Open 437: Town of Semi-Nightless Plots (Game Over)

[seilkops]

I don't remember typing nothing, what the hell.

[greygnarl]

For the reaction, like I said. Sisterman's post looked like it was made to get reactions, so I wanted to see what I could get from it.

So you're placing a reaction test on a reaction test? I find that to be a strange reaction, though I guess this game is made of that type of thing, though if your reaction test is being questioned and it needs to come out as having been a reaction test, then it's not a very good reaction test is it?

UNVOTE: sisterman

I'm a little scared to respond to that, since I can barely read it. I could be answering to anything.
But, I'll go ahead and take a shot at it.
I was hoping Greygnarl would give me the reasons for why he thought Sister's post wasn't scummy,

but he never answered.

Instead, Sister jumped on, then Tech, and a wagon developed on me.

I respond to you here.

@Seilkops, I could see where people might think Sisterman was being scummy because he was being kind of ridiculous but I don't think it looks scummy because I don't normally read scum on people who make a big deal out of themselves.

You need to go back and look at what you posted, because you are constantly contradicting yourself.

It came out jumbled but what I was trying to say was what PG said.

Sisterman: Likely town. I don't see scum drawing that kind of attention early on or trying to rush us out of RVS on the first post.

In Post 17 he says he's RVSing.
In Post 31 he says he was fishing for a reaction.

In Post 21 he says I'm his #1 scum suspect
In Post 33 he says he was once again fishing for a reaction.

I will not buy fishing for a reaction as an excuse if you say that's what you were doing every time someone calls you out on a bad post.

Dude. What's the point of reaction fishing if I tell you that I'm reaction fishing. And yeah, you are still my top suspect. The reason for this, like I said earlier, is because of your covering yourself on Sistermans post. I don't like that type of covering of ones self, as I do the same thing whenever I play scum.
Post 31 and 33 are about the same things! I don't know if we're not understanding each other,

but I've only reaction fished once.

Let's get this clear now.

When I "RVSED' Sisterman, that was reaction fishing. People keep asking me about the same post, so that's why I have the same answer. It was reaction fishing. Just to make it a little clearer.
It was reaction fishing
It was reaction fishing
It was reaction fishing

First off, I know why you wouldn't say you are reaction fishing but the point is I don't think you were reaction fishing, only using that as an excuse.

Now for the bolded. If this post is to be believed than you only reaction fished once. If you go back and look at Post 31 you say you were reaction fishing Sisterman and in Post 33 you say you are reaction fishing me. Contradicting yet again.

Pedit:I was saying that I could've understood your vote if you had said Sisterman looked scummy but instead you said you were RVSing. Even though I don't think that post was scummy I could see where someone might think it was.

[greygnarl]

I don't remember typing nothing, what the hell.

That happens if you start to type a reply and then go back and get a quote.

[Equinox]

Vote Count 1.02

seilkops (4) - greygnarl, Sisterman, TeChNoWC, ProsecutorGodot
greygnarl (1) - seilkops
Sisterman (1) - funkybike1

Not Voting (5) - andrew94, Hiraki, Mr.K, Voidedmafia, Cheery Dog

With 11 alive, it's 6 to lynch.

The deadline is Wednesday, August 29, 2012, at 10:00 AM EDT (UTC-4).

Mod Notes

Hiraki is V/LA until August 20.

[seilkops]

I respond to you here.

In post 40, greygnarl wrote:
@Seilkops, I could see where people might think Sisterman was being scummy because he was being kind of ridiculous but I don't think it looks scummy because I don't normally read scum on people who make a big deal out of themselves.

You need to go back and look at what you posted, because you are constantly contradicting yourself.

I honestly missed that, but in any case, I was more interested in what you had to say

before

Sister and Techno jumped in. That's not your fault since you probably logged of, but not a whole lot you can do about it.

Yeah, I agree with your reasoning on why Sistermans post wasn't scummy, but I still think

you're

scum. It's part my reaction to your covering, and part dislike on how unclear we are with each other.

Now for the bolded. If this post is to be believed than you only reaction fished once. If you go back and look at Post 31 you say you were reaction fishing Sisterman and in Post 33 you say you are reaction fishing me. Contradicting yet again.

No. I voted Sisterman for reactions, and got one when you replied. I then continued my interactions with you, in order to get a better read on you. That's just one reaction fish.

