Newbie 767 - Game Over!

[Korlash]

I just realised... I hope I have an isle seat... Perferably near the back so I can bolt myself in the Lavatory should the captain switch the "buckle seatbelt" sign to "kiss your ass goodbye"...

[Wolf]

there seems to be an attack on delathi which I haven't read the reasonings behind them yet, if I agree with them delathi could be my #1 suspect instead.

You haven't read the reasons behind the attack, but you're already saying he could be your new #1 suspect?

Sorry for not making myself clear enough. I meant that

when

I read the reasons,

if

I agree with them and find delathi

even

more scummy,

then

he will be my #1 suspect.

[muzzz]

See any inconsistency there? People shouldn't be able to get away with not explaining things, yet you stop pushing them when they don't respond, effectively letting them get away with not explaining things? Pure hypocrisy.

Vote: muzzz

My frelling vote is on him. I want him lynched for it. How is that letting him get away with it?

I shouldn't have to want you to reiterate your case. You have kept yoru vote on him and you just recently said you still found him MORE suspicious then the guy you have been dealing primarily with. YOU should want to reiterate your case constantly to make Porkens respond to it and thus give you either more evidence or at least ease your suspicions.

I don't believe in constantly repeating a case that doesn't change. Convincing others by repeating something over and over is a logical fallacy. http://mafiascum.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl/Ar ... Repetition.

What I provided was proof your vote on Porkens isn't justified nor is it being backed up. It's a contradiction to your "everyone lets try and figure out who to lynch before deadline" statements. You want the rest of us to vote and find a target yet are to daft to push your own lynch target. this can mean a number of different things, most of them makes you scum. Quid Pro Qui, you are scum.

I want Porkens lynched. He's scum. See my previous posts for reasons. If you have any questions or comments on those, feel free to mention them. Otherwise I'll continue to assume that my case on Porkens does not need to be made again. If you want to lynch me for it you're being silly. But I can't stop you.

And I'd appreciate it if you don't use the word daft.

This is pretty bold coming from someone who unvoted before he really cleared the non-voters list.

I fail to see how that has any corrilation at all... Mine actually had a purpose yours seems like a snide little belitteling remark that will only help lead to your downfall. But whatever, think what you like. When you join a game where the mod has strict rules about voting and unvoting you'll understand why i try to follow the pattern I used every time every game.

That was an attempt at humor. I hoped the smilie would make that clear. I'll be more explicit in the future.

[muzzz]

What I provided was proof your vote on Porkens isn't justified nor is it being backed up.

Also, I did justify my vote at the very moment I made it. If you don't agree with them, fine. Be a man and attack them openly. Saying my vote "isn't justified nor ist it being backed up" without even mentioning why is just low.

[muzzz]

EBWOP: in "...agree with them", "them" refers to the reasons I provided for my vote when I made it.

[muzzz]

http://mafiascum.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl/Ar ... Repetition

The original link accidentally included a dot. The one above should work.

[Korlash]

I don't believe in constantly repeating a case that doesn't change. Convincing others by repeating something over and over is a logical fallacy.

And not convincing other by not saying anything at all is also a logical fallacy. it contradicts the fact you find him so suspicious and want him lynched when you do nothing about it.

I want Porkens lynched. He's scum. See my previous posts for reasons. If you have any questions or comments on those, feel free to mention them. Otherwise I'll continue to assume that my case on Porkens does not need to be made again. If you want to lynch me for it you're being silly. But I can't stop you.

And I'd appreciate it if you don't use the word daft.

How is it you have ignored someone you thought to be scum for a little less then two whole weeks? What, now that you found him you don't need to attack him or comment on his posts anymore? And the way things are going I will lynch you for it, this is a completely logical lynchable offense and you'rre not doing anything remotely close to explain it.

And I find daft to be a less offensive word then most of it's other meanings... But if you want replace the word "daft" with "stupid"... not sure why you would want to.

