Golden Pantheon - Japanese - Endgame

[freezie]

I had an interest in strike's motives for many of the same reasons you did. If they were legitimate concerns that he thinks someone is scummy, then my asking of him allows us to refine or dismiss his concerns and opens up discussion, which is always a good thing. If he was attempting to put up a helping-facade while actually doing nothing, then we could call him on that.

Hm. Well, then, I'll get behind you on this one.

Strike, whom were you suspicious of, and why? Or at least, why omit the gory details? The simple act of telling us that you're baiting merely serves to warn 'em off.

-Tails

Which is, If I follow Strike's train of thought, the very reason he's saying it.

[strike wolf]

I had an interest in strike's motives for many of the same reasons you did. If they were legitimate concerns that he thinks someone is scummy, then my asking of him allows us to refine or dismiss his concerns and opens up discussion, which is always a good thing. If he was attempting to put up a helping-facade while actually doing nothing, then we could call him on that.

Hm. Well, then, I'll get behind you on this one.

Strike, whom were you suspicious of, and why? Or at least, why omit the gory details? The simple act of telling us that you're baiting merely serves to warn 'em off.

-Tails

Which is, If I follow Strike's train of thought, the very reason he's saying it.

I think Freezie gets the point. If I can get someone to alter their behavior without calling out their name that strongly suggests to me that they have reason to believe someone might become suspicious of them through the game. For this reason, I wish not to reveal who I am suspicious of unless I am forced or feel I have a strong enough case to follow through on my suspicions.

[strike wolf]

I had an interest in strike's motives for many of the same reasons you did. If they were legitimate concerns that he thinks someone is scummy, then my asking of him allows us to refine or dismiss his concerns and opens up discussion, which is always a good thing. If he was attempting to put up a helping-facade while actually doing nothing, then we could call him on that.

Hm. Well, then, I'll get behind you on this one.

Strike, whom were you suspicious of, and why? Or at least, why omit the gory details? The simple act of telling us that you're baiting merely serves to warn 'em off.

-Tails

Which is, If I follow Strike's train of thought, the very reason he's saying it.

I think Freezie gets the point. If I can get someone to alter their behavior without calling out their name that strongly suggests to me that they have reason to believe someone might become suspicious of them through the game. For this reason, I wish not to reveal who I am suspicious of unless I am forced or feel I have a strong enough case to follow through on my suspicions.

Ebwop: I also think Tails is right as far as if this was not day 1 I would probably not try something like this. Mainly because as he seems to suggest himself there is less to go on and leads will be more solid even if slightly so by Day 2.

[TA1LGUNN3R]

Which is, If I follow Strike's train of thought, the very reason he's saying it.

Nay:

Well, I was hoping to bait a reaction from someone I consider scummy but he didn't respond and I don't think I have enough on him without the reaction to make a case on him.

He already attempted the bait; telling us after the fact isn't the bait, unless strike is claiming a feint within a feint which is pretty sophisticated.

I think Freezie gets the point. If I can get someone to alter their behavior without calling out their name that strongly suggests to me that they have reason to believe someone might become suspicious of them through the game. For this reason, I wish not to reveal who I am suspicious of unless I am forced or feel I have a strong enough case to follow through on my suspicions.

Well that's all well and good; but it stands to reason that by announcing your plans, you affect the entire population. Ripples in the water and all that. It seems to me that you then have a case of confirmation bias, in that you'll read the reaction to fit your suspicion. I would think it would be more efficient continue the bait unannounced.

But perhaps I'm getting tangential here. Carry on.

-Tails

[MeDeFe]

I'd say SW was shooting blindly into the dark with a machine gun and seeing what, if anything, he might hit. We shouldn't overinterpret things, there are hardly any leads on day 1 anyway.

[safariguy5]

I'd say SW was shooting blindly into the dark with a machine gun and seeing what, if anything, he might hit. We shouldn't overinterpret things, there are hardly any leads on day 1 anyway.

At the same time, attempting to get a concrete foundation on suspicions is good, considering Day 1 usually doesn't give us major scumtells.

[everywhere116]

I'm torn so far. On the one hand, SW's actions may have been a ruse. On the other hand, they could have been legitimate and by talking about it we may have spoiled his plan.

Fastposted by safari.

[everywhere116]

EBWOP I suppose time will tell.

[freezie]

Even if it was a ruse...Mostly everything that has been said can be seen as that way if you twist it a little.

[Victor Sullivan]

Sorry for the lack of activity. Please be patient as I recover from an illness. If my activity drops below expectations, I understand if I must be replaced.

Apologies,

-Sully

[freezie]

Sorry for the lack of activity. Please be patient as I recover from an illness. If my activity drops below expectations, I understand if I must be replaced.

Apologies,

-Sully

You suck. I hate you. You're inactive.

