Open 121: Two of Four (b9) - Over! before 752

[ZazieR]

I don't think that Sens has to show any examples of players who agree with policy lynches. There are players who are not appreciated due to their playstyle. And apparently Zwets is one of them (Don't shoot the messenger as I don't agree with policy lynches. I'm just bringing the message across).
And no, I don't find that ridiculous. I can remember the way Sens posted during our first game, so I'm not surprised. Just get used to this if you're gonna play with him again.

Anyway, I'm in favor of hearing something from BSW.

[Empking]

I think he should, just because he said he could.

[hewitt]

Well hey if he's attacking me I'm going to defend myself so it's not that I can't get used to his gameplay trust me if I can get used to zwets and Empking I can get used to SensFan.

[SensFan]

Drawn Together. If I counted right, Nat gets to L-1 on page 2.

[veerus]

Vote Count X:

I'll prod BlondeSoWut again..

Kmd4390 (0):
BlondeSoWut (1): Empking
hewitt (2) SensFan, Kmd4390
Empking (0):
militant (0)
SensFan (1): hewitt
ZazieR (0):

Not voting (3): BlondeSoWut, militant, ZazieR

With 7 alive, it takes 4 votes to lynch

Deadline: March 25, 2008, 2100 CST

[hewitt]

Okay well Nat's not in this game so I don't see how he's relevant.

[SensFan]

Okay well Nat's not in this game so I don't see how he's relevant.

Are you serious? You told me it was scummy to pressure someone based on policy. I showed a perfect example of it happening.

[hewitt]

Directly quote where I told you it was scummy to pressure someone based on policy.

[SensFan]

Coming in with bias on certain players when the game is random and every player has an equal chance of being scum is not fair to the rest of the town. Then forming a bandwagon on them for crappy reasons is unacceptable and totally scummy, it is not a town thing to do.

And that's just one example.

[hewitt]

The key word that you seem to forgetting here is bias. If we had zwets and Empking in the same game you can lynch them both based on "policy lynching". But if their both town, that's just plain stupid, hence, I think your actions were stupid and scummy.

[SensFan]

The key word that you seem to forgetting here is bias. If we had zwets and Empking in the same game you can lynch them both based on "policy lynching". But if their both town, that's just plain stupid, hence, I think your actions were stupid and scummy.

You're contradicting yourself. Pick the stance you are taking:

*Pressuring zwet for policy reasons is not scummy
**Then shut up about it

*Pressuring zwet for policy reasons is scummy
**Then my example of Nat getting to L-1 on page 3 in a Mini is completely relevant.

[Kmd4390]

Ok, I didn't miss much with Marathon Day going on.

Well, I'm back. XD

Still ok with votes on Hewitt and BSW. Where the hell IS BSW by the way?

[Empking]

I think SF's action was less scummy than BSW's.

[militant]

That does nooooooooot at all mean people should do it just because others do it. Basically you're saying because other people do it you should do it too and that makes it acceptable. And zwets may have been spewing random bullshit but you were just spewing regular bullshit.

Let's face it. If going into the game, I knew he would refuse to play, I would absolutely be ready to wagon him to a claim in the first page. He's absolutely useless even as Town, and still has equal chances to be Scum. Seems like a pretty good Day 1 wagon to me.

Why did you join the game if you knew he would be so useless? I did not know but if I did I would have though twice about it.

I do find this rather peculiar; that you would come into a game ready to lynch someone if they didn't meet your expectations that you knew they were likely not to meet before the roles were even given out.

[veerus]

Vote Count XI:

BSW will need to be replaced as she didn't pick up the latest prod.
I'll prod ZazieR tomorrow if she doesn't post.
Kmd4390's V/LA is noted.

Kmd4390 (0):
BlondeSoWut (1): Empking
hewitt (2) SensFan, Kmd4390
Empking (0):
militant (0)
SensFan (1): hewitt
ZazieR (0):

Not voting (3): BlondeSoWut, militant, ZazieR

With 7 alive, it takes 4 votes to lynch

Deadline: March 25, 2008, 2100 CST

[ZazieR]

Militant, what's your opinion of what you discussed in post 263?

Anyway, I'm hoping to hear something soon from the replacement. BSW hasn't said much. I don't even know which action from BSW Empking is talking about in post 262.

[Empking]

Militant, what's your opinion of what you discussed in post 263?

Anyway, I'm hoping to hear something soon from the replacement. BSW hasn't said much. I don't even know which action from BSW Empking is talking about in post 262.

the answering the prods but not helping discussion.

[militant]

Militant, what's your opinion of what you discussed in post 263?

I relly don't mean to offend you here Sensfan but a little bit silly. To be sure you are going to lynch someone if they behave in a manner you think they will behave in before even they know there alignment is silly in my opinion. I don't think it is productive towards town either. Although I can also see what Sensfan is going on about; if a person does not contribute and is posting bullshit, what are you going to do?

[SensFan]

That does nooooooooot at all mean people should do it just because others do it. Basically you're saying because other people do it you should do it too and that makes it acceptable. And zwets may have been spewing random bullshit but you were just spewing regular bullshit.

Let's face it. If going into the game, I knew he would refuse to play, I would absolutely be ready to wagon him to a claim in the first page. He's absolutely useless even as Town, and still has equal chances to be Scum. Seems like a pretty good Day 1 wagon to me.

Why did you join the game if you knew he would be so useless? I did not know but if I did I would have though twice about it.

I do find this rather peculiar; that you would come into a game ready to lynch someone if they didn't meet your expectations that you knew they were likely not to meet before the roles were even given out.

I didn't know he was in this game. I most certainly would have thought long and hard about it had I known, and the only reason I even would have considered staying is because a couple of people that I've never really been able to play with asked me if I would join with them.

[SensFan]

Militant, what's your opinion of what you discussed in post 263?

I relly don't mean to offend you here Sensfan but a little bit silly. To be sure you are going to lynch someone if they behave in a manner you think they will behave in before even they know there alignment is silly in my opinion. I don't think it is productive towards town either. Although I can also see what Sensfan is going on about; if a person does not contribute and is posting bullshit, what are you going to do?

As I outlined above, I didn't know. And you'll notice that, as I've said several times, I gave him more than enough chances to start playing.

[hewitt]

To answer your question SensFan it would be option that putting zwets at L-1 is scummy but here's the thing...Nat isn't relevant because Nat isn't zwets. They are completely different players. You can't possibly say two people play this game the same and the unpredicatability on everybody's part is high.

[SensFan]

To answer your question SensFan it would be option that putting zwets at L-1 is scummy but here's the thing...Nat isn't relevant because Nat isn't zwets. They are completely different players. You can't possibly say two people play this game the same and the unpredicatability on everybody's part is high.

Its perfectly relevant, and there's no fucking way you even believe the shit you are saying at this point.

[hewitt]

To answer your question SensFan it would be option that putting zwets at L-1 is scummy but here's the thing...Nat isn't relevant because Nat isn't zwets. They are completely different players. You can't possibly say two people play this game the same and the unpredicatability on everybody's part is high.

Its perfectly relevant, and there's no fucking way you even believe the shit you are saying at this point.

It's not relevant at all, zwets is a completely different player than Nat, that much is quite clear right from the get-go. And did that really change Nat's behavior? Didn't really seem like it.

[Kmd4390]

The point on Nat is that he has an anti-town meta like Zwet does. It's perfectly reasonable to compare the two.

[hewitt]

The point on Nat is that he has an anti-town meta like Zwet does. It's perfectly reasonable to compare the two.

Did it end with the same result though?