Pirates Mafia III - Day One

[Vincent Denis]

Just now, Daniel Lucas said:

You have ALREADY voted for two of them. Also this is not even a reply to what I was refering to, I've pointed out the difference of your narrative for the very similar cases, not your tendency in taking poke voters scummy.

Also if you think poke vote is scummy why do you not always believe they are made by actual scums? Why is it scummy then? You mean scummy town? Or not-scum scummy? What are you talking about?

I'm using the word scummy for things I believe scums would do. Clearly you are not.

 

*Fwom fwom fwom*

Do you think that every thing every player has called another play scummy for has been actual scum? Oh, great! Game over, everybody. All we have to do is look at who has been called scummy and there's the game. That was easy.

Are you suggesting I would believe that every poke vote is made by scum? Do you not think we have evidence of every poke vote ever placed? We can literally quantify it by looking. Not all poke votes are placed by scum so it would be utterly stupid to believe that or to believe that anybody would believe that. I cannot believe these words are coming out of my mouth that it would need to be explained to anybody. Townies find other townie's actions scummy all the time. How do you think mislynches occur. People's personality or communication skills get in the way of seeing their intentions and people find them scummy, even when they're not scum. That's the exact model of the game. We have to figure out who is scum and getting pings and identifying things we find scummy doesn't always work.

Scummy is an opinion, not a fact. 

Let's use me, for example, since you just love discussing my votes today. I found both Andrew and Justin scummy because of their behavior, as a whole. Part of that is that I find poke votes scummy, because it's an easy place for scum to hide and appear useful. I may have mentioned it 18 times already, but here it is again for you. Maybe it'll make a difference this time? Probably not. Side note: Me finding them scummy does not mean they are definitely scum nor does it mean that I need to conclude that they are scum after further interaction and analysis going forward. Are you following me so far? Need a break? Want to play tic tac toe? Let's take a tuba break for your brain to catch up.

*Fwomma fwomma fwom fwom, fwomma fwomma fwomma*

OK, so back to the demonstration. I found Andrew and Justin scummy, only one reason of which was their poke votes. Now, after interacting with both of them more, I find Justin more scummy. Do I have to hold this opinion forever? No. If I unvote Justin and vote for someone else, was I just poking Justin? No. I'm placing my vote on Justin (as I did on Andrew) so it will go towards a lynch of him. I would like Justin to be lynched, at this point in the day, because he seems the scummiest to me. I'm not voting for him because I want him to talk more. His talking, up to this point, seems the most suspicious to me. Am I sure he's scum? Of course not and I know I could be wrong but I'm not sure about anybody we don't have night action results on or that I am myself. 

Now, once you understand that, it's important you understand this next part. Someone might say something I find even scummier than Justin. Somebody may make a case against someone and point out things about someone that I didn't see before and that may cause me to change my vote. And that's what we're supposed to do to find scum.

You know what is messed up about this constant back and forth, my most town-leaning read is actually on Daniel here. No scum would go after a townie this hard on day one. Or maybe he's pretending to not understand to make himself seem like a noob that needs all of this explained so we'll let our guards down. Great, now I'm in full-on over-think. 

I lean town on you Daniel but I find you one of the most frustrating, obtuse people I've ever interacted with in mafia. Your face is stuck in one tunnel and I don't think you have the grace to even think about looking into another one, let alone out at the world.

*Fwom fwom fwom fwomma fwomma fwomma fwom fwom Fwom fwom fwom fwom fwomma fwomma Fwom fwom fwom*

[Fabien Bellamy]

1 hour ago, Daniel Lucas said:

*Tempest in a teapot*

 

28 minutes ago, Vincent Denis said:

*Fwom fwom fwom*

*wall of text*

 

Wow, I'm impressed. I didn't expect such a heated argument right on Day One. This escalated fast! Over poke votes of all things.

It gives me the odd feeling of scum showing off by arguing over nonsense in order to look like they're actively participating. Experience tells us that players arguing the most on Day One are always Loyal, right?

Taratatatatatata!!!

I can make noise too!

Keep it going mates, I'd like to see where this is going!

[Vincent Denis]

Just now, Fabien Bellamy said:

Taratatatatatata!!!

*Fwom fwom—

You know your trumpet sounds a lot like a drum. You should consider cleaning out your spit valve.

*Fwom fwomma fwomma fwomma fwom fwom fwom*

[Daniel Lucas]

7 minutes ago, Vincent Denis said:

Do you think that every thing every player has called another play scummy for has been actual scum? Oh, great! Game over, everybody. All we have to do is look at who has been called scummy and there's the game. That was easy.

I said when someone feels scummy about something they think there is a scum behind that. Thus the term scummy. What you are talking about is the possibility of them being wrong. You are clearly twisting the whole reference here, since this is not what you've said before.

11 minutes ago, Vincent Denis said:

Me finding them scummy does not mean they are definitely scum nor does it mean that I need to conclude that they are scum after further interaction and analysis going forward. Are you following me so far? Need a break? Want to play tic tac toe? Let's take a tuba break for your brain to catch up.

Making offensive remarks while trying to act as the consistent one, won't help my vote against you. You are still playing along on your original twist, which was saying you do not think every poke voter is scum, while also saying every poke vote is scummy. Either you think it is scummy because a scum would do it or you don't. You might have said someone intentionally acts scummy. Would not make too much sense unless their win condition is suicide, but you interestingly did not point this out, meaning you did not even really thought about this.

26 minutes ago, Vincent Denis said:

Need a break? Want to play tic tac toe? Let's take a tuba break for your brain to catch up.

Yes, give me a break, because you're full of sh*t and your attitude is unwarranted.

16 minutes ago, Vincent Denis said:

No. I'm placing my vote on Justin (as I did on Andrew) so it will go towards a lynch of him. I would like Justin to be lynched, at this point in the day, because he seems the scummiest to me. I'm not voting for him because I want him to talk more.

