Open 86 - Lovers Multiball (Game Over)

[sekinj]

@Sp - So can you quote for me your case against charter?

[armlx]

So what is your reason for voting me now? The times have been posted.

Stalling on a claim, the complete and utter OMGUS of everyone, illogical attacks.

And you are really digging here WWB, manipulating it so the since implies I had before rather then implying that I had left.

[sekinj]

What I don't like about charter/ceph is how they try to get anyone but themselves lynched...

[Raging Rabbit]

armlx - There's also the unmatching number of posts because charter "left out some off topic ones". And scummy d1 behavior, and going after everything that moved d3 (iirc). I just don't get how OMGUSing the shit out of everyone voting him somehow took him almost off the limelight like that.

For the record, I'm not convinced by Walt's case, nor do a recall a case against Panda/armlx by charter that wasn't pure OMGUS.

[armlx]

What I don't like about charter/ceph is how they try to get anyone but themselves lynched...

I swear I've said this before.

[WaltWishbone]

So what is your reason for voting me now? The times have been posted.

Stalling on a claim, the complete and utter OMGUS of everyone, illogical attacks.

And you are really digging here WWB, manipulating it so the since implies I had before rather then implying that I had left.

Not anymore, he pretty much admitted he did with the implication it was merely a semantics error.

[sekinj]

What I don't like about charter/ceph is how they try to get anyone but themselves lynched...

I swear I've said this before.

well, so have I, I'm just re-iterating since charter/ceph don't seem to think they've doen anything scummy.

[armlx]

Not anymore, he pretty much admitted he did with the implication it was merely a semantics error.

Huh? What the hell does this even mean?

[WaltWishbone]

this

Go ahead, continue arguing over semantics.

[ThAdmiral]

looks like you got lucky today sekinj.

since armlx/sp have a different time as well I guess it still will help prove or disprove the theory.

unvote, vote: sleepypanda

[SleepyPanda]

@SleepyPanda - I'll tell you what, I will probably have some free time later this evening or tomorrow, I will go back and post the merits of his case if you do something for me. Can you reword this for me.

Go ahead, continue arguing over semantics.

To me, it sounds like you are saying this;

"Yes you are correct WWB, by using the word since, my comment does imply that I talked to Armix in daytalk prior to September 2nd, however thats not what I meant it was a semantics error on my part."

Can you please reword that for me?

You're saying the word 'since' implies that we have talked in our daytalks before. I'm saying it doesn't. We're arguing over the definition of the word. Thus we're arguing over semantics. Do I need to hold your hand so you can go to the bathroom as well?

@Sp - So can you quote for me your case against charter?

I've done this before already. My post #93.

[WaltWishbone]

@SleepyPanda - I'll tell you what, I will probably have some free time later this evening or tomorrow, I will go back and post the merits of his case if you do something for me. Can you reword this for me.

Go ahead, continue arguing over semantics.

To me, it sounds like you are saying this;

"Yes you are correct WWB, by using the word since, my comment does imply that I talked to Armix in daytalk prior to September 2nd, however thats not what I meant it was a semantics error on my part."

Can you please reword that for me?

You're saying the word 'since' implies that we have talked in our daytalks before. I'm saying it doesn't. We're arguing over the definition of the word. Thus we're arguing over semantics. Do I need to hold your hand so you can go to the bathroom as well?

Are you hiting on me SleepyPanda? Missing your werewolf lovers and looking for some fresh meat?

It does, you are wrong. When you finsih school and actually graduate, then you can tell me all about it.

I have an idea, wanna get my goat and end this argument. You are town right, why don't you post your daytalk right now prove me wrong, you will be modkilled and if you are town, we will look really stupid.

But the thing is you are scum.

[armlx]

since armlx/sp have a different time as well I guess it still will help prove or disprove the theory.

The mod already did this.

I notice a strong propensity of those people we have attacked to vote us today.

[SleepyPanda]

It does, you are wrong. When you finsih school and actually graduate, then you can tell me all about it. Wink

English isn't my first language, but I'm still pretty sure I have a better grasp of it than you do.

