Mini 836: Commie Mafia (Game Over)
-
-
CoCo Goon
-
-
CoCo Goon
-
-
CoCo Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 695
- Joined: June 8, 2009
Yes there is. Jumping on a bandwagon brings one person closer to a lynch. You admit to being opportunistic in jumping on a bandwagon, therefore, you are bringing that player closer to a lynch. Its too early in the game to get a read on Hoopla. Out of all possible players, you chose to jump on a wagon.
That seems scummy to me.ShowRecord:
Town: 3
Power Role: 3
Special: 1
Scum: 0
Ongoing: 2
W/L/D: 3/1/0-
-
CoCo Goon
-
-
CoCo Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 695
- Joined: June 8, 2009
Because he had the third vote, thus creating a wagon. Did anyone vote after Vaya?charter wrote:
Where do you say/hint at anything like this? All you've done so far is jump on Vaya for jumping on a wagon.CoCo wrote:What I AM suggesting is the opening wagon was not random.ShowRecord:
Town: 3
Power Role: 3
Special: 1
Scum: 0
Ongoing: 2
W/L/D: 3/1/0-
-
CoCo Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 695
- Joined: June 8, 2009
Egging on a bandwagon. If Hoopla = Town, scum would know and seek to get a quick lynch.Vaya wrote:Explain then why you think that my putting her closer to a lynch is scummy. What would I, if I were scum, have to gain from it?ShowRecord:
Town: 3
Power Role: 3
Special: 1
Scum: 0
Ongoing: 2
W/L/D: 3/1/0-
-
CoCo Goon
-
-
CoCo Goon
-
-
CoCo Goon
-
-
CoCo Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 695
- Joined: June 8, 2009
Oh for fuck's sake! L-2 right out of the fucking gate is a scummy wagon. Stop digging for an explanition. There's nothing more to say. I'd say the same about any wagon like that starting up right away.
I singled you out because you voted third and allowed the wagon to take off. I've said this. The fact that you continue to carry on and ask me to explain something that is as plain as day furthers my resolve that you're scum.ShowRecord:
Town: 3
Power Role: 3
Special: 1
Scum: 0
Ongoing: 2
W/L/D: 3/1/0-
-
CoCo Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 695
- Joined: June 8, 2009
Don't drag me into a circular argument. Read my posts and figure it out.Vaya wrote:So you're saying it's somehow my fault the wagon went to L-2? Why blame me for this and not charter? And I still don't see the harm in putting someone at L-2, it's not going to kill them.ShowRecord:
Town: 3
Power Role: 3
Special: 1
Scum: 0
Ongoing: 2
W/L/D: 3/1/0-
-
CoCo Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 695
- Joined: June 8, 2009
Vaya, I'm not the only person who thought the opening wagon was odd. You're the one defending it so hard. You've admited it was an opportunistic play on your part. Putting it all together, I feel you're scum.ShowRecord:
Town: 3
Power Role: 3
Special: 1
Scum: 0
Ongoing: 2
W/L/D: 3/1/0-
-
CoCo Goon
-
-
CoCo Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 695
- Joined: June 8, 2009
Vaya wrote: I'm not blaming you for thinking that it's unusual, this large of an early bandwagon doesn't happen to often. My problem is that you're being so stubborn in refusing to believe that it could not be scummy when you show no good or consistent reasoning to believe that it is. You keep changing you're stance on why you think it is scummy.
Precisely because it doesn't happen that often. It gave me pause to consider.
Fact: The odds of scum being on that wagon are probably higher than it consisting entirely of townies.
Fact: The scum were allowed 21 hours to talk pre-game.
Charter and Sensfan have about as much to do with this as Talitha and Harumafuji. Your vote is the third of the game and wagon. Its also smack dab in the middle of the wagon.
Just look at posts 42-49. That's the entire wagon. Everything else has been discussion about it.
See above. The wagon was scummy.Vaya wrote:At first you say you don't think there was a likely chance she would be lynched. You're just think its scummy because you think that the wagon wasn't random(What do you even mean by that?).
I don't think she would be lynched because good townies would either choose other votes or unvote.
CoCo wrote:Egging on a bandwagon. If Hoopla = Town, scum would know and seek to get a quick lynch.
This is misrepresentation. I said 'seek to get a quick lynch.' I said no such thing to imply a lynch was possible.Vaya wrote:Then you turn around and say that its scummy because she may have been lynched, contradicting yourself here.