But you surely had to vote for Andrew because of this (thus making your vote a poke just the same), since you said you're waiting for his reply. He talked indeed, quickly voting for someone else, since he never denied his initial one as a poke vote (means you got no information we did not already know) and you switched to Justin, acting like you'd have had magically recieved a better reason to do so. As I've pointed out the arguments you used for this were already known and pointed out before. If you really would think Justin to be the perfect lynch candidate, you wouldn't have had to wait for a totally redundant post from Andrew.

21 minutes ago, Vincent Denis said:

Now, once you understand that, it's important you understand this next part. Someone might say something I find even scummier than Justin. Somebody may make a case against someone and point out things about someone that I didn't see before and that may cause me to change my vote. And that's what we're supposed to do to find scum.

Yes, exactly. Only as I've pointed out above, you are all talk but your actions do not overlap with this. You know the script very well Vincent, I give you that.

27 minutes ago, Vincent Denis said:

I lean town on you Daniel but I find you one of the most frustrating, obtuse people I've ever interacted with in mafia. Your face is stuck in one tunnel and I don't think you have the grace to even think about looking into another one, let alone out at the world.

Now this is clever. My face is actually stuck in 3 different tunnels, considering that Aiden and Alexed just jumped to aid you out of nowhere almost simultaneously, while you were quite chatoic with accusing someone as a tryhard (while with your new vote it is now crystal clear that your behaviour and intentions were as tryhard at least the same way) and feeding your focus on the quite simple and open poke voters, I'd say they've came to quickly wishy wash away my observations of you:

4 hours ago, Alex Howe said:

Weeeeee!! My what a view I have had from up on the giraffe! I do hope I get daily rides accompanied by Mr Denis blowing a lot!

So much talk of poking!  I do love a good poke!  But it doesn't seem very conducive to catching anyone out right now!  Although it has certainly stirred up some lively rum-fueled discussion!

Mr Laurent!  You are welcome to mount the giraffe after me, despite your poking and prodding!  But like others I too find the coin flip explanation a tad unnecessary!  I don't think it warrants a vote against you right now, but it is worth noting!

Mr Reynaud! You may have a luxurious and enviable moustache but your poking makes me more uncomfortable that Mr Laurent's hard poking! Mr Levitt reported for duty yet your poke remains firmly poked! You did not even acknowledge his late arrival when you later responded to Lieutenant Pelley!  Possibly you were distracted by his even more enviable moustache and bold sideburns!

He talked about poking yes, but for some reason missed talking about Vincent, except his potential giraffe riding contribution. Wish-wash.

3 hours ago, Aiden Leon said:

Nay Daniel!!! Must you stamp out what life eminates out of Vincent be it forced or not? He could very well be like one who tries to get water from a stone, but at least he searches with intent versus those who choose to wander aimlessly or wait for one to come forth and call themselves leader!

Interesting. Vincent is searching with intent, but me pointing his questionable things out are not searching with intent. This is pure hypocrisy. Wish-wash.

6 minutes ago, Fabien Bellamy said:

It gives me the odd feeling of scum showing off by arguing over nonsense in order to look like they're actively participating. Experience tells us that players arguing the most on Day One are always Loyal, right?

What nonsense? Also If you think so, you may take your vote in the matter, right? I think my making of the information we have at the moment is clear: Vincent is my suspicion and Aiden and Alex were trying to take away my initial heat on him with questionable reasons in my opinion. The two poke voters are not cleared but nothing twisting was going on with that. Either you believe their poke intentions to be true or not. Forcing some far-fetched fabricated narrative into it is much scummier. With the other ones nothing much happened since.

I may be wrong but let's see how the day concludes. Until further notice I'll be at the Clipper, checking the riggings out to be sure. Maybe taking a quicky-quick look at the rum storage.

[Vincent Denis]

*Fwom fwom fwomma fwomma fwom stfu fwom fwom fwoom*

11 minutes ago, Daniel Lucas said:

I said when someone feels scummy about something they think there is a scum behind that. Thus the term scummy. What you are talking about is the possibility of them being wrong. You are clearly twisting the whole reference here, since this is not what you've said before.

No, I'm talking about them being scummy. I'm not saying they're wrong. How would a poke vote be wrong? I'm saying they're scummy. Take note that nobody is in agreement with you because we all have the same definition of scummy. And you constantly repeating yourself isn't convincing anyone because me thinking poke votes are scummy is how we express our opinions. But don't bother learning anything, keep barreling forward with your misplaced self-assurance. It's not making the thread unreadable or anything.

11 minutes ago, Daniel Lucas said:

Making offensive remarks while trying to act as the consistent one, won't help my vote against you. You are still playing along on your original twist, which was saying you do not think every poke voter is scum, while also saying every poke vote is scummy. Either you think it is scummy because a scum would do it or you don't. You might have said someone intentionally acts scummy. Would not make too much sense unless their win condition is suicide, but you interestingly did not point this out, meaning you did not even really thought about this.

Yes, give me a break, because you're full of sh*t and your attitude is unwarranted.

I could care less about your vote against me. It's insane. I don't expect you to un-vote and at this point, I don't care what you do with your vote. And you can call me full of shit and be insulting, go for it. If you don't like tuba serenades, just say so. Yes, my posts are dripping with disdain because I find you ridiculously frustrating. Not intending to be offensive, so I apologize if you felt that way. I do want to slap you in the face, like really hard, to knock some sense into you. But I realize I insulted your intelligence. It's really hard not to word things as simply as possible because it seems like you're misunderstanding everything I've said on a very basic level-the definition of scummy. It's the most bizarre thing I've ever encountered and it's quickly draining my enjoyment of the game. I can barely follow the thread of your concerns about me anymore. It seems like anything I say is just going to be picked apart over semantics and you just keep peering deeper and deeper into your one tunnel. I can't even believe I'm spending this much time replying to this post because I saw it as such utter nonsense when I first read it. I don't even know why I'm trying to get through to you. I really really don't.

29 minutes ago, Daniel Lucas said:

But you surely had to vote for Andrew because of this (thus making your vote a poke just the same), since you said you're waiting for his reply. He talked indeed, quickly voting for someone else, since he never denied his initial one as a poke vote (means you got no information we did not already know) and you switched to Justin, acting like you'd have had magically recieved a better reason to do so. As I've pointed out the arguments you used for this were already known and pointed out before. If you really would think Justin to be the perfect lynch candidate, you wouldn't have had to wait for a totally redundant post from Andrew.

