Day 12 ~ 2015 Game of Champions

#2801

"Super safe" - what do you mean by this? That he posted less than usual? But he said he was going to all along...
"Aggressive JJ" I've seen JJ get like this when suspected for crap reasons as a civ. I haven't seen it from him when bad.

But, HB, come back to the main point which you keep missing...

WHY WOULDNT HE JUST VOTE LLAMA? There is no bad reason under the sun that I can possibly imagine for him to go after Boomslang and declare that he felt llama looked genuine in his fight with me.

If JJ is mafia, he'd have to be a pretty daft one. He risked his own life to start a new bandwagon on someone he didn't know if he could lynch, when someone else he had previously claimed to suspect and he could have voted for in self-defence would have been perfectly understandable and not suspicious at all.

@Mac - I won't speak for myself, because I was having the conversation with FZ and JJ in the thread at the time.

Why did he need to toss up Boomslang as a 'desperate counterwagon'????

Why not just vote llama....

#2802

HamburgerBoy wrote:In fairness Jimmy's vote for self-preservation is obvious, and FZ at least seemed favorable towards Jimmy prior to the LoRab rush. If Jimmy is scum, though, I think it means FZ was definitely a partner and distancing herself from the Boomslang thing just a little bit, maybe because they thought Boomslang's lynch was going to happen and come back town. Tranq is super massive scum though if he isn't silenced.

I agree that if JJ is scum, FZ is quite possibly a teammate.

I think it much more likely JJ isn't scum, though.

I also don't think Tranq is scum. This is pretty standard Tranq.

#2803

DharmaHelper wrote:What kind of fuckboy wagon is this?

Which one?

Because honestly, I'd agree with you that the JJ wagon is.

#2804

I voted JJJ cause it's clear to me this fucking guy has some ballsy teammates.

FZ. wrote:I have to be honest and say that despite my accusations of Lorab the past day, her response to me seemed a lot more genuine, even if flawed. It made me hesitate. But if it's between jjj and her, I'll go with her.
It does bother me that both Mac and HB, who know jjj better than us, think he could be bad. Why is that?

FZ. wrote:I voted Lorab. Don't see any other options. Let's hope it's the right decision. Good night

ART

THOU

FUCKING

SRS

#2805

Golden wrote:
But its hardly 6 votes in record time. People were discussing and agreeing a mutual target in the thread, and then those people all voted that way. It's not hard to follow. Making it out like its everyone just driving by is highly suspect, in my view.

Com'on, you can argue better. First of all, 6 votes in 30 minutes is factual fast. If I'd end up with this many votes in this amount of time, I'd go berserk. Second, despite all dormant suspicions on LoRab, she was hardly a major topic anymore, throughout at least the last day, apart from JJJ "mulling over", Epignosis (with the only vote on her until this wagon) re-stating his case and FZ mentioning her again (I only traced back a few pages, though). If LoRab is indeed bad or an indy that needs removing, this'll be inspired, but if it ends up a mislynch, this massive move on her will be hella confusing and suspicious, regardless of "mutual targets" discussed or not in the thread.

LET ME POST

#2806

Golden wrote:
DharmaHelper wrote:What kind of fuckboy wagon is this?
Which one?

Because honestly, I'd agree with you that the JJ wagon is.

Bruh if you can't look at these LoRab votes and see some kind of fuckery, I can't help you.

#2807

I am taking the position that Tranq is not silenced. I mean, who would silence him he's been silent all game. Now he comes in and votes for Lorab after being in no conversation about the dynamic of this lynch. I am voting him.

#2808

HamburgerBoy wrote:
Golden wrote:I'm doing it mostly because I think the case on JJ holds no merit at all and I have no idea how he is one of the two people even in the frame.
How about JJJ played super safe day 2 when people were considering that he could be Zebra's scumpartner, only got more aggressive day 3 when he really realized his life waas on the line, and made a giant case against Boomslang that didn't hold at all to scrutiny?

