Mini #367: Endgame'd

[Thestatusquo]

vote: lunalovegood

for being scum. Obv.

[Thestatusquo]

Pretty sure that warrants a

FOS: Elias the thief

are you lunas scumbuddy?

[Thestatusquo]

Your OMGUS FOS and lack of sense of humor are noted.

[Thestatusquo]

Uh? How?

[Thestatusquo]

Seems like that might be a handy excuse for lurking, but I'm too lazy to look up any of your previous games.

Eh, as long as you're productive, it's not really lurking. We'll have to take this on a post by post basis. IGMEOY

[Thestatusquo]

Luna, because it was a random vote. That's how these games get started. Note the coupling of the jokingly sarcastic "obv" at the end.

FOS: Anyone who doesn't have a sense of humor.

[Thestatusquo]

Erm.

FOS: Anyone who doesn't have a sense of humor

Also, though, Luna, that was awfully defensive for one random vote on day one. Maybe my vote is good where I have it.

[Thestatusquo]

Is going to college considered a life?

[Thestatusquo]

unvote, vote Elias.

[Thestatusquo]

unvote

I didn't know he would be one from lynch, I was just trying to apply pressure with the bandwagon.

[Thestatusquo]

think that much pressure on somebody is not deserved if you don't have a reason. And that quick and very apologetic unvote seems fishy too. What I'm saying is, maybe not so much the quick unvote, (I would probably have quickly unvoted if it really was true that I didn't realise he was one from a lynch) but more the apologetic excuse seems like a slight over-reaction. Anyway, it deserves a vote.

This makes no sense. You say that had you not realized he was 1 from lynch, you would have done the same thing I did, but you wouldn't have stated your reasons, which is all my 'overly apologetic unvote' was? Stated reasons. In fact, nowhere in my unvote did I do anything remotely apologetic. I just unvoted, and explained why. You then go ahead and place a vote on me for something 'you would have done yourself.'

Keeping in mind you've been lurking, and your first post on the page is just a bandwagon hop restating others reasons, and using crap logic, I think it warrants a

FOS: Ziliu[/b

[Thestatusquo]

erm...

FOS: Ziliu

[Thestatusquo]

Lurking is more conducively discussed in terms of time between posts, not the number of pages. This thread has been open 8 days, and this is the first time he has posted. Your defense is noted, however.

[Thestatusquo]

Uh...I don't see how the fact that he posted one random vote changes anything. He hasn't participated in any discussion, or added anything.

[Thestatusquo]

I will admit that what I did looked scummy, but that's because I wasn't aware of the vote count, and what I like to do day one is form wagons to gain information. I unvoted when I realized that he was one from lynch, which was not 'backpeddling' or 'over apologetic' as some seem to think, but was the right play.

I'll claim if you want, but like... It was really just a stupid mistake on my part.

[Thestatusquo]

wuffles: My claim was that he was lurking. I.E. Not adding anything to the discussion, the fact that he random voted once before the post in question does not do anything to weaken that claim.

[Thestatusquo]

Uh....


Two different people. Two different justifications...Isn't that funny?

I voted Elias to put the bandwagon to the point where thered be a significant ammount of pressure. I put on too much pressure, because I did not realize it would put him one from lynch.

Those two posts are directed at Ziliu and are backing up what I said originally in post 45.

I guess I'm not the only one who needs to learn to read the thread.

[Thestatusquo]

perhaps you felt that i was lurking after a total absense of less than a day? what exactly was the reasoning behind joining that wagon in the first place.

MAFIA 101 FOR ELIAS BECAUSE HE'S AN IDIOT: Day one is random. In order to stimulate discussion, people form bandwagons, because they force reactions. That was the justification for joining the wagon. The same justification EVERY OTHER PERSON ON IT HAD. Sorry everyone, this may seem a bit defensive, but it really isn't. I'm just frustrated that this is the third time I've had to explain this.

signifigant pressure for what? you must have noticed at least that i had 3 votes on me already, and that's certainly enough to require a response from me. what was the point of another vote at all?

The tail end of this has been covered above. But additionally, ZOMGURSTUPID Have you not read the entire last page of the thread, which has been devoted to discussing the relative truth or untruth of my statement that I did not know I was putting you one from lynch?

Additionally, since I have already offered to claim if need be, your further attacking me is meaningless unless you're trying to get a concensus to overrule wuffles.

