/in-vitational 3: Brass & Shrapnel. Over. before 831

[molestargazer]

Vote: Quagmire

for not voting.

[molestargazer]

Only got one vote. Consider him FOSed

First post that really rubs me the wrong way.
It's RVS. You don't need a reason. This just seems like arse-covering.

@KK

- Why the change to hasdgfas in Post 26?

@hasdgfas

- Do you not think you're reading far too much into someone's first post? Saying you're going to be away/busy isn't scummy.

[molestargazer]

RVS? Hasdgfas gave a serious reason for voting and so did I. Are you attempting to dismiss in-game content? If so, why?

"Dismiss in-game content"? Oh, please.
It was page 1, I doubt everyone had even checked in at that time. Whilst you may have counted the discussion as 'serious', to me it was your first post and it was still RVS.

because of a bit of mafia theory I've started believing. That mafia subconsciously want to tell us they're mafia.

Sounds almost freudian.
I know where you're coming from, but I don't believe it.

Feels like a scummy attempt to return to RVS.

Don't like this post - it clearly wasn't an attempt to return to RVS.

Unvote
Vote: Kublai Khan

I may as well put a better vote on than a random one.

[molestargazer]

So you've misinterpreted the tone of my posts so far this game and you're finding me scummy for calling you out on it?

I didn't call you scummy for it.
The vote was better than a random vote and because I would've liked an explanation.
Please explain how I've misinterpreted.

Because it's jumping on something that isn't scummy at all. Voting someone for something that isn't scummy is either scummy or just horrid logic, and I think mole is smarter than that.

I understand your logic. I wasn't, however, looking for anything particularly scummy as a reason to cast my semi-random vote. Anything. That was the first thing that jumped out.

[molestargazer]

Sorry if you hate the excuse, but that's the reason.
I said Semi-random as the vote wasn't created randomly. I didn't roll a dice or use random.org or anything. I looked for any reason to vote for someone, found one, and used it.

[molestargazer]

Prod received. Will work on a post this afternoon.

[molestargazer]

Quick summary of my thoughts / catch-up. Apologies for my absence. I figure the best way to get myself back interested in this game is to make a few calls.
Despite calling it out earlier, I'm not so sure that Budja's RVS-return comment was scummy at all.

I'm quite happy with my vote on KK for now. I don't like how in Post 73 he states that a vote must be serious if correcting the mod on it. I know that I, personally, would want to make sure that ANY vote I placed, be it serious or not, be counted.
He also hasn't responded to my question regarding his criticism of me in said post in my Post 78.
Until that response occurs, I'll keep my vote here. Up to said post, I'm not seeing anything that would trump this.
I don't like his aggressive-seeming response to Mac in P79, whether it's scummy or not is debatable.

Interesting how Quagmire jumps to a vote after being called out for being wishy-washy by KK. I'm sure his reasons for the vote are OK, but the timing isn't.

@CKD, voting for someone for pushing out of the random stage could have an effect of dampening communication and is generally bad reasoning. I dislike that.

This seems silly. Putting back to RVS would reduce discussion, but voting someone for trying to do that

also

dampens discussion? How does that work?

[molestargazer]

Interesting how Quagmire jumps to a vote after being called out for being wishy-washy by KK. I'm sure his reasons for the vote are OK, but the timing isn't.

KK called me wishy-washy?

That's how I interpreted it, yes.
See Your post here. He accused you of "playing both sides", refusing to take a stand - being wishy-washy. And that evidently prompted you to make a vote.

[molestargazer]

Just going to take a reread to clarify Budja's question and my point.

- CKD votes hascow here, which I believe is the vote later discussed. It seems relatively serious to me.
- Budja first attacks CKD for 'attempting to return to RVS' here.

Now back to the quote:

@CKD, voting for someone for pushing out of the random stage could have an effect of dampening communication and is generally bad reasoning. I dislike that.

Which seems to suggest that Budja now things that CKD voted for hascow for trying to push out of the random stage, and Budja is voting CKD for this reason.

How my post should have gone:

This seems silly. Putting back to RVS would reduce discussion, but voting someone for

making a serious vote

also dampens discussion? How does that work?

[molestargazer]

- I like KK's idea regarding who hammers.

