Conquer Club

Fircoal wrote:
What have I done that was so scummy? Or are you voting me because I'm voting you. You know they have a word for that, it's called OMGUS.

It is a little OMGUS. I still don't understand how you couldn't see how nag's behavior was at least a little scummy from yesterday and how you practically exploded on me because I thought it was scummy.

Samlen wrote:

Fircoal wrote:
What have I done that was so scummy? Or are you voting me because I'm voting you. You know they have a word for that, it's called OMGUS.

It is a little OMGUS. I still don't understand how you couldn't see how nag's behavior was at least a little scummy from yesterday and how you practically exploded on me because I thought it was scummy.

It's because I could see the position that Nag was in because it was like the position I was in. And in general as a townie it makes sense to be stuck between unappealing lynches at that time. Like I don't get what was so scummy about what he did. Especially since Ragian ended up being mafia.

nagerous wrote:

Skoffin wrote:Vote DJ

As said, he and chu are top suspects at the moment. I'd like DJ to say something about that and the overall cases atm.
I can't agree on the Samlen case.

Chu already voted in favour of a mass claim. I for one am fine with a mass claim, so if anyone else has opinions do state which way you lean.

Can you give me some more reasoning please as per the case on DJ, is it purely based on inactivity? I've had a quick read through the thread and I'm struggling to locate any involvement by him at all really that has been of any use. To be honest I was thinking initially this is a pretty weak case but having just skimmed through his post history, I'm inclined to agree that he does deserve some pressure pushed his way as the input has been pretty poor.

1. Partly the inactivity, voting him to see if he would come out and start posting or if he needed to be replaced. As I've stated on this board before, voting someone is a decent way to see if someone is 'inactive' or lurking.
2. It is also due to process of elimination. due to my opinions on other players I am left with DJ or Fircoal, as I doubt I am getting anywhere on chu right now it seemed checking DJ would be a good place to start.

As for DJ.

You mentioned roleclaiming but did not do so. I am in favour of you claiming as at this point you haven't said a lot and what you have presented as been rambling thoughts that have just tacked on what's come from other players. Your rambling on the dakky/nag/sam/dds thing was redundant as that has already been resolved as much as it can at this point. I've already said it was likely a redirector at play there and my basis for believing that. And it's too convenient that you have disappeared for days but are now finally able to post after you have some votes thrown your way.

@ Chu above. I disagree with you still. Yes, Ragian DID turn up scum but that doesn't mean that someone can't have poor reasoning for voting a way they did. There is the phrase "right for the wrong reasons".
At the time Nag was adamant on voting Ragian, the basis on Ragian was circumstantial at best and hinged on a player doing something incredibly unlikely. This happened BEFORE Legion clarified on his role properly.
As such Nag did not have good enough reason to stay on Ragian and not be interested in other ideas. As such there is nothing wrong with Sam questioning that, just as I did.

I second Skoffin. I found it quite suspicious that almost immediately after I posted agreeing that his inactivity is worth of attention, he showed up and had things to say after a long time of silence. So Dj, claim.

Metsfanmax wrote:I second Skoffin. I found it quite suspicious that almost immediately after I posted agreeing that his inactivity is worth of attention, he showed up and had things to say after a long time of silence. So Dj, claim.

Why are you trying to force a claim out of him at L-4 and when you haven't even voted him yourself?

Sam is also -3 I think? (Need a VC) yet he seems to get a free pass when it comes to giving any indeterminable information to the town - despite being intrinsically linked to a guy who came out as Mafia the previous day phase.


Skoffin, I was never adamant on voting ragian, that is a complete stone-faced lie and makes me tempted to switch my vote to you. The amount of lies you continue to post about my play on day two is getting rather infuriating now

nagerous wrote:

Metsfanmax wrote:I second Skoffin. I found it quite suspicious that almost immediately after I posted agreeing that his inactivity is worth of attention, he showed up and had things to say after a long time of silence. So Dj, claim.

Why are you trying to force a claim out of him at L-4 and when you haven't even voted him yourself?

I thought it was obviously implied that I would vote for him if he didn't... but if it makes you happy,

vote Djfireside

nagerous wrote:Skoffin, I was never adamant on voting ragian, that is a complete stone-faced lie and makes me tempted to switch my vote to you. The amount of lies you continue to post about my play on day two is getting rather infuriating now

Sorry mate, I'm certainly not trying to rile you up - my interpretation of the previous day was that you were strongly in favour of voting Ragian and I wasn't trying to remark on you so much as state why I disagree with chu and his views on Sam and his comments regarding your play.

