NOC Fallout New Vegas NOC [GAME OVER - Wastelanders Win]

[ButteredToast]

All of the choices for Day 1 were flawed in a lot of ways. Obviously that was why Cancerous was lynched kind of by default. At least that's why I voted for him because it was kind of Cancerous. And it turns out that my reasoning behind why I didn't like him as a candidate turned out to be correct (kind of proud of myself for seeing that, yet wish I did a better job voicing those opinions obviously.) At the time I was pretty content to lynch Jalmont but that issue was beat to death and was kind of decided that's not what the group would do. I was also suspicious of Light Wolf staying out of the way and not posting a lot until the end and being destructive/overly suspicious in nature against people he knew better than to go after day 1. Either of those would have been my choice if I had the choice. And obviously I was wrong with light wolf.

Right now who I want to lynch? God, I dont feel like we as a collective group have more or less to go on in terms of proof than we did to end day 1. Von is rubbing me the same way Light Wolf did as suspicious but not overly so. And I am EXTREMELY interested in HD's response to you, and I think we have the same reasoning as to why. But bringing up said reasoning is dangerous business.

He does need to answer though and you're right in that he shouldn't skate with immunity after kind of buffing off the lynch. The only reason I feel people didnt lynch him instead of cancerous was because of his claim. And he shouldn't have to follow through with that "get out of jail free" card. I don't really care what roll he is ASIDE from whether or not he is the announcer. He needs to answer that question and that question alone soon in my opinion. I don't want his role claim. I don't want anyone else to claim the courier. But if he was the person to send the note as it SEEMS like he was, he needs to claim to clear himself and save his ass. He can't not try to make that announcement so obvious. And claim that he has a role which he can prove his innocence. And then leave all that information on the table.

Your points on him still carry weight in my mind. And your right that his time has come to answer for these suspicions and not get away with stunts. I am totally with you right now. So he is my answer right now until he answers that question or until we find better information on other people. So...

Lynch Haunted Diamond

 

[More Cowbell]

A sub-in for Ullar should be available soon, I hope once I wake up tomorrow.

Regarding edits: yes, Haunted Diamond can edit posts to include the message if he forgot them earlier, but please try to limit that as much as possible. More edits allow for fraud and I can't possibly double-check every post to see what's edited.

 

[Wayan Vistar]

Unvote
Lynch Haunted Diamond

So many reasons have been listed above... again I unfortunately have nothing to add... sorry :/

 

[vonFiedler]

Frankly the only reason I'm not lynching Haunted.Diamond right now is because I don't want to go a whole day and not talk about Cancerous, and I'd really suggest we hold off on the hammering for now.

Also I realize that I have a long Spiffy post to respond to, but I've been busy all day and won't be available for more than short posts for a bit longer still.

 

[Spiffy]

Unvote Haunted Diamond
Vote PokeguyNXB follows the vote that gets the most traction, nothing else. Warrants an explanation. What convinced you specifically and why?

 

[Spiffy]

We're stupid if we waste this day on a wagon that gets out of control. I was voting Haunted Diamond because I wanted clarification on his role, and even though he refused to give it, I want enough people to TELL HIM to clarify it and maybe we can get him to stop hiding behind the vague claim.

I would also like to hear opinions on Serious Bananas and ButteredToast and Amianki because I am having trouble getting a read on them myself.

 

[Spiffy]

Sorry for triple post again I promise I'll stop.

But the fact of the matter is that he was bullied, he was lynched with very bad reasons (not posting amazing things on day 1), and everyone should have known this.

Why do you continue to harp on how bad the Cancerous lynch was and how you are sure scum were on it but provide no case against anyone on it? By all means, point it out. I agree with you that there was probably some mafia influence (mafia are generally on separate wagons on Day 1 so I'm sure they weren't ALL on mine) but no one really stands out significantly as scummy to me because of it.

 

[ButteredToast]

Von, I have very limited mafia experience but that doesn't mean I do not understand high level strategies and reasoning. I have caught on to some things of how Spiffy is playing and I am certain that he is playing with a specific end game goal in mind. I think I get his motives and where he is going with his actions. And I find it ingenious and am in support of taking it to it's conclusion. If he does not pick up the argument I damn well might just because of the possible information gained from it.

I'm kind of thinking that if my noob ass can see how he is playing, other people can too if they take the time to look at him closely. Call it buddying if you want. But I believe what I assume to be his actions are worth supporting. And I will stick my neck out there to do it. Publicly and openly because I believe it to be that important. And I do not believe he has to stick his neck out alone. If I'm wrong I'm going to be pissed come post game. But I dont want to not act.

As soon as I get an answer from HD, I might or might not explain myself as to what I have figured out from the clues I read. I can't answer these questions now, but I think that if you look at the information starting from the beginning of night 1 until now by looking at Spiffy's actions, the more critically thinking players might be able to see my point.

---
The curtain is that I don't think the mafia, after all of the talk about making a habit of looking at votes, would sit together and vote all for one person. That would be assuming that the mafia would be dumb enough to hand us the game. There is just as much support to the belief that the mafia purposely divided themselves between voting for cancerous and voting for someone without a chance/not voting.

