Newbie 1633: The Daily Show-A Retrospective - GAME OVER

[necargoface]

Hola! I am necargoface, and let's get a few things out of the way:

-This is like my 4th mafia game in the last 5 years.
-I am generally lazy.
-I generally like wagons (probably because I'm lazy)

So, by skimming (because I'm lazy) we have an L-2 because... someone doesn't like RVS's? Is that a legit reason to put someone at L-1? At least we didn't get an intent to hammer (because that would just be hilariously bad).

So, here's my RV (although not actually an RV because his vote was odd and somewhat scummy):

VOTE: Honest Because his avatar is ironic. That's L-1.

PEDIT: Soooo, we HAD an L-2 because someone didn't like RVS's. Now it's because of a naked vote that's quite odd. Makes sense.

[necargoface]

@Necargoface: It seems weird to me that you have an issue with people putting someone at L-1 and yet you put someone at L-1 with your 'RV'.

Thank you for putting "RV" in quotation marks, because it was not really an RV. Definitely not actually an RV. Do you guys read what I put in my quotation marks?

Vote stays on Honest because he hasn't posted since the vote explaining why he should not be hammered. I will still violently go after whomever hammers him without warning, however.

[necargoface]

@Necargoface: It seems weird to me that you have an issue with people putting someone at L-1 and yet you put someone at L-1 with your 'RV'.

Something else to note: I don't have a problem with putting people at L-1. I have a problem with a stupid reason putting people at L-1. Not liking RVS's? That's a stupid reason. One post in the whole game so far with no context whatsoever and no actual input to the game? Better reason. I'm not moving my vote until Honest posts and actually puts something into the game.

Vote stays on Honest because he hasn't posted since the vote explaining why he should not be hammered.

That's an awful reason for your vote

I am voting because he has posted once this entire game with a naked, contextless, useless post, and has not responded to any of the resulting backlash.

Why not?

Because we shouldn't hammer Honest until he responds to all the backlash he's getting.

[necargoface]

You know if you were voting for a reason there's no need for you to name it RV. The only reason you should do so is because you know your reason sucks so you cover it up with a "RV" label should people ask about it in later games. And now when people frown on you you quickly defend your vote like he's your scumread all along.

vote: necargoface

I like RV's. I didn't get to make one in the early stages. I made an RV. I realized there was a pretty obvious vote. I voted Honest.

The reason I put the RV label on it is because I like RV's and wanted to make an RV, but didn't want to input nothing to that post either. Not because I have a horrid reason.

[necargoface]

God, I'm bad at remembering to reply to all the posts that I want to.

Vote stays on Honest because he hasn't posted since the vote explaining why he should not be hammered. I will still violently go after whomever hammers him without warning, however.

It sounds as though you think that he would flip Town. Do you?

He could flip town. I don't think he would, but he could. I will violently go after anyone who randomly hammers without stating an intent to hammer because random hammering doesn't give the defendant a chance to speak.

[necargoface]

I mean of course he's null. He has one post which is just a naked vote. We shouldn't hammer until he posts more though.

This. We shouldn't hammer Honest yet because he is a nul read to many, because many can't tell intentions when a person posts a total of 2(-4) words.

[necargoface]

So, by skimming (because I'm lazy) we have an L-2 because... someone doesn't like RVS's? Is that a legit reason to put someone at L-1? At least we didn't get an intent to hammer (because that would just be hilariously bad).

So, here's my RV (although not actually an RV because his vote was odd and somewhat scummy):

VOTE: Honest Because his avatar is ironic. That's L-1.

Hmm, criticizes wagons based on bad reasons and then votes Honest to put him at L-1. Necargo, what was odd about Honest's vote and why was it scummy?

One post in the whole game so far with no context whatsoever and no actual input to the game? Better reason. I'm not moving my vote until Honest posts and actually puts something into the game.

I am voting because he has posted once this entire game with a naked, contextless, useless post, and has not responded to any of the resulting backlash.

Your reasoning for your vote is very subtly changing. First it was because his vote was 'odd and scummy' and now it's because Honest is not contributing to the thread.

He could flip town. I don't think he would, but he could. I will violently go after anyone who randomly hammers without stating an intent to hammer because random hammering doesn't give the defendant a chance to speak.

And if he flipped scum?

1.It had no context, was a naked vote, and had no explanation at the time, which is scummy, at least to me.
2.It was both, actually. Now, all of his posts seem a bit off. He still seems to be fluff posting and stalling, although subtly.
3. I would still go after the person that randomly hammered because it would either be luck or a bus that caused the hammer (when the flip is scum). It's usually the latter by my experience.

[necargoface]

-I am generally lazy.
-I generally like wagons (probably because I'm lazy)

This is just an easy get out of jail free card if he get's caught later in the game for jumping on tons of wagons.

@Necargoface: It seems weird to me that you have an issue with people putting someone at L-1 and yet you put someone at L-1 with your 'RV'.

Thank you for putting "RV" in quotation marks, because it was not really an RV. Definitely not actually an RV.

This post directly contradicts his 68 where he says

'I like RV's. I didn't get to make one in the early stages. I made an RV.

'
He keeps saying that his vote was an RV, but then gives a reason. The meaning of an RV is

Random Vote

, ie. Voting without a

legitimate

reason.
I don't have a problem with him opening the game with an RV, or opening with a legit vote. I have an issue when he tries to pass off his vote as an RV. My guess is that if someone were to quickhammer, please for the love of god don't, then he will just say 'It was an RV, I wasn't on that wagon'.

Vote stays on Honest because he hasn't posted since the vote explaining why he should not be hammered.