Also, I did justify my vote at the very moment I made it. If you don't agree with them, fine. Be a man and attack them openly. Saying my vote "isn't justified nor ist it being backed up" without even mentioning why is just low.

You provided a reason when you first made your vote yes, thepost in which the vote was made was justified. however your new claims of "I think Porkens is scum" and "I want him lynched" are not justified, so perhaps I was wrong to call it your vote, for that I appologize but it's still roughly the same point. you are calling Porkens scum based on a post made 8 pages ago... Where is the discussion that should have come from this? Did you respond to Porken's responces to that post? Did he even respond to it? If he didn't why have you not brought that up yet? You are ignoring him... Completely.. while still calling him scum and pushing his lynch.

And just to further push my case... After this post:

My frelling vote is on him. I want him lynched for it. How is that letting him get away with it? /quote]

Your vote is no longer justified either. You want him lynched for the reasons in your vote post yet have not allowed those reasons to promote discussion. Be it you failed to respond to Porken's responces or you let him get away with not responding I don't care which, they both look bad for you.

The original link accidentally included a dot. The one above should work.

This isn't an argument for repitition, this is an argument for consistency, and argument for action. You have done nothing to promote a Porkens lynch yet you sit here wanting him lynched and claiming him a suspect of yours. You're "case" was made like 8 pages ago, nothing has come from it. You have to bring it up again, you have to add to it, you can't let it sit there, on page 5, hoping others finally read it while they are on page 14. And I've been arguing with you for a while now, I can't believe if you honestly wanted to lynch Porkens you would have ignored him for this long. No, I don't think you really want him lynched. I think you're doing one of many othher things that would take too long to outline them all right now but I can say most if not all make you scum.

I will also say that if and when you flip scum, Porkens probably has the best chance of being your partner, but I'll save this for tomorrow because I hate anything that sets up lynches.

[Platypus_Dude]

Sorry for not making myself clear enough. I meant that when I read the reasons, if I agree with them and find delathi even more scummy, then he will be my #1 suspect.

I'm guessing you haven't read it yet.

[delathi]

Platypus_Dude : in post 47 you say that you didn't consider Ethan's vote on Wolf to L-2 to be a scumtell, but my random vote on him to L-3 evidently was? What was the reasoning behind that?

[Platypus_Dude]

Where did I say your vote on him to L-3 was suspicious?

[delathi]

Where did I say your vote on him to L-3 was suspicious?

I was about to say by omission but in the copying and pasting of the following:

Neither muzzz nor delathi unvoted. Either one or both of them are scum, or they're ok with this bandwagon.

EBWOP: I've read games where townies put someone at L-2 on page 2, so I don't consider Ethan voting wolf to L-2 a scumtell.

I saw that I had misread. The first refers to muzzz and the second to Ethan. I initially read that as you jumping Ethan and Me, then removing suspicion from Ethan and not me. So, there's some consistency there even though you are still wrong.

[muzzz]

Your vote is no longer justified either. You want him lynched for the reasons in your vote post yet have not allowed those reasons to promote discussion. Be it you failed to respond to Porken's responces or you let him get away with not responding I don't care which, they both look bad for you.

Porkens responded. I said his reponse didn't change my mind. He ignored that. I asked him why he avoided questions. He claimed having missed them and answered them a little later. Those responses didn't change my mind either. I figured I wouldn't get anything more useful and moved on. I also rubbed him in your face a little, remember? And I called him out with that group that didn't post for over 30 hours.

I've pretty much exhausted my repertoire. Why don't you point me at someone who's done more to further a lynch today? If for no other reason than that I might learn how it's really done.

No, I don't think you really want him lynched. I think you're doing one of many othher things that would take too long to outline them all right now but I can say most if not all make you scum.

Yeah, well, I can't really prove I want him lynched without help. I don't suppose you're up for a gamble?

