Oh really?


That bit...does not make any sense. "If I was scum then that post wouldn't exist" is a non-argument, and saying you weren't aware of any team doesn't mean that your alignment is no longer "Self".
But that really doesn't say much. I have more.


It wasn't pessimism. It was game theory, more than anything else. At this point, the only way CK can win is if I and someone else cooperate to mark her or she's NK'd by scum. The first one is a bad idea because we need her vote more, and the second one isn't going to happen because scum generally do not play nice.
My saying "CK can't win" isn't me out to get her. It's saying that she really can't win.


I believe so. I think at one point I saw a 1/6 in a very early day update, but I might have been imagining things.
Static abilities are ones that are always on, and don't require a declaration to use.


So at first early on, you convinced everyone to stop marking because it was a scummy move and potential threat to 'the town', and now you want us to mark one specific player just to fulfill a wincon?
Your story is not consistent. You're trying to lead everyone.


I have never been in a Werewolf/Mafia game where the scum play nice.

~~~

No, I'm definitely not voting ChillBill. As I said earlier, he is most likely not scum because he voluntarily stirred up activity at the end of a day to push for a lynch.
You, on the other hand, are not remaining consistent. You're now encouraging marking for what seems like a really silly reason. But if you want CK's vote more than you want her wincon, why even bring it up?
I know I have been getting flak during the course of the game for leading things, and I understand that, but, to an extent, you are too. And I know I'll get flak for this too, by breaking my own rule of lynch choices...

Vote: Different55

...but I'm not going to support a lynch of a player who I believe to be largely in the clear. Cherrygrove, I'm looking at you too.

What do you mean, I'm not being consistent? I just want to help out CK. I'm not taking about the here and now, I'm talking about the future. Right now, we need her vote. BUT LATER. After her vote is no longer required. Then we kill her. It'd be pretty crappy of us if we took advantage of her being verifiably not scum, and then left her to lose the game. And, like I pointed out, there are very few situations I can foresee that end in CK losing. If we win and at least one of you and GP are alive, CK wins, too. If the wolves win, they can NK her and she wins. If she dies before the end of the game, CK wins. The only situation she wouldn't win in, is if the wolves and all markingpeople are dead at the end of the game. So I don't agree with your game "logic". Like I said, from my viewpoint, CK winning is one of the surest things in this game.

" That bit...does not make any sense. "If I was scum then that post wouldn't exist" is a non-argument,"
I know it was a nonargument. It wasn't intended to be a defense, but you seem to have latched onto it as if it were.


"and saying you weren't aware of any team doesn't mean that your alignment is no longer "Self"."
???
My alignment has never been self. It's "Non-Scum"

" I believe so. I think at one point I saw a 1/6 in a very early day update, but I might have been imagining things."
I haven't seen anything like that in any of the thread crawling I've been doing recently. Link, please.

Sorry for the bad formatting. I'm on my phone in the hospital right now. I probably won't be replying to any more responses or posts until the next day comes around.

Scratch that. Turns out that a mild cold I had the other day is still rattling around in my lungs, so we have to wait 4 weeks before we can try again. So it probably won't interfere with werewolf at all.

Looks like the wolves are getting a free kill tonight. To be perfectly honest, this isn't filling me with confidence in DNA or CB. NOT because he voted for me, or because he disagrees with me about CK. It's because he upset the bandwagon without having solid information to go on. CG admitted that he was going in blind, which we're fortunate enough to have avoided for the most part this game, but then DNA stepped up to defend CB citing essentially nothing as his source. He cited one isolated case of CB behaving in a way inconsistent with scum. Just one. And he used that as a reason to completely refuse to vote for this person for whom we have less information than we do for most other people. He then turns me showing gratitude to our MVP into a flimsy accusation for being "inconsistent".

And ChillBill, instead of spitting out a few chunks of information like everyone else to be lynched, just said that lynching him is a mistake.

I'm not going to accuse either of them of being scum, but something's not right here, and I'm keeping my vote set firm where it is.

Say what you will, but I'm not going to support a lynch out of the blue this late in the game. I really want to see some solid reasoning of why you think ChillBill is a threat, because if not, lynching him is worse than having a No Lynch day, at this late in the game.

Semivalid point, except that you turned around and voted for me without solid reasoning. You just listed perceived inconsistency as your reason.

Unfortunately, at any point in the game, we don't have the luxury of relaxing and gathering information to accurately find scum like you seem to want to do. We can't afford to wait around for information that will never arrive. If somebody could safely give up some information without giving themselves away as a target, I'm sure they would. But they can't or for some reason won't. So we can't wait on them while wolves slowly pick us off. We have to make a lynch every night and hope we get lucky, because our situation isn't going to improve if we wait around.

Not that it matters. The day is over, and now someone else will get marked or dead. Do the wolves give out marks or do they hand out death? I thought it was marks but a lot of people have been instadying.

