said. I never wrote you "tripped up on insider knowledge". What I wrote is that as a wolf, it is much harder to accuse people you know are innocent. And I think that you showed that behavior.

Also I never attacked you for your arguments, you didn't have any to begin with.

In between this exchange, you get challenged on your earlier statement “I would vote [Lewwyn] back but I don't like what that would do currently.” (#33). You respond to that challenge with contrived gobbledygook: “And I did not want the ranking changed at that time as I did not see that as beneficial. There was nothing giving me a reason to believe I can gauge more from the reactions towards Lewwyn leading than to myself leading.” (#49) For starters, your generally straightforward speech turns knotty. More importantly, you change your position: you had said “I don’t like what that would do.” As in, you actively dislike putting Lewwyn in the lead. What is your reason for this active feeling? “There was nothing giving me a reason to believe…” Suddenly it’s passive. Suddenly, all things are equal, so you might as well keep the vote tied. You thought you needed a defense from my challenge in post 33 but it was hasty and weak and it changed by post 49.

I really don't even get that argument. You again come up with things that are not there and try to sell them as facts. I'm not a native English speaker. I don't like what it would do, namely putting someone in the lead which I don't feel like I can gauge anything from him being there. See how awkward this sentence is? How do you write that "active"? Honestly, it is hard to translate from my language and some things will sound dumb. I'd rather we get that over with now, similar to "you called me a liar, how dare you"-exchanges and "he did not react fast enough" (yes, because men needs sleep and some even work...).  

I responded and went to bed, eager to hear your reply to my own defense. I come back and you’re attacking Superdeath with not a word about me. Why not even a mention? I suspect it’s because you sensed that the bus on me was slowing down. But never mind, it’s easy to find another newbie to lynch, and newbie mislynch votes are easy to explain away.

What was there to reply? You replied to something I didn't write, similar to what you do here. And then let me know that you still don't vote for me, like you are requesting a non-aggression-pact. I was staying on you, but gave the arguments that you are a floundering newbie some thought. And then superdeath happened and that was good enough reason to go there for now. Nothing what you posted cleared you in my books though.

Superdeath’s actions have been anti-town. The persona fits with the SD I know from Civ, but yes, his comments haven’t helped town.

Here’s your attack:

Are you effing me? What is that exchange?

1. superdeath votes me, no reason given
2. Rowain questions it, no explanation given, votes Rowain
3. Lewwyn chimes in with disgust, no vote tough
4. Commodore chimes in, with a joke, no vote again
5. superdeath still doesn't explain anything and reroutes his vote AGAIN, and again with no explanation

And none of you put at least a bit of pressure on him?

superdeath
I would like to get an explanation. Why did you vote me? Why did you vote Rowain? Why did you vote GKC?
And I would like to know from Lew and Commodore why they don't pressure him at all, but try to give him an easy out?

I actually have no problem with your argument here. Just note two things: it’s time to knife a newbie, but we also need to throw suspicion on some veteran bystanders.

And again: You even agree with my vote, but then try to make it appear as if I did something wrong for voting a newbie (even though you say yourself it is warranted) and not getting tunnel-vision but trying to see what else happened.

You know, we most definitely have more than 1 wolf so of course I will also consider what others did. Especially as I believe my observations are pretty spot on and helpful, maybe not today but later on.

But there’s a third knife-able newbie who hasn’t even drawn a glance from you. GKC’s been very suspicious, but when it comes time to talk about him, the actual newbie doesn’t get knifed, instead you go in on the vets.

I found that whole post of your [i.e. Pindicator] scummy to be honest, but this part is what gets me. You lay out in the first part very well why his behaviour reeks of wolfness (not being interested why he is being targeted, because he himself knows that they are right), but then you turn around and basically state "oh, you really sounded like a wolf, but you are new"... But I miss the explanation how newness has anything to do with being uninterested in why others target you?

Similarly, responding to Gaspar:

<snip>

Much text that does not say much though. We have gone over this arguments in the old games already so often and why giving players a pass just because they are (or pretend to be) new, isn't really doing much for town. Pressuring players, no matter how long they play, helps, at least to understand how they play, how they react. Especially later on that is important.

You’re looking for a newbie to lynch and are happy to ride the bus on me or Superdeath (ride, not drive both times). But GKC gets the kid gloves.

So, it is bad that I call out the vets, but it is also bad that I call out the newbies? But it is also bad that I don't call out the newbies? Can't win with that one.

What I see is just the same thing, repeated and repeated and repeated: You are not analyzing anything I actually did or wrote, you are adding, twisting and interpreting freely.

I don't like superdeaths play and still want an explanation, but right now if I had to decide whom to lynch today:

naufragar

[Lewwyn]

Also, reading Chev's long participant rundown post, I realized there's special vote tags we can use (I was just making my text bolded and red), so Lewwyn

Bob, could you please give us a little more reasoning about this vote? You were another player I had noted as not having posted much substance so far, and from your other overnight post you sound like you have some experience in this meta. So why vote for Lewwyn like this? He's already been contributing plenty to the discussion, so it's not just a prod, but you gave no reasoning at all, so it also can't be an earnest effort to lynch him. Are you saying that you read him as scummy, and if so why?

That post was only a test for the tags and reinforcement of his Lewwyn vote from here

Indeed, and the reasoning was quite ok. So once more, how seriously did you suspect naufragar originally, Lewwin?