English 101. The word 'since' specifies a time between a given point, which in this case would be when "he left", and the present. The action would be "posting in daytalk". Is there any mention about what happens before he left? No. From then on, it's assumptions, which seems to be the only thing you're good at.

I have an idea, wanna get my goat and end this argument. You are town right, why don't you post your daytalk right now prove me wrong, you will be modkilled and if you are town, we will look really stupid.

I have to say, your logic is quite something. It's right up there on par with charter's.

I'm also waiting on my summary of charter's case.

[sekinj]

Thanks, I'll click that little quote button for you...

1) Ignoring questions
2) Using crap logic *
3) Contradictions**
4) Active lurking
5) Willingness to bandwagon

*Example:
-Concludes that armlx was on two townie lynch wagons, so he must be scum. Ignores the fact that he (charter) was on the first townie wagon, as well as expressing intent to vote for the second townie wagon.
-Uses lynched townies' suspicion as part of case. The only information you gain from confirmed townies is that they have no hidden agenda. They are just as susceptible to being incorrect.

**Example:
-Says that lynching mafia would be the best move. However, hints that he believes armlx/SP are werewolves.
-Named at least 5 pairs he believes are confirmed scum. All recently, Day 4.
-Believes Crazy/KoC are scum, yet calls KoC a sheep, as in he is town blindly following scum.

I'm sure there are more examples, but these are the ones I can remember off the top of my head.

[WaltWishbone]

It does, you are wrong. When you finsih school and actually graduate, then you can tell me all about it. Wink

English isn't my first language, but I'm still pretty sure I have a better grasp of it than you do.

Okay, that's actually kinda a big deal and translation often changes context as well as meaning. An argument over semantics is not as easy as defining a word differently when it is within the boundries of a discussion that requires context and intent. For instance in the case of Japanesse (which I do not speak), however a friend told me there is not a direct word that translates to "no". I'm not sure if this is true or not, but it illustrates the point regardless.

In the end, this is really what the exchange between myself and you comes down to. You are saying that you were not implying that you had spoken to Armix in daytalk and I don't believe you. I'm not sure what else to say until we see your daytalk and have proof.

So there is one more thing I didn't mention previoulsy. I asked you politely twice to please present the case you were building on Seknj/Neko. Can you please post that.

I'll be happy to highlight, in my opinion, the merits of the Charter case against you once that is posted and I have free time.

[armlx]

I'll be happy to highlight, in my opinion, the merits of the Charter case against you once that is posted and I have free time.

Why do you want the case on sekinj before highlighting the "merits" of charter's "case"?

[WaltWishbone]

I'll be happy to highlight, in my opinion, the merits of the Charter case against you once that is posted and I have free time.

Why do you want the case on sekinj before highlighting the "merits" of charter's "case"?

Because I asked him twice over the weekend and at the beginning of the week and he completely ignored my question, so, why should I answer his request?

[SleepyPanda]

Because I asked him twice over the weekend and at the beginning of the week and he completely ignored my question, so, why should I answer his request?

That's right, it's a request. A request that benefits me in no way. If it's a good case as you say, it strengthens your own. You're not hurting me by not posting it. And even so, you refuse to post it multiple times, as well as asking for something in return, as if this is a trade.

[WaltWishbone]

Because I asked him twice over the weekend and at the beginning of the week and he completely ignored my question, so, why should I answer his request?

That's right, it's a request. A request that benefits me in no way. If it's a good case as you say, it strengthens your own. You're not hurting me by not posting it. And even so, you refuse to post it multiple times, as well as asking for something in return, as if this is a trade.

Yes, it does benefit you if you are town and we catch scum. If you have a case against them why are you not posting it?

Is it because you think if they flip scum you will be lynched next? The object of the game is not to stay alive until the end, the object is to lynch all the scum. If you are holding back a case because you think it will further prove the timestamp theory, you are hurting the town.

[armlx]

The time stamp theory that was already disproven?

SP, just post the case though. Seriously.

[SleepyPanda]

Yes, it does benefit you if you are town and we catch scum. If you have a case against them why are you not posting it?

I was only talking about charter's case, not neko and sekinj. Why are you just repeating everything I've said about you and charter's case on us? If you're saying we're scum, I see no reason for you to be so reluctant to post charter's case, which is what I've been saying this entire time.