Those last two votes struck me as wrong, as they seem quite a bit more defensive from Elias then would be normal seeing as he is no longer under significant pressure, and the points he is raising have already been discussed. Am I right here, or am I way off?

[Thestatusquo]

Erm. Excuse me. Last two posts, not votes.

[Thestatusquo]

Uh...Elias, I think I responded to your main point pretty well.

@ Wuffles. Conceded, sorry for misunderstanding.

@

First of all, yes, maybe I've been lurking, depends how you choose to define lurking. But if I've been lurking, many many more people in this game have been lurking.

But I do acknowledge that you have a point in your defense. I probably was a bit unclear, but what I was trying to convey was that it was not so much the unvote in itself which my scumdar pinged on, but more the tone of the post in which the unvote was contained. Call it a hunch.

Then you say that I just bandwagon restating others' opinions. Well, I have to say that I consider that better than very blatantly bandwagonning someone to lynch minus one without stating any reaons whatsoever.

I won't like a claim from you though. Not yet. Though I'm curious to hear what others think about thestatusquo.

While it's true that many others haven't been posting (

mod note: Can we get prods, please?

I find the kind of lurking where you post without saying much to be far more likely to be a sign of a good scum player.

And no, it's not better, because while mine was a mistake, yours was a very calculated move, which makes it more suspicious in my eyes.

[Thestatusquo]

Some girl just went by my dorm naked being pushed in a shopping cart. O.O

[Thestatusquo]

I agree. It was just so random I HAD to share it

[Thestatusquo]

Uh, no, I'm still happy with my vote where it is

K.

Ahem, back to business. Well, with this TSQ stuff cleared up, lets put some pressure on the lurkers, eh?

Vote: Luna.

I'm actually happy with not voting at the moment. My biggest suspect is elias still, based off of his extremely defensive reactions.

I could be persuaded to go lurker hunting. But only for Ziliu.

[Thestatusquo]

your vote didnt seem right to me

i wanted to apply some pressure.

El Oh El.

And Because Zilziu is like a lurker second class. He popped up once, jumped on a bandwagon, and has disapeared since. So he's a lurker + suspicious.

[Thestatusquo]

I responded to your post, and then I reponded to arafax.

[Thestatusquo]

I like the term scandle.

[Thestatusquo]

Hi!

[Thestatusquo]

Then read the thread, dumbass.

[Thestatusquo]

K. So. That's your only response after not posting anything since your overly defensive begining to day one, and saying you didn't see anything at all by page 4? Not good enough. Not good enough at all.

unvote, vote lunalovegood

This puts her at three. See, I learned my lesson.

[Thestatusquo]

Your FOSing yourself?

[Thestatusquo]

luna is obv scum.

[Thestatusquo]

Yeah, you're scum.

[Thestatusquo]

mod, that's wrong. In 107 I voted for luna.

[Thestatusquo]

And I have class, Wuffles. I will respond afterwords. It's hard to take notes and peruse the thread to dig up my reasons at once.

[Thestatusquo]

Hey, Ziliu. If you're going to mislead the town, I would suggest that you do it by NOT POSTING CONTENT THAT PROVES YOU WRONG IN YOUR OWN CASE. Kthx bye.

[what]made you change your mind?

Well, maybe THIS:
1)

That's your only response after not posting anything since (insert last post here.)

2)

saying you didn't see anything at all by page 4?

3) and that's her only response to being called out is a determined refusal to be productive.


So. Three responses, WITHIN your last post that tell you why I voted her, aside from lurker hunting. If you had ANY patience at all. you'd have noticed that I said a POST EARLIER that I was making up my case, and planning to post it after class.

I reiterate. Learn to read.

[Thestatusquo]

Ziliu, I never said I was sure you were scum at all. In fact, I never even voted you. Nice job with the improvement of the reading skills, though, because I didn't change my vote after norinel voted, but instead after luna refused to respond to the case against her. I did so with a plethora of reasons that you've already admitted I supplied, and a warning to others where she was in the lynch count. What exactly was scummy about it?

However:

Okay here you go a complete sentance happy? And

vote: TheStatusQuo

because you all said to make a decision and that is mine and i know this is going to get a ton of complaints but that is my opinion.

No mafia, already under suspicion would OMGUS as blatantly as she just did, so I am very inclined to believe in her noobness right now. So,

unvote

and we'll see what happens from here

[Thestatusquo]

And wuffles, that's my response to the request. All my reasons typed out. (I like to say things like "she's scum obv." in order to get someone posting, not necessarily because I'm sure. I thought the jokng nature of that tone of voice was easy to pick out. I guess I was wrong.)

