Pick Your Power Game Thread

[swiftstrike]

I didn't remove anything from that post so I didn't take anything off the context.

 

You did though Swift. You only quoted his part of his post. You took out the Teedy Kay post he was responding to. By doing so, it looks like Chris brought up the term anti-wagon, when actually that was Teedy Kay's defense to claims that "he started the wagon".

 

Chris's response was more of a "It could be that yes, or it could be this instead". He wasn't accusing anyone of anti-wagoning nor did he bring up the term. By posting his words alone, you changed the context of them.

I quoted directly post 131 nothing removed from that post in anyway. if I haven't please point out exactly what I missed from that. and I response directly to this.

[Andrew the Giant]

Right thoughts on the game and shizzle, whilst Im willing to accept that Bristep may have made a slip up with the hours and such but then Spotlight makes a similar mistake even though it states the numbers thing was quite clear

 

I am suspicious of Bristep because quite honestly, I thought the whole '48 hours to talk and change numbers' was fairly clear. I can understand he made a mistake but then when people started to question how quick he was to clear it up, I thought maybe it was a little speedy. I read that he was fast, and started to wonder if maybe he was some distracting us with a silly point, but then decided against it, for whatever reason.

 

Its a slip that people if they are town shouldnt be making as the rules are explained several times in the sign-up thread and by making them, it just gives the scum more ammunition to work with.

[tom]

So at the base level TDK's response to assertions that he's seemed very eager to do all the things that people would expect from town in order to distance himself from scum and that it appears he is planting "evidence" to use when his target flips town in order to say "look, I didn't even vote first", is more or less to go "ahh go on, trust me". He also seems to not be bothered with the game when people analyse things and that same post seemed critical of people who do analyse most posts; would rather everyone leaves him alone? something to hide? Seems convenient that he claims vanilla townie as the pressure grows on him. He says he truely believes it was a slip from bristep yet he isn't putting a vote down; now how does that work? A slip would obviously be a scum slip, so he believes bri is scum yet he wont vote because he wants to wait, but why wait when you've found scum, it's not exactly helpful to town is it?

[Mafia Scum Scum]

I have a couple of things I would like to discuss.

 

First of all, I am getting confused by the cases for peoples votes at this stage already, so can people please briefly sum up there case on their suspect and can the suspect briefly reply with their defence.

 

Secondly, we might have a bomb, so if we suspect two people should we get the other suspect to put in the final vote but allow time for someone else to do it at the last minute if they don't.

 

Even though the odds aren't high, scum won't want to risk taking the chance, unless they have the bomb on their side or have worked out who it is via their role e.g rolecop, neighborizer etc.

 

Is it also worth us trying to direct the odd night vigilante towards another suspect?

 

There is a possibility scum could have the watcher or trackers role to discover who the vig is, but if we aim at someone we suspect, is it worth the risk?

 

Thirdly, two players having the same numbers would mean that they slip down the draft list, so scum won't have two people pick the same, so if any of them are scum it will be just one but we have no proof of whether that could be true yet.

 

These are just my random thoughts, so I am interested in peoples opinions, as well as hearing other people thought as well.

 

If I don't appear to be posting as much as other games, don't judge that as scummy, just me distancing myself from the game a bit after things that have happened in previous games.

 

If you have other reasons to believe I am scum, then vote away, but it will be a wasted vote.

 

As I am still unsure about what the hell is going on here I am going to unvote.

 

Unvote: Swiftstrike

[tom]

If you have other reasons to believe I am scum, then vote away, but it will be a wasted vote.

But isn't the problem that this is quite an inflammatory statement already, and it could be read as you more or less saying "well don't look into me, ignore any valid reasons you have for me being scum because you're an idiot if you vote, don't even bother looking at me, I'm innocent gov". Not accusing you but the whole "wasted vote" thing can read as a bit scummy to some people, especially when you don't appear to be hunting yourself and simply asking everyone else to hunt for you

[Retro Red]

bristep how did you get that to do 2 separate posts there?

 

Manipulating the mechanics of the forum? Seems a bit scummy to me.

 

Anyway, seen as we're past the RVS, I may as well unvote for the time being.

 

I wouldn't want the town getting sidetracked by the whole numbers thing, if swiftstrike is happy enough to use the numerology in his arguments, then fair enough, but without some rock-solid reasoning and/or evidence to accompany them, I'd more than likely disregard them as a method of scum-hunting.

 

TDK's use of language, whilst intriguing, is not necessarily scummy. It indicates he is trying to start a wagon, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's because he's trying to get a townie lynched, more that he's trying to get a player lynched. Yes it could be because he's scum, but equally it could be because he believes bristep is scum and is trying to get his argument across.

 

Personally, I don't think bristep is scum based on the facts presented by swift and TDK, and don't think their arguments are solid enough to entice me to vote. Again, to clarify, that doesn't mean I think swift and TDK are scum because I don't agree with them, simply that I don't think they are correct in their accusations.

