Mini #509: Mighty Morphin' Power Rangers, Game Over!

Flameaxe · Post Post #4 (isolation #0) » Thu Sep 27, 2007 3:58 pm

Vote: Peers.

Will anyone join me?

Flameaxe · Post Post #11 (isolation #1) » Thu Sep 27, 2007 6:06 pm

Because I luerve myself a good bandwagon.

Flameaxe · Post Post #25 (isolation #2) » Fri Sep 28, 2007 8:12 am

dybeck wrote:
Unright wrote:
dybeck wrote:vote: FlameAxe
See, it was new and exciting when originality did that, now it's dull and derivative..

Any reason you're choosing to be the first to double-up a vote?
Yes. It's because I know categorically within the first page of this game that FlameAxe is scum. I could tell you all his scumbuddies too but I thought that might detract from the fun of it all.

Team asshat has nothing to do with this game, don't make like it seem like it does. My Asshat partner and I will determine when it will be necessary to make that change.

Flameaxe · Post Post #27 (isolation #3) » Fri Sep 28, 2007 8:16 am

Unvote, Vote: UA.

Officially a bandwagon now!

Flameaxe · Post Post #35 (isolation #4) » Fri Sep 28, 2007 1:56 pm

Mirth wrote:I'm not a fan of pointless bandwagons, sorry.

Pointless bandwagons are what get the discussion going.

@dybeck: I bet you can't wait. I can assure only greatness from TAsshat in this game.

Flameaxe · Post Post #39 (isolation #5) » Fri Sep 28, 2007 4:36 pm

It's morphin' time!

Flameaxe · Post Post #46 (isolation #6) » Sat Sep 29, 2007 5:59 am

It's nothing, I've just wanted to say that for a really long time. Stop trying to bandwagon me, scum.

Flameaxe · Post Post #74 (isolation #7) » Mon Oct 01, 2007 10:31 am

Considering you haven't played with UA before, I'll let the fact that you don't realinze it was a total joke that he does every game slide...

Flameaxe · Post Post #80 (isolation #8) » Mon Oct 01, 2007 4:11 pm

Mirth wrote:I agree with Peers. Not funny and a waste of time = not good. I don't see what Avalon's crappy attempt as joking has to do with the rest of you piling on pointlessly? I also don't understand why Avalon would have such a ridiculously annoying method of joking, but I'm of the belief that playing along with juvenile behavior only further encourages and enables it, so I'd like the extend the humorless schoolmarm headshaking to everyone who plays along with this kind of nonsese.

If it is pointless and a waste of time, does that make talking about how it is a a waste of time MORE of a waste of time? (psst, the answer is yes!)

If it was pointless we wouldn't be talking about it for two pages, no?

Flameaxe · Post Post #82 (isolation #9) » Mon Oct 01, 2007 5:36 pm

I second the Carlos Mencia not being funny part. As for UA, it's just a tradition for him. If he tries to push the wagon the whole game, THEN I would have an issue.

Flameaxe · Post Post #96 (isolation #10) » Tue Oct 02, 2007 11:14 am

Mirth wrote:Since this is getting nowhere (and none of you are funny. Get over it) I will purpose the fowwing. Since Avalon's bandwagon hd 5 people on it (including himself) it would be satistically sound to assume that at least one of them is scum. In a game likje this, I will also assume that we have probably three or four mafia players (could be 2, could be 5 cause of the five rangers, but one mislynch and one nightkill would put town in LYLO with that, so I'm going to assume that 5 is less likely than 3 or 4 for that reason, though it is still possible due to the number of rangers). Possibly some other killing role, don't know yet since we started on day.

So, in no particular order, Blight, Avalon, Flame, CES, Unright, what do you all think about my above comment.

If you are thinking about focusing pressure on just those 5: I say, screw dat, scum.

Flameaxe · Post Post #100 (isolation #11) » Wed Oct 03, 2007 2:23 am

A simple "no" would have been acceptable. And I did answer it.

Flameaxe · Post Post #105 (isolation #12) » Wed Oct 03, 2007 12:13 pm

I trust that PJ made this setup balanced. We probably shouldn't really need to worry about it.

Flameaxe · Post Post #145 (isolation #13) » Sun Oct 07, 2007 6:54 am

I'm out of town, that's why. I'll start talking tomorrow (my flight is later this afternoon/early evening) once I get caught up on mah schoolz stuff.

Flameaxe · Post Post #187 (isolation #14) » Wed Oct 10, 2007 3:25 pm

originality wrote:Meh, why not, I havn't done anything yet.
vote jmar
.

This isn't a good thing on page 8...you start doing things on liek...page 2, at the latest.

Unvote

for being a useless vote that has no current meaning.

Flameaxe · Post Post #193 (isolation #15) » Wed Oct 10, 2007 5:42 pm

'anything particularly useful'

Flameaxe · Post Post #209 (isolation #16) » Thu Oct 11, 2007 4:08 pm

Mirth wrote:In no particular order:

PlaysWith: Reasonless bandwagon.
Unright: Wagon hopping.
Flameaxe: See page 1.

So let me get this straight...I am on your top scum list because of "being eager" for random votes? This is just plain dumb in my opinion.

Flameaxe · Post Post #212 (isolation #17) » Thu Oct 11, 2007 5:17 pm

For jumping on a jokewagon or saying "It's morphin' time'?

Flameaxe · Post Post #219 (isolation #18) » Fri Oct 12, 2007 8:40 am

Nowhere better to put my vote. I like it there still.

Flameaxe · Post Post #221 (isolation #19) » Fri Oct 12, 2007 8:56 am

Cause no one has done anything substantial enough to draw my vote.

Flameaxe · Post Post #223 (isolation #20) » Fri Oct 12, 2007 2:33 pm

Because I always jump on a UAwagon like that, because there always is one.

Flameaxe · Post Post #228 (isolation #21) » Sat Oct 13, 2007 1:50 pm

Jokewagons are what get the game moving, if you can't tell by what is going on here by NOW...

Flameaxe · Post Post #231 (isolation #22) » Sat Oct 13, 2007 2:59 pm

If you don't find them 'especially suspicious', why even bother voting?

Flameaxe · Post Post #236 (isolation #23) » Sat Oct 13, 2007 5:28 pm

I don't see the issue of a jokewagon over 4 votes. All I see...Is a jokewagon over 4 votes...

Flameaxe · Post Post #238 (isolation #24) » Sat Oct 13, 2007 6:33 pm

Cogito Ergo Scum wrote:
Unvote PlayswithSquirrels, Vote UltimaAvalon

Only 3 more, guys!

Also
FoS Flameaxe
for morphing.

This post REALLY does seem TOTALLY serious...[/sarcasm]

Now you say 'It wasn't obviously a joke.' So please tell me why you decided to jump on a wagon you now say wasn't a joke.

Peers wrote:unvote: Flameaxe

I guess he won me over with his "You're stupid!" defense.

vote: UltimaAvalon

I guess I'm an enabler.

Killerbob: Your lurking isn't helping the town at all, stop it, or I will bring out the paddle.

Flameaxe · Post Post #245 (isolation #25) » Sun Oct 14, 2007 6:47 am

Yea....because the difference between L-4 and L-3 is HUGE when it comes to pressure...

Flameaxe · Post Post #250 (isolation #26) » Sun Oct 14, 2007 3:21 pm

Peers wrote:
Flameaxe wrote:
Peers wrote:unvote: Flameaxe

I guess he won me over with his "You're stupid!" defense.

vote: UltimaAvalon

I guess I'm an enabler.

Killerbob: Your lurking isn't helping the town at all, stop it, or I will bring out the paddle.

Unovte

Vote: Flameaxe

Reason: The above quote was made by Unright, not me. He put my name on it... why? To try to rally suspicion around me? Don't know. But he's trying to put words in my mouth, and I don't like that.

I mistook you two, nothing more, nothing less. (neither of you have avatars, fix it, and that doesn't happen anymore.)

I think that's a stupid reason for a vote, honestly. Almost seems like scum voting over something stupid, to me.

Flameaxe · Post Post #252 (isolation #27) » Sun Oct 14, 2007 3:42 pm

Try making sense. It helps.