While I WASN'T sure she was scum, I was very suspicious, but I think she just pushed herself over the suspicious threshold, and into the 'too guilty to be guilty catagory,' and I will not support any lynch or bandwagon of her.

Any questions still?

[Thestatusquo]

Your overiding problem that doesn't allow you to answer anything I said in my last post?


ALSO,

FOS: CDB

Thats a horrible plan...For town anyway.

[Thestatusquo]

Those aren't actually reasons. But ok.

What, I'm not allowed to defend myself? And yes, I know I over-reacted, but I tend to get overly-defensive over everything.

Yes, of course you're allowed to defend yourself, but overly defensive reactions are often a scum tell, because a town doesn't really need to be desperate, because they have nothing to hide. Defend yourself with logic, not emotional appeals.

Um vote without a reason? You could have at least said "I'm jumping on the band wagon" or something.

@cdb:

No, you FoSed him for lurking, which was a false accusation. You said you would only lurker hunt if it was for Ziliu, which suggests that you already felt he was scum(my).

It was not a false accusation. He posted once, (after his random vote, that was my mistake.) rehashing others opinions. That is lurking, friend. I'm starting to get awfully suspicious of you, townies don't need to invent reasons to push their case.

WIFOM, craplogic, BS...seriously, this is a non-argument. Newbies are just as likely to be scum as they are to be townies, no matter how ridiculously scummy they may be. Note that I do not support a luna wagon at this time, but your reasons for hopping off it are crap.

It's actually none of that. It's a gut feeling that she's playing too poorly to be scum. And that's all I advertised it as. Again, townies don't need to invent cases...

FOS:CDB

I think this has already been extensively covered in the thread. Read please.

I saw where you were coming with the reasoning but he has a right to defend himself.

See response one.

[quoteI didn't post my reasons before because I was in a rush and I know I should have so yeah I'm sorry. That's all I can say now because I obviously can't go back and fix it. [/quote]

You know...Right now, I'm honestly not sure if you're just a noob town player or a noob scum player. I'm learning towards you being town, but statements like that make me start to lean the other way.

[Thestatusquo]

That's convoluted, because apparently I put my CDB response into the middle of my kuna response. If you guys can't understand it, tell me, and I'll post a fixed version. Maybe MEME can fix it up.

[Thestatusquo]

Sorry, I screwed it up. Half of it is directed at CDB, the other at Luna.

[Thestatusquo]

cool. Activity is sexy.

[Thestatusquo]

I am so disillusioned with this game after ghettoanthonys asshollery.

[Thestatusquo]

Norinel: I don't think standing behind an opinion necessarily makes a person less scummy. Only vote hopping makes a person seem scummy, not the other way around. (aka the you're so townie you must be scum theory.)

Hm...Can I say WIFOM?

[Thestatusquo]

Yeah, but I'm town, and therefore not the best for today. Please outline, other than the -1 lynch, which has been extensively covered, what you find scummy about me? I can't defend myself against..."You know...He just feels scummy."

[Thestatusquo]

Uh...Ok. I think that's stupid, as it was a mistake. But whatever.

[Thestatusquo]

The 'accident' that you keep mentioning IS the defense. It was a day one wagon to put pressure, I didn't know how close to lynch she was.

Guys, this is distracting us. I am town, we need to focus on finding scum. Since I am not scum, all you guys are doing is throwing out red herrings. Perhaps you're scum trying to push a lynch on a town, or perhaps you're just a bad town player, but either way, you're not helping the town by focusing on me like this.

[Thestatusquo]

No, I unvoted in 139. I'm not sure about Arafax though.

[Thestatusquo]

<snip>
1. hypocrisy: Accusing me of bandwagonning when you do the same without giving reasons

-Ok, fair point. I didn't think of it that way. I'm still not scum, though.

2. Vote-hopping (from me to luna) and accusing people left and right, probably to get attention off yourself

Let me repeat this, because you still seem to be inable to read. I NEVER VOTED YOU. EVER. I FOSd YOU BUT I NEVER EVER VOTED YOU. Everyone has been pointing out what they find suspicious. That's how this game is played. I have shown why I thought Luna was scummy, and now I tend to think that she's 'too scummy to be scummy' So I'm not voting atm, waiting for something scummy to come up.