[seilkops]

Have to go, but will be on later tonight gaiz and galz.

[greygnarl]

I respond to you here.

In post 40, greygnarl wrote:
@Seilkops, I could see where people might think Sisterman was being scummy because he was being kind of ridiculous but I don't think it looks scummy because I don't normally read scum on people who make a big deal out of themselves.

You need to go back and look at what you posted, because you are constantly contradicting yourself.

I honestly missed that, but in any case, I was more interested in what you had to say

before

Sister and Techno jumped in. That's not your fault since you probably logged of, but not a whole lot you can do about it.

Yeah, I agree with your reasoning on why Sistermans post wasn't scummy, but I still think

you're

scum. It's part my reaction to your covering, and part dislike on how unclear we are with each other.

Now for the bolded. If this post is to be believed than you only reaction fished once. If you go back and look at Post 31 you say you were reaction fishing Sisterman and in Post 33 you say you are reaction fishing me. Contradicting yet again.

No. I voted Sisterman for reactions, and got one when you replied. I then continued my interactions with you, in order to get a better read on you. That's just one reaction fish.

You're starting to make more sense now, I thought you meant you were trying to get a reaction out of Sisterman.

Not sure about you being scum now, you're starting to seem too smart than to try to form an obvquicklynchwagon as scum. It still seems like you kind of freaked out when people started voting for you though because none of your posts made much sense.

[greygnarl]

BTW my vote is staying where it is. He has not cleared himself but rather started climbing out of the hole he is in.

[ProsecutorGodot]

In bold you say I might be distancing but when Tech did the same thing you call it a good play.

It's in the how and why. Tech went for Seil based on his reaction to Sisterman's opening (which looked like a chainsaw defense) and you went for Seil for his "RVS" vote and inconsistencies in his reasons. Being inconsistent doesn't necessarily lead us to scum, but the chainsaw defense is certainly fishy. That's why Tech's town read seems stronger to me.

[greygnarl]

Understandable. Do you agree with my stance that seil is starting to look more town?

[seilkops]

God that last paragraph makes no sense.
In English:
-I agree that Seil might be making town mistakes
-I still think he's scum
-If he doesn't stop stumbling around he will be useless in Lylo so I won't be too disappointed if he turns up as town.

Pedit:I was talking to Seil.

Remember that this is Semi-Nightless, if you are what I think you are (scum), you can't night kill for the first 2 days. You think I'm scum, so what I'm about to say doesn't apply to you.
@Everyone
Wasting a lynch on a VI is a terrible idea right now. You're basically throwing away a day, and getting scum closer to where they can start NK'ing people. We should all make sure to vote on someone who we think is scum, rather than a townie we don't like, these first two days, since this is when we have the advantage.

[seilkops]

Not a whole lot else to say. Me and Grey are the only things going on right now, and not a whole lot of people are posting.
PG's reads look mostly solid, with what little content he has to back them up.

I wanna say Voided is town, since he could have easily put me at L-1 and let someone else finish me off. However, I know scum usually try's to stay away from being the L-1, or final vote since that draws attention.
Ahhhh
So for now, two new reads

PG: Nullish/slight town read, he's done nothing to attract attention or done anything else that's raised flags for me.
VD: Lean town

[Sisterman]

I have a better question: Why are you both answering for grey (the fact that the question specifically asks why

sisterman's

(aka your) post isn't scummy indicates this question at the very least excludes you from answering) and (for lack of a better way to put it) already giving him a sort of template to answer with?

Because I really didn't care what grey's answer was. The question "Why is Sisterman's post not scummy" does not have any answer or reaction that can be used to find scum, because the reasons as to why my post was not scummy are plainly obvious to anyone possessing Human Eyes. I was far more interested in why such a question would be asked in the first place, because that question DOES imply that my post was scummy, which is weird, for a vote that was supposed to be random.

Also, I've seen some reasoning for me being town because I'm aggressive being thrown around: Please stop that, people who are not scum. This is my first game here, but I'm aggressive in every game, and it's really lazy reasoning that could be the doom of town if applied elsewhere.

[seilkops]

Because I really didn't care what grey's answer was.

