Newbie 767 - Game Over!

[Korlash]

Are you saying that if wolf was at L-1 he shouldn't claim?

Not if no one has actually made a valid attack on him. There is no point in claiming is no one has even accused you of being scum.

However, he is not at L-1 so this question is nothing more then a hypothetical. In the event he actually gets to L-1 I reserve the right to change my answer.

[Claus]

Vote Count

In a few moments, we are going to start the in-flight entertainment system.



Wolf 3 - Muzzz, Delathi, Ethan
Delathi 1 - Wolf
Korlash 1 - Korlash
Ethan 1 - Platypus_Dude
Platypus_Dude 1 - Phelan

Not Voting: Archaist, Porkens

[Porkens]

vote: Wolf

Claim, please.

[Korlash]

Unvote:, Vote: Porkens

Asking a player to claim on page 2 is one thing, asking them to claim even though no one has even offered a single valid attack is one thing as well, but an IC player putting a person at L-1 without backing his vote or even commenting on anything in the entire thread is... well... Another also.

So that's three reasons I think... or one... at least one.

Anyways Wolf has no reason to claim and you have no basis for asking him.

[Porkens]

Unvote:, Vote: Porkens

Asking a player to claim on page 2 is one thing, asking them to claim even though no one has even offered a single valid attack is one thing as well, but an IC player putting a person at L-1 without backing his vote or even commenting on anything in the entire thread is... well... Another also.

So that's three reasons I think... or one... at least one.

Anyways Wolf has no reason to claim and you have no basis for asking him.

1. This is page 3.
2. There's nothing to attack at this point, why are you surprised that there haven't been any

valid

ones?
3. My status as an IC has nothing to do with how I choose to vote. I'm here to answer questions and play a supportive role in the development of new players.
4. I like to come out swinging.
5. He's at L-1, that's

the best

reason to ask him to claim.
6. You're playing both sides of the field with your previous post; "I reserve the right to change my answer."
7. Self-Voting is never pro-town, even in RVS. Why did you do it?

[Korlash]

1) Still the same point.
2) Then there is no reason anyone should be forced to claim
3) Your status as an IC means you are held accountable for any stupid move I would otherwise forgive someone. Meaning you can't pull stuff like this and get away with it.
4) I like to win. i won't let rash actions get in the way of that.
5) He's at L-1 for no reason other then you want him to claim. Thusly by using that as the reason he should claim you have created a paradox... scum you broke the internet.
6) No, the question is situational. My answer in that post will not be the same in every situation. If for instance you had laid out a case when you put him at L-1 and showed evidence he was scummy, I would actually contemplate him claiming. However, ont he opposite scale by putting him at L-1 without a case, let alone an attack, there is no evidence he is scum in any way and thus no evidence he should claim. The question was loaded in a way and so I reserved my right to change my answer depending on the situation that came up. There is no "field", I am not playing either side much like you with this game.
7) ... And putting a guy at L-1 on page three for no reason is protown? No player does pro-town actions all the time it's impossible. If you want to argue what I did was anti-town go ahead, you will lose. But as far as it being pro-town, what random vote is?

This game isn't going to last very long I think...

[Porkens]

1) Nope, one statement is accurate, the other (the one you said) is not.
2) If someone is at L-1, they should claim. Do you really say otherwise?
3) Accountable to you, let's be clear on that?
4) I don't think my action to put Wolf at L-1 is rash, at all.
5) I want him to claim because he's at L-1 regardless of who put him there. I want him to claim before he's hammered. Don't you?
6) Situational...so if someone else had put him at L-1, you might have hammered? Being at L-1 does not make him scummy, given, but the situation is what it is, and it dictates that he claim.
6b) HOW, exactly, am I playing both sides?
7) I have a reason to put him at L-1.
7b) Explain to me how self voting is protown.

[Wolf]

Sorry guys, the timezone in my area is GMT +8, so I'll be posting at weird times compared to you guys.

vote: Wolf

Claim, please.

I'm not convinced by your reason to put me (or anyone) at L -1 at this stage of the game. Its obvious what you're trying to do! Of couse the accused is gonna claim town in this situation, regardless of his allegiance. That being said, I'm town through and through!

