Mini 1087 - The Dresden Files Game Over!

[havingfitz]

@fitz: Here are the reasons I suspected you, and felt you were a better suspect than smargaret. <snip>

Honest. I mean it. No reason other than randomness.

That is some serious weirdness there.

Or as I mentioned to CoA....sarcasm (with a bit of reaction fishing).

I'm just not a big fan of RVS and as I was going through the motions of putting a vote out there I just felt like letting my sarcasm flow a bit.

If you're not a big fan of RVS, then why were you "going through the motions"? There are plenty of players who don't RVS because they don't like it. Why wouldn't you just say "I'm not RVS'ing cause I don't like it". It looks to me like you are trying to blend with the town, and you want to appease people who expect an RVS vote.

I'm not a big fan of RVing and I RV in every new game I am in. I do not say I don't because I don't like it because in one of my early games someone expressed that sentiment and took more flack than I care to bother with. So I put a RV out there to go through the motions. Anyone who think my OTT emphasis on my RV is a scumtell is making a major reach and IMO which is more indicative of a suspect alignment that the OTT RV itself.

Smargaret was not a better vote than you at the time CoA made that vote, IMO

So you are saying from the early onset of this game you have suspected both smarg and I....me moreso than smarg. Seeing as CoA suspects smarg moreso than me...that made him voteworthy. You then proceed to FoS the person you just indicted CoA for voting and ignore me...i.e. no FoS or vote...despite the fact you clearly tought I was more suspect than smarg. Timeline or not...you have not been sonsistent in your reads and the votes you have placed have been for crap rationale IMO

---

Only because you left out the second part of my quote. Here, let me bring up the whole thing again, for your convenience:

The second part of your quote, which I did not include, has nothing to do with the fact I do not think you provided an adequate response.

I never voted you just because you didn't take the daykill seriously. Rather, the vote was because, despite professing a distaste for the RVS, you were actively engaging in RVS practices even though there was an issue of significance (the fake daykill) that you could easily have commented on to avoid all pretense of RVS. This kind of hypocrisy is a little hard to ignore.

On a side note, although I thought of the daykill as a joke, I didn't simply sit on my hands and do nothing. I chose to take the opportunity to pressure the "daykill victim" and see how she'd respond. That's the difference between you and me--I did something with the significant issue, and you didn't.

As I mention above in my LMP reply...I do not like RVing and I always RV. And 9.5 times out of 10 I'm town when I do it. So? And you continue to harp on the point that something significant had occured when I placed my RV that warranted some sort of action I apparently did not take...yet you have also pointed out you thought the daykill was fake by the time I made my RV...and I have pointed out that I disregarded it considering the source (DP). Why is it ok for you to consider on the one hand...DP's daykill a joke...but at the same time consider it a significant event that warranted some action or comment? Which btw several others chose not to do either. This is a much better example of that hypocrisy you allude to.

At least two people would beg to differ. Your response on the top of page 4 was not convincing IMO.

Why wasn't it very convincing?

Because it did not convince me.

Secondly...this is a game. There is no need to be a p-r-i-c-k by calling people ignorant and/or offering to s-p-e-l-l things out for them.

I will concur that the insults were not necessary, but to be honest, I feel you've been making some terribad posts, and it's driving me a bit crazy.

And yet you continue to belittle/undermine the comments/contributions of others with ad-hom attacks like, "I assumed you would be smart enough."

Your post was irrelevant. What purpose did it serve? It’s not a case against you. It appeared to be posting for the sake of posting...kind of like imitating content.

So pointing out an error in the mod's vote count with dramatic force is imitating content?

You could have just pointed it out instead of putting up a mini-wall.

Your LMP push isn't that hot, either, IMO. Despite that, I'm still going to FoS: LMP.

So you denigrate my case on LMP and then proceed to FoS him. Another example of playing both sides of the fence (ala the 'significant' fake daykill). While LMP is currently my vote option 1a...I have at least provided reasoning. Why are you FoSing him...since it couldn't be the 'not hot' push I made on him.

I just realized that LMP made a self-vote to do some reaction hunting...while the fake daykill scenario was occurring. Hmm...redundant much?

Are you talking to LMP or me...and what/who are you calling redundant.

[Enigma]

@Mod: Can you please correct my quote fail tags. Thanks.

[Oopidstay]

he second part of your quote, which I did not include, has nothing to do with the fact I do not think you provided an adequate response.

I want you to respond to it, anyway.

