Ok, here's my line of thinking. 

 

No one is coming forward with anything. 

 

My vote on Robert isn't "out of the woodworks"(-LordSunday) , I gave a legitimate reason for voting Robert. 

 

I said that we should stop talking about Brewers' jester issue. Robert immediately went right back to it. To me, that is him keeping our conversation on a topic that won't get the town anywhere. I bring this up because I don't want it to seem like I am just sheeping or randomly hopping on wagons for no reason.

No matter how much we can say we dislike the mod, it's his game. If we could get some information so we can move forward, that would be helpful.

 

 

 

Not really salty, its Policy. 

 

I have to say this is Niave. I don't trust Brewers now. He's the mod who puts in Jesters. Your really going to trust brewers after MK flipping Jester?

Someone is salty 

 

 

@CM, Jesters are more Bastard roles, not used unless to piss off the masses. 

 

No matter how much we can say we dislike the mod, it's his game. If we could get some information so we can move forward, that would be helpful.

I don't dislike the mod, I'm saying for this game he can't be entirely trusted. 

 

 

Other people agreed with me in that Robert was leading the discussion away from productivity. Yehom posted before me, and SM hopped on after I posted. My vote wasn't a hammer vote, nor was it definitively going to lead to a lynch.

 

Vote: Robert

 

You're way too busy playing against the game then playing the actual game with the actual players. Could be a tactic to seem like you're actively doing something, but you're not in fact. All that bitching and moaning has to be good for something, so I'm guessing you're stalling for something, because I'm not seeing some actual contribution

 

Sorry Robert, but you look like the best candidate to me. Honestly, I have no idea if you are scum, but you are being the least constructive right now. I’m open to changing my vote.


VOTE ROBERT

@LordSunday I don't know what pattern you're referring to. If it's the timing of my posts, I cannot help what time and who posts before I am able to get on and post. Also, I wasn't hopping onto any wagons that were undoubtedly going to result in a lynch (iSoc was supposed to go to trial by combat, and I made it clear that I didn't like what MK did) or that I would have hammered through. 

Then are you saying I shouldn't use my vote?

 

The deadline is approaching and we still haven't done anything. 

it is out of the woodworks. You decided to jump on an active player during the last day of a game. The wagon literally formed within this page. With Kevin planting seeds before hand with me the only person who commented and laughed at those not on the MK lynch wagon. Maybe we should talk more who was on the MK lynch wagon. it dosen't help the wagon on me is Inherently scummy. 

 

 

Lord MK (6) KevinH, Jazzy, Nadarr, Kverst, iSocalism, The Warrior

 

iSocialism (5) The Warrior, Robert2424, Lachiton, Kverst, Lord

 

Lord MK (6) KevinH, Jazzy, Nadarr, Kverst, iSocalism, The Warrior

Seems to be a pattern and a bit of Sheeping from Kverst here. Although I would say I find Kevin a bit more scummy, people are content on Kverst today. 

 

I'm alright with either or, but not until everybody chimes in. 

 

My Vote will put him at 3. Unless Wolfpacks changes his vote. TW could swoop in as I'd like to hear his thougts on this last min push. Jazzy's thoughts would be welcome, along with Lach and CM. And Nadarr. 

 

Vote Kverst

 

He isn't in trouble yet, but should reevaluate what he's done thus far. 

He isn't in trouble yet, but should reevaluate what he's done thus far.

 

Yeah, 3 votes...not in trouble. If voting for someone because I think they are suspicious is "sheeping" (and incriminating) just because others also think they are suspicious, how does anything get done? I gave a legitimate reason for my vote. It was not because I followed others without thinking for myself. 

it is out of the woodworks. You decided to jump on an active player during the last day of a game. The wagon literally formed within this page. With Kevin planting seeds before hand with me the only person who commented and laughed at those not on the MK lynch wagon. Maybe we should talk more who was on the MK lynch wagon. it dosen't help the wagon on me is Inherently scummy.

 

 

Lord MK (6) KevinH, Jazzy, Nadarr, Kverst, iSocalism, The Warrior

iSocialism (5) The Warrior, Robert2424, Lachiton, Kverst, Lord

 

Lord MK (6) KevinH, Jazzy, Nadarr, Kverst, iSocalism, The Warrior

Seems to be a pattern and a bit of Sheeping from Kverst here. Although I would say I find Kevin a bit more scummy, people are content on Kverst today.