I agree that the initial case against JJJ was weird as fuck, but his reaction to it seemed totally unlike him. He has been snarky as fuck. Every time I've pressured him he starts swearing at me and spitting chips, which is again unlike him. "Mac, I appreciate the attempt but you are wrong. Here are a few reasons you are. Take some time to understand and get back to me." THAT is JJJ civ. Not "Fuck I am sick of this shit blerughgfgfsg gooooooollllyyyyy" like the shit he is doing here. All this craziness around his lynch just makes me feel like scum desparate to not get lynched and teammies helping. I think Golden is a major patsy.

Linki: Golden, here is a reason I literally just pulled from my ass instead of being one track minded.

There was 3 hours left when he pushed the button on Boomslang, if he just pushes Llama wagon and Llama flips civ, then Jimmy is a push button lynch on day 3.1. Now the conversation will include whichever of Boomslang, Lorab and Llama don't get lynched (assuming we fail to lynch him). As well as you, me and HB likely at each other's throats over what we've just been through. He has introduced an opportunity to him to survive two lynches, not just one. Also Llama is more present, better at defending himself and NOT CURSED so a 1v1 with Llama is a far riskier proposition than introducing scapegoats like Boomslang. Then you introduced Lorab who has proven an even easier scapegoat.

#2809

Super safe = he didn't want to step on anyone's toes, and while he posted a lot, he didn't make significant targeted attacks from my viewpoint.

Plenty of possibilities for why he wouldn't vote llama. Maybe llama and Jimmy were partners and forced into bussing because of the circumstances of Zebra's death. Maybe Jimmy worried that if Syndicaters saw a Jimmy-llama tie, that they wouldn't vote for one of their own. Maybe he thought llama interest was dying down, but knew that I was getting more skeptical of Jimmy. Etc.

And Boomslang was hardly a desperate counterwagon, a lot of people were considering him until I came out against it, followed by Mac (whose intent I'll admit I do not trust), and then you bringing up the curse thing. It could have happened.

#2810

Golden wrote:
HamburgerBoy wrote:In fairness Jimmy's vote for self-preservation is obvious, and FZ at least seemed favorable towards Jimmy prior to the LoRab rush. If Jimmy is scum, though, I think it means FZ was definitely a partner and distancing herself from the Boomslang thing just a little bit, maybe because they thought Boomslang's lynch was going to happen and come back town. Tranq is super massive scum though if he isn't silenced.
I agree that if JJ is scum, FZ is quite possibly a teammate.

I think it much more likely JJ isn't scum, though.

I also don't think Tranq is scum. This is pretty standard Tranq.

Not making a single post in a day while still voting is standard Tranq? Definitely not the Tranq I saw during A World Reborn, even prior to his conversion into a zombie.

#2811

juliets wrote:I am taking the position that Tranq is not silenced. I mean, who would silence him he's been silent all game. Now he comes in and votes for Lorab after being in no conversation about the dynamic of this lynch. I am voting him.

Or you could vote for his teammate, for whom your vote is likely to matter more.

#2812

Golden wrote:
I also don't think Tranq is scum. This is pretty standard Tranq.

I don't care if he flips as the Pope. It's unacceptable. If you're a civ, don't do shit like that, guaranteed to get you suspected. If he is silenced, it'd be the first instance I recall of this total silencing, and there are multiple ways to try signaling this.

LET ME POOOST

#2813

Sorsha FZ Tranq confirmed mafia goml

#2814

juliets wrote:I am taking the position that Tranq is not silenced. I mean, who would silence him he's been silent all game. Now he comes in and votes for Lorab after being in no conversation about the dynamic of this lynch. I am voting him.

Place it where it matters, vote Jimmy to negate Tranq's vote.

#2815

Ricochet wrote:
Golden wrote:
I also don't think Tranq is scum. This is pretty standard Tranq.
I don't care if he flips as the Pope. It's unacceptable. If you're a civ, don't do shit like that, guaranteed to get you suspected. If he is silenced, it'd be the first instance I recall of this total silencing, and there are multiple ways to try signaling this.

LET ME POOOST

I don't care for anyone calling anyone elses game 'unacceptable' as a civ game.

This kind of attitude has been around here enough in recent times. It's driving people away. It's time for it to stop.

Every civ is entitled to play the game their own way.

#2816

And epi has provided decent reason for being suspected, which is exactly why I say 'this is like tranqs standard game'. Tranq plays ambiguous deliberately at all times.

