Open 124 (2:10 Bugs Bunny -- GAME OVER) before 761

[Giuseppe]

Vote: Empking

Hm... So, we've got two wagons already? One on Grimmy and the other on Empking? Who knows where we'll go from here, since both are on L-3, surprising, for the first page of the topic.

[Giuseppe]

Next vote on Empking gets my vote. He's L-2, no point in pushing him farther, no matter his playstyle.

[Giuseppe]

Oh, xoops, my bad. I was only counting town players in the player count. Please disregard my stupid mistake.

[Giuseppe]

@Phail- the only evidence you'd be discounting is that I can't count. *XD, pun*

On Millar's behavior: I too agree that self-voting doesn't indicate anything other than a comical or self-destructive attempt at discussion-sparking this early in the game. It's simply not good play, nothing else is really associated with it.

[Giuseppe]

How is self voting a good stance ever?

QFT.

[Giuseppe]

How many votes does he have now? We shouldn't quick-lynch him, even if his reputation precedes him.

[Giuseppe]

He's not exactly what the Town would call useful...

I believe Emp's on L-1 or L-2, if lynch is to 7.

[Giuseppe]

Unvote

Vote Millar13

What were you thinking putting him on L-1?

[Giuseppe]

A quick lynch is a stupid lynch, even if it is Empking. Hell, especially if it's Emp. I mean, come on. He's scummy. We know that. But quick-lynching him for stuff we know is stupid.

[Giuseppe]

if emp is scum, either giuseppe or zwets is his partner

Any real reason you're setting me and Zwet up to be lynched? I hardly say that stopping a quick lynch of Empking qualifies as defending him overtly. Let him actually have a chance to be scummy before you lynch him, at the very least.

[Giuseppe]

Well, then that means that Empking can't very well come up scum, can he? At least that's how it looks from my perspective, using your argument. That said, you did meta on Zwet, do meta on me. It's a tendency of mine, good or bad, to back out of lynches or unvote if I have any apprehensions about a lynch happening.

Examples include:
The Unvote of Zind in Newbie 736 on Day One
The Unvote of Alcove in the Ongoing 724 on Day Two

Besides, why shouldn't I try to prevent his lynch if I don't think he's scum? He hasn't even really posted yet. No reason to put a silent player on L-1.

[Giuseppe]

wow I admit i am scum....vote for me

Unvote

Vote: Millar13

Don't claim scum if you don't mean it. Lynch all scum, lynch all liars.

[Giuseppe]

By your logic, if Empking comes up scum, I can't be town. Which couldn't be true, from my perspective, because I am a pro-town player. Thus, if I'm to agree with you, Empking must be town.

I'm actively trying to prevent the lynch of someone I don't believe to be scum, by first walking away from his lynch, and now arguing against it.

Is there anymore in me defending him on such little than you attacking him on such little? Better to err on the side of caution this early than to err on the side of rashness.

[Giuseppe]

The aforementioned post was directed to Rofl.

[Giuseppe]

My god, this topic moves fast. My last relevant post was talking to Rofl.

[Giuseppe]

By your logic, if Empking comes up scum, I can't be town. Which couldn't be true, from my perspective, because I am a pro-town player. Thus, if I'm to agree with you, Empking must be town.

please show me where i said if empking comes up scum you CAN'T be town

oh, wait, that didn't happen

your point fails

So, what was your initial point in setting all that up? If you're going to assert that I'm scum if Emp is scum, at least be absolutely convinced...

[Giuseppe]

My main issue with you saying that I'm scum if Emp is scum is that setting up that assertion now is only distracting from the goal you have for the town for today, which is to lynch Empking *or Millar*. Worry about my actions after we know whether Empking is scum or not.

As for my vote, it stays where it is until Empking proves he's scum this game, as I can't accept someone claiming scum, and then saying just kidding...

[Giuseppe]

EBWOP: Worry about my actions

in regard to Empking's identity

after we know if he's scum or not.

Bold added.

[Giuseppe]

Hm, good enough philosophy for me. Alright, let's lynch scum.