Flameaxe · Post Post #253 (isolation #28) » Sun Oct 14, 2007 3:43 pm

EBWOP: Still a stupid reason for a vote.

Flameaxe · Post Post #269 (isolation #29) » Mon Oct 15, 2007 7:40 am

Cogito Ergo Scum wrote:
Flameaxe wrote:I mistook you two, nothing more, nothing less. (neither of you have avatars, fix it, and that doesn't happen anymore.)
Fact is, Unright
does
have an avatar, and therefore, whether intentional or not, this is a lie.

Yes, I know. I wasn't meaning to lie here, but hell, it happened anyway. Sometimes my brain just gets jumbled up, and I happened to get more people mixed up than I should be. I honestly have no clue how I mixed up the quotes in the first post. I fucked up, yes, I did.

ps. LAL is a terrible strategy, and lynching just based on that is dumb.

Flameaxe · Post Post #271 (isolation #30) » Mon Oct 15, 2007 8:00 am

I'm not the only one bringing it up either. And if you notice the funny little box at the top of my post with a quote in it, that probably means I am replying to something.

You can't really backtrack when the topic of discussion still is going on...

Flameaxe · Post Post #279 (isolation #31) » Mon Oct 15, 2007 4:41 pm

We already realize that Unright.

Please don't make me give up any respect I may have for you because you think we take the fact that we are both in 'Team Asshat' into consideration for ANY game, excluding scumchat games because those don't really mean anything and most of the time are incredibly unbalanced. I'm pretty sure I've even stated this already in this game. It might be a different game because everyone seems to use it against us...Outside contact=scumtell, obvobv.

Flameaxe · Post Post #282 (isolation #32) » Mon Oct 15, 2007 5:54 pm

^Truth.

Flameaxe · Post Post #292 (isolation #33) » Tue Oct 16, 2007 6:05 am

No Unright, what you are doing is

assuming

that an outside connection between the two of us has some sort of effect on the game. That is absurd. I didn't know our ICs were teaching newbies that two people knowing each other outside of the game (AIM/Scumchat namely) is an obvious scumtell.

You keep saying I'm defending his 'wacky' behavior, but remember this: IT WAS A RANDOM VOTE WAGON AT THE BEGINNING OF THIS GAME.

Anyone who thinks that Team Asshat means anything in this game WHATSOEVER needs to go to their roof, and jump off so maybe the impact will spark one small ounce of common sense in your brain.

Flameaxe · Post Post #294 (isolation #34) » Tue Oct 16, 2007 6:21 am

Team Asshat never makes it out of the random vote stage.

The fact that you are STILL pushing for a lynch based on personal connections bothers me ALOT.

Flameaxe · Post Post #295 (isolation #35) » Tue Oct 16, 2007 6:28 am

Feel like pointing this out:

[quote="Unright"I'm not really accusing you guys of anything. I'm just voicing my thoughts on the game of Mafia. Interactions between players is a big part of trying to deduce scum. And you guys stand out because your interactions with each other are really different from everyone else. It seems like it should at least be acknowledged before we can move on.[/quote]

Unright wrote:Hope your insurance is good.

unvote
Vote: Flameaxe

You sir, are an amazing person, and I wish I had your amazing logix.

Flameaxe · Post Post #296 (isolation #36) » Tue Oct 16, 2007 6:29 am

Flameaxe wrote:Feel like pointing this out:

Unright wrote:I'm not really accusing you guys of anything. I'm just voicing my thoughts on the game of Mafia. Interactions between players is a big part of trying to deduce scum. And you guys stand out because your interactions with each other are really different from everyone else. It seems like it should at least be acknowledged before we can move on.

Unright wrote:Hope your insurance is good.

unvote
Vote: Flameaxe
You sir, are an amazing person, and I wish I had your amazing logix.

Fixed tags.

Flameaxe · Post Post #298 (isolation #37) » Tue Oct 16, 2007 7:08 am

Peers, your vote/post reeks of opportunistic scum. Not to mention you are also putting words into Unright's mouth, and I don't like that at all. I don't see Unright saying anywhere that he is voting me for being a 'total asshat', only my connections with my fellow asshat, UA. Third, you seem to have NO problem with lynching a 'poor

town

player' because I am apparently distracting you. While I'm at it, point out this distraction if you could.

Please then, explain to me this: How does me being a 'total asshat' = scum?

I personally don't see myself being a total asshat here, I see myself trying to show him that using your head would help. He's trying to make it seem as if my outside connections make me change my play here, which makes very little sense at all. He's attacking me for defending UA's jokewagon at the beginning of the game, a wagon in which I understood because I've played with UA before and have a decent meta on him.

Flameaxe · Post Post #303 (isolation #38) » Tue Oct 16, 2007 8:31 am

Peers wrote:
Mirth wrote:Peers, give me a good reason why not to vote you right now, please. Because I'm not sure how much longer the already sizable wagon on you will continue to deter me.

This is the third time you've wagon jumped. For very poor reasons. Yes, Flameaxe is obnoxious. Being obnoxious is not a scumtell.
To be fair, this most recent one was not wagon-jumping, it was realizing my previous unvoting of Flameaxe was a mistake.

You're right. Being obnoxious is not a scumtell. However, when that obnoxiousness is so strong that it becomes the focal point of the game, then either a) the obnoxious person is scum, or b) the obnoxious person is town and working to help the scum by being so obnoxious.

The goal of the game is to win. Town cannot hunt scum is someone is being so obnoxious they throw everyone else's scumdar off.

Prove that my being obnoxious hinders the town. I can be obnoxious and still scumhunt just fine.

You still need to answer my last post's many answers also.

@Unright: Probably not, unless I had some sort of meta on them that told me otherwise, much like UA.

Flameaxe · Post Post #305 (isolation #39) » Tue Oct 16, 2007 8:53 am

My defending of his actions have nothing to do with Team Asshat. My point is that you need to actually read my posts to see that my defense of him has no mention of Team Asshat.

Flameaxe · Post Post #307 (isolation #40) » Tue Oct 16, 2007 9:05 am

And guess what, you STILL haven't answered ANY of my questions.

YOU need to stop avoiding them.

Vote: Peers.

You can't just respond to the parts of other people's posts that are convenient to you.

I am an obnoxious person, I like it. I like how I am. I'm not changing for you.

Flameaxe · Post Post #308 (isolation #41) » Tue Oct 16, 2007 9:08 am

Posting again:

I feel like pointing out that the Asshat discussion from the joke vote portion of the game died down until Unright brought it back up in post 277. Re-reading his posts feel like he is trying to blow the whole thing out of proportion. Anyone else notice/feel like I am right now?

Flameaxe · Post Post #311 (isolation #42) » Tue Oct 16, 2007 9:50 am

Ok, now I'm feeling even better about my vote, because most of your vote was based on the fact that you thought I am a total asshat, now you outright say that it doesn't = scum. And you still seem fine with the chance of lynching a townie here. I'm hoping someone else actually notices how scummy you are acting right now, it's just not funny anymore. You seriously need to try to find scum harder, because your case on me right now is 'He seems scummy to me, but if he does turn up town, we still benefit from it" which is a 100%, outright stupid case to try and push as seriously as you are pushing it.

How am I bad town to you? I feel like I'm huntin' dem scumz just fine, I'm sorry if I don't do it the same way you do: attacking with flimsy reasons.

Flameaxe · Post Post #312 (isolation #43) » Tue Oct 16, 2007 9:51 am

@Dybeck: Your post is unhelpful at best.

Flameaxe · Post Post #315 (isolation #44) » Tue Oct 16, 2007 10:32 am

Now, I'll agree with you, to a point. Wanting all the townies dead? Scumtell. Wanting lots of townies dead? Scumtell. Wanting one particular townie dead so he can't screw over the town and the rest of us can get the scum? Not a scumtell.

Where have I shown my interest in screwing over the town? The fact is that it IS a scumtell. You are assuming that I don't want to play this game, accusing me of it, and not showing ANY clear evidence to support it. Here's the funny thing. I HAVE a case on you. My reasoning is correct, very unflimsy in fact. You are acting SO scummy right now. Just because I'm going after you for something I find to be scummy, doesn't mean I'm here to screw over the town.

