Mini 858 - Dexter Season One (Game Over)

[don_johnson]

because lynching someone without a claim and subsequent discussion is stupid.

[Cyberbob]

Unvote, Vote: don_johnson

[don_johnson]

did i miss something? is lynching without a claim the "in" thing to do now? can someone explain to me what is "scummy" about wanting a claim before a lynch?

[don_johnson]

I can buy that nameclaim.

I haven't watched Season 1 in a while but Masuka is fairly consistently to-the-point.

i certainly hope that cyberbob isn't voting me for asking for a claim. he himself used a claim to determine the believability of another player, and yet is now voting me for what?

please explain the vote.

[Cyberbob]

I can buy that nameclaim.

I haven't watched Season 1 in a while but Masuka is fairly consistently to-the-point.

i certainly hope that cyberbob isn't voting me for asking for a claim. he himself used a claim to determine the believability of another player, and yet is now voting me for what?

please explain the vote.

I

used

the claim, but I did not ask for it. There is a difference, particularly when you are fishing as blatantly and as badly as you are.

[Budja]

don, you are basically asking for a claim without having even giving much of an opinion on Konowa before. The purpose of a claim is a last chance to stop the lynch to save a PR, whatever. It is not the time to make decisions .

[don_johnson]

If someone threatens with a possible hammer I will claim.

Consider yourself threatened.

^^ are we not going to lynch konowa? it seemed as though that was the direction we were heading. is there any reason that alamaster is getting a pass on this? is it because of his stellar contribution(all 12 posts)?

lynching someone without a claim and subsequent discussion is stupid.

^^ anyone who disagrees with this statement may speak up and explain themselves. if we are not lynching konowa, then i retract the request for a claim, but it seemed as though that's what was happening. so whatever.

[Juls]

Vote Count

AlmasterGM

(Konowa)

don_johnson

(SocioPath, Cyberbob)

Budja

( )

chamber

()

charter

()

Cyberbob

( )

Debonair Danny DiPietro

(Budja)

Jebus

(Locke Lamora)

Konowa

(don_johnson, Sotty7, Debonair Danny DiPietro)

Locke Lamora

(chamber)

SocioPath

( )

Sotty7

( )

Not Voting :

Jebus, AlmasterGM, charter

Deadline :

November 4

Notes:

None.

[AlmasterGM]

^^ are we not going to lynch konowa? it seemed as though that was the direction we were heading. is there any reason that alamaster is getting a pass on this? is it because of his stellar contribution(all 12 posts)?

Your desperation is noted. What have I done that is bad, exactly?

[don_johnson]

^^ are we not going to lynch konowa? it seemed as though that was the direction we were heading. is there any reason that alamaster is getting a pass on this? is it because of his stellar contribution(all 12 posts)?

Your desperation is noted. What have I done that is bad, exactly?

what desperation? i don't think nyou've done anything bad. personally i don't have a problem with your post, i am simply pointing out the poor logic used to vote me, yet again.

you seem to have been under the same impression that i was. the impression that we were lynching konowa.

he said "i'll claim if threatened,"
you said," consider yourself threatened."
that's not real different from me saying, "go ahead and claim."
yet for some reason, instead of calling out both of us, i'm the one getting called out.

why did you say "consider yourself threatened"? when you said it, did you realize that the implication would be a role claim? if so, do you find your actions suspicious? if not, then what is suspicious about my actions? get it?

cyberbob is now accusing me of rolefishing because i asked for a claim from who both you and i thought was the number one lynch candidate for the day. considering you asked for the roleclaim as well, do you not find anything odd about cyber's accusation?

[AlmasterGM]

The difference is because you want the claim to "make up your mind." This shouldn't be necessary. The only point of the claim is to check back a lynch on a PR. If he claims Vanilla or something dumb that is obviously a lie, then you should be ready to proceed almost immediately.