 

A lot of "I don't thinks" in there, anyone you do find remotely scummy yet?

 

Not at that time there wasn't. There's a very strong push coming from both you and TDK on each other, it could be because one of you is scum, it could be that you're both town assuming that the other is scum because they are accusing you.

 

TDK is doing an awful lot of talking, but it's because you've put an awful lot of pressure on him over very little. Your case on him lacks clarity, and since your possible slip, it's like you've been trying to find someone to wagon.

 

Vote bristep

 

Prove me wrong champ.

 

Eh. That statement just seems messy. First off you don't think I'm scummy based on what Swift and TDK said, then I am for voting for TDK? So at the point you made the first post you didn't think I was scummy. At that point 3 people had fingered me. Swift originally, spotlight, and TDK (unless I missed anyone else). If I'm not scum, which i'm not, why wouldn't I look at my accusers to try and find scum amongst them?

[Mafia Scum Scum]

If you have other reasons to believe I am scum, then vote away, but it will be a wasted vote.

But isn't the problem that this is quite an inflammatory statement already, and it could be read as you more or less saying "well don't look into me, ignore any valid reasons you have for me being scum because you're an idiot if you vote, don't even bother looking at me, I'm innocent gov". Not accusing you but the whole "wasted vote" thing can read as a bit scummy to some people, especially when you don't appear to be hunting yourself and simply asking everyone else to hunt for you

 

I only put that in there to let people know why I am not posting as much as I normally do and don't want to be lynched because of it.

 

I very nearly didn't join this game because I was sick of the way certain things were in the game, so I after I decided to rejoin the games, I decided to do so but limit my playing time.

 

I don't wish to discuss my previous games so please don't ask me to comment on them.

[Chris B]

I have a couple of things I would like to discuss.

 

First of all, I am getting confused by the cases for peoples votes at this stage already, so can people please briefly sum up there case on their suspect and can the suspect briefly reply with their defence.

 

TDK - supported a wagon while maintaining deniability. Declared 'the nail may have been hit on the head', but avoided voting. Based on experience as scum, this is exactly the kind of thing I used to try to do. Since then has got very defensive, attacked people for analysing his posts (despite introducing the analysis of his sentences) and is now appealing to emotion.

 

Swiftstrike - Currently behaving very oddly. Refused to discuss TDK until I'd asked him multiple times. Tried to build a case on me based on RVS, which was utterly transparent. Keeps trying to twist my words - pushed me to try and answer for Lion, then complained that I wasn't answering for Lion. Took out the fact that I quoted TDK on the 'anti-wagon' thing, and pushed that I'd introduced the term. Seems to be focusing on me for some reason.

 

So, I've got a vote on TDK and I'm suspicious of swift. The TDK thing is the kind of thing he's usually all over, but he's mostly ignored it.

 

 

Secondly, we might have a bomb, so if we suspect two people should we get the other suspect to put in the final vote but allow time for someone else to do it at the last minute if they don't.

 

I've got a strong suspicion that scum will have tried to pick the bomb. Allows for an otherwise vanilla role, who can then take out another town even if they're lynched.

 

Even though the odds aren't high, scum won't want to risk taking the chance, unless they have the bomb on their side or have worked out who it is via their role e.g rolecop, neighborizer etc.

 

Is it also worth us trying to direct the odd night vigilante towards another suspect?

 

Possibly, but bearing in mind that the scum may have tried to pick a vigilante, it could backfire horrendously.

 

There is a possibility scum could have the watcher or trackers role to discover who the vig is, but if we aim at someone we suspect, is it worth the risk?

 

I think it's probably worth the risk. It's safer than the roles where someone definitely dies. Plus, a watcher/tracker can easily be found to be lying if they're bluffing.

[Retro Red]

I didn't remove anything from that post so I didn't take anything off the context.

 

You did though Swift. You only quoted his part of his post. You took out the Teedy Kay post he was responding to. By doing so, it looks like Chris brought up the term anti-wagon, when actually that was Teedy Kay's defense to claims that "he started the wagon".

 

Chris's response was more of a "It could be that yes, or it could be this instead". He wasn't accusing anyone of anti-wagoning nor did he bring up the term. By posting his words alone, you changed the context of them.

I quoted directly post 131 nothing removed from that post in anyway. if I haven't please point out exactly what I missed from that. and I response directly to this.

 

Not what I was talking about. Post #115 of yours quoting post #96 of ChrisB's. TDK's part has been removed from the quote, changing the context. Wouldn't be as big an issue if your question to ChrisB wasn't directly related to the change of context.

 

TDK - "What I did was an anti-wagon if anything"

ChrisB - "It might be an anti-wagon, but then again it might not be"

You - "ChrisB what do you mean by anti-wagon"

 

Your question only really applies if you remove the first of the 3 statements, which you did.

