I don't expect you to not analyze pitstop's actions. Go for it. Just don't expect me to be able to answer for them, I can answer for mine only.Zach wrote:Lester, you are a replacement in this game.
Fair or not, what your predecessor has done in the game is relevant to you. You and Pitstop had the same role, thus if his actions indicate he was scum, by extension they indicate you are scum as well.
Don't expect me to drop this subject just because the actions were not done directly by you. I'm not interested in letting scum slip away just because they got replaced.
DDD wrote: The cold arguments are contained in post 330. Zach addressed them, I countered by arguing against his rebuttals. My tone may seem harsh, but don't let that distract you from the facts I'm presenting.
the thing is... I don't think the Cheerleading point is worth anything. The buddying is always a touchy and WIFOM-ish subject and I don't think his vote against Amished was manufactured because I suspected strongly of him at first. The fact that he is willing to lynch anti-town townies is something I don't like but that only regards playstyle.DDD wrote: Going back to his cheerleading for an Amished lynch which was highly anti-town then and even more blatent in retrospect. The reasons for the attempted Amished lynch were basically manufactured reasons instead of legitimate one. He buddies with a townie or defends a scum buddy in Steph. And he's quite content to ride a lynch of a stupidly anti-town townie at two different points.
Alexhans wrote: You also voted right after DDD had and left Wall-e for the hammer.
Apparently, you're right. But my point was that you left him at L-1 and voted right after DDD had issued the L-2.Jazz wrote: Um, what? I put Wall-E at L-1 on March 30 because I believed him to be scum. He was subsequently unvoted by Panz on March 31, voted by Steph on April 1 (putting him at L-1), unvoted by Gateway and re-voted by Gateway on April 1 (putting him at L-1), and then Panz hammered him on April 2. So, I'm not sure that I understand your point here. Please explain.
Sorry if I'm being thick but I STILL can't see where I'm supposed to read the answers you gave to my questions. Can you quote them for me or something? Also... suddenly you have a reason for something I allegedly did after you stated I was scummy...How come you didn't say it before...? Or are you just manufacturing cases about anyone that attacks you?Panzer wrote: @Alexhans, Twice in post 346 you ignore my answer. Why should I give you answers if you're just going to ignore them? How did I rapidly switch votes, It was quite a few posts in between My vote switch. Ignoring answers to your questions and giving misleading information is pretty scummy. That's why you're on the top of my list right next to Lester.
*sigh*, I don't agree that self-hammering was good for the game but lets close that subject. I didn't say that because of that incident you were scum. I just wanted to make you concious that we deserved better and not that agressivenes and orders you seem to give everyone.Panzer wrote: Yes, only scum would try to pin me as scum or try to intentional deface my opinions by bringing up something I did in a newbie game for A) the good of the game and B) out of frustration because everyone wanted to sit around have their feeling shurt instead of catching scum.
So you're sure who is scum??? No town is ever sure until someone flips his alignment when dead.Panzer wrote: And I want scum to be less obvious so it actually takes work to catch.
What do you mean by anti-town? That I'm scum or that I'm a anti-town townie? You really think I'm not doing anything positive for the town? So you're trying to threaten me in some kind of way with a vote if I don't behave like you want me to...? Are you gonna give better arguments than in Steph's or Lester's case?Panzer wrote: I'd be willing to bet that Alexhans is anti-town, and the more I bring him up the better a vote on him seems. I'll see what he has to say but if his next post is inadequate I will be voting him.
At least tell us what do you think about his case on Steph.Lester wrote: I don't expect you to not analyze pitstop's actions. Go for it. Just don't expect me to be able to answer for them, I can answer for mine only
Well, in Post 63 he was stupidly defensive over an vote-prod for content, which I think made him try to force a case or something because he spirals out of control from there, singling in on one turn of phrase in a post. He's following the "scumhunting too hard" train of thought, which can be true if someone gets tunnel vision, but this was fairly close to RVS and I just don't understand his reasoning. Didn't seem anti-town and I don't see why he'd give off a scummy impression. So I dunno ... that's all I can really comment on Pitstop.Alexhans wrote:At least tell us what do you think about his case on Steph.
