meh.Darox wrote:I haven't soft claimed anything.Ythill wrote:Sure, Darox soft-claimedbionic wrote:Can somebody remind me how Crywolf has managed to slip completely out of the picture here?
Why did you not answer this question at all Tony? Not even a deflection?Darox wrote:Why did you try to seem like you might actually have other suspects then defend your lack of insight on others by passing it off as a character flaw? Why did you decide to not answer the highlighted question?
What made you feel the need to justify the mafia's decision? Why do you persist in deflecting the questions?TonyMontana wrote:Uhh.. the discussion that was going on about the nightkill.Darox wrote:Can you please explain to me what prompted you to defend the mafia nightkill choice?
Why do you refuse to answer this question? Why did you stop hunting, or alternatively, what makes you feel that you have not stopped hunting? It is not a tough question, and I want you to answer me.TonyMontana wrote:It linked up, and Ythill understood the context, and I don't believe it went over your head either, so bring some real inquiries please.Darox wrote:How does your answer link up to what the question is asking? Why did you feel compelled to give a weaselly non-answer to Ythill's questioning?@Tony: Why did you stop hunting?
(Incidentally, Ythill, why did you call him out for his slippery answers the first time but not the second time?)
So how does this answer either of my questions again? You described my actions then completely failed to make the connection between them and me somehow saying I had special knowledge.TonyMontana wrote:You vote for me, saying nothing else than "This vote has reasons"Darox wrote: Where did I insinuate that I had special knowledge? Why are you seemingly trying to pull a claim from me here?
(In case anyone couldn't figure it out, I was complaining that no one was voting period, not that no one was voting for Tony.)
Several people go "whatever" and ask you to bring forth reasons if you got em.
You say nothing, then make the votecount comment, which could not have been interpreted as anything else than a wish for people to follow your lead.
After several requests for an explanation, you now attempt to construct some arguments against me, and is still not adressing the question.
See first line of this post.TonyMontana wrote:So I ask again: What did you have in mind when you said "This vote has reasons"
NOTE: IF YOU THINK SOMEONE IS SOFT CLAIMING, DON'T POINT IT OUT. All it does is point the mafia to them. The point of soft claiming is to keep it SECRET AND SUBTLE.bionicchop2 wrote:meh.Darox wrote:I haven't soft claimed anything.Ythill wrote:Sure, Darox soft-claimedbionic wrote:Can somebody remind me how Crywolf has managed to slip completely out of the picture here?##unvote TonyMontana
I kind of thought you were making a soft-claim myself which is why I couldn't provide any solid reasons for following you. Since you are saying you weren't, then I see no reason to vote Tony based on arguments given throughout the game.
I did, but let me spell it out for you..Darox wrote:So can you please answer these two questions again, and properly this time?
So why did you ignore the rest of the questions? Fear of slipping up?TonyMontana wrote:I did, but let me spell it out for you..Darox wrote:So can you please answer these two questions again, and properly this time?
1) "This vote has reasons" (Oh, if only this would amount to a reasonable basis for a vote everytime.)
2) I'm trying to get a coherent answer from you, not a claim.
##vote: Darox
Obvious that I am scum, or obvious that you voted me because I'm scum?Darox wrote:I'm voting for Tony because he is scum. I thought that was obvious.
In what respect, Charlie?Darox wrote:So Sarah Palin, are you going to answer my questions or do you need time to fabricate more answers?
How about answering all of these?Darox wrote:I'm voting for Tony because he is scum. I thought that was obvious.
I also thought it was obvious that I hadn't softclaimed. Because, you know, I never once hinted at something like 'I'm going to get you tonight' or 'I won't let you die' or 'I have proof of guilt' or anything along those lines.
What you interpret from my actions does not equal a softclaim from myself.
Anyway, back to the scumbag.
Why did you not answer this question at all Tony? Not even a deflection?Darox wrote:Why did you try to seem like you might actually have other suspects then defend your lack of insight on others by passing it off as a character flaw? Why did you decide to not answer the highlighted question?
What made you feel the need to justify the mafia's decision? Why do you persist in deflecting the questions?TonyMontana wrote:Uhh.. the discussion that was going on about the nightkill.Darox wrote:Can you please explain to me what prompted you to defend the mafia nightkill choice?
Why do you refuse to answer this question? Why did you stop hunting, or alternatively, what makes you feel that you have not stopped hunting? It is not a tough question, and I want you to answer me.TonyMontana wrote:It linked up, and Ythill understood the context, and I don't believe it went over your head either, so bring some real inquiries please.Darox wrote:How does your answer link up to what the question is asking? Why did you feel compelled to give a weaselly non-answer to Ythill's questioning?@Tony: Why did you stop hunting?
(Incidentally, Ythill, why did you call him out for his slippery answers the first time but not the second time?)
So how does this answer either of my questions again? You described my actions then completely failed to make the connection between them and me somehow saying I had special knowledge.TonyMontana wrote:You vote for me, saying nothing else than "This vote has reasons"Darox wrote: Where did I insinuate that I had special knowledge? Why are you seemingly trying to pull a claim from me here?
(In case anyone couldn't figure it out, I was complaining that no one was voting period, not that no one was voting for Tony.)
Several people go "whatever" and ask you to bring forth reasons if you got em.
You say nothing, then make the votecount comment, which could not have been interpreted as anything else than a wish for people to follow your lead.
