Mini #1004 - Popularity Mafia (Over)

[VasudeVa]

Ugh. My head hurts.

Hold on, imma parse through this content explosion when I'm not high as a kite.

[Xite91]

Unvote

Going to bed. Vote will return tomorrow probably

[Parama]

Parama, to be honest, I'm tired of your AtE and that last long post of yours looks like "lynch me, I dare you"
I've seen that all too often from scum.

Unvote, Vote: Parama

I will be around to unvote if the wagon grows a little too fast.

And this is why I don't like playing with you.
YOU ARE COMPLETELY MISSING THE POINT.

DID YOU NOT EVEN READ MY POINTS AGAINST CHARLIE? NO, YOU DIDN'T. I CAN TELL YOU DIDN'T.

[LlamaFluff]

Vote Count

No Lynch (3) - Parama, Twomz, vollkan
Twomz (1) - Andrius
Parama (1) - Charlie

Not Voting (3) - VasudeVa, Hinduragi, Xite91

Deadline in 48 hours

[VasudeVa]

Parama, your #1444 defense against Charlie is hardly satisfactory. You are either replying with vague answers, AtE or non-answers. Charlie makes some great points against you and whatever the hell that post was, I don't count it as proper defense. You have no right to whine about how much Town sucks when you aren't even trying(or you're trying but failing hard, w/e.).

Also, just because you do massive catchup posts as scum doesn't mean everyone does. I find Charlie did a genuine attempt at catching scum with his post(based on how detailed it was, and how much effort it took. Signs of genuineness.). You dismissing it because you 'do that shit as scum' doesn't mean that scum are less likely to put that much effort upon replacing in. Can you tell me why you think he's scum? You effectively ignored his attempt to catch scum by page by page analysis, and just looked at his conclusions. While I'm not a fan of his conclusions too, I look at the whole pie instead of one slice.

Charlie, why are you voting for Parama instead of vollkan? I don't see the reason mentioned anywhere.

[VasudeVa]

Thank God it takes 5 votes to lynch at this MyLo. Can people please stop jumping the gun, it's giving me a headache.

We are no lynching today, okay? There is little to no reason to do otherwise. Even if you're sure that another dude is scum, you can afford to wait. Right? RIGHTT~?~!?@~

prevedit:
@Xite: I think my explanation was sufficient. Perhaps if you explain to me why you don't understand, I can explain it to you better.

Vote: No lynch

I want my questions answered before anyone hammers though.

[Parama]

Vague? I'm answering the accusations and proving why they're wrong. I'm specifically addressing every point. And that's vague? <.<

[Parama]

Charlie, why are you voting for Parama instead of vollkan? I don't see the reason mentioned anywhere.

Also, I'll answer this for you:
He doesn't want to lynch a scumbuddy in MyLo, so instead he's opting for a ML.

You guys are really freaking dumb if you haven't picked up on this by now.

[VasudeVa]

Vague? I'm answering the accusations and proving why they're wrong. I'm specifically addressing every point. And that's vague? <.<

I have to call bullshit. Lemme get my handy-dandy bullshit detector:

Final leg of reading, but as usual I always check the latest posts to respond to:

BZZZZT. I did not judge the AMOUNT of effort, only the genuinity of the effort. Huuuge difference.

Can't say I believe you there.

...but what I said here is exactly what I said before. You were attacking me for a "lack" of effort, implying amount. I said you couldn't judge effort that way.
I'm saying Xite's effort, whether huge or small, is genuine effort, not falsified effort. Not implying an amount.

Semantic nitpicking of the word "lack". Avoids Charlie's attack by making Charlie's attack sound like something else. YOU are the one in question here, not him. You've ultimately avoided his attack by attacking him right back.

...linked the post I was talking about...
Which you took out in this quote. Nice job.

Oh gosh; that "If you say so" wasn't an attack, learn to read in context! Your over defensiveness in this matter is suspicious to me.

"If you say so" always implies mistrust to me. I usually just put a <_< after it to make it more obvious what I mean <_<

Another one of your "To me" beliefs, thinking that everything that revolves around you is correct. While I know it's part of your playstyle, it doesn't answer anything.