Regarding sekinj/neko, I never got around to making a formal case. I'm not holding anything back. You're lost in your own world again. I've already explained that I was only fishing for a response from them, and I'm positive I've said this before and that you even acknowledged it. I only had a feeling they could be possible scum. It was also due to their interactions, or lack of, with charter/Ceph. I also noted the same lack of interaction between charter/Ceph and Admiral/DBE, which is what also made me unsure to pursue it further. And obviously since BM flipped mafia, that point is now moot.

[WaltWishbone]

Yes, it does benefit you if you are town and we catch scum. If you have a case against them why are you not posting it?

If you're saying we're scum, I see no reason for you to be so reluctant to post charter's case, which is what I've been saying this entire time.

You're lost in your own world again.

Again, you are lost in your own little world. I am not reluctant, the case I prepared has plenty of merit on it's own. As far as Charter/Cephrir here are few points, I am not going to clutter the thread by re-posting the entire exchange. For anyone who would like to read it in full, in order to appreciate the context, please refer to Septemeber 23rd to 25th, 2008.

Or it could be exactly what I said it was. Also the truth. I don't really care how I convey it really, call it whatever you want, it's still right and you know it.

Lets look at the facts here.

Your case

1. I attacked you for your day talk
2. TS

(confirmed town, who was playing to lynch scum, not townies, as you are)

said you were town
3. I didn't vote for someone while the person I replaced was inactive, then helped spur wagons on 2 people who turned up town.

You have the same role as their not being on iceman's wagon. Regardless of being inactive or not, his wagon started up way before you were replaced in.

4. Your extreme buddying up to anyone who will listen (which is a lot of people in this game...)
5. Your being horribly wrong, tunneling in on one townie, lynching them, and moving right on to the next.

Honestly, I don't understand how no one else wants you dead.

Oh, look at what I found, armlx wasn't on icemans wagon, and was on Kloud's and HP's. Now he's on another townie's as well! Are the rest of you guys going to let him get away with lynching townies at will? Seriously?

I'm mostly not answering stuff directed at charter, but I feel the need to point out that the case on charter/me mostly revolved around charter.

EBWOP,

If people seem willing to listen to reason perhaps I will bother trying.

Actually, I'm interested in what you have to say. I'm willing to listen, so talk.

Things to do/questions to answer:

1) Explain your case on armlx/SP
2) Explain your case on CW/BM
3) What are your thoughts of Adel/TS? TS has continued to post, but has yet to post their daytalk. Essentially, it's the exactly what CW/BM have done, which is not posting daytalk. Why do you not mentioning them?

This post strikes me as an attempt to look town while lynching a townie but I will answer nonetheless.
1) It's pretty simple. armlx's back and forth with charter, for the most part; I don't really care for his case. Call it OMGUS if you really want to; I also happen to know that a protown player is suspicious of him. That said, you are way way way way way further down from BM/CWR on my scumlist.
2) Um, duh? CWR is outright refusing to post daytalk without reading the thread and there are EXACTLY ZERO PROTOWN REASONS why he would insist on this after it has been explained to him why doing so would be protown.
3) TS says she's doing it, although it is taking her a suspicious amount of time; they better have quite a lot of daytalk. But what it really boils down to is that I thought Adel seemed protown.

Daytalk fix upcoming; I'll just do the whole thing over rather than filling in charter's holes since looking for them would be pretty time-consuming.

Re-reading this, without having Charter/Cephrir confirmed scum gives it new meaning in my opinion. It comes across more as frustrated townie then scum and their opinions are more thought-provoking then concrete evidence. I feel I touched on several of the most important points in my post, however anyone wishing to read themselves, please check out September 23rd to the 25th.

[SleepyPanda]

I am not reluctant, the case I prepared has plenty of merit on it's own.

If you think your case has plenty of merit, so be it. We're not talking about your case, we're talking about charter's. You refused to quote or summarize their case at least three times. Then you tried to barter for it, telling me to do this and do that and then you'll post it. If you weren't being reluctant, you would've posted it the first time I asked.

What is the first huge quote suppose to be? Armlx is pointing out charter's scummy behavior and then charter follows it up with his broken record response. How about you say what points they are trying to bring up in each one because I have no idea what I'm suppose to be looking at.