[Konowa]

I do not like how you [dj] are still invoking Artem's name. You have parked your vote, or rather Artem's, since you have replaced in and have contributed nothing to scum-hunting. Now you are saying that I am good as any, banking on Artem's opinion and not your own.

unvote;

vote don_johnson

[don_johnson]

The difference is because you want the claim to "make up your mind." This shouldn't be necessary. The only point of the claim is to check back a lynch on a PR. If he claims Vanilla or something dumb that is obviously a lie, then you should be ready to proceed almost immediately.

and?

i'll take the claim and go from there.

how is this ^^ different from "checking back a lynch on a powerrole"?

if he claims something dumb or that is obviously a lie, what gives you the impression that i wouldn't carry through with the lynch?

if i did think the claim was dumb, would it be advisable to hammer without discussion, or would it be better to discuss why i think its dumb before taking action?

what if his claim is entirely believable and fits perfectly with the flavor? would someone who unvotes because they believe the claim then be accused of "using the claim to make up their mind"?

charter asked:

don, explain why you have to hear a claim to make up your mind.

dj responded:

because lynching someone without a claim and subsequent discussion is stupid.

what's the issue? do you disagree with my statement?

[don_johnson]

I do not like how you [dj] are still invoking Artem's name.

You have parked your vote, or rather Artem's, since you have replaced in and have contributed nothing to scum-hunting.

Now you are saying that I am good as any,

banking on Artem's opinion and not your own.

bolded are the misreps here. i am not "still" invoking artem's name. it was used the exact same number of times now as it had been since your last accusation. also, i did not say you are as good as any. i actually said that i'd listen to your claim and go from there.

to say i have contributed nothing to scumhunting is also false. i am currently engaged with several players and have TWICE pointed out faulty logic.

[Konowa]

bolded are the misreps here. i am not "still" invoking artem's name. it was used the exact same number of times now as it had been since your last accusation. also, i did not say you are as good as any. i actually said that i'd listen to your claim and go from there.

Your [dj] post 270 reads differently to me.

not to continue arguing as that usually goes nowhere, but you are ignoring context when referencing my statements. i didn't just "throw artem's name out there." i was attacked with "your contribution is minimal, therefore you are scum." i used artems contribution in addition to my own(which was admittedly minimal) to point out that there were other player slots which fit the equation better.

i don't know who is scum here, but you are as good a bet as any for day 1, and as i said before, townartem is a good player so i'm trusting his opinion.

i don't see the case on chamber, and my other suspects will be investigated soon enough.

You do say that you will take my claim and go from there later in that post. However, it looks like you are trying to absolve yourself of the vote by saying that you trust Artem.

[don_johnson]

bolded are the misreps here. i am not "still" invoking artem's name. it was used the exact same number of times now as it had been since your last accusation. also, i did not say you are as good as any. i actually said that i'd listen to your claim and go from there.

Your [dj] post 270 reads differently to me.

not to continue arguing as that usually goes nowhere, but you are ignoring context when referencing my statements. i didn't just "throw artem's name out there." i was attacked with "your contribution is minimal, therefore you are scum." i used artems contribution in addition to my own(which was admittedly minimal) to point out that there were other player slots which fit the equation better.

i don't know who is scum here, but you are as good a bet as any for day 1, and as i said before, townartem is a good player so i'm trusting his opinion.

i don't see the case on chamber, and my other suspects will be investigated soon enough.

You do say that you will take my claim and go from there later in that post. However, it looks like you are trying to absolve yourself of the vote by saying that you trust Artem.

touche. agree to disagree on the interpretation here.

i am not, however, trying to absolve myself from the vote. if you were lynched and flip town and i then said, "well, i was trusting artem!", then i would be 'trying to absolve myself' from the vote. as it stands, i am not. i am clearly standing behind said vote. personally, i am waiting on cyberbob's response.i just reread the entire thread and you are still among my top suspects.

I do not like how you [dj] are still invoking Artem's name.

for reference. artem's name was invoked once in 233. then, when you questioned me on it, his name was brought up again in 270, but only because you asked why. this statement seems as though you are trying to paint something scummy which is clearly not. my use of artem's name was part of a logical equation being evoked to respond to an illogical accusation against me.

if you want to change my vote, then convince me. there are a couple others i will consider, but i am fine starting with you. are you willing to lynch chamber? he's dropped out of sight since this discussion began, no?

