Newbie 1388 Nexlexia Game Over

[Pebro]

[quote="In post 862@Pebro, Beyond lurking, what is the case for Channel being scum? I'm open to revisiting Dr. Pepper/NS as scum but I'd like to be shown that one of Dr. Pepper/NS is town or that Channel is unmistakably scum.

A minor thing is that CDB seemed okay with sitting on the fence and deciding between you/pepper, but mostly the lack of interaction for almost a full gameday. Is there a post that summarizes your thoughts about NS that I missed? It seems it's just pushing for a quick lynch on yes and by association with Pepper.

[Titus]

@Pebro, I'm going to make a post that summarizes my feelings on NS.

[Titus]

Suspicious Behaviors by NS

1) On post 66, says he won't call a scum team. On post #252 calls Bob/Channel the scum team. Post #310, he's back on the Yessiree train despite Yessiree not being apart of the alleged scum team he's called because he's "convinced" yessiree is scum. He hasn't backed off of Bob/Channel being scum at all. In fact, he ceases mentioning them all together after post #252.

2) Pushes the Yessiree lynch to the point of absurdity. Post #74, he explicitly asks for a yessiree lynch ("Can we please lynch yessiree?"). Later, NS votes me because Yessiree's lynch is going nowhere supposedly despite being at L-1 with a hammerer confirmed. His emphasis on the vote is because "unmaintained wagons fall apart". My question is though, why didn't he push is confirmed scum team of Bob/Channel this hard?

3) Post 121 -

I honestly can't recall why I suspected Rika. It's probably something I thought I saw in post 96. But let's do this and see if he slips again:

He voted Rika

gene, I was basically telling you that scumslips do indeed exist, and if you believe they don't, you're as deluded as if you also believed in magical fictional characters.


Also, yessiree, I've been scumhunting. At least I don't quote statistics.

This is an overly hostile post that he admits he's fosing people but he cannot remember the reason later.

4) Post 818 is hypocritical to say the least. NS says I have not enough interaction with Channel. Since the yessiree lynch, NS has mentioned Bacde, Pebro and JKM a whopping 0 times in his posts. He did however, vote Channel during the day post 684. He asks for everyone's read on Channel (but never posts his own). He stops any mention of Channel after this point. Instead, his focus turns exclusively to myself and Bob.

5) Post 826, advocates lynching Bob "just because".

The context of these posts is clear to me. NS intended to get Channel lynched (probably would spin it as a "policy lynch" gah I hate those), but when the town didn't focus on him, NS changed over to myself and Bob. NS basically tries to push whoever he thinks will get lynched and drops the name of those who suspect him as scummy without evidence.

[Nobody Special]

While I understand your reason for asking the question, I don't really like the question itself. It makes me feel like I'm picking scumteams, which I really try not to do (my earlier pronouncement of CDB + Bob notwithstanding).

At this point, if I was forced to lynch one player, it would be Titus. Reason: Not enough interaction with CDB; and Titus being scummier than Bob.

Okay, looking back at this now, I see my intention was extremely muddled. If I may rephrase: My reason for wanting to lynch Titus is that

there has not been enough game interaction from CDB.

I never intended to mean that Titus and CDB had not interacted together enough. Sorry......

And in fact, I corrected myself here:

I meant that CDB has very little interaction with the game

in toto.

I didn't mean any particular interaction at all.

[Titus]

Umm that just muddled it more. So your reason for wanting to lynch me is because Channel never spoke enough?

[Nobody Special]

If he had interacted more, and had proven his scumminess, I'd've lynched him. Since he's lurking and null, I chose you.

[Titus]

If he had interacted more, and had proven his scumminess, I'd've lynched him. Since he's lurking and null, I chose you.

This post pretty much proves my point that NS doesn't really have arguments/confidence as to who is scum but is rather whimiscal about who he lynches. Generally, voting should be reserved for who we think the scum is, not gee there's no one better available.

[JKMatthews]

Ok, so seeing as there have been a lot of different people being the focus of a pseudo-wagon and one point or another today, you'd think that at least one of them would get to L-1 by now. With deadline approaching, and suspicion being all over the place, I think CDB is a good lynch. Yet another player that we can't afford to have alive during LyLo, and probably scum.
UNVOTE:
VOTE: CDB

I'd be happy with a NS lynch too...