(just kidding)

[Phelan]

Oh, and to make it official:

Unvote, Vote: Platypus

I found this during re-reading, but the only prior vote I could find was on Platypus as well. Did I miss one?

I saw that too and figured he was unvoting his random vote and voting his unrandom vote in an attempt at cleverness. Or has bad book keeping skills and thought his random was for someone else.

I was indeed unvoting my random PlatypusDude vote, and putting down a serious PlatypusDude vote.
I don't think it was an attempt at cleverness. It was mostly a matter of record, as I thought it mattered.
Speaking of which, do the votecounts show the order of votes? Should my vote be the third or the first, in that case?

I just realised... I hope I have an isle seat... Perferably near the back so I can bolt myself in the Lavatory should the captain switch the "buckle seatbelt" sign to "kiss your ass goodbye"...

What do you mean by this? I know it's a joke, but I didn't get it.

(snipped quote)

But if it makes you feel any better: only Porkens is higher up my suspicion list right now.

I might still vote for you if lynching him turns out to be infeasible today.

(snipped part of post)

However,... Saying "Porkens is higher up on my suspicion list" and

"I may change votes if his lynch seems inevitable"

is not alright. Do a little search by author on yourself and tell me when the last time you actually said anything remotely close to questioning him and helping his lynch? I'll help you out.

(snipped rest of post)

The bolded parts are not equivalent. Are you implying, or putting words in his mouth?

Also, are you trying to start a different bandwagon to protect PlatypusDude?

[Phelan]

Porkens, at post 285 you said:

I think a lynch would do wonders for the game; our day 1 is bordering on the academic at this point.

Did you mean that you had thought no-one would change their votes at that point, or that you are sure that PlatypusDude is scum? Or was it something else?

[Porkens]

I just mean that there's only so much you can figure out day 1. we have a great deal of text to reread after we get a couple of murders done, and we can draw new conclusions from there.

[Phelan]

Speaking of which, do the votecounts show the order of votes? Should my vote be the third or the first, in that case?

By the way, this part of the post was for Korlash and Porkens, as IC's. If anyone else knows, feel free to answer.

[Korlash]

Porkens responded. I said his reponse didn't change my mind. He ignored that. I asked him why he avoided questions. He claimed having missed them and answered them a little later. Those responses didn't change my mind either. I figured I wouldn't get anything more useful and moved on. I also rubbed him in your face a little, remember? And I called him out with that group that didn't post for over 30 hours.

Where did you say his responce didn't change your mind? and is that all you said or did you actually attempt to get new responces from him? Did you say why they didn't change your mind?

Rubbing him in my face doesn't do anything for your case on him, and calling him out along with other people kinda disproves you find him any special sort of suspicious.

I've pretty much exhausted my repertoire. Why don't you point me at someone who's done more to further a lynch today? If for no other reason than that I might learn how it's really done.

No. This isn't about other people, this is about you. one of those "Well everyone else is doing it" excuses wont help you. If the only justification you can find to defend yoruself is that no one else is doing it then you deserve to be lynched for your lack of creativity.

As an IC I will also tell you you cannot prove what someone has and hasn't done to further a lynch until a lynch happens. For all I know I've done the most, providing today ends in your lynch. that is not something you can measure.

What do you mean by this? I know it's a joke, but I didn't get it.

I want to hide in the bathroom if the mafia start running down the plane with guns...

The bolded parts are not equivalent. Are you implying, or putting words in his mouth?

Also, are you trying to start a different bandwagon to protect PlatypusDude?

I agree they are not equivalent hence why I put it in "'s and not litterally quoing it. However if you feel the words I used changed his meaning then feel free to correct me. My intentions were not to change his words or put words in his mouth, simply to write something quick that borderlined explained what I was talking about. I do appologize for writing "inevitable" when I meant to write "infeasable" as those two words are completely different.

And do you have any evidence I'm protecting PD or do you honestly think I'll let yu get way with such a bogus and false implication? Are you trying to plant seeds of disbelief in my case on Muzzz? Are you protecting him?