As I mention above in my LMP reply...I do not like RVing and I always RV. And 9.5 times out of 10 I'm town when I do it. So? And you continue to harp on the point that something significant had occured when I placed my RV that warranted some sort of action I apparently did not take...yet you have also pointed out you thought the daykill was fake by the time I made my RV...and I have pointed out that I disregarded it considering the source (DP). Why is it ok for you to consider on the one hand...DP's daykill a joke...but at the same time consider it a significant event that warranted some action or comment? Which btw several others chose not to do either. This is a much better example of that hypocrisy you allude to.

The fact that a daykill is fake does

not

suddenly make it an insignificant thing. The fact that it came from player you claim you tend to ignore for a spell does

not

suddenly make it an insignificant thing. Do me a favor and remind me of these "several others" you mention. And if you're going to start throwing meta at me, I'd like you to link multiple examples of you doing the same thing you're doing here,

as town

.

Because it did not convince me.

This is not a valid answer. I'll ask again: why didn't my reply convince you?

And yet you continue to belittle/undermine the comments/contributions of others with ad-hom attacks like, "I assumed you would be smart enough."

*headdesks* That was

not

intended as an insult. I honestly thought you'd be able to tell the difference.

You could have just pointed it out instead of putting up a mini-wall.

Your point? You still haven't shown why that post is "imitating content".

So you denigrate my case on LMP and then proceed to FoS him. Another example of playing both sides of the fence (ala the 'significant' fake daykill). While LMP is currently my vote option 1a...I have at least provided reasoning. Why are you FoSing him...since it couldn't be the 'not hot' push I made on him.

Are you talking to LMP or me...and what/who are you calling redundant.

Would it help if I rewrote the two paragraphs like this?

Your LMP push isn't that hot, either, IMO.

Despite that, I'm still going to FoS: LMP. I just realized that LMP made a self-vote to do some reaction hunting...while the fake daykill scenario was occurring. Hmm...redundant much?

I think the reasoning for your LMP case stinks, but I found a reason to FoS LMP that is entirely separate from your case. That better?

Speaking of which...LMP, I'm curious as to why you haven't responded to this, yet?

[Mariyta]

I'll be reading through what happened yesterday, but not sure if I'll have time to post the cases I was going to post. My life has taken an unexpected turn and internet access is limited. I can hopefully check in daily and I will do my best to post the case on fitz (maybe tomorrow or Friday).

[LimMePls]

The smargaret accusation at that point in time was weak.

Smargaret has done more recent stuff that is much better

. So the voting smargaret when your accusation of fitz was stronger is strange. So I disagree with your assessment of the strength of those two cases. Hence my vote and questions.

When I said that, you weren't a particularly good lynch.

Then you kept making your awesome-bad posts

, and now I'm certain the play is you or fitz.

LMP, do you want to explain the discrepancy here? Why do I feel like you're trying to keep your options open?

I'm not 100% satisfied by DDD's response, but I'm leaning more misguided town than scum at the moment.

UNVOTE:
VOTE: LMP

The first bold (if read properly for context) is saying "Smargaret has done more recent stuff that is much scummier". The word "better" meant "better reasons to vote her" since my point as that when CoA placed his vote on you, it looked sketchy to me because you hadn't really done things I felt deserving of the vote. But then you started making scummy post after scummy post. Hence the second bold.

There is no discrepancy.

[LimMePls]

@fitz: Here are the reasons I suspected you, and felt you were a better suspect than smargaret. <snip>

Honest. I mean it. No reason other than randomness.

That is some serious weirdness there.

Or as I mentioned to CoA....sarcasm (with a bit of reaction fishing).

Well sure, you say that now. Doesn't change that it stank to high heaven.

I'm just not a big fan of RVS and as I was going through the motions of putting a vote out there I just felt like letting my sarcasm flow a bit.

If you're not a big fan of RVS, then why were you "going through the motions"? There are plenty of players who don't RVS because they don't like it. Why wouldn't you just say "I'm not RVS'ing cause I don't like it". It looks to me like you are trying to blend with the town, and you want to appease people who expect an RVS vote.

I'm not a big fan of RVing and I RV in every new game I am in. I do not say I don't because I don't like it because in one of my early games someone expressed that sentiment and took more flack than I care to bother with. So I put a RV out there to go through the motions. Anyone who think my OTT emphasis on my RV is a scumtell is making a major reach and IMO which is more indicative of a suspect alignment that the OTT RV itself.