This paragraph is like the most boring Mad-Libs I've ever read. It's a word salad, I can't even begin to make sense of it. You keep saying I'm coming up with magic reasons and getting suspicions out of the blue but I spend a lot of time composing posts and a lot of time thinking about who to vote for. You can follow my reasoning in real time through out this day thread. I wonder if you just need the last word? I'm spending all this time trying to answer your concerns and this might just be your ego. I find it important to answer people's concerns so that everyone can judge reactions, but I think we're way past that. I'm not sure our argument is helping anybody. If we're both town, then it's definitely helping the scum. You seem really smart. But, in my experience, to be intelligent, you need to shut your mouth every once in a while and really listen to people. I have no evidence you listen to anybody but yourself. 

47 minutes ago, Daniel Lucas said:

He talked about poking yes, but for some reason missed talking about Vincent, except his potential giraffe riding contribution. Wish-wash.

Interesting. Vincent is searching with intent, but me pointing his questionable things out are not searching with intent. This is pure hypocrisy. Wish-wash.

What nonsense? Also If you think so, you may take your vote in the matter, right? I think my making of the information we have at the moment is clear: Vincent is my suspicion and Aiden and Alex were trying to take away my initial heat on him with questionable reasons in my opinion. The two poke voters are not cleared but nothing twisting was going on with that. Either you believe their poke intentions to be true or not. Forcing some far-fetched fabricated narrative into it is much scummier. With the other ones nothing much happened since.

I may be wrong but let's see how the day concludes. Until further notice I'll be at the Clipper, checking the riggings out to be sure. Maybe taking a quicky-quick look at the rum storage.

OK, you've pinged me again. I tell you you have tunnel vision and you finally start voicing suspicion about other people. You may think, in your tunnel, that they're defending me, but they're actually trying to help you. They're pointing out what I'm saying but they're not saying that I'm not above suspicion. They're trying to tell you that your actions seem scummy to them. If you're scum you know that, if you're town, you should listen. The reason this is a ping, and I find it scummy-not wrong-is that you only called back to them after I said you had tunnel vision, like your trying to sweep what I said under the rug. It wasn't even a suspicion I was expressing but you're acting like it was. You being active and verbose doesn't make you town. Your constant arguments are trivial (and annoying as fuck) but they're really just picking apart everything I say and arguing on semantics over substance. Fabien's right, this could be an act. But, if it is, I'm the only one who currently knows that you'd be the one putting it on. 

If you're town, and this is just for you; if we could PM I'd PM it, you clearly think you are right but you couldn't be more wrong. I'm not Scum. I hope you're the vigilante and you target me. You'll see I bleed blue, baby. Plus it will put me out of my misery. I'm not one of those dastardly red shirts, may they all be damned to hell.

I've wasted so much of my, and everyone else's, precious precious time responding to you that I just cannot do so again. I don't care if it gets me lynched, I need to ignore you for my own sanity and enjoyment of the game. I'm trying to help you see a way out of your tunnel but not even knowing if you're town, it's not worth it. 

Can I apologize to everyone for going point to point with this guy? I intended to post a quick response and I feel we're all losing irreplaceable brain cells reading our interactions. I'm really really sorry.

*Fwom fwom fwom Fwom fwom fwom Fwom fwom fwom Fwom fwom fwom Fwom fwom fwom...*

[Daniel Lucas]

34 minutes ago, Vincent Denis said:

*Fwom fwom fwomma fwomma fwom stfu fwom fwom fwoom*

No, I'm talking about them being scummy. I'm not saying they're wrong. How would a poke vote be wrong? I'm saying they're scummy. Take note that nobody is in agreement with you because we all have the same definition of scummy. And you constantly repeating yourself isn't convincing anyone because me thinking poke votes are scummy is how we express our opinions. But don't bother learning anything, keep barreling forward with your misplaced self-assurance. It's not making the thread unreadable or anything.

I can't even fathom how swiftly you are using your disdain to twist and jump over my point again. Also you may stop talking in the name of others already, like you were some kind of town majority here. Your whole post is about these hidden suggestive elements all over the place. This is why I'm still onto you even at this very moment. You're dragging the whole thing into a total wifom.

39 minutes ago, Vincent Denis said:

I could care less about your vote against me. It's insane. I don't expect you to un-vote and at this point, I don't care what you do with your vote. And you can call me full of shit and be insulting, go for it. If you don't like tuba serenades, just say so. Yes, my posts are dripping with disdain because I find you ridiculously frustrating.

I'm being insulting? I. am. being. insulting. Okay. Just how many times did you mention my decreased brain functionality? Let me help you:

5 hours ago, Vincent Denis said:

Perhaps you don't realize the complexity of the human brain and how curiosity and searching can spark thought, but that's the process I go through when hunting scum. I could ask Alexa about the literal synapse process if it will help answer all of your questions about my evolving opinion.

3 hours ago, Vincent Denis said:

Are you following me so far? Need a break? Want to play tic tac toe? Let's take a tuba break for your brain to catch up.

1 hour ago, Vincent Denis said:

I do want to slap you in the face, like really hard, to knock some sense into you. But I realize I insulted your intelligence.

Honestly twisting it back and calling me insulting is a reason to lynch you already on its own.

13 minutes ago, Vincent Denis said:

OK, you've pinged me again. I tell you you have tunnel vision and you finally start voicing suspicion about other people.

 I've voiced this suspicion over those two players two pages ago. This is just one single example of how inconsistent your post is.

57 minutes ago, Vincent Denis said:

You seem really smart. But, in my experience, to be intelligent, you need to shut your mouth every once in a while and really listen to people.

To be clear, I've voted you in an initially brief post because of your seemingly forced and far-fetched attitude towards a very first vote taken in this game. Everyting else has just escalated of you being totally questionable, patronizing and simply scummy since. I've just said in my last post that I may be wrong and we have to wait this out, but clearly you had to start all over again. Now you are saying I can't shut my mouth - considering we're both very much being talkative - is WIFOM defense. Pointing out that I need to have the last word, while you are clearly eager to have it yourself is also a useless WIFOM defense.

