Newbie 1953 | Zooborns IV | Game Over

[NorwegianboyEE]

Based on my lynch. Here is my last chance to post my reads. Updated to reflect recent events.

(Towniest)

Dyrenz
Farren
Leucosticte
Jamelia
Micc
skitter30
Chemist1422
Mr Oobsy

(Scummiest)

[NorwegianboyEE]

Predicted nightkill= Dyrenz.

[Leucosticte]

Predicted nightkill= Dyrenz.

I don't get what the point would be of killing Dyrenz.

[Farren]

Predicted nightkill= Dyrenz.

I don't get what the point would be of killing Dyrenz.

This discussion favors scum more than town right now.

[Plotinus]

official vote count 1.18

siberian musk deer

---

Lynching

With 9 votes in play, it takes 5 to lynch.

NorwegianboyEE

(5): Chemist1422, skitter30, Farren, Micc, Mr Oobsy

<-- LYNCH

Chemist1422

(2): Jamelia, NorwegianboyEE

Farren

(1): Leucosticte

Jamelia

(1): Dyrenz

Not Voting

(0):

None.

Deadline:

(expired on 2019-09-04 23:00:00).

Mod notes:

A lynch![/area]

[Plotinus]

Day 1 Lynch - NorwegianboyEE

---

NorwegianboyEE has been lynched day 1. He was a

vanilla townie.

It is now Night 1. Deadline for night actions is (expired on 2019-09-04 08:00:00). Jamelia and Chemist1422 haven't posted in the last 24 hours. Per Rule 12, they must contact me during the night so that I know they are still playing, otherwise they will be replaced and Day 2 will be delayed.

[/area]

[Plotinus]

At least one player would like to accelerate the night phase^{Rule 19}. If every living player PMs me and says yes they want this, we can start the day early. If I don't hear from everybody or if anybody says no then the day will start at the usual time / when all slot are filled.

[Plotinus]

Night 1 Kill - Dyrenz

---

Dyrenz has been killed night 1. He was a

town friendly neighbor.

It is now Day 2!

[/area]

[Plotinus]

official vote count 2.00

arctic wolf pup

---

Lynching

With 7 votes in play, it takes 4 to lynch.

Not Voting

(0): Chemist1422, Farren, Jamelia, Leucosticte, Micc, Mr Oobsy, skitter30,

Deadline:

(expired on 2019-09-11 08:15:00).

Mod notes:

[/area]

[Farren]

Mr Oobsy. Please explain your hammer on Norwegianboy.

[Farren]

Leucosticte: still waiting for a response to post 437.

[Leucosticte]

Leucosticte: still waiting for a response to post 437.

I was just like, "Let me just prove that I'm not scum arbitrarily voting for this other guy instead of you, because voting is more powerful than words; if I give some explanation, that could just be BS, but voting proves my sincerity"

Also, I was just getting exhausted from all the debate and feeling too lazy to go back through what was said and figure out who was more likely to be scum, especially since my vote probably wasn't going to matter anyway; maybe I'll be less lazy today.

[Micc]

VOTE: Mr Oobsy
For hammering that wagon.

[skitter30]

Mr oobsey needs to explain his hammer

Also, micc i think ur scummy

[Leucosticte]

VOTE: Mr Oobsy
For hammering that wagon.

Is it bad for someone to be decisive and say, "Let's get this show on the road; we've debated long enough and there are already four votes for this guy, and I think he's guilty too, so let's do this"? (Of course it looks bad if afterward they turn out to be innocent)

In other words, when is it okay to hammer a wagon?

[Farren]

I was just like, "Let me just prove that I'm not scum arbitrarily voting for this other guy instead of you, because voting is more powerful than words; if I give some explanation, that could just be BS, but voting proves my sincerity"

Also, I was just getting exhausted from all the debate and feeling too lazy to go back through what was said and figure out who was more likely to be scum, especially since my vote probably wasn't going to matter anyway; maybe I'll be less lazy today.

How would switching your vote demonstrate that your vote wasn't arbitrary? If anything, it indicates the opposite.

Your vote was post 426. Plotinus's VC: post 425 shows the tally being 2-2*-1-1-1-1 just before your vote for Micc, with you as the only non-voter and being one of the two people with two votes. With the tally in this state, why would you believe that your vote wouldn't end up mattering?

[Micc]

Also, micc i think ur scummy

Then say why and put down a vote. Just stating it like this is meaningless.

In other words, when is it okay to hammer a wagon?

When the person who is being wagoned has claimed their role, and everyone who’s on the wagon already has a chance to react to that claim by unvoting or not.

[Farren]

Also, micc i think ur scummy

Then say why and put down a vote. Just stating it like this is meaningless.

In other words, when is it okay to hammer a wagon?

When the person who is being wagoned has claimed their role, and everyone who’s on the wagon already has a chance to react to that claim by unvoting or not.

Or alternately:
- the person who is being wagoned has been given enough time since they hit L-1 to indicate that they don't plan to claim or address the accusations against them. That didn't happen in this case; Norwegianboy was at L-1 for seventeen minutes. I don't think seventeen hours would be sufficient to meet that standard, much less seventeen minutes.
- the hammerer is scum, and deploying the hammer wins scum the game. Mr Oobsy may be scum, but that was definitely not a game-winning hammer.
- deadline is close enough to expiring that not hammering invokes No Lynch. Also not the case here by a long shot.

[Jamelia]

I absolutely agree that voting for Norwegian without any explanation and hammering the vote was scummy.

Farren putting their vote on Norwegian waiting for them to explain their posts makes sense. But I don't quite understand Micc letting it go to L-1 10 minutes after, and then Oobsy hammering almost instantaneously.

Oobsy NEVER expressed any intentions of even saying Norwegian was scummy either.

[Chemist1422]

L-1

.

No more votes for Norwegian without a declaration of intent and a chance for Norwegianboy to respond.

VOTE: NorwegianboyEE

ok

[skitter30]

VOTE: Mr Oobsy
For hammering that wagon.

Is it bad for someone to be decisive and say, "Let's get this show on the road; we've debated long enough and there are already four votes for this guy, and I think he's guilty too, so let's do this"? (Of course it looks bad if afterward they turn out to be innocent)

In other words, when is it okay to hammer a wagon?

this doesn't accurately describe how the hammer went down
you're partner-y with mr oobsey imo

also i only townread one person rn so this is ... great

[skitter30]

Then say why and put down a vote. Just stating it like this is meaningless.

i dislike ur progression on norwegian, i'm contemplating putting down a vote, and i disagree that stating it like this is meaningless

[Farren]

L-1

.

No more votes for Norwegian without a declaration of intent and a chance for Norwegianboy to respond.

VOTE: NorwegianboyEE

ok

ok, what? I'm confused. What are you trying to say here?

[Chemist1422]

L-1

.

No more votes for Norwegian without a declaration of intent and a chance for Norwegianboy to respond.

VOTE: NorwegianboyEE

ok

ok, what? I'm confused. What are you trying to say here?

ok as in "this is stupid to the point where I can't comprehend its stupidity"

that sounds really insulting whoops

[Farren]

this doesn't accurately describe how the hammer went down
you're partner-y with mr oobsey imo

I agree that it doesn't describe how the hammer went down. Leucosticte didn't directly portray it that way directly, though - it was couched as more of a hypothetical ("someone", not "Mr Oobsy").

Normally I'd think that coaching it as a hypothetical is a bit scummy. In the Newbie queue, though, I'd be more inclined to think null / NAI.

Partner-y, I'm deferring judgement until either Mr Oobsy makes an appearance or the prod timer gets triggered.