So you do it because you don't want to take flak? That is EXACTLY my point. You are altering your feelings/behavior to appease the town, which is bad. It shows that your thinking in this game is aligned towards not wanting to take "more flack than I care to bother with" rather than behaving in a manner you deem best for hunting scum. You think RV is bad, but you not only participate you go out of your way to constantly point out that you are doing it. Scumtastic.

Smargaret was not a better vote than you at the time CoA made that vote, IMO

So you are saying from the early onset of this game you have suspected both smarg and I....me moreso than smarg. Seeing as CoA suspects smarg moreso than me...that made him voteworthy. You then proceed to FoS the person you just indicted CoA for voting and ignore me...i.e. no FoS or vote...despite the fact you clearly tought I was more suspect than smarg. Timeline or not...you have not been sonsistent in your reads and the votes you have placed have been for crap rationale IMO

That's what I'm saying. What exactly is inconsistent (the word I'm guessing you meant with "sonsistent")? And what does "timeline or not" mean? Does that imply that you agree with the timeline I'm showing? If so, then your statements make no sense.

Speaking of which...LMP, I'm curious as to why you haven't responded to this, yet?

Because a) I already did earlier when someone else mentioned it and b) it's ridiculous. For the reading impaired (the relevant portion bolded for comprehension assistance):

This is absurd. The daykill was an OBVIOUS JOKE. Anyone with an IQ above single digits could tell it wasn't real. Why was it worthy of discussion or having an opinion of it at all?

I also fail to see how it was by itself worthy of driving us out of RVS

, or

why more than one person taking actions that can drive us out of RVS is bad

. Your suspicions are ridiculous.

[Mariyta]

Please don't do this. I won't read it anyway, I'd hate for you to waste time.

I love you. I was dreading wading through those wall posts.

I'm beginning to dislike LMP.

It seems I always find him scummy. I think it might be a playstyle thing, but /shrug.

Why is there so much focus on the "smarg has done much better"? I got that he meant she's done more scummy things. Why are others having so much trouble with it?

[havingfitz]

he second part of your quote, which I did not include, has nothing to do with the fact I do not think you provided an adequate response.

I want you to respond to it, anyway.

Respond to what? You didn’t ask a question. And in the interest of not wasting time...if the answer doesn’t matter to you please don’t ask it.

The fact that a daykill is fake does

not

suddenly make it an insignificant thing. The fact that it came from player you claim you tend to ignore for a spell does

not

suddenly make it an insignificant thing.

This would be a matter of opinion...not fact. You say yourself you considered the daykill a joke. Others have dismissed it as a joke. I assumed it was a joke coming from DP and the question had already been asked as to whether he was serious so it did not need to be reiterated. IMO joke’s aren’t significant events...it didn’t warrant comment at the time. IMO your continued push on this point is scummy.

Do me a favor and remind me of these "several others" you mention. And if you're going to start throwing meta at me, I'd like you to link multiple examples of you doing the same thing you're doing here,

as town

.

The ‘several others’ are listed in post 188.

As for “examples of you doing the same thing you're doing here,

as town

”...could you be more specific. I assume you aren’t referring to my history of RVing. If so...you can easily find that yourself.

This is not a valid answer. I'll ask again: why didn't my reply convince you?

Wall post avoidance reply=> It is a valid response and because when I got done reading it I wasn’t convinced.

And yet you continue to belittle/undermine the comments/contributions of others with ad-hom attacks like, "I assumed you would be smart enough."

*headdesks* That was

not

intended as an insult. I honestly thought you'd be able to tell the difference.

Seriously? You deny that your

"I assumed you would be smart enough"

comment is insulting (and an ad hom attack) while making another in the same response,

“I honestly thought you'd be able to tell the difference.”

Niiiice.

You could have just pointed it out instead of putting up a mini-wall.

Your point? You still haven't shown why that post is "imitating content".

Well...you cut 'n pasted four variations of the mod’s same erroneous vote count. That was a lot of unnecessary content that filled up unnecessary space that could have been accomplished with ex. “@mod...the votecount on Fate appears to be messed up.” I’m equating unnecessary content with imitating a content post. Feel free to disagree. It is not one of the factors in my vote on you so I hope you don’t feel the need to drag this point out any longer.

So you denigrate my case on LMP and then proceed to FoS him. Another example of playing both sides of the fence (ala the 'significant' fake daykill). While LMP is currently my vote option 1a...I have at least provided reasoning. Why are you FoSing him...since it couldn't be the 'not hot' push I made on him.

Are you talking to LMP or me...and what/who are you calling redundant.

Would it help if I rewrote the two paragraphs like this?

