Open 144 - Near-Vanilla - GAME OVER!

[lobstermania]

In light of this observation, what are thoughts on MCD?

It seems as though MCD is trying to get you to repeat yourself until you create a slip-up. I feel you have addressed and answered all of his points with an overwhelming degree of evidence.

845 {lobster}- lobster's reaction doesn't make sense to me. You thought she was Scum only if Cephrir was? What about her being scummy and trying to cover that by buddying? Lobster defending her due to her not being here {see V/LA} I get, but that's not what's going on.

Khamisa would have been an automatic vote from me on Day Two had Cephrir flipped scum Day One. Because that didn't happen, I was hesitant at first to leap into a vote.

861 {lobster}- It takes 7 to lynch, you'd be 3. Why the reluctance? Again, it seems like you're trying to stall her wagon. Why?

Not stalling, just analyzing. I was weighing her Day One actions and her V/LA status and decide where I stood on her case.

p913- {lobster} Umm... "it would be stupid to vote for her while she's V/LA" "Vote: Khamisa" What? Frankly, the way you are handling Khamisa is bothering me. It almost feels like you know she's Scum {ScumBuddy} and see the inevitable lynch here. You then jump with a Vote so when she flips, you'll look pretty damn good.

ChannelDelibird brought up (what I feel is) a similar case on Day One against my posting/voting pattern in Mini 807. Most of the time I like to take my time posting and outlining my case on a player.

You know, I was going to ask hohum some questions about what happens if you flip Town, but he'd just dodge them. I reread my post on you and furthered my opinion that you need some more pressure. Let's see what color your blood is.

Vote:AndyTony

I don't understand why you prefaced this vote with a statement about questioning hohum. Are the two related? And how?

[pablito]

@Pablito
-I'm finding your gameplay extremely uncharacteristic when compared to the last game I was in with you (as AA23). You were fair, calculated, positive, and very helpful to the town. Hence I'm a tad put off by your mentality to simply "meh" - throw a vote willy nilly somewhere.

Whichever game that was, it must've been months ago. Congrats on remembering. I have abilities stored up, but I have no motivation for this game at this very moment in time. Part of it is that there's walls of text and a strong game mentality for logic. I tend to rely on gut and genuineness. There are a few people I see as not having genuine language: Kise, Khamisa, and KDub.

Anyway, I feel like unmotivatedly doing this.

unvote, vote: Kise

[Crazy]

Vote Count:

Alduskkel (2)

- AndyTony, ODDin

AndyTony (2)

- hohum, d3x

d3x (0)

hohum (0)

Kdub (0)

Khamisa (4)

- Kdub, lobstermania, Alduskkel, Kise

Kise (1)

- pablito

lobstermania (0)

MadCrawdad (0)

ODDin (0)

pablito (0)

Zer0ph34r (0)

Not voting (3)

- Khamisa, MadCrawdad, Zer0ph34r

With 12 alive, 7 votes will achieve a lynch.

Deadline for Day 2 is

August 27th.

[MadCrawdad]

@Pablito
-I'm finding your gameplay extremely uncharacteristic when compared to the last game I was in with you (as AA23). You were fair, calculated, positive, and very helpful to the town. Hence I'm a tad put off by your mentality to simply "meh" - throw a vote willy nilly somewhere.

Whichever game that was, it must've been months ago. Congrats on remembering. I have abilities stored up, but I have no motivation for this game at this very moment in time. Part of it is that there's walls of text and a strong game mentality for logic. I tend to rely on gut and genuineness. There are a few people I see as not having genuine language: Kise, Khamisa, and KDub.

Anyway, I feel like unmotivatedly doing this.

unvote, vote: Kise

Pablito, when we last heard from you in post 1000 you had issues with ODDin's language that you planned to address at a later time. What has since eased your mind on ODDin, as he is not on your list of those not having genuine language?

[d3x]

Here's the thing, AT. I came into the game and there were standing questions about what people thought of your p1023 {iIrc}. I then made a statement about the case in my impressions on the first 42 pages. You followed up by asking me more about p1023 and the case against you. You are now...

simply wondering what your special interest was in my situation with MCD.

Meh. My 'special interest' is that you asked me my thoughts. I just so happen to think that MCd has some valid points. Trying to paint it as anything but that is scummy, in my eyes. You are inferring that I've taken a special interest when you are the one asking me my thoughts. That's weird.

In regards to Khamisa and Zer0, I'm not into Voting or going into full attack mode on players that aren't around unless I have no other choice. I like the case against you {whether you think it's fair and concrete or not} and their unwillingness to speak has been duly noted. Have no fear.

--------------------------------

@lobster

I was weighing her Day One actions and her V/LA status and decide where I stood on her case.