Millar, why did you say you were scum?

[Giuseppe]

So, do we have a vote count on Millar? I wouldn't mind seeing him gone, after his weak attacks on Rofl, his scum claim, and his general erraticism.

[Giuseppe]

Did you just put yourself on L-1 with a self-vote, after arguing that self-voting on day one was bad earlier?

L2P.

[Giuseppe]

You, sir, are an an absolutely abominable atrocity and the acme of assholery. Don't screw the town over with your ludicrous self-votes. If you're town, prove it. Otherwise, you deserve to die.

[Giuseppe]

Then dig yourself out. Why are you innocent? Who are the real scum?

[Giuseppe]

Well, that's a good start. To be honest, I have no clue what Rofl's doing either, but it's moving the game forward.

Now, I recommend explaining why you tried so hard to draw attention off Empking by drawing it directly onto yourself. That's what it amounts to, at least. If you didn't think it was right, you could have argued against it, like I was.

Keep in mind, I'm not sure you'll save yourself. But make sure you get your opinions on the game out into the open before you're lynched. Reread the game, and put out some words, as if they were the last you'd have. After all:

i say everything i suspect when i suspect it, rather than possibly taking it to the grave with me

It's a good idea right now.

[Giuseppe]

Is there any hope for you, Millar?

Not with posts like that...

Ceph, could I get a brief definition on coaching? The wiki has nada.

[Giuseppe]

Ah, I've never heard that one before.

Well, I stand by the idea that he needs to defend himself, and a good start would be to explain his actions in taking the scum claim. I still think he's scum, but you know, there's no point in letting his opinions go to waste if he dies and flips town.

[Giuseppe]

Cephrir for DOC

Inexcusable. Didn't see this when I posted my previous post. Can we get a hammer, please?

[Giuseppe]

Millar's doomed himself. Can we please just hammer and be done with it?

[Giuseppe]

Please note, Andy, that it was Rofl who said that if Emp came up scum, I would also be scum. I was defending myself from that accusation.

[Giuseppe]

@Millar- Stop speaking in metaphors that don't apply to yourself.

We'd appreciate it if you at least gave some thoughts on the game.

@Andy- I agree that lynching town is bad. I myself used to carry the philosophy 'Town is Town', and as such, any Town lynch is unacceptable. However, we cannot confirm Millar's identity without a lynch. I myself devoutly think he's scum. His behavior is more than indicative of either rampant idiocy or scumhood, and probably both combined.

There's a line that a person crosses on the scale of forgiveness in Mafia. It's highly subjective; it depends on the circumstances. However, when people cross that line, they're not even worth their role any more they're being so destructive to both sides, which ever side they may be on. Millar is an example of someone who has crossed the line, and now his very presence in the game is dragging the quality of play down.

He's not leading us to his partner. His last few posts have been one liners appealing not to be lynched. He's not going to lead us to his scumpartner, I can assure you, unless he actually begins to post relevant material.

If he doesn't post stuff, he's not useful. The town gains more information from his death than his living if he endures within the game without posting substantive information.

[Giuseppe]

In an open game, where all the roles were listed at the beginning.

[Giuseppe]

No, the Jester is a role that wins if it's lynched.

Care to explain your sig?

[Giuseppe]

That was descriptive. Explain why.

[Giuseppe]

Sorry, didn't see the second post.

[Giuseppe]

And does that apply to this game too?

[Giuseppe]

So why did you claim scum, and point out who you thought was doc?

[Giuseppe]

That's not a very good reason to do such a risky move. Were you defending another scum partner?

Why are you even speculating about who the Doc is if you're pro-Town? The Town's only interest is to keep the Doc hidden and alive.

[Giuseppe]

If we made you crack, then wouldn't you have claimed Townie? When people crack, they generally start spilling out the truth.

[Giuseppe]

If you're town, try and help the town, and do not self hammer. If you're scum, go ahead and hammer.

[Giuseppe]

Simply put, MadeofPhail is MadeofWin. A nice guy while simultaneously very pro-Town.