 

I'm alright with either or, but not until everybody chimes in.

 

My Vote will put him at 3. Unless Wolfpacks changes his vote. TW could swoop in as I'd like to hear his thougts on this last min push. Jazzy's thoughts would be welcome, along with Lach and CM. And Nadarr.

 

Vote Kverst

 

He isn't in trouble yet, but should reevaluate what he's done thus far.

I'd like to hear TWs thoughts on this before I choose which way to go, I still think KevinH is scum, but I personally dont think Robert is scum.

Unvote

 

Kverst was absolutely ready to jump on that wagon. Seeing how his previous votes went I can only agree that his voting pattern is horrible at least and scummy at best. The fact that SM was really soon to follow only again confirms my believe that she isn’t town. Though for me Robert isn’t completely out of scum contention, Kverst is absolutely being more scummy and needs to feel the consequence of that.

 

Vote Kverst

REQUESTING EXTENSION.

I have a busy morning. After sleeping on it I don’t think Robert is scum.

 

UNVOTE

Well, there you go. 4 votes. I still don't believe I have done anything wrong in following what I think. If you all want to regulate my play style and how I act, I'm sorry, but it's not going to happen. 

 

Since you all seem so hell bent on lynching me, I guess I'm going to have to RC even though there is no solid evidence against me other than that you think using my vote means I'm scum. 

 

I am a vanilla townie. 

 

It's probably too late for this anyways, but I didn't think that using my vote and explaining why would be grounds for being lynched. So be it. 

FYI I am going to extend the deadline until noon tomorrow. We are getting pounded with snow so I won't be anywhere near a computer until tomorrow, and I am not trying to update this via mobile.

 

I've been super busy the last four days or so but I'm hoping to be back to normal activity tomorrow. Sorry about that

FYI I am going to extend the deadline until noon tomorrow. We are getting pounded with snow so I won't be anywhere near a computer until tomorrow, and I am not trying to update this via mobile.

 

I've been super busy the last four days or so but I'm hoping to be back to normal activity tomorrow. Sorry about that

 

OOC Note... This mod is likely never going to be "back to normal." He's dead as a doornail and won't admit that it's now actually hurting his ability to take up commitments he makes to people here

 

 

Now back to the interesting stuff:

 

 

@LordSunday I don't know what pattern you're referring to. If it's the timing of my posts, I cannot help what time and who posts before I am able to get on and post. Also, I wasn't hopping onto any wagons that were undoubtedly going to result in a lynch (iSoc was supposed to go to trial by combat, and I made it clear that I didn't like what MK did) or that I would have hammered through. 

Then are you saying I shouldn't use my vote?

 

I never said someone shouldn't vote, but simply placing votes to place votes can have upsetting consequences. Now I look at the facts and you have been on every wagon, and every wagon thus far has not been scum. It's a pattern, exactly like I said.

 

 

Well, there you go. 4 votes. I still don't believe I have done anything wrong in following what I think. If you all want to regulate my play style and how I act, I'm sorry, but it's not going to happen. 

 

Since you all seem so hell bent on lynching me, I guess I'm going to have to RC even though there is no solid evidence against me other than that you think using my vote means I'm scum. 

 

I am a vanilla townie. 

 

It's probably too late for this anyways, but I didn't think that using my vote and explaining why would be grounds for being lynched. So be it. 

 

Why didn't you provide a name? I distinctly remember TW and/or Rhizo noting that if you must RC you should include your name. Also, simply acting like the world is now crashing down around you isn't going to change the votes on you, nor is anyone "hell bent" on seeing you lynched. Give me a reason not to, and my vote will go elsewhere.

Tbh Kverst you not doing your self many favours on this line of reasoning, but stsyi g that I'm keepi g my vote where it is for the time being,

 

Still hoping Warrior can add something, Rhizo you've been pretty quiet as well, to your normally way of playing.

The world isn't "crashing down around me", I am simply restating that my votes have been on people that I had a reason to vote for. For iSoc, that was d1 where we had to pick someone and he was supposed to go to trial by combat. For MK, I voted him for the obvious reason of him triggering iSoc's immediate death and skipping the trial by combat. It's not as if I was the only one to vote MK, either. Quite a few others also did the same. My votes alone aren't that suspicious. 