What rewrite?

Your LMP push isn't that hot, either, IMO.

Despite that, I'm still going to FoS: LMP. I just realized that LMP made a self-vote to do some reaction hunting...while the fake daykill scenario was occurring. Hmm...redundant much?

I think the reasoning for your LMP case stinks, but I found a reason to FoS LMP that is entirely separate from your case. That better?

First off...the above "fitz wrote" is not a quote by me...it's by you.

And no...."better" would be if you indicated what you disagree with on my LMP points and provided your separate ‘reason’ with your FoS.

[havingfitz]

Honest. I mean it. No reason other than randomness.

Well sure, you say that now. Doesn't change that it stank to high heaven.

Stank like a self vote? What would be the scum motivation for a RV like I made?

You think RV is bad, but you not only participate

you go out of your way to constantly point out that you are doing it.

Scumtastic.

Please elaborate on the bolded part of your quote above. What am I constantly doing?

And I'm not sure why this point isn't getting through to certain people but I will try again....I am not a fan of RVing. Despite the fact I am not a fan of RVing...I continue to RV in games that I play in (at least that I'm in from the start of). The fact I RV when I do not care for RVing is not scummy considering I do it on a regular basis. And as I have never been in a game as scum from the start...it can't be construed as scummy behavior (or at least as a scumtell) on my part.

So you are saying

from the early onset of this game you have suspected both smarg and I....me moreso than smarg. Seeing as CoA suspects smarg moreso than me...that made him voteworthy. You then proceed to FoS the person you just indicted CoA for voting and ignore me...i.e. no FoS or vote...despite the fact you clearly tought I was more suspect than smarg.

Timeline or not...you have not been sonsistent in your reads and the votes you have placed have been for crap rationale IMO

That's what I'm saying. What exactly is inconsistent (the word I'm guessing you meant with "sonsistent")?

That's what you are saying? huh? I state what I find inconsistent in my post that you quote. I'll bold the bits I find inconsistent. And as CoA is still voting smarg over me...and you have FoS'd smarg over me...despite liking CoA's "case" on me more than his "case" on smarg...your move off CoA onto me continues what I view as inconsistency.

And what does "timeline or not" mean? Does that imply that you agree with the timeline I'm showing? If so, then your statements make no sense.

It means I did not think your timeline had any bearing on the comments I made in conjunction with that point. No...I do not agree with your timeline. Your timeline comments are below and aside from the obv statement that people's opinions change over time (some at least) the bit below in bold still doesn't fit IMO.

Also, your timeline on me isn't taking into account that I haven't been very active, so naturally my opinions on things will change from one of my posts to the next. Smargaret was not a better vote than you at the time CoA made that vote, IMO. Hence my suspicion of him, and placing my vote there.

By the time I came back and made my next post, smargaret had done many more things that make her (right?) a better suspect.

Trying to paint my change of opinion as scummy is hilarious.

At what point are you saying smarg became a "better suspect"? When you had a vote on CoA for voting her over me (which infers I was a better suspect att). When you maintained your vote on smarg and Fos'd her (over me). Or when you took your vote off CoA and put it on me? For all the suspicions you have expressed towards smarg you sure seem to be avoiding commitment. Is she still your #2? Just out of curiosity (as I don't have any negtive read on him), has CoA fallen off your list?

[Oopidstay]

Respond to what? You didn’t ask a question. And in the interest of not wasting time...if the answer doesn’t matter to you please don’t ask it.

The first part of my quote (the "snarky attitude" reply) was responding to the first sentence of your comment on #48. The second part of the quote (everything that follows the first part) is in reply to the rest of your comment on #48. Additionally, considering that I have already asked you

twice

to

specifically

respond to the second part of the quote, I think it's fairly obvious that I want you to respond to it.

So please, just respond to the damn quote.

This would be a matter of opinion...not fact. You say yourself you considered the daykill a joke. Others have dismissed it as a joke. I assumed it was a joke coming from DP and the question had already been asked as to whether he was serious so it did not need to be reiterated. IMO joke’s aren’t significant events...it didn’t warrant comment at the time. IMO your continued push on this point is scummy.

But you didn't bother to do

anything

with the reactions people gave, instead choosing to do something you said you hated to do. In my mind, you were

intentionally

doing something useless, when you could have at least

tried

to do something productive with the fake daykill. There was plenty of gold to mine, if you get my meaning.

Why is my push on this point scummy?

The ‘several others’ are listed in post 188.