Because IT IS. I was only frustrated because you failed to even bother to take a look at the situation objectively. Posts 42-49.Vaya wrote:Then you get frustrated and just say its just scummy because it is.
Because I've already thought about it. Your vote, its placement on the wagon, your defensiveness.Vaya wrote:You're not even trying to think about why or whether or not its scummy. You're just attacking me for any reason you can come up with. You've yet to show any valid and well backed reason to think I'm scum.
Is this post a good enough reason?Vaya wrote:Also, you never gave a good reason for singling me out either. You just keep repeating 'you're the third vote, therefore you're somehow responsible for the wagon and the other two votes.'ShowRecord:
Town: 3
Power Role: 3
Special: 1
Scum: 0
Ongoing: 2
W/L/D: 3/1/0-
-
CoCo Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 695
- Joined: June 8, 2009
These aren't reports. These aren't even facts.charter wrote:
Hoopla's reaction to the wagon on her wasn't scummy, so I'm leaning town on her. Pretty much every post of Vaya's I've agreed with, so town there as well.Peabody wrote:Charter, why are you getting a town reading on Hoopla and Vaya? Can you please point out specific posts that make you come to this conclusion?
Vaya, I wouldn't continue to waste your breath defending yourself against CoCo (aka it's way too early in the game for quote wars). I can't imagine anyone is actually buying what he's selling, I'm certainly not.ShowRecord:
Town: 3
Power Role: 3
Special: 1
Scum: 0
Ongoing: 2
W/L/D: 3/1/0-
-
CoCo Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 695
- Joined: June 8, 2009
Unvote
FOS Charter.
charter wrote:Early reports say both Hoopla and Vaya are town. Coco looks pretty suspect with his Vaya inquisition but ignoring the bandwagon votes of others. Looks like he's trying to build up a lynch on Vaya rather than question bandwagon votes.
unvote, vote CoCo
Like I said, these aren't reports. They aren't even facts.charter wrote:
Hoopla's reaction to the wagon on her wasn't scummy, so I'm leaning town on her.Peabody wrote:Charter, why are you getting a town reading on Hoopla and Vaya? Can you please point out specific posts that make you come to this conclusion?Pretty much every post of Vaya's I've agreed with, so town there as well.
Vaya, I wouldn't continue to waste your breath defending yourself against CoCo (aka it's way too early in the game for quote wars). I can't imagine anyone is actually buying what he's selling, I'm certainly not.
FOS Mathcam
mathcam wrote:
Was going to make the same piont myself.charter wrote:Early reports say both Hoopla and Vaya are town. Coco looks pretty suspect with his Vaya inquisition but ignoring the bandwagon votes of others. Looks like he's trying to build up a lynch on Vaya rather than question bandwagon votes.
unvote, vote CoCoUnvote, vote: Coco..
Cammathcam wrote:Ahhh...I suspect Haru is a non-native speaker. That should be interesting.
And I don't think we need to be too harsh on CoCo -- certainly common wisdom raises an eyebrow at a 5-person bandwaggon in the first few posts of a game. That he finds this suspicious is not that surprising. The whole "The bandwaggon is scummy" vs. "No its not" quote war isn't particularly informative, imho.
Cam
Looks like both of them have shabby reasons for voting for me. I think some REAL explanations are due.mathcam wrote:
Cuz there's a difference between finding someone scummy and being condescending to them?Vaya wrote:If that's how you feel, then why are you voting for him?
CamShowRecord:
Town: 3
Power Role: 3
Special: 1
Scum: 0
Ongoing: 2
W/L/D: 3/1/0-
-
CoCo Goon
-
-
CoCo Goon
-
-
CoCo Goon
-
-
CoCo Goon
-
-
CoCo Goon
-
-
CoCo Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 695
- Joined: June 8, 2009
Allow me to make myself clear.
Charter posts about early reports showing Vaya as town. When asked, he says its simply because he agrees. I want to know exactly what posts he agrees with that point town on Vaya.
Second, Mathcam quotes the post by Charter and says he was "about to make that point himself."
What point? There was nothing to go on in that post. Also, he later tells people not to be so hard on me because the wagon did indeed look suspicious. When confronted about why he's voting for me in that case, he responds saying there is a difference between finding someone scummy and being condescending. After making 104, he responds with YET ANOTHER reason that has nothing to do with the quotes in question.