Now you are even trying to point out what I'm going to do IN THE FUTURE, still, with absolutely no evidence at all.

Flameaxe · Post Post #317 (isolation #45) » Tue Oct 16, 2007 10:41 am

PEERS, TELL ME SOMETHING, HOW DOES THE TOWN WIN? OBVIOUSLY MY PREVIOUS THOUGHTS OF ELIMINATING THE MAFIA ISN'T HOW THE TOWN WINS ACCORDING TO YOU.

Still accusing me, still haven't proved anything.

Flameaxe · Post Post #318 (isolation #46) » Tue Oct 16, 2007 10:44 am

Also, everyone votes someone for something to be scummy, what they are means everything. It just so happens your reason is full of poor reasoning and no proof of anything.

Flameaxe · Post Post #321 (isolation #47) » Tue Oct 16, 2007 10:56 am

Still haven't proved anything.

Flameaxe · Post Post #322 (isolation #48) » Tue Oct 16, 2007 10:58 am

Edit: I never act like an asshat just to be an asshat. I may come across as an asshat when going after someone, but that doesn't mean I just feel like being an asshat there.

Peers wrote:At this point, everyone in this game has a choice to make: Lynch one of you, and remove part of the brick wall; Lynch me, because I let myself get dragged down to your level and look just as bad as you; or lynch someone else... which will be difficult because of the animosity going on here, but if it happens, more power to 'em.

Stop trying to lead the town, let them make their own decisions.

Flameaxe · Post Post #324 (isolation #49) » Tue Oct 16, 2007 11:08 am

Referring to us as a 'brick wall' was though.

ps. still havent proved anything...I'm gonna keep saying it till I get some.

Flameaxe · Post Post #326 (isolation #50) » Tue Oct 16, 2007 11:18 am

<Still haven't proved anything>

I don't plan on changing my vote unless someone does something scummier than you have already done.

Brick wall reference: I may have phrased that wrong, if you take it into context of your actual post, you basically put UA and myself together as one of your 'possible lynches for today'. Are you seriously still pecking away at the whole 'they are partners in team asshat, obviously we need to get them apart' nonsense?

Flameaxe · Post Post #328 (isolation #51) » Tue Oct 16, 2007 11:25 am

Any input at all from the rest of you?

Flameaxe · Post Post #330 (isolation #52) » Tue Oct 16, 2007 11:58 am

I am.

Flameaxe · Post Post #332 (isolation #53) » Tue Oct 16, 2007 12:34 pm

I will assure nothing when it comes to not being a jerk. Tis' my personality, it just happens when I post.

Flameaxe · Post Post #334 (isolation #54) » Tue Oct 16, 2007 12:41 pm

Where did I say I was trying to get myself lynched here? I said that that is my playstyle and personality. You need to get used to it, and learn to deal with it.

Also, contribute moar please.

Flameaxe · Post Post #336 (isolation #55) » Tue Oct 16, 2007 12:54 pm

How am I being unhelpful? I'm doing a hell of a lot more than you are right now. Maybe actually reading would help that.

I'm allowed to be a jackass to whoever I feel deserves it. Stop trying to pin that on me and try to post something actually relevant to the game right now.

Flameaxe · Post Post #338 (isolation #56) » Tue Oct 16, 2007 1:40 pm

I agree.

Flameaxe · Post Post #341 (isolation #57) » Tue Oct 16, 2007 2:18 pm

Show me how I'm not trying to catch scum. I feel the exact opposite of my actions. I thought Peers had a terrible case and reason to vote me, called him out on it, thought his reply was scummy, to say the least, and went after him for it. How is that not scumhunting to you?

Flameaxe · Post Post #362 (isolation #58) » Wed Oct 17, 2007 8:10 am

Yarr.

Unvote.

I need to reread on Jmar, I'm not exactly a fan of his latest posts.

Flameaxe · Post Post #371 (isolation #59) » Wed Oct 17, 2007 5:50 pm

Those weren't the two posts, thats why. Here they are:

jmar wrote:
Peers wrote: Unless, of course, nobody received that PM because nobody is a vanilla townie. It'd be a little high-powered for a small game, but this -is- Power Rangers...

Peers wrote: *shrug* I'm town. Specificly, a Putty. Some of you will believe that, some of you won't, you'll find out in two more votes I guess.
Contradict yourself much?

Flameaxe · Post Post #378 (isolation #60) » Thu Oct 18, 2007 6:17 am

Peers: My reasons for unvoting were stated, and had nothing to do with you.

Bob: I think UA unvoted too.

Flameaxe · Post Post #423 (isolation #61) » Wed Oct 24, 2007 11:21 am

Try concidering that it could just be his playstyle to post like he is, maybe? (Possible meta with nothing to back it up, just throwing out a possible idea..) I know of another person that plays similar. There are reasons behind his pushing, ya know...

Flameaxe · Post Post #426 (isolation #62) » Wed Oct 24, 2007 12:30 pm

Tuning in at 11 is what all the cool people do.

Flameaxe · Post Post #451 (isolation #63) » Tue Oct 30, 2007 3:42 am

Yes, but that wasn't his point. His point was, all you are currently doing is trying to save your own ass from being lynched, not trying to find scum. I find that all liek...scummzie.

Vote: Peers.

Flameaxe · Post Post #469 (isolation #64) » Thu Nov 01, 2007 10:53 am

Peers wrote:Hrm. Tell you what, as an experiment...

Unvote

Jmar is now at 3 and will not by lynched at deadline. A full two votes (three if you think I'm dishonest enough to re-vote him despite the amazingly scummy scent I'll gain) can be taken off me and put elsewhere and I'll still by lynched at deadline.

So, who else do you people think is scum, other than me?

YOU scumhunt, and then (no wai!) you FIND scum! Don't rely on our opinions to form yours. I personally find doing that very scummy.

Flameaxe · Post Post #471 (isolation #65) » Thu Nov 01, 2007 11:01 am

I found my scum too. Complexity is awesome isn't it?

Flameaxe · Post Post #473 (isolation #66) » Thu Nov 01, 2007 11:06 am

Ok. Cause I obviously have every reason to pity you, don't I?

Flameaxe · Post Post #475 (isolation #67) » Thu Nov 01, 2007 11:10 am

Read your own posts, then you will see yourself begging for pity, it's quite simple and you've been doing it for quite some time.

Flameaxe · Post Post #480 (isolation #68) » Thu Nov 01, 2007 5:18 pm

UltimaAvalon wrote:
Peers wrote:Who the fuck am I following?
CES. You were going after Flameaxe, then unvoted soon after CES said he thought you were Town. Since then, neither of you can seem to build a case against anybody except jmar

Peers wrote:Unless you think I'm the only scum in the game, you should be looking for the other ones!
Thanks for claiming Scum

Teehee @ second quote.

Flameaxe · Post Post #488 (isolation #69) » Fri Nov 02, 2007 12:00 pm

Peers wrote:
jmar wrote:But, didn't you say like two pages ago if you went down I would go down the next day?
My faith in this town to do the right thing has, for some amazingly unfathomable reason, wasted away to nothing.

Deadline hasn't hit, giving up doesn't help at all.

Flameaxe · Post Post #490 (isolation #70) » Fri Nov 02, 2007 7:00 pm

Uhm...Doing something is pro-town.

Doing nothing but bitching about being lynched is anti-town.

Flameaxe · Post Post #492 (isolation #71) » Sat Nov 03, 2007 4:34 am

It's hard not to call someone anti-town when they are being completely useless.

Flameaxe · Post Post #494 (isolation #72) » Sat Nov 03, 2007 5:20 am

Mirth wrote:Peers, weren't you the one who spent pages arguing how Flameaxe needed to die because you thought he was annoying and useless?

This really needs a QFT. So I'm giving it one.

QFT.

Flameaxe · Post Post #506 (isolation #73) » Sun Nov 04, 2007 8:20 am

Can we avoid the "omg they are liek...being jackasses" conversation please? If you really want to argue about it, yell at your monitor as you read pages 8-12ish...

