Best of the Internet Mafia: Over!

[W!nt3r]

Unvote, Vote: W!nter

.

A). Iammars is dead.
B). Your attitude is arbitrary and poor.
C). So, we shouldn't vote for CA because he might end up being a doc? Or that he might fake roleclaim and where would that get us?

What???

.

A: Yes, I realize that.

B: So... are you going to vote for me based on my sounding brash in a total of two posts or because I'm defending CA?

C: No, what was trying to say was that you should have a better base for voting CA than his first post. It seems, and It may just be my lack of experience talking, that the bandwagon against CA is all riding on his first comment. Where as the Jecht-wagon appears to have several instances of scummy behaviour within the argument... hell even the W!nt3r wagon has more basis for votes than CA, for god's sake. I've posted twice in a very brash manner adamently defending a player who is seen as the most scummy by 9 people. That in an of itself is scummy as hell, and I see that.

Now please if my logic seems

so

flawed and missguided, than by all means correct me or notify me as such. But voting me because you didn't understand one of my posts is more "arbitrary and poor" in both content and reasoning than a post with hypothetical information that could be useful.

You have little or no content in most of your posts, you jumped me for sounding brash, and you apparently don't understand that the words: "Suppose", and "say we" and "assumption" are all hypothetical in nature. In this case at least, you have no basis for voting for me.

I gave our fellow players a better reason to vote for me than you have. So if you must vote for me, do so in a fashion that at least advertises your reasons.

I've answered you, would you like me to put it in lamens term's next?

[Lostprophet]

Ah, it's the "super-long analysis/OMGWTFYOUVOTEDFORME" guy. That's usually me, but so it goes.

Your ad hom diatribe there only fuels the fire, though. If you're a townie I would strongly reconsider your tactics. If not, feel free to continue shoveling your own grave.

[VisMaior]

Spamwise, you never answered my question! Are you still allowed to talk?

[JechtMurray]

Unvote, Vote: W!nter

.

A). Iammars is dead.
B). Your attitude is arbitrary and poor.
C). So, we shouldn't vote for CA because he might end up being a doc? Or that he might fake roleclaim and where would that get us?

What???

.

B: So... are you going to vote for me based on my sounding brash in a total of two posts or because I'm defending CA?

C: No, what was trying to say was that you should have a better base for voting CA than his first post. It seems, and It may just be my lack of experience talking, that the bandwagon against CA is all riding on his first comment. Where as the Jecht-wagon appears to have several instances of scummy behaviour within the argument... hell even the W!nt3r wagon has more basis for votes than CA, for god's sake. I've posted twice in a very brash manner adamently defending a player who is seen as the most scummy by 9 people. That in an of itself is scummy as hell, and I see that.


I gave our fellow players a better reason to vote for me than you have. So if you must vote for me, do so in a fashion that at least advertises your reasons.

I've answered you, would you like me to put it in lamens term's next?

To be perfectly honest, I'd say the main reason to vote for you just now would be the way you said:

Say we push CA to a claim and he happens to be doc, ok now what? do we effectivly start over pointing fingers at other "he looked kinda scummy..." people?

but this is slightly double standards. What if

I

claimed doc? That's exactly the same situation there. (that's just an example, just so you all know)

I'm also slightly concerned that you might not want to halt a bandwagon if he or I claimed something other than doc.

To address the point C: I guess you do make a good point, but the CA wagon while started at thefirst 2 posts he made, a few things he's said since were also fairly odd.

I'm still deciding how best to use my Vote for the moment, so I'll give you an obligatory

FOS:W!nt3r

for using suspect reasoning for not making CA claim, a reason that could be applied to pretty much everyone, you know?

[W!nt3r]

Ah, it's the "super-long analysis/OMGWTFYOUVOTEDFORME" guy. That's usually me, but so it goes.

Your ad hom diatribe there only fuels the fire, though. If you're a townie I would strongly reconsider your tactics. If not, feel free to continue shoveling your own grave.

Right... I don't really care if you lynch me today or knock me off tonight. GL HF

but this is slightly double standards. What if I claimed doc? That's exactly the same situation there. (that's just an example, just so you all know)

I realized my flaw only after I had posted that first CA-defence message in my first brash post.