- Quag- I'm voting for you mostly because of this. Nothing else during this (fairly inactive) game has jumped out at me for being off. So there you go.
I also don't like the "argue how hascow is town" thing.

I noticed nobody's tried to attack my logic on hasdgfas yet.

I'll take a look at your logic...
Wait, there isn't any. All I can find from that attacks hascow is this:

I voted CKD because his entire post was scummy. He started by basically telling us to post as little as possible so he could be sure to catch up. Anti-town.

Then, hypocrisy. Doesn't like CKD's vote because it's "too easy" yet he votes for an easy target himself.

Oh don't give me that trash and tell me it's legit, cow!!

Seriously. Read yourself in ISO.

So, for the benefit of everyone, what exactly

is

your logic against hasdgfas?

I would be quite happy to hammer Quag.

[molestargazer]

Need to reread, really not got a feel for this game at all.

[molestargazer]

First thing I noticed on the reread was KK's FoS which I pointed out in my Page 2 post here. He responded by accusing me of Dismissing in-game content, which I replied to here. Looking back, he never really replied to my original accusation of the fact that the P1 FoS was, really, covering his arse.

CKD's reaction to Budja's RVS vote seems a bit OTT - sure, it wasn't a good reason. But Post 48 basically looks like OMGUS.

KK's attacking of Quag in Post 58 looks reaching at best, could even be taken as chainsaw-y.
He also appears to not have responded to my request for an explanation as to how I misinterpreted him here. KK seems to be going out of his way to avoid answering anything.

Stopping here for now as MS has stopped loading...
Oh, wait, it's back.

@CKD

- I'm not seeing what the Budja case is. Could you please remind me?

I'm happy to

Vote: Kublai Khan

as I did yesterday.
Sure, it's not a great case. You might even think it OMGUSsy. But it's all I could find right now. Here's hoping this can be the breakthrough that makes this game interesting.

[molestargazer]

Mole, want make you think that Bud's vote was random?

?

Why didnt you say I was OTT yesterday?

Because I didn't notice it yesterday.

[molestargazer]

same question...what makes you think his vote on me was random?

Apologies - it's not an RVS vote at all. Same point applies however, I still think it was an overreaction.

also, there is only 8 pages in this game..how did you miss it?

By not reading the game properly, because of lack of interest. Which is why this whole catchup was needed in the first place.

[molestargazer]

I guess I never replied because I didn't understand the accusation. Doesn't an accusation of covering my arse imply that I made some sort of mistake to begin with? What was it? Not FOSing hasdgfas immediately?

It's the fact that you FoSed only after being called out on it.

Though it's funny that you now think that my case was "reaching and chainsaw-y". Especially since you didn't have a problem piggy-backing on my Quagmire case with no added insight. That's the sort of 180° move that gets you invited to the X-Games.

1. X-Games?
2. I asked Quag questions about his 'case' because I didn't see his logic. I found his lack of one scummy. I didn't just use your case to 'hop-on' to the wagon. What made you think that?

Sorry, I missed your post while replying to MacavityLock. Check the timestamps it was a near-simulpost.

Understood.

How the hell is it "OMGUSsy"? After I missed your last post I didn't even address you for the rest of Day 1 or any at all of Day 2?

Purely due to the "misinterpretation" and "dismiss in-game content" scenario that went on between us in D1.

And your case isn't merely "not great", it's really weak. Either I had already responded to it, or you're asking me to clarify something that I already was pretty clear about when I posted about it the first time.

The misinterpretation thing I admit was already clarified. That's my bad.
Yes, it's a weak case.

I don't remember you being such an obtuse player. What's the deal?

But it's all I could find right now. Here's hoping this can be the breakthrough that makes this game interesting.

[molestargazer]

Now you're accusing me of being reaching and chainsaw-y because it lynched an innocent townie.

What...? the result of the lynch had nothing to do with why I voted for you on D2. I freely admitted that I would have been happy with a Quag lynch. I don't think you scum just because he flipped town. I think you scum because I found the case itself reaching and chainsaw-y. A bad case on anyone is scummy, regardless of the resulting alignment when the object of that case dies.

2. When you made your case against Quagmire (post 147), you linked back to post 117 where you note that my observation of Quagmire's "wishy-washy playing both sides of the fence" is valid. Then you note that his hasdgfas case has no merit, which I had already questioned him on.

