DraketheFake - 1 (FishytheFish)
JereIC - 1 (Netlava)
FishytheFish - 4 (Light-kun, tubby216, Jazzmyn, Looker)
Light-kun - 1 (DraketheFake)
Not Voting - 2 (JereIC, HowardRoark)
9 alive, 5 to lynch
-Mod
(Vote Count accurate as of Post 600)
Well, to be fair you'd only just said it after a day of playing coy and acting like you were going to do what you wanted.Light-kun wrote:DtF, what the fuck? I already said I'm not shooting anyone. Damn, you're stupid.
So here we have ego-stroking mixed in with near-unintelligible babble, a vote without any kind of reasoning at all, and acquiescence to a plan without forethought that has the dangerous potential to end the game by morning. Wasn't I voting Looker at some point already today? I'm gonna do a look-back at all the people who I listed in that last post and see what is the what.Looker wrote:@LK - You would sound so much more convincing if you were a babbling idiot, but you aren't. You are a highly-intelligent vigilante mastermind, which leads people to distrust you no matter what you put so obvious before their faces.
Hmm...
I say the fish friesunvote vote: Fishythef**kinfishand you shoot drakethefrigginfake
I agree. More on this later.Fishythefish (604) wrote:I find the wagon on me now much more suspect than yesterday's.
I agree (with the obvious exception of myself ).DraketheFake (602) wrote:You know who I think are scum? The people who lurked through the majority of yesterday: pacman, ZEEnon, and one of Mizz.Mafia/na85, AKA Jazzmyn, Netlava, Howard or Looker.
So where would you like to start?DraketheFake (605) wrote:I'm gonna do a look-back at all the people who I listed in that last post and see what is the what.
You've also done a lot of "I'm going to do what I wanna do, no matter what y'all think" preaching. I still believe that you should not kill tonight.Light-kun (603) wrote:DtF, what the fuck? I already said I'm not shooting anyone. Damn, you're stupid.
And his vote (just removed) on you looks like distancing. If Fishy is scum, you're scum.DraketheFake wrote:Well, to be fair you'd only just said it after a day of playing coy and acting like you were going to do what you wanted.Light-kun wrote:DtF, what the fuck? I already said I'm not shooting anyone. Damn, you're stupid.
I think Fish is a mislynch. Even if he's not, he raises a good point about the wagon on him, and we shouldn't take a lynch so lightly at this stage in the game.
This strikes me as a distinction without a difference. The flavour doesn't make sense regarding co-existing townies as both penguins and krill, so why do you suddenly expect it to make sense regarding a killer whale not having opposable thumbs?Fishythefish wrote:I have not much experience of flavour, but the inconsistency of a killer whale with a gun seems on an altogether different scale than the inconsistency of two species which don't make sense together.
He said quite some time ago that he would not shoot if half the town indicated that preference, and we have done so, have we not?Fishythefish wrote:I also don't think L-k's recent conduct (ie. repeated refusal to acknowledge that he will obey the town) is that of a vig, but rather of a SK who is unable to no kill. The people who are urging leaving L-k alive based on being able to lynch him if he disobeys us haven't thought about the numbers. Unless we are exceptionally lucky (ie. lynch scum AND shoot scum), we won't be able to kill L-k tomorrow without handing the game to the scum.
I have pointed out my reasons for voting for you previously. They have not changed. Your post 551 was inadequate, as it was a selective response to my prior post; it addressed only parts of my post and left out other parts; and much of it (just like your prior post to which I was replying in a prior post) was in the nature of strawman arguments, addressing things that I did not raise in the first place. Your 551 only further solidified my take on you as scum, and did nothing to alleviate it.Fishythefish wrote:Jazz, your other reasons for voting me I have responded to (551), and you have not commented.
If that is the case, it appears even more strongly that you are not paying attention. I have previously set out my reasons for voting you, and as I said above, your responses since have done nothing to alleviate my suspicions. Admittedly, I am just as capable of anyone of being wrong, but this is how I feel at present and I'm not going to back off of someone who I think is scummy just because you say so.Fishythefish wrote:I currently am very unclear on why you are voting for me, other than a disagreement over the importance of the flavour argument which is shared by 3 other players (jere, drake, tubby). I think your vote looks bandwagonny, as it is not well backed up, and I am clearly a player whose lynch is a possibility relatively soon.