Unvote

,

vote porkens

.

[Korlash]

1) Statement and point are two different things... reading is tech.
2) Yes. There is obviously something wrong with his wagon if he reached L-1 without a single attack against him. So in this case I cannot get behind his claim.
3) Sure why not.
4) Do you have any reasoning behind it? no? Then it's rash.
5) He won't be hammered becuase there is no reason to hammer him. Forcing him to claim is just a stupid point. Find reason to suspect him before asking him to claim.
6) ... I didn't say that at all... That wasn't even the question... Are you intentionally distorting facts or are you just this dense?
6b) No, you're not playing the game... That was a little confusing wasn't it.. my bad... Grammer is not my best subject.
7) No you don't. I checked the thread, there isn't one. If it's not in the thread, you don't have it.
7b) ... I never said it was... because it normally isn't... is this another misrepresentation from you because I have no other choice but to lable you as scum if you are doing this on purpose every time...

Also this trial by numbers thing is going to get old real fast...

[Porkens]

Sorry guys, the timezone in my area is GMT +8, so I'll be posting at weird times compared to you guys.

vote: Wolf

Claim, please.

I'm not convinced by your reason to put me (or anyone) at L -1 at this stage of the game. Its obvious what you're trying to do! Of couse the accused is gonna claim town in this situation, regardless of his allegiance. That being said, I'm town through and through!

Unvote

,

vote porkens

.

You don't even know what my reason is. How could you be convinced of it? How could I convince you?

What am I trying to do? State it.

Full claim, please.

[Korlash]

I think that last post says it all..

You don't even know what my reason is.
...

Full claim, please.

... *sigh* I would normally say die scum die but I don't want you to die nor do I have any strong feelings of you being scum so I'm left with...

[Porkens]

1) Statement and point are two different things... reading is tech.
2) Yes. There is obviously something wrong with his wagon if he reached L-1 without a single attack against him. So in this case I cannot get behind his claim.
3) Sure why not.
4) Do you have any reasoning behind it? no? Then it's rash.
5) He won't be hammered becuase there is no reason to hammer him. Forcing him to claim is just a stupid point. Find reason to suspect him before asking him to claim.
6) ... I didn't say that at all... That wasn't even the question... Are you intentionally distorting facts or are you just this dense?
6b) No, you're not playing the game... That was a little confusing wasn't it.. my bad... Grammer is not my best subject.
7) No you don't. I checked the thread, there isn't one. If it's not in the thread, you don't have it.
7b) ... I never said it was... because it normally isn't... is this another misrepresentation from you because I have no other choice but to lable you as scum if you are doing this on purpose every time...

Also this trial by numbers thing is going to get old real fast...

1) Explain this semantic difference please.
2) You don't count votes as attacks?
4) I have reasoning.
5) Whether he is hammered oor not is...how did you put it..."hypothetical." But, if he is, information will be gained. Do you disagree? As to your question on this number: no, I don't think so.
6) I was asking a question, for you to answer.
6b) I disagree. I think I am, in fact, playing the game.
7) Not all strategy is reactionary.
8) ummm...

If you want to argue what I did was anti-town go ahead, you will lose.

I'm asking you to go ahead and tell us why your self-vote wasn't anti-town (or, as I said pro-town).

[Porkens]

... *sigh* I would normally say die scum die but I don't want you to die nor do I have any strong feelings of you being scum so I'm left with...

Then why are you voting for me?

[Wolf]

You don't even know what my reason is.

Of couse I know what you're reason is. You said so yourself!

5. He's at L-1, that's the best reason to ask him to claim.

Thats your reason, which I said is not convincing for reasons I already stated.

[Porkens]

You don't even know what my reason is.

Of couse I know what you're reason is. You said so yourself!

5. He's at L-1, that's the best reason to ask him to claim.

Thats your reason, which I said is not convincing for reasons I already stated.

Nope, you were not talking about my reason for asking you to claim. See below (bolded):

Sorry guys, the timezone in my area is GMT +8, so I'll be posting at weird times compared to you guys.

vote: Wolf

Claim, please.

I'm not convinced by your reason to put me (or anyone) at L -1 at this stage of the game.

