The Village of Secrets [GAME OVER] Werewolves Win!

[Jmac1026]

@ Jmac1026 how do you feel about his willingness to claim?

I feel nothing. Its common logic to claim before you get lynched. That's like saying "I plan on eating breakfast in the morning," or "I plan on tying my shoes after I put them on."

I'm not defending him, but I'm certainly not going to support a lynch based entirely on his meta, especially from people who he's never even played with. That's just nuts.

[jak111]

@ Jmac1026 how do you feel about his willingness to claim?

I feel nothing. Its common logic to claim before you get lynched. That's like saying "I plan on eating breakfast in the morning," or "I plan on tying my shoes after I put them on."

I'm not defending him, but I'm certainly not going to support a lynch based entirely on his meta, especially from people who he's never even played with. That's just nuts.

I've played with him enough times to say something is a bit fishy. I may be rusty, but jonty in this game seems to be leaning toward his not-so-townie self. That being said, for Day 1, all we can go on is pick a few to pressure for claims and then either make a lynch or go into a no-lynch and get more info in the night. (For example, a tracker/cop finding out he is not exactly who he says he is (VT, doc, etc).

[Lootifer]

I would have thought that if Jonty is scummy then there will be some scummy things in that big ole wall of text other than a difference in posting between one game and the next. I am starting off skeptical of the case, I will keep you updated as I go through the post.

The Serious Part
So once again, X-Stor-X, starts off with his dislike of the jokevote stage, which personally I'm a great fan of, but hey-ho one man's poison is another man's pudding. And the jokevote stage continues, which includes but was no limited to [sarcasm]a bit of playground bullying as we all voted X-Stor-X due to his dislike of the jokevote stage[/sarcasm] and MudPuppy getting confused by this new fangled vote system (which I believe I understand just in case I'd confused anyone).

Only thing that stands out here is the sarcasm bit. Something is odd here. Jonty can you please explain the sentance starting with And the jokevote... up until the [/sarcasm]?

Note this is all information and no analysis which is usually a scum-tell, but since its the first paragraph that's null.

THEN!!! Things get serious, with jak's awful case on Nark. He has three reasons cited for voting Nark. Numero uno. 1. He's the last to continue the BW, and that makes him scummy because ... everyone's found a new joke in the jokevote stage and he was the last with the old one.
Point secondus, he sheeps everybody's else's' reasons, jak you openly admit your vote is the first serious vote of the game so how can you judge a vote that is not serious
And lastly, the Nark is time wasting and/or pushing for the lynch, well firstly I'd argue you can't be doing both of them on D1 joke case but meh, that's a moot point. Once again, we're back to this been a joke vote so if X-Stor-X was in a L-2 position based on this claim alone he who asked him to claim, should be made to claim himself. And this all rounded off with a very much WIFOM argument, that Nark is trying to push for a mislynch, deliberately (which as scum, probably would be a good idea). But the final statement i.e. Nark is scummy, I feel is very much based off the assumption Nark is scum.

Hard to follow writing aside this section is still interesting.

His reply to jaks first point is odd but makes sense contextually, jaks first point is crap [therefore Jonty comment is null].

Second point response is odd; but he does rightly point out something inconsistent with jaks case - this points towards him is building a case against jak rather than defending and/or buddying Nark, this is consistent with the rest of the post and to me the townier response of the two options (defending nark: slightly scummy, prodding jak: slightly towny) [leaning town].

Both jaks point and the response here are classic early day confirmational bias fuelled by the earlier two points. However the first sentence seems to be just a instinctive observation and comment [townish], second sentence I can't quite work out; I dont think there's anything telling though - again he's not directly defending Nark so nothing obviously scummy here [null]. Third sentence I don't think is particularly accurate (it's not really WIFOM) because going back to the original action Nark either voted for X-Stor because he's scum and he knows X-Stor is town, or he voted for X-Stor thinking he is a suitable target for lynching or at the least pressure (which under the circumstances was reasonable); but to me this is simply a case of over-using WIFOM rather than a result of Jonty being scum [therefore null].

Now at a high level whats Jontys main point here?