And last time I checked, none of them stated that they disliked the RVS while going through the motions of RVS.

As for “examples of you doing the same thing you're doing here, as town”...could you be more specific. I assume you aren’t referring to my history of RVing. If so...you can easily find that yourself.

The examples I want are with regard to this statement:

I do not like RVing and I always RV. And 9.5 times out of 10 I'm town when I do it.

I can find them myself, if you insist, but it would make things a great deal easier if you just provided me the relevant examples yourself.

Wall post avoidance reply=> It is a valid response and because when I got done reading it I wasn’t convinced.

In case you didn't get the hint, I

want

a detailed explanation for why you weren't convinced.

Seriously? You deny that your "I assumed you would be smart enough" comment is insulting (and an ad hom attack) while making another in the same response, “I honestly thought you'd be able to tell the difference.” Niiiice.

With all due respect, you are taking things way,

way

too personally. I admit there was some attitude in the first one, but it was hardly an insult. The second statement wasn't an insult in any way whatsoever, and I

specifically

avoided putting any sign of an attitude in there. Let's just make my opinion frank and clear: your allegation that I voted you for "kissing up to the mod" was stupid. This is not the same thing as me saying "you are stupid".

votecount issue

I disagree with your assessment that all posting of "unnecessary" content is an attempt at "imitating" content, but I'll agree to drop the argument if you will.

"fitz"

First off...the above "fitz wrote" is not a quote by me...it's by you.[/quote]

So it is. My mistake.

And no...."better" would be if you indicated what you disagree with on my LMP points and provided your separate ‘reason’ with your FoS.

For the latter, that's what I did when I "rewrote" (although "restructured" is probably the better word, here) those two paragraphs. For the former, I don't think any of your points against LMP hold water. I don't have time to launch into the specifics now, so that'll have to wait for later.

[LimMePls]

Honest. I mean it. No reason other than randomness.

Well sure, you say that now. Doesn't change that it stank to high heaven.

Stank like a self vote? What would be the scum motivation for a RV like I made?

Hilarious. I love how I made the self vote and you say nothing, and only later when I admit that my self-vote gambit got nothing, people are screaming their heads off about it. Keep posting fitz, you're making this easier and easier. If you have a problem with my self-vote, why are you only NOW saying something about it? It didn't seem to bother you at the time. Your sudden interest in flinging mud at anyone you can when you are under pressure is awesome. I love my vote.

The scum motivation is obvious. You want to blend with the town, so you place an RV even though you don't like RV. You then point out that you are participating in the RV, trying to gain town-cred (LOOK AT ME, I RV'ED, EVEN THOUGH I DON'T LIKE IT. I MUST BE TOWN).

You think RV is bad, but you not only participate

you go out of your way to constantly point out that you are doing it.

Scumtastic.

Please elaborate on the bolded part of your quote above. What am I constantly doing?

And I'm not sure why this point isn't getting through to certain people but I will try again....I am not a fan of RVing. Despite the fact I am not a fan of RVing...I continue to RV in games that I play in (at least that I'm in from the start of). The fact I RV when I do not care for RVing is not scummy considering I do it on a regular basis. And as I have never been in a game as scum from the start...it can't be construed as scummy behavior (or at least as a scumtell) on my part.

You're kidding right? MULTIPLE TIMES DURING RV YOU POINTED OUT THAT YOUR VOTE WAS RV. You went out of your way to say "this is just RV". I've already quoted the relevant posts, I'm not doing it again. This isn't rocket science.

I say it is scummy that you are so concerned about what others see as RV or not RV, yet you say you don't like RV. If you don't like RV, don't do it. It's your obsessive need to reiterate that it was just RV that was scummy.

So you are saying

from the early onset of this game you have suspected both smarg and I....me moreso than smarg. Seeing as CoA suspects smarg moreso than me...that made him voteworthy. You then proceed to FoS the person you just indicted CoA for voting and ignore me...i.e. no FoS or vote...despite the fact you clearly tought I was more suspect than smarg.

Timeline or not...you have not been sonsistent in your reads and the votes you have placed have been for crap rationale IMO

That's what I'm saying. What exactly is inconsistent (the word I'm guessing you meant with "sonsistent")?

That's what you are saying? huh? I state what I find inconsistent in my post that you quote. I'll bold the bits I find inconsistent. And as CoA is still voting smarg over me...and you have FoS'd smarg over me...despite liking CoA's "case" on me more than his "case" on smarg...your move off CoA onto me continues what I view as inconsistency.

