You're funny.M4yhem wrote:Claim, Darox.
I'm not voting Tony. I think the case against Darox is far better. Ythill sums up his day two play nicely; his day one play was nothing but opportunistic bandwagonning.
Mini 659: The Neighborhood- Game over on Day 6
-
-
Darox Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2970
- Joined: May 10, 2008
- Location: The Future
-
-
crywolf20084 Cayke
- Cayke
- Cayke
- Posts: 1597
- Joined: August 16, 2008
- Location: No longer in practically Canada
Yes, Rash's posts were few and far between, but I found most of them helpful and to the point. I was putting a little bit of faith in him that he would show up in D2 and do a bit more than what he did in D1, which happened in the begining and it lulled like almost everybody else.bionicchop2 wrote:
Could you elaborate a little more on your decision here. Rash didn't stand out to me as super productive on D1 and I thought a few people called him out as being unproductive.crywolf20084 wrote: I protected Rash N1 because he seemed to be pretty productive and I wanted to see him last to the next day.
Further, could you explain your thoughts on Iamusername and your opinion of him during day 1.
As for User, I didn't see the scum targeting him at all. Yeah, I didn't believe the claim, yes, but I thought Rash was a more useful to the town than User was based on the information I found useful.aim:gochat?roomname=ScumChat&Exchange=5
GlorkTheInvader: GET UP ONTO SEXY ROSS'S BACK-
-
crywolf20084 Cayke
- Cayke
- Cayke
- Posts: 1597
- Joined: August 16, 2008
- Location: No longer in practically Canada
This isn't funny Darox. We are in the last moments of the day.Darox wrote:
You're funny.M4yhem wrote:Claim, Darox.
I'm not voting Tony. I think the case against Darox is far better. Ythill sums up his day two play nicely; his day one play was nothing but opportunistic bandwagonning.
Oh and, I'm starting to think Jester with Darox and his stupid moves here.aim:gochat?roomname=ScumChat&Exchange=5
GlorkTheInvader: GET UP ONTO SEXY ROSS'S BACK-
-
Darox Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2970
- Joined: May 10, 2008
- Location: The Future
You're really funny.crywolf20084 wrote:
This isn't funny Darox. We are in the last moments of the day.Darox wrote:
You're funny.M4yhem wrote:Claim, Darox.
I'm not voting Tony. I think the case against Darox is far better. Ythill sums up his day two play nicely; his day one play was nothing but opportunistic bandwagonning.
Oh and, I'm starting to think Jester with Darox and his stupid moves here.
Tony is still the best lynch.-
-
crywolf20084 Cayke
- Cayke
- Cayke
- Posts: 1597
- Joined: August 16, 2008
- Location: No longer in practically Canada
I don't think so anymore.Darox wrote:
You're really funny.crywolf20084 wrote:
This isn't funny Darox. We are in the last moments of the day.Darox wrote:
You're funny.M4yhem wrote:Claim, Darox.
I'm not voting Tony. I think the case against Darox is far better. Ythill sums up his day two play nicely; his day one play was nothing but opportunistic bandwagonning.
Oh and, I'm starting to think Jester with Darox and his stupid moves here.
Tony is still the best lynch.
Vote: Daroxaim:gochat?roomname=ScumChat&Exchange=5
GlorkTheInvader: GET UP ONTO SEXY ROSS'S BACK-
-
Ythill Fabio
- Fabio
- Fabio
- Posts: 4892
- Joined: November 10, 2007
-
-
M4yhem Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1833
- Joined: August 3, 2006
-
-
fhqwhgads Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 798
- Joined: March 26, 2008
- Location: South Africa
Damn,
I don't have as much time as I would have wished. I'm not going to lynch a claimed doc today. Lets see what tomorrow brings for crywolf. I'm going back to my original vote, one, which I see, has become all the more popular.
Unvote, Vote: Darox
That's L-1 if I'm not mistaken. Any inclination to claim now, Darox?Avoiding votes by means of the spelling of my name.-
-
bionicchop2 Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 3069
- Joined: March 12, 2008
Wolf never unvoted from the other convenient wagon she hopped on in her haste to lynch anybody who wasn't her without actually making an effort to scum hunt. Oh the glories of claiming a power role and the immunity from being held to townie standards.fhqwhgads wrote:
That's L-1 if I'm not mistaken. Any inclination to claim now, Darox?The above written statement is pro-town.-
-
gorckat Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2830
- Joined: January 17, 2007
- Location: Bawlmer, Hon!