3. Desperately using non-arguments (I'm town, you should be focused on scum) to try to draw attention on oneself.

That is because up until now I had not heard any argument against me besides "HE PUT HIM ONE FROM LYNCH LOLz." So I was inclined to believe it was scum throwing out red herrings, and focusing on a moderately scummy thing I did accidentally to force a bad lynch. You just actually posted reasoning, which makes me inclined to believe you're not scum. Not sure about CDB though.

In general, I feel that you have very strongly played to get focus elsewhere without addressing the points made against you.

I have responded to every point made against me.

And instead rely on an aggressive attitude and tone in your post towards other players to ridicule to put everyone who's trying to say anything against you in a bad light. Which, IMHO, is not pro-town behaviour.

My style is a little bit abbrasive and rude. I find that this gets the most reaction out of people, and helps me judge scum the best. It is not by any means 'a non pro town' style. Like, there are some rediculous styles, Lordy in scum chat just basically shouts "I'M SCUM." over and over again, so I don't think you can accuse me based soley off my playstyle. It seems to me like it would be the same regardless of like...what role I have. :rolleyes:

[Thestatusquo]

K, arafax. Fair enough. I will be back later tonight with an in-depth post of what my opinions are of everyone right now.

[Thestatusquo]

I am a bog standard townie. I win with the town. Pretty vanilla guys. *shrug*

[Thestatusquo]

@CDB. My claim is what my pm says I am. I'd be willing to be any other vanilla can confirm it.


@Wuffles. I already posted defenses, but people did not believe them. I got frustrated, and thats what came out.

@Everyone. Vote for me if you like, I'm town, but vanilla, so voting me might not be a terrible play, certainly better than lynching power, or even outing power. But mafia would be better. *shrug*

[Thestatusquo]

@ arafax:

In posts #9, #115, #118 TSQ says these "you're obvioulsy scum" type posts...What is that?...You're not claiming cop because you said it about multiple people...So, what is that all about?

Perhaps you should stop editing which posts of mine you use, and pay attention to 140, where I most def said this:

And wuffles, that's my response to the request. All my reasons typed out. (I like to say things like "she's scum obv." in order to get someone posting, not necessarily because I'm sure. I thought the jokng nature of that tone of voice was easy to pick out. I guess I was wrong.)

Yeah...So like why are you only paying attention to some of my posts in order to make me look more scummy then I am?

In post #11 you make a statement about Elias & Luna being scum buddies?...What the heck are you doing?

Yeah...Pretty easy to understand based off of the fact it was RANDOMVOTINGSTAGElolz and I was just throwing random suspicions or half suspicions out, just like everyone does.

In post #18 you call Luna on lurking...It's still the random stage and many have not even posted yet, but you're bringing out lurking already?.

Yeah, my post 18 was directed at norinel, and I think you'll find it makes much more sense not through your distorted context if you read her previous post. kthxbi

In post #48, did you then post that he wasn't lurking?...I'm confused.

Well, admitting you're confused is the first intellegent thing you've done in this thread, because that post was directed about ZILIU, and was in the middle of a drawn out discussion with CDB...Like...Do you just read through the thread and pick out things that look scummy out of context?

Post #85 you say that you'll go lurker hunting, but only for Zuilu...What's that all about?

Well like...This might be understandable, considering you've asked me this before. I say MIGHT because I already answered it in post 88

And Because Zilziu is like a lurker second class. He popped up once, jumped on a bandwagon, and has disapeared since. So he's a lurker + suspicious.

AND you hadn't ANSWERED ME IN A MANNER THAT SEEMED LIKE YOU AGREED WITH ME IN 89!!!!!!!

And Because Zilziu is like a lurker second class. He popped up once, jumped on a bandwagon, and has disapeared since. So he's a lurker + suspicious.

Sounds good enough for me.

Wuffles, whats with the "rawrs?"...You only use them sometimes, I see?

So now we get to the meet. You just completely made up a case against me. Like. Not any of it was even close to being relevant, and not only that, you said you found me suspicious for something you said you agreed with me on. Like...I don't see how what you just did could be pro-town behavior. A pro-town does not need to invent a case, ignoring contrary information in the thread like you just did. So it warrants a

vote: Arafax

Guys will probably jump on me for OMGUS voting, but I'm not. I'm not voting ziliu, wuffles or CDB, because they have at least attempted to use logic in pushing for my lynch, arafax did not.