#2817

Well, at least this lynch is confirmed cray.

#2818

Not posting = not playing tho, and based on seeing Tranq both as a townie and a recruited scum, I can't imagine this is normal for him.

#2819

Tranq and Sorsha and FZ and JJJ confirmed mafia

#2820

HamburgerBoy wrote:Not posting = not playing tho, and based on seeing Tranq both as a townie and a recruited scum, I can't imagine this is normal for him.

I don't think he was recruited in WR.

#2821

Golden wrote:And epi has provided decent reason for being suspected, which is exactly why I say 'this is like tranqs standard game'. Tranq plays ambiguous deliberately at all times.

I think I have a pretty good grasp of JJJ's games since I've played probably 50 mafia games with the guy. I am not seeing civilian JJJ here. His cases have lacked fire, his reactions to my pressuring him have been unusually aggressive and he walked away without leaving a legacy. I'm not seeing civilian JJJ.

#2822

Golden wrote:
HamburgerBoy wrote:Not posting = not playing tho, and based on seeing Tranq both as a townie and a recruited scum, I can't imagine this is normal for him.
I don't think he was recruited in WR.

Killcruited or whatever right? Wasn't he a zombie recruited by juliets?

#2823

Golden wrote:
Ricochet wrote:
Golden wrote:
I also don't think Tranq is scum. This is pretty standard Tranq.
I don't care if he flips as the Pope. It's unacceptable. If you're a civ, don't do shit like that, guaranteed to get you suspected. If he is silenced, it'd be the first instance I recall of this total silencing, and there are multiple ways to try signaling this.

LET ME POOOST
I don't care for anyone calling anyone elses game 'unacceptable' as a civ game.

This kind of attitude has been around here enough in recent times. It's driving people away. It's time for it to stop.

Every civ is entitled to play the game their own way.

You don't seem to grasp that the essence of what I've been saying is counter-productiveness of civs pulling scummy moves.

Golden wrote:And epi has provided decent reason for being suspected, which is exactly why I say 'this is like tranqs standard game'. Tranq plays ambiguous deliberately at all times.

ISO Tranq = 0 on LoRab.

That is the only measure that interests me.

By your logic, Tranq can easily claim he was cognizant of every player that provided decent reason for suspicions, in order for Tranq to place his vote alongisde.

Ridiculous.

#2824

going with JJ. Mac makes a good point about how JJ has handled heat in the past vs his reaction to mac this cycle. And also, DH makes sense to me.

I'm now late for work.

#2825

MacDougall wrote:
Golden wrote:And epi has provided decent reason for being suspected, which is exactly why I say 'this is like tranqs standard game'. Tranq plays ambiguous deliberately at all times.
I think I have a pretty good grasp of JJJ's games since I've played probably 50 mafia games with the guy. I am not seeing civilian JJJ here. His cases have lacked fire, his reactions to my pressuring him have been unusually aggressive and he walked away without leaving a legacy. I'm not seeing civilian JJJ.

I was talking about tranq in that quote.

If you are right about JJ, and he did that shift away from llama when he could have just voted llama... well, kudos to Jay for fooling me. I'd call that move, as a baddie, stupid and pointless. But I guess it would have fooled me.

But I'll be astonished if that is correct.

#2826

voted LoRab then

#2827

DharmaHelper wrote:Tranq and Sorsha and FZ and JJJ confirmed mafia

No

#2828

Sorsha wrote:
DharmaHelper wrote:Tranq and Sorsha and FZ and JJJ confirmed mafia
No

Yes tho.

#2829

bea wrote:going with JJ. Mac makes a good point about how JJ has handled heat in the past vs his reaction to mac this cycle. And also, DH makes sense to me.

I'm now late for work.

Golden wrote:
MacDougall wrote:
Golden wrote:And epi has provided decent reason for being suspected, which is exactly why I say 'this is like tranqs standard game'. Tranq plays ambiguous deliberately at all times.
I think I have a pretty good grasp of JJJ's games since I've played probably 50 mafia games with the guy. I am not seeing civilian JJJ here. His cases have lacked fire, his reactions to my pressuring him have been unusually aggressive and he walked away without leaving a legacy. I'm not seeing civilian JJJ.
I was talking about tranq in that quote.