I'm still deciding how best to use my Vote for the moment, so I'll give you an obligatory FOS:W!nt3r for using suspect reasoning for not making CA claim,

a reason that could be applied to pretty much everyone, you know?

(Emphasis mine)
You are beginning to understand what I was trying to say. (though I admit, in looking back on my post I was rather hard to understand, and I curse the fact that Editing is restricted.) What I meant was, there is nothing that has been seen as outrageously scummy(at least to me) to separate CA from anyone else in this game, thus far. CA's only strike that has been clearified as scummy behaviour and is seen as such by the general populace of this town, is his first two posts. I've only seen half-support in his "apparent" scummyness past his first two posts. and within that reasoning I'll

Unvote

.

You, jecht, are one of the few people who have labeled his[CA] later posts as scummy/odd, I can't even recall who the others were, as their support was so laxidasical in nature, and the only reason I point you out is because it's right in front of me. Point is: as either town or mafia this game is a game of persuasion, to do well you must persuade others into you're line of thought. And no one has been able to pursuade me into voting CA, thus I'm defending him.

[Lostprophet]

Right... I don't really care if you lynch me today or knock me off tonight. GL HF

Well as long as that's settled.

And no one has been able to pursuade me into voting CA, thus I'm defending him.

This seems, again, like a slightly askew way of going about it. There was really no reason for you to defend CA, as there was already a wagon rolling on Jecht; you could have, for example, simply analyzed why Jecht was acting scummy. Or found somebody else who was acting scummy. As you said, defending a player that many, even "laxidasical"ly, though was scummy only makes you look scummier.

[W!nt3r]

kthnxbai

Lost prophet, I thank your for your efforts to help correct my actions, even if, in your eyes, I'm far too scummy.

[Lostprophet]

The problem with the old "I don't care if I'm lynched" gambit is that it's very hard for people to determine if you're just scum using that gambit or if you're really a townie so disgusted with the act of being voted for that you're willing to die.

In a game this big, you'd think we'd have more than three people talking at each other.

[W!nt3r]

Well to be honest my Death will prove at least one persons innosence. if not more.

That's why I don't mind dying. I'm looking at Antrax's article on how to be a good townie and so far so good.

[Commodore Amazing]

Ah, it's the "super-long analysis/OMGWTFYOUVOTEDFORME" guy. That's usually me, but so it goes.

Your ad hom diatribe there only fuels the fire, though. If you're a townie I would strongly reconsider your tactics. If not, feel free to continue shoveling your own grave.

Nice with the "ad hominem." I enjoy people who use the "ad hominem" tactic, and then accuse other people of it:

B). Your attitude is arbitrary and poor.

Or is that not "ad hominem?" For those who don't speak Latin: Logical_Fallacies. @LP - You're lucky I don't believe in the hypocrite vote.

That's why I don't mind dying. I'm looking at Antrax's article on how to be a good townie and so far so good.

Is that a claim? Like, a full claim?

The best thing about all this nonsense is that I could just claim and end it all by being confirmed town, but then it wouldn't be nearly as informative as watching people scummify themselves by calling me a scumbag. I'll give everyone a chance to unvote once more before they commit to, "CA, I think you're a scumbag so much, even though you are claiming to have an obvious role that we probably don't want to reveal, I want you to claim it anyway before I move on to someone else. And here's my reason for thinking you're scum (or the copout: I agree with Macros, or: I am Macros*)." I'll claim if it's the only way to move on.

Speaking of moving on, I recommend that we move on to lynching sinister_bunny.

One last thing: I disapprove of a bandwagon that has been started solely becase someone defended me.

* No offense, Macros.

[JechtMurray]

1

The best thing about all this nonsense is that I could just claim and end it all by being confirmed town

2

Speaking of moving on, I recommend that we move on to lynching sinister_bunny.

1: I see. I'm fairly sure I know what you are implying here.

2: I was meaning to ask about this vote. What's your reasoning behind this one?

[JechtMurray]

Well to be honest my Death will prove at least one persons innosence. if not more.

That's why I don't mind dying. I'm looking at Antrax's article on how to be a good townie and so far so good.

