Mini 707: Cops and Robbers Mafia (Game Over)

[Empking]

GC strawmans a lot. Nobody has denied or contested that. The fact that I find this behavior scummy is not reachy

Read the couple of pages right after your replacing in.

Nobody has contested his recent Starmanning, though.

FM protects GC a lot. Again not contested. Again not reachy.

I'll protect anybody that I think is worth protecting. In this case, that person is GC.

Doesn't make it any less scummy.

GC was voting Myk despite not considering him in his top three. Not reachy.

Actually, I'm not sure that we know his entire top three, only that Mizzy and I are in it.

My mistake.

GC; Who is the other member of your top three?

[crywolf20084]

GC was voting Myk despite not considering him in his top three. Not reachy.

Actually, I'm not sure that we know his entire top three, only that Mizzy and I are in it.

...Fuzzy you realize that statement is really dumb. We know his entire top three...Emp, Mizzy, and yourself....1, 2, 3...

Now what we don't know is his entire scum list top to bottom. Which doesn't concern me at the moment.

[q21]

He has three defenses.

1. He wasn't the driving force of the Simpor lynch. This is obviously a strawman.

2. Arguing that my case against him was for the Simpor thing. Again a Strawman.

You're case against GC is based on him not helping the town. When asked you categorised this as:

We know who isn't helping. The person who's only target is the (confirmed) Pro-town Simpor.

From this statement its quite obvious where people get points 1 and 2 from - so no, I don't think they're strawmen. Also, just because Simpr is GC's only target that got lynched, doesn't mean he was GC's only ever target.

Also, lets not ignore how scummy this post is, regardless of who its aimed at.

3. I'm making .a case out of nothing. Completely unbacked up without evidence

Thanks for pointing that out, since I don't remember you ever coherently stating your reasons for suspecting GC.

The case against me is that I had someone I thought was scummy, before December the 21st.

Some other things I don't like.

Your arguing with GC has its roots in your second post (334). You go back and forth a few times trying to actually argue your point until post 345 where you claim he "strawmanned the original argument". Generally one claims they're being strawmanned as soon as it happens. It appears to me that you took the easy out once you realised that there was no way you could out argue GC.

Originally you claimed that Ether was scum trying to convince the town that she was town. I didn't see much in your posting that explains why, but your opinion changed:

I'm torn between Fuzzyman or Green Crayons. Green Crayons go to great lengths to protect Ether but I don't think Ether is scum. Fuzzyman goes to great length to protect GC and I do think he's scum. (Those were along with everything else scummy they've done.)

Vote: Fuzzyman

The abrupt, unexplained opinion change on Ether is something else I find scummy. Especially since your original opinion on Ether is where your argument with GC began, an argument which is still going.

[q21]

EBWOP: There was supposed to be a paragraph on the end of that which read:

While I'm not terribly happy with how fast the wagon on Emp formed after my vote; I feel that my vote is in the right place and I intend to leave it there for the foreseeable future.

[charter]

Vote Count:

Fuzzyman - 1 (corporate)
Green Crayons - 1 (Empking)

Empking - 4 (q21, Fuzzyman, crywolf20084, mykonian)

Not Voting: (3)

Green Crayons
Mizzy
Ether

With 9 alive, it takes 5 to lynch!

[Empking]

He has three defenses.

1. He wasn't the driving force of the Simpor lynch. This is obviously a strawman.

2. Arguing that my case against him was for the Simpor thing. Again a Strawman.

You're case against GC is based on him not helping the town. When asked you categorised this as:

We know who isn't helping. The person who's only target is the (confirmed) Pro-town Simpor.

From this statement its quite obvious where people get points 1 and 2 from - so no, I don't think they're strawmen. Also, just because Simpr is GC's only target that got lynched, doesn't mean he was GC's only ever target.

Is it? Explain to me the logic thast ges you to 1.

Also, lets not ignore how scummy this post is, regardless of who its aimed at.

3. I'm making .a case out of nothing. Completely unbacked up without evidence

Thanks for pointing that out, since I don't remember you ever coherently stating your reasons for suspecting GC.