Flameaxe · Post Post #508 (isolation #74) » Sun Nov 04, 2007 9:06 am

Ok.

Also, I would like to officially smack Peers for his actions in mafia discussion. Shame on you.

Flameaxe · Post Post #511 (isolation #75) » Sun Nov 04, 2007 3:47 pm

Peers wrote:Aw, c'mon, Flameaxe. I'm obviously not talking about this game... that other thread talked about when there's a two-week wait until deadline, not just a few days. And this isn't hte only game I'm in with the 'half votes at deadline' rule. By the time it gets enough replies for me ot get any info about it, I'll be dead in this game... won't affect my play here at all.

Besides, only way I'd self-hammer here is if you all wanted me to... and it looks like just two of you do, so, you'll have to wait to see my role.

I never wanted a self-hammer. If I did, I would have said so. I just have problems with people breaking site rules. Rules are rules.

@PWS: What exactly am I needed to 'cut out' here? When I see someone talking about an issue in another thread that is very similar to this game, it pisses me off. Rulebreakers deserve to be given water torture.

Flameaxe · Post Post #517 (isolation #76) » Mon Nov 05, 2007 11:21 am

originality wrote:In before prod.

I'd love to hammer Peers already, but sadly I am currently voting for him. Someone hammer him so tomorrow comes quicker, this is accomplishing nothing and he's dead meat tomorrow anyway.

Unvote, Vote: Originality.

Reasons:

Eagerness to hammer.
Urging others to hammer, so 'tomorrow can come quicker'. This just doesn't sound right to me, what about you?
His reason being that not hammering him isn't accomplishing anything. The longer we stay in day, the more info we receive. Very simple, really.
The fact that he isn't posting that much, if anything, and comes in with 'In before prod'. This added with the rest of the post is all liek...whoazorz scumz!
Last: "he's dead meat tomorrow anyway". Care to explain...a little?

Flameaxe · Post Post #519 (isolation #77) » Mon Nov 05, 2007 11:49 am

Oh ok. When people say tomorrow in games, I tend to think tomorrow as in Day 2.

2: You are basically doing the same thing as Peers right now, not coming up with any of your own cases and expecting us to do it for you. There is always a case, go back and read to strengthen your opinions on EVERYONE, not just the current target.

3: You made up your not posting by posting...nothing (essentially). Your post had no content worthwhile to what is going on, much like all of your posts today (today as in game today, wee). Saying that I think you should keep your mouth shut is dumb. I'm trying to say that you should keep your mouth open, preferably keeping important contributions flowing out towards the rest of us.

Mod: I'm aware that it is last minute, but would it be possible for the deadline to be moved back to get the replacement (for Blight) in here before night?

Flameaxe · Post Post #522 (isolation #78) » Mon Nov 05, 2007 2:06 pm

One with no sense of humour can not have a sense of humour...

Flameaxe · Post Post #529 (isolation #79) » Tue Nov 06, 2007 4:19 am

Peers wrote:
Mirth wrote:Mirth has no sense of humor, if you haven't noticed.

Originality, your calling for a hammer kind of sets of some alarm bells in my head, but not too many, as Peers has been getting on my nerves with his bad playing.
I'm not the one ignoring the the last few days of being able to look for possible signs of scuminess in people other than me...

Without getting into this more...you can help with this...

Flameaxe · Post Post #542 (isolation #80) » Tue Nov 06, 2007 11:51 am

dybeck wrote:Don't be idiots.

It's OK for CES to be of the opinion that Peers is not scum. Just because you've all comvinced yourself Peers is scum doesn't mean that there's no room to question it.

You should take a long look at your reasons and try to come to terms with the fact that you're actually pointing the finger (at both Peers and CES) out of a complete lack of information, rather than because you've actually spotted scumtells.

You haven't exactly contributed a boatload yourself...you know.

Flameaxe · Post Post #562 (isolation #81) » Wed Nov 07, 2007 4:13 pm

The urge for pity to keep you alive just doesn't stop, does it Peers?

Flameaxe · Post Post #569 (isolation #82) » Wed Nov 14, 2007 7:05 pm

Even though the question isn't directed at me, I think I might know...

/Don't feel like voting 'till (nearly)everyone checks in and such.

UA, why must you leave me...

Flameaxe · Post Post #571 (isolation #83) » Wed Nov 14, 2007 7:13 pm

I figured, thus why I didn't say anything.

Flameaxe · Post Post #574 (isolation #84) » Thu Nov 15, 2007 6:27 am

Unright wrote:
Mirth wrote:Hmmmmm...interesting night choice.

I'm going to
vote: Unright
. Unright, why do you think I'm voting you now?
Because you're basing it off the night choice?

I didn't think very highly of him because of his self-voting gimmick and I prodded UA pretty strongly over his meta-defending of Flameaxe. As such I was high on his list of suspects, but he wasn't very high on mine.

Did I miss anything?

Can you point out where he meta-defended me? I only remember me meta-defending his self voting.

Flameaxe · Post Post #581 (isolation #85) » Thu Nov 15, 2007 11:23 am

That is a BIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIG stretch. Big even being an understatement. Orig, you logic is severly flawed (both points you made are), your day 1 actions were all scummy and stuff.

It really is looking like you have a personal agenda against me.

I'm not getting this from CES on the topic at all, nor do I see how you get it either.

Vote: Originality

Diescumdie.

Flameaxe · Post Post #589 (isolation #86) » Fri Nov 16, 2007 3:42 pm

I still like my orig. vote.

Flameaxe · Post Post #596 (isolation #87) » Mon Nov 19, 2007 11:18 am

Care to comment on anything else?

Flameaxe · Post Post #602 (isolation #88) » Wed Nov 21, 2007 9:31 am

He at least needs to get here to talk, thats for certain.

Flameaxe · Post Post #604 (isolation #89) » Wed Nov 21, 2007 12:32 pm

No I wasn't.

Pressure votes on page 25 woo!

Flameaxe · Post Post #610 (isolation #90) » Sun Nov 25, 2007 4:26 pm

We need more Originality lynches guys. No joke. Do it! Do it NAO!

Flameaxe · Post Post #624 (isolation #91) » Fri Nov 30, 2007 11:50 am

Well, Originality is still getting by with being scum, so until that changes, I will be over there. *points over yonder*.

Flameaxe · Post Post #631 (isolation #92) » Sat Dec 01, 2007 6:47 pm

Bookitty - Vote for originality, because it is a win/win situation. If you are town, you move one step closer to winning. If you are scum you get to perform some awesome bussing.

How can you go wrong with that?

Flameaxe · Post Post #634 (isolation #93) » Sun Dec 02, 2007 8:18 am

PWS is being replaced.

Flameaxe · Post Post #636 (isolation #94) » Sun Dec 02, 2007 9:29 am

STOP FOLLOWING ME DGB! Anyway, vote for originality for the reasons I gave Bookitty.

Flameaxe · Post Post #638 (isolation #95) » Sun Dec 02, 2007 9:33 am

Originality is so much scummier! It's fairly obvious.

Flameaxe · Post Post #641 (isolation #96) » Sun Dec 02, 2007 10:17 am

No, just fucking read the posts. I'm sorry I have to go after your scumbuddy like this, but that's just how the game is played.

Flameaxe · Post Post #646 (isolation #97) » Sun Dec 02, 2007 11:06 am

Then why is your vote still on him?

Flameaxe · Post Post #650 (isolation #98) » Sun Dec 02, 2007 1:17 pm

He's scum.

Flameaxe · Post Post #652 (isolation #99) » Sun Dec 02, 2007 1:51 pm

originality wrote:Okay Flameaxe, I know you can't be cop claiming, so stop being so crazy about lynching me. Gawd. Its such a crappy and scummy softclaim.

Be a dear and summarize your reasons for why I'm scum in one post. I find that your motives have been sort of scattered and weak and I want to understand your bloodlust.

Why can't I be cop claiming? Diescumdie.

Flameaxe · Post Post #655 (isolation #100) » Sun Dec 02, 2007 2:59 pm

The last quote was directed at CES, if I recall correctly. It can apply to me as well, though.