My stance is not inconsistant. This is so simple, it's absurd. Are you always this dense, or is this you squirming because you're caught scum? Here is a simple explanation of the flow of events:

1) You act scummy.
2) Smarg acts scummy, but not as much as you.
3) CoA votes smarg and not you.
4) I find it odd that CoA votes smarg and not you, when I feel that you are much more deserving of a vote.
5) I vote CoA and prod him over his vote.
6) Smarg goes on to make more scummy posts, now making smarg a much more viable wagon.
7) I say that smarg or you are the lynch.
8) CoA explains why he felt you were a better vote than smarg. CoA wants to know given my feelings in 7, why I'm voting him.
9) I explain that I hadn't had a response to my 4 and 5 from him, and so I didn't want to move my vote until I'd gotten a satisfactory response.
10) I consider CoA's response somewhat satisfactory.
11) I move my vote to you (the one I'm seeing as scummiest between smarg and you).

If you disagree with my understanding of the sequence of events, show me where you think I'm wrong. If you agree with the sequence of events, then show me an inconsistency, cause I don't see one.

And what does "timeline or not" mean? Does that imply that you agree with the timeline I'm showing? If so, then your statements make no sense.

It means I did not think your timeline had any bearing on the comments I made in conjunction with that point. No...I do not agree with your timeline. Your timeline comments are below and aside from the obv statement that people's opinions change over time (some at least) the bit below in bold still doesn't fit IMO.

Also, your timeline on me isn't taking into account that I haven't been very active, so naturally my opinions on things will change from one of my posts to the next. Smargaret was not a better vote than you at the time CoA made that vote, IMO. Hence my suspicion of him, and placing my vote there.

By the time I came back and made my next post, smargaret had done many more things that make her (right?) a better suspect.

Trying to paint my change of opinion as scummy is hilarious.

At what point are you saying smarg became a "better suspect"? When you had a vote on CoA for voting her over me (which infers I was a better suspect att). When you maintained your vote on smarg and Fos'd her (over me). Or when you took your vote off CoA and put it on me? For all the suspicions you have expressed towards smarg you sure seem to be avoiding commitment. Is she still your #2? Just out of curiosity (as I don't have any negtive read on him), has CoA fallen off your list?

Ok, I think perhaps I understand where the miscommunication is here. When I said that smarg mades comments that made her a beter suspect, I meant a better suspect than she had been before, NOT a better suspect than you.

You claim that I'm avoiding commitment on smarg. That is laughably absurd. Let me make myself abundantly clear:

The only lynches that I think are good today (at this point) are fitz and smarg.

I don't know how to be any clearer.

[Antihero]

I refuse to read these stupid walls of text.

Think that's scummy? Lynch me.

I hope everyone is catching Z's intent to vote-park. Keep in mind that the only other reason for the vote was that stupid beginning self-vote by LMP. No mention of LMP's fail push on marge? Z's going after LMP for a bunch of crappy reasons. And LMP's response is pretty much "lol, no". I'm smelling diesel.

[LimMePls]

AH, RTFT or GTFO.

Define my "fail push on marge". You sound nonsensical.

[Zdenek]

I refuse to read these stupid walls of text.

Think that's scummy? Lynch me.

I hope everyone is catching Z's intent to vote-park. Keep in mind that the only other reason for the vote was that stupid beginning self-vote by LMP. No mention of LMP's fail push on marge? Z's going after LMP for a bunch of crappy reasons. And LMP's response is pretty much "lol, no". I'm smelling diesel.

I wish I knew what "I'm smelling diesel" meant, but attacking me for voting LMP? Look at what we have in this game:

antihero, DavidParker, Fitz, Oops and Smarg all strike me as town, and a lot would have to change for me to push any of their lynches today.

CityofAs has barely posted but his ISO 3 makes me think that he is probably town because it feels authentic.
DDD - I dislike his "asked me about the reasons for my vote" town-tell that he seems to be using.
Enigma - his ISO 6, which takes him up to page 8 is fluffy: we should keep an eye on Parker for using she, and sarcasm has a deeper meaning?
Fate - I'm willing to wait and see what he has to say before passing judgment.
LMP - I've made what I think here clear.
Mariyta - aside from the fact that her vote is still on Fitz seems pretty townie to me, but she's apparently got some cases coming up. Needless to say, I'm interested.

So at the moment, I am waiting for some people to post, and I see Enigma and LMP as the scummiest. As far as LMP's arguments with others go, I'm holding off on commenting for the time being, but I think that the self-vote and his reaction to my accusation are both pretty scummy: obvious scum motivation for the self-vote and his defence missed the point.