So what would you summarize the case as being? She is no longer V/LA, are you still so comfortable with her wagon moving along so briskly with her being inactive?

I don't understand why you prefaced this vote with a statement about questioning hohum. Are the two related? And how?

The two are only related in that he's on the wagon I'm currently on. He's been a bit stingy with his reasonings and I would like to get some more clear information out of him.

[AndyTony]

Meh. My 'special interest' is that you asked me my thoughts. I just so happen to think that MCd has some valid points.

Trying to paint it as anything but that is scummy, in my eyes

. You are

inferring that I've taken a special interest when you are the one asking me my thoughts. That's weird.

In regards to Khamisa and Zer0, I'm not into Voting or going into full attack mode on players that aren't around unless I have no other choice. I like the case against you {whether you think it's fair and concrete or not} and their unwillingness to speak has been duly noted. Have no fear.

******
So me clarifying, and defending weak accusations against myself is scummy to you? "Trying to paint it as anything but [valid points] is scummy"
******

*****
And special interest? It's one thing to answer a question, it's another to have pending issues with three players including myself, and only vote for me (before hearing from them, and without working on the case lol)

I'm glad I inspired you to try and use the word "inference" more, however, it doesn't apply to the "special interest" topic - - your actions implied, good sir!

A vote before you hear everything you need from players you claim to have pending concerns with sounds rash and irresponsible - - you're basically admitting to making an ill informed decision (having voted and then acknowledged you're waiting to learn and hear more from others)
*****

Zero and Kham have been present recently. If they leave your issues "pending" - will that make them scummier, or give you cause to ignore them and tunnel me?

See, these are valid concerns, there are many things that factor into a mislynch.

I can't help but find your behavior a tad opportunistic. But hey! You voted. You must be pretty confident

So do tell:

What is your case on me? What are your points? lol

List them off, and I guaruntee you'll get a response and have me fairly address them. I do hope you have some of your own thoughts, because MCD has found nothing on me, and he's the one that started the whole darn circus lol (and isn't voting).

**Your activity and ambition is appreciated - I can only hope you'd have a more open mind before condemning me for another man's discomfort.

There is a logical and fully explained motivation and reasoning behind everything I've done in this game, and everything MCD has taken a frown to.

People are CHOOSING to look at these elements in any way they can to make a scum title fit ME.

That's all backwards, you see? The evidence should spark and inspire, should lead and reveal - and at the end of the road? Scum! That's what's exciting about this game.

MCD targetted me D2 and had to backtrack in order to FIT an idea around me.

Now naturally I have to respond! It's only fair. But I can only be hasselled with the same thing so many times.

*What are your feelings toward Alduskkel's behavior for D2 (for instance). His activity has been void of inestigations, questions, and more specific scum hunting (when we regard how he was D1) and he opportunistically hopped on a train of thought from MCD and the now lurking, narrow minded (in current gameplay), policy town lynching, hohum.

It's rather uncharacteristic.
===============================================

@hohum
- There are things for you to address.
(please also include evidence to back up your vote!)

@Khamisa
- There are things for you to address.

[AndyTony]

In light of this observation, what are thoughts on MCD?

It seems as though

MCD is trying to get you to repeat yourself until you create a slip-up

. I feel you have

addressed and answered all of his points with an overwhelming degree of evidence

.

I fully agree.

[Alduskkel]

- I don't think Khamisa has fully addressed/cleared herself from suspicion, and I'm sure she'll get that impression when she reads that she is of interest to so many people. Why post right after him? Dude, that's when my post was up lol I didn't plan anything, I read the board, made notation, posted my thoughts.

This really doesn't answer my question, or I've misunderstood. Why did you feel the need to restate what Kdub had said in the previous post? You could just say, "I agree with Kdub w.r.t. Khamisa, and in addition X Y and Z."

If they're such weak points, why are you [AndyTony] continually pushing back so hard? You've been going bananas from the get-go for such weak points that can't be used. Why not let the weak points speak for themselves? Clearly everyone else would see that they're not usable, right?

Right. So you can accuse him of ignoring questions.

His activity has been void of inestigations, questions, and more specific scum hunting

Hey, I think I've been raising decent points recently.

And AndyTony must be dying of laughter since he's saying "lol" so much.

[Kdub]

OK I'm back and caught up. AT had asked me to give my opinion on his post 1023. I find his explanations to be reasonable, and MC appears to have dropped some of the arguments that AT had addressed. I think this is a case where MC found a few inconsistencies that could possibly be construed as scummy, then went back and looked for anything else he could find to apply pressure and see how AT would respond. MC raised some good points that forced AT to explain certain actions, but I feel that: 1) the initial case was interesting and raised questions, but did not necessarily imply AT was scummy even if true, and 2) AT's response to those questions has been logical and consistent IMO.