Check my posts.

The case against me is that I had someone I thought was scummy, before December the 21st.

Some other things I don't like.

Your arguing with GC has its roots in your second post (334). You go back and forth a few times trying to actually argue your point until post 345 where you claim he "strawmanned the original argument". Generally one claims they're being strawmanned as soon as it happens. It appears to me that you took the easy out once you realised that there was no way you could out argue GC.

Do you think I'm scummy because you're in love with GC? Serriously, that's what I'm getting from this post. That or you think I'm scummy because I don't believe you should drop an argument, once somebody has done something scummy.

Originally you claimed that Ether was scum trying to convince the town that she was town. I didn't see much in your posting that explains why, but your opinion changed:

I'm torn between Fuzzyman or Green Crayons. Green Crayons go to great lengths to protect Ether but I don't think Ether is scum. Fuzzyman goes to great length to protect GC and I do think he's scum. (Those were along with everything else scummy they've done.)

Vote: Fuzzyman

The abrupt, unexplained opinion change on Ether is something else I find scummy. Especially since your original opinion on Ether is where your argument with GC began, an argument which is still going.

Unexplained. I explained it here.

Unvote

Read some of PYP, Ether isn't as blatant as she is here but I think its sort of their.

Unvote

Vote@ GC

[q21]

He has three defenses.

1. He wasn't the driving force of the Simpor lynch. This is obviously a strawman.

2. Arguing that my case against him was for the Simpor thing. Again a Strawman.

You're case against GC is based on him not helping the town. When asked you categorised this as:

We know who isn't helping. The person who's only target is the (confirmed) Pro-town Simpor.

From this statement its quite obvious where people get points 1 and 2 from - so no, I don't think they're strawmen. Also, just because Simpr is GC's only target that got lynched, doesn't mean he was GC's only ever target.

Is it? Explain to me the logic thast ges you to 1.

The only thing you offered when asked how GC was being unhelpful was his targeting Simpor. If he wasn't the driving force behind that lynch then it makes sense that you'd have gone after whoever was. Since you went after GC the obvious assumption is that you thought he was the driving force of that lynch. You have since stated otherwise, but that is where the misconception started, I think.

Also, lets not ignore how scummy this post is, regardless of who its aimed at.

3. I'm making .a case out of nothing. Completely unbacked up without evidence

Thanks for pointing that out, since I don't remember you ever coherently stating your reasons for suspecting GC.

Check my posts.

I did. Many of them are hard to follow, hence the lack of a coherent statement of your suspicions. Even if you think you have, could you do so again so that there is a succinct record of your suspicions if you are in fact town (something I personally doubt)

The case against me is that I had someone I thought was scummy, before December the 21st.

Some other things I don't like.

Your arguing with GC has its roots in your second post (334). You go back and forth a few times trying to actually argue your point until post 345 where you claim he "strawmanned the original argument". Generally one claims they're being strawmanned as soon as it happens. It appears to me that you took the easy out once you realised that there was no way you could out argue GC.

Do you think I'm scummy because you're in love with GC? Serriously, that's what I'm getting from this post. That or you think I'm scummy because I don't believe you should drop an argument, once somebody has done something scummy.

The point was that I felt you changed tact from arguing with GC to accusing him of strawmanning only when you realised you couldn't out argue him.

Originally you claimed that Ether was scum trying to convince the town that she was town. I didn't see much in your posting that explains why, but your opinion changed:

I'm torn between Fuzzyman or Green Crayons. Green Crayons go to great lengths to protect Ether but I don't think Ether is scum. Fuzzyman goes to great length to protect GC and I do think he's scum. (Those were along with everything else scummy they've done.)

Vote: Fuzzyman

The abrupt, unexplained opinion change on Ether is something else I find scummy. Especially since your original opinion on Ether is where your argument with GC began, an argument which is still going.

Unexplained. I explained it here.

Unvote

Read some of PYP, Ether isn't as blatant as she is here but I think its sort of their.