A Vote count would certainly help to see where we stand. I don't trust Dj's sudden return and his response to it, or his appearance of "ok I'll help you guys out' and ultimately not offering anything that hasn't already been said,
and making a confusing paragraph on the dakky role action that has already been addressed.

I am accepting of the outcry, I was absent for a few days cause I was overloaded at work and didnt participate so I cant expect a warm welcome which is why I offered the claim as a tribute. I also prefaced it with if someone asked, so coming at me for not claiming when noone asked is kinda pointless. There is much to be seen when a claim is offered up and who jumps at it. On to the claim so I can get back to understanding the piece I brought up and maybe someone can explain how its possible.

Sadly, I have been outted since the game began. I am Dr Hibbert, I am the town doctor.
'

strike wolf wrote: Players:
5. Dr fireside

and because I know the second question coming is what are my actions, I covered Mets both nights.

Ill let this get hammered on a bit and then return back to my question on with dakky/sam and the rest

Reminder: roles are randomly assigned to alignment in this game. If no one counterclaims Dj, it just means that he is probably a doctor, not that he is probably a town doctor.

I really don't think Strike would out a player just like that. That doesn't makes any sense. He could also have put Det mitch in the list as well then. I think he just played with the letters so you're not Dj but Dr

fp'd by mets, yeah that's also possible.

Anything by strike would be a typo I think that seems a bit convenient to help your claim? Also HIbbert isn't he a Simpsons character ?


Who did you protect the last two nights dj ? Reticent to lynch a claimed doctor especially if no one counters the role

Sorry. With every thing going on I've found it difficult to focus on two games. I thought I had posted on Wednesday but I'm not seeing it so I'll update vote count later tonight.

I can only confirm that Dr fireside is a typo.

nagerous wrote:Who did you protect the last two nights dj ? Reticent to lynch a claimed doctor especially if no one counters the role

Djfireside wrote:I covered Mets both nights.

A bit skimming there nag?

dakky21 wrote:

nagerous wrote:Who did you protect the last two nights dj ? Reticent to lynch a claimed doctor especially if no one counters the role

Djfireside wrote:I covered Mets both nights.

A bit skimming there nag?

Just missed it.

I find it a bit weird that the doctor is a Simpsons character, there isn't a Simpsons theme as far as I know.

nagerous wrote:

dakky21 wrote:

nagerous wrote:Who did you protect the last two nights dj ? Reticent to lynch a claimed doctor especially if no one counters the role

Djfireside wrote:I covered Mets both nights.

A bit skimming there nag?

Just missed it.

Again....

Djfireside wrote:and because I know the second question coming is what are my actions, I covered Mets both nights.

You missed the whole sentence which is really important and what happened?

nagerous wrote:I find it a bit weird that the doctor is a Simpsons character, there isn't a Simpsons theme as far as I know.

Why do you find it weird? It's like saying Jack Ventura wasn't Ace Ventura's brother and you don't know we had a Ace Ventura theme.

FOS Nag

Look I missed it, it happens..

Now you know where you can stick that finger of suspicion

I just find it a bit random and misplaced. I have never heard of Jack Ventura

Fireside were you given any form of backstory to your character name? Just wondering as though my character doesn't have a name (seems we have a mixture of name and un named characters) I got a little bit of a backstory and flavour.

To note: I never did say that Strike outted me and it was pure coincidence in the typo but I found it interesting

Nag: I do have some backstory, it just relates to flavor of the char but nothing really important. You would be the first to not have a name, even Owl was a name although outside the norm. How do you not have a descriptor, as if I asked you who are you, you could not tell me?

I mean like a real life name obviously I have a character identifier .

Hmmmm while I think killing the town doctor would be bad I'm not sure if I buy this claim. Something about it seems fishy to me personally.

Samlen (3) Chu, Nag, DDS
Chu (1) Samlen
Nag
Djfireside (3) Skoffin, Dakky, Mets
Dakky (1) Tim
Mets
Legion
DDS
Skoffin
Tim

With 10 alive it takes 6 to lynch.

Deadline was supposed to be on Monday (end of day EST as always) but considering my own absence, I am leaning towards extending it unless there are objections.

I am good with a extentson of course

After reviewing everything with Dakkys claim I still have issues with it. I will Vote Dakky, I cant figure what you were doing with DDS other than roleblocking and having it switched with them.