You are trying to sound frustrated and tired but still using so calculated and shady tools to create this symphaty needed stand. You could totally have caused me to change my mind if you'd just dropped this pompous self pity act and actually replying to my observations with explicit logical follow-ups and not some general garnishing and nonsense talking with totally irrevelant padding texts and picky remarks.

5 hours ago, Vincent Denis said:

I look forward to your wall of text response exclaiming how interesting it is that my thought process continues to evolve. 

You were just looking forward 5 hours ago to see my response. Now you are in this frustrated and enjoyment-losing act of yours.

Which is fake. Do you know why? Because you still have found the energy to Fwom fwom fwom fwom fwom fwom all around your post all the same.

 

[Trenton Monette]

On 4/6/2020 at 3:04 AM, Jean Pelley said:

No longer may candy be mute!

Onhn hon hon mon amis, canst toi name but une symphonie whomst doth feature le tuba?

Are we sure we are in Pirates III, for I thought I felt un frisson d' Warren Pratt course through mes veins?

Wherefore should'st another's reasoning entrée into one's own, monsieur? I doth deem this remark "scummy AF" and Vote: Justin Reynaud

I don’t think it’s that scummy to poke a player for being inactive. Sure a vote on an inactive player isn’t going to automatically make them come out and say something but If that player responds to the vote in some way then I’d say job done. Feels like an attempt to jump on the first thing you saw.

Vote: Jean Pelley 

 

[Aiden Leon]

8 hours ago, Jean Pelley said:

Andrew in particular has placed two poke votes, first for Michael with this rationale for picking Michael over Joshua:

On 4/5/2020 at 4:57 PM, Andrew Laurent said:

I did a simple coin flip to choose between Michael and Joshua.

And now he's voted for Alex, citing (among others) this reason for choosing Alex over anyone else:

8 hours ago, Andrew Laurent said:

There's a bunch of people who have only posted a couple times, and out of those, Alex was the first alphabetically. 

It's like Andrew is going through the motions of "being concerned" over inactivity while making his choices in a characteristically inconsequential fashion — and to me this smells of making up reasons to vote for a townie over someone else. After all, if his vote contributes to the lynch of a townie, he can just say "well shucks they weren't very inactive anyway and besides the alphabet told me to do it." Andrew isn't the only member of the Professionally Concerned Due Diligence Brigade — let me take you back to the post that prompted my vote for Justin:

Oh dear! I feel faint! The bullshit is to much. Why does one feel the need to explain themselves in such a manner? Coins? The Alphabet?! Perposterous!!! I think at the very least Andrew is feeling rather paranoid.

 

8 hours ago, Jean Pelley said:

And actually Vincent already remarked on it, but Tweedledum and Tweedledee Andrew and Justin had essentially the exact same thing to say about a day one lynch:

On 4/5/2020 at 4:57 PM, Andrew Laurent said:

I think a day 1 lynch is vital.

 

On 4/5/2020 at 7:24 PM, Justin Reynaud said:

I think a day 1 lynch is critical.

Cut this bullshit Dupond et Dupont clown show. Stop writing like high schoolers equipped with Wikipedia and a thesaurus. Vote for someone you actually think is scummy.

Sacre bleu!

Indeed the resemblance is uncanny.

[Aiden Leon]

My dear Daniel I regret to inform you that you are traumatically reminding me of a certain merman traveler... I fear I'll have to lie down.

If your scum then you are very cunning. But if your town (which I find more likely) then you are very simple minded. 

[Aiden Leon]

5 hours ago, Daniel Lucas said:

considering that Aiden and Alexed just jumped to aid you out of nowhere almost simultaneously,

I suppose you also need clarification as to the difference between offence and deffence. You may view it as the latter but I claim it to be the former.

5 hours ago, Daniel Lucas said:

Interesting. Vincent is searching with intent, but me pointing his questionable things out are not searching with intent. This is pure hypocrisy. Wish-wash.

At the time you were not in the state then that you are now.  And even now I would not equate you to such. You are instead like one who bashes their head against the rock in attempt to obtain water. 

[Aiden Leon]

6 hours ago, Daniel Lucas said:

The two poke voters are not cleared but nothing twisting was going on with that. Either you believe their poke intentions to be true or not. Forcing some far-fetched fabricated narrative into it is much scummier. With the other ones nothing much happened since.

I'm sorry what? 

I viewed your actions as being on the offense against Vincent, but I can view this no other way than you being on the defense of Andrew and Justin!

3 hours ago, Trenton Monette said:

I don’t think it’s that scummy to poke a player for being inactive. Sure a vote on an inactive player isn’t going to automatically make them come out and say something but If that player responds to the vote in some way then I’d say job done. Feels like an attempt to jump on the first thing you saw.

Vote: Jean Pelley 

 

I've seen this a couple of times now where someone is like: "Oh hello, this looks scummy. I'm going to vote for them. Goodbye."

[Andrew Laurent]

9 hours ago, Jean Pelley said:

It's like Andrew is going through the motions of "being concerned" over inactivity while making his choices in a characteristically inconsequential fashion — and to me this smells of making up reasons to vote for a townie over someone else. After all, if his vote contributes to the lynch of a townie, he can just say "well shucks they weren't very inactive anyway and besides the alphabet told me to do it." Andrew isn't the only member of the Professionally Concerned Due Diligence Brigade — let me take you back to the post that prompted my vote for Justin:

Or, you know, it's day 1 and we're not likely to have any *actual* evidence of scumminess. Hell, look at all the votes so far. Pokes, responses to pokes, and that's about it. It's day 1. Of course I'm poking at low-activity voters to encourage people to talk. That's how we find scum! 

6 hours ago, Daniel Lucas said:

Now this is clever. My face is actually stuck in 3 different tunnels, considering that Aiden and Alexed just jumped to aid you out of nowhere almost simultaneously, while you were quite chatoic with accusing someone as a tryhard (while with your new vote it is now crystal clear that your behaviour and intentions were as tryhard at least the same way) and feeding your focus on the quite simple and open poke voters, I'd say they've came to quickly wishy wash away my observations of you:

I can't imagine scum buddies jumping to defend each other, so I'm actually leaning slightly townie on Aiden and Alex for this. If anything, in my experience, the scummos attack each other gently in the first day or 2. 

