Open 124 (2:10 Bugs Bunny -- GAME OVER) before 761

[Zachrulez]

And another game that's been going on longer than this one.

23 posts.

Scrolled down a little more for that one.

C:\>votecount

Running VoteCount

TM

madeofphail - 2 - dejkha, AndyTony

AndyTony - 1 - Zachrulez

dejkha - 0
Cephrir - 0
Grimmy - 0
Zachrulez - 0

Not Voting: Grimmy, Cephrir, madeofphail

With 6 players, it takes 4 to Lynch.

[dejkha]

Nice job, Zach, but this time I think it would be better not to pick a Large Normal Game, which is coincidentally the game I've been catching up with today since I haven't had time to post for the last 2 week and a half. How about you find a 2 games game with a similar amount of players then you're point will be of concern.

[dejkha]

And make sure its not ongoing also, since it wouldn't do much if you don't know if I was scum in the game.

[dejkha]

And another game that's been going on longer than this one.

23 posts.

Scrolled down a little more for that one.

I've been forgetting about that game (read through my posts to see) and it's an ongoing game in which my role is unknown.

You're still not making any headway, Zach. The closest thing you can get to a low post count on a finished game with me as scum in my newbie game, in which I was only learning.

[Zachrulez]

I disagree, you asked to be metaed in this regard, which is scummy in and of itself.

And now you're flailing in defense because I've found 2 games that don't compare to your ever lovely frequent posting meta.

So your excuse for one is that it's a large theme game (Which I would imagine would give you more people and things to talk about.)

And you forgot about the other...

But it's not your opinion that matters, and I have to wonder why you're posting so frequently to discredit it...

[Zachrulez]

And don't try to bury this under 20 posts. I'll keep bolding these post numbers to make sure they are read.

[dejkha]

The problem is that those are ongoing. You have no support if you don't know my role in those games, thus making your argument full of flaws.

[AndyTony]

That being said. Can you give us any?

Poked me with a stick one too many times...

Are you saying this is OMGUS? Because to my list of feelings about you, that's now added

You hammered Millar while sounding unsure of yourself.

I'm always sure when voting - what you're referring to is me being HOPEFUL that it wouldn't turn out bad for town.

I never vote without expressing my thoughts and feelings - your argument is empty.

Bad cases, bad logic, distancing, all in exchange for lurking. I think I preferred your lurking.

OF COURSE YOU DID. You're one to talk about bad cases, bad logic, and distancing when you've done all of the above in past lynches with your past reasoning.

This is opinionated, no evidence. I never gave OMGUS votes, or totally unsure votes - I always expressed thoughts and gave fair chances.

Hey, Zwet and Guiseppe are scum! I'm sure of it! Oh shit they're not? It's not my fault, it's Zach's! Look! He was on every lynching bandwagon.

Not what I'm saying -- I'm pointing out that you're using the mislynches as some form of evidence on me, and in doing so, seemingly distancing yourself - I'm reminding you that you're on the wagon's too - chill out, Zach, you're slipping scum

WELL SO WERE YOU! What say you to that now? Will you try to rationalize your actions hypocritically in a desperate effort to paint me as scum, an attempt to prevent us from realizing that we should have lynched you on day 2?

Can you rephrase this with less emotional distress from being called out as potential scum? It's makes you seem more scummy and you're calling me hypocritical and scum with no evidence

Obviously scum? Why do you keep trying to have other people make cases against themselves to save you the work?

... Yeah, what do you have to say for yourself now. In light of all this work I've just done, this comment seems a bit ridiculous now doesn't it?

You haven't done work up to this point! You've given opinions with no evidence, and emotions without understanding (especially with me pointing out you were on the very wagons you try to condemn me for)

Vote: AndyTony

I may

regret not pushing for your lynch harder earlier in the game, but there's still time to correct that little mistake

.

Shortened reason:

For trying to distance away from his own hand in the lynching of the 3 townies in this game while attempting to hypocritically cast blame on me for being on the bandwagons as well.

I was saying that you distanced yourself by condemning me for the wagons I was on, and forgetting you too were on them. How is that distancing? It was more so re-attaching you, pal...
Show the hypocrisy, you can't just say it.... and it's also attached to the wagon distance idea - -

You turned my wagon comment on you and repeated it to me - that's pretty cheap, man - I didn't say I wasn't on those wagons, I reminded you that you were on them all too and should be careful with saying I'm scum - YOUR HANDS ARE JUST AS DIRTY.

Which means you need to clarify, or have a better reason for the vote on me (aside from the above admitted "OMGUS" vote earlier in my post here...

One thing I can say for you AndyTony is that there's a lot of information for me to make my cases out of. About 130 posts worth.

Then use them and make a better case

[AndyTony]

too many flaws in his argument

[dejkha]

The problem is that those are ongoing. You have no support if you don't know my role in those games, thus making your argument full of flaws.

Actually, I don't even know why I'm arguing that. All he needs is to looks at completed games where I was town and my post count was high. If he finds those two things, his argument is null.