And here we reach one of those points where there's sod all I can do to convince you that you're wrong.
The case on Quag was valid. I noted that, called him out on the points regardless of what anyone else did or thought, and said I would've been happy with his lynch. There's nothing else I can say on the matter.

[molestargazer]

1. I'm not called molestar.
2. I believe it's a case of when KK first brought it up, the look of it to me was that it was reaching a chainsaw-y. At the time when I joined it, I looked more in-depth and found it to be a valid case.

I'll explain more if needs be.

[molestargazer]

Seems what we have here is a classic case of foot-in-mouth syndrome.
I will try, however, to answer your questions to your satisfaction.

Are a player's reasons for voting locked in stone at the time of his/her vote? Do you feel that Kublai's were?

Reasons aren't set in stone, no.
More reasons can be added as time goes by, and reasons could be mistakes. If a mistake is found, said player should seriously consider their position on the player they're voting.

To answer your second question, here is the post where KK voted Quag (Quoting only the relevant bits. If you want to check for yourself, it's KK ISO 6.

Are you seriously expecting air-tight cases on the first few pages? hasdgfas' case may be weak, but it's kick-starting discussion. He's looking more town than you.

unvote
Vote: Quagmire

It's not much, IMO.
I hope you can see why I may have interpreted this to be mildly chainsaw-y. It appears to be attacking Quag in the defence of Has and his case.
Before this post, there was barely anything in KK's posts that referenced Quag at all.
So, no, reasons weren't set in stone, and more were clearly added afterwards, if I'm being accused of copying his case.

Mole,

what was the difference between your case and KK's case of Quag?

When I voted, my case on Quag was really 2 things:
- His wishy-washiness.
- His lack of a case on Has when he voted.
A quick look at KK in ISO seems to reveal that the second point wasn't brought up by KK until after my vote during D1.
So there's your difference.

[molestargazer]

clearly doesn't believe in his case, but still voting anyway.

Would you rather I cast no opinions at all and continued to lurk? At the time when I voted, I honestly couldn't see a better case.

There's really not much I can say to defend myself. It's a bad case. I knew it was a bad case. I made it anyway.
I did this to try and get myself interested in the game again, and to try and get some new discussion rolling. In that aspect, it worked - perhaps with a less desirable outcome than I had originally imagined.

If you want me to claim, I'll do so, just say the word. Seems I'm near-lynch anyway.

[molestargazer]

this being said, mole, you knew it was a bad case when pushing it? In your words what was bad about it?

It was really quite reaching, and normally wouldn't be anywhere near vote-worthy.

[molestargazer]

Hi all.
No idea what's happened since I last logged in. Been hit by flu or something, don't expect any useful posts til tomorrow at the earliest.

Just making so I don't need to be prodded.

[molestargazer]

Looks like I'm gonna die.

I really don't like how ChannelDelibird and Porochaz are totally avoiding commenting on the molestargazer wagon. Porochaz is V/LA until... Friday? (Feels like it's been longer) But ChannelDelibird doesn't have the same excuse.

His inactivity is dragging the game and killing the wagon on molestargazer. Strong scum-partner possibility.

You're blaming the inactivity of 2 people of killing the wagon on me?
Unless someone else gets more votes by tomorrow (real-tomorrow), I'm dead anyway. Read the rules. Their inactivity wouldn't help me anyway. And, well, you can't call most people's activity good.

(15b) If the game reaches deadline before a majority lynch happens, the player with the most votes at that time will be lynched. In the event of a tie, the player who had the most votes (of those tied) before the tie will be lynched.

[molestargazer]

Sorry, no supersaint here. I'm a Pro-Town Vig.

My case was an easy one to hop on. I understand why you're doing it, but I don't think that my trying to make a case and move the game along, trying to get myself interested in the game again, is something lynch-worthy. As I've stated repeatedly, that's all I was trying to do.

I urge you to look at those who pushed my wagon along - and don't let the scum control the conversation. I fear that with the inactivity it'll be too easy for the scum to control our lynches and end this game pretty quick.

[molestargazer]

No.

[molestargazer]

Note that everyone but molestargazer was a blank shot.

Oh, bloody hell.