[Chris B]

I don't wish to discuss my previous games so please don't ask me to comment on them.

 

Nobody's mentioned them. I understand your defensiveness, but it may be worth remembering that defensiveness can be misread.

[tom]

If you have other reasons to believe I am scum, then vote away, but it will be a wasted vote.

But isn't the problem that this is quite an inflammatory statement already, and it could be read as you more or less saying "well don't look into me, ignore any valid reasons you have for me being scum because you're an idiot if you vote, don't even bother looking at me, I'm innocent gov". Not accusing you but the whole "wasted vote" thing can read as a bit scummy to some people, especially when you don't appear to be hunting yourself and simply asking everyone else to hunt for you

 

I only put that in there to let people know why I am not posting as much as I normally do and don't want to be lynched because of it.

 

I very nearly didn't join this game because I was sick of the way certain things were in the game, so I after I decided to rejoin the games, I decided to do so but limit my playing time.

 

I don't wish to discuss my previous games so please don't ask me to comment on them.

I didn't mention your previous games, the only one bringing that up is you, to be fair. I do see your logic but when someone is inactive then it leaves them open to being fingered as scum and accused of lurking. If you are indeed town then doing anything that could confuse people into thinking you're scum isn't a good thing to be doing, regardless of how well meaning your intentions are

[Ron Simmons]

Carbomb - Haven't heard your input on what's happening in a while. What do you make of the current situation in game?

 

Chris I wasn't referring to you and bristep.

 

Do you not think it's odd that both you and lion choose exactly the same numbers and the he randomly chooses a vote to go for and it's you again what are the chances of that?

Having rubbished your number analyzing idea this is going to sound odd coming from me, but I think that's quite a good spot.

FOS Chris B

 

FOS Lion Of The Midlands

[swiftstrike]

I didn't remove anything from that post so I didn't take anything off the context.

 

You did though Swift. You only quoted his part of his post. You took out the Teedy Kay post he was responding to. By doing so, it looks like Chris brought up the term anti-wagon, when actually that was Teedy Kay's defense to claims that "he started the wagon".

 

Chris's response was more of a "It could be that yes, or it could be this instead". He wasn't accusing anyone of anti-wagoning nor did he bring up the term. By posting his words alone, you changed the context of them.

I quoted directly post 131 nothing removed from that post in anyway. if I haven't please point out exactly what I missed from that. and I response directly to this.

 

Not what I was talking about. Post #115 of yours quoting post #96 of ChrisB's. TDK's part has been removed from the quote, changing the context. Wouldn't be as big an issue if your question to ChrisB wasn't directly related to the change of context.

 

TDK - "What I did was an anti-wagon if anything"

ChrisB - "It might be an anti-wagon, but then again it might not be"

You - "ChrisB what do you mean by anti-wagon"

 

Your question only really applies if you remove the first of the 3 statements, which you did.

Right I understand that now I removed that as I didn't want to start creating walls of text. given you didn't refer to that post earlier I assumed you where talking about my most recent post.

[tom]

EBWOP : didn't preview, chris b hadn't posted when post was started

[Chris B]

Carbomb - Haven't heard your input on what's happening in a while. What do you make of the current situation in game?

 

Chris I wasn't referring to you and bristep.

 

Do you not think it's odd that both you and lion choose exactly the same numbers and the he randomly chooses a vote to go for and it's you again what are the chances of that?

Having rubbished your number analyzing idea this is going to sound odd coming from me, but I think that's quite a good spot.

FOS Chris B

 

FOS Lion Of The Midlands

 

You think, in a game with lots of roles, that scum would intentionally be very likely half-vanilla?

 

I didn't remove anything from that post so I didn't take anything off the context.

 

You did though Swift. You only quoted his part of his post. You took out the Teedy Kay post he was responding to. By doing so, it looks like Chris brought up the term anti-wagon, when actually that was Teedy Kay's defense to claims that "he started the wagon".

 

Chris's response was more of a "It could be that yes, or it could be this instead". He wasn't accusing anyone of anti-wagoning nor did he bring up the term. By posting his words alone, you changed the context of them.

I quoted directly post 131 nothing removed from that post in anyway. if I haven't please point out exactly what I missed from that. and I response directly to this.

 

Not what I was talking about. Post #115 of yours quoting post #96 of ChrisB's. TDK's part has been removed from the quote, changing the context. Wouldn't be as big an issue if your question to ChrisB wasn't directly related to the change of context.

 

TDK - "What I did was an anti-wagon if anything"

ChrisB - "It might be an anti-wagon, but then again it might not be"

You - "ChrisB what do you mean by anti-wagon"

 

Your question only really applies if you remove the first of the 3 statements, which you did.

Right I understand that now I removed that as I didn't want to start creating walls of text. given you didn't refer to that post earlier I assumed you where talking about my most recent post.

 

 

So now you understand it, how about the fact that you pointed the question towards me, and not TDK?