 

You said you needed a name, but I don't see the use of names in a game that doesn't require knowledge of GoT (which I don't know anything about).

 

Anyways, I am Rhaegal, one of the three dragons born to Daenerys (vanilla townie)

Can someone with some GoT lore knowledge confirm at least that that character matches his claim? Because I'm suspicious by the formatting and the fact that he's trying to be overly detailed for no reason at all, which to me signals a lie. 

 

 

For iSoc, that was d1 where we had to pick someone and he was supposed to go to trial by combat.

 

So to translate: Well we needed to vote someone so I just stuck another on the guy who had the most... Because that's definitely what a townie would do.

 

 

 

For MK, I voted him for the obvious reason of him triggering iSoc's immediate death and skipping the trial by combat.

 

Yes, the obvious reason that allowed scum to ride the free lynch. I personally stated before I would be shocked if there had been no scum on that wagon.

 

 

 

My votes alone aren't that suspicious.

 

It's the pattern of your voting and the fact you've been on each wagon that's suspicious. The facts that we know are simple: Each day you voted for the lynch wagon, and (minus Robert as we don't know his role) each wagon you jumped onto resulted in a non-scum death (for sake of this debate, any non-mafia/SK role I would consider non-scum).

 

Also, looking back you initially were the 6th vote on iSoc (lynch at deadline was 5 votes and there were two people who unvoted after noticing how many votes were on him)… Yet you claim he was supposed to go to trial... Your vote at that time tells me otherwise, that you were actively looking to lynch

 

Unofficial Vote Count

Kverst (4): LordSunday, Rhizoctonia, Robert2424, Yehom,  

Robert2424 (2): KevinH, Kverst, 

KevinH (1): Wolfpacks,

iSocialism (0):

Colonel Medved (0) 

Jazzy (0)

LordSunday (0)

Nadarr (0) 

Rhizoctonia (0)

Sister Midnight (0)

The Warrior (0) 

Wolfpacks (0)

Yehom (0)

 

Not Voting : iSocialism, Jazzy, Nadarr,  The Warrior,  Colonel Medved, Sister Midnight,

 

 

With 13 alive, it takes 7 to lynch or 4 at deadline.  Deadline is Wednesday, Jan 23rd at 12:00 PM CN time.

 

 

... we have 4 scum left

... at least 1 scum voted for MK

Taken together, this means that up to 3 scum did not vote for MK.

 

What significance does this have to yo, exactly? Please elaborate?

 

It was a little bit of fun with math.

 

If only 1 scum voted for MK, then the 3 other scum did not vote for MK and we would have a better chance of catching scum by pursuing those that did not vote for MK. 

I note that you said "at least" and if 2 scum voted for MK, then 2 did not, which makes everybody about equally likely to be scum or not.

 

I admit that my premise about scum lying low and not voting is pretty weak, but it's better than nothing.

The world isn't "crashing down around me", I am simply restating that my votes have been on people that I had a reason to vote for. For iSoc, that was d1 where we had to pick someone and he was supposed to go to trial by combat. For MK, I voted him for the obvious reason of him triggering iSoc's immediate death and skipping the trial by combat. It's not as if I was the only one to vote MK, either. Quite a few others also did the same. My votes alone aren't that suspicious. 

 

You said you needed a name, but I don't see the use of names in a game that doesn't require knowledge of GoT (which I don't know anything about).

 

Anyways, I am Rhaegal, one of the three dragons born to Daenerys (vanilla townie)

 

A Dragon without power? Interesting to say the least. 

Can someone with some GoT lore knowledge confirm at least that that character matches his claim? Because I'm suspicious by the formatting and the fact that he's trying to be overly detailed for no reason at all, which to me signals a lie. 

I'm not Familiar with GoT lore, I was starting to get into in last game because I had an awesome character. 

 

With 2 scum factions suspected, I have to imagine more then average power roles. His name gives me pause. His Claim of a VT seems off though. 

 

https://gameofthrones.fandom.com/wiki/Rhaegal

 

Found that pretty easy. 

 

The Claim makes me uneasy to say the least. I don't know how to take it. 

actually, for the name, I have to pull my vote. 

 

UNVOTE

Rhaegal is one of Daenarys Dragons but as they where only born I doubt they would have too many powers, season 2 they where learning to blow fire so if Kverst is indeed telling the truth, then he could well be VT as RC.