If my other posts haven't testified to it enough, I support MoW's outlook on this game.

[Giuseppe]

I'm back, but I haven't had a chance to read anything yet. Jet lag is horrible... I'll try to read everything over tomorrow.

[Giuseppe]

Well, having skimmed over the game, I've concluded that I could never make an adequate reply in the five minutes I have to make one. That said, let me say a few things:

1. My treatment of Millar was in the hopes of drawing useful information out of an erratic player who was heading towards a lynch. If he claimed a scum buddy, got lynched, flipped scum, that would have been good, no?

2. While I can't argue that lynching me would reveal more information about the game than lynching Empking, I'd argue that basing that decision strictly on my defense of him would be a poor choice to make. I'm no fan of Empking, but I don't like seeing him lynched on policy, and Millar was behaving worse than Emp was. Lynch the most anti-town player.

More later~

[Giuseppe]

Well then, I have a lot to say, now, I suppose. My absence in this game for most of the first half of Day 2 is going to make some of what I say look 'Opportunistic', but I'll clarify all of those concerns later in the post.

I think Guiseppe is defending himself against the guilt of EMP's meta, rather than guilt in this game.

Yes! I, in my defense of Empking, was unsure of his guilt. Please recall, I was defending him from a policy lynch, as seen here:

Any real reason you're setting me and Zwet up to be lynched?

I hardly say that stopping a quick lynch of Empking qualifies as defending him overtly. Let him actually have a chance to be scummy before you lynch him, at the very least.

Dejkha's been conveniently leaving out the fact that at that time, I had no read on Emp's alignment. I was defending him from a Quick Lynch, not from any lynch. I'm actually going to advocate for his lynch further down in the post, as I've seen his scumminess within this game.

What's more, I was the

only

one defending him from a policy lynch at that point in the game. Copying what others have said? No. Bandwagoning? No. Following along? No.

That was initiative of my own, and it's not like it was some petty, little thing to try. Defending Empking, Lord knows, isn't a popular decision. Zwet and Dejkha's attitudes on the matter are more than a testament to that. I defended Empking because I felt that his lynch would be disadvantageous at that time. Emphasis on 'At that time'.

You'll recall that before Millar's little stunt, I had no distinct suspicions. I was trying to stop Emp from being quick lynched. With Millar's appearance, I had a suspicion, and followed up on it with all haste. When someone claims scum, why lallygag?

I find that there's a certain quandary you're placing me in through your arguments against me. Half the time what you say I do is that I follow people around, like a sheep. The other half of the time I'm being opportunistic, and making grabs where I can.

To me, these don't compute, and they fail to make accounts for what I have done to counter these.

Examples of Leadership Include:

1. Defending Empking from a quick lynch.
2. Voting Millar13 for his scum claim. *People started voting for him

after

I did, and for the same reasons*

As for opportunism, well, it's much harder to cite an example of a topic so ill-defined. It comes down to opinion whether one sees my actions as opportunistic or not. When a person claims scum, is it not right to vote them? I had no suspects before, and then I had one. Opportunism, or simply a wanting to put forth original material on someone who I thought was scum?

In the end, a lot of Dej's argument against me lies in twisting my motive: I was defending Emp from a quick lynch, not a total lynch. I was not acting sheep-like in the case against Millar, as I started it.

To continue, what about this quote:

Millar was a threat to himself, not town, or whatever faction he was on. He didn't care if he was lynched and it's extremely rare that scum will claim and truthfully give up their scumbuddy. From the moment he self voted, it should've been clear that we weren't getting anymore out of him.

If he was town, he hurts the town through his behavior. He's not an isolated player; his actions affect which ever side he's on. He was a threat to the town because he was acting anti-town, there's not much more to say about it. My questions to Millar were to at the very least try to get information: you say that when he self-voted it was hopeless, and I say that he who does not try has a 100% chance of failure.

You seem to repeat what people say, which may be due to the time in which you read the game and it's after everyone else has said everything there is to say, but your defense of Emp as a scumbuddy is

supported by the NK

.