He accuses Steph of being scummy because of how he welcomed new players.Panzer wrote:Unvote: Vote:StephI'm with Amished on this one.
He hammers Wall-e without making a single statement or giving a single reason besides moving on.Panzer wrote: I don't like how Jazz tried to jump on that wagon when if she wasn't already on it Wall-E would have been lynched...but I totally agree that Steph was exetremely scummy with that welcome.
He didn't say anything else in day 1.Panzer wrote: We aren't getting much more info out of today and Wall-E seems to be the play ebcause of how scummy his early play was.unvote:Vote:Wall-e
He seems to be too lazy to read the game to find out this and is looking for a reason to accusse others.Panzer wrote:X: can you please put the votes in chronological order. So we know who piled on where.
The he votes for steph without giving any reasons and implying it is obvious.Vote:Steph obviously.
He nods Zach's response to a question asked to himself and Foses lester for scum-hunting. I'm willing to let this off my case because he argues it is part of his gameplay. We disagree but it may not be an indicative of scummyness.Panzer wrote: @Zach:*nod*
@Lester:FoS:LesterWhy are so curious with what happened at night? Why are you asking me specifically about the night actions?
Acusses everyone that asks him questions.Panzer wrote: I did. Read Zach;s post in which i responded yes. Also, you're only analysing that there was a sk kill, and not who the kills were on. So that either means you don't finad the mafia kill interesting or you already know why the mafia killed who they killed. Both would lead to you know who the mafia killed and being in the mafia.
This isn't consistent with his alleged gameplay of not looking at night actions.Panzer wrote: Also the kills are the only thing new. The alignment reveals are as well. Why no comment on why they picked Gateway and Amished?
This is the example of the persecuted. He is too eager to say that he isn't dropping scum tells.Panzer wrote: EBWOP: Also, It's not like we are at lylo so me being hasty to lynch isn't a tell.
This post is a response regarding 325 from lester but I don't find it scummy for the content but for the way in wich it quickly tries to pin another player as scum in such a matter of factly way when he had just expressed and idea.Panzer wrote: Terribly scummy idea and only scum would benefit from doing such a thing.
Why can't lester investigate? Don't we all have to be curious?Why is your vote on Steph obvious? Isn't it possible that Amished was killed to make Steph look scummy? Wouldn't it be a stupid move by Steph to kill Amished?
and I gotta recognize I thought I had asked him a question in twilight wich in truth I didn't. I just quoted his null reason posts hammering Wall-e and pretended him to answer why he had done that. I would really like to know.Panzer wrote: Also the kills are the only thing new. The alignment reveals are as well. Why no comment on why they picked Gateway and Amished?Why do you think they picked them then? Any ideas?
I don't see answers here. But a sudden attack at me. I was investigating him so he felt the need to retaliate. His reasons are weak and the self congratulation thing just sucks.panzer wrote: OK Unvote:Vote:Lester and FoS:Everyone else who is speculating about night Night speculation IS ANTITOWN. It's given mafia info which gives them room to plan their next attack and depending on who says what they could very clearly pick a good nightkill. Who killed who DOESN"T matter cause unless the other killing party claims their kills we'll never know who the kills were.
@Ash, this game is about criticizing and judging other people. If you don't like it and you would rather just speculate please switch your hobby to meteorology.
Anyway, Lester is definently by far the scummiest and Alexhans is not far behind. This is due to so openly wanting to give the scum information about what the town thinks about their night actions which is terribly scummy and the only motivation I can see behind that is self-congratulations
Apparently I'm Ignoring answers to my questions... I don't think so. And giving misleading information??? How? Notice how the scum list of panzer consists on the people that have questioned him first.Panzer wrote: @Alexhans, Twice in post 346 you ignore my answer. Why should I give you answers if you're just going to ignore them? How did I rapidly switch votes, It was quite a few posts in between My vote switch. Ignoring answers to your questions and giving misleading information is pretty scummy. That's why you're on the top of my list right next to Lester.
another certain case from Panzer, he is so sure. This time on me.Panzer wrote: Yes, only scum would try to pin me as scum or try to intentional deface my opinions by bringing up something I did in a newbie game for A) the good of the game and B) out of frustration because everyone wanted to sit around have their feeling shurt instead of catching scum.