Also,

Originality wrote:Why are you guys ganging up on Peers? Now I bad for pointing him out. Let's not forget that the mafia will do whatever they can to lynch a possible powerrole, so FoS everyone against Peers for crappy reasons.

petroleumjelly wrote:
Official End of Day One Vote Count

Peers – 5 – Mirth, originality, jmar, UltimaAvalon, Unright

originality – 4 – Flameaxe, Cogito Ergo Scum, dybeck, Peers
jmar – 2 – PlaysWithSquirrels, Blight

With
12
alive, it takes
7
to lynch!
4
to lynch at deadline.

Not Voting – 1 – killerbob

Peers has been lynched. Lynch scene coming right up.

Still the most ideal vote for me.

Flameaxe · Post Post #657 (isolation #101) » Sun Dec 02, 2007 3:10 pm

Yes, yes it does.

Flameaxe · Post Post #659 (isolation #102) » Sun Dec 02, 2007 4:31 pm

Right, I'm clearly unsure. I've made it perfectly clear that I want Originalityscum dead.

I'm perfectly happy with my vote after that post of awesomeness. Keep being scummy, it's convenient for me.

Flameaxe · Post Post #661 (isolation #103) » Sun Dec 02, 2007 4:43 pm

Why isn't he dead yet? I mean seriously guys.

Flameaxe · Post Post #666 (isolation #104) » Mon Dec 03, 2007 4:27 am

DrippingGoofball wrote:
Mirth wrote:
Vote Originality

I'm *not* currently happy with Unright or CES either, but they're not talking so I can't badger them if they're not responding. But I am comfortable enough to be the L-2 vote on you.
That's pretty scummy. And it's rewarding your scumbuddies for lurking.

unvote, vote: CES

*You're* rewarding your scumbuddy by letting him slip by being a 'tard. Just lighten up and learn to bus a little!

Flameaxe · Post Post #668 (isolation #105) » Mon Dec 03, 2007 4:57 am

DrippingGoofball wrote:Flameaxe, your defense of Mirth is noted.

DGB, you being a

Mod Note: {Edited}

is noted.

Mod Note: Keep in mind the "allowable" rules, specifically #1. Watch your language and watch your attitude - I am fairly liberal in terms of free speech, but it should be easy to know when you are crossing the line.

Flameaxe · Post Post #669 (isolation #106) » Mon Dec 03, 2007 4:57 am

Wait, I already had that noted. Metagames weeeeeeeeeeeeeee.

Flameaxe · Mon Dec 03, 2007 12:18 pm

It's both a defense and an attack in one! WHOA!

Flameaxe · Post Post #710 (isolation #108) » Thu Dec 06, 2007 6:39 am

In terms of numbers, you're correct. But once the deadline was set, I think it was inevitable.

A wagon shift is never inevitable. I'm slowly becoming tempted to move my vote... That last post bothers me quite a bit.

Flameaxe · Post Post #716 (isolation #109) » Thu Dec 06, 2007 8:08 pm

/in for Sleep. (Aka: Will try and post tomorrow, but work kicked my ass tonight, and I needz sleep.)

Flameaxe · Sat Dec 08, 2007 11:04 am

Unvote, Vote: Jmar

Origscum can wait till tomorrow.

Flameaxe · Sat Dec 08, 2007 11:33 am

I read his previous post.

Flameaxe · Sat Dec 08, 2007 12:52 pm

Mirth wrote:Anything in particular about it?

All of it?

Flameaxe · Post Post #740 (isolation #113) » Sat Dec 08, 2007 2:43 pm

I'd say its either 3 Mafia SK or 3 Mafia, from my prior experience. Now does anyone care to explain to me why all of this setup speculation is more important than killing people?

Flameaxe · Post Post #742 (isolation #114) » Sat Dec 08, 2007 3:40 pm

Then we can worry about it later in the game, but right now it just isn't important. Finding scum is, not figuring out how many scums there are. As long as we keep finding scums, then we shouldn't need to worry about how many there are, as we will just win eventually.

Answer to your question:

Myself wrote:All of it?

Flameaxe · Post Post #744 (isolation #115) » Sat Dec 08, 2007 4:39 pm

I'm perfectly aware thats what they want to know, and my response requires only a small portion of reading of your (or in everyone else's case: Jmar's) posts, or maybe just that last one.

Flameaxe · Post Post #746 (isolation #116) » Sat Dec 08, 2007 5:12 pm

No shit sherlock. I've got a case, and its right there in front of everyone, and pretty fucking obvious.

Flameaxe · Post Post #750 (isolation #117) » Sat Dec 08, 2007 7:15 pm

<3 Shea.

Flameaxe · Post Post #752 (isolation #118) » Sat Dec 08, 2007 7:23 pm

Except it is, you are just 'retarded'.

Flameaxe · Post Post #755 (isolation #119) » Sun Dec 09, 2007 8:05 am

Mirth wrote:Can you please not insult the mentally handicapped and spell it out for us? Slowly and with diagrams and/or slideshows?

No, this is just too much fun.

Jmar: You're the one who looks like scum.

Flameaxe · Post Post #777 (isolation #120) » Mon Dec 10, 2007 6:03 pm

Albert B. Rampage replaces Unright effective immediately.

Oh god...sorry for everyone else playing, I don't know what might happen with us together. Maybe a cop lynch? (or nuke...)

Flameaxe · Post Post #779 (isolation #121) » Mon Dec 10, 2007 6:24 pm

Whatever, seems like a good description of your play to me. Keep it, I insist. Hai ABR.

Flameaxe · Post Post #781 (isolation #122) » Mon Dec 10, 2007 6:25 pm

...wait...don't tell me...you like to spout nonsense just like Flameaxe?

Yeah, but I do it better.

Flameaxe · Post Post #783 (isolation #123) » Mon Dec 10, 2007 6:32 pm

Because voting scum leads to victory?

Flameaxe · Post Post #787 (isolation #124) » Mon Dec 10, 2007 6:42 pm

Only a scum has a shotgun.

Flameaxe · Post Post #791 (isolation #125) » Mon Dec 10, 2007 6:45 pm

Mirth wrote:So by that logic, Flameaxe, a large chunk of the American South (and midwest) is scum?

Yes. America isn't really in a war against terror, just a game of mafia within the country. True story.

Flameaxe · Post Post #795 (isolation #126) » Mon Dec 10, 2007 6:48 pm

Two conversations at once! Woo, good times!

Flameaxe · Post Post #799 (isolation #127) » Mon Dec 10, 2007 7:17 pm

You should make a better attempt at reading a single post, namely the first one.

They were revealed as Putty Patrollers, and in the sample vanilla PM we see:

Townie Role PM wrote:Putty Patroller

“Ooble ooble ooble!” That's right – you are a Putty, and your ability at making nonsensical noises is nearly unsurpassed. You can't do much of anything except flail your arms around and try to look menacing, so you are essentially a
Townie
. You might not have a night action, but you
do
have a vote – use it well!

You win when all threats to Rita Repulsa (which may include characters other than Power Rangers) are destroyed. Please confirm you have received this role, and feel free to ask me questions.

Woo!

Flameaxe · Post Post #816 (isolation #128) » Tue Dec 11, 2007 3:03 pm

FLAVOR

Flameaxe · Post Post #820 (isolation #129) » Wed Dec 12, 2007 2:50 pm

I very highly doubt this "Limited Reveal" theory. It just seems like too much of a stretch in this game, especially with two dead matching the exact Townie PMs.

Also, you can look at PJ's flavor text (first post and a death scene would be ideal) and it seems like Rita knows who is who, and says so upon death, as seen in Peers' lynch scene.

Flameaxe · Post Post #822 (isolation #130) » Wed Dec 12, 2007 5:22 pm

He's still scum. You can keep spouting theory, all your theories have been easy to disprove.

Flameaxe · Post Post #824 (isolation #131) » Wed Dec 12, 2007 6:19 pm

Because he is.

Flameaxe · Thu Dec 13, 2007 12:13 pm

Mirth wrote:But know do you know, Flameaxe? And why are you so resistant to giving a straight answer?