Scum-jonty is either building a potential mislynch on jak or defending nark (for buddying purposes or diverting away from a scum-buddy) or both - looking at the general jist of the content it looks like the former; this means that his case on jak will be fabricated. However his case on jak has some merit: there's a lot wrong with his initial case on Nark; so not a lot here saying Scum-jonty is at play.

Town-jonty would be simply digging into a lead that he noticed; jaks rubbish case. This seems about right since he would need to defend nark a little bit (which he does) but the main focus would be building a case on jak.

Overall I am leaning town from this section alone.

Now, if I'd arrived, at this point in the game I would of voted jak without a second thought for his hideous case, but Nark's response, is well, less than flattering, it's very much an angry shout, at jak. Now, here is the thing that makes me hesitate on voting either of these two candidates. Is Nark's reaction justified? Has he over-reacted, jury's out on that one I'm afraid, could he have reacted better, definitely yes, a nice little deconstruction of the argument like mine would of been very good Anyhow, later down the page, Nark continues flinging the insults at jak, rather than the case at hand, and Nark, by his own admission, claims to have played the game for six years, surely, with that much experience, he would of addressed the case at hand by now, rather than just raging at jak, but is this outside of Nark's meta, not really, I've known Nark to be a very agressive player, and this, I wouldn't say is too far astray. BACK TO REALITY (or back to life, you're slightly behind) jak says his vote stays on Nark for Nark's overreaction, which I say has a lot more justification than his original claim.

Well arse. I was actually building up a little bit of the ole confirmation bias of my own leading into this paragraph. I thought to myself: "Yessss case on jak looks towny, but then following up with a flop onto also attacking Nark would be what I would expect of a scum-jonty" but this is wall of text has pretty solid reasoning and mimics my thoughts as well. It's not really what I would expect from scum covering his bases (i.e. being neutral/middle of the road) in terms of language etc.

And lastly, Roger Dodger, which was a campaign a few years ago around here to not try and sneak on to buses, but aside. I don't know if he's been skimming or just plain newb. For now, I'm going to go with newb.

Meh

So where to cast my vote, jak, for his poor case on Nark, or Nark for his poor reaction on the poor case. vote jak this doesn't say Nark is blameless but I do believe that the origins of jak's case of Nark, are poor, and this does partially justify Nark's reaction.

I can see how he reached that conclusion.

To me the post is null-leaning-town. There's very little scummyness in there, and considering the length and detail i'd expect a few little holes to appear.

[jak111]

I fail to see how he has any case against me, I have said myself my first case was not strong, it was the first REAL case of the day (no matter how crumby).

He focuses on my first case more than my second case on Anark which DOES hold water for Day 1 cases. Which people seem to fail to look at more. They just want to point fingers at the guy who made this get serious.

There's a few reasons why they are against me making this serious and getting my 2nd case on Anark which was more serious than the first (let's face it, everyone knows my first case was nothing, just throwing knives hoping to hit a target in which undeniably I succeeded in).

Those reasons would be:

1.) Whether they be town, mafia or another party, avoiding digging into an actual case would cause them to become targets of judgement later on if this case falls through (which it just might, but we don't know until we push onto Anark's and now Jonty's reactions to my case).

2.) If they are mafia, they could be trying to avoid a successful town lynching a mafia Day 1 which would put us at an early advantage.

3.) If they are town, they could seriously just not want to pressure for information in case we out a power role, which would suck, but I am sure a doc/investigative role can check them in the night to confirm them right/wrong.

This is Day 1, and from what I've seen I am confident there must be something to find in between the Anark's overreaction to my first case which brought on the more serious second case, or Jonty's defense of Anark, by trying to turn my case around when he knows full well the first case was never meant to hold 100% water.

To me, at least, it looks like he is trying to take the pressure off of Anark for one reason or another. Which leads me to the belief that we may have outed a group Day 1 (whether they be mafia, 3rd party, 4th party, cult, whatever).

If you need me to break down jonty's post for you Lootifer, I can to the best that I read it as.

[spiesr]

3.) If they are town, they could seriously just not want to pressure for information in case we out a power role, which would suck, but I am sure a doc/investigative role can check them in the night to confirm them right/wrong.

Oh yeah, that's what we want, the cop spending his time checking someone we already decided we trust enough to not lynch...

[Anarkistsdream]

Jak111

show

Rishaed

show

Lootifer

show

Spiesr

show

X-Stor-X

show

Final findings... Virus, Roger Dodger, and kgb are actually town....