Can someone with some GoT lore knowledge confirm at least that that character matches his claim? Because I'm suspicious by the formatting and the fact that he's trying to be overly detailed for no reason at all, which to me signals a lie.

I can tell you Brewers was overly detailed for me as well.

 

Can someone with some GoT lore knowledge confirm at least that that character matches his claim? Because I'm suspicious by the formatting and the fact that he's trying to be overly detailed for no reason at all, which to me signals a lie.

I can tell you Brewers was overly detailed for me as well.

Jazzy! I haven’t seen you for a while. How ya doing? What are your thoughts for the day?

 

 

 

 

 

... we have 4 scum left

... at least 1 scum voted for MK

 

Taken together, this means that up to 3 scum did not vote for MK.

 

What significance does this have to yo, exactly? Please elaborate?

 

It was a little bit of fun with math.

 

If only 1 scum voted for MK, then the 3 other scum did not vote for MK and we would have a better chance of catching scum by pursuing those that did not vote for MK. 

I note that you said "at least" and if 2 scum voted for MK, then 2 did not, which makes everybody about equally likely to be scum or not.

 

I admit that my premise about scum lying low and not voting is pretty weak, but it's better than nothing.

Why was it scummy to not vote for MK when some people did not think he was scum?

[ooc]I am really happy to see the extension. I worked from home today to stay home with a sick kiddo and completely forgot about the game today.[/ooc]

 

I will be going through all of yesterday’s and today’s action this evening and will post my thoughts.

I was specific with the role because that's what brewers gave me and you all were pushing for the name and more information. I don't know the significance of the name. I know nothing about GoT. 

Why was it scummy to not vote for MK when some people did not think he was scum?

 

Lord MK played the scummiest way possible.

He was either scum or a Jester.

Exactly one player voiced and tried to advocate the Jester option.

Lord MK was clearly the best option to lynch if you didn't believe the Jester theory.

 

The scum knew this, too, so I agree that scum might be on the MK wagon trying to look like townies.

But the typical game usually has suspicion put on those that vote to lynch townies.

From a scum perspective, a good course of action would have been to lay low and let the townies lynch their own.

 

Therefore, I feel that the best probability of finding scum is to look at those the didn't vote for MK (and didn't cry "Jester!").

 

So now you change tack, originally it was everyone who didn't vote for MK was suspect in your eyes, now its everyone except those who thought he was a jester, what's next just the ones who didn't vote full stop. As i said before there was already enough on his wagon to lynch it didn't need more, it was better to go scum hunting, as i am now.

I doubt that iSoc would have oversold his new role as 1-shot BP if he was actually re-incarnated as a simple VT. It wouldn't really be a town play to make. I would think that if he was just a VT he would prefer to be lynched again since he couldn't do much more than vote. He would at least prefer it more than us possibly lynching another town PR.

 

I personally think Isoc had his one go and now is just an ordinary VT and is just playing up his role, either for fun or just because he was lynched in the first place.

LS I was figuring the SK in the five, there was probably a odd number of scum 3 to 2 ratio and add the SK, if there is a SK then he must of saved his kill.

 

If we go by game mechanic-wise, it would be too anti-town for iSoc to return to a non-town faction after he was killed during N1, especially seeing that there are more likely than not more scum factions. Given that plus the fact that Brewers has point out multiple times not to overthink things from a flavor point of view, I'm leaning more towards iSoc being town. 

I believe this is true. I was originally only skeptical of iSoc's return because I could see an avenue that would lead to him being re-incarnated as a scum member based off of GoT lore with dead people being resurrected by the Night King. With Brewers telling us not to put much stock in that flavor I'm hoping it means that my original worry was unfounded. 

 

 

Vote: Robert

 

You're way too busy playing against the game then playing the actual game with the actual players. Could be a tactic to seem like you're actively doing something, but you're not in fact. All that bitching and moaning has to be good for something, so I'm guessing you're stalling for something, because I'm not seeing some actual contribution

 

I said that we should move on and stop talking about the jester, but Robert still wanted to keep it going.

 

 

Someone is salty I have to say this is Niave. I don't trust Brewers now. He's the mod who puts in Jesters. Your really going to trust brewers after MK flipping Jester?

 

Not really salty, its Policy. 

 

@CM, Jesters are more Bastard roles, not used unless to piss off the masses. 

 

No matter how much we can say we dislike the mod, it's his game. If we could get some information so we can move forward, that would be helpful.