With that said, I disagree with AT that MC's tunnelvision is scummy. In most of the games I've been in or read, players who focuses on a single player and goes to great lengths to dig up anything and everything they can find usually end up being town. Maybe your experience has been different, but I can't help but see MC's persistence and attention to detail as anything other than a town tell.

[pablito]

I decided to go for full-out skim on ODDin instead of just looking at that one post where I picked up vibes. ODDin doesn't really seem to be in any radar at the moment, and I feel that there deserves to be some sort of look on him. But the reason why ODDin was not on my list is my memory failed me. But thanks for reminding me. On this re-read I'm suddenly remembering that I had issues with ODDin in D1 as well. This could be worthwhile. There was never a lessening/clearing of any thought on ODDin. I just got sidetracked by my cases on Kise and KDub (and their votes on Khamisa).

In D1, what's interesting is that ODDin did nothing to actually question or poke anything at Pitstop before voting for pitstop. From what I can get out of skimming the whole entire argument, andytony called out pitstop on being lazy. pitstop kinda omgussed and then ODDin jumped on the case as well.

ODDin tries to coax khamisa into talking about pitstop, but then eventually votes cephrir. I'm gonna skip rest of D1, because while ODDin's language seems genuine, I don't know what to think of his motives and such. And I really want to get to the meatier D2 (or at least I hope).

In D2 early posts from ODDin, I have some weird feelings about the language. There's sense of obligation that he's trying to pull out of people.

Alduskkel:

I have a feeling you're trying to "make amends" with hohum.

He's been accusing you in late D1, so you want to make sure he's fine with you, and thus you follow his points and go for AT. Also, you're latching onto other people's cases almost all the time - ceph, khamisa, AT.

hohum: You promised to answer my questions (post 839), you didn't. You also didn't answer Alduskkel's 843.
Also, I really don't like your attitude towards AT. Your own case against him isn't nearly strong enough to warrant a lynch at this point,

and you must see that for yourself

. You didn't even say anything regarding MCD's case, you're just saying "good, more arguments on AT". You're being horribly narrow-minded and you're trying to push for an early lynch.
...
Also, pablito, you seem unable to be arsed to do lots of things. Unvote D1, catch up.

I wonder if you can be arsed to play the game.

See my bolding for examples of where I feel that ODDin is using persuasive language to create an obligation for players that they have to live up to. Guilt I often see as genuine, but it's a pathetic move in my mind. But it smells more like frustration more often than not. But guilting others is an advanced scum tactic that can be pulled off by a skilled player. It's just way too many YOU YOU YOU statements that I don't like. Maybe it's a personal preference, but there is strong persuasion that is underlying all these statements. Now I just have to look at why ODDin was using this language in the first place.

There's just a different quality that I was getting when comparing AndyTony to ODDin in this type of obligation. I sense a lot of what AndyTony is saying is coming from himself and his own perspective. I can't say it clears him from being scummy, but the sense I get from him is that he's being fairly internally consistent, his inconsistencies happen to be who he is, not necessarily him losing "scum perspective". But with ODDin, there wasn't necessarily a moment why he needed to be so frustrated. AndyTony was on the defense, but I want to know what was pissing off ODDin at that time.

Hohum: you're avoiding posts 839 (mine), which ask you questions you really should answer. This is (pathetic / childish / scummy) (circle the correct answer, possibly more than one).
You sort of answered al's question, though quite poorly. I guess that earns you a medal.

Also, you don't own the game. I guess it makes you feel all happy and important to tell us whom we lynch and whom we don't, but this is only 1/13 your decision.

...
pablito:

This is *exactly* the time to notice lurkers. Because scum want to lurk. If the scum team sees lots of townies arguing among each other - it's the best time for them to sit back and do nothing, while the townies are busy lynching each other.
It's important to lift your head

from what's currently going on and shake up those who aren't responding much. Everyone should have a say. If you don't do this, you're allowing the scum to easily slip under the radar, and then later in the game, when you go back to reread - for instance, to see how people reacted to someone who has later flipped town or scum - you discover that some people didn't say anything on the subject, and there's nothing you can discern from that.
...
Kise: While I can resepct that you may be busy at the moment, you are still expected to read the entire game. You knew its length when you agreed to replace.

If it was too much for you, you shouldn't have agreed to replace in the first place.