And this isn't OMGUS. I actually have a reason for wanting to vote for one of them. It appears their reasons are lacking substance.ShowRecord:
Town: 3
Power Role: 3
Special: 1
Scum: 0
Ongoing: 2
W/L/D: 3/1/0-
-
CoCo Goon
-
-
CoCo Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 695
- Joined: June 8, 2009
Where is the clear point in, "Early reports say Vaya is town?" (Paraphrased)mathcam wrote:Huh? There is a very clear point in that post -- that it is bizarre that you are attacking Vaya and no one else, and further suggests an implication for this bizarreness. You havestillnot responded to this line of inquiry.
Sensfan is V/LA. I'd get absolutely nowhere if I'd voted or questioned him until he returns.mathcam wrote:In fact, because you seem to be missing the point, let me emphasize with some questions: On Page 2, you vote vaya for continuing the bandwagon. Why did you not mention SensFan continuing the bandwagon? On page 3, you say that it seemed Vaya was being opportunistic in voting Vaya. Why not mention SensFan then? Why not mention charter, who quite explicitly was being opportunistic in his vote on Vaya?
Vaya admitted it was opportunistic. Sensfan was and is still gone.
In the argument with Vaya, I didn't see Charter's posts until later, and by then I had other bones to pick with him. Most notably, why he thinks agreeing with someone clears them as town.
Vaya's vote was smack tab in the middle of the bandwagon, this added fuel to the fire.
But you didn't find it suspicious yourself?mathcam wrote:No I didn't. I said to not be so hard on you because I could understand whyyou(or someone in general) would think it's suspicious. Then I said to Vaya that me coming to your defense in the meta-mafia sense does not mean I didn't find you suspicious. But I don't see what either of these points have to do with anything.
If the bandwagon could be found suspicious by "someone in general,"why vote for the person that acts upon it?
What makes me suspicious for doing something you agree is possible?ShowRecord:
Town: 3
Power Role: 3
Special: 1
Scum: 0
Ongoing: 2
W/L/D: 3/1/0-
-
CoCo Goon
-
-
CoCo Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 695
- Joined: June 8, 2009
Here's a recap:
42: First post of the game, Talitha votes Hoopla.
43: Harumafuji, second post of the game, votes Hoopla. Says something about being inside the glass and agreeing with the cute little girl.
44: Vaya votes Hoopla.
45: Col.Cathart posts a remark of surprise that a bandwagon has already happened. Votes Harumafuji for creating it.
46: Sensfan votes Hoopla. Very suspcious as well, due to Cathart's remark.
47: Cyberbob posts and questions if the bandwagon is because Hoopla may have caused the game to restart.
48: I post. Vote Vaya for continuing the bandwagon. Clearly echoing the reasons for Cathart's vote.
49: Charter votes Hoopla. Exuberantly proclaims "Bandwagon!" Also suspicious.
50: Mathcam posts. Uses non-canon posts to suggest Hoopla as a valuable pro-town asset. Or strong scum. Would like to keep her alive. Doesn't understand Haru's statement. Wants to focus on Vaya and Sensfan's votes. Thinks Charter's vote is so nuts he isn't sure its scummy.
51: Vaya posts. Says it was a random bandwagon vote (is there such a thing?). Doesn't see anything wrong or scummy because no one has the intention of getting Hoopla lynched.
52: Hoopla posts. Doesn't care about blatent bandwagon. Votes Vaya as a bandwagon alternative.
53: Le Chat doesn't understand why all five players voted without the intention of lynching Hoopla.
54: Le Chat inquires about Hoopla's ongoing birthday.
55: Vaya doesn't see what's so hard to understand, when you bandwagon, you're not always pushing for a lynch.
56: Cathart posts. Says yes. Why join a bandwagon if you don't intend to lynch.
57: Mathcam asks Vaya why he didn't tell us it was blatant bandwagoning. Asks if Vaya rolled dice or just couldn't think of anything else. Is okay with blatant bandwagoning as long as its aknowledged.
58: Vaya once again defends the bandwagon. Responds to Cathart by saying the random bandwagon jump was to gauge reactions (doesn't this imply it wasn't a random vote then?). Doesn't understand why people have an issue with it. Tells Mathcam he didn't see a reason to point out that it was blatant bandwagoning. Claims by random vote, he meant he saw a wagon forming and jumped on to see what would happen.
59: I mention it seems rather opportunistic of Vaya to jump on the wagon.
60: Vaya says it was indeed opportunistic. But there's nothing scummy about it.