Cancerous wasn't bullied. He just messed up as a villager. If he took the game more seriously and contributed he would have been saved. Instead he just didn't put the effort into it. And as a result people assumed things of him. He honestly has to be responsible for his actions and not defending himself when he knows he is innocent. He didn't do that. And a lot of the blame for the cancerous vote goes mainly on him because of his actions. I feel that personally, the Cancerous lead argument was village indicated just by the nature of it. We weren't being lead. We just kind of went on him by default.

The "no tie in the voting" was because of the arguments made on the people involved. Spiffy wasn't going to be lynched day 1. A lot of us said while he might be suspicious and to watch him for the future, he was definitely not day 1 lynch material. HD threatened to claim to save himself, and that would have just played into the end goal of the mafia figuring out his role, so that was taken on it's word. (That word now needs to be answered or else anyone moving forward is going to do the same strategy. If you soft claim to save your ass, you need to do it with full intentions of following through.) Cancerous was the ONLY logical vote for the villagers. This wasn't a "two people are tied in suspicion" situation. This was two suspects being cleared and having nothing to turn to but the third option. It doesn't smell of mafia at all. All the arguments are purely village in nature and that's why I think it needs to be downplayed.

 

[Spiffy]

For the record I have no idea what ButteredToast is talking about.

 

[ButteredToast]

We're stupid if we waste this day on a wagon that gets out of control. I was voting Haunted Diamond because I wanted clarification on his role, and even though he refused to give it, I want enough people to TELL HIM to clarify it and maybe we can get him to stop hiding behind the vague claim.

I would also like to hear opinions on Serious Bananas and ButteredToast and Amianki because I am having trouble getting a read on them myself.

This. This this this this this.

Haunted Diamond This is exactly what I am doing. Fully and utterly. Anyone else who thinks so speak up. Doesn't have to be with a lynch vote. But the people who want to hear him speak up. And the people who don't need to speak up. But to me, this needs to be done. And this needs to be done fairly soon before we move on to something as a result of the possible implications.

 

[ButteredToast]

For the record I have no idea what ButteredToast is talking about.

All you need to understand is that I support you 100% on your Haunted Diamond call out. I have a strategic reason for doing what I am doing and right now, I need to ask that people allow this to kind of play out. As soon as Haunted Diamond makes his claim, I have a strategy in mind that I have formed from following your logic.

That's all there is to it. I believe that following through on calling out Haunted Diamond will give us critical information that we need regardless of his answer. This is our best lead right now. He just needs to answer.

 

[Spiffy]

Although ButteredToast did explain my reasoning for HD needing to claim in more eloquently than I ever have. Quoting for significance:

HD threatened to claim to save himself, and that would have just played into the end goal of the mafia figuring out his role, so that was taken on it's word. (That word now needs to be answered or else anyone moving forward is going to do the same strategy. If you soft claim to save your ass, you need to do it with full intentions of following through.)

 

[Amianki]

Ok, holy pages.

I still have to read stuff, but good god.

 

[Amianki]

Updated Vote Count (final given for day 1)

ButteredToast (2): Amianki, Serious Bananas
Cancerous (2): Jalmont, rssp1
Spiffy (2): Celever, PokeguyNXB
Fatecrashers (1): Spiffy
Haunted Diamond (1): vonFiedler
Jalmont (1): Haunted Diamond

Not voting (6): ButteredToast, Cancerous, Fatecrashers, Lightwolf, sunny004, Ullar

---

Day End Vote Count

Cancerous (7): Jalmont, rssp1, sunny004, Fatecrashers, Amianki, Spiffy, ButteredToast
Spiffy (2): Celever, PokeguyNXB
Haunted Diamond (2): vonFiedler, Lightwolf
ButteredToast (1): Serious Bananas
Jalmont (1): Haunted Diamond

Not voting (2): Ullar, Cancerous

---

For scum in the Cancerous wagon, sunny004 and Fatecrashers are the most suspicious slots since they played the biggest part in pushing the Cancerous wagon to the end. Quick note is that I was on the Spiffy wagon before switching over, so Spiffy had three votes instead of two. This increases the odds of Spiffy being scum as well if either of them ever flip scum.

There's most likely one scum off wagon that is less likely to be on the Spiffy wagon. {vonFiedler, Serious Bananas, Haunted Diamond, Ullar}

I'd have to create more vote counts to get more analysis from this, especially for Jalmont and rssp1 for when this wagon started up, but this is a decent start, I guess.

 

[vonFiedler]

Fair enough. Don't credit yourself with Jalmont though because that was an argument that had nothing to do with the game or his alignment. Either way, just because there might be a large consensus that "x" is village, doesn't mean we don't continue to re-evaluate them. And where do I post constantly with nothing to say? Don't just make claims and not back them up (you're starting to sound like Celever!). I explained myself against LightWolf's accusations, what were you unsatisfied about in my responses?

That argument started entirely because I was trying to convince people that Jalmont's behavior wasn't scummy for him, and his actions could be very town. Do not take credit from me for that. That's blatant deceit on your part.