[Trenton Monette]

12 minutes ago, Aiden Leon said:

 

I've seen this a couple of times now where someone is like: "Oh hello, this looks scummy. I'm going to vote for them. Goodbye."

So have I and on a later day I would agree with you. I think it's important to place vote and establish where you stand even if you don't have a full reading yet. Who do you think is suspicious? Who are you going to vote for?

[Bob]

Vote Count:
Joshua Levitt - 1 (Justin Reynaud)
Justin Reynaud - 2 (Jean Pelley, Vincent Denis)
Vincent Denis - 1 (Daniel Lucas)
Fred Dumont - 1 (Peter Lyon)
Alex Howe -  1 (Andrew Laurent)
Jean Pelley - 1 (Trenton Monette)

With 16 players, a majority of 9 is required to lynch. About 46 hours remain in this day. 

[Jean Pelley]

6 hours ago, Trenton Monette said:

Feels like an attempt to jump on the first thing you saw.

And this feels un petit peu rich since this is your first substantive contribution to the discussion all day. If you'd bothered to read what I wrote around 12 hours ago, you'd have noticed that I'm not interested in poke-votes for people who are apparently AWOL, which is prima facie not a bad thing, but rather I am curious about this procedure of voting for inactive people in such a calculatedly offhand way. That's why Andrew's coin flip and "hurr durr Alex comes first alphabetically" comments absolutely reek, and it seems to me like he's trying to find a vote that sticks and get people to latch on to it.

3 hours ago, Aiden Leon said:

Oh dear! I feel faint! The bullshit is to much. Why does one feel the need to explain themselves in such a manner? Coins? The Alphabet?! Perposterous!!! I think at the very least Andrew is feeling rather paranoid.

Oh dear! I feel faint! This overwrought reaction is "to much".

2 hours ago, Andrew Laurent said:

Or, you know, it's day 1 and we're not likely to have any *actual* evidence of scumminess. Hell, look at all the votes so far. Pokes, responses to pokes, and that's about it. It's day 1. Of course I'm poking at low-activity voters to encourage people to talk. That's how we find scum!  

You mean like night action results spilled to the thread? No thanks, mate. Doesn't mean we shouldn't try to root out scum, though. Have your votes for Michael and Alex brought them out of the woodwork? No, we've just talked about other things of our own volition. And if your goal is to encourage people to vote, then why restrict yourself to low-activity players? Why not vote for the Wizard of Oz, for all the impact you're making here? Your votes for Michael and Alex are literally meaningless and they stand in contrast to your very careful yet "Lel I am le RANDOM! look! a SpOrK" methods of choosing them in particular. Makes me wonder if there's another reason you're not voting for Joshua...

This tedious series of posts by Laurent is leaving a nasty residue about my mouth... And it's making me think my vote for Justin is presently misplaced.

Unvote: Justin Reynaud

Vote: Andrew Laurent

[Joshua Levitt]

17 hours ago, Peter Lyon said:

Who all did you see pushing for a no-lynch?  Who among them do you find particularly troubling?

Looking back, it was Fred Dumont and Emmett Ware. Nobody particularly troubling because of this, just the idea of saying there should be a no-lynch is troubling. 

That being said, day 1 is hard. I mean just look at the votes, they are all over the place! I find Fabien's behavior or coming in and telling people to give opinions or continue arguing - but never giving opinions of his own - very suspicious. 

The Daniel/Vincent argument fest is dangerous. If they are both town, then scum are probably eating popcorn and watching the show. if one of them really is scum then he is is definitely putting up a fight.  My problem after reading the whole thing is that they are both being mean, both making sense, and both seem just as plausible as town or scum. In my experience that means both are town, but sometimes it could mean one is a Godfather and will investigate as town so good to get out there and look super active.

Aiden Leon - posting 3 times in a row an hour or so apart each time is very strange. Can't you get all your thoughts together and just post once? After all those posts, still no opinion on where to cast a vote?Not worth killing someone over, but strange nonetheless.

At the ristk of splitting the vote even more, i'll vote for Fabien. There's a lot of time left, I hope some more folks will come in and give opinions on what's going on rather than just sit back and watch.

Vote: Fabien  

13 hours ago, Justin Reynaud said:

I am sorry to hear you are under the weather. 

Thank you. The meds are helping, I'm at 75% healthiness now and climbing 

17 hours ago, Bob said:

With 16 players, a majority of 9 is required to lynch. About 46 hours remain in this day. 

45 minutes ago, Bob said:

With 16 players, a majority of 9 is required to lynch. About 46 hours remain in this day. 

I think the clock has stopped

[Vincent Denis]

1 hour ago, Jean Pelley said:

Unvote: Justin Reynaud

Vote: Andrew Laurent

*Fwomma fwomma fwoom fwoom fwom fwom fwom*

Even with a perpetual 46 hours remaining, it doesn't look like we will be able to achieve a lynch today. I still find Justin and Andrew's actions scummy. I would be OK with an Andrew lynch. While I think the idea of poking someone flying under the radar is more productive, it is dangerous to start doing this early in the game as townies have legitimate reasons to fly under the radar as well on day one. They could both be scum, or they could both be town...or one town the other scum, obviously. If they are both scum, Andrew is the more dangerous as he seems to be more capable of appearing townie.

I get a stronger scummy feeling from Justin because he's modeling his behavior off of Andrew. If Andrew is either alignment, this is troubling because why would you need to model your behavior off of anybody unless you're trying to appear a certain way? Andrew is at least switching tactics with his vote. Both of them thinking that their votes alone are causing every conversation and they've committed some sort of heroic act by voting for people who hadn't posted is ridiculous. But I find Justin leaving his vote on Joshua more troubling. It's like he's worried he was caught placing that easy poke vote and trying to appear to be useful and doesn't want to un-vote when asked about it because that would seem scummier. 