He actually gloats here. He knows who is scum... and tries to lay the terrain for a future vote.Panzer wrote: And I want scum to be less obvious so it actually takes work to catch. I'd be willing to bet that Alexhans is anti-town, and the more I bring him up the better a vote on him seems. I'll see what he has to say but if his next post is inadequate I will be voting him.
This appears to be purposely confusing.Panzer wrote: I'm talking about your post where you are pointing things out against me obviously. Stop being purposely dense. You said what I said about Lester was a stretch. That isn't true. Also you said scum push the no mod guessing games view. Not only is that not true, it isn't a tell. Many scum like to scumhunt to appear town. Does that make scumhunting anti-town?
You vote for Steph (obv), then after a quick exchange with lester you Fos and Vote him, then you say you're considering my vote because apparently im really anti-town. I don't see a pretty clear case against me... I see smoke.Panzer wrote: I don't see how I'm wish-washy. It's quite obvious where my opinion comes. And I haven't "attacked" anyone I've defended myself against ryan steph and jazz. Also I've made a pretty clear case as to why I think you're scum. I was talking about your post 346. You ignore my reasoning that I gave PRIOR to your questions.
Because if you were town you would try to make things clear.Panzer wrote: Why should I put in extra work because you are too dense to read YOUR OWN POST and get what I'm talkign about.
I fail to see it as I've already stated here.Panzer wrote: 2nd and third quote..
This portion of 329 gives me a really bad feeling about you.alexhans wrote:LesterGroans wrote:So apparently there's a Serial Killer?or maybe there is a vig... And he chose to shoot. Why the Amished kill? He had been in the spotlight with his scum-hunt too much and persecution of Steph.... 2 mafia night kills is not likely at all.
Don't like this comment either. I got the vibe you were going to vote before you even analyzed things...alexhans wrote:I think I'm gonna please Jazzmin here...
This is truealexhans wrote: He hammers Wall-e without making a single statement or giving a single reason besides moving on.Panzer wrote: We aren't getting much more info out of today and Wall-E seems to be the play ebcause of how scummy his early play was.unvote:Vote:Wall-e
Except that Lester did specifically ask him what he thought about night actions.alexhans wrote:ThenHe nods Zach's response to a question asked to himself and Foses lester for scum-hunting. I'm willing to let this off my case because he argues it is part of his gameplay. We disagree but it may not be an indicative of scummyness.Panzer wrote: @Zach:*nod*
@Lester:FoS:LesterWhy are so curious with what happened at night? Why are you asking me specifically about the night actions?
However, note how he says "Why are you askingmespecifically"... That may be viewed as a freudian slip from the guilty.
Panzer wrote: EBWOP: Also, It's not like we are at lylo so me being hasty to lynch isn't a tell.
Yeah, I didn't care too much for that post.alexhans wrote:This is the example of the persecuted. He is too eager to say that he isn't dropping scum tells.
I'm not a big fan of the case. I see a few decent points, but I fail to see how Panzer is "obvscum."alexhans wrote:So...
@everyone: What do you think about my case on Panzer... Do you think is good? Do you think it's weak? Any comments on a given point?
No... I don't seem to indicate that. I'm just giving out the posible options. Don't manufacture a case against me.Zachrulez wrote:This portion of 329 gives me a really bad feeling about you.alexhans wrote:LesterGroans wrote:So apparently there's a Serial Killer?or maybe there is a vig... And he chose to shoot. Why the Amished kill? He had been in the spotlight with his scum-hunt too much and persecution of Steph.... 2 mafia night kills is not likely at all.
You seem to indicate here that you know Amished wasn't the mafia kill.
I did this comment purposely for that reason. To see who would jump on me for nothing. Jazzmin said Panzer need more votes and I was about to post my vote on Panzer so I added that null comment to look for people who would try to make it look like a scum tell. Read my post. I definetly analized things.Zachrulez wrote:Don't like this comment either. I got the vibe you were going to vote before you even analyzed things...alexhans wrote:I think I'm gonna please Jazzmin here...