Because I'm having too much fun not revealing it.

Flameaxe · Post Post #829 (isolation #133) » Thu Dec 13, 2007 6:04 pm

Oh don't you worry, it's all there buddy. Jmar's buddies might as well start the bussing (that means you Originality!)

Flameaxe · Post Post #835 (isolation #134) » Fri Dec 14, 2007 5:26 pm

dybeck wrote:Voting him has proven elsewhere to make him more coherent. Let's see what he's trying to hide with this play acting.

Where did you get THIS fact? L-1 won't break this.

Flameaxe · Post Post #840 (isolation #135) » Sun Dec 16, 2007 8:01 am

And all we are seeing from dybeck (and basically all we've seen from him for the majority of the game) is him doing things, but never actually scumhunting...hmm. This is quite an interesting development.

Flameaxe · Post Post #842 (isolation #136) » Sun Dec 16, 2007 8:09 am

Helping the scumhunting effort != scumhunting. Try better.

Flameaxe · Post Post #843 (isolation #137) » Sun Dec 16, 2007 8:15 am

And you know what, expect a PbPA from me later. I'll wait to give you my vote till after that.

Flameaxe · Post Post #849 (isolation #138) » Sun Dec 16, 2007 9:21 am

Analysis - Focus: dybeck

Note: When reading this PbPA, please note that post subject numbers are those with only dybeck's posts, not actual post numbers.

-
Post 0: "Random" vote on me.
Post 1: States he "knows I am scum, and who my buddies are".
Post 2: Asks why we hate Originality.
Post 3: Makes Team Asshat comment.
Post 4: Useless quicklynch comment. Says "Give me a nudge and I'll hammer".
Post 5: Setup/Flavor speculation.
Post 6: Fucked up quote tag comment.
Post 7: FoS's Unright for something that is a stretch, in my eyes.
Post 8: Explains the FoS.
Post 9: Wants to drop the subject.
Post 10: Tells Mirth to keep reading post 108 (Unright) still trying to justify his FoS, and losing.
Post 11: Says Unright's post doesn't mean scum, means he isn't vanilla. Yet another stretch here. Then, the best part: He tells

everyone else

to get back to work. I got a giggle.
Post 12: After all his Unright pressure, he pushes a "lets stop talking about it" comment. Then tells Unright "feel free to tell us more". Uhm, yeah.
Post 13: Puts money down on one of Unright and Peers being scum. Got one wrong already, I see. No explanation with this either.
Post 14: Attacks Peers for not being useful.
Post 15: Another FoS. Says that PWS can't pin the outing of power-roles on Originality. This is partially correct. You pin it on dybeck and Originality, thats who.
Post 16: Says that two people already outed themselves as not townie, which is completely false. There is no way to tell if there is a named vanilla character, period. Wants more investigation after wanting to close the discussion earlier. HRMMMM.
Post 17: Saying we should have pointed out the slip.
Post 18: Assured of Unright's protown credentials, yet he doesn't move his vote...
Post 19: Plays it off as sarcasm.
Post 20: List with no reasons. Doesn't name a number three, just says everyone else. Try better.
Post 21: Replies to Unright's reason to have him at number three by calling his actions 'his thing'.
Post 22: Vanishes for a bit, calls the game slow and slips on a Peerswagon(T). That's all the post had, nothing else.
Post 23: LAL comment. Useless essentially. Says he doesn't think a lie had been told (refer to next post to continue off this).
Post 24: Asks which lie he is referring to. Wait, I thought there wasn't a lie?
Post 25: Still defending me.
Post 26: Vanishes for a few pages (of quality discussion that ended up leading to the Peers lynch) and comments on it by calling it obnoxious, and that we were just prying at each other. No visible scumhunting here.
Post 27: Vanishes again, says I'm not helping the town by getting myself lynched, when I was nowhere close. Says I have poor people skills and leaves. No scumhunting.
Post 28: Says me being a tit leads to my lynch always. Only if you make it that dybeck. Goes on to attack my attitude in games, and how it isn't helpful. Wee for being totally wrong. You couldn't possibly know this with no experience. Attack on attitude, not on scum! Go go slipping by...until now!
Post 29: Drops the argument, goes back to being useless.
Post 30: Unvotes Peers because he lied, and that doesn't sit well with him. Wait, what?
Post 31: Bleh, lynch all liars vote. Slipping onto bandwagons are cool though. Especially when you do it with no effort on your part.
Post 32: Jumps on to Unright because he doesn't want the day to end, and thats where his gut is pointing. Still no effort.
Post 33: Meh, this post just bothers me, plain and simple.
Post 34: Wow, a half-way decent point for once. Holy shit!
Post 35: Same point as 34.
Post 36: Useless third-way wagon comment. Still no reasoning to go with it beyond gut.
Post 37: 'Still time' comment. Not scumhunting.
Post 38: Another FoS. Asks Peers to be less whiny.
Post 39: Asks for prods. Not scumhunting, but an easy way to seem more protown for sure.
Post 40: Knows that people are inactive. Yay?
Post 41: Smileys don't find scum.
Post 42: Tells us that our reasoning for a Peers wagon is flawed, when he has been on a Peers wagon for the majority of the game.
Post 43: Originality is a decent third way wagon.
Post 44: Unright is still scum. End.
Post 45: Still wants more investigation into Unright's "claim" day 1. Yeah, that one he tried to close the discussion on. That's the one!
Post 46: Wants to get that investigation by wagoning to push a claim. I don't like this one bit.
Post 47: Useless.
Post 48: Useless.
Post 49: Still pushing an Unright claim to 'tear the town in two' preferably down the middle. That doesn't seem like a good thing to me...
Post 50: Wants to show people's colors for information for TOMORROW. Why tomorrow, why not today?
Post 51: Wants to wagon for a claim instead of skipping the wagon and going straight to the claim. Seems overeager to me.
Post 52: Wants us to explain the Originality wagon. No huntin'.
Post 53: Attacks the Orig. case.
Post 54: More Unright obsession.
Post 55: States he started the Peers wagon. This bothers me way too much. Yeah, you did. You started it with no reasoning whatsoever. Nice try to get townie brownies, but you lose.
Post 56: Says I'm wrong. Cool, care to scumhunt?
Post 57: Vanishes for a few pages and comes in saying Albert is on crack. Continues the Unright obsession with his replacement. If you could, point out some of these implausible theories he has stated.
Post 58: Avatar comment, who the fuck cares?
Post 59: Oh what a stretch. Nice FoS by the way. Very committal.
Post 60: Wants Mirth to completely bury her theory. Another post slipping by without scumhunting I see.
Post 61: Votes me. Reasoning: One good reason why not? I don't like people who try to imitate my playstyle. Stop it.
Post 62: Useless. Basically explains he doesn't have scumhunting intentions.
Post 63: Post that almost seems like scumhunting, but when you actually read it, you find...HE ISN'T! SHOCKER!
Post 64: You make too many assumptions of my playstyle, sir. Also not scumhunting here either.

unvote, Vote: dybeck

. I love knowing your two scumbuddies too. They can die tomorrow.

Flameaxe · Sun Dec 16, 2007 10:45 am

No, read it. I say which are scummy. I'm not doing the work for you, this is your job to pick apart the case against you, not the person that made it.

Flameaxe · Sun Dec 16, 2007 12:28 pm

Mirth wrote:^ Good Posting, but I still want to know why you voted jmar.

In due time, in due time.

Flameaxe · Sun Dec 16, 2007 12:29 pm

dybeck wrote:
Flameaxe wrote:No, read it. I say which are scummy. I'm not doing the work for you, this is your job to pick apart the case against you, not the person that made it.
Sorry, buddy. If you want a rebuttal, make a coherent case. Most of what you've written about me in that long post looks OK to me. Although I must admit I only scanned it - it's pretty long.

Sorry buddy, I have one. Try NOT scanning it. Just because it is long doesn't mean its ok to scan over a post, all that shows is that you are lazy.

Flameaxe · Sun Dec 16, 2007 12:29 pm

dybeck wrote:
Mirth wrote:Dybeck: is there a reason why everything you type doesnt really say anything new and/or productive?
I don't really agree with the premise of your question.