Did you really just try and use the NK as a piece of evidence against me? Isn't that WIFOM out the wazoo? That sits really ill with me that you'd try to devise the motives of the scum out of the night action. Not to mention that I was defending Empking against the quick lynch, not a real lynch.

So, yeah, that's my defense. If I forgot a point, please notify me, and I'll put forward my argument.

* * *

So, my suspect? Well, here's the part where everyone screams: 'Opportunistic!' I was V/LA for a couple of days, and so thus, my opinions come late, and that really doesn't help me all that much.

That said, Empking has more than proven his lack of usefulness to the Town now, and I can and will vote for him by the end of this post. Before my argument, let me say it again: I was against his quick lynch, not his lynch for the entire game.

So, well, Empking has officially proven himself to not only be anti-Town, but also destructive to the game environment. His unexplained accusations of lies and just general OMGUS insults... *For example this quote in response to Dej*:

Just typical stupidf Dejhka.

(sic)

...show that he's degenerated past the point of putting forth useful, substantive arguments. The neutral that he began with, as all players at the start of every Mafia game that I play with them do, on my ScumScale has now fallen deep into the depths of Scum and villainy.

His single sentence posts against AndyTony feel childish, unhelpful, and insulting, and they do not put forth any useful information towards the discussion. I propose the lynch of Empking not because of the fact that he is Empking, as Zwet and Dej have been advocating since the beginning, but because his behavior at this point in the game has derailed proper discussion, been inflammatory to at least one of the parties involved, and made me ashamed that I gave him the benefit of the doubt.

Vote: Empking

I'm not currently aware of the vote count, and would like to have one.

Mod, Vote Count please?

On a side note, I don't approve of any of the petty name-calling going on between Empking and Dej&Co., and would request that you guys stop bickering and progress towards a more pro-Town aim than vendettas that existed outside of this game. If that means ignoring each other, so be it.

[Giuseppe]

Since you voted Emp, it'll only reinforce your connection to him if you flip scum because it would be seen as obvious distancing.

I apologize, but I don't find anyone else scummy, at the moment. My V/LA made it difficult for me to have any say in the matter up until this point, and I can't exactly vote for someone I don't find scummy. Allow me to reread the game, and I'll produce another suspect, if Empking doesn't satisfy you all. It seems like distancing, yes. Is it distancing? No.

My vote to Empking is based around the severity of his Ad Hom this game. In my previous game, he was much, much more mild with his critiques. These seem defensive, angry, and scummier than he played before.

I, once I finish my homework, will reread the topic and find Empking's partner, and post my findings.

[Giuseppe]

I don't think it really matters. It's WIFOM, and mostly pointless, but not a scum tell.

[Giuseppe]

Town is Town is gone... I've gotten over that, after seeing the disasters of Millar, and Empking in another game. Never, ever gonna use that phrase again. Consider it a portion of my newbie experimentation within that game.

As for the list, I was providing examples of times when I did the exact opposite of what Dej said I was doing. I felt he was misrepresenting my behavior, and put forth examples to the contrary.

Anyway, I stand by Empking being scummy. However, in the spirit of open-mindedness, I've found another player worthy of examination.

Let's look at Zachrulez, shall we? He's been flying way low on the radar. Zach's last real detailed post was back on page 10, where he voted AndyTony. Since then, he hasn't posted often, nor has he put forth an original idea. He seems to be riding low, staying neutral, and his lack of opinion on every matter is conspicuous. It's not 'crap' as he calls it in last post: there's nothing really convoluted to look at in this game.

In his post 247, he calls and votes AT. And then... an unvote. And then nothing. I think that when potential for an AT lynch fell through, he abandoned his position because it wasn't going anywhere. Zach's behavior is 'Opportunistic' in this regard. He didn't even really offer an explanation for why his suspicions of AT fell through. He just unvoted. Watch for actions he's done that seem to be committed with less than full effort behind them, and you'll see he's playing in the outfield, and not really involved with the discussion that occurs closer to the front.

Contrast him with Grimmy, who when he appears, at least puts forward interesting and original opinions.