It's just that a lot of these comments have a hint of anger at the specific person it's directed toward. And usually when I see anger bubbling underneath the surface in comments directed toward others, it's because there's either genuine dislike, frustration with that person or desperation (often in defence). Considering that ODDin himself was switching course and voting Alduskkel in that very same post, I don't get it, because would he express frustration based on who's voting whom? I just need to know where it's all coming from. I think I know the answers to this all, but I'm not understanding the motivation behind it all. And that's what I tend to look at. If there's no motivation for something, then it can likely be a scum tell.

I hope this explains why I said what I did about ODDin earlier, MCD.

[AndyTony]

Al
- I type "lol" a lot :s. I find text to be very less personal and often cold, so (and this started on msn messenger) I type "lol" to give a more pleasant impression (lol = smiling, pleasant/positive, lmao=actually laughing etc) Pretty lame, but yeah. lol

- It's not a misunderstanding or you being wrong, it's just a matter of reapproaching the post. You'll notice that kbub points out the

inconsistency

whereas my questions are leading, and trying to determine if Khamisa it

people pleasing

or following. I'm not sure if everyone is the same as me on this, but I have a favorite "scum tell". I find anyone who plays neutral and pleases the town (by following their logic without adding anything new, by not conducting investigations, by being afraid of conflict and butting heads) is scummy.

That being said. With Khamisa still unanswered for, hohum still lurking, ODDin challenged in good form by Pablito, and general things calming down:

Unvote:Alduskkel

As the game has continued, there are more questions and ideas in other directions (making my decision less informed). Only fair!
===============================================

@Kbub
- I agree and have encountered it

[MadCrawdad]

MCD targetted me D2 and had to backtrack in order to FIT an idea around me.

Just keep repeating that, AT. Someone's likely to believe at some point, right?

If they're such weak points, why are you [AndyTony] continually pushing back so hard? You've been going bananas from the get-go for such weak points that can't be used. Why not let the weak points speak for themselves? Clearly everyone else would see that they're not usable, right?

Right. So you can accuse him of ignoring questions.

Al, that's multiple times that you've popped in to defend AT. It wouldn't be so odd if it weren't for your early vote for him (based on your blanket agreement with my earlier points against him). Since the potential link has been pointed out between the two of you, you seem to have almost gone out of your way to draw AT to you.

I can't think of a logical reason why a townie would do this, but can think of a couple why scum might:

1. Player A (scum) draws in Player B (town) hoping to secure Player B's mislynch should Player A be lynched.
2. Player A (scum) draws in Player B (scum) actually hoping to muddy an existing link (through WIFOM) should Player A be lynched.

Both create a muddy link that the town needs to sort through after Player A is lynched and flips scum.

Thoughts?

Strong FoS: Alduskkel

[Crazy]

Vote Count:

Alduskkel (1)

- ODDin

AndyTony (2)

- hohum, d3x

d3x (0)

hohum (0)

Kdub (0)

Khamisa (4)

- Kdub, lobstermania, Alduskkel, Kise

Kise (1)

- pablito

lobstermania (0)

MadCrawdad (0)

ODDin (0)

pablito (0)

Zer0ph34r (0)

Not voting (4)

- AndyTony, Khamisa, MadCrawdad, Zer0ph34r

With 12 alive, 7 votes will achieve a lynch.

Deadline for Day 2 is

August 27th.

[AndyTony]

@MCD
- Thoughts? Sounds like you're unhappy people aren't dancing to your tune.

You're tunnelling is making it very hard to appreciate the idea that you're aggressively confused town. Stop tunnelling me, it hurts towns more than you'd think.

- What are your thoughts on the ODDin ideas from Pablito?
- What are your feelings to Khamisa sitting on the fence, avoiding confrontation, not bringing anything new to investigations/conducting any of her own? What are your feelings to her little activity with no active V/LA?
- What are your feelings toward hohum's narrow mindedness toward a case that came after his prejudice to me? What are your feelings to his lurking?
===============================================

[d3x]

So me clarifying, and defending weak accusations against myself is scummy to you? "Trying to paint it as anything but [valid points] is scummy"

No. Are you even reading the discussion? I'll boil it down for you. You asked me my thoughts on a topic. I gave you those thoughts. You said I had taken a special interest in a debate. I said I hadn't, pointing to you asking me my thoughts. So, you are now saying that I'm calling you scummy for defending yourself? That isn't even close. I'm saying it's scummy to bring someone into the conversation and then question why they're there. It has nothing to do with you defending yourself. In fact, I didn't even mention you defending yourself.

I'm glad I inspired you to try and use the word "inference" more

I'm sorry...

what

? What exactly are you saying here, AT? I want it to be clear that you're being condescending and mocking me openly because I'm pursuing a case on you.