So? What's the problem with that? I think Panzer's attitude is to be scared guilty.Zachrulez wrote:Except that Lester did specifically ask him what he thought about night actions.alexhans wrote:ThenHe nods Zach's response to a question asked to himself and Foses lester for scum-hunting. I'm willing to let this off my case because he argues it is part of his gameplay. We disagree but it may not be an indicative of scummyness.Panzer wrote: @Zach:*nod*
@Lester:FoS:LesterWhy are so curious with what happened at night? Why are you asking me specifically about the night actions?
However, note how he says "Why are you askingmespecifically"... That may be viewed as a freudian slip from the guilty.
When did I say he was obv scum? I think he is very likely scum, therefore my vote.Zachrulez wrote: I'm not a big fan of the case. I see a few decent points, but I fail to see how Panzer is "obvscum."
Giving out the possible options still doesn't explain why you asked about the Amished kill in the same breath as expressing the vig possibility as if Amished was the vig kill.alexhans wrote:No... I don't seem to indicate that. I'm just giving out the posible options. Don't manufacture a case against me.Zachrulez wrote:This portion of 329 gives me a really bad feeling about you.alexhans wrote:LesterGroans wrote:So apparently there's a Serial Killer?or maybe there is a vig... And he chose to shoot. Why the Amished kill? He had been in the spotlight with his scum-hunt too much and persecution of Steph.... 2 mafia night kills is not likely at all.
You seem to indicate here that you know Amished wasn't the mafia kill.
alexhans wrote:I did this comment purposely for that reason. To see who would jump on me for nothing. Jazzmin said Panzer need more votes and I was about to post my vote on Panzer so I added that null comment to look for people who would try to make it look like a scum tell. Read my post. I definetly analized things.Zachrulez wrote:Don't like this comment either. I got the vibe you were going to vote before you even analyzed things...alexhans wrote:I think I'm gonna please Jazzmin here...
The problem is that the action isn't as scummy as you're trying to say it is.alexhans wrote:So? What's the problem with that? I think Panzer's attitude is to be scared guilty.Zachrulez wrote:Except that Lester did specifically ask him what he thought about night actions.alexhans wrote:ThenHe nods Zach's response to a question asked to himself and Foses lester for scum-hunting. I'm willing to let this off my case because he argues it is part of his gameplay. We disagree but it may not be an indicative of scummyness.Panzer wrote: @Zach:*nod*
@Lester:FoS:LesterWhy are so curious with what happened at night? Why are you asking me specifically about the night actions?
However, note how he says "Why are you askingmespecifically"... That may be viewed as a freudian slip from the guilty.
Ok, Jazz says he's obvscum, you say he's likely scum. This is semantics.alexhans wrote:When did I say he was obv scum? I think he is very likely scum, therefore my vote.Zachrulez wrote: I'm not a big fan of the case. I see a few decent points, but I fail to see how Panzer is "obvscum."
Wow... So you are actually more suspicious of me than Panzer for my Jazz comment? lol. Does anyone else think that my comment is scummy?
I never said Amished was the vig kill. I only said that he isn't necessarily the mafia kill as Panzer seemed to imply with his vote on Steph and its obviousness.Zach wrote: Giving out the possible options still doesn't explain why you asked about the Amished kill in the same breath as expressing the vig possibility as if Amished was the vig kill.
regarding the comment: I wrote it as a little, unnecesary thing. So it is nothing important. At first I thought I would better remove it because someone might try to make it look like something else but then I decided to leave it for that same exact reason.Zach wrote: You say it's nothing, yet somehow know that people would jump on the comment. If it really WAS nothing, then there'd be no reason for this bad "trap."
No... There's a huge difference between obv and likely. I'm town. I don't know exactly if someone is scum but I can be pretty sure that my guess is correct.Zach wrote: Ok, Jazz says he's obvscum, you say he's likely scum. This is semantics.
Also, I bolded your final paragraph, which summed up my suspicions, yet ignored the most important reason why I had a bad feeling about you.