61: I say it is. Jumping on a bandwagon brings a person closer to a lynch. Too early to read Hoopla, and of all possible players, Vaya does the admited opportunistic route and jumps on a bandwagon. I say it seems scummy to me.
62: Charter says early reports say Hooplah and Vaya are town. Thinks I'm suspicious for my inquisition of Vaya (two posts) while ignoring the other bandwagon voters. Votes for me.
63: Vaya again says he was merely jumping on the bandwagon to promote discussion and gauge reactions. Asks if I was suggesting Vaya was trying to get Hoopla lynched. Also points out a lynch was unlikely to happen.
64: I concur that a lynch was unlikely. I point out that I was suggesting the wagon wasn't completely random.
65: Vaya asks what Vayascum would have to gain from pushing Hoopla one vote closer to a lynch.
66: Charter asks where I've said or hinted at the wagon not being random.
67: I point out Vaya had the third vote, creating the wagon, which in turn (because it was opportunistic) that the wagon wasn't random. I asked (knowing full well who I was asking, mind you) if anyone else voted after Vaya.
68: Charter says yes.
69: Vaya doesn't understand my point. Asks what scum motivations he would have for jumping on the bandwagon.
70: I say it eggs on the bandwagon. Allowing it to continue. Scum would know Hoopla is town, and can capitolize on it.
71: Charter asks why Vaya's was scummy rather than Sen's or his.
72: I point out that Sens and Charter voted for Hoopla as well. I ask why it wouldn't be suspicious.
73: Vaya tells me scum wouldn't be trying to go for a quick lynch because it would be too obvious. Also doesn't think a five person bandwagon right away is suspicious. Thinks I don't have good reasons to attack him and only going after him because others voiced suspicion and I'm obviously trying to go for a mislynch. (What???) Votes for me.
74: I call it an OMGUS vote. I refuse to believe Vaya doesn't see anything scummy about such an early L-2.
75: Vaya asserts that its not OMGUS and he has perfectly good reasons for voting me. Also if someone attacks him, he can find those attacks scummy. It was just a harmless random bandwagon and nothing bad can come of it. Says I haven't explained why I think the bandwagon is scummy.
76: I respond by saying I certainly have explained why I view it as scummy. I also say at least on of the people on the wagon, votes 3-5, are scum.
77: Vaya AGAIN says I haven't explained why the bandwagon is scummy. Nor why I singled him out instead of Sens or Charter.
78: I frustratingly post that I HAVE said why I think the wagon is scummy and why I singled out Vaya. I then say exactly why I did those things. I point out the circular argument furthers my reading that Vaya is scum.
79: Asks if I'm implying its his fault the wagon is at L-2. Asks why I blame him and not Charter. Doesn't see the harm in putting someone at L-2, because it won't kill them.
80: I tell Vaya not to pull me into a circular argument and to go read my posts.
81: I post again and tell Vaya that I wasn't the only person that thought the wagon was odd. I say I find Vaya scummy for defending the wagon strongly and admitting it was an opportunistic play.
82: Peabody votes Mathcam because he sucks at math... and because he missed the random phase. Doesn't understand why Hoopla is at L-2 right out of the random phase. Thinks something fishy is going on. Agrees with me, Le Chat, and Cathart. Asks Vaya if his vote on Hoopla was random. Asks Charter why he's gatting a town read on Hoopla and Vaya. Requests specific posts.
83: Mathcam quotes Charter's post #62. Ssays he was about to make that point. Votes for me.
84: I ask where the early reports came from.
85: Vaya's large post. Says he isn't blaming me because I think the wagon is unusual. It doesn't happen often. Says I'm stubborn for refusing to believe its not scummy. Says I have no good or consistent reasons for thinking so. Tells me I continually change my stance on why I think the wagon is scummy. Tries to imply I contradicted myself concerning whether or not a lynch of Hoopla was even possible. Claims I only think the wagon is scummy because I think it wasn't random. Says I claim the wagon is scummy for absolutely no reason. (Fuck you, btw. L-2 as soon as the game begins IS the reason.) Says I'm using whatever I can come up with to attack Vaya. Says I need a well backed reason. Also says I haven't given a good reason for singling him out. (round and round we go...)
86: Vaya tells Peabody there's nothing wrong or scummy with an early random bandwagon. Then says, "My vote was an intentional bandwagon vote. When I said it was random, I meant that the wagon itself was random." (I thought your vote was random.)