That's an awful reason for your vote

I am voting because he has posted once this entire game with a naked, contextless, useless post,

and has not responded to any of the resulting backlash

.

Given the fact that at the time he hadn't posted anything else, or on any other threads on the site, why is this scummy?

Because we shouldn't hammer Honest until he responds to all the backlash he's getting.

This could just be a grammar error, if that's the right way to phrase it, but doesn't this imply that you want someone to hammer no matter how he responds?

The reason I put the RV label on it is because I like RV's and wanted to make an RV, but didn't want to input nothing to that post either. Not because I have a horrid reason.

Again, saying it's an RV then also saying it's not an RV.

God, I'm bad at remembering to reply to all the posts that I want to.

Vote stays on Honest because he hasn't posted since the vote explaining why he should not be hammered. I will still violently go after whomever hammers him without warning, however.

It sounds as though you think that he would flip Town. Do you?

He could flip town. I don't think he would, but he could.

How can you

possibly

think this? He had made

one

post. One.

I mean of course he's null. He has one post which is just a naked vote. We shouldn't hammer until he posts more though.

This. We shouldn't hammer Honest yet because he is a nul read to many, because many can't tell intentions when a person posts a total of 2(-4) words.

If he's a null read to many, as you said yourself you can't tell intentions from one post, why are you so adamant that he is scum?
Finally is my issue with necargo for putting Honest at L-1 with his 'Rv'-'Not RV'-'legit vote'-whatever you wanna call it. Why not just state your dissatisfaction with the post, and look through other posts so far to come up with a scum read? The only reason I can see you doing this is to rolefish.
VOTE: Necargoface

1. Nope. It's just true. I jump on wagons, and I'm lazy. I am just lazy, but I only jump on wagons when I feel there's a reason to. I

NEVER

jump on wagons "because wagons" because that's a stupid play.
2. Not wrong. I put this vote under an "RV" label, mainly because I, like I said, like RV's, and wanted to put

something

under that label. Also, hammering with an "RV" is completely stupid and anyone who does it should feel bad... and also get lynched. If Honest were already at L-1, there's no chance that I would vote him.
3. It's closer to "he didn't give me a reason yet to unvote him."
4. If that did imply that we lynch him either way, it wasn't supposed to.
5. It's not an RV, I put under that label. I'm pretty sure I've made this clear from the start.
6. You can say a lot (or very little, as Honest did) with one post. Also, how can I believe that there is a chance of both options happening? It's like flipping a coin. I think it'll land heads, but there is definitely a chance of it landing tails.
7. Because he's the biggest scum read for me this game.

[necargoface]

Yuriko's insistence on attacking Cargo's 'RV' thing is comically missing the point, which is a common scum tactic.
.

This. Yuriko is putting all of his emphasis on a single sentence. I'm restating the whole "RV isn't an RV guys" thing because I for some reason need to reiterate that a single sentence should not have this much weight on the game. In fact, I changed the vote and added the words in parenthesis in Preview editing, after looking at the game a bit more. There should not be over 10 posts talking about this. This should be the last post or one of the last posts debating this issue.

Welcome Lowercase and Dwlee! (BTW D, should I pronounce your name Dwa-Lee or D-W-Lee? Not relevant to the game, just wondering.)

[necargoface]

I find Honest's vote more off-putting than the votes BBT listed because ALL of those were blatantly RV's. Honest's vote was not clearly an RV and was at a time where RV's are becoming more uncommon. Without explanation, I assumed it was not an RV (correctly), which made it even more unsettling.

[necargoface]

Mathilda's first posts seem town oriented and legitimate. A good way for a replacement to enter. Adding real content is always nice.

UNVOTE: Mathilda

Pretty null read on Gratuitous because I had a pretty null read on ZS and Gratuitous's first post didn't change that.

Welcome you two! It's nice to see replacements making an impact, so that's good.

On why I didn't assume that Honest was making an RV: Rv's should have some form of text surrounding them, because an RV is supposed to say

something

about you, whether explicitly or implicitly. A completely naked vote can't do that because there cannot be anything personal about the post. If Honest had some nonchalant context (even such as a simple "Hi there") then it could be an RV, but RV posts should have some content other than the two words used to vote, especially if there is no following content. Honest's vote seems odd to me because it had no context; It had nothing surrounding it, not even a non-conspicuous "hi".

[necargoface]

I disagree aswell. First of all, an RV is far more likely to be a naked vote compared to a serious vote. A serious vote with no reasoning is dumb and scummy. An RV that has no reasoning is just an RV

Honest also said later that it was not actually an RV, which made him even scummier (as you just said would happen). This was NOT an RV, as I suspected, and had no reasoning. I am going to see if Mathilda can change my opinions on the Honest slot.

[necargoface]

I still think Necargoface is the scummiest person in the game. I outlined my initial case in 93.
In 137 he says '

Honest's vote was not clearly an RV

and was at a time where RV's are becoming more uncommon

'.
The underlined is blatantly not true. There was 0 way to tell whether the vote was an RV or not, and the end result doesn't matter because it doesn't justify the scum read in the first place.

I hope that you read this right. You do realize that it is "Honest's vote was

not clearly

and RV" , not "Honest's vote was

clearly not

an RV. I did not say that there was no possible way in all of the world that it was an RV, I said that it wasn't clear as to which it was, and was during a time where RV's were becoming more uncommon.

[necargoface]

Necargoface pretty much responded to nothing but the issue on his "RV" (or not) on honest. This in itself is scummy. He only mentioned one (seemingly weak) town read.

Once people stop mking a bbig deal about it, I will move on to other things.