[Zachrulez]

The problem is that those are ongoing. You have no support if you don't know my role in those games, thus making your argument full of flaws.

It's not about knowing your role, you're kinda fogging up the point a bit.

You argued Meta as a defense. This is about games that don't apply to your meta.

It's not about your alignment in those games, it's about you acting as though your meta was consistent with ALL your games when it was not.

[dejkha]

In games, I'm active in, it's consistent. The games you choose, there were times that I didn't post for days into weeks. In the large game, it's a legitimate lack of posting due to my internet troubles that I told everyone about and it naturally takes longer to catch up. Think what you want about the other.

But if the point is that it's not consistent with the other 2 games of the many I've played then fine, but good luck making a case out of it, since that point is irrelevant.

[Zachrulez]

I haven't even gotten into metaing AndyTony yet either to see if his posting level is consistent either.

I'll do that, and start looking at Phail's posts. (I believe I had trouble understanding what he was trying to say at least half the time.) Which on a rough read puts him in the same category as Millar, Zwet, and Emp.

We'll see if that changes.

[AndyTony]

I think your OMGUS should be acknowledged by everyone (as in my previous post - early)

And you should clarify your case if you intend to keep that vote on me - it would otherwise seem more scummy - -

I told you not to freak on my for the mislynches because you were also on the wagons. - - - you took that point from me, perverted it, and shot it back, telling me that "I was on the wagons too!" - - As thought it were news or something. Do you understand? You're basing your case off of nothing (assuming you had more than "AndyTony was on the wagons and is hypocritical for saying I was too!" - -

I would only be hypocritical if I contradicted myself. I said no such thing to suggest I wasn't on those wagons, I reminded you that I wasn't alone and you were there too - - -

So with that cleared up - I'd suggest a new case. I'm very confident those votes won't climb considering there's no evidence on me, and I think it would be insulting the intelligence of everyone else on the board to think there could "still be some out there" even after you've looked. We've all looked at each other, we've had a lull - - you're right now suggesting that everyone is too foolish to see how scummy I am, yet even YOU have failed to prove such a thing - - where's your evidence?

Please clarify...

[AndyTony]

Also, I think Zach missed post 707. Give'er a read, Zach.

Vote: AndyTony

I may

regret not pushing for your lynch harder earlier in the game, but there's still time to correct that little mistake

.

Shortened reason:

For trying to distance away from his own hand in the lynching of the 3 townies in this game while attempting to hypocritically cast blame on me for being on the bandwagons as well.

Particularily here.

For the last time. I told Zach he was on all the wagons - I did not say I wasn't on them too - I was reminding him that his hands were just as dirty and the argument was weak - - - that isn't scummy or hypocritical.

So since that's the basis of his case.

Why does the above quote suggest he once again held back on piping up when he was suspicious. I called this out on him before and am still annoyed that he only seems to voice his will to schumhunt whenever it's convenient for him.

When it's convenient for him meanin - when people are scumhunting HIM. He's looking to me becuase I "Poked him one too many times"? So he's a sleeping animal/child? Really?

And twice he gets his back against a wall and comes out with "Well I WANTED to vote so and so, but didn't....I regret it now... **pouting** I won't make that mistake again..."

Well, your mistakes have a name, Zach - - "Scumtells".

You have lurking against you, hypocrisy, OMGUS, and a vote on a player with no solid case lol

I think my points have a stronger base than yours, friend lol
---------------

Unvote : MadeofPhail
Vote: Zachrulez

I recently made the mistake of trying to lynch the suspected partner of a scum instead of the person out of the two who seemed more of a sure thing - - It cost me the town and won't happen again.

Phail lurking at this time doesn't bode well for him either, but Zach has dug his own hole.

[AndyTony]

Also, are you threatening to call Dej scum if he doesn't support you?

Also Dejkha, are you honestly saying you don't find my case against AT interesting in the least?

I mean, even if you disagree with any points I made against you... I would have to find it strange if you didn't.

[Zachrulez]

Also, I think Zach missed post 707. Give'er a read, Zach.

Vote: AndyTony

I may

regret not pushing for your lynch harder earlier in the game, but there's still time to correct that little mistake

.

Shortened reason:

For trying to distance away from his own hand in the lynching of the 3 townies in this game while attempting to hypocritically cast blame on me for being on the bandwagons as well.

Particularily here.

For the last time. I told Zach he was on all the wagons - I did not say I wasn't on them too - I was reminding him that his hands were just as dirty and the argument was weak - - - that isn't scummy or hypocritical.

So since that's the basis of his case.

Why does the above quote suggest he once again held back on piping up when he was suspicious. I called this out on him before and am still annoyed that he only seems to voice his will to schumhunt whenever it's convenient for him.

When it's convenient for him meanin - when people are scumhunting HIM. He's looking to me becuase I "Poked him one too many times"? So he's a sleeping animal/child? Really?

And twice he gets his back against a wall and comes out with

"Well I WANTED to vote so and so, but didn't....I regret it now... **pouting** I won't make that mistake again..."