87: My response to Vaya's large post. http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... 50#1832050
88: Long response from Vaya: http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... 78#1832178
89: Charter responds to Peabody that Hoopla's reaction to the bandwagon wasn't scummy, so he gets a town read. Says he agrees with Vaya and that makes her town. Tells Vaya not to bother arguing with me because its too early for quote wars and no one is "buying what I'm selling." (Coaching?)
90: Vaya says Charter is right and he'll stop arguing.
91: I tell Charter that his "reports" aren't even facts.
92: Harumafuji agrees with Charter and Mathcam, although I can't understand why. His wording is obtuse due to being a non-English speaker. Votes for me.
93: VOTE COUNT
94: Mathcam notices Haru isn't a native English speaker. Then says:
"And I don't think we need to be too harsh on CoCo -- certainly common wisdom raises an eyebrow at a 5-person bandwaggon in the first few posts of a game. That he finds this suspicious is not that surprising. The whole "The bandwaggon is scummy" vs. "No its not" quote war isn't particularly informative, imho."
95: Cathart expresses that being a verteran or not has little to do with the surprise that occurs when a bandwagon forms so quickly. Does not believe 5 people voted for the same person for little to no reason. Says its too little to accuse anyone of anything and drops out of the argument. Unvotes. Says Haru's posts causes his head to spin.
96: Hoopla says my facts in post 87 are debatable. Doesn't want to do the math, but agrees its probable scum is on the early bandwagon. Says bandwagons are more beneficial to the town because they generate reads, while the only thing scum stand to gain is the remote chance of a quick lynch.
97-98: Vaya asks Mathcam if he feels that way (post 94) why is he voting for me.
99: Mathcam responds its because there is a difference between finding someone scummy and being condescending to them.
100: Cyberbob chimes in saying Vaya and I are overreacting. Says new players tend to be more emotional, overreacting != scum. Votes Peabody for the late RVS vote.
101: Haru agrees with Cyberbob. FOS's Peabody. Bolds Peabody's statement of something fishy going on with the L-2 wagon. Says something about a 21 polling day.
102-103: Talitha arrives and says the bandwagon is good, unsure about me, votes Peabody for the random vote.
104: I unvote and FOS Charter and Mathcam for various quotes.
105: Admits he doesn't have any facts. Says his reason for voting me isn't shabby, its due to the fact I claimed I was questioning bandwagoners, yet hadn't confronted anyone but Vaya. He felt as though I didn't care about the bandwagon and only wanted to build a case on Vaya. Tells me I'm OMGUSing. Adds that the peabody wagon is good.
106: I tell Charter he is twisting the argument and I wish to see his early reports (i.e. specific quotes).
107: Charter says they were just his thoughts. Early reports = I think.
108: I point out his choice of words implied he had additional information.
109: Le Chat tells me he understood what Charter meant by "early reports." Thinks Haru's posts make things interesting. Tells Vaya he should have stressed "all 5 of you" because he found it odd that Vaya could speak for the alignment of everyone on the wagon. Says the wagon inspired discussion. Understands it didn't threaten Hoopla. Inquires about Hoopla's ongoing birthday.
110: Le Chat asks Charter what Hooplascum reaction to a 5-vote bandwagon would be. Says Peabody's random vote isn't a scumtell.
111: Vaya tells Le Chat he wasn't speaking for everyone on the wagon. Says jumping on the wagon doesn't have scummy motivations. If scum are on the wagon, voting isn't a sign of it. Also doesn't agree with all the votes for Peabody.
112: Peabody tells Cyberbob there are no other reasons for his Mathcam vote aside from the fact it was random. Doesn't see what's wrong with his bolded line in Haru's post 101. Tells Charter he disagrees with Charter's readings on Hoopla and Vaya. This is due to not hearing much from Hoopla and the Vaya reading being weak. Says he disagrees with a majority of the things Vaya has said. Requests specific quotes Charter refers to when saying he agrees with Vaya. Votes Charter.
113: I agree with Peabody. Announce I want to hear from Mathcam before making a vote.
114: I chuckle at my phrasing in post 113 and regret drinking so much coffee.
115: Mathcam responds. Says he gave a reason for his vote. Goes back to saying I ignored the other people on the bandwagon. Talks about me ignoring Charter. Says my post 87 is a pathetic reason. Says its not a good enough reason because I gave reasons long after Charter asked for them. Says I shouldn't have a problem being found scummy because two people disagreed with me. Wonders if I couldn't think of a valid response.