[Thestatusquo]

I will also point out that arafax didn't even use that post of crappy non relevant logic to warrant a mere vote, but instead a CONFIRM VOTE. Like, are you kidding me? That's strong stuff. WAY stronger than your post warranted, which was not even a FOS.

[Thestatusquo]

No, it's not rediculous. When looking through a thread to build a case, you look at every single post a person makes, and see how it affects your case. At least that's what I do, wuffles. I'm not saying that he needs to post/read posts of mine which are referring to naked girls being pushed past my dorm room, but if he is going to call me out, he should at least read the posts that are directly contradicting what he's saying. Not doing so is skimming, and just attempting to make me look bad, which is not something town would do. If town was building a case and saw "Hmmm... I'm not really right about any of this" you would assume they would stop building the case. That's not what arafax did.

I can buy the confusion shtick up to a point. And that point is where he says he finds me suspicious for something he not only had a conversation with me about, but agreed with me about. That is uber scummy behavior, folks.

[Thestatusquo]

I'm not sold pon wuffles, though you do bring up a good point. I think what Arafax did was pretty damn scummy.

[Thestatusquo]

That's just the point. Nice strawman falacy, though. No one said you should post non scummy posts. We're saying if there are posts that contradict you, you shouldn't post such a case.

[Thestatusquo]

What? That is not at ALL what you said earlier. Not even close. REALLY happy with my vote right now.

[Thestatusquo]

I think two things are rather interesting:

One, obviously I still think Arafax is the play, and two, has anyone noticed how luna has not posted at all since she stopped being in the center of attention?

Wuffles is interesting, I'm going to re-read all his posts tonight, and see if he doesn't strike me as scummier than arafax, but I doubt it because arafax is looking really scummy to me.

[Thestatusquo]

how about Arafax, and would you please post your reasons for voting me?

[Thestatusquo]

wuffles. my last post was directed at luna.

[Thestatusquo]

Also,

unvote, vote wuffles

that's the exact opposite of what you said before.

He's two from lynch guys, proceed with caution.

[Thestatusquo]

Lowel, I posted a response to everyone who has raised points against me. Arafax, I think I very well showed why I thought they were scummy, and luna I didn't say she was scummy, I said she hadn't posted since the attention came off of her. Both these statements are true, and unscummy.

I voted wuffles based off of this post:

TSQ, one thing Arafax has done consistantly is post his reasons.

The fact that he places FAAAAR too much emphasis on your -1 to hammah vote right near the start is irrelevant.

But he just needs to realize that it would be beyond stupid, BEYOND retarded, hell, even beyond WIFOM for a mafioso to DELIBERATELY put anyone at -1 to lynch that early in the game.

It would not serve a mafioso any good at all to do so - just look at how much scrutiny TSQ has come under since he did that - He's now going to have to be absolutely on his game for the rest of Primate Mafia, alignment be damned.

From this point on, I really feel that anyone who points fingers at TSQ because of that should be regarded with suspicion. Putting someone at lynch -1 is just not something anyone, regardless of alignment, would deliberately do.

rawr!

Which seems kind of strange considering that he was just asking people to hammer me based on the same things he's attacking here. I also found his post about "If he isn't the play we should go...x" To be scummy, especially considering it was on someone on the same wagon as he is. That isn't enough for the vote?

[Thestatusquo]

You know wuffles. You're right. I had thought you were on my wagon because of the -1 lynch thing, but going back and re-reading, I can't seem to find you post any reasons EVER. Just a vague agreement with channeldelibird, and a comment about my playstyle. That's it in the sense of reasons. Don't quite know how I missed that before, because they you were willing to have someone hammer me, and you hadn't even posted reasons to be voting me.

[Thestatusquo]

I tend to agree with you norinel, unless we can assure scum, which I don't think we can, I am probably the best play for the town at this stage.

[Thestatusquo]

How the hell have I presented 0 effective defense? I have responded to every point brought against me.

As to 'having given up' It's true. I'm town, but just vanilla. I feel like it's the best play to kill me then risk outing a power role.

[Thestatusquo]

I'm wondering where elias has went. Do we need a prod on him?

[Thestatusquo]

Who exactly is more lurking than you, Elias? Everyone has posted at least 2 times since you have.

[Thestatusquo]

Yes, you have been absent for several days, which is rather interesting because I have seen you post several times on starcraft mafia.

Also, at least luna is contributing to the conversation, which is more than you're doing.