Unvote

Vote: Victor Sullivan

I hope you're freaking lynched after this....Not really.

Unvote

Vote: Jonty

Cause..I was voting in beforehand..and I keep it there as a reminder I will not allow an inactive to be voted to lynch without a prod first

I am sorry for you Victor. I hope it wasn't anything serious and that you'll be fine soon.

[drake_259]

I am sorry for you Victor. I hope it wasn't anything serious and that you'll be fine soon.

That all depends, if he is mafia, i hope he suffers and dies.

But if you are town of course, he may live till endgame.

[jonty125]

Sorry for the lack of activity. Please be patient as I recover from an illness. If my activity drops below expectations, I understand if I must be replaced.

Apologies,

-Sully

You suck. I hate you. You're inactive.

Unvote

Vote: Victor Sullivan

I hope you're freaking lynched after this....Not really.

Unvote

Vote: Jonty

Cause..I was voting in beforehand..and I keep it there as a reminder I will not allow an inactive to be voted to lynch without a prod first

I am sorry for you Victor. I hope it wasn't anything serious and that you'll be fine soon.

So I'm being voted for trying to move things on . I can see your logic by not lynching without a prod but if I hadn't made the vote of faith we could be still going in circles. unvote drake as his activity has perked up. We have 4 days to get a lynch. I find Strike acting strangely with his mysterious baiting but I don't feel its caseworthy.

[edocsil]

4 days till deadline.

[strike wolf]

Well it would have been foolish of me to go through ahead with that post and not expect the potential for some kind of questioning. It's not optimal but I can't say I didn't see the potential and i wouldn't say it was completely ruined.

With an approaching deadline I'm going to unvote vote thegeneral He's off his ban now but still isn't posting except for a couple posts that didn't add much a few days ago (I know day 1 isn't going to lead to 20 page long essays anyways). One of them was an easy comment on possible third party flavor and the other a quick nod at the inactive who was brought up. I also feel he was a bit eager on the meta case early on so with limited information I would rather pressure him than the others in this game.

As far as prods, I may be getting my games mixed up (lots of the same people) but I think the people who haven't posted in a while have been prodded at this point.

[safariguy5]

How long was his ban? Maybe he was just catching up. But either way, I would like to see something from thegeneral at least in regards to strike baiting someone to vote.

[freezie]

Sorry for the lack of activity. Please be patient as I recover from an illness. If my activity drops below expectations, I understand if I must be replaced.

Apologies,

-Sully

You suck. I hate you. You're inactive.

Unvote

Vote: Victor Sullivan

I hope you're freaking lynched after this....Not really.

Unvote

Vote: Jonty

Cause..I was voting in beforehand..and I keep it there as a reminder I will not allow an inactive to be voted to lynch without a prod first

I am sorry for you Victor. I hope it wasn't anything serious and that you'll be fine soon.

So I'm being voted for trying to move things on . I can see your logic by not lynching without a prod but if I hadn't made the vote of faith we could be still going in circles. unvote drake as his activity has perked up. We have 4 days to get a lynch. I find Strike acting strangely with his mysterious baiting but I don't feel its caseworthy.

Your vote didn't change anything, beside the fact I voted you for it. Edoc prodded drake, which answered, and strike went with his bait and hope to catch someone offguard. Your vote, on my point of view, ended up beeing a vote for an inactive. And only when I called you on it that you unvoted, since you posted 3 times since drake's return.

[TheGeneral2112]

How long was his ban? Maybe he was just catching up. But either way, I would like to see something from thegeneral at least in regards to strike baiting someone to vote.

Ah yes, I knew this would happen rather soon. Consider me pressured.

As I have stated before in other games, I really am not a fan of the D1 random lynch. In one game I gave that info and it got me into multiple pages of arguments about numbers and math and pros and cons. Bottom line, I decided to lay low for D1 to avoid that confrontation. However, give me a little bit and I will out some DETAILED reads about this game so far. To be honest, I will most likely end up assembling a case against strike for this "baiting" bullshit, BUT let me reread and I will put something good up tonight.

[everywhere116]

I anticipate your report.

[TheGeneral2112]

In asembling my post I learned I must have totally skimmed this shit right over...

He came from mafiascum I believe.

Take it back. I came from EM.

Moving on to Strike... (My words are in this color.)



Joke vote yadayada...


More or less states that anyone using meta is scum.


More on the don't use meta train.

This is what Strike claims is the "bait" in the next post.

ANNNNNNNNNNNNNNDDDDDDDDDDDD, I'm calling bullshit. Sorry, Strike... Out of nowhere you claim to "bait" someone as an rxn test. THEN when he softclaims a PR, you feel the need to backpedal a little so you post this explanation for your actions. Bottom line, voting someone for inactivity is NOT an rxn test. Not even close.