116: I point out Mathcam's contradiction with the quotes in 104.
117: Mathcam has no idea what I'm talking about because I offered no additional commentary. Tells me they are meta-mafia and irrelevent.
118: Hoopla says the CoCo vs the world discussion has become an irrelevant typing contest. Says my post 104 is rife with OMGUS and over-defensiveness. Wants Peabody's wagon to pick up steam. Votes Peabody.
This recap extends to the middle of page 5. The rest I'm sure you're all aware of.
Now, who looks scummiest in all that? This is a question for everyone.
Second, the Peabody wagon is incredibly stupid.ShowRecord:
Town: 3
Power Role: 3
Special: 1
Scum: 0
Ongoing: 2
W/L/D: 3/1/0-
-
CoCo Goon
-
-
CoCo Goon
-
-
CoCo Goon
-
-
CoCo Goon
-
-
CoCo Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 695
- Joined: June 8, 2009
Peabody wrote: This is my first game where I'm not a replacement on this site. I wanted to experience the RVS. Also, I do not believe my "before discussion starts" comment was so unbelievable. The only events that transpired was the questionable argument back and forth between Vaya and Coco. Many of you have already said the conversation was useless.
How is this defensive of a late RVS vote, Talitha?ShowRecord:
Town: 3
Power Role: 3
Special: 1
Scum: 0
Ongoing: 2
W/L/D: 3/1/0-
-
CoCo Goon
-
-
CoCo Goon
-
-
CoCo Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 695
- Joined: June 8, 2009
What's obtuse about it? Seriously, enlighten me. I cannot, in good consciousness, vote for a player that made a lame RVS joke. Had he not commenteated on the goings on, I'd be in your camp.ShowRecord:
Town: 3
Power Role: 3
Special: 1
Scum: 0
Ongoing: 2
W/L/D: 3/1/0-
-
CoCo Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 695
- Joined: June 8, 2009
I've already taken a stance. I do not beleive at this moment that Peabody is scum. I have made several statements to this effect for quite some time now.
Could someone point out the post in which Peabody says something such as "The RVS vote was a joke" and another in which he says, "The RVS vote was not a joke"?ShowRecord:
Town: 3
Power Role: 3
Special: 1
Scum: 0
Ongoing: 2
W/L/D: 3/1/0-
-
CoCo Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 695
- Joined: June 8, 2009
Orddung! You weren't reading because you thought the 4-way argument was based upon null tells. You STILL have yet to comment on that. Surely your opinion must have read one way or another!Cyberbob wrote:
Can you elaborate? I haven't really been getting any sort of a read off of him.Talitha wrote:In other news I'm also interested in mathcam.. I think he could easily be scum.ShowRecord:
Town: 3
Power Role: 3
Special: 1
Scum: 0
Ongoing: 2
W/L/D: 3/1/0-
-
CoCo Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 695
- Joined: June 8, 2009
Cyberbob:
Post 1: Shouldn't that have been obvious? He separated it with a line and everything. I am certainly not going to reach at straws for a lynch around that. I'd rather look at how a player behaves.
Post 2: Blatant fence straddling. I don't expect you to agree with me, but you must have other thoughts about the situation. Who in that tug-of-war looks the scummiest?ShowRecord:
Town: 3
Power Role: 3
Special: 1
Scum: 0
Ongoing: 2
W/L/D: 3/1/0-
-
CoCo Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 695
- Joined: June 8, 2009
This is a non-answer. I think you can do better.Cyberbob wrote:Oh, aline!! Well that changes everything.
And now I'm asking. You should be just as proficient at answering my inquiries as you were to theirs.Cyberbob wrote:Oh yes, clearly I'm trying to play both sides here. That's why I've been defending myself rather vigourously against a bunch of people who were involved on both sides of the aisle.
Can't say I didn't see that coming. How about explaining my overreactions? Go on, quote posts.Cyberbob wrote:If I absolutely life-depending-on-it had to choose a scummiest player to come out of the argument I would choose you for overreacting the most.ShowRecord:
Town: 3
Power Role: 3
Special: 1
Scum: 0
Ongoing: 2
W/L/D: 3/1/0-
-
CoCo Goon
-
-
CoCo Goon
-
-
CoCo Goon
-
-
CoCo Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 695
- Joined: June 8, 2009
charter wrote:See, this is another one of those misconstrues. I SPECIFICALLY stated when I voted you that it was because you were only questioning Vaya, not everyone who was bandwagoning.