Well, your mistakes have a name, Zach - - "Scumtells".

You have lurking against you, hypocrisy, OMGUS, and a vote on a player with no solid case lol

I think my points have a stronger base than yours, friend lol
---------------

Unvote : MadeofPhail
Vote: Zachrulez

I recently made the mistake of trying to lynch the suspected partner of a scum instead of the person out of the two who seemed more of a sure thing - - It cost me the town and won't happen again.

Phail lurking at this time doesn't bode well for him either, but Zach has dug his own hole.

Bolded the important parts of this part for you.

You just made everything crystal clear in a way I never could.

And accusing me of OMGUS is bullshit when YOU'RE the one casting a vote for me in response to my vote of you.

And yes, I know you're going to argue that my attacks were based in response to you, but you KNOW that's bullshit, because you KNOW I was attacking you long before you started attacking me.

[Zachrulez]

I haven't even gotten into metaing AndyTony yet either to see if his posting level is consistent either.

I'll do that, and start looking at Phail's posts. (I believe I had trouble understanding what he was trying to say at least half the time.) Which on a rough read puts him in the same category as Millar, Zwet, and Emp.

We'll see if that changes.

And you apparently missed this when you accused me of not reading 707.

Even though I initially missed it in your rapid fire responses that came at the same time as Dejkha's rapid fire responses.

I DID see it eventually though... but I guess you're goal is to constantly keep me distracted and replying to current events rather than actually be able to go back and read through the game.

Noted.

[Zachrulez]

Also, are you threatening to call Dej scum if he doesn't support you?

Also Dejkha, are you honestly saying you don't find my case against AT interesting in the least?

I mean, even if you disagree with any points I made against you... I would have to find it strange if you didn't.

I meant it exactly the way I said it.

Way to misrepresent scumbag.

[Cephrir]

I guess you missed the many times where he unvotes because he's supposedly found many flaws in his posts and reasons...

Fair enough.

Zach 682: so posting is scummy? =P

I dont see much on dej in that post but what there is is probably wrong, no tiime to read it >.>

But Andy case is good I guess. Apologies for the lame comments, Im only skimming.

Also, posting too much is protown.

[Zachrulez]

http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... 26&start=0

42 game posts

Completed game.

TOWN

[Zachrulez]

I guess you missed the many times where he unvotes because he's supposedly found many flaws in his posts and reasons...

Fair enough.

Zach 682: so posting is scummy? =P

You mean 689 I think

I dont see much on dej in that post but what there is is probably wrong, no tiime to read it >.>

I've probably focused too much on Dej. The case I have on him is honestly pretty circumstantial, yet interesting, and I'm less convinced he's scum than I am of AndyTony.

But Andy case is good I guess. Apologies for the lame comments, Im only skimming.

Also, posting too much is protown.

It depends really. Anyway, I think it's interesting that every living player but them has been tiered into a post number level that's considered lurking.

Probably best to leave it at that. I honestly think it's more accurate to say posting too much is a null tell. I think activity and lurking runs the town/scum spectrum and isn't really indicative of alignment at all.

Dejkha's response to that point is really more interesting than the merit of the point itself in all honesty though.

[Zachrulez]

Also, I'm browsing through Phail in iso right now.

[Zachrulez]

A portion of Phail's post 5 that I found interesting.

AndyTony also said in that same post:

And I'm saying we should KEEP hiim around if he's scum, because the only thing we do know is that he's a weak player, and his weakness will either prove a poor towny, or a shitty scum that will lead us to his partner - - I don't want to lose any opportunities. If he's town, he doesn't die and town heeps higher numbers - if he's scum, we can milk him for all he's worth.

Scum should be lynched while you have the chance. The less scum there are, the quicker it is to winning. Leaving

any

known scum alive is anti-town because given our one lynch a day limit, it gives the scum an extra day. Furthermore, if there's only one scum, it pressures that person.

It interests me because AndyTony was arguing to keep a scummy, Anti-Town player alive.

Why would a townie want to do this?

... Why would scum want to do this?

[dejkha]

And accusing me of OMGUS is bullshit when YOU'RE the one casting a vote for me in response to my vote of you.

Wow, that's a giant load. I'd be voting you right now if it weren't for Phail not being here. In fact, seeing how scum could've quicklynched Phail when me and Andy were voting for him, I think the best bet is that Phail, Me, or Andy is scum. And since I have a good feeling about Andy, I think Phail's almost certainly scum.

I DID see it eventually though... but I guess you're goal is to constantly keep me distracted and replying to current events rather than actually be able to go back and read through the game.

There you go again blaming others for what you're not doing. If you need to read the thread, then go back and read it. We're not on a time limit.

I meant it exactly the way I said it.

Way to misrepresent scumbag.

I didn't know what you meant when I read it either, so it wasn't very clear.

http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... 26&start=0

42 game posts

Completed game.

TOWN

Not only did that have a fairly quick first day, but I was NK'd the first night, smart one. Do your research correctly next time.

Good god, I feel almost positive that Zach is scum, but the probabilty of Phail being scum is higher.