Pretty sure I answered this, but his defensiveness triggered my suspicions, and his newbishness gave benefit of the doubt. So as I said earlier I used the opportunity. So how seriously did I suspect him originally? I mean... ha I don't really know how to say it. When I read his post it screamed wolf to me and then I almost voted for him right there, but I used my brain, made a comment first and went to see what information could be gleaned rather than simply voting for him.

It was such an early faux pas I didn't want to get caught up in sitting on him all day, would have been truly unproductive.

Would I still vote to lynch him at the end of the day? Possibly, depends on how things unfold here. Currently I would not be opposed to voting for:
El Grillo
superdeath
Adrien
CMF
nauf
Gaspar
Comm
Cyneheard

Of course this list is in flux and some of these are conditional on more and better activity. For example I am voting for Superdeath and if he doesn't come back with a little more substance and nuance then I would keep my vote on him. If people suddenly turned on El Grillo, that would be interesting. If Adrien doesn't come back with a bit more I'd be willign to vote for him. If CMF doesn't correct his statements and give me some feedback on my questions I will definitely switch to him. Gaspar I'd prefer to wait on for at least a day, but I'm really on the fence tbh. Same with Comm. Cyneheard gives me the impression of floating a bit so far.

[Rowain]

@El Grillo
Why are you not voting for Lewwyn despite your dispute? Do you see him as town?

[El Grillo]

Commodore, your latest post comes across poorly for me. Long posts with mostly quotes and little new material aren't worth much unless the points being synthesized are conclusive.

Summarizing, you claim that:
1. Lewwyn and Gaspar's interactions are suspicious
2. superdeath isn't worth a lynch today
3. scooter's vote on you is weak

My responses to those points:
1. I can't speak to all the player-meta comments, but I also haven't been liking some of Gaspar's posts. Listing 7 players as scummy with reasoning for only a few of them is very unhelpful. I'd like for him to narrow that down substantially today. Half that would be more realistic for a 17-player game.
2. I disagree, if superdeath continues to try and hide behind his personal brand of style instead of posting more constructively, then everyone else can just throw up their hands and call him null, neither of which is helping town. Commodore, if you think that superdeath would be an easy mislynch at any time, isn't that the kind of player scum wants in endgame? As for waiting to see his play evolve, how about in the next 24 hours?
3. That's a pretty soft deflection considering at that point you hadn't contributed much, aside from the more blatant act that is ignoring my post and vote on you entirely. That level of deflection rises to scummy behavior in my perspective.

I'm keeping my vote on you.

[Lewwyn]

Commodore, your latest post comes across poorly for me. Long posts with mostly quotes and little new material aren't worth much unless the points being synthesized are conclusive.

Summarizing, you claim that:
1. Lewwyn and Gaspar's interactions are suspicious
2. superdeath isn't worth a lynch today
3. scooter's vote on you is weak

My responses to those points:
1. I can't speak to all the player-meta comments, but I also haven't been liking some of Gaspar's posts. Listing 7 players as scummy with reasoning for only a few of them is very unhelpful. I'd like for him to narrow that down substantially today. Half that would be more realistic for a 17-player game.
2. I disagree, if superdeath continues to try and hide behind his personal brand of style instead of posting more constructively, then everyone else can just throw up their hands and call him null, neither of which is helping town. Commodore, if you think that superdeath would be an easy mislynch at any time, isn't that the kind of player scum wants in endgame? As for waiting to see his play evolve, how about in the next 24 hours?
3. That's a pretty soft deflection considering at that point you hadn't contributed much, aside from the more blatant act that is ignoring my post and vote on you entirely. That level of deflection rises to scummy behavior in my perspective.

I'm keeping my vote on you.

Oh man, I like this post... It fits with a lot of my thoughts and feelings about Comm's post.

[El Grillo]

Rowain, why would I vote for Lewwyn? Just because I disagree with him on my own innocence? I like his activity level and there are enough other players who seem content to sit on the sidelines for Day 1 without much engagement. I want to hear more from them and will vote accordingly.

[Lewwyn]

Commodore, your latest post comes across poorly for me. Long posts with mostly quotes and little new material aren't worth much unless the points being synthesized are conclusive.

Summarizing, you claim that:
1. Lewwyn and Gaspar's interactions are suspicious
2. superdeath isn't worth a lynch today
3. scooter's vote on you is weak

My responses to those points:
1. I can't speak to all the player-meta comments, but I also haven't been liking some of Gaspar's posts. Listing 7 players as scummy with reasoning for only a few of them is very unhelpful. I'd like for him to narrow that down substantially today. Half that would be more realistic for a 17-player game.
2. I disagree, if superdeath continues to try and hide behind his personal brand of style instead of posting more constructively, then everyone else can just throw up their hands and call him null, neither of which is helping town. Commodore, if you think that superdeath would be an easy mislynch at any time, isn't that the kind of player scum wants in endgame? As for waiting to see his play evolve, how about in the next 24 hours?
3. That's a pretty soft deflection considering at that point you hadn't contributed much, aside from the more blatant act that is ignoring my post and vote on you entirely. That level of deflection rises to scummy behavior in my perspective.

I'm keeping my vote on you.

Oh man, I like this post... It fits with a lot of my thoughts and feelings about Comm's post.

[Meiz]

Yeah I agree, and El Grillo's play has evolved from waking up people to actual supicions. As for Commodore, the theory for two wolves throwing shade on each other while not committing is plausable, however I feel like both Gaspar and Lewwyn know each other very well, and both have had better targets than each other, so it's a bit thin line to draw.