Mini #1081 - SitMOA Mafia (Endgame... Congrats, winners!)

[Katsuki]

Chess is making me raise my eyebrow........... But I've played with him before, and this is all pretty normal stuff, so until he does something really drastic, my vote stays where it is.

This is pretty much the same problem with YOU, gandalf, in that, you guys generally say and do such ridiculous things that, when you do it as scum, it STILL looks normal.

In essence, what I am saying is, saying that "extraordinary" stuff is "pretty normal stuff" is kind of like throwing a smokescreen on your play.

[chesskid3]

Uh, no, it was over because there was actually content to analyize, namely opportunistic votes on me based on the false assertation that pages 1-3 contained any actual content. The obvious point of that being that I was "supposed to" vote for Andrew, when he's done absolutely nothing scummy.
Hence why I figure one of the people voting for me is scum, since a negative reaction to not voting andrew is not pro-town.

Also Narsis needs to answer my questions.

ANY QUESTIONS?

[malthusis]

What impatience... I was reading the effing thread.

Malthusis, tell me this. What is the difference between 3 seperate players claiming dayvig, and me claiming "partners" with the mod?

If it means anything for you though, I am mason-lovers with snow_bunny I get to talk to her any time of the day.

Impatience? I might have gotten slightly annoyed, but considering I asked you 3 times in posts #53, 95, and 122, I was getting tired on waiting. Also, even an idiot would realize the davig claims were jokes

@Malthusis: Why do you only ask for my prod, when adumbro has posted absolutely nothing thus far in this game? Do you have reasons for wanting to let him slide and skate through this game?

I'm sorry, but there's not much I can do. Ambro did post in #89, and can't be prodded yet. I'm waiting for some information too, but unless you want to take a LAL stance (which I really don't want to do), I might as well question the people here.

Unvote

[malthusis]

Chess is making me raise my eyebrow........... But I've played with him before, and this is all pretty normal stuff, so until he does something really drastic, my vote stays where it is.

This is pretty much the same problem with YOU, gandalf, in that, you guys generally say and do such ridiculous things that, when you do it as scum, it STILL looks normal.

In essence, what I am saying is, saying that "extraordinary" stuff is "pretty normal stuff" is kind of like throwing a smokescreen on your play.

QFT.

It's really, really, really hard to make a case when it's hard to tell whether a lot of these bad plays are simply anti-town, scummy, or just VI.

[chesskid3]

Gimme my town leader hat back, jerks.

[malthusis]

Uh, no, it was over because there was actually content to analyize, namely opportunistic votes on me based on the false assertation that pages 1-3 contained any actual content. The obvious point of that being that I was "supposed to" vote for Andrew, when he's done absolutely nothing scummy.
Hence why I figure one of the people voting for me is scum, since a negative reaction to not voting andrew is not pro-town.

Also Narsis needs to answer my questions.

ANY QUESTIONS?

?
What are you talking about?
How does Andrew have anything to do with this at all? Your paragraph looks like absolute junk. What do you mean by "You had to vote Andrew?". There were tons of people to make a case on at that time. You could have made a case on me, Gandalf, Katsuki, Narsis or any lurker that wasn't posting at that time. Using that as justification to randomly lash out at people voting you is extremely weak and thin as an argument.

Pedit:

Gimme my town leader hat back, jerks.

?

[chesskid3]

I was responding to Katsuki. It actually makes perfect sense, and I'm not going to spoon-feed it to you.

[malthusis]

I was responding to Katsuki. It actually makes perfect sense, and I'm not going to spoon-feed it to you.

Saying my arguments are bad logic doesn't make them any less valid.

[chesskid3]

You didn't make any arguments, you basically said you didn't understand my posts.
The only notable thing that happened on pages 1-3 that everyone was touting the RVS being over about was Andrew apparently being scummy, when that was in fact completely false.
Hence my assertation that the RVS was not, in fact, over.

Please try to follow.

[malthusis]

You didn't make any arguments, you basically said you didn't understand my posts.
The only notable thing that happened on pages 1-3 that everyone was touting the RVS being over about was Andrew apparently being scummy, when that was in fact completely false.
Hence my assertation that the RVS was not, in fact, over.

Please try to follow.

?
What are you talking about?
How does Andrew have anything to do with this at all? Your paragraph looks like absolute junk. What do you mean by "You had to vote Andrew?".

There were tons of people to make a case on at that time. You could have made a case on me, Gandalf, Katsuki, Narsis or any lurker that wasn't posting at that time. Using that as justification to randomly lash out at people voting you is extremely weak and thin as an argument.

and

chesskid3 wrote:Hi, you don't read much, do you? We're still in RVS now, and i'm clearly trying to get us OUT. Thanks for playing. You are the weakest link, goodbye!

Maybe you aren't the one reading?

Pretty much everyone posting regularly has/had reasons for their votes (except AmbreoDeus, but he's only posted once besides his original confirm).

Arguments are in bold.

[chesskid3]

Uh yeah except I did make a point on Narsis, and am currently questioning him, and he has gone AWOL. Also way to quote the "we're not out of RVS" thing waaaaay after we ARE out of RVS.

Your point?