My honest suspicions, yes.
Wait, how's that scummy?

Look, not everything I say about you is "scummy" or attacking you. My analysis consists of a mixture of suspicions, pro-town behavior, gut reads and others... You are overreacting to nothing.

I post my scumreads - the only reasons you'd mention that is if you had something to say about it.
Unless you're going for the IIoA approach in your analysis, which I don't think you are.

I don't even know why you're saying this in response to Charlie's statement.

Dear god are you people not seeing this. He's trying to scumlink based on a meta comment (guess what I hate meta). Do you even know what distancing implies? Calling another player town doesn't exactly imply distancing.
Also again you're saying I gave my scumreads but don't say what the problem is with that.

1) I get that you don't like meta; and I don't like it also for I feel it isn't worth the effort. In the event that it is available, I'll apply a subjective view towards it. Moreso of the fact that I'll have to take a person's word for it and look back at the meta-ed game.
2) Perhaps I have the terminology wrong; its not distancing then... the opposite of bussing? Coaching, perhaps?
3) Once again, you view this as an attack when it is not. Read in context, please.

1. mmk
2. buddying
3. see above

Nothing here too.

...
This is the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Active posting =/= pro-town by default. What if someone posted 5 posts in a row, but they were all fluff? By your logic, they're more pro-town than the guy who posted once but with content.

Oh my lord, you are clearly not reading the whole thing or you've missed out on important details. I just said what you said above there, you didn't notice it? Go find it yourself; I'm not linking it for your apathetic/lazy behavior.

I'm always lazy but whatever.
Also the post I quoted did imply the opposite of what I described, so...

Self-metaing lazyness to avoid Charlie's accusations.

This is just Charlie trying to look good.

Oh no, he found out my secret!

Pro-tip - townies don't put effort into trying to look town, scum do

Not explaining the 'Charlie trying to look good' in detail. It's a serious accusation without accusation. Then the pro-tip is just worthless and still doesn't explain anything..

Ooor Andrius/vollkan are the scum on the wagon.

Can't really blame you for saying this; you're defending yourself by pointing out the other possibilities. Changes nothing.

But, looking at your most recent post, you'd be totally fine believing this

I don't even understand why you said this.

Honest logic, bro. I know how it looks, but it's exactly what I feel.
If it's advocating an Andrius lynch (who you have a scum read on) why do you care, though?

You do realize that you're my top suspicion along with Andrius, no?

And there are 3 scum. I fail to see your point.
P.S. - 2 of your top 3 suspicions are right, but the third is very very wrong.

More vagueness, more a lot more of nothing, more fluff.

A failtown posting a weak case on me automatically makes me scummier? What kind of world do you live in?

C'mon, only you think that's failtown. Don't project your opinions directly on me; convince and not force. You're certainly not pro-town for this.

I'd define vezok as failtown (no offense)

Again, nothing.

*switches vote one time from one strong scum read to the next, first post of the page.

Yeah, vote hopping!

...
Tell me how this is vote hopping.

Charlie is being as vague to you as you are to him. It doesn't mean anything, he gave up trying to get anything from you because you are not giving coherent reactions.

Oh, and you continue to over react.

Lol, people posting a case on me automatically makes me scummier.
Why don't I go BS a case on every player in this game? I could totally do it, but it wouldn't prove anything.

Man Charlie your logic is weaker than vollkan's was at the start of the game.

If you say so

Why, yes I do.

Again, nothing. The amount of 'nothings' in this post makes me think that you're trying to look good by making the posts longer than they should be.

Page 43: Mmmh, Parama's setup speculation... at #1050. Right, I know that setup speculations are notorious for being misleading; but I personally feel it is okay to some extent (not to mention fun to guess around a bit). Based on the seperations, a Parama/Twomz/VasudaVa mafia team fits. Otherwise, Andrius/Vollkan/VasudaVa. But the rest of the page sums up popular opinion: this isn't reliable because it could all be easily randomized. The rest of the page show some connections between players, but I'm not sure how to connect the dots because we lack a mafia flip.