I will look more closely at who the others have voted for but with 7 people each getting 1 vote, it doesn't look promising that we will achieve a lynch. 

*Fwom fwom fwomma fwomma fwoom fwoom fwoom, Fwomma fwomma fwom fwom fwomma fwomma fwoom fwoom*

8 hours ago, Trenton Monette said:

I don’t think it’s that scummy to poke a player for being inactive. Sure a vote on an inactive player isn’t going to automatically make them come out and say something but If that player responds to the vote in some way then I’d say job done. Feels like an attempt to jump on the first thing you saw.

Vote: Jean Pelley 

This sounds more like you're jumping on the first thing you saw. Jean isn't the only person who find poke votes scummy. Why did you go with him? Why wouldn't a townie mention the first "thing they saw?" Assuming by "thing" you mean "scum tell," yeah, again, that's how the game is played. We get pings and we mention them to everybody. What exactly is scummy about it?

*Fwom fwom fwomma fwomma fwom fwom fwomma fwomma fwom fwom fwom fwooom fwooom fwooom fwoooooooooooooooooom*

[Emmett Ware]

1 hour ago, Joshua Levitt said:

Looking back, it was Fred Dumont and Emmett Ware. Nobody particularly troubling because of this, just the idea of saying there should be a no-lynch is troubling. 

To be fair, I wasn't advocating a no-lynch day, I said I wasn't sure how we could make an informed decision and then tried to get the quiet (AWOL) people to talk. Clearly, the point of that was to get more information to potentially base a vote on without taking a stab in the dark. I think random voting is a scummy practice, it almost always seems to kill a townie and then people say "oh well, we needed to vote for someone," which just gives the scum a free kill without providing much useful evidence.

At this point, I feel like we've gotten a lot of chat to look back at later, but nobody is absolutely screaming scum to me right now and the votes are still all over the place. I'm still not confident enough about anyone to place a vote, though a couple of people are starting to concern me enough that I might get there in the next "46" hours.

[Vincent Denis]

*Fwom fwom fwomma fwomma fwomma fwomma fwom fwoom*

1 hour ago, Joshua Levitt said:

Looking back, it was Fred Dumont and Emmett Ware. Nobody particularly troubling because of this, just the idea of saying there should be a no-lynch is troubling. 

21 hours ago, Fred Dumont said:

Of course, Monsieur Bellamy. I find myself thinking that we should have a lynch today. Who that is, I have no clue or leaning as of this moment.

On 4/5/2020 at 4:12 PM, Emmett Ware said:

I don't see how we can make an informed decision to lynch today, unless it's someone who is AWOL. Is anyone AWOL?

At the very least, we can't lynch the giraffe, I don't think we have a high enough yardarm to do it.

(emphasis added) I'd say your "looking back" skills need a tune-up. 

*Fwom fwom fwomma fwomma fwom fwom fwoom fwoom fwomma fwomma fwom fwom fwoom fwooom fwoooom*

[Daniel Lucas]

5 hours ago, Aiden Leon said:

Indeed the resemblance is uncanny.

For the the love of the Clipper, I would even try to take a look at others, but what you are doing is so forced, uninformative, useless and scummy, that you are just keep feeding me with my suspicion to you. Is it uncanny? Are you frustrated as well, like Vincent? Why don't you just vote then?

5 hours ago, Aiden Leon said:

My dear Daniel I regret to inform you that you are traumatically reminding me of a certain merman traveler... I fear I'll have to lie down.

If your scum then you are very cunning. But if your town (which I find more likely) then you are very simple minded. 

Why would this really change my mind? Just honestly Aiden, you are now doing the very same thing as Vincent. I've called out my suspicion on you, yes. And this is what you can say about this? Why would playing the offended town and giving back the same insults about my simple mind would do any more good for the town cause?

Let me give you back: If you are town, you are doing it wrong and making it needlessly personal. Even if you are town, we would have no assurance of that, so stop implying that we should act so anyways,

4 hours ago, Aiden Leon said:

I'm sorry what? 

I viewed your actions as being on the offense against Vincent, but I can view this no other way than you being on the defense of Andrew and Justin!

Oh, such a coincidence that you do accuse me of defending them! Let's see:

16 hours ago, Aiden Leon said:

I could say your looking to hard into these things, but I'd be nothing more than a rotten liar if I said it didn't ping myself as well.

How interesting, you are so eager to look at our actions so objectively, but for some reason you were leaning on to agree with Vincent, now you play the same narrative only to say you can't see my actions anything else than just a defense towards the poke voters. You clearly can use your imagination if you want to. Truly, this difference of this objective leaning is not because I have a suspicion on you, isn't it?

Do you have anything exact to say? Why don't you just take your vote? You seem to believe in Vicent quite fast (again), but you add nothing to it just keep pushing in the same manner that made be believe you are wishy washing the heat from him at the first time.

It is stinky at this point that you've observed so manny uncanny things but had no time to take a vote. Also, if you'd take it on me, that'd be just a point in my argument. That's why you are not doing it, isn't it? Then stop acting like you'd have a scum read on me. Clearly you are not.

4 hours ago, Andrew Laurent said:

I can't imagine scum buddies jumping to defend each other, so I'm actually leaning slightly townie on Aiden and Alex for this. If anything, in my experience, the scummos attack each other gently in the first day or 2. 

Is this experience like a rule without exceptions now? I'm not sure this should be enough of an argument fhere. If I'm on a right track with Vincent, it is not the smallest of heat a scum would have on Day 1 isn't it? I'd say it could very cause a situation well suited for an exception.

But again. I may be wrong. I'm just reacting to their scummy posts since.

11 minutes ago, Vincent Denis said:

I still find Justin and Andrew's actions scummy. I would be OK with an Andrew lynch. While I think the idea of poking someone flying under the radar is more productive, it is dangerous to start doing this early in the game as townies have legitimate reasons to fly under the radar as well on day one. They could both be scum, or they could both be town...or one town the other scum, obviously. If they are both scum, Andrew is the more dangerous as he seems to be more capable of appearing townie.

I get a stronger scummy feeling from Justin because he's modeling his behavior off of Andrew.