Good thing I don't care that you don't care.

the reasons as to why my post was not scummy are plainly obvious to anyone possessing Human Eyes

If they're so obvious, why does Grey feel the need to state that it could be seen as scummy? And if they're so obvious, then it's really not a big deal to let Grey state them.

I was far more interested in why such a question would be asked in the first place, because that question DOES imply that my post was scummy, which is weird, for a vote that was supposed to be random.

So I could get a better read on Grey.

[Cheery Dog]

Wasting a lynch on a VI is a terrible idea right now. You're basically throwing away a day, and getting scum closer to where they can start NK'ing people. We should all make sure to vote on someone who we think is scum, rather than a townie we don't like, these first two days, since this is when we have the advantage.

So you would rather us lynch a VI when they actually have a chance of killing people? Having a VI around then is just going to make it easier for scum since they will take away the suspicion away from who we need to actually be suspicious of, though in this case I do believe it is you that is scum.

VOTE: Seilkops
None of your reasoning thus far has been any good

Also you have done multiple reaction fishing, you've even admitted them

so I just played off that by voting him,

and seeing what would happen

. Sister is town, and I think grey is scum, is what I got from that.

This is your 'RVS' vote being used for reactions. You may have worded it differently, but that's still a reaction test claim. (unless I've read it wrong, but using 'him' there made me thing you were talking about sisterman since you had that post quoted (and #47 tells me that I was in fact reading it correctly))

I was hoping Greygnarl would give me the reasons for why he thought Sister's post wasn't scummy, but he never answered. Instead, Sister jumped on, then Tech, and a wagon developed on me.

Greygnarl hadn't even posted in game when you made your 'RVS' vote, so therefore you had a target already preset in your mind when you made your post since you've only "reaction fished once".
So either that means you're bussing grey and therefore could have already had a target in mind or you have in fact reaction tested multiple times.

[seilkops]

L-1 on me. I'm tired, and just got back from a buddies.

In case someone votes me I'll go ahead and save the suspense.
I was: VT
Ta-da.

Not going to read or respond to Cheery's post till' the morning since it'll most likely just be me re-explaining myself again. If someone votes me, no big loss on the no response to Cheery.

This looks nice and juicy, so I'll answer it

So you would rather us lynch a VI when they actually have a chance of killing people? Having a VI around then is just going to make it easier for scum since they will take away the suspicion away from who we need to actually be suspicious of, though in this case I do believe it is you that is scum.

Right. So if you thought someone was town, go ahead and waste a lynch on them instead of trying to find scum who still cannot NK. Solid, I'll keep that in mind.


Anyways, some final reads.
greygnarl: My personal biggest scum read right now.
Cheery: Slight lean scum. The constant lack of understanding from GG, and now him, make me really wanna say that they are scum. I think they know what I really meant, and are just looking for reasons to undermine that. Nothing else really from him. Going on instinct with this one.
Techno:Null
PG: Leaning town
VD: Leaning town
Sister: Town
Sister: Town
Everyone else: ???

If I wake up dead, it was a good game guys. I really want you guys to continue to look at gg, I think the guys scum. Unless something else major happens, I don't see anybody else that's as scummy.

Good luck.

[Mr.K]

I just woke up so I'm not even trying to write a proper post yet. Should have time to reread and post later today. But yeah, I don't think seilkops should be in l-1 yet.

[Voidedmafia]

When Grey says "it could be seen as scummy, but I don't think it is", I just see it as a way to cover himself. Like if a wagon developed on Sister, he could easily just refer to that post, and hop on the Sister wagon.

Well, yeah, that's what I was saying I agreed with.

On my post on 17, yeah I was trying to be a little clever, failed miserably I have to add, with my post. To be clear, post 17 was my reaction fishing post and when Grey jumped all over it, I kept up exchanging with him.

Well, at least it produced some things to work with.

It's in the how and why. Tech went for Seil based on his reaction to Sisterman's opening (which looked like a chainsaw defense) and you went for Seil for his "RVS" vote and inconsistencies in his reasons. Being inconsistent doesn't necessarily lead us to scum, but the chainsaw defense is certainly fishy. That's why Tech's town read seems stronger to me.

Like I think I said in my previous post, I don't think post 17 (assuming that's the one you're talking about) was in any way a chainsaw defense--or at least I don't see it that way.