My case has nothing whatsoever to do with PD in anyway and to even ask such a question without any supporting evidence is scummy on your part.

Speaking of which, do the votecounts show the order of votes? Should my vote be the third or the first, in that case?

The votecounts usually show the order votes were placed but it doesn't really matter.

[muzzz]

Where did you say his responce didn't change your mind? and is that all you said or did you actually attempt to get new responces from him? Did you say why they didn't change your mind?

Are these genuine questions you came up with after carefully reviewing what I said in the past? Or are you poking random places in hopes I'll implicate myself?

No. This isn't about other people, this is about you. one of those "Well everyone else is doing it" excuses wont help you. If the only justification you can find to defend yoruself is that no one else is doing it then

you deserve to be lynched for your lack of creativity

.

I'm not persuasive, therefore I die? Awesome! Seriously, "lack of creativity" is a crappy reason to lynch someone. Even on day 1. But I know that's not your real point against me, so whatever.

I've let myself get a little too worked up by your attack, I think. Partly because of how you attack nearly every single thing I say. And partly because you called my actions "daft" and "hypocritical". I'll try to keep my cool a little more.

[muzzz]

[...] calling him out along with other people kinda disproves you find him any special sort of suspicious.

Also, this is hogwash. All it means is that one of the things I didn't like about him isn't "any special sort" of suspicious. It doesn't say anything about my other points against him.

[Korlash]

Are these genuine questions you came up with after carefully reviewing what I said in the past? Or are you poking random places in hopes I'll implicate myself?

This is called pusing my case. I question you, you respond, i then comment on those responces in such a way as to further the discussion. I don't sit there and go "i haven't changed my mind" and just leave my vote on you becuase that won't do anything. Now are you going to actually answer the questions or should I add avoidance to my list of scummyness from you?

I'm not persuasive, therefore I die? Awesome! Seriously, "lack of creativity" is a crappy reason to lynch someone. Even on day 1. But I know that's not your real point against me, so whatever.

Good thing you have that last sentence in there or I'd add strawman to it as well. You're defenses so far have left a lot to be expected.

I've let myself get a little too worked up by your attack, I think. Partly because of how you attack nearly every single thing I say. And partly because you called my actions "daft" and "hypocritical". I'll try to keep my cool a little more.

You've asked for a good example of how to push a lynch, and now you have one. When you think someone is scum you do everything in your power to lynch them short of making stuff up. Now getting a little worked up is all on you. you're going to need to learn how to handle constant pressure sometime...

Also, this is hogwash. All it means is that one of the things I didn't like about him isn't "any special sort" of suspicious. It doesn't say anything about my other points against him.

Considering you only had like three points it's still a big deal. When ou add in your failure toa nswer my questions about two of yoru other points and when you discount the "rubbing him in my face" one as well you're left with no point. So in reality... I think I've said just about everyone I can about all your points... And so far they are all bad.

[muzzz]

This is called pusing my case. I question you, you respond, i then comment on those responces in such a way as to further the discussion. I don't sit there and go "i haven't changed my mind" and just leave my vote on you becuase that won't do anything. Now are you going to actually answer the questions or should I add avoidance to my list of scummyness from you?

You're not questioning. You're making me repeat myself. I

can't

avoid those questions, because the answers are already in this thread.

Considering you only had like three points it's still a big deal. When ou add in your failure toa nswer my questions about two of yoru other points and when you discount the "rubbing him in my face" one as well you're left with no point. So in reality... I think I've said just about everyone I can about all your points... And so far they are all bad.

You have no reason to call them all bad. Or at least no reason that you've made known. You've explained why you're convinced that I'm a scummy bastard that doesn't really want to lynch Porkens. But as far as I can tell by your posts, you've never actually considered whether I could be right about Porkens being scum.