I leaned away from this earlier, but I just noticed a Charlie/vollkan/Andrius team fits with this too ^.^

Lack of explanation, vagueness etc.

Page 46: ... It leads us to vollkan's #1136 which is terrible! He ends up in a worse position than VasudaVa. Aside from his vebrose post, he's trying to sell his points of view and make it sound like a fact. That's bull crap right there. Vote vote vote!

Following that he has a Wall of Quotes/Wall of text which is also unimpressive. Who are you hoping to convince with those points? And no I don't buy what he's selling. I'm more confident that vollkan's manipulating mafia at this point. This or he's so caught up in doing "townie analysis" to the point that he's blinded by the fact that not everything is black and white logic in Mafia.

d(''d)

You also barely mentioned me in that last set, whereas vollkan was a hot topic, so your vote on me in light of your most recent analysis post makes little to no sense coming from a townie.

This one is the only one that makes a tid bit of sense. But it's an obvious move from anyone to question Charlie's vote, so not nearly enough to make me feel good about this post

.

--prev-edit.
That does make sense, but it's baseless theory. Can you give me links/evidence that will give your theory credence?

You've been shouting out random names throughout the course of the game. Forgive me if I can't find myself willing to believe your unsubstantiated attacks.

[Xite91]

Parama, to be honest, I'm tired of your AtE and that last long post of yours looks like "lynch me, I dare you"
I've seen that all too often from scum.

Unvote, Vote: Parama

I will be around to unvote if the wagon grows a little too fast.

And this is why I don't like playing with you.
YOU ARE COMPLETELY MISSING THE POINT.

DID YOU NOT EVEN READ MY POINTS AGAINST CHARLIE? NO, YOU DIDN'T. I CAN TELL YOU DIDN'T.

I read them but there was too much nothing there to consider. VV actually says it VERY well. Oh, and I'm back again, so

Vote:Parama

[Parama]

I freaking hate that response style btw.

Final leg of reading, but as usual I always check the latest posts to respond to:

BZZZZT. I did not judge the AMOUNT of effort, only the genuinity of the effort. Huuuge difference.

Can't say I believe you there.

...but what I said here is exactly what I said before. You were attacking me for a "lack" of effort, implying amount. I said you couldn't judge effort that way.
I'm saying Xite's effort, whether huge or small, is genuine effort, not falsified effort. Not implying an amount.

Semantic nitpicking of the word "lack". Avoids Charlie's attack by making Charlie's attack sound like something else. YOU are the one in question here, not him. You've ultimately avoided his attack by attacking him right back.

BZZZT again. Charlie's attack IS something else, regardless of what it looks like. Charlie attacked me for "lack" of effort which means he believes I'm not putting effort into my posting.
That has nothing to do with how genuine one's effort is, which is the point I argued.
If you can tell me how lack implies non-genuine, I will give you an e-cookie.
In fact you should explain this or your point is null.

...linked the post I was talking about...
Which you took out in this quote. Nice job.

Oh gosh; that "If you say so" wasn't an attack, learn to read in context! Your over defensiveness in this matter is suspicious to me.

"If you say so" always implies mistrust to me. I usually just put a <_< after it to make it more obvious what I mean <_<

Another one of your "To me" beliefs, thinking that everything that revolves around you is correct. While I know it's part of your playstyle, it doesn't answer anything.

[/quote]
But Charlie himself said it wasn't an accusation.

My honest suspicions, yes.
Wait, how's that scummy?

Look, not everything I say about you is "scummy" or attacking you. My analysis consists of a mixture of suspicions, pro-town behavior, gut reads and others... You are overreacting to nothing.

I post my scumreads - the only reasons you'd mention that is if you had something to say about it.
Unless you're going for the IIoA approach in your analysis, which I don't think you are.

I don't even know why you're saying this in response to Charlie's statement.

[/quote]
My response is COMPLETELY logical. I'm saying that he had no reason to mention my scumreads unless he found them suspicious or noteworthy in a way. And from his post he doesn't. Forgive me for being completely confused as to why he even brought it up in the first place if he doesn't think it's important.