The evidence is in that 'oh, its too long, ima just skim' post.

Flameaxe · Sun Dec 16, 2007 12:36 pm

dybeck wrote:It occurs that I've not been particularly forthcoming with my opinions so far, whilst I've called repeatedly for others to show their colors. So that you get an idea of where I am, for now:

I'm 90% sure originality is town. We've just finished a game together in which he will have observed that, once riled, I can be a very easy lynch target. No doubt some of you will have also uncovered this fact. His complete failure to jump aboard my bandwagon despite having been online at the most opportune time to do so makes me think that he's not scum.

Hooray for terrible logic! Yay terrible logic!

It's tough to get a read on Flameaxe when he's an ass all the time, regardless of alignment. I'd still encourage the rest of you not to give him encouragement, although I gather that for those of you for whom I'm a lynch target, it's unlikely you'll follow my advice.

It's tough to get a read on anyone with tunnel vision like you have. Me being an ass shouldn't really hide my play, I don't think it has in this game.

Mirth and Bookitty do seem to be actively scumhunting, which certainly counts in their favour.

I shall agree with this one.

Jmar, I'm not sure about. No real reason to suspect, and I think the wagon on him was flawed, and based upon flimsy 'evidence' - but I don't see any overwhelmingly town behaviour, and I may still join it at a later date. It's been a while since any real analysis from him, and I'd like to see more - particular his response to my wagon.

Thats the thing about Jmar, he's the other person I feel is slipping by without much pressure (oh noes, might I have slipped my reason to vote? Eek!). He hasn't done all too much to impress me either, and is next on my analysis list. Yes, I plan on analyzing most, if not all players. Maybe even connections of the dead players. And yes, this all plays into my earlier style, you just can't really tell yet.

The fact that Albert and Unright are the same person had passed me by. Unright's unnecessary softclaim, along with Albert's overenthusiastic, defensive and desperate bandwagon-jumping sets off my scumdar. I'm pretty happy with my vote for now.

I'm honestly happy with ABR's play for once...He seems like he almost cares about playing halfway decent in this game, not a copvigger.

We also need to hear more from the others. You'll find that there are scum in the shadows here.

Yarp.

If you don't have a brain: the bold is mine.

Flameaxe · Mon Dec 17, 2007 11:58 am

Originality is too much of a pussy to bus his buddy. Haahahahahah.

Flameaxe · Mon Dec 17, 2007 12:09 pm

Albert B. Rampage wrote:
Flameaxe wrote:Originality is too much of a pussy to bus his buddy. Haahahahahah.
What ?

It's not too hard to understand...just look at what has generally been discussed...

Flameaxe · Mon Dec 17, 2007 12:22 pm

Addition to request: Comment on Dybeckwagon™.

Flameaxe · Mon Dec 17, 2007 12:27 pm

Uhm...did you read the last two pages at all?!

Flameaxe · Mon Dec 17, 2007 12:29 pm

Flameaxe wrote:
dybeck wrote:It occurs that I've not been particularly forthcoming with my opinions so far, whilst I've called repeatedly for others to show their colors. So that you get an idea of where I am, for now:

I'm 90% sure originality is town. We've just finished a game together in which he will have observed that, once riled, I can be a very easy lynch target. No doubt some of you will have also uncovered this fact. His complete failure to jump aboard my bandwagon despite having been online at the most opportune time to do so makes me think that he's not scum.

Hooray for terrible logic! Yay terrible logic!

It's tough to get a read on Flameaxe when he's an ass all the time, regardless of alignment. I'd still encourage the rest of you not to give him encouragement, although I gather that for those of you for whom I'm a lynch target, it's unlikely you'll follow my advice.

It's tough to get a read on anyone with tunnel vision like you have. Me being an ass shouldn't really hide my play, I don't think it has in this game.

Mirth and Bookitty do seem to be actively scumhunting, which certainly counts in their favour.

I shall agree with this one.

Jmar, I'm not sure about. No real reason to suspect, and I think the wagon on him was flawed, and based upon flimsy 'evidence' - but I don't see any overwhelmingly town behaviour, and I may still join it at a later date. It's been a while since any real analysis from him, and I'd like to see more - particular his response to my wagon.

Thats the thing about Jmar, he's the other person I feel is slipping by without much pressure (oh noes, might I have slipped my reason to vote? Eek!). He hasn't done all too much to impress me either, and is next on my analysis list. Yes, I plan on analyzing most, if not all players. Maybe even connections of the dead players. And yes, this all plays into my earlier style, you just can't really tell yet.

The fact that Albert and Unright are the same person had passed me by. Unright's unnecessary softclaim, along with Albert's overenthusiastic, defensive and desperate bandwagon-jumping sets off my scumdar. I'm pretty happy with my vote for now.

I'm honestly happy with ABR's play for once...He seems like he almost cares about playing halfway decent in this game, not a copvigger.

We also need to hear more from the others. You'll find that there are scum in the shadows here.

Yarp.
If you don't have a brain: the bold is mine.

Read up!

Flameaxe · Mon Dec 17, 2007 12:34 pm

Never!

Flameaxe · Post Post #886 (isolation #150) » Tue Dec 18, 2007 6:37 am

jmar is scum with dybeck. This is truth. Lets follow though on this one guys.

Flameaxe · Post Post #888 (isolation #151) » Tue Dec 18, 2007 8:27 am

dybeck wrote:
Flameaxe wrote:jmar is scum with dybeck. This is truth. Lets follow though on this one guys.
This post has nothing to do with the fact that we're the two thst have been on your case? Give me a break.

No, I won't give you a break, scum. And I'm not giving your buddy a break either.

Flameaxe · Tue Dec 18, 2007 11:05 am

jmar wrote:If I were scum, you'd be giving me a huge break by not posting any reasoning behind your assertions.

Except I'm lynching you tomorrow, so you get a "30 second time-out".

Flameaxe · Post Post #893 (isolation #153) » Tue Dec 18, 2007 1:26 pm

Mirth wrote:Can y'all please start making sense? Or giving reasons for stuff? I'd really appreciate it.

As to asserting, no, not explicitly, we shouldn't be. Claiming and explicitly asserting is the same thing, as far as I'm concerned. As to why it's a bad thing, there is no practical use for it in most discussions, and since it is superfluous, one has to wonder why its included.

My opinion on dybeck, and my opinion on jmar found on the last page is slowly altering. What are you missing out of all of this? dybeck is scum, jmar is his buddy, and originality is in my third spot.

Flameaxe · Post Post #899 (isolation #154) » Thu Dec 20, 2007 3:46 am

dybeck wrote:I will have limited access over the Christmas period.

Thats nice, claim now then.

Flameaxe · Post Post #906 (isolation #155) » Fri Dec 21, 2007 8:17 am

Why is dybeck still getting away without claiming (and being scum)?

Flameaxe · Post Post #912 (isolation #156) » Fri Dec 21, 2007 9:53 am

Commenting on the buddying up:

I had nearly no choice with a lot of the blanket accusations on Team Asshat, or in other words: The two of us. When people make bullshit excuses to vote/push a case on, such as that, I tend to make it known what my feelings on it is.

Flameaxe · Post Post #914 (isolation #157) » Fri Dec 21, 2007 9:57 am

You miss an entire push on dybeck. I'd say it's rather important looking at the vote count right now.

Flameaxe · Fri Dec 21, 2007 10:06 am

Example please.

Flameaxe · Fri Dec 21, 2007 10:19 am

Depends on whether or not you mean the actual end, where I (funny enough) began to pressure Originalityscum.

As for the "towards the end of the day" point of the game: I felt that I justified my voting of Peers well enough, and that calling it buddying up is a stretch. Peers went after me with a bullshit case of me being an asshole (guilty of that one) and that no matter if I'm scum or town, I needed to die. At this point, I didn't give a flying fuck who was on that wagon, when someone tries to push a wagon like that, I'm going to fight back against it.

I didn't see buddying up at all, I just saw a shitty justification for a vote, and I went after him for it, for about two/three pages...

