Open 188 - Tweed Mafia - Over!

[XScorpion]

I operate on the assumption that whoever has the most anti-town behaviour is most likely to be scum.

[StrangerCoug]

Unvote

Gonna opt to lay back for a bit and watch stuff unfold. Coug's still shaky, but I'm gonna go the path of inhibiting my vote until it's needed. I'm nowhere near wanting to lynch yet.

I was at L-5 before you pulled your vote. Granted, not the best position to be in, but I wasn't going to die anytime soon with your vote there.

Is there anything you still want to probe out of me? I'm all ears.

[StrangerCoug]

Oh, and

Mod: I'm voting KittyMo, not yabbaguy.

Mod fail noted - DTMaster

[Lowell]

If kitty can keep up this intensity throughout she'll be an asset. If she can't than this will be a waste of our time. In general I agree with nik's assesment.

unvote, vote zach

. 39 and 41, taken together, rub me the wrong way. 39 is meta and 41 is defensive and meta.

Is it your position that people who make meta arguments are scummy then?

Yes, basically. If that's pretty much all they do. It's my opinion that being meta is a good way to appear active while not really ruffling any feathers. This is what I see you doing, even in the way you phrased this question.

[Zachrulez]

If kitty can keep up this intensity throughout she'll be an asset. If she can't than this will be a waste of our time. In general I agree with nik's assesment.

unvote, vote zach

. 39 and 41, taken together, rub me the wrong way. 39 is meta and 41 is defensive and meta.

Is it your position that people who make meta arguments are scummy then?

Yes, basically. If that's pretty much all they do. It's my opinion that being meta is a good way to appear active while not really ruffling any feathers. This is what I see you doing, even in the way you phrased this question.

Curious that you've shown no interest in suave in that case...

[yabbaguy]

Curious that you've shown no interest in suave in that case...

This is true, but a questionable remark because it also serves to selfishly deflect suspicion.

Zach has racked up a lot of questionability so far in my notes:

-the weird vote on Kitty, saying "start some discussion"
-the abrasiveness, conveyed in post 19 (a real minus, I don't think it was fully explained why you weren't cooperating)
-questionable opportunism at 89 asking for an answer to his own question
-now the deflection to Suave

Any reason I shouldn't find any of the above questionable/scummy?

Brosius, LoLa (Locke Lamora), and Jason are lurking to me. Without enough activity, I can't read the entire game as well. Jason hasn't said a damn thing all game, no less.

[jasonT1981]

OK, sorry folks, been a bad week for me and have not been on MS at all, have also had to replace out of games due to this.. I will have a catch up hopefully by tomorrow evening.

Sorry again.

Noted - DTM

[Zachrulez]

Curious that you've shown no interest in suave in that case...

This is true, but a questionable remark because it also serves to selfishly deflect suspicion.

Huh? So it's scummy that I pointed out that while he was attacking me he was completely ignoring at least one other player who was doing the same thing? That's what you call being selective.

Zach has racked up a lot of questionability so far in my notes:

-the weird vote on Kitty, saying "start some discussion"

How was it weird?

-the abrasiveness, conveyed in post 19 (a real minus, I don't think it was fully explained why you weren't cooperating)

I found the questions she was asking to be scummy. Her question to me specifically.

Explain to me exactly what benefit it would be to the town to reveal what I find scummy. (Which would result in scum consequently not doing the things I tend to find reliably scummy.)

-questionable opportunism at 89 asking for an answer to his own question

So wanting an answer to a question I asked earlier is scummy, but the person who avoided answering the question in the first place is not?

-now the deflection to Suave

Interesting that you characterized my response that way. My point was directed more toward Lowell's selective method of attack, where he is interested in a bandwagon on me due to meta arguments, but apparently shows no interest in other players at all for doing the same thing. What exactly is wrong about that?

[DTMaster]

I will notify that I am putting my modding requirements on hold for 3 days due to exams and such. I can catch up to all pending requests on Wednesday. Since it is such a short time:

1. You may post unofficial vote counts and such.
2. I'm auto extending the dead line by 3 days that I'm away so December 24th is your new deadline.
3. Play fair

[Nikanor]

well, I don't want to get 2 days in and be like, "OH CRAP NIK IS SCUM!" I want to get this cleared up asap. hence, guilty untill prooven innocent. you will always be scum to me untill I cannot read you. but so far, my recent game wth you where I read you like a book, I'm going to go with the fact I can read you.