I wanna say Voided is town, since he could have easily put me at L-1 and let someone else finish me off. However, I know scum usually try's to stay away from being the L-1, or final vote since that draws attention.

I'm not keen on your lynch, hence I don't care to vote for you.

Because I really didn't care what grey's answer was.

You do understand that that's not my point?

The question "Why is Sisterman's post not scummy" does not have any answer or reaction that can be used to find scum, because the reasons as to why my post was not scummy are plainly obvious to anyone possessing Human Eyes.

A.) Because scumhunting is the only thing we ever do in these games, amirite?

B.) Apparantly not everybody. Quite frankly, if someone said you were overreacting to being called out for your vote there, I don't think I could disagree with them.

I was far more interested in why such a question would be asked in the first place, because that question DOES imply that my post was scummy, which is weird, for a vote that was supposed to be random.

...Not necessarily. I will agree that it TENDS to imply that, but it does not always do so. What makes you think it was implying it (regardless of what Seil was intending.

Also, I've seen some reasoning for me being town because I'm aggressive being thrown around: Please stop that, people who are not scum. This is my first game here, but I'm aggressive in every game, and it's really lazy reasoning that could be the doom of town if applied elsewhere.

So you want us to call you scummy for being aggressive? Cool beans.

Wasting a lynch on a VI is a terrible idea right now. You're basically throwing away a day, and getting scum closer to where they can start NK'ing people. We should all make sure to vote on someone who we think is scum, rather than a townie we don't like, these first two days, since this is when we have the advantage.

So you would rather us lynch a VI when they actually have a chance of killing people? Having a VI around then is just going to make it easier for scum since they will take away the suspicion away from who we need to actually be suspicious of, though in this case I do believe it is you that is scum.

That post. It doesn't say what you thought it said. You should re-read it.

Also you have done multiple reaction fishing, you've even admitted them

So?

Greygnarl hadn't even posted in game when you made your 'RVS' vote, so therefore you had a target already preset in your mind when you made your post since you've only "reaction fished once".
So either that means you're bussing grey and therefore could have already had a target in mind or you have in fact reaction tested multiple times.

I have something to say, but I'd rather let Seil answer first since this is directed at him.

[seilkops]

Well, just took my shower. Checked the thread before bed, to see if I'm alive, but I'll answer what VD pointed out. Just cause' I'm pretty interested/curious in what he has to say.

Greygnarl hadn't even posted in game when you made your 'RVS' vote, so therefore you had a target already preset in your mind when you made your post since you've only "reaction fished once".
So either that means you're bussing grey and therefore could have already had a target in mind or you have in fact reaction tested multiple times.

Well, with reaction fishing you usually don't start out with a target in mind. Which I did not. It'd be kinda hard to specifically plan out a reaction fish for a specific target. When I "RVSED" Sisterman, I was trying to get some reactions out of people, and some reads. Hence the reaction fishing.
Actually, both the options you gave me are wrong. Surprise.
I reaction fished, by "RVSING" Sisterman once, and greygnarl responded. I did not know who was going to respond, but thought that it would be a good way to get some initial reads. I thought his covering of himself was scummy, so I went ahead and keep exchanging with him in order to get more reads on him.

Any and all further questions/comments/concerns about my reaction fishing can be directed at
http://cleverbot.com/
It's this neat thing I made, so I won't have to explain myself again. I trust it'll satisfy everybody's questions.

VD, I'm going to pass out in 30 mins. Lets hear what you have to say.

[Voidedmafia]

Greygnarl hadn't even posted in game when you made your 'RVS' vote, so therefore you had a target already preset in your mind when you made your post since you've only "reaction fished once".
So either that means you're bussing grey and therefore could have already had a target in mind or you have in fact reaction tested multiple times.

First off, what exactly is the big problem with the fact that grey hadn't posted? If you want to argue that Seil did not in any way suggest he was going for Grey in particular, that's fine and something we can all agree on, but while that by itself is slightly scummy, it doesn't make Seil's action scummy, either.

Secondly, reaction fishing tends to have a a preset target anyways, unless you're going for a "do something to get people to post" kind of reaction. That's kinda the point of reaction fishing.

Thirdly, how in the hell did you even get bussing out of this? I don't mean to say it isn't possible, but I don't understand how you got that as one of your possible conclusions.