The above is just an observation I made while nodding off to sleep, and one I feel hasn't received enough attention. I'll read in more detail later today, because it's an unreasonable hour of the morning right now.

[Giuseppe]

@Zach- Apathy about the game won't help us. Even though they've had their unfortunate discourses, it's important that you weigh in. Saying, basically, that because you don't like the discussion that you aren't going to put any input in isn't helpful to anyone.

Get over their squabbles, and give an opinion.

[Giuseppe]

Hm... Well, I could give you my general reads:

I like Phail, and feel he's the most Town of the lot. I feel Dej and Pablo are well-intentioned, if not misguided in their attention. AndyTony and Zwet are reading a bit off, AT due to his wishy-washiness at the end of Day 1, and his overreactions to Emp, who could easily be ignored sooner. My neutral read on Zwet is primarily due to confusion of his role in this one as opposed to all the other games I'm playing with him in. I haven't seen a lot from Grimmy or Cephrir, but mostly a positive feel, maybe a higher neutral than I give to Zwet and AT. I do not like Empking or Zachrulez, Empking for his higher levels of hostility in this game, and Zachrulez for his lurking/abrasiveness about catching up on the game.

Other than that, I simply feel like Millar was still a good lynch for how he was behaving at the time, and that my only mistake in handling him was trying to pry for more information, which the Town has frowned upon.

Aside from my treatment of Millar, is there any other strong evidence against me that I might think about?

[Giuseppe]

Ceph was on Millar's wagon. He doesn't believe himself scum. Thus, he wants to look off wagon.

That's how I read it, anyway.

[Giuseppe]

Sorry, that was a bit unclear. I mean the part you've played in this game. All of the games I've played with you have given me different reads, and they've begun to mesh together.

[Giuseppe]

@Zach- I was offended because I didn't think that there was anything conclusive enough about my behavior to warrant suggesting that if Empking were lynched, I would be the next obvious lynch. If Emp were scum, I'd be next in the firing line, when I was clearly defending him from just a quick lynch, not condemning his lynch permanently.

[Giuseppe]

At the time, I was alarmed by Rofl's playing style. My initial impression was that he was erratic, and yet he seemed to have some reputation for being a good player. I wouldn't be upset at an Emp lynch, but I would be upset at my own, and the way Rofl phrased it and acted around it felt very much like it would be a foregone conclusion. He clarified later, of course, which you'll note is around the time it stopped worrying me.

[Giuseppe]

Ah, so the conversation has zoomed out again. I'm busy for the rest of the day, but rest assured, I'll have a post in this thread with my thoughts by Sunday evening. MY apologies for the inconvenience.

[Giuseppe]

Alright, so here's my current view on this entire Dej thing. I really didn't like this line:

I'm almost afraid to lynch Emp first, because if he flips town, we may lose most of our leads, because they all involved Emp.

Now, I saw this and I thought: why wouldn't people want to lynch Empking at this point? If he's guilty, I'm sunk, even though I personally believe that Empking is guilty. With my track record, though, all it looks like is bussing since I'm voting him now, but I'm glad to give my vote to the town for the cause of lynching scum.

The thing is, Dej is neglecting the fact that Emp's lynch really does give us more information than my lynch, because it opens up information about Dej's behavior. Dej is going after me in a very tunnel-like format: I know I haven't given him an reason to unvote me yet personally, but there's been more than enough arguments flying around to make him at least consider another course of action.

For instance, look at Emp's slip, or gaffe, or whatever. Now, it could be an honest mistake. On the other hand, it could be a Freudian slip. And when you look at the pressure on Empking, who rivaling me for control of the votes, there must be something to the pressure he has on him. I don't think we can discount it entirely. Let it be what it's worth: just another thing Empking has said that's bad play, but may possibly be revealing.

Let's look at Dej's behavior concerning the quote I have above. Really, he hasn't addressed it. He's brushed it off, even though Cephrir and other members of the town have all stated that if Empking dies, we lose the bad theories.