This makes no sense. If you always see me as scum, as you say in your fourth sentence, that means you cannot read me. Yet you think you can read me now. Use a defense that actually makes sense or be lynched.

Interesting that you characterized my response that way. My point was directed more toward Lowell's selective method of attack, where he is interested in a bandwagon on me due to meta arguments, but apparently shows no interest in other players at all for doing the same thing. What exactly is wrong about that?

This is what I saw. I don't see where yabba finds deflection.

@farside: You admit that Suave's meta 'evidence' is not valid. Why does your vote linger?

@Mod: Why are there fourteen votes in the poll? I'm scared.

[yabbaguy]

LoLa's the only nonvoter. I'm listed both there and Coug's wagon.

[yabbaguy]

Submitted way sooner than I wanted...

-Nik: this is really it.

Curious that you've shown no interest in suave in that case...

-Zach, I'll get to your points later. Felt like doing a 6 AM post... which I usually shouldn't.

[farside22]

@farside: You admit that Suave's meta 'evidence' is not valid. Why does your vote linger?

I'm waiting for a response from Suave on my question and see how he responds. Right now he has my full attention.
You are not scare of a vote on you are you? Does it concern you in some way or reason at this point?

[yabbaguy]

Questionability, often anti-town or speculative tells, can be done by other town or scum. I've racked up questionable points on most-to-all players in the game, so really they're not so much inherent scummy points as... points that can become scummy later.

Huh? So it's scummy that I pointed out that while he was attacking me he was completely ignoring at least one other player who was doing the same thing? That's what you call being selective.

It may be scummy, but the problem I have here is that suspicion deflection can also be construed as scummy. Seeing as they offset, I pegged it interesting.

"Weird vote" was more a random vote. I'm questionable for nitpicking at that.

I found the questions she was asking to be scummy. Her question to me specifically.

Right, I had forgotten this. I mean, the problem is that RQS also has that as one of its flaws, as some questions are pointless towards other players, others a little too hard-hitting. You can't really take it too much to heart. Point taken, though.

So wanting an answer to a question I asked earlier is scummy, but the person who avoided answering the question in the first place is not?

Questionable, again. The timing is what irked me, seeing as you kind of opportunistically pounced. Calling it scummy is a real stretch... but it just felt odd for whatever reason. Prob. just overreacting, might be because of a prior experience I had in O160, where scum BloodCovenent twisted an active lurking case out of a point not addressed to him or me. The situation here doesn't really parallel though, I'll admit... so I'm prob. overreacting.

I think that's an interesting window on how dangerously carefree I can be when notetaking. I gotta watch that.

---

Don't wait for a prod that's not gonna come in a few days, folks. Let's keep moving.

[MrSuave]

what question do you speak of?

[farside22]

To MrSuave:

well, I don't want to get 2 days in and be like, "OH CRAP NIK IS SCUM!" I want to get this cleared up asap. hence, guilty untill prooven innocent. you will always be scum to me untill I cannot read you. but so far, my recent game wth you where I read you like a book, I'm going to go with the fact I can read you.

Why are you saying that is normal meta is X when that is not the case then?

[farside22]

If kitty can keep up this intensity throughout she'll be an asset. If she can't than this will be a waste of our time. In general I agree with nik's assesment.

unvote, vote zach

. 39 and 41, taken together, rub me the wrong way. 39 is meta and 41 is defensive and meta.

Is it your position that people who make meta arguments are scummy then?

Yes, basically. If that's pretty much all they do. It's my opinion that being meta is a good way to appear active while not really ruffling any feathers. This is what I see you doing, even in the way you phrased this question.

Why the vote on Zach when MrSuave was the first to bring meta discussion up.

Reading 39 and 41. How is 39 meta?

SC post 68 can't say I agree with you here. Maybe it's the female in me but I know I get that if you don't like it then you do it attitude. No I'm not trying to say this in a sexist way but I've felt many times like Kitty has when someone tells me I fail I will go back at them and say well then lets see you do better.

@scorpion: What is the point of post 84? Why the self vote and how does that help the game at this point?
post 116 I would say it's hard to take you seriously. You're actions are either anti-town/scum or town trying to promote discussion and using traps to bait scum.