What the ? It is very poor form to change someone's post while pretending to quote it.Looker wrote:Jazzmyn wrote: This thread needs more Looker, the Greatest Woman to Ever Live...I pray she arrives swiftly...
Regards,
Jazzy-Wazzy
What the ? Now, this is just getting downright weird. Looker, why would you (a) feel the need to bastardize the names of both Fishy and Drake to incorporate swearing; and (b) ask the claimed vig to NK someone when it has already been established that (i) it is better to direct him to hold off on killing during the night in order to better test his claim (which we still need to do despite the fact that I, for one, believe his claim) and to better protect the town; and (ii) he has already said that he will not kill tonight if half the town indicates that preference?Looker wrote:@LK - You would sound so much more convincing if you were a babbling idiot, but you aren't. You are a highly-intelligent vigilante mastermind, which leads people to distrust you no matter what you put so obvious before their faces.
Hmm...
I say the fish friesunvote vote: Fishythef**kinfishand you shoot drakethefrigginfake
DraketheFake wrote:Looks like claiming time, Fish.
And this is weird too. Drake, why did you tell Fishy to claim and then immediately claim yourself when you did not even have any votes on your except for Fishy's?DraketheFake wrote:I shouldn't be vigged tonight regardless of whether or not Fishy flips scum because I am thedoctor. My species isEmperor penguin. The flavor is that I am the top of the penguin food chain, and can therefore protect all the other penguins.
Because I didn't want a situation where we had a quick hammer before we set in stone that L-k isn't shooting tonight. Also because we're not in a very good position here and people need to understand that before they carelessly throw their votes around. Also because I think people are more inclined to consider the opinions of a power role seriously.Jazzmyn wrote:And this is weird too. Drake, why did you tell Fishy to claim and then immediately claim yourself when you did not even have any votes on your except for Fishy's?
You're a fool/scummy player etc.Light-kun wrote:If Fishy is scum, you're scum.
Nop, don't agree.1st off lynching lk is retarded and and any talk of it should be and will be considered anti town to me.
...mostly for the townie part. But my conclusion on him is not scum.You read like a scum desperately trying to get a townie lynched, or a hopelessly tunnelled townie.
But I think there must be some opinion on which one he is since it makes a difference whether to lynch him or not.All I know is that post 555 appears to be an incredible lie. I don't believe that LK is a killer whale with a gun to shoot people tucked under his blubber.
What inconsistency is that?No, I just didn’t consider the possibility that I misunderstood what you were saying. But there is still an inconsistency that you haven’t explained yet.
I was specifically referring to this:Ok, if you had to state a rule for when the present tense is scummy, what would that rule be?
This part of 608 is, to put it simply, a lie. I don’t quote every word in your post. But I respond to every point in your post, and in your case. If you think there is a strawman argument in it, where is it? Everything I say is detracting from your reasons for finding me scummy, are there are no big reasons I have overlooked. That 519 brings up things you did not say is false. Everything in it is relevant to you finding me scummy.Jazzmyn 608 wrote:I have pointed out my reasons for voting for you previously. They have not changed. Your post 551 was inadequate, as it was a selective response to my prior post; it addressed only parts of my post and left out other parts; and much of it (just like your prior post to which I was replying in a prior post) was in the nature of strawman arguments, addressing things that I did not raise in the first place. Your 551 only further solidified my take on you as scum, and did nothing to alleviate it.Fishythefish wrote:Jazz, your other reasons for voting me I have responded to (551), and you have not commented.
Sorry, mama neva taut me bot no formJazzmyn wrote:What the ? It is very poor form to change someone's post while pretending to quote it.Looker wrote:Jazzmyn wrote: This thread needs more Looker, the Greatest Woman to Ever Live...I pray she arrives swiftly...