If you are right about JJ, and he did that shift away from llama when he could have just voted llama... well, kudos to Jay for fooling me. I'd call that move, as a baddie, stupid and pointless. But I guess it would have fooled me.

But I'll be astonished if that is correct.

Absolutely not stupid and pointless. If HB, DH, Rico and I weren't in here throwing our toys out of the pram, Lorab would be lynched (and it would have likely been Boomslang if it wasn't for HB and I) and tomorrow the conversation would be all about JJJ and Llama again. That is the kind of lynch that pisses me right off. I would call it very intelligent to introduce a patsy like Boomslang the way he did. He probably expected me to jump on his wagon and drive it tbh.

Linki: Motel Room wtf

#2830

DharmaHelper wrote:
Sorsha wrote:
DharmaHelper wrote:Tranq and Sorsha and FZ and JJJ confirmed mafia
No
Yes tho.

No what she's saying is that you are wrong about people other than her.

#2831

HamburgerBoy wrote:
Golden wrote:
HamburgerBoy wrote:Not posting = not playing tho, and based on seeing Tranq both as a townie and a recruited scum, I can't imagine this is normal for him.
I don't think he was recruited in WR.
Killcruited or whatever right? Wasn't he a zombie recruited by juliets?

Yes he was. I think quiet tranq is normal especially early but I don't like that he voted and didn't post.

#2832

Ricochet wrote:You don't seem to grasp that the essence of what I've been saying is counter-productiveness of civs pulling scummy moves.

I wish civs didn't play like scum too, but I've been fighting this fight ALL GAME and people who disagree just disagree.

But, thats different from calling someone elses game unacceptable.

I think JJ is going down, and I think that his voters are making a massive error. If he is lynched and comes back civ, I'll be putting a vote on HB as soon as the next day begins.

If JJ is actually bad, I've been bamboozled. I just don't think I have.

@Mac - if he just voted llama, the three of you might not be throwing your toys out of the pram at all.

#2833

DharmaHelper wrote:
Sorsha wrote:
DharmaHelper wrote:Tranq and Sorsha and FZ and JJJ confirmed mafia
No
Yes tho.

No tho.

#2834

Sorsha wrote:
HamburgerBoy wrote:
Golden wrote:
HamburgerBoy wrote:Not posting = not playing tho, and based on seeing Tranq both as a townie and a recruited scum, I can't imagine this is normal for him.
I don't think he was recruited in WR.
Killcruited or whatever right? Wasn't he a zombie recruited by juliets?
Yes he was. I think quiet tranq is normal especially early but I don't like that he voted and didn't post.

Dat teammate distancing tho 1/10

#2835

Golden wrote:
Ricochet wrote:You don't seem to grasp that the essence of what I've been saying is counter-productiveness of civs pulling scummy moves.
I wish civs didn't play like scum too, but I've been fighting this fight ALL GAME and people who disagree just disagree.

But, thats different from calling someone elses game unacceptable.

I think JJ is going down, and I think that his voters are making a massive error. If he is lynched and comes back civ, I'll be putting a vote on HB as soon as the next day begins.

If JJ is actually bad, I've been bamboozled. I just don't think I have.

@Mac - if he just voted llama, the three of you might not be throwing your toys out of the pram at all.

Yeah but if he just voted Llama he would have been 1v1 with a guy capable of defending himself and if he managed to win the battle he'd have been a push button day 3.1 lynch.

#2836

Can we CFD Golden for barking at me allegedly doing something that lately drives people away. Like, wtf. You play in odd ways, you get sussed by me. Always the case. Blank vote bandwagoning is not "standard" anything, on the civ side, and I'll never let it slide from anyone ever.

#2837

DharmaHelper wrote:
Sorsha wrote:
HamburgerBoy wrote:
Golden wrote:
HamburgerBoy wrote:Not posting = not playing tho, and based on seeing Tranq both as a townie and a recruited scum, I can't imagine this is normal for him.
I don't think he was recruited in WR.
Killcruited or whatever right? Wasn't he a zombie recruited by juliets?
Yes he was. I think quiet tranq is normal especially early but I don't like that he voted and didn't post.
Dat teammate distancing tho 1/10

ok dh

#2838

Can I just say getting to play with Mac after hosting him in Star Wars is like, really dope.