Fourthly, was it not established that Seil was only doing on reaction test?

[seilkops]

Ok, just really read Cheery's post.

What the fuck?

Like, seriously.

You've taken misreading to a whole new level. You're on some different book now.

Also you have done multiple reaction fishing, you've even admitted them
In post 31, seilkops wrote:
so I just played off that by voting him, and seeing what would happen. Sister is town, and I think grey is scum, is what I got from that.

You are wrong. All that quote says is that I voted for Sister to see who would respond. That's my first reaction fishing post. Here, I'll even set up a tally for you.
That's one.

This is your 'RVS' vote being used for reactions. You may have worded it differently, but that's still a reaction test claim. (unless I've read it wrong, but using 'him' there made me thing you were talking about sisterman since you had that post quoted (and #47 tells me that I was in fact reading it correctly))

#47 tells me something a little different.
I'm talking about the same damn thing. That "RVS", is the same vote I just talked about. I voted Sisterman to see who would respond, and greygnarl did. I kept up exchanging with him to get reads.
That's 0


Total Tally: I
Just to make sure you don't misread that, it's a Roman numeral.

Sorry for the rudeness, but I'm tired (sleepwise), and tired of explaining myself about the same thing.

[Voidedmafia]

Vote: Cheery dog

[seilkops]

@VD

My "RVS" on Sisterman was the kind of "getting people to post" type of reaction fishing. I was just waiting for anyone to respond, and grey did. Besides that, you seem to understand 100% what I'm saying.
God bless you.

Just asked Cleverbot why nobody but VD understands.

"Because it reflects the sky."
and
"What is the truth?"

Hope everyone thinks heavily on that.

[Voidedmafia]

you are wise, master Cleverbot. I shall take your words to heart.

[Cheery Dog]

This looks nice and juicy, so I'll answer it

So you would rather us lynch a VI when they actually have a chance of killing people? Having a VI around then is just going to make it easier for scum since they will take away the suspicion away from who we need to actually be suspicious of, though in this case I do believe it is you that is scum.

Right. So if you thought someone was town, go ahead and waste a lynch on them instead of trying to find scum who still cannot NK. Solid, I'll keep that in mind.

I'm not going to be voting anyone I think of as town at any stage of the game, however you seemed to indicate that you would be happy to lynch them when we come to day 3.

Wasting a lynch on a VI is a terrible idea right now. You're basically throwing away a day, and getting scum closer to where they can start NK'ing people. We should all make sure to vote on someone who we think is scum, rather than a townie we don't like, these first two days, since this is when we have the advantage.

So you would rather us lynch a VI when they actually have a chance of killing people? Having a VI around then is just going to make it easier for scum since they will take away the suspicion away from who we need to actually be suspicious of, though in this case I do believe it is you that is scum.

That post. It doesn't say what you thought it said. You should re-read it.

Shouldn't you be using the fact of me slipping in my thoughts in a case against me instead of telling me straight out that my post has gone wonky on me?

Also you have done multiple reaction fishing, you've even admitted them

So?

I believed he was contradicting himself, is there a problem with me doing that?[/quote]

Well, just took my shower. Checked the thread before bed, to see if I'm alive, but I'll answer what VD pointed out. Just cause' I'm pretty interested/curious in what he has to say.

Greygnarl hadn't even posted in game when you made your 'RVS' vote, so therefore you had a target already preset in your mind when you made your post since you've only "reaction fished once".
So either that means you're bussing grey and therefore could have already had a target in mind or you have in fact reaction tested multiple times.

Well, with reaction fishing you usually don't start out with a target in mind. Which I did not. It'd be kinda hard to specifically plan out a reaction fish for a specific target. When I "RVSED" Sisterman, I was trying to get some reactions out of people, and some reads. Hence the reaction fishing.
Actually, both the options you gave me are wrong. Surprise.
I reaction fished, by "RVSING" Sisterman once, and greygnarl responded. I did not know who was going to respond, but thought that it would be a good way to get some initial reads. I thought his covering of himself was scummy, so I went ahead and keep exchanging with him in order to get more reads on him.

I found it odd that you had called grey out by name, but it seems I had mistakenly mistook your response to be inclusive of my first question in that post.

unvote

I'd do more pedits here, but that's too many new posts to look for information in, possibly more stuff coming from me soon.