A vote before you hear everything you need from players you claim to have pending concerns with sounds rash and irresponsible - - you're basically admitting to making an ill informed decision (having voted and then acknowledged you're waiting to learn and hear more from others)

Not even close. The information I'm trying to glean from Khamisa and Zer0 have

nothing

to do with the case on you. How can you say that it's uninformed to think someone's scummy and still ask questions to others? Assuming you are Scum, there are 2 others out there.

What is your case on me? What are your points? lol

Frankly, this seems to be your MO. The case on you has been laid out so many times that I think people are dismissing it more because they're more sick of reading through it than they find you innocent. On top of what has been posted multiple times before, you are trying to bully me off of your case with snide and condescending comments {completely contrasting your statements on 'diplomacy' lol}, you are twisting my points {ala the most recent 'special interest' fiasco}, and you're setting up strawmen to beat the devil {reducing MCd's case to 'another man's discomfort'}.

What are your feelings toward Alduskkel's behavior for D2 (for instance).

I think it is noteworthy and curious, but I find that others are doing a good job of questioning him, as is the case with Khamisa and Zer0.

[AndyTony]

So me clarifying, and defending weak accusations against myself is scummy to you? "Trying to paint it as anything but [valid points] is scummy"

"Trying to paint it [the MCD issues] as anything but [valid] is scumm"

I'm defending myself, saying they are not valid - there's no confusion there.

I'm glad I inspired you to try and use the word "inference" more

I'm sorry...

what

? What exactly are you saying here, AT? I want it to be clear that you're being condescending and mocking me openly because I'm pursuing a case on you.

Condescending?

I'm clarifying that there was NO inference, d3x - - I'm making it very clear that you sir,

implied

.

The information I'm trying to glean from Khamisa and Zer0 have

nothing

to do with the case on you. How can you say that it's uninformed to think someone's scummy and still ask questions to others? Assuming you are Scum, there are 2 others out there.

I'm saying it's

ill informed

.

What are your feelings toward Alduskkel's behavior for D2 (for instance).

I think it is noteworthy and curious, but

I find that others are doing a good job of questioning him, as is the case with Khamisa and Zer0

.

So you're voting me without working on the case yourself or having any of your own thoughts/evidence,

and that decision is ill informed because you've voted me (while still waiting to gain more information from pending persons of interest)

Yet once again - although they're pending, you're going to vote a man based on someone elses investigation (which was a null one, he's not even voting me) while waiting to let other people do more work for you? lol

Think about it - you have pending interests in people, and don't want to interrogate them because "others are doing a good job" enough?
==============================================
Do whatever you've gotta do, man, I've no personal beef with you lol

Would like to see your reasons for voting me, though. Listed. So I can address them fairly.

Are you not confident in the case?
Are none of your points yours?

Let's see the list

[d3x]

So me clarifying, and defending weak accusations against myself is scummy to you? "Trying to paint it as anything but [valid points] is scummy"

"Trying to paint it [the MCD issues] as anything but [valid] is scummy"
I'm defending myself, saying they are not valid - there's no confusion there.

Why are you ignoring what I am clearly saying? Why did you refuse to include my very clear breakdown on what we were talking about? When I said "trying to paint it as anything but is scummy" I was not refering to you defending

anything

. Let's see if I can do this in a way you'll understand.

"Trying to paint this {my entry into the debate between you and MCd} as anything but {ie- me taking a special interest} is scummy". Better? You are trying to say that I'm taking a special interest in the discussion, but this is not true. You asked me to join the debate. Just because I don't agree with you doesn't make that special interest. This is very similar to when you said that MCd needed to weigh in because he was a strong thinker and had good opinions and then called him out for tunnelling when you didn't like what he had to say.

I'm glad I inspired you to try and use the word "inference" more

I'm sorry...

what

? What exactly are you saying here, AT? I want it to be clear that you're being condescending and mocking me openly because I'm pursuing a case on you.

Condescending?
I'm clarifying that there was NO inference, d3x - - I'm making it very clear that you sir,

implied

.

First, your statement is dripping in sarcasm. You "inspired" me to try a word more? Bullshit that's not condescending. Aside from that, you're ignoring the entire point of the conversation. If you want to say that there was no inferrance, then fine. I actually found the original quote.

simply wondering what your special interest was in my situation with MCD.

You are inferring that I've taken a special interest when you are the one asking me my thoughts

You know, you're right. You didn't

infer

that I had a special interest in your case. You flat out said it. The interest I have in the case stems from you asking me to weigh in on the case. I don't see how it could be any more clear.

What are your feelings toward Alduskkel's behavior for D2 (for instance).

I think it is noteworthy and curious, but

I find that others are doing a good job of questioning him, as is the case with Khamisa and Zer0

.