Your arguments Vincent is so confusing and incosistent that I'm just almost begging you to stop.

You just switched voting from Andrew to Justin. You said it is because Justin feels more scummier. But if they are both scum how Andrew is the more dangeours out of the sudden? You just switched to Justin, which is suggesting quite a bit that you don't think both of them to be scum. Why? Because If you'd really think both of them to be scum and Andrew is the more dangerous, you would not even have switched for the first time, saying Justin is scummier.

But you did switch. And you would be STILL OK with an Andrew lynch all the same? What is that supposed to mean? That if a wagon starts on Andrew, you'll be happy to flip back again on him?

It is soo obvious you think neither of them scum at this point. This is a charade. Your own motivations of suspicion don't add up as a town.

You see this is the only reason why I am not onto Andrew and Justin. Not because I know anything sure about them. It is because I totally see that you have information about them not making you believe either of them as scum and only a scum would be able to do so on Day 1.

[Bob]

Vincent was playing his tuba when Jean approached him.

"Why are you all alone here playing by yourself?" he asked.

"People don't like the way my tuba sounds, so I feel as though I'm stuck playing here." Vincent replied

"Go ahead, play it for me."

"Really? "

*Fwom fwomma fwom fwom fwom fwomma fwomma fwom fwom fwoooom fwooom fwooooom fwom*

"Well, what did you think?"

"I think I have ear damage."

Vote Count:
Joshua Levitt - 1 (Justin Reynaud)
Justin Reynaud - 1 (Vincent Denis)
Vincent Denis - 1 (Daniel Lucas)
Fred Dumont - 1 (Peter Lyon)
Alex Howe -  1 (Andrew Laurent)
Jean Pelley - 1 (Trenton Monette)
Andrew Laurent - 1 (Jean Pelley)
Fabien Bellamy - 1 (Joshua Levitt)

With 16 players, a majority of 9 is required to lynch. Less than 25 hours remain in this day. 

 

2 hours ago, Joshua Levitt said:

I think the clock has stopped

Shh...

Mod Note: Without trying to overstep, there is currently nobody playing as Michael Lavoie. If I cannot get a replacement for him by Day Two, I will have to remove him.

[Vincent Denis]

17 minutes ago, Daniel Lucas said:

It is because I totally see that you have information about them not making you believe either of them as scum and only a scum would be able to do so on Day 1.

*Fwom fwom fwom fwom fwomma fwomma fwom fwom*

I don't have any information on them, or anyone. They seem the scummiest to me out of everyone who has posted. Period.

I have a hypothetical for you. If I'm lynched or night-killed (which I kind of really hope I am because then I wouldn't have to talk to you anymore) or in the conclusion when you see that I'm town and at this moment, have no information on anybody, are you going to consider how unhelpful you've been to the town by going after me all day? Because you've wasted a lot of people's time and it's only helping the scum, because I'm not one of them. I really want an answer to this now because we'll definitely be revisiting it in the conclusion.

I've played in a tunnel before and it got the town killed. I thought my tunnel was a beautiful rose garden, but it turned out to be my own ass my head was up. Get out of your tunnel. I'm not scum.

*Fwom fwom fwomma fwom Fwomma fwomma fwom fwom Fwomma fwomma fwom fwom*

17 minutes ago, Bob said:

"People don't like the way my tuba sounds,

 They don't? Then why did they enlist a tubist?

*Fwom fwooom*

[Daniel Lucas]

Just now, Vincent Denis said:

I don't have any information on them, or anyone. They seem the scummiest to me out of everyone who has posted. Period.

I have a hypothetical for you. If I'm lynched or night-killed (which I kind of really hope I am because then I wouldn't have to talk to you anymore) or in the conclusion when you see that I'm town and at this moment, have no information on anybody, are you going to consider how unhelpful you've been to the town by going after me all day?

Yes. If you are town I'm totally on a wrong track by going to this direction. But let the future decide that.

Until then, are you really town? Okay. Then why are you fwooming around? Why are you being sarcastic, cocky, insulting, calling yourself frustrated and emotional while clearly having a lot of time to make patient responses. For me it is a tell of feeling the well-grounded heat. If you'd town and wanted to stay concise, you could've started this 10 posts ago without any of this confusing padding texts and personal remarks.

But okay, you asked now a totally valid question. If you are town I have to think about my tunneling here as quite unhelpful. Also IF you are town, you are doing it wrong. Have you realized Town's main weapon is to be simple, clear and consistent? Look at my first vote on you:

22 hours ago, Daniel Lucas said:

Andrew's and Justin's intentions are quite straightforward to me, they were voting for the absent ones to get some reaction. I don't think there is anything more complexity about that.

But it seems Vincent did find something out of the blue, the two soldiers' reason mentioned above. This seems overly forced to me. I don't believe he would truly think them as scum just because of early poke votes. Either he is poking as well or trying to push some scum agenda. His sarcastic behaviour towards both of them tells me he is in the process of argument fabrication.

Vote: Vincent Denis

And now take a look at your answer to this:

21 hours ago, Vincent Denis said:

*Fwom fwom fwom fwomma fwomma fwom*

You're right, I totally forgot to consider the posts that would come after mine when I posted that there was nothing to go on yet. I should've used my telepathic skills to make the case against Andrew at that point. Ooops, more scummy sarcasm. 

....

No one was asking you to know things beforehand they happen. I had a feeling about your implications on waiting for some well-grounded information and I've found it to be forced. That's it.

But your whole attitude just went crazy right at the first moment. And you talk about my ego. If you are Town dear Vincent, you should not play this game. Period. You could have made this much more cleaner for Town right there. If you are really town you clearly can't help yourself to bring your cocky, easily offended nature into this game. There is absolutely no reason to about 30% of your texts contributed here so far. Their only function up to this point is to make it hard to others to read long texts and understand why am I going after you. 

So there it is, my answer. I still think you have skipped most of my inconvenient questions with the garnishing of your fwomfwomy insulting, emotionally wish wash.