Regards,
Jazzy-Wazzy
(a) Sorry, I was/am-still-kinda drunk...Jazzmyn wrote:What the ? Now, this is just getting downright weird. Looker, why would you (a) feel the need to bastardize the names of both Fishy and Drake to incorporate swearing; and (b) ask the claimed vig to NK someone when it has already been established that (i) it is better to direct him to hold off on killing during the night in order to better test his claim (which we still need to do despite the fact that I, for one, believe his claim) and to better protect the town; and (ii) he has already said that he will not kill tonight if half the town indicates that preference?Looker wrote:@LK - You would sound so much more convincing if you were a babbling idiot, but you aren't. You are a highly-intelligent vigilante mastermind, which leads people to distrust you no matter what you put so obvious before their faces.
Hmm...
I say the fish friesunvote vote: Fishythef**kinfishand you shoot drakethefrigginfake
Regards,
Jazz
You quoted the part of my kill-'em-all plan discussion where I said there was a big risk that there was only one scum in the group, so killing us all would screw town, and said a townie wouldn't consider "this". Later, you said that a pro-town wouldn't suggest himself as a lynch target. That explanation seems inconsistent with the part you quoted - how do you get from me criticizing the plan to me suggesting myself as a lynch target?Netlava wrote:What inconsistency is that?JereIC wrote:No, I just didn’t consider the possibility that I misunderstood what you were saying. But there is still an inconsistency that you haven’t explained yet.
As far as I'm concerned, it was a continuing occurence. I highlighted several posts by DDD in which he seemed to twist his words or reverse his position, and I didn't notice him stop doing it until after I made that post. I know that past performance isn't a guarentee of future actions, but c'mon.Netlava wrote:I was specifically referring to this:JereIC wrote:Ok, if you had to state a rule for when the present tense is scummy, what would that rule be?
> DDD seems to be constantly reversing his position and twisting his own words in response to anyone accusing him of saying something odd.
Imo, I believe town would say something like, "DDD has reversed his position" instead. That is more akin to calling it like it is without the exaggeration. The way you worded it is less accurate because it suggests a continuing occurrence.
First, the reason I think LK is lying is not just that it doesn't make sense flavor-wise. I think if he was actually claiming killer whale, he would have accounted for the flavor in his post (something like, "I'm a killer whale, not sure why the mod has me crawling onto land and punching a single hole in DDD.") He's also hinted before that he has a gun (post 484), so the killer whale claim now isn't credible.Netlava wrote:But I think there must be some opinion on which one he is since it makes a difference whether to lynch him or not.JereIC wrote:All I know is that post 555 appears to be an incredible lie. I don't believe that LK is a killer whale with a gun to shoot people tucked under his blubber.
Firstly, a factual error. My unvote was from DtF, not L-k. I was, for a time (to be precise, one post), leaning towards L-k's lynch (not least because he was planning to blow my head off tonight), but I have also said that even a confirmed SK is not the obvious kill. I have never, ever pushed for L-k's lynch.JereIC wrote:So, here's why I find Fishy (and, to an extent, DoctheFake) scummy. Their rationale for pushing LK to claim is that they thought he'd screw up, and then they could push for his lynch. That's preposterous. LK's lie was clumsy, but no one could have reasonably anticipated a massive disconnect between the flavor and his actual claim. Therefore, their post hoc justification strikes me as opportunistic, especially since they'vebothbacked down when other people started criticizing it. In particular, Fishy's claim that he unvoted LK because LK promised not to kill tonight doesn't make sense. You think the guy's lying about his species in a scummy way, but he's telling the truth about what he's going to do tonight?
I intend to hammer, and I'd like a claim from Fishy.
Actually.... got a little carried away here. Jazz has, just about, mentioned that he finds me scummy because of vote analysis, though with little justification. L-k finds me scummy largely because of my reaction to said vote analysis. Jere has also said this vote analysis made sense, although not specifically when making a case on me. So this is not, in fact, true. Still, there is remarkably little consensus on the good reasons for voting me.Fishythefish wrote:Notably,no two of my attackers share.anycommon ground on why I am scummy
Yeah, because saying "I think L-k should claim his animal so we can see if his animal matches the second kill method" would have been so effective. It's hardly fair to call it "post-hoc" justification when there would have been no other way for us to catch L-k in his lie.JereIC wrote:Therefore, their post hoc justification strikes me as opportunistic, especially since they've both backed down when other people started criticizing it.