I'm frankly less unsatisfied with your behavior yesterday than much of your behavior today. I do feel that in this post you are telling me a lot of what you want me to hear (something LW also accused you of). Though I could say the same of Fatecrasher's defenses from yesterday and I didn't feel he was scummy, so I am going to let that simmer for now.

Unvote

Why do you continue to harp on how bad the Cancerous lynch was and how you are sure scum were on it but provide no case against anyone on it? By all means, point it out. I agree with you that there was probably some mafia influence (mafia are generally on separate wagons on Day 1 so I'm sure they weren't ALL on mine) but no one really stands out significantly as scummy to me because of it.

Specific case about anyone? I asked for people to talk about it. That's how you build a case. First you don't want me throwing this discussion around for an easy revenge lynch, now you want me to single someone out? Well which is it? So far some people haven't gotten around to commenting or are ducking the issue. You've said your piece and so has BT as far as I'm concerned. There's still a lot that could be said.

Cancerous wasn't bullied. He just messed up as a villager.

One usually follows the other. What were the things against Cancerous?

That he posted a recap Amianki? This was allegedly "pretending to help", but outside of actually being helpful, even if that logic was right, it was day 1 dudes. That oil shouldn't separate from water until about day 3.

That he asked Amianki what he thought about moi? What? I mean that's an odd request, not really useful, but outside of the fact that Amianki could lie I don't think it's a total waste of time for him to examine his predecessor's playstyle. Maybe I'm wrong, but as a justification to lynch, just, WHAT?

Pressure is fine, discussion is fine, and I didn't think one thing either way about Cancerous when these accusations were first leveled. But for them to gain sooo much traction is absurd.

It honestly seemed to me like he was trying, and yet no one ever listened to him. Regardless of what he said in his defense, the same things were just repeated.

Spiffy was definitely not day 1 lynch material? Well neither was Cancerous, but he sure was easier. And to disregard that now and be like "what happens on day 1 happens bra" just invites the same thing to happen again today.

 

[vonFiedler]

And none of that is say that I wouldn't mind for more people who didn't lynch Cancerous to say what they think about it, or what they think now about their own targets for that matter.

 

[Spiffy]

Celever Jalmont vonFiedler PokeguyNXB sunny004 Fatecrashers Amianki Serious Bananas rssp1
Should Haunted Diamond claim his role? Not allowing this to not be addressed.

 

[sunny004]

Celever Jalmont vonFiedler PokeguyNXB sunny004 Fatecrashers Amianki Serious Bananas rssp1
Should Haunted Diamond claim his role? Not allowing this to not be addressed.

Yes

I'm still reading the last couple of pages so I'll get back to you on reasoning.

 

[sunny004]

The problem with Haunted's defense is honestly that he is refusing to claim his role. Cancerous was a safeguard, and I'd assume there's a solid chance of a bodyguard.

He should know that having a cleaned town member would be extremely beneficial to the town, and the fact that he is not seems very suspicious. Also he DID claim a power role, making him a target for the mafia. At this point, revealing his role shouldn't matter to him.

For these reasons, I feel it is nessecary to Lynch Haunted Diamond

(I can unvote if we are getting close to majority)

 

[Amianki]

I'm not supporting HD claiming right now because I'm not going to declare intent to hammer.

I don't have enough of a scumread on him to intrinsically want a claim from him regardless.

 

[JALMONT]

vote serious bananas

 

[JALMONT]

It's pretty easy to defend Cancerous in hindsight. I can discuss in a later post why I thought he was a good lynch (which I still stand by), but right now My only regret is that he couldn't claim (and I don't think that was my fault or his fault even).

I don't understand why you would only need to state why x is a bad lynch once. I mean, that's ok, but then how can you go about acting like you knew it was a bad lynch all along, if you didn't really put in that much of an effort to save him/lynch someone else? I was just surprised that you posted replying to someone else's argument iirc instead of saying something about how all of the votes in quick succession on Cancerous were wrong/bad/something that indicated that you thought it was a bad lynch. I don't know man, I usually don't like looking at this sort of stuff, but I just feel it's weird. If it was absurd that his lynch gained so much traction, I would've expected you to say something of that sort, even after he was hammered (which no one would've known unless they had paid attention to the votes [and it seemed like you didn't because you posted something after the hammer vote]).

I don't see how the post restricter could have any way known what the announcer was going to say so I am fairly certain the two are aligned together as mafia. Is Haunted Diamond mafia? I don't know right now. I could see it both ways. If we're at the point where we are 100% lynching him today then he should claim, otherwise probably not.

 

[vonFiedler]

Okay, I'm adding your posts to the "will not read" file, as you clearly can't read mine without distorting them. Everything in that middle paragraph is a bold lie, and anyone can look back and check this. I mean you're not even paying the slightest attention, seeing as you don't know that the announcer posted in the middle of the night phase even after having to go back and check to see that it exists at all.

 

[vonFiedler]

Also, would have expected me to say something even after the hammer? You know that a hammer ends the night right? As in people stop talking? HOLY FUCK. Ignored.

 

[vonFiedler]

"I dunno vonFiedler, you didn't tell people not to lynch Cancerous literally every five minutes and during the night phase, are we SURE this isn't hindsight?"