Just for the sake of town, answer this previous one:

38 minutes ago, Daniel Lucas said:

You just switched voting from Andrew to Justin. You said it is because Justin feels more scummier. But if they are both scum how Andrew is the more dangeours out of the sudden? You just switched to Justin, which is suggesting quite a bit that you don't think both of them to be scum. Why? Because If you'd really think both of them to be scum and Andrew is the more dangerous, you would not even have switched for the first time, saying Justin is scummier.

But you did switch. And you would be STILL OK with an Andrew lynch all the same? What is that supposed to mean? That if a wagon starts on Andrew, you'll be happy to flip back again on him?

You skipped your logical fallacy you presented us here. "They seem the scummiest to me." That is all your answer to this? That is just a general, unusable phrase given to some serious contradictions at this point. Every time you start to elaborate why do you truly take them as both scum, you start to contradict your own actions.

You voted Andrew. After you got a repsonse, you said it is at least something to switch to Justin and you used reasons for it that was already clear to us. If Andrew is truly scum, his answer should have not given you anything to unvote him. Your switch was a town-act. In my eyes you are ACTING like a town, but your reasons are totally unreasonable as a real town. You even go quickly to say Andrew is an OK Lynch after Jean votes for him as well, quickly calling him the more dangerous again.

Well too late, isn't it? Shouldn't have switched the vote if you'd think Andrew to be more dangerous. Even if you think both of them scum, you don't flip-flop until you finally get a lynch on them. Maybe someone has already pointed it out, but it only shows how FORCED it is. Do you know what I think why have you switched? Because I was onto you already and you were so eager to act town, instead of doing the actual reasonable thing as a town by keep voting for Andrew, not to mention you've made some pretty elaborative accusation of him.

[Vincent Denis]

*Fwooom fwoom fwoom fwoom*

Just now, Daniel Lucas said:

Until then, are you really town? Okay. Then why are you fwooming around?

I'm the god damn tubist. It's my job. You think playing the tuba is scummy?

 

Just now, Daniel Lucas said:

Why are you being sarcastic, cocky, insulting, calling yourself frustrated and emotional while clearly having a lot of time to make patient responses. For me it is a tell of feeling the well-grounded heat. If you'd town and wanted to stay concise, you could've started this 10 posts ago without any of this confusing padding texts and personal remarks.

You think I have time for this? I've already answered. I think it's important for townies to answer concerns and I've answered all of your repeatedly. That's why I'm taking the time, to answer for the town's sake. I'm done spending this much time on you. I spent two hours responding to one of you asinine posts last night and it took me all of 4 seconds to repeatedly type variations of "fwoom." You honestly think the time it takes me to play the tuba is the same to respectfully continue to answer you? Since you have no appreciation of the time I'm committing to it, you can have much less of it. If you think playing the tuba is padding the texts and the word "fwoom" confuses you that's on you. I find it ridiculous you're that put off by "fwoom." And you're one to tell someone to be concise. Decorate that tunnel with a mirror while you're at it.

Just now, Daniel Lucas said:

Blah blah blah

You repeatedly say that I've insulted you and then you insulted me ten times. So is it scummy or do you just get to do it? Do you also only get to have specific suspicions? You think I'm scummy because I'm looking at Andrew and Justin but you're only looking at me and you're so confident, it might seem like you have information. But you can do whatever you want because you're obviously so smart. It's scummy for me but not scummy for you, fine. You think my suspicion of Justin and Andrew is forced, it's not. I've been 100% honest about how I feel about them, there is absolutely zero deceit in it. You think one line of "fwom"s is confusing and distracting? Your ridiculous posts that go on forever and now you're even quoting yourself, are confusing and distracting. I know it's distracting from the scum hunt, because I know I'm not scum. I changed my vote from Andrew to Justin and have said I'll switch it back to Andrew, because I have consistently found them both to be scummy. You can follow my train of thought if you had the ability to listen, but you don't. I've tried to answer all of your questions but they just result in ten more questions each, like the Hydra of questions. You keep finding "fallacies" in my "arguments" and I've tried to do my job as a townie and answer them, but I can no longer answer when you're so deep in a fallacy that doesn't exist. I'm honestly voicing my opinion, not arguing. Nothing I've said is false. Nothing. I'm town so I'm 100% telling the truth about everything I've thought, every reason I've voted, and even my willingness to vote for either Andrew or Justin is 100% in the interest of hunting scum. And I will switch to Andrew if it means achieving a lynch today. If there's a compelling case for someone else in the next 24 hours, I may switch my vote to that person. That's how it works.

Just to summarize, you think I'm scum because:

1. My attitude rubs you the wrong way
2. You think I'm cocky
3. I play the tuba
4. I'm voicing my suspicions
5. I'm willing to change my vote as the day progresses

If you think we should hunt scum by looking for attitudes that rub us the wrong way, jokes and roleplaying, and evolving suspicions, you're doing it wrong.

*Fwoom fwom fwoom fwom fwoom fwom fwoom fwom fwoom fwom fwoom fwom fwomma fwomma fwomma fwomma fwom fwom fwom fwom fwom fwom fwooooooom fwoooooooom fwooooooom fwooooom fwooooom fwoooooooom fwoooooomo fwoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooom*

[Daniel Lucas]

Just now, Vincent Denis said:

28 minutes ago, Daniel Lucas said:

Blah blah blah

You repeatedly say that I've insulted you and then you insulted me ten times.

You know what? I think we really have to arrive to a conlusion at last, because this is getting out of hand. You asked me a question and I've answered in the most pateint manner as I've just could considering the possibility of you being town, since you asked.

Your reply is again immature, inaccurate and useless. It seems you was not even interested in my answer. Seems it was again just an act as well. Even know you are not able to answer to my questions on the other hand without twisting and quoting it as "blah blah". You are either acting undignified for a town or you are totally being hunted as a scum right at the beginning and you are just trying to save yourself. Also your so humble summary of my reasons against you is the most twisting thing I've read so far.

Like you would be the best candidate to summarize the accusation taken against you. You are using 100% scum tactics and I'd lynch you right here, at the spot.

This is the point when we really have to put this aside and let the other's decide. We've made some long text walls but I encourage everybody to read everything carefully to get a best picture of the things happened here.