Mini 707: Cops and Robbers Mafia (Game Over)

[Green Crayons]

Heh.

Fuzz is my number two to go after tomorrow solely based off of this past page or two. Plenty of stuff to reread once the night begins.

[Simpor]

wohoo, one to go!

[Empking]

Your 354 was referring to GC's 350? I guess it was just so arrogant and ignorant that I couldn't tell.

A post can't be arrogant, you were referring to my "arrogance".

Also Fuzzyman, did you even wait six hours before doing your " Emp: I still don't remember ad homming anybody."

Mizzy:

If the first -1L unvote made Patrick cool, then the second -1L unvote should make Ether even cooler.

Why?

[Ether]

I probably wouldn't fight a Fuzzylynch tomorrow, but I'd still prefer Tisp, I think.

I have done this a couple times in previous games, and it detrimented the town in both.

Links. I am also curious to know why you were not already aware that I was producing new cases.

[Mizzy]

Mizzy:

If the first -1L unvote made Patrick cool, then the second -1L unvote should make Ether even cooler.

Why?

Why not? He basically found Patrick "cool" for the -1L unvote, promptly put the guy back on -1L, and then when Ether unvoted, didn't extend the same consideration to

her

unvote. That seems fishy.

[Empking]

But why would it make her even cooler than Patrick?

[Mizzy]

But why would it make her even cooler than Patrick?

Because if one -1L unvote is cool, then a second should be at LEAST as cool, if not cooler. Apparently, he is just kissing Patrick's ass. Not that it's a bad ass, but still.

[Green Crayons]

Can you not actually see that she's criticizing Fuzzy's actions by using his own logic and wording to point out his inconsistencies?

Seriously?

[Empking]

Can you not actually see that she's criticizing Fuzzy's actions by using his own logic and wording to point out his inconsistencies?

Seriously?

What logic? When did Fuzzy use that logic? Please include quotes.

[Green Crayons]

Patrick is cool because he unvoted to get Simp off of L-1.

Post 421.

[Empking]

I fail to see how that logic makes Ether cool

er

.

[corporate]

id rather hang fuzzy and cry over simpor. :/

[Green Crayons]

Wow.

So, first I'm going to ask why you are arguing a semantical non-issue? Mizzy adding in "er" does not detract from her main point: that Fuzzy found Patrick favorable for doing Action Y, immediately counteracted that favorable action to make it null and void, then failed to have the same praise for Ether for repeating Action Y to nullify Fuzzy's nullification.

Furthermore, dissecting Fuzzy's logic ("If Player X does Action Y then they will be Result Z"), there is plenty of room for assumption (which Mizzy took) in believing this logic train will support the notion that repetition of Action Y might lead to a stronger sense of Result Z (an "er" adjective, if you will). But, wow. Totally beside the point.

Are you saying that Mizzy adding "er" to her point nullifies her criticism - which was basically a repetition of Ether's 420? If yes, please explain. If not, why are you harping on a minute point of logical assumption that actually has no standing on the legitimacy of her criticism?

[Empking]

With Mizzy, I was just seeing if their was something I'd missed. As can be seen by the fact that I haven't responded to Mizzy since she explained.

With you, you were accusing Fuzzy of doing something he didn't do. (having his own logic and wording point out his inconsistencies)

[Green Crayons]

With you, you were accusing Fuzzy of doing something he didn't do. (having his own logic and wording point out his inconsistencies)

Didn't read 437 where I pointed out where his own logic-train failed as both Ether and Mizzy had pointed out?

You're infuriating.

[Empking]

It makes no sense, is complete nonsense and is just you trying to cover your own hide. I read it, evaluated it, didn't let it affect my view point.

[corporate]

does everyone voting simpor really want him hammered? he is at L-1

[Green Crayons]

...What? Cover my own hide from what?

But it's good to know what you think of the criticism of the logic that when Player A claims Player B's action to be good (though immediately nullifying that action by doing something completely contradictory), but when Player C does the same action as Player B, Player A doesn't see that action to be good. Criticism of this failed logical path apparently makes "no sense" and is "complete nonsense?"

Now I can know that I can honest to goodness take your posts with a grain of salt without fear of me being inappropriately prejudiced. When you proclaim "nonsense" on a criticism that attacks a nonsensical train of logic, I know to mistrust anything else you might say.


Just do it, corporate.

[Green Crayons]

Actually, unless if I'm counting incorrectly, Simpor is -2L.

[Mizzy]

Actually, the point of my post WAS to point out the blatant inconsistency in Fuzzy's post.

[Mizzy]

Let me quick outline this so that no one can misconstrue my point against Fuzzy:

Patrick does action A.
Fuzzy responds with "that's cool."
Ether does action A.
Fuzzy doesn't respond with "that's cool."

Inconsistency!

In fact, I think he still thinks Ether is scum. Correct me if I am wrong, there, though.

[Ether]

I understand Empking's original question. I don't get why my unvote should be more or less cool than Patrick's, either. (I'd personally have said both unvotes were null, but Fuzzyman called Patrick's cool and mine a sign that I was trying to distance myself from a Simptown-wagon, which is obviously a double standard.)

(shrug)

[corporate]

oh L-2 is correct , i miss counted

[charter]

Vote Count:

Fuzzyman - 1 (q21)

Simpor - 4 (Green Crayons, Patrick, Ether, Fuzzyman)

corporate - 2 (Tisp, crywolf20084)
Ether - 2 (Empking, Simpor)

Not Voting: (2)

Mizzy
corporate

With 11 alive, it takes 6 to lynch!

[Green Crayons]

(I'd personally have said both unvotes were null, but Fuzzyman called Patrick's cool and mine a sign that I was trying to distance myself from a Simptown-wagon, which is obviously a double standard.)

This sounds pretty much like complete nonsense to me!


corporate: Were you willing to hammer Simp? Why are you backing away from putting a vote on him now - if you were willing to be vote 6, why not vote 5?