After several requests for an explanation, you now attempt to construct some arguments against me, and is still not adressing the question.
Not to mention some misrepresentation. My votecount comment could easily have been interpreted in the way it was meant rather than your abstract take, and I'm not 'attempting to construct some arguments', I am asking some questions.
So can you please answer these two questions again, and properly this time?
See first line of this post.TonyMontana wrote:So I ask again: What did you have in mind when you said "This vote has reasons"
I did. Fail.Darox wrote:Why did you not answer this question at all Tony? Not even a deflection?Darox wrote:Why did you try to seem like you might actually have other suspects then defend your lack of insight on others by passing it off as a character flaw? Why did you decide to not answer the highlighted question?
What made you feel the need to justify the mafia's decision? Why do you persist in deflecting the questions?[/quote]TonyMontana wrote:Uhh.. the discussion that was going on about the nightkill.Darox wrote:Can you please explain to me what prompted you to defend the mafia nightkill choice?
I guess you need to be spoonfed everything. I never stopped hunting as in "looking for scum". If you define "hunting" as asking alot of questions, and provoking other people, then yes I was focusing more on other games, and was keeping this one in my peripherals. I don't think you have any problems understanding neither this answer, nor all the other answers I have given that you claim don't answer the questions. You are purposefully trying to seem like, A)You are being investigative, and B) I am being evasive. You are failing at bothDarox wrote:Why do you refuse to answer this question? Why did you stop hunting, or alternatively, what makes you feel that you have not stopped hunting? It is not a tough question, and I want you to answer me.
So I ask again, in a way you can't weasel yourself out of:Darox wrote:See first line of this post.TonyMontana wrote:So I ask again: What did you have in mind when you said "This vote has reasons"
Not once did you answer this question I posed to you.TonyMontana wrote:I did. Fail.Darox wrote:Why did you not answer this question at all Tony? Not even a deflection?Darox wrote:Why did you try to seem like you might actually have other suspects then defend your lack of insight on others by passing it off as a character flaw? Why did you decide to not answer the highlighted question?
TonyMontana wrote:How do you know whether I'm "looking at other people"? I'm just not the instigator type..Ythill wrote:Tony:I still feel like his initial vote was a little suspect. The unvote @ L-1 + revote @ L-2 was null. However, what I find most suspicious afterwards was the way Tony stopped looking at other people. His posts after that vote were all defense or side-comment until the end-of-day IGMEO Oman. This while serious discussion about the Lowell lynch was taking place.
@Tony: Why did you stop hunting?
TonyMontana wrote:The charge of not being involved in the arguing? Not denying, no.Ythill wrote:I don't like slippery arguments. Are you denying the charge or not?
These are Tony's answers.TonyMontana wrote:*IGMEOYYthill wrote:No, Tony, that's not what I said. You found an early target and then you gave up the hunt. You didn't just refrain from arguing. You refrained from everything that wasn't defense or side-comments until almost the end of the day, when Oman got your OMGUS.
I understood what you meant, and I wasn't denying it.
They do, if you can read beyond a third grade level. But in any case, I just spelled it out for you in the post above, so get a new excuse to evade the issue at hand.Darox wrote:None of them explainwhyhe stopped hunting. None of them answer the question.
Yes, don't stonewall tony. Tony no like when people stonewall him.Darox wrote:Can you please stop stonewalling tony? Thanks.
Because working out how the mafia are thinking, coupled with working out how specific players are thinking, increases the chance of identifying the mafia.Darox wrote:Excuse me?Tommy wrote: He's trying to work out how the mafia are thinking, which is pro-town."
How?
Just because you say it is doesn't make it so.
I didn't really answer for him; I answered after him (see 461). I thought it would puncture Darox's aggression by making his sophistry more transparent. Didn't work.bionicchop2 wrote:Tommy - why did you feel the need to answer for Tony there?
If my defenses seem irrelevant, it could be because Darox hasn't said anything of value or substance since yesterday. I don't feel the need to defend myself against some douche who is blatantly trying to create reasons for the vote he claimed he had reasons for in the first place. Makes alot of questions, gives no answers.Oman wrote:Darox seems to be spanking Tony around, and Tony seems to be putting up strangely irrelevant defences.
DAROX: How do you feel about Tony, Town/scum etc
TONY: How do you feel about Darox, Town/Scum etc.
TOWN. SCUM. OR OTHER?TonyMontana wrote:If my defenses seem irrelevant, it could be because Darox hasn't said anything of value or substance since yesterday. I don't feel the need to defend myself against some douche who is blatantly trying to create reasons for the vote he claimed he had reasons for in the first place. Makes alot of questions, gives no answers.Oman wrote:Darox seems to be spanking Tony around, and Tony seems to be putting up strangely irrelevant defences.
DAROX: How do you feel about Tony, Town/scum etc
TONY: How do you feel about Darox, Town/Scum etc.
I can't be the only one who thinks Darox is absolutely ridiculous right now?
You could think he was town but needed to be lynched.TonyMontana wrote:I wouldn't be voting him if I thought he was town.
Aha! So I'm not the only one that has noticed that. There has been several instences where you, Tommy have been either quick to defend, or quick to answer for Tony, and it hasn't been just recent. I have been keeping track of that for quiet some time now. Let me go find my list of posts and finish catching up to everything thats going on right now.Bionic wrote:Tommy - why did you feel the need to answer for Tony there?