I propose that with Empking's death, we learn the good theories. If he flips Town, well, I'm not sure what that'll mean for me. I'm in a Catch 22 of a situation, guilty either way, so to speak. But if he flips scum, I don't think that me being his partner is the only option.

I think Dej may, could, possibly, just might be Empking's partner.

First and foremost, he's doing his best to delay Empking's lynch, and we know that Empking is a liability to the Town whose done scummy actions this game. But secondly, he's opting to lynch me, Giuseppe, first.

If we lynch me first, and I flip Town, which I will, Empking may still be scum. He won't be absolved by my death. If we lynch Empking first, and he actually validates theories: Phail has suggested Zwet as a potential Emp partner *although I disagree*, and I have a theory of my own about Emp's partner. By lynching Empking, more theories are enforced or destroyed than by lynching me. This is inherently more helpful to the Town.

The town should actively be looking for the errors of their ways. If theories involving Empking are errors, we should be working as fast as possible to get rid of them.

Dej has stated he doesn't want the current theories to change.

Crap, I have to go, but I want this idea out here. Rest assured, I'm not done making this case.

Dej has said he's afraid of leads following through. I find that an anti-town position to make. The Town needs to know Empking's identity so that we're not stuck in the perpetual swamp of not knowing if our theories are valid.

Dej is shielding Empking and simultaneously forestalling the town from gaining new theories.

*More on this later*

[Giuseppe]

Well, my current actions were designed to provide my parting opinions on the game, so as to put forth a *hopefully* compelling argument as to why I'm not only innocent, but someone else is guilty. However, in the revision stages of this post, *which is what I'm typing now*, I've come to believe that these by no means have to be my parting opinions.

I will say with overwhelming force that I do not want to be lynched before Empking. I feel it is the worst move the town can make, and it's going to wreck the town. If Empking is lynched first, and flips scum, please, by all means, lynch me next. It would make sense. But don't lynch me first.

You people are underestimating what happens if we leave Empking to the end of the game. AndyTony has stated it many times: Empking is unreadable.

Unreadable.

You want a non-helpful, unreadable player as part of the town in the endgame? No. If Empking flips Town, the later he does so, the worse off the Town is. There are cases surrounding Empking's involvement in this game. If he flips Town, you want him to flip Town, now. Not later, when the game is lagging, when the game is in LyLo.

I devoutly believe Empking is scum. I'll stake my role in the game on it, because if he flips scum, I will die almost certainly. However, if I am wrong, I want to be wrong now. On Day 2. Not on Day 3, that's too late.

Look. At. This:

He's town. All leads related to him are lost and we start anew.

We want to lose our false leads today if they're false leads! Why preserve them?

I recently finished a game very much like this one, where a Village Idiot sabotaged Day 1, and on Day 3, someone was very much in my current position. When all of your leads in a game center around a single player, and that player dies, it is

extremely

hard to bounce back.

Call this a little prophecy:

The game will not recover from an Empking lynch later than Day 2.

This game, this remaking of my argument have resparked my interest in this game. I will do everything in my power to help the Town win. You have my assurance of assistance to the Town cause. I wasn't keen on defending myself earlier in the game because I lacked interest. That interest is now 100% here.

What were the arguments for my scumhood again? My treatment of Millar, defense against a quick lynch of Empking? Is that really all? I can't remember any of the other strong arguments.

Going back and looking over Dej's original post that started this fixation on me, his main arguments were that I didn't post original material, and that I seemed opportunistic, on top of Millar and my defense against a quick lynch.

Out of those four arguments, I've defended against all of them as best I can.

Allow me to recap my defense.

1. My treatment of Millar was in the hopes of drawing useful information out of an erratic player who was heading towards a lynch. If he claimed a scum buddy, got lynched, flipped scum, that would have been good, no?

This was originally said to have been me 'coaching' Millar, but when he flipped Town, it became me trying to score Town points, and no one considered that if Millar had been scum, he might have ratted his partner out.

My defense got blown off.