[Thestatusquo]

No, I'm not stretching. Lets look at the timetable here:

1) I point out we might need to prod you.

2) You immediately post for the first time in days, almost immediately after being called out, saying that you haven't had time to play much mafia, and that somehow explains your abscense from the game, which it would, it it were true, and in the meantime call my motives into question by stating there are 'people lurking much worse than you' This all seems a bit overdefensive seeing as I never used the word lurker, but rather enquired if we ought to prod you.

3) I politely enquire who has been lurking more than you, considering everyone has posted way more than you recently.

4) You respond by trying to shift the blame to luna, who admittedly, could be scum, but I think it's more likely a distancing technique, and saying that well...She's not posting content. This is inconsistant with your earlier claim that a) there are MANY of "them", and b) That "they" are lurking.

5)I point out that it isn't true that you have no time for mafia, because you've been posting in other threads, thus proving your claim a lie. I also point out that everyone else has posted at least 2-3x as much as you have recently, thus proving your claim of worse lurkers to also be false.

6) You respond by questioning my motives in looking at other threads

(for future reference, I didn't, I can see when you are the last person to post in a given section, lets say little italy for one, I go in, to check to see if someone has posted in this game, notices you haven't, but have instead posted in the thread right above it. but ALSO, people frequently check out other players games, both previous and current, in order to get a better read on them. It's called meta gaming.)

instead of responding to the fact that your two earlier claims have been proven wrong, and you responded to a thead that you hadn't responded to in days after a period of about an hour after being mentioned, proving you have been checking the thread frequently.


So heres the list of scummy things you just did (aka just read this part if you want to know the condensed reason for my vote, see above for more in depth stuff.)

- Overdefensive reaction to being mentioned as needing a prod.
- Proved that you have been watching the thread carefully enough to be able to post an hour after being mentioned.
- Shifting the blame, (wrongly) to luna.
- Were proved lying about 'the many people' 'lurking' which turned out to be luna posting more than you.
- Were proved wrong about not having any time for mafia.
- Instead of responding to all that, you question my metagaming in an attempt to once again shift the blame off of you and on to me.


And that was in the sequence of a few posts. I think it more than warrants an

Unvote, Vote: Elias

[Thestatusquo]

I think he was referring to elias and luna.

[Thestatusquo]

Wuffles has been promising a PBPA for like...3 pages.

[Thestatusquo]

Arlen, (elias the theif.) You KNOW I was home from college this weekend (being that I am your brother.) and that I was running around visiting various friends/family. So why did you feel it necessary to mention that I haven't posted in this thread since friday? Like...That's deliberately misleading the town.

[Thestatusquo]

about those names you quoted....

I don't see anything wrong with them...

[Thestatusquo]

Well, I'm in college, and he's at home. So whatever.

[Thestatusquo]

note my quoted name for you, and my earlier claim that you have no sense of humor.

[Thestatusquo]

Elias. I've been looking over your other games. Do you ever post content?

[Thestatusquo]

Still think Arafax is the plan guys.


Also, wuffles, I love how you compliment my play in that post, and then say I'm stupid later on.

[Thestatusquo]

Is it just me, or has Arafax been in too many games to be a 'confused townie?'

[Thestatusquo]

Wuffles, go to profiles, and click show all posts or find all posts, or something like that. It will give you a good idea of how many games they've been in. Arafax has something like 500 posts.

Heres how I see it:

Relative noobs:
Elias
luna

Somewhat experienced:
Me
You
spectrum
Arafax

Veteran:
Norinel

[Thestatusquo]

Elias, you mentioned it once with a FOS? That is simply put: A lie.

wow, i was gone for a day and i go all the way up to lynch -1. kind of scared you guys were just gonna keep rollin till i was dead after that quo vote. anyways,

fos the_status_quo

for putting someone at lynch -1. you should really be more careful before placing your vote. you could have at least asked for a vote count. ugh. im pretty tired, so ill post more tomorrow.

1 attack, including the original 'FOS'

perhaps you felt that i was lurking after a total absense of less than a day? what exactly was the reasoning behind joining that wagon in the first place.
(sorry i didnt put that in the first post)

2, Continues to attack it

i just think that you must have noticed i had plenty of votes on me already, definately enough to warrant a reaction. even if you didnt know exactly how many i had, there was no reason to put an additional vote on me at all.
my last two posts were not defensive, they were posing questions to you. how could you not see that? by yelling at me and calling me an idiot you seem to have gone around the main point which was i was already signifigantly pressured --even without knowing the exact number of votes-- before you voted.