Unvote

Vote@ GC

This was very unclear to me. I thought you'd changed vote because you'd simply decided GC was scummier. The word blatant insinuates wrong doing so I didn't read this as you dismissing your suspicions of ether.

[crywolf20084]

Also, lets not ignore how scummy this post is, regardless of who its aimed at.

3. I'm making .a case out of nothing. Completely unbacked up without evidence

Thanks for pointing that out, since I don't remember you ever coherently stating your reasons for suspecting GC.

Check my posts.

I think your the one that needs to go through your posts and read them. Clearly you don't know what you wrote.

[Fuzzyman]

FM protects GC a lot. Again not contested. Again not reachy.

I'll protect anybody that I think is worth protecting. In this case, that person is GC.

Doesn't make it any less scummy.

I should be the one catching accusations for that. Not GC.

[Empking]

FM protects GC a lot. Again not contested. Again not reachy.

I'll protect anybody that I think is worth protecting. In this case, that person is GC.

Doesn't make it any less scummy.

I should be the one catching accusations for that. Not GC.

Only if you presume, your buddying up to a townie.

[crywolf20084]

That makes no sense, Emp. Please use complete sentences.

[Empking]

FM protects GC a lot. Again not contested. Again not reachy.

I'll protect anybody that I think is worth protecting. In this case, that person is GC.

Doesn't make it any less scummy.

I should be the one catching accusations for that. Not GC.

Only if you presume, you're buddying up to a townie.

[Fuzzyman]

Which I do, at the moment.

[q21]

@Emp

So the guy being buddied up to is scum, but the guy doing the buddying is less so.

... makes lots of sense [/sarcasm]

[crywolf20084]

Glad someone understood why he was trying to get at, because I wasn't.

[Fuzzyman]

Nobody ever understands Empking's play. We just do the best we can to interpret.

[Mizzy]

Okay, I am really confused and I don't see a lot of headway being made in any direction other than the direction of "Emp doesn't make sense."

I'd have voted Emp by now if his wagon didn't spring up as fast as it did. That worries me and there's a whole slew of WIFOM thoughts there that I won't go into, but suffice it to say that as much as I feel Emp is unhelpful, I think the case on him is circumstantial at best. I would want something more concrete on him/from him before I'd vote under the current quick-wagon circumstance.

[Empking]

@Emp

So the guy being buddied up to is scum, but the guy doing the buddying is less so.

... makes lots of sense [/sarcasm]

I never said anyone was less scum.

FM is less scummy due to the other scummy things GC has done.

[mykonian]

I'm sorry, mizzy, but empking doesn't seem to defend very well... What would your explanation of that be?

[Empking]

In my own words?

It's reachy. All you have done is pull this case out of your ass since the moment you replaced in.

@GC: I too would like to see where your attentions are going to go.

This is the case on me. he first time I mentioned GC was my fifth post. The second post must be untrue. I've discussed the lack of reachiness before.

[q21]

Right, I hate to do this, but I'm going to be gone (like no access at all gone) until 4 January. If that's too long then, by all means, replace me.

Otherwise, I'm quite happy to catch up again then. Either way I'll unvote, if I can stay in then I don't know what might come up in that time and if I can't them my replacement might not share my viewpoint.

unvote

[Mizzy]

I'm sorry, mizzy, but empking doesn't seem to defend very well... What would your explanation of that be?

Why are you asking me? I have no idea why he doesn't defend himself well. Why don't you ask him?

[Fuzzyman]

You said that the only thing on Emp was that he made no sense, so Mykonian noted his sub-par defense. Myko now wants confirmation that you are withholding your vote in spite of that, your opinions on his defense, or both.

I would personally prefer both.

[Fuzzyman]

Also, to our thus-far-wonderful mod, charter:

Could you prod Ether and corporate? I don't think they're V/LA.

[charter]

Also, to our thus-far-wonderful mod, charter:

Could you prod Ether and corporate? I don't think they're V/LA.

Yes, I will remind them of this game.