Dejkha's been conveniently leaving out the fact that at that time, I had no read on Emp's alignment. I was defending him from a Quick Lynch, not from any lynch.

Somehow, defending Empking from a quick-lynch on Day 1 has tied me to him on Day 2, and made my perfectly legitimate vote against him 'probable scum bussing'. At that time when I was defending him from the quick lynch, I was afraid that I would be quicklynched as scum for defending Empking from a quicklynch because Rofl had said that if Emp was scum, it was probably I was scum because I was defending him from that quick lynch. I was defending him against policy lynches, regardless of alignment, because he was more likely to be town at that time.

Seeing as the Town has tied me to Empking, it's clear that they still think I had some deeper motivation in stepping in before his quick lynch, when, in reality, it was me fearing the town might rush into a mistake.

My defense got blown off here too.

That was initiative of my own, and it's not like it was some petty, little thing to try. Defending Empking, Lord knows, isn't a popular decision. Zwet and Dejkha's attitudes on the matter are more than a testament to that. I defended Empking because I felt that his lynch would be disadvantageous at that time. Emphasis on 'At that time'.

You'll recall that before Millar's little stunt, I had no distinct suspicions. I was trying to stop Emp from being quick lynched. With Millar's appearance, I had a suspicion, and followed up on it with all haste. When someone claims scum, why lallygag?

This little gem was blown off because people thought citing examples of times when I'd gone out on a limb and tried something independent wasn't an effective method of counteracting the claims that I had no ideas of my own. I don't really see how I'm supposed to defend against being a sheep without citing examples when I, surprise, wasn't a sheep.

Surprisingly, people haven't brought this up again, but at first, they dismissed it, calling it 'awful' and 'horrible', but never really explaining why. *I think it was Cephrir who specifically said these things, and maybe Dej too*

As for opportunism, well, it's much harder to cite an example of a topic so ill-defined. It comes down to opinion whether one sees my actions as opportunistic or not. When a person claims scum, is it not right to vote them? I had no suspects before, and then I had one. Opportunism, or simply a wanting to put forth original material on someone who I thought was scum?

This, I believe, was never even addressed by anyone, but I'm bringing it back up again, because I don't believe I was being opportunistic, and this is part of the defense I made in one of my original posts from the base of Dej's argument against me. How is going and attacking the person who I found scum opportunistic? Was I suppose to just sit there and defend myself over and over from Roflcopter, and not get anything done, or find the real scum onboard?




So, there you have it. All of those quotes are from defenses I've made in past posts. So, yeah, what was I thinking? I do have a defense, and surprise, it was mostly ignored, or brushed off casually.

And, what's more, I'm ready to defend my defense from the relevant attacks that I hope come my way. I'm absolutely, 100% ready to prove my innocence.

I feel back in this game, and I'm going to get the scum bastards dead.

[Giuseppe]

Keeping Empking alive longer would be worse for the Town, because he's less readable. With less players in the game, to have even one be a complete blank read is devastating. Thus, scum want to keep Empking in the game.

[Giuseppe]

No Lynch is always, always, always a horrible idea.

[Giuseppe]

What's more, we're talking about NOT lynching Empking. Remember my prophecy? If he stays alive any longer, the town is going to go crazy not knowing, meanwhile, the scum get a free kill, while we do nothing to further our own information.

FoS: Andy

C:\>votecount

Running VoteCount

TM

Empking - 3 - Giuseppe, Zachrulez, dejkha

AndyTony - 1 - Empking

Giuseppe - 0
Grimmy - 0
dejkha - 0
zwetschenwasser - 0
Pablo Molinero - 0
Zachrulez - 0
Cephrir - 0
madeofphail - 0

Not Voting: zwetschenwasser, millar13, roflcopter, Cephrir, Pablo Molinero, Grimmy, AndyTony, madeofphail

With 10 players, it takes 6 to Lynch.

[Giuseppe]

I can't do all his defending FOR him just because I feel shitty about the mislynch

Exactly how do you know it's a mislynch?

[Giuseppe]

Bah! Lynched the day before I got back. Damn. Come on Town, you can win this!