Dear god are you people not seeing this. He's trying to scumlink based on a meta comment (guess what I hate meta). Do you even know what distancing implies? Calling another player town doesn't exactly imply distancing.
Also again you're saying I gave my scumreads but don't say what the problem is with that.

1) I get that you don't like meta; and I don't like it also for I feel it isn't worth the effort. In the event that it is available, I'll apply a subjective view towards it. Moreso of the fact that I'll have to take a person's word for it and look back at the meta-ed game.
2) Perhaps I have the terminology wrong; its not distancing then... the opposite of bussing? Coaching, perhaps?
3) Once again, you view this as an attack when it is not. Read in context, please.

1. mmk
2. buddying
3. see above

Nothing here too.

[/quote]
Responses = nothing? These are all that needs to be said - 1st point I can agree with, 2nd I gave him the word he was looking for, 3rd was similar to what was said above. And that's exactly what this post contains.

...
This is the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Active posting =/= pro-town by default. What if someone posted 5 posts in a row, but they were all fluff? By your logic, they're more pro-town than the guy who posted once but with content.

Oh my lord, you are clearly not reading the whole thing or you've missed out on important details. I just said what you said above there, you didn't notice it? Go find it yourself; I'm not linking it for your apathetic/lazy behavior.[/quote]
I'm always lazy but whatever.
Also the post I quoted did imply the opposite of what I described, so...[/quote]

Self-metaing lazyness to avoid Charlie's accusations.

[/quote]
Noooo. Nooo. I'm saying that, yes, I am lazy, but I'm repeating that my original accusation still stands because the Charlie post DID imply what I said it implied, regardless of whether he meant it that way or not.

This is just Charlie trying to look good.

Oh no, he found out my secret!

Pro-tip - townies don't put effort into trying to look town, scum do

Not explaining the 'Charlie trying to look good' in detail. It's a serious accusation without accusation. Then the pro-tip is just worthless and still doesn't explain anything..

[/quote]
Uh, you're missing the quote from Charlie that was originally in my first response. Because Charlie decided to leave out everything I'd quoted from him in responding to my responses.

Ooor Andrius/vollkan are the scum on the wagon.

Can't really blame you for saying this; you're defending yourself by pointing out the other possibilities. Changes nothing.

But, looking at your most recent post, you'd be totally fine believing this.

I don't even understand why you said this.

[/quote]
His scumlist had Andrius and vollkan both in the top 3. Yet he says I'm deflecting even though I'm pointing out what he himself settles on later in his analysis.

Honest logic, bro. I know how it looks, but it's exactly what I feel.
If it's advocating an Andrius lynch (who you have a scum read on) why do you care, though?

You do realize that you're my top suspicion along with Andrius, no?

And there are 3 scum. I fail to see your point.
P.S. - 2 of your top 3 suspicions are right, but the third is very very wrong.

More vagueness, more a lot more of nothing, more fluff.

[/quote]
Uh...
If you have 3 scumreads, and it's important to always lynch right, why wouldn't you be fine with lynching any of your top 3 reads? Just because I'm a top suspicion doesn't mean he can't be considering an Andrius lynch, too, wouldn't you think.
Trying to explain this to you is like talking to a brick wall, it seems. There's no fluff here; I'm responding succintly to posts that deserve no more than succintness.

A failtown posting a weak case on me automatically makes me scummier? What kind of world do you live in?

C'mon, only you think that's failtown. Don't project your opinions directly on me; convince and not force. You're certainly not pro-town for this.

I'd define vezok as failtown (no offense)

Again, nothing.

[/quote]
I'm saying that Yes I would define vezok as failtown which is in agreement with the first quote here, my original statement.
I don't post "nothing" ever. I am not a fluffy person.

*switches vote one time from one strong scum read to the next, first post of the page.

Yeah, vote hopping!

...
Tell me how this is vote hopping.

Charlie is being as vague to you as you are to him. It doesn't mean anything, he gave up trying to get anything from you because you are not giving coherent reactions.

Oh, and you continue to over react.