Oh, look at what I found, armlx wasn't on icemans wagon, and was on Kloud's and HP's. Now he's on another townie's as well! Are the rest of you guys going to let him get away with lynching townies at will? Seriously?

This has already been beaten to death. All the reading you said you've done, you should've seen this discussed many times. Do you actually see that charter was on kloud's wagon? He also said he was willing to vote HP just because everyone else was. However, at the end of the day, he chose to put his vote on someone who had no other votes, making it completely useless. RR was on both townie wagons as well. This must mean both of you are scum.

And again, I have no idea why you're just quoting the block of text from Cephrir. How is him answering my questions a case against me? Unless you're referring to this one specific line here?

This post strikes me as an attempt to look town while lynching a townie but I will answer nonetheless.

Do you realize how many people in this game won't contribute unless asked to? I hate to break it to you, but this is not a case. Even if he's scum, he can offer valuable clues as to who his scum partners are. If this is what you think is noteworthy, might I remind you of what you just tried to do? You tried to leech information about sekinj/neko from me while still advocating my lynch. Sounds like the above.

[WaltWishbone]

I am not reluctant, the case I prepared has plenty of merit on it's own.

If you think your case has plenty of merit, so be it. We're not talking about your case, we're talking about charter's. You refused to quote or summarize their case at least three times. Then you tried to barter for it, telling me to do this and do that and then you'll post it. If you weren't being reluctant, you would've posted it the first time I asked.

What is the first huge quote suppose to be? Armlx is pointing out charter's scummy behavior and then charter follows it up with his broken record response. How about you say what points they are trying to bring up in each one because I have no idea what I'm suppose to be looking at.

There is a difference between being reluctant, which indicates by definition that I had an ajenda as opposed to being difficult which indicates by definition I am acting with contempt.

As I stated in my prior post, the entire echanges is between September 23rd and 25th, and you can read for yourself and conclude what you wish from further reading.

Oh, look at what I found, armlx wasn't on icemans wagon, and was on Kloud's and HP's. Now he's on another townie's as well! Are the rest of you guys going to let him get away with lynching townies at will? Seriously?

This has already been beaten to death. All the reading you said you've done, you should've seen this discussed many times. Do you actually see that charter was on kloud's wagon? He also said he was willing to vote HP just because everyone else was. However, at the end of the day, he chose to put his vote on someone who had no other votes, making it completely useless. RR was on both townie wagons as well. This must mean both of you are scum.

You wanted me to illustatrare my reason for finidng merit in Charter/Cephrirs case. This is one point I find merit in, I think it's a good point and you do not agree. I don't agree with your logic here and it really takes away from a valid point.

And again, I have no idea why you're just quoting the block of text from Cephrir. How is him answering my questions a case against me? Unless you're referring to this one specific line here?

Yes, that is indeed the point I find valid. It does come across as an attempt to look townie whilst lynching a townie.

This post strikes me as an attempt to look town while lynching a townie but I will answer nonetheless.

Do you realize how many people in this game won't contribute unless asked to? I hate to break it to you, but this is not a case. Even if he's scum, he can offer valuable clues as to who his scum partners are. If this is what you think is noteworthy, might I remind you of what you just tried to do? You tried to leech information about sekinj/neko from me while still advocating my lynch. Sounds like the above.

Again, you asked for points and these are examples. I don't expect you to suddenly exclaim, "I am scum, lynch me." You asked for an explanation of the merits and the preceeding are a few examples. As I stated, reading the exchange from a different perspective adds credibility to his claims. The exchange between the 23rd and 25th is far more thought provoking then it is tangible evidence and the merits of the case stand on their own.

Of course, I constantly evaluate and re-evaluate the discussions in this game, however at this point I just don't see anything in your defense that warrants switching my vote. I think their are certain aspects of my case that you have explained quite well, however there are far too many that do not seem truthfull. Overall, I would say the worst thing or rather revealing tell in my opinion is in the way that you have defended yourself by trying to confuse the issues with answers that are questions. It comes across as smoke and mirrors.

I will absolutely consider what everyone else contributes to the discussion, however at this point my vote stands.