(6 to lynch)Vote Count
Darox (5):M4yhem, TonyMontana, crywolf, fhqwhgads, Ythill
TonyMontana (2):Darox, Oman
Ythill:Rashiminos
crywolf:bionic
Not voting (1):pickemgenius
**This vote count has been corrected per Ythill a few posts down.**Last edited by gorckat on Sun Oct 05, 2008 3:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.-
-
Oman NK Immune Miller Vig
- NK Immune Miller Vig
- NK Immune Miller Vig
- Posts: 7014
- Joined: June 19, 2007
-
-
Ythill Fabio
- Fabio
- Fabio
- Posts: 4892
- Joined: November 10, 2007
-
-
crywolf20084 Cayke
- Cayke
- Cayke
- Posts: 1597
- Joined: August 16, 2008
- Location: No longer in practically Canada
-
-
Rashiminos Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 510
- Joined: August 20, 2007
- Location: Eastern Shore, MD
It's more of an injunction, really...bionicchop2 wrote:
Wolf never unvoted from the other convenient wagon she hopped on in her haste to lynch anybody who wasn't her without actually making an effort to scum hunt. Oh the glories of claiming a power role and the immunity from being held to townie standards.fhqwhgads wrote:
That's L-1 if I'm not mistaken. Any inclination to claim now, Darox?ShowCompleted Games:
Newbie: 459, 625(replace), 642
Mini: 659
[i]Ralph, the Driv3r.[/i]-
-
gorckat Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2830
- Joined: January 17, 2007
- Location: Bawlmer, Hon!
-
-
Rashiminos Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 510
- Joined: August 20, 2007
- Location: Eastern Shore, MD
It probably does.M4yhem wrote:Also, do you really think the fact she claims doc should make no difference to my read on Crywolf?
You made a comment about fhq's voting yesterday that seemed out of place.M4yhem wrote: I'm not sure what you mean about Lowell, clarify.
***
It's a matter of letting the scum decide whether the doc should be killed if she is doc. If she survives to the next day, that would be somewhat more convincing of scumminess. What's the point in having someone claim if the result won't affect the vote?bionicchop2 wrote:I am trying to lynch who I think is scum instead of blindly believing a claim.
***
I'll be looking for an explanation of this when you get around to it.M4yhem wrote:I think he's being unfairly stiched up.
***
The other options being proposed are the Darox/Tony disputes, and I'm not feeling that some of the leapers from the wolf wagon have last minute scumkilling in mind.Ythill wrote:@Rash: Seriously dude, what's with the smokescreen? You don't seem scummy to me, and I thought your initial questions about my case on wolf were fair enough, but is this argument really helping the town one day from deadline?
Could be, worth one night.Ythill wrote:You think wolf is telling the truth?
You're not figuring anything out. At best your exercise is pointless. Most likely it is scummy.Ythill wrote: You think I'm scummy for trying to figure out whether she's being honest or not?
Your support of the neighborhood question was post-claim. The insinuation is that since townies are likely from the neighborhood, the scum are not. The likely result of people answering the question is that crywolf is singled out again, and demonized some more. If this exercise serves a purpose, IT IS TO LYNCH A CLAIMED POWER ROLE.Ythill wrote:
Your tacit suggestion is that I'm trying to lynch a claimed power role. Note that 99% of my attacks against wolf came pre-claim. Note that it was me who asked her to claim while we still had time. Note that, after her claim, in #638, I posted my thoughts about the claim which were pretty reasonable, and I sought more information.Rash wrote:I'm trying to wait at least one night before I decide to lynch a claimed power role. What are you and bionic up to?
The general case may be valid. I've said, repeatedly, that your case is not. There's a difference. I'm not endangering crywolf because I am neither voting her, nor am I asking everyone a question about his or her role.Ythill wrote:Now, for the last two days, I've been arguing about how a case against the claimed-doc is valid instead of looking for the best alternative lynch. Why? Because I've been defending against your attacks on that case. So if I'm endangering the claimed-doc then so are you.
//////////////////////////
I'm currently reading my literature on Darox and Tony. Leaning on Tony at the moment, but I may change my mind.ShowCompleted Games:
Newbie: 459, 625(replace), 642
Mini: 659
[i]Ralph, the Driv3r.[/i]-
-
Darox Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2970
- Joined: May 10, 2008
- Location: The Future
-
-
Oman NK Immune Miller Vig
- NK Immune Miller Vig
- NK Immune Miller Vig
- Posts: 7014
- Joined: June 19, 2007
Darox is does not look like scum to me, I admit I may be wrong, but he looks very very much like a townie stuck between a rock and a hard place.crywolf20084 wrote:
This is probably too late, but what the hell do you mean? (With two hrs left to go.)Oman wrote:Daroxclaim is not a good idea because daroxscum does not exist.
Thus forcing him to claim is a bad idea.It's unfortunate that good oral sex excuses bad chemistry. - Korts-
-
Rashiminos Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 510
- Joined: August 20, 2007
- Location: Eastern Shore, MD
Hmm..., Darox is terse, but I'm simply baffled at how many people missed Darox's focus on Tony "defending the scumkill" in his questioning of Tony. Obviously, this is part of his case.
Tony has made a potent mix of evasiveness (as noticed by Darox and Oman), discrediting his attacker, and resorting to to ad hominem. His basic answer to Darox's questions was "Darox is obvscum."