[Katsuki]

Uh, no, it was over because there was actually content to analyize, namely opportunistic votes on me based on the false assertation that pages 1-3 contained any actual content. The obvious point of that being that I was "supposed to" vote for Andrew, when he's done absolutely nothing scummy.
Hence why I figure one of the people voting for me is scum, since a negative reaction to not voting andrew is not pro-town.

Also Narsis needs to answer my questions.

ANY QUESTIONS?

My point that RVS was already over was that, by pg2, there was content to analyze, namely as you said, reactions to votes and what not.

CK, if you are willing to move your vote onto malthusis, I will be perfectly willing to sheep you onto that.

[chesskid3]

Malthusis is town though.

[Katsuki]

What impatience... I was reading the effing thread.

Malthusis, tell me this. What is the difference between 3 seperate players claiming dayvig, and me claiming "partners" with the mod?

If it means anything for you though, I am mason-lovers with snow_bunny I get to talk to her any time of the day.

Impatience? I might have gotten slightly annoyed, but considering I asked you 3 times in posts #53, 95, and 122, I was getting tired on waiting. Also, even an idiot would realize the davig claims were jokes

Considering what you just said about the dayvig thing, I find it interesting that you should push for the "partners with the mod" thing 3 times after.

@Malthusis: Why do you only ask for my prod, when adumbro has posted absolutely nothing thus far in this game? Do you have reasons for wanting to let him slide and skate through this game?

I'm sorry, but there's not much I can do. Ambro did post in #89, and can't be prodded yet. I'm waiting for some information too, but unless you want to take a LAL stance (which I really don't want to do), I might as well question the people here.

Unvote

My point is not prods. My point is you just leaving him be. If someone posts nothing, and the only thing you want to do about it is to prod them, then something is wrong coughscumcough.

P-EDIT: Yeah, you're not gonna be wearing that town-leader hat.

[Katsuki]

CK, give me 2 players you find suspicious, and why. I am not getting your Narsis case at all.

[chesskid3]

Dark for opportunistic vote/defense of Narsis/jumpingon the lol RVS is over u scum bro? wagon
Narsis for bad reaction to vote/why me.

Hypothetical, if I were you kill you tonight and then wear the hat tomorrow, what would you do?

[malthusis]

What impatience... I was reading the effing thread.

Malthusis, tell me this. What is the difference between 3 seperate players claiming dayvig, and me claiming "partners" with the mod?

If it means anything for you though, I am mason-lovers with snow_bunny I get to talk to her any time of the day.

Impatience? I might have gotten slightly annoyed, but considering I asked you 3 times in posts #53, 95, and 122, I was getting tired on waiting. Also, even an idiot would realize the davig claims were jokes

Considering what you just said about the dayvig thing, I find it interesting that you should push for the "partners with the mod" thing 3 times after.

It's just that something really rubs me about the way you phrased your role. I've been in quite a few Mind Screw/Weird Role games where the mod is indeed a role. It's practically a rule of thumb that a mod has to be neutral or self aligned if they are playing for many reasons such as mod bias and the like. The fact that a mod would be aligned with player has me scratching my head on how that could possibly work out....

[Dark Horse]

You know, I think katsuki's joking.

Also...

Fos:VP

Posts only after getting voted, then just giving everyone a blanket statement? Scummy in my eyes.

[Dark Horse]

[quote=Chess]Dark for opportunistic vote/defense of Narsis/jumpingon the lol [/quote]

I want to headdesk you so hard, except it's against the rules.

1. Opptimistic vote? Can you eleborate?
2. Where have I defended narsis?
3. Jumping on the "rvs is over" bandwagon? Seriously? That's like saying:

Guy: the sky is blue
Me: Youre right
Chess: OMG BANDWAGON

[chesskid3]

Hi, you don't read much, do you? We're still in RVS now, and i'm clearly trying to get us OUT. Thanks for playing. You are the weakest link, goodbye!

Seriously? Rvs ended a long Time ago. You really should go and read back.

Also, show me where you are "trying to get us out of rvs".

unvote, vote: chesskid

Whee

[Doombunny9]

@Chess/Malt- Why are we still talking about the overness of the RVS? It's over. We can all agree on that. It doesn't matter when it was over anymore.

It's just that something really rubs me about the way you phrased your role. I've been in quite a few Mind Screw/Weird Role games where the mod is indeed a role. It's practically a rule of thumb that a mod has to be neutral or self aligned if they are playing for many reasons such as mod bias and the like. The fact that a mod would be aligned with player has me scratching my head on how that could possibly work out....

Are you actually buying this Kat obvjoke? Come on now.

[Dark Horse]

Hi, you don't read much, do you? We're still in RVS now, and i'm clearly trying to get us OUT. Thanks for playing. You are the weakest link, goodbye!

Seriously? Rvs ended a long Time ago. You really should go and read back.

Also, show me where you are "trying to get us out of rvs".

unvote, vote: chesskid

Whee

How does that help you at all?

[chesskid3]

Opportunistic vote: check
Chainsaw defense: check
Wagon on me based on RCA not over comment: check
However based on doombunnys last post you might just be failtown, I have major issues with dooms last post that I will adresss when not on ipod

[Dark Horse]

Opportunistic vote: check
Chainsaw defense: check
Wagon on me based on RCA not over comment: check

Incorrect Facts: Check
Vagueness: Check
Trying to gain village's trust: Check

[chesskid3]

Sarcasm and avoidance of point noted