Jonty!!! I found it odd that you claim indefensible, but wait to claim, as if allowing your scum buddies to jump on the wagon to help prove their innocence and give credence to your lie...

Vote Jonty

[Jmac1026]

Holy crap Anarkist. Your post looks like you broke the forum. Could you possibly fix it? I have no idea what you're trying to say.

[Anarkistsdream]

Holy crap Anarkist. Your post looks like you broke the forum. Could you possibly fix it? I have no idea what you're trying to say.

Christ almighty, you are not lying... But I am drinking and not very coherent... Tomorrow morning... it looks like half my post was deleted...

[StorrZerg]

i hate this page

@anark i don't see any of your thoughts on Spiesr
you made comment on my case. saying "weak"

how so, can you explain why you think its weak? Besides that, what do you think of the action then of me pushing onto jonty?

[Lootifer]

I will have a quick edit to see if I can do anything. I wont touch the content.

[Lootifer]

Spoilers embedded in spoilers... Turns out it breaks forums.

[rishaed]

Jak111
Rishaed

show

I do remember our games together, but its just that I found what you wrote to be a stronger reaction than what I was used to from you. I admit its weak but it was an initial gut feeling. I also don't expect you to come up with an elaborate defense against a gut feeling. Also feeling I missed something here on D1, so rereading quite a bit.

[virus90]

@ lootifier / anark.

is the post now as it should be? or does it still miss information or something like that?
and nark how did you get to the conclusion that me kgb and roger doger are town?
i do know that your at least 33% right but whats your reason? was it supposed to be in the big post as well?

[superkeener]

Official Vote Count 1.3

Anarkistsdream (1): rishaed
HotShot53 (1): spiesr
Iron Butterfly (0):
jak111 (1): jonty125
Jmac1026 (0):
L-2 jonty125 (6): Iron Butterfly, X-Stor-X, Whatsausage, Roger Dodger, jak111, Anarkistsdream
kgb007 (1): HotShot53
Lootifer (0):
MudPuppy (0):
rishaed (0):
Roger Dodger (0):
spiesr (0):
virus90 (0):
Whatsausage (0):
X-Stor-X (0):

No Lynch (0):

Not Voting: virus90, Jmac1026, MudPuppy, kgb007, Lootifer,

With 15 alive, it takes 8 votes to lynch. If 8 votes are not reached by the deadline, then the first player with 6+ votes will be lynched.

Deadline for Day 1 is April 03, 2014.

[Iron Butterfly]

unvote jonty

When I voted jonty It was a straight up joke vote. I went to bed early last night and saw the vote count had him to L2 just now. When I vote someone it will be for a valid reason.

[Anarkistsdream]

Spoilers embedded in spoilers... Turns out it breaks forums.

You are the man.... Thanks for fixing that, brother.

Now all of my arguments are there.

[jonty125]

Only thing that stands out here is the sarcasm bit. Something is odd here. Jonty can you please explain the sentance starting with And the jokevote... up until the [/sarcasm]?

I was just giving a quick play-by-play guide to the jokevote stage, it was to help set the context for my argument.

Jonty!!! I found it odd that you claim indefensible, but wait to claim, as if allowing your scum buddies to jump on the wagon to help prove their innocence and give credence to your lie...

Vote Jonty

OK, I don't understand this. The majority of the votes on me, are for me playing against my meta, and by my own admission, this probably is (I am in the process of trying to change my meta). If I was to come out and say, no, you guys are wrong, this is my normal game, it would not take long for that lie to be picked apart. The accusations are true, whether they make me scum, that's another matter. But we're only going to end up with a WIFOM argument.

I fail to see how he has any case against me, I have said myself my first case was not strong, it was the first REAL case of the day (no matter how crumby).

See this is my issue, jak, the case was poor, and I don't think can be justified, by saying it was the first REAL case of the day, if it was the first REAL case of the day, then it would have substance.

(let's face it, everyone knows my first case was nothing, just throwing knives hoping to hit a target in which undeniably I succeeded in).

see this gives me the impression, you almost don't care who we have claim, just to get a claim, now that would be scummy.