Its obvious what you're trying to do! Of couse the accused is gonna claim town in this situation, regardless of his allegiance. That being said, I'm town through and through!

Unvote

,

vote porkens

.

Please answer my other questions.

[Wolf]

Oh, and how do I use the quote selected function? When I clicked the button it said to select a text anywhere and try again, but how do I select a text? By highlighting?

[Porkens]

Oh, and how do I use the quote selected function? When I clicked the button it said to select a text anywhere and try again, but how do I select a text? By highlighting?

Yessir. However, I recommend using the quote button on the individual post you want to quote and then copy/pasting as necessary. This automatically put's in all the quote tags and any quotes-within-quotes stay intact!

[Wolf]

Yessir. However, I recommend using the quote button on the individual post you want to quote and then copy/pasting as necessary. This automatically put's in all the quote tags and any€ quotes-within-quotes stay intact!

Thanks.

Nope, you were not talking about my reason for asking you to claim. See below (bolded):

Do you mean that I got the wrong reason for why you're asking me to claim? If so, whats the correct reason then?

Please answer my other questions.

Whats your other question?

[Wolf]

If your other question is what you're trying to do, its because you want to put me in danger-zone so any misunderstanding will result in a poor town getting lynched, since I'm only 1 vote away.

[Porkens]

Do you mean that I got the wrong reason for why you're asking me to claim? If so, whats the correct reason then?

I mean that in post 57 you said "I'm not

convinced by your reason to put me (or anyone) at L -1

at this stage of the game."

But in post 63 you refer to my reason for

asking you to claim

as what is "obvious."

Meanwhile, you still haven't explained what you think my reasoning (for putting you at L-1) is.

Thanks.

No worries

[Porkens]

Now the big question is do I edit it out, does that make me look suspicious? If I don't edit it out, does that make me look suspicious?

Mind games already? I smell a scum!

IGMEOY

...

Scummy opening line.

Unvote, vote porkens.

OMGUS.

any misunderstanding will result in a poor town getting lynched, since I'm only 1 vote away.

Appeal to emotion.

[Wolf]

Why are you throwing around bogus and obviously false attacks?

My attacks might be bogus, but I backed them up with reasons!

ou said you were new to mafia. And that you advocate LAL. So either you're advocating something without experience, or...

Indeed, I'm new to mafia, so yes, I'm advocating LAL with no experience whatsoever. What do you mean by or...?

[Wolf]

I mean that in post 57 you said "I'm not convinced by your reason to put me (or anyone) at L -1 at this stage of the game."

But in post 63 you refer to my reason for asking you to claim as what is "obvious."

Meanwhile, you still haven't explained what you think my reasoning (for putting you at L-1) is.

I gave my reasons here,

I'm not convinced by your reason to put me (or anyone) at L -1 at this stage of the game. Its obvious what you're trying to do! Of couse the accused is gonna claim town in this situation, regardless of his allegiance. That being said, I'm town through and through! Unvote, vote porkens.

If your other question is what you're trying to do, its because you want to put me in danger-zone so any misunderstanding will result in a poor town getting lynched, since I'm only 1 vote away.

So, I feel I have fair reasons to suspect you at the moment.

Scummy opening line.

How is that scummy?

OMGUS.

That was not a OMGUS vote, I voted for you because of the same reasons on top.

[Wolf]

If your other question is what you're trying to do, its because you want to put me in danger-zone so any misunderstanding will result in a poor town getting lynched, since I'm only 1 vote away.

This is what I think is your true reason for putting me at L -1. Sorry for not being clear earlier.

[delathi]

Wow.

Things go fast here and it takes a bit to catch up and alt+tab over to the wiki to look up every new acronym I see.

I'm assuming based on content that L-1 and L-2 are lynch level required minus # votes.

I don't know how much I'm learning so far on who's scum or not, but it's damn interesting to learn how the game is played. And what experienced people expect is how it is supposed to be played. So, for now, since it doesn't look likely that Wolf is actually gonna get strung up (and I have no reason to think he should) I'm not going to unvote yet and continue to watch the logic argument at the L-1 level.

And, I'm going to bed.