I don't dislike the mod, I'm saying for this game he can't be entirely trusted. 

 

 

 

vote robert

 

I agree that Robert being fixated on the jester role was unhelpful and sort of weird. I was pissed when MK flipped jester, especially before I saw that the game was continuing. If that would have ended the game I would have chewed Brewers out big time. Having said that, what's done is done. We can't change it so we shouldn't be fixated on it anymore. We have scum to find. Robert's issue with the jester shouldn't have continued as long as it did imo so I did view that as sort of scummy.

 

For this reason I can't really fault Kverst for his vote. However, as noted by others I find the timing to be sort of suspect. It came 21 hours later immediately after 2 votes were placed on Robert. I can't speak for Kverst's time when being able to check the game and post so it may be true that he just couldn't post until then but to do so immediately after two people had just voted for Robert makes it look incredibly convenient for him if he is scum looking for a lynch.

 

And honestly, it looks like Kverst might have had a chance to vote for Robert sooner than he did if he truly didn't like Robert discussing jester anymore. Robert posted this on Jan 19th:

 

And Kverst did respond a few posts later. In his defense he voiced some displeasure then with the continued jester talk:

 

If we go by game mechanic-wise, it would be too anti-town for iSoc to return to a non-town faction after he was killed during N1, especially seeing that there are more likely than not more scum factions. Given that plus the fact that Brewers has point out multiple times not to overthink things from a flavor point of view, I'm leaning more towards iSoc being town. 

I have to say this is Niave. I don't trust Brewers now. He's the mod who puts in Jesters. Your really going to trust brewers after MK flipping Jester?

 

 

But since this was ultimately Kverst's reasoning for voting for Robert the question should be asked:

No matter how much we can say we dislike the mod, it's his game. If we could get some information so we can move forward, that would be helpful.

 

@Kverst - Why didn't you vote for Robert then when there weren't any votes on him yet?

 

 

Well, there you go. 4 votes. I still don't believe I have done anything wrong in following what I think. If you all want to regulate my play style and how I act, I'm sorry, but it's not going to happen. 

 

Since you all seem so hell bent on lynching me, I guess I'm going to have to RC even though there is no solid evidence against me other than that you think using my vote means I'm scum. 

 

I am a vanilla townie. 

 

It's probably too late for this anyways, but I didn't think that using my vote and explaining why would be grounds for being lynched. So be it. 

 

 

 

The world isn't "crashing down around me", I am simply restating that my votes have been on people that I had a reason to vote for. For iSoc, that was d1 where we had to pick someone and he was supposed to go to trial by combat. For MK, I voted him for the obvious reason of him triggering iSoc's immediate death and skipping the trial by combat. It's not as if I was the only one to vote MK, either. Quite a few others also did the same. My votes alone aren't that suspicious. You said you needed a name, but I don't see the use of names in a game that doesn't require knowledge of GoT (which I don't know anything about). Anyways, I am Rhaegal, one of the three dragons born to Daenerys (vanilla townie)

 

Now for the role claim:

He simply claimed VT, which again by itself is a suspicious and convenient claim to make when you're up against the wall since he wouldn't have to really fabricate any night actions or anything to support it.

 

I asked for anyone who would role claim in this game to include their character name in their claim because I actually believe the names will matter here, given what we've seen so far. I am torn on the Rhaegal claim. On one hand we have Kverst saying that he doesn't know anything about GoT so claiming Rhaegal from that perspective would be out of the blue to me. This leads me to believe that that actually is his character name. On the other hand, Rhaegal the dragon being a VT? That also seems odd. At this point in the series the dragons were still adolescents I believe, but having one of them being a simple VT feels a bit odd.

 

Now, I would start to believe this more if there were other players in this game who claimed VT (not that I'm asking anyone to claim) and had character names of Drogon or Viserion (Daenerys other two dragons). So if anyone else happens to be a VT and has those names you should be more inclined to believe Kverst and not vote for him I would think. Althought that doesn't help us of course if no one else claims.

 

 

I am torn on what to do. There isn't anything solid on any of our current choices really.

 

We have Robert's fixation on the jester rather than moving on and Kverst's convenient vote on Robert when Robert started gaining traction. Of the two I'd be most inclined to say that Kverst is slightly more scummy all things considered but I want to know why Robert was fixated on the jester role as much as he was.