[don_johnson]

I can buy that nameclaim.

I haven't watched Season 1 in a while but Masuka is fairly consistently to-the-point.

i certainly hope that cyberbob isn't voting me for asking for a claim. he himself used a claim to determine the believability of another player, and yet is now voting me for what?

please explain the vote.

I

used

the claim, but I did not ask for it. There is a difference, particularly when you are fishing as blatantly and as badly as you are.

maybe i missed this.

how is asking for a claim from a player who is at hypotheticalL-2 rolefishing? there were five players on konowa's wagon when i asked for the claim. if i was scum, what need do i have to "rolefish" a player who is going to be lynched? as town, wouldn't it make sense to ask for a claim at hypoL-2? especially in a game where the vote count is clearly unreliable as per game specific rules laid out by the mod?

you have got to be joking.

[Budja]

don, why are you completely ignoring what both Almaster and I have both already stated.

Its not what you did, its

the reasons you gave for doing it

.

to say i have contributed nothing to scumhunting is also false. i am currently engaged with several players and have TWICE pointed out faulty logic.

I am not seeing "don scumhunting", I am seeing "don covering his back". Your scumhunting are mainly defence. I am getting a strong desperation to survive vibe from your posts.
Altogether, this is giving me a strong scum/neutral read.

unvote, vote don

[Juls]

Vote Count

AlmasterGM

( )

don_johnson

(SocioPath, Cyberbob, Konowa, Budja)

Budja

( )

chamber

()

charter

()

Cyberbob

( )

Debonair Danny DiPietro

( )

Jebus

(Locke Lamora)

Konowa

(don_johnson, Sotty7, Debonair Danny DiPietro)

Locke Lamora

(chamber)

SocioPath

( )

Sotty7

( )

Not Voting :

Jebus, AlmasterGM, charter

Deadline :

November 4

Notes:

None.

[don_johnson]

don, why are you completely ignoring what both Almaster and I have both already stated.

Its not what you did, its

the reasons you gave for doing it

.

not following you. i asked for a claim from a player with five votes on them to help determine if they are the best candidate for lynch. what is the correct reason? if the claim doesn't have the chance of making a difference, then why do we ask players to claim at all?

please be careful with votes. i am most likely closer to being lynched than some of you may think.

if someone has a question for me, please ask. simply piling on votes because i asked a player at hypoL-2 for a roleclaim with the intention of actually processing and discussing said roleclaim, is a bit strange.

[charter]

I am finding myself wanting to go back on chamber. Cyberbob, your thoughts?

[don_johnson]

The difference is because you want the claim to "make up your mind." This shouldn't be necessary. The only point of the claim is to check back a lynch on a PR. If he claims Vanilla or something dumb that is obviously a lie, then you should be ready to proceed almost immediately.

^^ this was not ignored. it was addressed in post 287.

The purpose of a claim is a last chance to stop the lynch to save a PR, whatever.

It is not the time to make decisions

isn't stopping a lynch to save a power role considered a "decision"? this is the most contradictory statement i have ever read.

the purpose of a claim is so that we can DECIDE whether or not to lynch the player if they claim a power role. not to make DECISIONS.

^^ fixed.

[chamber]

I am finding myself wanting to go back on chamber. Cyberbob, your thoughts?

I was wondering why I found myself with no votes so quickly.

For the record don seems like a terrible lynch and ll needs to die.

[don_johnson]

unvote.

thinking scum is on my wagon so i went back to review the votes on me. konowa was the only person addressing me in a pro-town manner. sp is too hard to call as he seemed to verbalize his issues with me well, however, since has dropped out of the discussion. alamaster(who didn't vote me when he easily could have) has posted some things earlier which have me leaning slightly town on him. however, he too seems to have dropped out of the conversation. so that leaves my top two right now as:

budja
cyberbob

with budja's just plain terrible hop onto my wagon grabbing the top spot on my scumlist. i don't think chamber is scum. i would like to hear more of a case on locke. charter is, well, charter. a very difficult read with the post restriction.

[don_johnson]

ebwop:

unvote