Attack # 3.

my responses werent in my defense, they were to get you to explain your vote further. your vote didnt seem right to me, so i wanted to apply some pressure.

Attacks it again.

So 4. Not one.

Other posts where you attack me include 16, 17, 27 (granted, there is still some dissent that this is an attack, but I think it is)


Quite a bit more than 1.

To be fair, he quasi defends me in 29, and definitely defends me in 15, but this is rehashing things everyone else already said (most notably me.) and then he attacks me in 16...

Also. The view all posts is a wonderful function. In this game, Elias has thrown a lot of vague suspicion around, but he has exactly 1 vote, his first random one. And he has three FOS's. One on me for my random vote in the begining of the game one on luna for not posting odd, seeing as it was post 9..., and the thirdone for the -1 from lynch. Other than that, he has not once felt the need to show his suspicions by voting or FOS'ing

The lying is not a huge thing, because I'm not a huge fan of LAL, because I see many situations where towns lying might be necessary, but the fact that he has been completely vague, and avoided all confrontation that was not someone attacking him, I think Elias very well may be a better target than arafax.

Unvote, vote Elias

fos Arafax

[Thestatusquo]

Oh. That was dumb of me. Those are post numbers that come up on the 'show all posts' function. I'll post the real #s in a second.

[Thestatusquo]

I am so sick of this game. It's really starting to grate on my nerves.

MOD: Please replace me.

[Thestatusquo]

I don't want to be judged by any of my predecessors dumb actions. We all know he was a moron. I am my own person Etc. Etc.

[Thestatusquo]

Maybe, but you'll have to ask me nicely.

[Thestatusquo]

I am of the opinion that this game needs a deadline. Heres what I think:

I believe Arafax and Elias the theif to be scummiest. However, I am not convinced they are the best play for today, considering they are actually posting. I might be swayed to vote off Ziliu or Lunalovegood, as I feel they're deadweight, and if we leave them around for next round, the game might stall out.

Thoughts?

[Thestatusquo]

Lowel, I did not get that impression from Elias at all. I too thought you were attacking wuffles.

[Thestatusquo]

Random kills are the worst IMHO, because theres no way to justify them with flavor. I think flavorwise, no lynch should always be the choice if concensus is not reached by deadline, but I realize the need to make things fair on the town.

I actually think primate is using the norm.

[Thestatusquo]

Arafax, I agree with spectrums assessment of your 'confused townie'dom. I don't buy it either.

[Thestatusquo]

I will when I'm not sitting in class.

[Thestatusquo]

This site is about athiesm, but it has a fairly good list of logical fallacies that are very well explained.
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/ ... logic.html

In a nut shell, a strawman falacy is saying that a person said something besides what they said, in order to make it more easily defeatable. For instance. I say "My car is blue." And you respond "HOW CAN YOU POSSIBLY SAY ALL CARS ARE BLUE, THAT'S REDICULOUS!!!" A little extreme, but a good example of the general idea.

[Thestatusquo]

unvote, vote arafax

[Thestatusquo]

Hmmm. It seems pretty obvious to me that Norinel was killed by void, and the scum group killed void. Any dissent?

Good. There shouldn't be.

Confirm vote: Thestatusquo

[Thestatusquo]

I recall. What are your reasons for FOSing me?

[Thestatusquo]

Then why not vote for me? It's all the rage in france.

[Thestatusquo]

Do I? Why are you defending me?

[Thestatusquo]

Because I'm obviously scum. I mean, I'm making my scumdar go crazy.

[Thestatusquo]

Oh. I also don't like his name.

[Thestatusquo]

What do you think? PENNY FOR YOUR THOUGHTS GOV'NA.

[Thestatusquo]

Lowel, I am allowed to play in any manner I fucking see fit. For you to tell me I can't is both fucking arrogant, rediculous, and dumb. Shut the fuck up, stop crying, and play the game.

[Thestatusquo]

No.

[Thestatusquo]

Being obnoxious is clearly a scum tell.

[Thestatusquo]

I am blatantly scummy.

[Thestatusquo]

I agree. Can we also get prods on norinel? Oh wait. I killed her last night.

[Thestatusquo]

Again, I re-iterate...Obviously, being obnoxious is scummy.

[Thestatusquo]

Unvote, Vote: TSQ

Blatently omgus.