So you're voting me without working on the case yourself or having any of your own thoughts/evidence, and that decision is ill informed because you've voted me (while still waiting to gain more information from pending persons of interest)

I'm still having a hard time understanding your point. Again I'll ask, what does the suspicions I hold of other have anything to do with the suspicions I have with you? You're saying that I'm ill informed for working a case against you and not working cases that are being built by others? You keep saying that I have nothing and I'm not doing anything to further your case. Just because you are ignoring what I'm telling you doesn't make that true. Before you respond, keep reading to the end. I'll quote myself on your case below.

you're going to vote a man based on someone elses investigation (which was a null one, he's not even voting me)

Hey, if you want to ignore the reasons I'm giving, that's up to you. And in regards to MCd's case being null? That's a matter of opinion. His vote is his own and I'm happy with mine on you for the moment.

you have pending interests in people, and don't want to interrogate them because "others are doing a good job" enough?

Two of the three people were' talking about aren't responding to anything. If they're not going to answer the questions I have out there for them, what good will it do to ask more questions? Sounds like an exercise in futility to me. The third I am watching and following. What interest is it of yours how I choose to do this? Only to get me off your case?

Would like to see your reasons for voting me, though. Listed. So I can address them fairly.

For one, I agree with MCd in regards to those discrepencies in your play. I don't need you to go through them again, I get that you don't agree. For two, did you not read my post? I'll quote it for you.

On top of what has been posted multiple times before, you are trying to bully me off of your case with snide and condescending comments {completely contrasting your statements on 'diplomacy' lol}, you are twisting my points {ala the most recent 'special interest' fiasco}, and you're setting up strawmen to beat the devil {reducing MCd's case to 'another man's discomfort'}.

Thirdly, I already clearly said that I wanted more pressure on you. It is a pressure vote. Obviously with others backing off of you, there's not a whole lot of pressure, but if you're asking for my reasons, there they are. Stop saying that I don't have them.

[AndyTony]

So me clarifying, and defending weak accusations against myself is scummy to you? "Trying to paint it as anything but [valid points] is scummy"

"Trying to paint it [the MCD issues] as anything but [valid] is scummy"
I'm defending myself, saying they are not valid - there's no confusion there.

Why are you ignoring what I am clearly saying? Why did you refuse to include my very clear breakdown on what we were talking about? When I said "trying to paint it as anything but is scummy" I was not refering to you defending

anything

.

Let's see if I can do this in a way you'll understand.

- It was fair for me to come to the conclusion I did, d3x. There is NO reason to be hypocritical and negative.

- I was not wrong. You were simply in need of clarification, which you have done (seem familiar?)

- Look at the bold. How would everyone feel about you having an indescrepency like that? Whining about a player seeming condescending while making comments like that?

- There is NO reason for you to lose composure, I am as open and willing to hear another player out as much as I expect the same in return, I've shown nothing but that in this game.
==========================================

I'm glad I inspired you to try and use the word "inference" more

I'm sorry...

what

? What exactly are you saying here, AT? I want it to be clear that you're being condescending and mocking me openly because I'm pursuing a case on you.

Condescending?
I'm clarifying that there was NO inference, d3x - - I'm making it very clear that you sir,

implied

.

First, your statement is dripping in sarcasm. You "inspired" me to try a word more? Bullshit that's not condescending.[/quote]

Once again - for you to not be full of nonesense on this one, you would have to do two things.

1. Connect me to your game meta where you recently made a post (before I did in this game to you) where you used the word "inference" in such a manner

2. Acknowledge that you are being condescending an emotional yourself, sir - while making those issues toward me.

I assure you that it wasn't condescending - hence I went so far as to clarify. I've been in games where someone will make an empty and fruitless point toward me just so they can use a word I "use on them" in an attempt to seem clever. I didn't want you to get trapped in something as childish as that and corrected it's use (since you in fact did NOT use it correctly)

And the second point? You're being hypocritical and suspiciously emotional.

Had you actually read D1, you would see that I had logical, understandable, and fair reasoning to every action, decision, and comment.

If you've actually followed D2, you will see that I have clarified, reassured, and continued to be fair and reasonable.
===============================================
What I'm trying to tell you is that there is indeed no case. There are no indescrepencies, contradictions, or holes.

If you believe there are - I insist that you list them, otherwise, I will have to assume you simply don't know what you're talking about (which would explain two things:

Why you are so aggressive and easily offended/confrontational
Why you refuse to make a brief and

fair

list
Why in addition to not interrogating me (even though you've voted) you won't continue to interrogate OTHER PEOPLE because....they're lurking? And...as you put it, in addition to their lurking, OTHER people are interrogating them just fine?

So you like other people doing the work FOR you,
and you don't find lurking scummier than me.