Which leads me to the belief that we may have outed a group Day 1 (whether they be mafia, 3rd party, 4th party, cult, whatever).

there is no link between me and Nark, to my knowledge.

[jak111]

I will have a quick edit to see if I can do anything. I wont touch the content.

Do I want to know what it looked like before? Let me check...

show

[/spoiler][/spoiler][/spoiler][/spoiler]

Nope, I don't see it effecting it too bad.

See this is my issue, jak, the case was poor, and I don't think can be justified, by saying it was the first REAL case of the day, if it was the first REAL case of the day, then it would have substance.

It was the first real case in the context that it was no longer JUST a joke vote like most were doing at the time. You know I mean that and now you're trying to twist it to something else.

see this gives me the impression, you almost don't care who we have claim, just to get a claim, now that would be scummy.

I am not pushing for a lynch Day 1 like the real scum do, I am pushing for information that we can use in the night to better use any actions people may have to help town out better tomorrow.

The real scummyness trails from wanting NO information for our power roles to use in the night to help find/kill scum. I found two people I find scummy and whether people agree with me or not I want more information on one of them before I just move on and potentially let a scum go without any more pressure. But hey, it's Day 1, let scum go into the night with no pressure on their claims so they can perfect a story together for tomorrow.

there is no link between me and Nark, to my knowledge.

Of course if there WAS you'd not admit to it, why would you? The only townie link would be masons and which I believe you not to be, so any other link would most likely be mafia/3rd party.

Interesting how it went to L2 though and still no claim from you, perhaps we need another to vote and put you back into the spotlight for claim time.

Depending on your claim personally to me, would dictate on whether or not I push on Anark again, if there's no link like you say, then you could be a townie ignorantly defending a mafia (ignorantly is not an offensive term, it just means you don't know, the same with everyone in the game besides the mafia are ignorant to who the mafia is, so do not blow that word out of proportion).

If you admit to there being a link, then I may back off of Anark, but if there isn't my 2nd case on him still stands and my vote will quickly be back onto him for potential scum.

But all in all, I do not want a lynch today, I want information. If someone begins pushing for a lynch with basically no REAL info (roles at night) then personally I'd find that scummy, killing off the town before we can put all of our roles into action to defend town and find mafia.

Here's some reasons why we should not be pushing for a lynch but information instead:

1.) We do not know how many "mis-lynches" we have before mafia outnumber us.
2.) We do not know if there is a "Lyncher" third party or a "Fool" third party (1 needs to lynch a specific person, other needs to just be lynched).
3.) We do not know how many power roles there are, we could all be power roles and lynching anyone could result in a loss of a power role.
4.) One less townie is one less person pushing for a mafia lynch tomorrow when we have clearer information on people (if investigative roles wish to tell us what is what).
5.) Without information today, power roles go into the night without any leads on what to do (watchers can be on the claimed or docs can be, trackers can follow them or someone else, etc etc).

Spin my words as much as you want, I find it odd how the people that are usually pushing for information and lynches Day 1 when they are town are NOT doing so this game. Which as X-stor-X pointed out is different Meta. Which I do remember people used a lot of that around here back in the day.

[spiesr]

I am not pushing for a lynch Day 1 like the real scum do, I am pushing for information that we can use in the night to better use any actions people may have to help town out better tomorrow.

This argument is BS. Scum do what it takes to win. Usually this involves them surviving and therefore looking like town.

[jak111]

I am not pushing for a lynch Day 1 like the real scum do, I am pushing for information that we can use in the night to better use any actions people may have to help town out better tomorrow.

This argument is BS. Scum do what it takes to win. Usually this involves them surviving and therefore looking like town.

So basically like what they are trying to do by twisting my words? Or others are doing by not giving their thoughts on the current cases in case they slip somewhere or say something that gets an investigative role to check them out?

Go on and say it, you pick one sentence from my entire thing and think it's an argument. I am simply stating that unlike what they may believe I am trying to do, I am not. I want information, not useless blabbering back and forth over Day 1 and not a lynch without knowing more info, this is going to go up to the last second like it did in my game and people are going to panic that we have no information and accidentally lynch people prematurely.

If you're town you'd want information out early to avoid last second panics that usually end up in misinformed lynches.