C'mon, get a grip. The town's already taken a really bad hit night one. As townies, people really cannot just let themselves die without a damn good reason. With 2 dead cops and a dead FBI (which I don't actually know what it would do) we need to make the correct lynches more often than usual because I would imagine we're going to get less leads.

Reading articles is all well and good, but you need to apply them to actual situations.

[SpamWise]

Spamwise, you never answered my question! Are you still allowed to talk?

Apologieth, I mutht have miththed it. I can talk, but I have to replace the 19th letter of the alphabet with 'th'.

I'm uncertain whether it ith thcummy or not.

[W!nt3r]

Is that a claim? Like, a full claim?

Yes and no.

C'mon, get a grip. The town's already taken a really bad hit night one. As townies, people really cannot just let themselves die without a damn good reason. With 2 dead cops and a dead FBI (which I don't actually know what it would do) we need to make the correct lynches more often than usual because I would imagine we're going to get less leads.

The FBI is the SK finder, he searches each night for the SK role and once found, kills it. At least that is if I understood correctly, the first day.

[Aureal]

Well to be honest my Death will prove at least one persons innosence. if not more.

Er, whose? Besides yours, a dead innocent isn't of much use.

[Lostprophet]

Hey now now. Let's not get touchy.

[inHimshallibe]

Here are the people under my suspicion at the moment. I'll go through later and back these up. I won't now because I'm tired.
inHim's mafia picks: JechtMurray, lostprophet, StrykkerVerde
I'm pretty good with bandwagoning: the above 3, W!nt3r, cropcircles
Won't be getting a vote from me Today: Macros

Unvote
Vote: JechtMurray

[cropcircles]

@CA: We've already seen multiple cops, how can you expect a roleclaim to clear you?

[W!nt3r]

Well to be honest my Death will prove at least one persons innosence. if not more.

Er, whose? Besides yours, a dead innocent isn't of much use.

when a dead innosent clears 4 others and points towards a possible scum it does help. But I'm not going to be lynched because LP is too scared to have multiple confirmed innos'

[JechtMurray]

Is that a not-so-subtle way of saying 'I'm a mason!'?

[Lostprophet]

when a dead innosent clears 4 others and points towards a possible scum it does help. But I'm not going to be lynched because LP is too scared to have multiple confirmed innos'

But if I was scared of having confirmed townies, then that would mean... that I'm... oh that's clever. Nice reversal there.

I'm not sure how comfortable I am with lynching Jecht here, but the CA wagon looks unnattractive and this W!nt3r wagon didn't really get me anywhere either. So for now I'll simply

Unvote

.

[Aureal]

when a dead innosent clears 4 others and points towards a possible scum it does help. But I'm not going to be lynched because LP is too scared to have multiple confirmed innos'

You're going to have to be more explicit than that. -_- Why would 4 people be cleared and a possible scum fingered?

[W!nt3r]

when a dead innosent clears 4 others and points towards a possible scum it does help. But I'm not going to be lynched because LP is too scared to have multiple confirmed innos'

But if I was scared of having confirmed townies, then that would mean... that I'm... oh that's clever. Nice reversal there.

Thanks.

I'm not sure how comfortable I am with lynching Jecht here, but the CA wagon looks unnattractive

and this W!nt3r wagon didn't really get me anywhere either.

So for now I'll simply

Unvote

.

What exactly do you mean by the emphasized text? That just kinda confused me.

[W!nt3r]

I request that the following players be poked for having 3 or less posts after a week of open discussion.

Diggy, Bigbenwd, Ibaesha, Macros, Mastermind of Sin, Nightfall, Peacebringer, Pookythemagicalbear, Sinister_Bunny, Smilax765, StrykkerVerde,TSAGod, Tyfo

[JechtMurray]

I request that the following players be poked for having 3 or less posts after a week of open discussion.

Diggy, Bigbenwd, Ibaesha, Macros, Mastermind of Sin, Nightfall, Peacebringer, Pookythemagicalbear, Sinister_Bunny, Smilax765, StrykkerVerde,TSAGod, Tyfo

I also believe bethelmark has not posted at all. I sent a PM to the mod yesterday -I think- about a number of inactive players.