[LimMePls]

I refuse to read these stupid walls of text.

Think that's scummy? Lynch me.

I hope everyone is catching Z's intent to vote-park. Keep in mind that the only other reason for the vote was that stupid beginning self-vote by LMP. No mention of LMP's fail push on marge? Z's going after LMP for a bunch of crappy reasons. And LMP's response is pretty much "lol, no". I'm smelling diesel.

antihero, DavidParker, Fitz, Oops and Smarg all strike me as town, and a lot would have to change for me to push any of their lynches today.

RUJK? That is your town list? RLY? Please explain what is townie about fitz and smarg.

[LimMePls]

First of all, LMP's self-vote. I've seen scum caught day one for essentially their self-vote and subsequent reaction to questioning. I'm still definitely worried about LMP because of this early move. I'm all the more concerned because when he made the self-vote, we'd already had the fake vig kill so we were well on the way out of RVS. The fact that he didn't have a plan to determine scum reactions from town reactions makes me think that he was just reaction fishing which was unnecessary at that point in the game.

This is absurd. The daykill was an OBVIOUS JOKE. Anyone with an IQ above single digits could tell it wasn't real. Why was it worthy of discussion or having an opinion of it at all? I also fail to see how it was by itself worthy of driving us out of RVS, or why more than one person taking actions that can drive us out of RVS is bad. Your suspicions are ridiculous.

Also respond to this, cause I don't think you have.

[LimMePls]

EBWOP: Oh, nevermind. You did. It was hilarious.

Zd's on the scum list. Whichever of smarg/fitz is scum, Zd is their partner.

[Oopidstay]

Activate:

PHOENIX WRIGHT MODE!!!

OK...still a bit behind on reads but one person has jumped out at me (aside from the person I am voting) and that is LynchMePls. He has not posted very much content and the content he has posted has IMO not been consistent or well supported.

At the very least LMP's content is superior to yours, if not several other players as well. I mean, if you're after lack of content and you aren't looking at yourself, Enigma's a very good way for you to go. LMP? Nuh uh.

In post 118 LMP votes CoA for bypassing his (CoA's) ‘pretty good suspicions’ towards me and infers suspicions himself towards me despite not mentioning me at any other point in the game to this point and without any reasoning. BTW....the ‘pretty good suspicions’ CoA expressed towards me consisted of:

@havingfits: obv random is weird. why try so hard to make a random vote? Looks like trying too hard to blend in.

So LMP agrees with CoA’s comments on me and also agrees with CoA that smarg is suspicious...yet votes him for picking an smarg vote over me.

This was LMP's first post since you made your entrance into the thread, so of course he hadn't mentioned you, yet. And it's very clear that LMP voted CityofAss for giving better reason to vote for you than smarg, yet voting smarg. Not even worth mentioning in the police report.

Then in the next post (119) LMP FoS’s smargaret (who he just voted CoA for voting for) on the basis that her scumhunting was just right. WTF?
Then lumps all three of us in a scumpool. While I do not doubt there could be scum in any grouping of three players...LMP is not giving any solid reasoning IMO.

The FoS was for smarg having just the right amount of

fake

scumhunting. And LMP has given better reasons for all of his votes than you have, so I'd be careful about calling the kettle black.

Post 147 - LMP piles on a bit with a QFT on some post 121 (my wallpost) bashing. Still no reasoning for suspecting me.

He's already agreed with CoA's earlier statement regarding you, and here he's just agreed with my sentiments about your wallpost. It's fairly obvious why he suspects you.

Post 154 - Although his LMP’s vote is still on CoA he points out that “we can’t go wrong with lynching fitz or smargaret today.”

The vote clearly stayed on there to incite CoA to respond to his questions. It's a perfectly valid way to use a vote.

When CoA asks why LMP still has a vote on him LMP responds with “You still hadn't addressed my points, and I didn't want you to lurk them away.” So LMP is not voting CoA for scummy actions but for not addressing LMP’s points against CoA...which at this point CoA had addressed and has since elaborated on.

LMP was still applying pressure to CoA, and thus it's perfectly acceptable for his vote to remain where it was.

Verdict: LynchMePls is found Not Guilty! He's as town as town can be!

Deactivating Phoenix Wright Mode...

Mod Edit: Red's my colour.

[Oopidstay]

tl;dr LMP is town, fitz's reasoning is bull, let's all have a

Mariyta

margarita.