As for the case on me, I am what I am and there isnt much else I can provide on it. I initally was questioning if there was more to a scene on d2 to see if somehow I actually saved the target and thats why I chose the same one only to be shocked that there was another non night kill. This is why I was so confused. Hopefully thats enough and Im not pity voting myself against sam for no reason to save my skin so hopefully you believe who I am.

I'm very reluctant to lynch a claimed doctor, despite my earlier point, given that there's not much on Dj other than his inactivity. I'm going to unvote.

While I'd love to believe that Dj saving me is the explanation for the lack of mafia NK's, I am guessing that explains at most one of the two nights. I doubt mafia would have targeted me N1, saw that I didn't die, and tried the same thing N2.

I don't trust DJ, but I will unvotefor now.

@Mets
N1 already is covered as it is most likely that was due to delaying ragian, so it's only N2 we need to figure out. It's possible you were targeted N2, or myself, or something else weird happened.
@DJ Can you please pay attention. Dakky's claim has already been explained on how it could have happened. That explanation is that a redirector changed dakky's target entirely. Dakky can certainly be lying and be scum,
but how that action could have happened if truthful has already been explained and it has already been said to you.

I am honestly in favour of just a mass claim at this point, I think we the various weird actions that have happened it could make it hard for scum to fake a claim amongst it without breaking their claim on later nights. Only one person has actually said anything on that though so it would be nice to get feedback on those in favour and those against. Another point in favour is that it has gone very quiet and this may be a way to get interest going again, as otherwise we may just stagnate til night phase and not have enough info for tomorrow either.

If you're in favor of mass claims, and no one is coming forth as a doc, then I'd like to hear Samlens claim. Pretty sure it'd be Vig or something similar, but all the same, we might as well start trying to cross off who is actually what.

Skoffin wrote: I don't trust DJ, but I will unvotefor now.

@Mets
N1 already is covered as it is most likely that was due to delaying ragian, so it's only N2 we need to figure out. It's possible you were targeted N2, or myself, or something else weird happened.
@DJ Can you please pay attention. Dakky's claim has already been explained on how it could have happened. That explanation is that a redirector changed dakky's target entirely. Dakky can certainly be lying and be scum,
but how that action could have happened if truthful has already been explained and it has already been said to you.

I am honestly in favour of just a mass claim at this point, I think we the various weird actions that have happened it could make it hard for scum to fake a claim amongst it without breaking their claim on later nights. Only one person has actually said anything on that though so it would be nice to get feedback on those in favour and those against. Another point in favour is that it has gone very quiet and this may be a way to get interest going again, as otherwise we may just stagnate til night phase and not have enough info for tomorrow either.

So below is what you are referring to as an explanation? All you did was give a theory about a role which holds no water and expect it to be taken as word and for noone else to say anything about it and clearing Dakky. Then you asked for it to be done to you to prove its worth? Also requesting a mass claim in a game where there can be any kind of role and setup seems a bit sketchy. This raises a few alarms so FOS Skoffin

Skoffin wrote: [removed for space but was player list with suggested roles]

It looks like we have a Reflector/deflector in the mix at the vest least. I'm going to assume that role is scum sided unless someone states otherwise. IF that role is a townie then I suggest they target me tonight as a way to let us know without claiming.
Interesting is the potato waffle bomb, and who may have started that chain. Is that possibly what the role 'gifter' does? Well Sam, I hope you plan to pass it to someone that seems scummy XD I imagine that the mod is rolling dice each time it is passed to determine if it goes off or not.

I'm leaving Dakky off my scum list for now, along with tim, Legion and DDS. Interesting to note that since I called chu as possible scum he hasn't posted here but has been in the other game. I think Chu is going for a dodge roll.

Im sorry but just simply saying that there is a redirector in the game is not an explanation nor does that clear someone especially with all the other pieces. A deflector/reflector would deflect actions on a person to another, not results so I dont think that happened. It appears that definitely there was a RoleSwap, which would make perfect sense, and maybe some bussing but ill deal with that second. Since Dakky got a watcher results, which dds claimed, and dds got turned to a roleblock, which had to come from somewhere, I am assuming Dakky is a Roleblock if DDS is a watcher.

Truth be told, I have been a little uneasy on DDS because of their statement at the beginning of the day preclaiming legion as to what happened and covering for them. However, if we assume they are being truthful, then I would assume Dakky and DDS had their roles switched which would make Dakky the roleblocker. I also would assume that DDS and Sam were bussed which explains why dakky would have gotten the results they did.

My vote stays unless anyone wants to explain otherwise.