Then you go and do this shit... Now what you did could make a bit of sense... Looks townie to me, but in my experience, scum usually looks town. Why is this? Because scum is playing a role. Their role is to pretend to be town. To do townie things. Like the thing you just did. The jury is out. The verdict is coming...

DAMN! You are ALLLLLLL over the board on this. Now I am back to viewing you as scum. You actually slipped a little here. First you said you were looking to see if anyone would sheep your vote. Now you are saying you were looking to see if a specific, unnamed player reacted in a certain way by increasing their posts? All I have to say is that you had better townread real quick. You can't have that many more posts that I have yet to see...

Sounds like excuses...

Alrighty, now we get to the real kicker. FYI, I had food poisoning recently. Wasn't posting much then. Also, I haven't been proded either. Perchance you are mixing games. Regardless, you haven't townread to me. BUT I can't get a strong scumread either. For this reason, I'm not calling you town or scum, but I will be keeping a close eye on you... Perhaps others could weigh in on this? I kinda still feel like Strike slipped earlier.

[TheGeneral2112]

I anticipate your report.

Perhaps Nath-Pal-Nahr is in order?

[edocsil]

For record General it is really hard to tell that you posted an image there, almost counted vote in the image. Not saying you have to do anything different, just a heads up.

[strike wolf]

what's with the use of images? I like to remember which part of a post I am responding to as I'm going through it. I can still check but this makes a little more frustrating. responses in blue.

In asembling my post I learned I must have totally skimmed this shit right over...

He came from mafiascum I believe.

Take it back. I came from EM.

Moving on to Strike... (My words are in this color.)



Joke vote yadayada...


More or less states that anyone using meta is scum.

because you're the only one who can be semi serious here and yeah I'm against using meta as "OMG he's always scum". I've joked once or twice about in the past but I wouldn't even regard it in a semi-serious manner and it was getting to that point. Frankly I'm less against meta as a small thing to link suspicious behavior when there's a bigger case to put it together with but by itself it's dangerous and frankly with you who haven't been on this forum that long, I'm kind of uncomfortable with you trying to meta people.

More on the don't use meta train.



This is what Strike claims is the "bait" in the next post.

ANNNNNNNNNNNNNNDDDDDDDDDDDD, I'm calling bullshit. Sorry, Strike... Out of nowhere you claim to "bait" someone as an rxn test. THEN when he softclaims a PR, you feel the need to backpedal a little so you post this explanation for your actions. Bottom line, voting someone for inactivity is NOT an rxn test. Not even close.

Who softclaimed? That had nothing to do with it. I tried to bait someone into voting on the inactive Drake wagon (It wouldn't be proof positive but it would reinforce suspicions) and then Drake seemed to be coming back so I didn't think it was going to come about.

Then you go and do this shit... Now what you did could make a bit of sense... Looks townie to me, but in my experience, scum usually looks town. Why is this? Because scum is playing a role. Their role is to pretend to be town. To do townie things. Like the thing you just did. The jury is out. The verdict is coming...

Town also tend to look town because well they are town. I am not going to call this bull shit so much as there is just nothing here.

DAMN! You are ALLLLLLL over the board on this. Now I am back to viewing you as scum. You actually slipped a little here. First you said you were looking to see if anyone would sheep your vote. Now you are saying you were looking to see if a specific, unnamed player reacted in a certain way by increasing their posts? All I have to say is that you had better townread real quick. You can't have that many more posts that I have yet to see...

Trying to sheep a reaction yes but in particular I was hoping to get a reaction out of someone specific. "I was hoping to bait a reaction for someone I considered scummy..." If someone else had responded, I would have taken note and have taken some brief notes on the drake inactivity case but quite frankly I've been looking at you.


Sounds like excuses...

Alrighty, now we get to the real kicker. FYI, I had food poisoning recently. Wasn't posting much then. Also, I haven't been proded either. Perchance you are mixing games. Regardless, you haven't townread to me. BUT I can't get a strong scumread either. For this reason, I'm not calling you town or scum, but I will be keeping a close eye on you... Perhaps others could weigh in on this? I kinda still feel like Strike slipped earlier.[/quote]

Sorry to hear you had food poisoning but with the exception of Sunday you did continue to post elsewhere both in this forum and outside it. it's not a strong case no but we have (or had) 4 days to deadline so we needed to get something as far as a case moving.

[jonty125]

And only when I called you on it that you unvoted, since you posted 3 times since drake's return.

Well drake made a few posts when he came back on a debate on the setup but I was waiting to see if he'd sink under the radar again over the test of time he hasn't (curse of the commentary) so I unvoted as he was being more active

[TheGeneral2112]

For record General it is really hard to tell that you posted an image there, almost counted vote in the image. Not saying you have to do anything different, just a heads up.

Sorry, I should have captured a little bit larger area. It's just easier than quoting. Ctrl+Shift+4, instantly uploaded, link placed on my clipboard.