So, I've decided to take some of your criticism as advice. I'll make some time tonight to fit my case against Porkens in a shape that you might appreciate more. Make every little thing look scummy, and all that. I don't really expect that to change your mind about me. But perhaps it'll make you consider him after you're done with me.

[Korlash]

You're not questioning. You're making me repeat myself. I can't avoid those questions, because the answers are already in this thread.

Then they should be easy to answer. I mean all you would have to do is link. hell a post number would suffice.

You have no reason to call them all bad. Or at least no reason that you've made known. You've explained why you're convinced that I'm a scummy bastard that doesn't really want to lynch Porkens. But as far as I can tell by your posts, you've never actually considered whether I could be right about Porkens being scum.

Funny you should say this... but no, that's for tomorrow.

Even if you are right it doesn't change what you have done. So discussing if you are or are not right is pointless. And if you're not even going to defend your reasons when I question you about them i have every right to call them bad. I mean how good can reasons be if their own creater won't back them up?

So, I've decided to take some of your criticism as advice. I'll make some time tonight to fit my case against Porkens in a shape that you might appreciate more. Make every little thing look scummy, and all that. I don't really expect that to change your mind about me. But perhaps it'll make you consider him after you're done with me.

So now it's appeasement. No no, you do this. It's a good idea.

[muzzz]

Even if you are right it doesn't change what you have done. So discussing if you are or are not right is pointless. And if you're not even going to defend your reasons when I question you about them i have every right to call them bad. I mean how good can reasons be if their own creater won't back them up?

You've questioned me about a lot of things, and asked me to back bunches of stuff up. My reasons for voting Porkens weren't among those things. How can I defend them if they're not the things you're attacking?

[muzzz]

Then they should be easy to answer. I mean all you would have to do is link. hell a post number would suffice.

You know, I don't feel like I should have to answer those questions. If you said "I've gone back and re-read everything you said but couldn't find it" it'd be a different case. But those questions asked me to back up my claims before you even showed why they need to be backed up. That's unjustly putting the burden of proof on me. The fact that it's a light burden in this case doesn't make it right.

But at this point, it would be silly for me to refuse you those answers on principle. I'm fairly certain that the upcoming anti-Porkens post will give you the answers you're looking for. If you can wait for that, I promise I'll answer any questions afterwards.

[muzzz]

The thing that triggered my scum radar with Porkens was the way in which he replied to questions. He points at an error or an inconsistency that has nothing to do with the question itself, evading it in a quick and dirty way. If he's lucky, people will focus on his new argument and forget he owes them an answer. Worst case he can always claim he simply misunderstood.

In this case, Porkens used it to make questions go away. Wanting to keep something to yourself for a little while is one thing. But actively ushering people away from things is quite another. No townie should ever want to do that. He also failed to see a number of questions that people asked. Since he evaded most other questions, I doubt they were all accidental.

What he did say, at first, was that he voted Wolf in order to get him to claim. But the only reason he had for asking that claim was the fact that Wolf was at L-1. His vote, according to his logic, was his reason to vote. After a few people jumped on that, he started alluding to other reasons.

Why I put Wolf at L-1
Primarily, my attempt here was to illicit some specific reactions.

That's post #119. Then the post goes on to examine people before and after the lynch and draws some conclusions from that. What's interesting is not what he says, but what he doesn't say. He never mentions what reactions he was trying to get. Nothing in there shows that he thought of those things

before

he voted.

Even after that post, he avoid a few more questions, then drastically changed his playstyle. He's much less active now, and trying very hard to look friendly. Telling us we're doing a "bang up job", and things like that. He ignored me when I said his original reason was bogus, and again when I said his second reason didn't show any signs of actually having been a reason. He even ignored me when I called him out for evading my questions.

A well meaning townie would've done at least

something

to try and convince me I'm wrong. But Porkens is just hoping very hard that the whole debacle will die a silent death.

He's scum. We need to lynch him.