LMAO.
===============================================

This can be a fun game, d3x, you just need to take a breather and step back to look at this whole game objectively. I'll always hear you out fairly when you need to clarify things that you accidentally imply, but we won't get anywhere with you flying off the handle at me because so far it's made you seem

1. Like a follower (latching to a case someone else made without investigating it yourself or offering anything new)
2. Dependent on other people (not interrogating other people because there are other players doing it for you...as you suggest)
3. Suspicious (not finding other players with "pending issues" genuinely lurking and being narrow minded as something scummy
4. Hypocritical (getting emotional and driven toward me for being "condescending" when it would seem it's not REALLY an issue with you since you did it to me in your recent post where I bolded it above)

You risk shooting yourself in the foot. There's no need to get up on your hind legs - keep a cool head, mate.

I will need that list, though.

[AndyTony]

Oh. A pressure vote. With people backing off of me.

Then why do you defend the "evidence" on me?

Seems like you want to vote me, but don't want to commit to the evidence.

I'd add that to the list I've made toward you, mate.

Very suspicious behavior. Like wanting to vote/lynch someone but not wanting any of the responsibility.

[Khamisa]

@khamisa - Do you have any suspects? If not, then who is closest to being scum IYO?

Not really suspects, more like minor suspicions. hohum seems very tunnelled onto AT, and I don't like it. I can't help but be wary about Zer0, even though his playstyle is virtually separated from his role.

You initially thought Zer0 was town after his initial vote for dejkha, but changed your opinion later to thinking he was scum. What caused you to change your opinion? Zer0 had posted basically nothing substantial in between the posts where you switch your view on him.

You cannot just look totally at what zer0 said, but what others said as well. Others noted that zer0's immediate vote indicated frustration. I can't remember, but I probably noticed this on a reread and saw the reasoning, and it made sense.

Lobster, Khamisa, Zero, Kise,
- Can I get your opinions on 1023?

I can agree with this. Initially, I was thinking that "Fine." doesn't really indicate much, especially when the next word is "But...". However, I like the theory at the end that "scum hunt for lynches, town hunts for scum".

[d3x]

Hypocritical? I never advocated being politic. You did. I'm merely pointing out the difference between your behaviour and your plan of action.

I was not wrong.

Hold my hand like a child and explain to me how what I said and what you said are the same thing? Explain to me how...

"Trying to paint it [the MCD issues] as anything but [valid] is scummy"

...and...

"Trying to paint this {my entry into the debate between you and MCd} as anything but {ie- me taking a special interest} is scummy"

The fact of the matter is, you ignored my statement and you continue to do so. You have been and still are clipping my words for some reason I can't quite figure out.

Whining about a player seeming condescending while making comments like that?

A leads to B, AT. I'm sorry if you believe that I have been unfair in my treatment of you, but I feel that you have been doing this to me since I came into the game. I am merely responding in kind.

If you believe there are - I insist that you list them, otherwise, I will have to assume you simply don't know what you're talking about

Would you prefer I start spamming the thread until you aknowledge the fact that I have been listing reasons that I'm voting you? Fair enough.

Would like to see your reasons for voting me, though. Listed. So I can address them fairly.

For one, I agree with MCd in regards to those discrepencies in your play. I don't need you to go through them again, I get that you don't agree. For two, did you not read my post? I'll quote it for you.

On top of what has been posted multiple times before, you are trying to bully me off of your case with snide and condescending comments {completely contrasting your statements on 'diplomacy' lol}, you are twisting my points {ala the most recent 'special interest' fiasco}, and you're setting up strawmen to beat the devil {reducing MCd's case to 'another man's discomfort'}.

Thirdly, I already clearly said that I wanted more pressure on you. It is a pressure vote. Obviously with others backing off of you, there's not a whole lot of pressure, but if you're asking for my reasons, there they are. Stop saying that I don't have them.

You can now officially add to the list that you are ignoring me and my points.

This can be a fun game, d3x

I don't know about you, AT, but I'm having a blast.

I'll always hear you out fairly

You mean like ignoring my posts? Thanks.

I will need that list, though.

Of which I have provided time and time again. I even posted it again for you. Crystal?

Oh and the pressure vote? I was adding pressure to the case being built against you. How is that not a pressure Vote? I want to Vote you

and

add to the case, regardless of whether you acknowledge that or not. I have no problem with the 'responsibility' of my Vote. And frankly, I think you're still trying to bully me off of this case.

--------------------------------------------

Now that she's back...

@Khamisa- Would you care to respond to the following points?

I have a fairly strong Scum read on her. She's not helping in any way. She is so far beyond actively lurking that it hurts. I think p446 is pretty huge.