Yes, I'm still ignoring the votes of others...charter wrote:Early reports say both Hoopla and Vaya are town. Coco looks pretty suspect with his Vaya inquisition but ignoring the bandwagon votes of others. Looks like he's trying to build up a lynch on Vaya rather than question bandwagon votes.
unvote, vote CoCo
Charter: "Hooplah has a couple posts, she must be town. Also, I agree with Vaya, obviously town then. But sweet Jesus, CoCo isn't happy. Must be scum."
You have drawn this on yourself, scum.ShowRecord:
Town: 3
Power Role: 3
Special: 1
Scum: 0
Ongoing: 2
W/L/D: 3/1/0-
-
CoCo Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 695
- Joined: June 8, 2009
Read 201 and get back to me.Cyberbob wrote:
No, I didn't.CoCo wrote:Lol, you missed my following post, didn't you, Cyberbob?
It may (emphasis on "may") even be as you say, that you managed to draw some reactions from people that will be useful later on. However to try and claim that that was your intention all along is a pretty blatant falsehood and an attempt to retcon some form of rationality into your earlier posts.ShowRecord:
Town: 3
Power Role: 3
Special: 1
Scum: 0
Ongoing: 2
W/L/D: 3/1/0-
-
CoCo Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 695
- Joined: June 8, 2009
Go on... what is it about my posts that bother you so much as to pull your hair out?charter wrote:Ok, I'm just going to stop arguing with CoCo before I pull my hair out. If I see something he does that I think is scummy, I'll post it, else I'm just going to try and avoid migraines.
I'll come right out and say I'm not liking Talitha's recent posts. Furthermore, Haru deserves attention before the day is over.Hoopla wrote:
I don't see how. Clarity is important to the town, while Haru's garbled nothing-posts only serve to provide murkier waters for scum to lurk in.Talitha wrote: The Hoopla vs Harufakefuji thing was interesting too. Still trying to figure out if I think Hoopla acted a little suspiciously there.
Will do.Cyberbob wrote:
Read the first part of my post and get back to me. I'm not saying that you definitely did not draw any potentially useful reactions, only that it was pretty obviously not on your mind at the time.CoCo wrote:Read 201 and get back to me.ShowRecord:
Town: 3
Power Role: 3
Special: 1
Scum: 0
Ongoing: 2
W/L/D: 3/1/0-
-
CoCo Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 695
- Joined: June 8, 2009
This post?Cyberbob wrote:It may (emphasis on "may") even be as you say, that you managed to draw some reactions from people that will be useful later on. However to try and claim that that was your intention all along is a pretty blatant falsehood and an attempt to retcon some form of rationality into your earlier posts.
I'm sorry I don't offer a play-by-play. Suffice to say I keep many of my motivations secret in order to trap scum later. You are more than welcome to read over any of my games, current or otherwise.ShowRecord:
Town: 3
Power Role: 3
Special: 1
Scum: 0
Ongoing: 2
W/L/D: 3/1/0-
-
CoCo Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 695
- Joined: June 8, 2009
Yes, during that time I WAS genuinelyCyberbob wrote:
I'm sure you do; plenty of people do. I just don't buy it here; you were getting pretty genuinely angry IMO.CoCo wrote:I'm sorry I don't offer a play-by-play. Suffice to say I keep many of my motivations secret in order to trap scum later.frustrated. However, if you read Iso-Charter, perhaps you will understand the reasoning behind my vote.ShowRecord:
Town: 3
Power Role: 3
Special: 1
Scum: 0
Ongoing: 2
W/L/D: 3/1/0-
-
CoCo Goon
-
-
CoCo Goon
-
-
CoCo Goon
-
-
CoCo Goon
-
-
CoCo Goon
-
-
CoCo Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 695
- Joined: June 8, 2009
@Le Chat: iso-[player name] is basically reading a player's posts in isolation. You can do so easily by going to the bottom of the page and using the drop down menus to select a player.
I'll respond to Mathcam's 215 after dinner.ShowRecord:
Town: 3
Power Role: 3
Special: 1
Scum: 0
Ongoing: 2
W/L/D: 3/1/0-
-
CoCo Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 695
- Joined: June 8, 2009
Really? I'm quite single-minded. If I think someone is scum, I tend to ignore everything else until I'm satisfied either a) that player isn't scum or b) the player is scum and the case is iron-clad.mathcam wrote:
CoCo, this is almost everyone in the game chiming in on the same topic -- you either inadvertently or consciously misinterpret just about every argument made in this game. Further, when people call you out on it, you tend to ignore their claims. You also ignored direct attacks against you for quite some time. If these are indeed inadvertent, I suggest you start taking your time reading other people's arguments. But since I'm beginning to suspect not-so-inadvertent...Charter wrote: I agree with CoCo being ridiculous obtuse and misconstruing everything. Unfortunately, I'm not feeling scum off him.