[Oopidstay]

@Mod: That wasn't the same color red that you use. Unless you mean that

all

red is forbidden...

Mod Edit: For simplicities sake I reserve red (All shades, hues and flavours) for myself.

[Zdenek]

I refuse to read these stupid walls of text.

Think that's scummy? Lynch me.

I hope everyone is catching Z's intent to vote-park. Keep in mind that the only other reason for the vote was that stupid beginning self-vote by LMP. No mention of LMP's fail push on marge? Z's going after LMP for a bunch of crappy reasons. And LMP's response is pretty much "lol, no". I'm smelling diesel.

antihero, DavidParker, Fitz, Oops and Smarg all strike me as town, and a lot would have to change for me to push any of their lynches today.

RUJK? That is your town list? RLY? Please explain what is townie about fitz and smarg.

Why I think smarg is town:
Her initial vote on Fate. I think scum would choose an easier path.
I think all this business of pushing people to answer questions and provide reasons for their votes is townie because scum might prefer to keep their mouths shut.

I'd like to point out that Smarg had posted a just twice before CoA's vote, and I think LMP was right to call him on voting her, but to call her scummy for questioning DP and RVing fate is a bit much.

I think the best point against Smarg is her vote on DP.

LMP when you attack her for that in Post 119, you call it the "Goldilocks of scum hunting" when it was a garbage vote for no good reason. Why would scum aim for the "Goldilocks of scum hunting?" Her vote was bad, but I think calling it that is pointless rhetoric.

Well, after a read through of Fitz, his earlier play was scummy: the RVS timidity; the buddying with Mariyta, being called on it, and then OMGUS voting her. On the other hand, I don't that scum under pressure would draw attention to themselves like that. The other cases on him seem to be based on his making an RVS vote despite not liking RVS and his reaction to the day-vig. Is that right? Anyway, I think he's been under a lot of pressure and hasn't responded badly. Now, if someone wants to show me that I am wrong, go ahead.

After this read through, I still think Fitz and Smarg are town; although, perhaps I am less convinced than I was before. Unless someone shows me Fitz really floundering or lying in his walls, I'm comfortable with my read on him. Looking over a past game with town-Smarg, she was overly concerned with people providing cases in that game too, so while meta arguments are fairly weak, this combined her play in this game makes me feel okay about her too.

Preview edit: Oops' post. I think Oops is defending LMP from the weaker parts of the case against him. That said, I agree with his points, except the third as should be clear from the above.

[Debonair Danny DiPietro]

Danny, to what extent do you trust your "asks me the reasons for my vote so he must be town" town-tell?

Well I'm not going to bet the game on it, but it seems a decent place to start. I think genuine curiosity make more sense from town especially when the counterpoint of Mari and Smargret provides such a contrast and so much more likely to be scum driven.

~~~

I wish most of you people would take a nice dose of shutthefuckup; it would make this game so much easier and better.

~~~

LMP and OopidStay really store Fitz and his lame arguments apart, but right and wrong are basically irrelevant in my book when it comes to catching scum. Minimal reads on the lot of them; noise to sound ratio is simply way too high for them.

~~~

It would totally not surprise me if Zdenek was scum; he asks me a question and then before I even get a chance to answer he's already issuing an opinion on the matter? That suggests to me that he's not interested in my motivations or the truth of the matter and just want to stake out a position.

[Zdenek]

Danny, to what extent do you trust your "asks me the reasons for my vote so he must be town" town-tell?

Well I'm not going to bet the game on it, but it seems a decent place to start. I think genuine curiosity make more sense from town especially when the counterpoint of Mari and Smargret provides such a contrast and so much more likely to be scum driven.

It would totally not surprise me if Zdenek was scum; he asks me a question and then before I even get a chance to answer he's already issuing an opinion on the matter? That suggests to me that he's not interested in my motivations or the truth of the matter and just want to stake out a position.

How the hell do you get from me not liking your town-tell to me not being interested in your motivations or the "truth of the matter?"

[Antihero]

AH, RTFT or GTFO.

Define my "fail push on marge". You sound nonsensical.

You quite cluttering the thread with walls or GTFO.

How do you like that?

Can you give me one good reason why marge is a good lynch today?

LMP - I've made what I think here clear.

So, pretty much, that initial self vote is what did it for you?

Glad to see you're pushing a lynch on a nice strong case.

[Fate]

Damn smarg dropped a town tell back on page 3, shoulda re-read sooner.

Unvote:
Vote: oopidstay

"why'd you wish you dayvigged me instead?" <-SCUM