[Titus]

Why is CDB a good lynch? I don't think we should lynch someone just because there's a deadline approaching and they are a lurker. What suggests CDB is scummy beyond his lurkiness?

[JKMatthews]

The things I said at the start of my post? Nobody has really gotten near L-1, which implies some scum aren't around to try to support bad wagons...

[Titus]

Ahh, well that makes sense but then again, that argument is just Channel being scummy because he's lurky. I'm not going to stand in the way of a Channel lynch but I was meaning something more in the way of behavioral/linguistic analysis showing Channel is scum.

[JKMatthews]

How can you say "that makes sense" then say I'm saying "lurking = scum". It's not at all what I said.

[Titus]

I'm understanding your argument that scum might not be around, and that's why no one is being voted up. However, that's just a rephrase of Channel is lurking and lurker scum are the reason no one is being voted up. I'm saying that I want something more than lurking.

[Nobody Special]

I want a pony.

[JKMatthews]

Pretty much what NS said. Unfortunately we can't afford to have CDB around tomorrow, and have to face up to the fact the there is scum lurking somewhere in this game...

[Titus]

I really don't like this, but if that is the normal play for this site, I will do this.

VOTE: ChannelDelibird

Channel is at L-1. Announce intent to hammer if you intend to hammer. Also, if there's any further investigation to be had, please post your questions or updated reads.

[JKMatthews]

UNVOTE:
VOTE: Titus

Not "I agree with your logic", but "I don't like this but I'll do it because of the site"... This is the ultimate not taking any responsibility for the vote.
And the last sentence is just trying to appear town...

[Titus]

Hey look, if the site really says that lynching is better than no lynching, that's what I'd do. I know I'm responsible for not insisting on more evidence. I don't agree with your logic and if I suddenly did that would be scummy. I'm stuck between a rock in a hard place. If I don't vote Channel, then I'm causing a no lynch which is scummy. You've also just proven what happens when I vote Channel.

What is the proper thing to do when you don't agree on a lynch but the alternative is a no lynch?

[JKMatthews]

I disagree with your interpretation of the situation you're in... if you're town, you should do what you think will help town win, not what you've decided the website says you should do...

[Titus]

Well the thing is, I'm not sure what helps the town. I know I'm not some all-knowing God. There's a chance I could be wrong on NS/Dr. Pepper as scum. I just want someone, anyone to give me a reason that Channel is scum or Dr. Pepper/NS is town beyond activity levels. I'm not going to derail a lynch unless I'm 100% certain I am right, but I'm not certain of that. This is the first time that this has happened to me while playing mafia.

[JKMatthews]

I've explained something other than activity levels. The correlation between no solid wagons and lack of activity is what I'm talking about. If there had been a wagon with a forced claim or something, I wouldn't be saying "CDB is lurking therefore probably scum". I'm analysing the circumstance...

[Titus]

That "analysis of the circumstance" could easily apply to any lurker. Something specific to Channel would make me feel a lot better about this.

[JKMatthews]

It could only apply to any lurker in a situation like the one we're in - what aren't you getting here? Everyone else has posted to at least the point where they could vote to cause a wagon, CDB hasn't...

[Titus]

Your analysis could apply to Bacde, Channel and NS. None of them have contributed significant analysis in the past few days. I expect Bacde to post more analysis due to his own posted conflict about something not adding up (but then again, he reads town but with a sudden absence). Channel posted and could have caused a wagon on Dr. Pepper but y'all were against voting Dr. Pepper. The votes have just split evenly due to the fact we've failed to organize. Channel just happens to post the most promises of analysis and also fails to follow through on his promises. Pretty much lurking.

[JKMatthews]

The amount of analysis posted has nothing to do with it. NS has been around and

could have

posted analysis and tried to start a wagon. I'm not saying I don't necessarily think NS is scum, I'm saying my point against CDB doesn't really apply to him.
Bacde on the other hand is probably a good point... so I'm happy to lynch Bacde too!