#2839

Golden wrote:If he is lynched and comes back civ, I'll be putting a vote on HB as soon as the next day begins.

So do you think I'm putting all of my effort into getting a town Jimmy lynched just because town Jimmy is so dangerous to scum? I've been vocally against him longer than anyone in the game I think, and I don't remember you taking too much issue with my suspicions, even if you didn't agree with most/any of them. Do you think I am protecting Boomslang or llama?

#2840

Golden wrote:
Ricochet wrote:You don't seem to grasp that the essence of what I've been saying is counter-productiveness of civs pulling scummy moves.
I wish civs didn't play like scum too, but I've been fighting this fight ALL GAME and people who disagree just disagree.

But, thats different from calling someone elses game unacceptable.

I think JJ is going down, and I think that his voters are making a massive error. If he is lynched and comes back civ, I'll be putting a vote on HB as soon as the next day begins.

If JJ is actually bad, I've been bamboozled. I just don't think I have.

@Mac - if he just voted llama, the three of you might not be throwing your toys out of the pram at all.

"Calling someone else's game unacceptable".

No, the vote move is. I can criticise someone's vote move all I want, it's called mafia. Doesn't mean I attacked his entire game.

#2841

DharmaHelper wrote:Can I just say getting to play with Mac after hosting him in Star Wars is like, really dope.

OMG you made me feel so warm and fuzzy just now.

#2842

HamburgerBoy wrote:
juliets wrote:I am taking the position that Tranq is not silenced. I mean, who would silence him he's been silent all game. Now he comes in and votes for Lorab after being in no conversation about the dynamic of this lynch. I am voting him.
Place it where it matters, vote Jimmy to negate Tranq's vote.

Hmmmm - Mac who has played with Jimmy in over 50 games see's his behavior as scum. I said I wasn't going to vote for JJJ but Mac is pretty persuasive. And I don't mind changing my mind at the last minute so ok - I will negate Tranqs vote by voting Jimmy.

#2843

Ricochet wrote:
Golden wrote:
Ricochet wrote:You don't seem to grasp that the essence of what I've been saying is counter-productiveness of civs pulling scummy moves.
I wish civs didn't play like scum too, but I've been fighting this fight ALL GAME and people who disagree just disagree.

But, thats different from calling someone elses game unacceptable.

I think JJ is going down, and I think that his voters are making a massive error. If he is lynched and comes back civ, I'll be putting a vote on HB as soon as the next day begins.

If JJ is actually bad, I've been bamboozled. I just don't think I have.

@Mac - if he just voted llama, the three of you might not be throwing your toys out of the pram at all.
"Calling someone else's game unacceptable".

No, the vote move is. I can criticise someone's vote move all I want, it's called mafia. Doesn't mean I attacked his entire game.

Rico, I'll ask that you don't describe anyone else's anything as unacceptable, ever. You don't actually get to decide their game style.

Recent games have had several mod interactions because of language like this, and its getting old. We can tell others they are suspicious because of things, we can suspect them all we want.

We can't tell them what is and is not an acceptable way to play the game.

#2844

juliets wrote:
HamburgerBoy wrote:
juliets wrote:I am taking the position that Tranq is not silenced. I mean, who would silence him he's been silent all game. Now he comes in and votes for Lorab after being in no conversation about the dynamic of this lynch. I am voting him.
Place it where it matters, vote Jimmy to negate Tranq's vote.
Hmmmm - Mac who has played with Jimmy in over 50 games see's his behavior as scum. I said I wasn't going to vote for JJJ but Mac is pretty persuasive. And I don't mind changing my mind at the last minute so ok - I will negate Tranqs vote by voting Jimmy.

JJJ was already leading, why have you focused on "negating" someone's vote?

#2845

juliets wrote:
HamburgerBoy wrote:
juliets wrote:I am taking the position that Tranq is not silenced. I mean, who would silence him he's been silent all game. Now he comes in and votes for Lorab after being in no conversation about the dynamic of this lynch. I am voting him.
Place it where it matters, vote Jimmy to negate Tranq's vote.
Hmmmm - Mac who has played with Jimmy in over 50 games see's his behavior as scum. I said I wasn't going to vote for JJJ but Mac is pretty persuasive. And I don't mind changing my mind at the last minute so ok - I will negate Tranqs vote by voting Jimmy.