Let's say this gets to the last 2 days and someone makes a case about player A being inactive, everyone begins piling onto the bandwagon for a claim and that person has actually less than 2 days to claim, because then if we decide he is townie or to give him a chance it may be too late waiting for people to get on to think it through and unvote if we go that route.

That's exactly what will happen if we don't begin this early. But instead of nodding your heads and doing something productive I see people stalling it. Then, instead of adding anything constructive or productive they just tear at each other with no other reads/leads/etc. Right now it's me, jonty and about 2-3 others tops contributing our ideas and reasons why we're leaning this way or that, others are sheeping it and trying to get by.

So to be honest, I have more of a town read from jonty and Anark than I do half of the players in this game, that does not mean I don't want confirmation from them on what they are. I gotta check all the roads and no leave potential scum in my town reads early on. Because later that will bite us in the ass.

Now I will be quiet for a bit here and I want to see other's thoughts at the very LEAST on what's going on and then hear what they think we should do. Scummarining does NOT work with me in the game.

I want info on jonty and Anark early so I can turn my focus on somewhere else. Do not leave this for the last second decisions. THAT is the obvious signs of a scum "surviving and looking like town". I am putting my neck out on the line to be potentially SHOT tonight for barking up the right tree, but most of you are hanging back and just letting time go by.

[jak111]

Sorry for double posting, this is not entirely game related (just for my activity sake) if I am needed to respond and don't I may of lost power. Nova Scotia is being hit with a storm all day and night today. Everything is closed, and the winds are supposed to reach 120km/hr. So chances of power going out are pretty high and for how long is unknown.

[HotShot53]

This has been one of the craziest day 1's I've seen so far... normally day 1's are a lot more boring. A lot of different players than the other games I've been in too, which makes it a lot harder to get reads on people.

It's possible I mis-read what kgb said, since no-one else read it that way I guess... so I will unvote

Honestly, I don't see the case on jonty, although him admitting that it is different than his normal does raise a question. At this point it's looking like he'll have to claim sooner or later though, so I would recommend he claim sooner so we can move on to other places.

I do think nark way overreacted to the vote on him though... while the original case had no real substance (as has been admitted), that reaction deserves some pressure, if nothing else maybe he'll learn to not overreact so much in the future lol.

So after jonty claims (as seems inevitable), we'll see where to go next... my support would be to go back to the anark case, so I will vote Anarkistsdream

[Whatsausage]

This has been one of the craziest day 1's I've seen so far... normally day 1's are a lot more boring. A lot of different players than the other games I've been in too, which makes it a lot harder to get reads on people.

It's possible I mis-read what kgb said, since no-one else read it that way I guess... so I will unvote

Honestly, I don't see the case on jonty, although him admitting that it is different than his normal does raise a question. At this point it's looking like he'll have to claim sooner or later though, so I would recommend he claim sooner so we can move on to other places.

I do think nark way overreacted to the vote on him though... while the original case had no real substance (as has been admitted), that reaction deserves some pressure, if nothing else maybe he'll learn to not overreact so much in the future lol.

So after jonty claims (as seems inevitable), we'll see where to go next... my support would be to go back to the anark case, so I will vote Anarkistsdream

It doesn't seem as inevitable anymore. He said he would claim at L-2, and when he reached L-2, someone (IB) unvoted before he did return to post and therefore didn't claim. So the only way to get him to claim is for you or someone else to put him back at L-2.

[Anarkistsdream]

Hell, folks, lemme help you all out... Since most of you are being absolutely ridiculous, I will jump up and claim now... Guess what? I am a vanilla townie, and so not to quote my PM, I am a Peasant... That isn't what the title says, it mentions village... So, folks, way to out a Vanilla Townie!

You all are ludicrous... I am always aggressive, never quiet, and usually rude... Go back through mt games... Then see what I flipped when I was lynched or killed... And there is always one idiot, usually rhat I had never played with before, who was driving the case against me, and who afterward said, "It isn't MY fault... He seemed scummy." And all the people who have played with me before, several who have been in multiple games with me, will say, "That's the way he always plays..." And then the cycle repeats itself the next game... It truly is ridiculous, but that fact is also what keeps me coming back. To see when that trend will change.... and to laugh at the irony and stupidity of it all.

[StorrZerg]

i don't know what the hell this is... is this repeat of BB