[/quote]
...
My BS meter is going off the charts here. All I'm going to say. He did not explain HOW a SINGLE VOTE SWITCH

FROM ONE TOP SUSPICION

TO ANOTHER

MAKES ME A VOTE-HOPPER

.
How do you define vote-hopping, then?
And how am I supposed to react to BS logic? Sit back and let myself be lynched?

Lol, people posting a case on me automatically makes me scummier.
Why don't I go BS a case on every player in this game? I could totally do it, but it wouldn't prove anything.

Man Charlie your logic is weaker than vollkan's was at the start of the game.

If you say so

Why, yes I do.

Again, nothing. The amount of 'nothings' in this post makes me think that you're trying to look good by making the posts longer than they should be.

[/quote]
Actually, I'm just responding to everything directed at me. If that's "fluff" then I guess I shouldn't respond at all.

In fact, I'm just going to stop responding right here. No kidding. Because obviously responding to posts is fluff and I should be lynched for it.

[Parama]

And this is why I hate that response style. Messed up the quote tags every single time.

[Parama]

I read them but there was too much nothing there to consider.

...
A blatant FoS: Scumbuddy Vote: Townie in which the scum ranked his scumbuddy above the townie in his list of suspicions and then tries to cop out of the vote with a lame excuse is NOTHING TO CONSIDER?

...

I can't even deal with this anymore.

Requesting Replacement

. Call me a quitter if you want to, I don't give a damn. Obviously nobody here understands basic logic, and making perfect sense doesn't work in Mini 1004 because sense is a lie.
GG scum, I hope you win this one. You deserve it.

VV actually says it VERY well.

Pssh. You probably didn't even read his responses. Your post doesn't make it look like you did.

[Xite91]

I read them but there was too much nothing there to consider.

...
A blatant FoS: Scumbuddy Vote: Townie in which the scum ranked his scumbuddy above the townie in his list of suspicions and then tries to cop out of the vote with a lame excuse is NOTHING TO CONSIDER?

...

I can't even deal with this anymore.

Requesting Replacement

. Call me a quitter if you want to, I don't give a damn. Obviously nobody here understands basic logic, and making perfect sense doesn't work in Mini 1004 because sense is a lie.
GG scum, I hope you win this one. You deserve it.

VV actually says it VERY well.

Pssh. You probably didn't even read his responses. Your post doesn't make it look like you did.

You know, based on a flip of someone that acts exactly like you are right now I was willing to say you were probably town, until that replace out thing. I'm done dealing with you, and at this point I'd rather everyone just help me lynch you than him find a replacement.
I pointed out why that was wrong, and EVEN YOU JUST SAID that if you have 3 top suspects, you should be willing to lynch any of the three, did you not? So your point is invalid and you're flailing like a madman.

My Vote stays

[vollkan]

ALSO.

Why are people voting in MyLo? I'm going to be NLing until the scum get the balls to kill someone, even if it a takes a whole damn year. Discussion is fine but the discussion that's happened during today has been mostly useless crap. We sat around waiting for Nicol for a week, then he got replaced, and now we're sitting around and waiting for Charlie to make biased and opportunistic cases on me to try and push a ML on me tomorrow after he kills obvtown Xite tonight while hanging out with his buddies vollkan and Andrius.

THERE IS NO GOOD REASON TO LYNCH IN MYLO WHEN WE'RE ALMOST 100% SURE THERE ARE NO POWER ROLES (P.S. - There aren't unless they've been doing a terrible job protecting, investigating, tracking, watching etc. because I don't believe it for a second that we don't have anyone confirmed town due to roles AND these roles that could confirm townies exist)

Sounds a lot like you're flailing Parama.
I'm curious, though, how am I ovbtown again? I think that's the first time I've seen me called that this game.

Why does it look like flailing? Then again, I've got basically the same frustration with the NL opposition, so maybe I am more sympathetic...

Um, I've told you in our QT that you're my strongest town read. Twice, I think. <_<

Why is he your strongest town read?

Why would I waste my time explaining my town reads?