I sure don't. But it's nice to hear it, and since the rest of the town seems to want to believe his claim and play Russian roulette between the three of us there's really not a lot I can do. I only just unvoted, I laid out the case against him over and over, and nobody was having any of it. I don't see you voting for L-k at the moment, for instance.JereIC wrote:You think the guy's lying about his species in a scummy way, but he's telling the truth about what he's going to do tonight?
QFT.DraketheFake (620) wrote:Yeah, because saying "I think L-k should claim his animal so we can see if his animal matches the second kill method" would have been so effective. It's hardly fair to call it "post-hoc" justification when there would have been no other way for us to catch L-k in his lie.
While I don't entirely trust Light-kun, I feel that lynching him today would be a bad choice. If he doesn't kill tonight, then we have a more confirmed town aligned player. If he does kill tonight and we are placed in a bad spot, at least we have something more solid to justify his lynch.DraketheFake (620) wrote:the rest of the town seems to want to believe his claim and play Russian roulette between the three of us
Dear DTF: If we lynch scum, and mafia miss by your all powerful Doctorness (Sarcasm), I will shoot you tomorrow night. And I repeat for Howard who is obviously hard of hearing: TOMORROW NIGHT.DraketheFake wrote:Because I didn't want a situation where we had a quick hammer before we set in stone that L-k isn't shooting tonight. Also because we're not in a very good position here and people need to understand that before they carelessly throw their votes around. Also because I think people are more inclined to consider the opinions of a power role seriously.Jazzmyn wrote:And this is weird too. Drake, why did you tell Fishy to claim and then immediately claim yourself when you did not even have any votes on your except for Fishy's?
But yeah I understand what that must look like.
You're a fool/scummy player etc.Light-kun wrote:If Fishy is scum, you're scum.
You know, the only arguable idea I have about flavor is that, even though I targeted Debonair doesn't mean I killed him. It is entirely possible that a serial killer and I targeted him, and when I "found him dead," I did nothing. Therefore, maybe a serial killer and I both targeted him. However, your narrow minded concept that I am serial killer for, essentially, flavor and/or "fucking up my species claim" (paraphrased) is absurd because:Fishythefish wrote: On asking for species claims: L-k shot someone. The obvious read on this is "man with a gun". The obvious read on "man with a gun" is serial killer. I certainly thought there was a possibility that L-k would not want to claim a species for which "serial killer" made the most sense. In this case, he was very likely to claim a false species. Where is the ridiculous leap of logic you suggest? Once you start thinking about species, and thinking about the only claimed person, this is not a big step.
Also, it's pretty hard to see how this boast of this being my plan all along would be a scum move; outing L-k does not gain me town points, as L-k's lynch would be at least as good for the scum as the town.
I am not ready to claim. There are 4 votes on me I consider bad, and at least two which are unarguably so. I think a hammer now would be a horrible move. As town, you should be questioning the motives of my other attackers, even if you think me scummy.
Well then you apparently missed JereIC's post about 4 above yours.Light-kun wrote:I see no defense here nor do I see a requested claim.
The bolded section is terrible logic. If we're both alive tomorrow after I protect you and you shoot yourself, then neither of us is confirmed except to each other, barring a tracker or some such. As for the first part: what? If I die and you die because I didn't protect you, and we both turn up town, how does that help lead to a lynch?Light-kun wrote:DtF: I might shoot myself tonight just to test your Doc Claim. Anyone object? *Is very angry at the moment, and wants to shoot DtF instead, but won't...*
The way I see it, DtF is the mafia logical kill. If I attempt to shoot myself and the Doc protects me, I live, the Doc dies, I'm confirmed. If the mafia doesn't shoot the doc, and I die because DtF doesn't protect me, then we lose 2 townies,but get to lynch a mafia member very quickly.If we're both alive with this, we're both confirmed.This does, however, require town trusts me to shoot myself, as if I lied, I would be "confirmed" but actually scum. Yes, this is the single hole in my play but, you get the idea.