Once one of those criteria are met, I begin to judge the reactions of other players.
I became not-as-suspicious of Vaya and turned my attention onto you and Charter. If you're going to attack me, attack my arguments rather than my playstyle.
1. For crying out loud. Are we still talking about Sensfan? He was on V/LA,mathcam wrote:I'm going toVote: CoCo, for two reasons. First is the original attack -- while I think he has some "plausible deniability" in the sense that he can push off inconsistencies onto the V/LA, it's hardly airtight. Even if he decided that Vaya was the right target, why not evenmentionSensFan? The second is the argument in the previous paragraph -- delaying responding to attacks gives him time to read how other people respond to them before providing a defense, not to mention the possibility that people would forget about it. Contributing to this "hoping people forget about it" is his proclivity for strongly shifting focus on some very bizarre topics -- the "early reports" comes to mind, as does his insistence that there was no content in the post of charter that I quoted and agreed with (and a pretty implausible interpretation of what I was agreeing with).explain what good it would have done for me to put everything else on hold until he returned.In fact, he still hasn't said much (one post?) since he's returned. You can bet your ass I'm suspicious of him... but there really isn't much I can do until he starts participating.
2. I can see your logic in thinking this. But it is simply not true, as I explained above.
Pro-town fervor = scum?mathcam wrote:The main reservation I have with my vote is that I would typically assign CoCo's fervor in this game a slightly pro-town rating, but it's not enough to overcome the above points.
If your above points lead to "fervor" how is that a case for me being scum?ShowRecord:
Town: 3
Power Role: 3
Special: 1
Scum: 0
Ongoing: 2
W/L/D: 3/1/0-
-
CoCo Goon
-
-
CoCo Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 695
- Joined: June 8, 2009
Sensfan, why did you jump on the bandwagon at the beginning of the game? If you'd been reading the thread since you "came back," I find it odd you haven't commented on it yet. Even though I have mentioned a few times it made me suspicious of you, but couldn't do anything about it until you returned.
Second, new laptop? I thought you were visiting your girlfriend...
I'm still mostly V/LA until tomorrow or Monday, but I'm near a computer for the time being and will be reading/discussing until I leave again.ShowRecord:
Town: 3
Power Role: 3
Special: 1
Scum: 0
Ongoing: 2
W/L/D: 3/1/0-
-
CoCo Goon
-
-
CoCo Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 695
- Joined: June 8, 2009
So? During a random vote stage, there are 11 other players to vote for (including yourself), why jump on a bandwagon? That doesn't make your vote very random, does it?SensFan wrote:Because its "a wagon so early in the game".
@Peabody: What? I get called out because I couldn't question Sensfan (and therefore didn't mention him) and you chime in to say it gets us nowhere? I'm covering the ground I intended to cover. What are you doing?ShowRecord:
Town: 3
Power Role: 3
Special: 1
Scum: 0
Ongoing: 2
W/L/D: 3/1/0-
-
CoCo Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 695
- Joined: June 8, 2009
Perhaps. But wouldn't that be suspicious? I think one would have their own reasoning for jumping on a bandwagon. Especially when two players voted others for starting/continuing it... which brings us back to Charter.Col.Cathart wrote:CoCo - the main problem is, I can see an EXACT copy of your and Vaya argument from beginning of the game. We can already see from his statement, that he'll use the same line of defense.
I still expect answers from Sesnfan.ShowRecord:
Town: 3
Power Role: 3
Special: 1
Scum: 0
Ongoing: 2
W/L/D: 3/1/0-
-
CoCo Goon
-
-
CoCo Goon
-
-
CoCo Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 695
- Joined: June 8, 2009
Okay, aside from "being a big wagon" why did you jump on it? Its a simple question and I can't believe you haven't answered it.SensFan wrote:No, you are not. To quote Tally, stop being obtuse.ShowRecord:
Town: 3
Power Role: 3
Special: 1
Scum: 0
Ongoing: 2
W/L/D: 3/1/0-
-
CoCo Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 695
- Joined: June 8, 2009