Flameaxe · Fri Dec 21, 2007 10:23 am

The fact that you call my push on Peers buddying is kind of silly.

Flameaxe · Fri Dec 21, 2007 10:27 am

This back and forth is becoming silly.

(PS. I was calling it a very poor example)

Flameaxe · Fri Dec 21, 2007 10:31 am

Flameaxe wrote:Why is dybeck still getting away without claiming (and being scum)?

Anyway, this still applies.

Flameaxe · Post Post #926 (isolation #163) » Fri Dec 21, 2007 1:04 pm

I don't think he should be able to get by with just a smartass remark over claiming like this. Scumbag needs to die, and his two buddies (I know who you are) need to get bussing.

Flameaxe · Post Post #932 (isolation #164) » Fri Dec 21, 2007 7:33 pm

dybeck wrote:
Thestatusquo wrote: Therefore, the only way peers saying "I retain the right to claim putty if need be." and then ACTUALLY doing so, is if he were actually vanilla townie. As soon as I saw that, I was 100% sure peers was a townie, and I was so fucking frustrated as you all lynched him. CES was the only one who picked up on that, and thus I am happy to consider him strongly town.
Actually, you'll note that I picked up on this too. When I tried to explain this earlier today, I believe I said that someone would post the same thing more eloquently than I. Thanks for doing so!

And thanks for posting but still avoiding claiming and/or doing anything whatsoever!

Flameaxe · Sat Dec 22, 2007 12:04 pm

What exactly caused this change of heart?

Flameaxe · Post Post #941 (isolation #166) » Sat Dec 22, 2007 1:52 pm

We're going after his buddy first.

Flameaxe · Post Post #943 (isolation #167) » Sat Dec 22, 2007 2:03 pm

Good, maybe you'll bang it hard enough to kill yourself, thus giving us two scum lynches for the price of one! Sounds like a swell deal to me!

Flameaxe · Post Post #946 (isolation #168) » Sat Dec 22, 2007 7:03 pm

Fair enough.

Unvote, vote: jmar

. Scum for a scum seems like a decent trade off.

Flameaxe · Post Post #948 (isolation #169) » Sat Dec 22, 2007 8:32 pm

Thats nice. Why am I scum though?

Flameaxe · Post Post #950 (isolation #170) » Sat Dec 22, 2007 8:33 pm

Also, you could hardly say my last wagon hop was without reason. Stop being mad that I found you and your buddies already.

Flameaxe · Tue Dec 25, 2007 10:42 am

Mirth unvoted CES to vote CES guys...vote count...few posts ago.

Flameaxe · Tue Dec 25, 2007 12:26 pm

Bleh, I could have sworn you unvoted and voted in your last post. Forgive me, my brain is currently sleep deprived. I had a busy night.

Flameaxe · Post Post #965 (isolation #173) » Tue Dec 25, 2007 7:22 pm

Albert B. Rampage wrote:I am really scatter-brained right now with all the Christmas stuff going on..most of my games are slow right now but this one seems to go on strong (don't you guys have no life ? j/k)

So I'm on leave of absence for a while until things calm down, most likely after new years when I can get my shit together and actually read everyone's posts et al

Yeah about that...I'm snowed in and stuff.

Flameaxe · Post Post #976 (isolation #174) » Tue Jan 01, 2008 8:47 am

Getting defensive for Jmar, are we?

Flameaxe · Post Post #977 (isolation #175) » Tue Jan 01, 2008 8:47 am

Also

Mod: Originality needs a prod.

Flameaxe · Post Post #979 (isolation #176) » Tue Jan 01, 2008 9:00 am

He's scum. Whats more to ask?

Also, it seems that once pressure let up, dybeck seems to have vanished yet again from the world of contributions. Therefore

Unvote, Vote: dybeck

.

Sorry Shea

Flameaxe · Post Post #981 (isolation #177) » Tue Jan 01, 2008 9:12 am

Because he is.

Flameaxe · Post Post #982 (isolation #178) » Tue Jan 01, 2008 9:13 am

Also, you notice, he's gone under pressure and all he had to comment on it was an OMGUS vote on me...hrmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

Flameaxe · Mon Jan 07, 2008 3:28 pm

Cop directing, lets kill, kthx?

Flameaxe · Tue Jan 08, 2008 1:04 pm

That's only because you are overthinking, and need to diescumdie. Shea, baby, please?

Flameaxe · Thu Jan 10, 2008 12:40 pm

But HOW is he acting scummy, why not point that out?

Flameaxe · Sat Jan 12, 2008 4:43 pm

scumtell!

Flameaxe · Sat Jan 12, 2008 4:52 pm

That's a stupid question, as I am clearly not listed as one of your buddies.

Flameaxe · Sun Jan 13, 2008 1:44 pm

Albert B. Rampage wrote:V/L/A

a/s/l?

Flameaxe · Sun Jan 13, 2008 2:26 pm

1) ABR is town.
2) You won't.
3) Jmar

Flameaxe · Tue Jan 15, 2008 12:24 pm

6) Don't listen to the mob! There's almost as many scum as town! If you think you're right, post it!

Exactly why I ignored you.

Flameaxe · Tue Jan 15, 2008 1:33 pm

He's town because I'm not getting scum vibes.

Flameaxe · Tue Jan 15, 2008 7:29 pm

Thestatusquo wrote:Dybeck is making a hell of a lot of sense, guys. Can we just lynch Jmar?

No. Tomorrow.

Flameaxe · Wed Jan 16, 2008 4:08 am

dybeck wrote:You guys do remember that the entire case against me boils down to the fact that my early posts weren't putting enough effort into the game, right?

That, and Flameaxe repeatedly saying "OMG we must lynch Dybeck".

Is that pretty much about it? Is this the reason that we've let players like Jmar off scot-free?

Prove me wrong, Flameaxe? I'd like to see what happens when you actually try and build a case against someone, actually.

Except...I've already posted my case against you. So grats on reading.

Flameaxe · Wed Jan 16, 2008 4:10 am

dybeck wrote:You guys do remember that the entire case against me boils down to the fact that my early posts weren't putting enough effort into the game, right?

That, and Flameaxe repeatedly saying "OMG we must lynch Dybeck".

Is that pretty much about it? Is this the reason that we've let players like Jmar off scot-free?

Prove me wrong, Flameaxe? I'd like to see what happens when you actually try and build a case against someone, actually.

Except...I've already posted my case against you. So grats on reading. We aren't letting Jmar off scot-free, he just isn't our target today. All I see in this post is dybeck over-reacting and trying to save his balls.

Flameaxe · Wed Jan 16, 2008 4:11 am

Wow...wtf.

Flameaxe · Wed Jan 16, 2008 4:11 am

Thestatusquo wrote:Dybeck, I would find it helpful if we can see your list of top suspects, and why you suspect them. I don't want any half assed job here, but I would like you to put the "listening" you've done to use. Such a list could be very potentially helpful tomorrow if you're lynched, or today if you are not.

I agree.

Flameaxe · Wed Jan 16, 2008 3:25 pm

Strong being loosely defined...

Flameaxe · Wed Jan 16, 2008 5:08 pm

Fair enough.

Flameaxe · Fri Jan 18, 2008 1:12 pm

Trying to post and be bluehost'd isn't fun. Ima try this again.

Flameaxe · Sat Jan 19, 2008 6:27 am

Flameaxe wrote:Trying to post and be bluehost'd isn't fun. Ima try this again.

^If you can't tell, I gave up last light...fucking bluehost...

Flameaxe · Sun Jan 20, 2008 7:48 am

ABR, it's Dybeck (its actually "dybeck" but I have OCD when it comes to capitalization and such, so Dybeck it is!), not Dybek. That keeps bothering me...sorry. ><

I'm gonna do some PBpAs tonight (hopefully). Namely Jmar and the dybeck follow up analysis.

Flameaxe · Mon Jan 21, 2008 3:43 pm

Conveniently dybeck vanished when asked to name suspects...

Flameaxe · Tue Jan 22, 2008 4:27 am

Dybeck is still scum. Nothing has changed. Jmar replacement makes me happy.

3 lines.