Every post you make gives me the pingiest pings juliets. Even if the content is a totally agreeance with me. You have buddied me so much. I feel like I haven't showered in weeks right now.

#2846

Can we all agree that the FZ/Tranq votes both look scummy as fuck? Forget Sorsha and Motel Room for now and just focus on how totally baffling those two votes in particular are. What civ minded person makes those decisions?

#2847

Golden wrote:
Ricochet wrote:
Golden wrote:
Ricochet wrote:You don't seem to grasp that the essence of what I've been saying is counter-productiveness of civs pulling scummy moves.
I wish civs didn't play like scum too, but I've been fighting this fight ALL GAME and people who disagree just disagree.

But, thats different from calling someone elses game unacceptable.

I think JJ is going down, and I think that his voters are making a massive error. If he is lynched and comes back civ, I'll be putting a vote on HB as soon as the next day begins.

If JJ is actually bad, I've been bamboozled. I just don't think I have.

@Mac - if he just voted llama, the three of you might not be throwing your toys out of the pram at all.
"Calling someone else's game unacceptable".

No, the vote move is. I can criticise someone's vote move all I want, it's called mafia. Doesn't mean I attacked his entire game.
Rico, I'll ask that you don't describe anyone else's anything as unacceptable, ever. You don't actually get to decide their game style.

Recent games have had several mod interactions because of language like this, and its getting old. We can tell others they are suspicious because of things, we can suspect them all we want.

We can't tell them what is and is not an acceptable way to play the game.

<3

#2848

I mean, golden, if you had only started a bandwagon against Sorsha instead I would have been cool with that. You can't seriously look at my history and be surprised that I would vote Jimmy over LoRab.

#2849

Ricochet wrote:
juliets wrote:
HamburgerBoy wrote:
juliets wrote:I am taking the position that Tranq is not silenced. I mean, who would silence him he's been silent all game. Now he comes in and votes for Lorab after being in no conversation about the dynamic of this lynch. I am voting him.
Place it where it matters, vote Jimmy to negate Tranq's vote.
Hmmmm - Mac who has played with Jimmy in over 50 games see's his behavior as scum. I said I wasn't going to vote for JJJ but Mac is pretty persuasive. And I don't mind changing my mind at the last minute so ok - I will negate Tranqs vote by voting Jimmy.
JJJ was already leading, why have you focused on "negating" someone's vote?

I was gearing my comment to Ham Boys comment "Place it where it matters, vote Jimmy to negate Tranq's vote."

#2850

Golden wrote:
Ricochet wrote:
Golden wrote:
Ricochet wrote:You don't seem to grasp that the essence of what I've been saying is counter-productiveness of civs pulling scummy moves.
I wish civs didn't play like scum too, but I've been fighting this fight ALL GAME and people who disagree just disagree.

But, thats different from calling someone elses game unacceptable.

I think JJ is going down, and I think that his voters are making a massive error. If he is lynched and comes back civ, I'll be putting a vote on HB as soon as the next day begins.

If JJ is actually bad, I've been bamboozled. I just don't think I have.

@Mac - if he just voted llama, the three of you might not be throwing your toys out of the pram at all.
"Calling someone else's game unacceptable".

No, the vote move is. I can criticise someone's vote move all I want, it's called mafia. Doesn't mean I attacked his entire game.
Rico, I'll ask that you don't describe anyone else's anything as unacceptable, ever. You don't actually get to decide their game style.

Recent games have had several mod interactions because of language like this, and its getting old. We can tell others they are suspicious because of things, we can suspect them all we want.

We can't tell them what is and is not an acceptable way to play the game.

Take it to the mods, if you feel like it. If I'm obviously pissed off by a 0-post 0-reasoned vote, my language can happen to end up right there. Doesn't mean I'd use it in any regular way or resort to such critique under lesser circumstances. But again, I don't care about vouches that a 0-post 0-reasoned vote is "standard", "typical", "to be expected", "in need of time", "intentionally ambiguous".

Finish It