[farside22]

If kitty can keep up this intensity throughout she'll be an asset. If she can't than this will be a waste of our time. In general I agree with nik's assesment.

unvote, vote zach

. 39 and 41, taken together, rub me the wrong way. 39 is meta and 41 is defensive and meta.

Is it your position that people who make meta arguments are scummy then?

Yes, basically. If that's pretty much all they do. It's my opinion that being meta is a good way to appear active while not really ruffling any feathers. This is what I see you doing, even in the way you phrased this question.

Why the vote on Zach when MrSuave was the first to bring meta discussion up.

Reading 39 and 41. How is 39 meta?

SC post 68 can't say I agree with you here. Maybe it's the female in me but I know I get that if you don't like it then you do it attitude. No I'm not trying to say this in a sexist way but I've felt many times like Kitty has when someone tells me I fail I will go back at them and say well then lets see you do better.

@scorpion: What is the point of post 84? Why the self vote and how does that help the game at this point?
post 116 I would say it's hard to take you seriously. You're actions are either anti-town/scum or town trying to promote discussion and using traps to bait scum.

[farside22]

sorry for the double post the connection was slow and I didn't think it went through the first time.

[Lowell]

@farside- because I only have one vote. Zach strikes me as the bigger offender. suave is just plain lurky.

[Zachrulez]

@farside- because I only have one vote. Zach strikes me as the bigger offender. suave is just plain lurky.

Hmmmm...

You realize you've never bothered to explain why right? Speaking of lurky... your total contribution to the game is 6 short posts.

If kitty can keep up this intensity throughout she'll be an asset. If she can't than this will be a waste of our time. In general I agree with nik's assesment.

unvote, vote zach

. 39 and 41, taken together, rub me the wrong way. 39 is meta and 41 is defensive and meta.

What specifically about my posts "rub you the wrong way?"

I'd like to see some interest in a zach wagon if folks aren't doing anything other than telling jokes.

*Eyebrow* It would be one thing if you actually put much effort in explaining why you think I'm scummy, but your reasoning is actually quite vague.

@farside- I'm more or less uninspired by Kitty's recent play. She squirms too much for my liking, and overreacted to some mild comments. That said, KingMetaZach looks like a better option.

@zach- what question are you talking about?

Bold indicates you are not reading the game.

If kitty can keep up this intensity throughout she'll be an asset. If she can't than this will be a waste of our time. In general I agree with nik's assesment.

unvote, vote zach

. 39 and 41, taken together, rub me the wrong way. 39 is meta and 41 is defensive and meta.

Is it your position that people who make meta arguments are scummy then?

Yes, basically. If that's pretty much all they do. It's my opinion that being meta is a good way to appear active while not really ruffling any feathers. This is what I see you doing, even in the way you phrased this question.

Your accusation lacks analysis and evidence to illustrate your argument that I'm trying to appear active without ruffling any feathers.

Speaking of trying to appear active... throwing accusations around without backing them up is a really good way of going about that.

FOS:

[farside22]

@farside- because I only have one vote. Zach strikes me as the bigger offender. suave is just plain lurky.

How is post 39 meta talk?

[Nikanor]

You are not scare of a vote on you are you? Does it concern you in some way or reason at this point?

No, but not putting your vote where your mouth is is a scumtell.

-Nik: this is really it.

Curious that you've shown no interest in suave in that case...

I still only see Zach pointing out double standards. *Shrugs*

[MrSuave]

why do I say this is the norm? because I expect "hostility" from my friend Nik. he hasn't failed me before, at wanting to screw me over, so why should I expect different now? I was lightly trying to provoke him, this is true. but if you look at the werewolf game, I believ it was game C?, I was provoking him and he blatently ignored me. Now, if you look at a end game comment, it gets all wifomy because he states he will never be nice to me again. well, I took his ignoring of my pokes at him as a sign. that's all.

[Nikanor]

That's not the issue here. The issue is that YOU'VE BEEN LEAVING OUT EVIDENCE WHILE BUILDING A META ARGUMENT. Furthermore, when confronted with the contradicting evidence, you have dodged addressing it.

I'm going to ask you nice and slowly now so that you can't possibly dodge the question again:

Do
You
Consider
The
Pokemon
Madness
Mafia
Game
To
Exhibit
Signs
Of
Tunneling
On
You
By
Me
On
Day
One
Four
Pages
Into
The
Game?

If
Not,
Why
Did
You
Ignore
This
Evidence
While
Building
A
Meta
Attack?