I'll go back and find some choice quotes, but I know which one of them I'm going to vote since there's not enough momentum in the Ythill direction.
##Unvote: Ythill
##Vote: TonyMontanaShowCompleted Games:
Newbie: 459, 625(replace), 642
Mini: 659
[i]Ralph, the Driv3r.[/i]-
-
pickemgenius Jack the Tripper
- Jack the Tripper
- Jack the Tripper
- Posts: 2471
- Joined: April 27, 2007
- Location: Pepsi Center
vote: TonyMontanaShowRumpelstiltskin Grinder
(1:55:11 AM) ahallucinogenic: it's ok drench
(1:55:21 AM) ahallucinogenic: it's perfectly normal for young children to walk in on their parents making love
(1:55:31 AM) Drench394: i can't wait
STREAMING:
www.twitch.tv/xxxpickemgenius-
-
Rashiminos Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 510
- Joined: August 20, 2007
- Location: Eastern Shore, MD
Dodged the 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?
Darox is referring to the lack of votes. Tony throws suspicion on Darox for no good reason.TonyMontana wrote:
Dude, if you got something to say, say it. Insinuating that you have some kind of special knowledge is not gonna make everyone follow you blindly, and it's a scummy trait, so you're not doing yourself any favours.Darox wrote:
There is something wrong with this picture.gorckat wrote:(6 to lynch)Vote Count
TonyMontana:Darox
Not voting (9):Elias, Rashiminos, Oman, TonyMontana, crywolf, bionic, Tommy, Ythill, fhqwhgads
I'll give you a hint.
There are exactly 9 things wrong with this picture.
Darox was asked to explain his vote on Lowell by Tommy in post 443.TonyMontana wrote:Tommy, Darox is explaining his vote on lowell, instead of explaining the more relevant, reasonless vote on me.ShowCompleted Games:
Newbie: 459, 625(replace), 642
Mini: 659
[i]Ralph, the Driv3r.[/i]-
-
Ythill Fabio
- Fabio
- Fabio
- Posts: 4892
- Joined: November 10, 2007
If everyone else is from the Neighborhood, it singles her out because it suggests heavily that she is lying about her flavor. If this excercise serves a purpose, it is to lynch a fake-claiming mafioso. Putting things in big letters does not make them true.Rash wrote:The likely result of people answering the question is that crywolf is singled out again, and demonized some more. If this exercise serves a purpose, IT IS TO LYNCH A CLAIMED POWER ROLE.
How can youknowthat she is likely to be singled out and still believe she is telling the truth?
How do you know they missed it? I, for one, found it to be a reach. Lots of us were talking about the NK, stating some reasons why it could have been the choice isn't defending it.Rash wrote:I'm simply baffled at how many people missed Darox's focus on Tony "defending the scumkill" in his questioning of Tony.Record:Town 10W/15LScum 4W/1LOther 2W/2LNewbie 1L
"So yeah, it is a sign from the angels." ~CooLDoG-
-
gorckat Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2830
- Joined: January 17, 2007
- Location: Bawlmer, Hon!
-
-
Ythill Fabio
- Fabio
- Fabio
- Posts: 4892
- Joined: November 10, 2007
That's what I thought at first too, then he reiterated.Rash wrote:Dodged the question.
No good reason from your PoV maybe. It sounds to me like Tony didn't understand what he was talking about, and was pressuring him for more info.Rash wrote:Darox is referring to the lack of votes. Tony throws suspicion on Darox for no good reason.
Which doesn't invalidate anything you quoted by Tony.Rash wrote:Darox was asked to explain his vote on Lowell by Tommy in post 443.Record:Town 10W/15LScum 4W/1LOther 2W/2LNewbie 1L
"So yeah, it is a sign from the angels." ~CooLDoG-
-
Rashiminos Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 510
- Joined: August 20, 2007
- Location: Eastern Shore, MD
Merely states there was NK discussion. Does not mention why Tony is involved, or what Tony hopes to do as a result of the discussion.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?
For instance, Tony could have tried to provide justification that Darox wanted user dead, but Tony just says there was discussion.
Begs these questions: Why is it productive to discuss motives for the NK? Who had the motive to commit the NK?TonyMontana wrote:
Again, we were discussing the nightkills, and I was providing viewpoints on possible motives. And what does "defending" NK even mean? Defending to who?Darox wrote:Why are you continuing to defend the mafia nightkill choice? Why do you feel the need to justify the decision?
Defending the scum is obviously what Darox meant by "defending the nightkill."
Ad hominem and discrediting Darox.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?
(Incidentally, Ythill, why did you call him out for his slippery answers the first time but not the second time?)
Ockham's Razor: Vote count comment was to entice people to vote, not necessarily for Tony. Lack of votes = lull in game. Darox's arguments referred to pre-vote information.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.ShowCompleted Games:
Newbie: 459, 625(replace), 642
Mini: 659
[i]Ralph, the Driv3r.[/i]
Copyright © MafiaScum. All rights reserved.