Because calling somebody town is a common scum buddying tactic, so it makes sense for us to ask you why you called him town, because absence of reasons = bullshit

I've seen nothing in your posts or you behavior to make me think you're scum;

*sigh*

I really wish people would stop confusing "town" with "null". The absence of scumtells makes somebody less likely to be scum, but it is not positive evidence for them being town (ie. it cannot make them 'obvtown')

Page 26: At this point I've noticed that Andrius makes a lot more posts as compared to Twomz's slot (my opposing mafia read). I can view Twomz's slot as lurkish; thus diluting the apparent "scumminess" caused earlier by Andrius.

No. Number of posts is irrelevant to alignment. Town get bored, lazy, writer's blocked, etc. etc. In contrast, scum get excited, hyper-posting, and aggressive. I am NOT saying only town get bored and only scum are aggressive (I'm a big proponent of the view that aggession is not scummy). My POINT is that lurking is a nulltell.

Page 31: Hinduragi's slot's #754 looks town.

Because?

Page 33: I disagree a lot with vollkan's #802. Sometimes gut is the way to go because logic fails.

You're ignoring the context. Vezok, who if you aren't aware is pretty much a cancer upon the game of mafia, said "RayFrost is scum cause I have a gut feeling about him."

Even if there are some rare cases where logic fails, nothing suggests that this was one of them. 99.99% of the time when people use gut, there are plenty of good logical reasons available, but they are CHOOSING to go with their emotional instincts. For a whole range of theory reasons that I shouldn't go into here, I think that's wrong.

Vollkan's previous case on her is... not leaving an impression.

My case on whom?

Page 46: ... It leads us to vollkan's #1136 which is terrible! He ends up in a worse position than VasudaVa. Aside from his vebrose post, he's trying to sell his points of view and make it sound like a fact. That's bull crap right there. Vote vote vote!

My 1136:

@Volkan: Basically from #1063-#1074. I think it's slightly important since Taz pushed Parama to L-3 and you didn't post in that time frame. In the event that you are scum and Taz and Xite are Town, that would have been a splendid time to hammer and get the win.

I was accusing Parama's #1095 to be an attempt to buddy Twomz. Parama said Twomz is Town just because he 'agreed with him'. It doesn't make much sense to me to think that someone else is Town because you agreed with him. It makes more sense that someone is Town based on their actions. And Twomz' votal copy pasta + lazy analysis does not really strike me as something that would make a Townie say 'Twomz is Town' nor does Parama's explanation 'I agreed with him' as a reasonable defense.

Yeah, that. Thoughts on that?

On 1063-1074: I myself have already indicated that the "distancing" accusation made no sense (nor did the "coaching" one, for that matter). It's a bad vote as it is, but for a MYLO vote, it's terrible. Xite's defence of it in 1074 is interesting, in that while Taz allegedly "claimed he would do it last night", the ostensible reasoning for the vote is based purely on something that occurred today (or, more accurately, something which Taz says occurred today).

On 1095 issue: I think you are blowing it out of proportion somewhat. If we're going to be pedantic, the yes it's true that agreeing with somebody is not the same as thinking they are town. But it's a reasonably common colloquial thing to say that somebody is town if they post something you agree with. I don't do it myself, but it doesn't strike me as unusual. If Parama is scum, then it's very likely buddying and so may have implications for Twomz' alignment, but it isn't a scumtell.

Yoda talks: majorly iffy, vollkan is.

In between 20 and 200 words, why do you suspect me?

How on earth is that "verborse"?

Second, I hate the "fact"/"opinion" distinction you are trying to draw here.

The distnacing and coaching claims were bullshit. AFAIK, nobody has yet refuted what I said. If I was wrong, somebody should be able to explain why.

And on 1095, I didn't even say I was absolutely correct, merely that I thought it was being blown out of propoertion.

Following that he has a Wall of Quotes/Wall of text which is also unimpressive. Who are you hoping to convince with those points?

Walls are not scummy. They are a playstyle thing. Some people like only making brief posts; others like me like being comprehensive and having a record of everything.

Page 47: The bottom half of this page consists of vollkan defending himself from the trouble he stirred himself up into, akin to digging his own grave. People expressed that they don't agree to his line of thought and he subsequently says stuff. This is manipulation at its finest, people! vollkan is purposely generating content from nothing. We should vote him now. Law students cannot be trusted. VOTE: vollkan

Why is it manipulation? You keep repeating that word without any justification. You've also failed entirely to explain why you don't 'buy' my meta defence.