I actually see quite a few vaild points against you. I still can't make sense out of your defense agaisnt the accusations made off your alliance. You still haven't presented anything substantial to support your push for ChillBill's lynch. The only slightly-vaild defense that you've given so far is that you were trying to defend CK. Alright, cool, except for the fact that she's the only one of us thats definitely cleared. She doesn't need defending, I was really the only one to lunge at her throat, but I withdrew my accusation and realized my theories were wrong.

So, overall, yeah, you are being inconsistent, and quite frankly, suspicious.

VOTE: DIFFERENT55

If someone is inconsistent, it's DNA, as I explained above. I hope you don't end up killing a townie DNA.

I won't vote, because I don't think any of these two are scum.

Ho-lee crap.

First off, I'm not defending CK. Well, I am. Sort of. I want her to win, but DNA seems to think that it's impossible. But I don't want her to win now. We need her right now.

Second, what valid points? He gave one half-hearted accusation because I'm "inconsistent" which was based on the single act of me requesting that CK be marked later in the game. Go back and look at his post.

I haven't provided anything substantial for CB's lynch because I don't have anything. I'm supporting CG's lynching of him because he's one of the biggest unknowns, and because he still hasn't provided any information. Like I said, we MUST lynch someone every night. We can't wait around for information that's not coming.


Okay, this is one I don't get at all. Show me where I'm being inconsistent because I'm not seeing it. I can almost get the "DON'T MARK ANYONE" vs "Mark CK so she can win later" being seen as inconsistent, but my motivation here is to just be a decent person and show some gratitude to our MVP later after we know we've won. The original statement to not mark anyone was made when I couldn't think of any situations where marking people would be okay.

Also, because it hasn't gotten much attention, I'm going to say this again:

This is suspicious. We know next to nothing about CB except that at one point in time, he acted in a way that scum would not act. But DNA is ready to go after the people who voted for him first, Cherrygrove and I. This is just like the beginning of the game, where DNA was absolutely positive that GhostPony was a townie, citing absolutely nothing as his source (and then marked him).


If it gets bad, I'll probably just cough up my role in an attempt to at least "clear" myself.

Also, are we sure that wolves can only mark people? Because there have been a lot of deaths recently, and not a lot of marks.

...I can never trust my own decisions anymore...

UNVOTE: DIFFERENT55

You seem to be proving that you're using some kind of logic that I just can't understand... At this point I'm just too confused to vote... I no longer see enough evidence to condemn any one of us. I'm starting to see why this game is subtitled "Trust Issues".

We can't keep having no lynches. We just can't. It doesn't seem like anyone will die today, which means 8 will remain tomorrow. That's a 1:4 ratio.

This is starting to look grim.

You know, it's starting to get interesting.

I am now giving you a week long extension for this day, since I care about the debate/carnage.

If you can point out all the parts I'm not explaining well, I can try to clear things up.

>get 1 week extension
>go from posting once every ~15 minutes-3 hours to no posts within an almost 24 hour period.

Where'd everyone go?

>greentexting anywhere but 4chins
kek

> 4chn
>not even once

CB set himself apart from everyone else about to be lynched by providing no information on his role.

I find this suspicious but insubstantial. Despite being insubstantial, it's the most substantial thing I know of, currently.

Good day to you, and may your shipping powers pass us by this day.

;_; Come on guys, I can see you getting on. I'm stalking your last visited times (those of you that have them)

Do you guys want to get shipped? Because this is how you get shipped.

Well, I haz nothing to say. o_O The only dude I suspect is DNA, and the rest looks fine to me.
Imma read the posts a bit and check for suspicious stuff.

Why DNA? Let's get some conversion worthy of a 7 day extension going.

Sorry, I've been under-the-weather the past few days, with headaches so bad, staring at a screen was the last thing I was planning on doing.

Anyway,

Different, I was only suspicious of you because you said you were defending CK, who was already basically in the clear, but you've stated your reasons for that, so to me, you're fine. The only other thing I had to hold against you was your random vote against ChillBill, but Cherrygrove started that bandwagon, so if I should be wary of anyone, it's Cherrygrove.

However, ChillBill hasn't been too active, so it's not too weird or random to vote agaisnt him. In fact, his only defense agaisnt the seemlying random accusations was simply to say he wasn't a wolf, and then to agree with his own lynch. This make me a bit wary... I'm not sure why. I just feel as though that might be a last-ditch attempt to look innocent... though that might be him trying to sincerely let people know he's innocent.

DNA... I'm still not sure about. He's backed off a bit once I pointed out that he was dominating the thread, which could be him simply not having much to say, or it could be him trying to lay low. But at this point, honestly, he's helped the town out quite a lot. Maybe the wolves are keeping him around because he's a very easy person to turn the town against? Or maybe this is just the smartest he's ever played as a wolf.

With no one saying anything, the day's starting to come to a standstill. We've bought ourselves some time, but it won't matter if we still can't figure out who to lynch.

Remember, if we get a wolf today, even after the night kill, the ratio stands town:scum as 7:1.
If we can't get enough votes to lynch, they'll stand 4:1
If we lynch a townie... 5:2

TL;DR- Let's use this extra week to make damn sure we get a wolf, or it's basically over.