I don't get the Cephrir case. I searched his posts and couldn't find a "note to self" anywhere. Whatever the case, I'm sure bunches of other players make "notes to self" and yes, they are useless (I eman, does anybody really go back and look at them) but they aren't telling in any form I can think of.

Agree or disagree, I don't think I've ever understood a case as well as I understood the one against Cephrir. This whole post smacks of Scum trying to look good when the inevitable lynch goes through. Continuing on, p487 she says that she couldn't find the explanation. Again, agree or disagree, that was a very large and clear part of the discussion. Further, I don't like her strange reaction to zer0's question in p487. Regardless of whether there's merit to a question, I don't understand not answering it.

p894 {Khamisa}- Khamisa brings up what we all know. Mentioning the no kill = scummy IMO. She references the Kdub case on AT, but what about the MCD/Ald/hohum case? That's a bit odd to say the least considering how much of the thread is being dominated by it. Not looking at relationships on Cephrir would be a really bad idea. The relationships {not just buddies} shows us a lot! It shows us who was going after him with little/no reason. It shows us who was buddying with little/no reason {aside from knowledge of alignment}.

Also, why the active lurking? You've been back from V/LA for quite some time, but you come back to the game with no suspects and hardly anything to say? How would you like to see the Day progress? If you have no suspects, why aren't you asking anyone questions? What will it take to get you to participate?

[Alduskkel]

If they're such weak points, why are you [AndyTony] continually pushing back so hard? You've been going bananas from the get-go for such weak points that can't be used. Why not let the weak points speak for themselves? Clearly everyone else would see that they're not usable, right?

Right. So you can accuse him of ignoring questions.

Al, that's multiple times that you've popped in to defend AT. It wouldn't be so odd if it weren't for your early vote for him (based on your blanket agreement with my earlier points against him). Since the potential link has been pointed out between the two of you, you seem to have almost gone out of your way to draw AT to you.

I can't think of a logical reason why a townie would do this, but can think of a couple why scum might:

1. Player A (scum) draws in Player B (town) hoping to secure Player B's mislynch should Player A be lynched.
2. Player A (scum) draws in Player B (scum) actually hoping to muddy an existing link (through WIFOM) should Player A be lynched.

Both create a muddy link that the town needs to sort through after Player A is lynched and flips scum.

Thoughts?

Strong FoS: Alduskkel

And yet you haven't actually addressed my point. You just OMGUS'd me here (and screw you Andy, I have a looser definition of OMGUS ); you didn't respond to my point, just twisted it into something scummy and attacked me. You're essentially saying that if the points against AT were so weak then he shouldn't have bothered with them at all. If AT had done that I guarantee he would have taken flak.

And I better not be the only one having trouble following the AT-d3x exchange. This phrase just baffles me:

"Trying to paint this {my entry into the debate between you and MCd} as anything but {ie- me taking a special interest} is scummy"

[AndyTony]

lmao

d3x is "having a blast" while getting sarcastic, negative, and fussy lol "okay".

Bully you off the case?

Do whatever you need to do, man, it takes 7 to lynch and enough people see the whole debacle for what it really is.

Keep your vote, I've said my peace, mate
==============================================

@Khamisa
- Are there pressing RL circumstances that are making it harder than ideal to post more than you have been? Do you have anything more to say for yourself on any raised points?

-Why have you been avoiding confrontation?
-You seem to have spent D1 coasting on other players' ideas, and not really interrogating or taking risks

My vote lies between you and hohum.

hohum, though ignorant and lurking, is still seeming characteristic (though the lurking makes it worse by the day)

however your gameplay is uncharacteristic than what I've seen in the past, and you have been down right playing it safe all the way through.

See, if I had to decide between you or hohum being scum, I would say you. Hohum, with multiple things against him I can think of - has had a "fuck you" attitude throughout this game. He snaps, gets testy, curses, gets ignorant like a child when he can't form his own thoughts and suspicions into something legible etc. - - - - and honestly? That reads town in a way.

Think about it - why would he risk being lynched with such negativity off the get go? It's characteristic of him on mafiascum, in this game, and even now.

His lurking is what's saving a vote your way, and I'd like to see you address all the things presented to you!

[Alduskkel]

Can we stop with the insults? kthx

[AndyTony]

Someone insulted you?
------
What are your thoughts on Khamisa "playing it safe"?

I'm deciding between hohum and her, and hohum has played without caring who he offends/pisses off that it makes it difficult to see him as scum (but he's lurking). Khamisa has been people pleasing, and avoiding confrontation like CRAZY - - I don't even think she's had an interrogation of her own - if she's asked a question, it's been asked before/has been innocent and once again - to avoid confrontation.

She's played it safe and has had a couple major V/LA's.

Thoughts?