[Parama]

I read them but there was too much nothing there to consider.

...
A blatant FoS: Scumbuddy Vote: Townie in which the scum ranked his scumbuddy above the townie in his list of suspicions and then tries to cop out of the vote with a lame excuse is NOTHING TO CONSIDER?

...

I can't even deal with this anymore.

Requesting Replacement

. Call me a quitter if you want to, I don't give a damn. Obviously nobody here understands basic logic, and making perfect sense doesn't work in Mini 1004 because sense is a lie.
GG scum, I hope you win this one. You deserve it.

VV actually says it VERY well.

Pssh. You probably didn't even read his responses. Your post doesn't make it look like you did.

You know, based on a flip of someone that acts exactly like you are right now I was willing to say you were probably town, until that replace out thing. I'm done dealing with you, and at this point I'd rather everyone just help me lynch you than him find a replacement.
I pointed out why that was wrong, and EVEN YOU JUST SAID that if you have 3 top suspects, you should be willing to lynch any of the three, did you not? So your point is invalid and you're flailing like a madman.

My Vote stays

[/quote]
You're confusing things. You should be willing to lynch any of your top 3 suspicions, but in a MyLo/LyLo situation, why the hell wouldn't you vote for who you think is most likely scum? You're not allowed to screw up anymore.

[Parama]

BTW yes I'm going to be posting until I get replaced. Deal with it d(''d)

[Twomz]

It's not as simple as 'you should be willing to lynch any of your top suspects'. You lynch based on who you think is scum AND who you think you CAN get lynched, the fact that votes have been been put on you and taken off of you today makes you a better lynch candidate than vollkan.

unvote, vote: Parama

I HATE the whole 'oh woe is me, replace me' thing that people do, at that point I would vote you even if I thought you were town. If you don't want to play the game, don't sign up for it.

[Parama]

You guys really want to lynch in MyLo.
Congratulations, this is why I called you failtown.

[Parama]

Your only posted suspicion on me is you "didn't like my reactions" (vague and unspecific) and now you're voting me.
Are you voting me for any reason other than the fact that I replaced out?
Because your vote looks like Opportunism: The Movie.

[Parama]

And for future reference, the only time town should lynch in MyLo is if they have a confirmed town with no protection roles left to keep them alive. Otherwise, town needs to freaking NL as fast as possible, before scum try to lead BS lynches like this once.
Twomz, on this:

It's not as simple as 'you should be willing to lynch any of your top suspects'. You lynch based on who you think is scum AND who you think you CAN get lynched, the fact that votes have been been put on you and taken off of you today makes you a better lynch candidate than vollkan.

It's much harder to get scum lynched in MyLo/LyLo than it is to get town lynched. Scum will NOT bus unless lynch is inevitable.
Yes, if this wasn't a situation where mislynch = lose, I'd agree. As it stands, hell no not a chance in the world we should not be lynching in MyLo.

[Parama]

If you don't want to play the game, don't sign up for it.

This is hilarious. I signed up to play a game that looked like an interesting concept. If the players make it unfun, that's not my fault nor the mods' fault. So just signing up for the game does not imply a commitment to play with players who have no idea what the hell they're doing.

[Parama]

Y'know what scratch the replacement thing.

I'm just gonna do this.

unvote, vote: No Lynch

unvote, vote: No Lynch

unvote, vote: No Lynch

unvote, vote: No Lynch

unvote, vote: No Lynch

unvote, vote: No Lynch

unvote, vote: No Lynch

^the best idea
If you guys have noticed yet, I've been trying to push NL all game because there is no pro-town reason for lynching in MyLo. Just freaking do it already. It's not like you can't lynch me tomorrow if you still want to do that after we NL and have a night in which the scum kill someone and narrow the suspicion pool. But you probably shouldn't lynch me today, tomorrow, the next day, or the day after that.

[VasudeVa]

Well, you're being weird.

I still stand by the no lynch though.

[Parama]

Thank you for being pro-town in MyLo, VV.