Two-Headed Mafia 2 - GAME OVER!

[ShadowLurker]

H2 da tizzle basically claimed scum.

Vote H2 da Tizzle

[ShadowLurker]

Vote: H2 da Tizzle

:goodposting:

[ShadowLurker]

H2 da tizzle is lurking.

Double confirm vote: H2 da tizzle

[ShadowLurker]

And the squabbling between heads begins so soon!

vote:Glork(and MoS)

for using craplogic!

Which craplogic was that?

FoS: re2fan

Appears to be looking for an excuse for a vote rather than a reason or no reason all (random).

OMG get your vote off my 2nd Head.
He wasnt searching for excuse and what he told was sort of joke. /punches fan in head.
I think you are creating elephant out of Fly ibaesha =[

YOUR GRAMMAR MAKES ME HEAD ASPLODE.

Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo.

[ShadowLurker]

FoS: HyToFry/ambic

[ShadowLurker]

Pretty sure that I get lynched for my theories fairly consistently. Doesn't stop me though... :-p

Pretty sure you only have one other game where you were SCUM.

LAL.

[ShadowLurker]

H2 da tizzle needs prodding. Scum should only take lurking to a certain level.

[ShadowLurker]

Sorry for having lurked, but stressful times have overtaken me. I agree with lordy for saying that we need to move beyond the random voting stage. On that note I'm going to

unvote

. When it is so random there is no way to choose who is really acting scummy. Now that H2 da Tizzle and I are back, and no longer lurking, I say people give good voting reasons, or unvote us. For some random craplogic reason we are the majority vote.

You're sure overdefensive aren't you? My vote on you stays.

[ShadowLurker]

Why aren't more people voting obvious H2 da tizzle/themanhimself scum?

[ShadowLurker]

Pretty sure both themanhimself and H2 da tizzle are being overdefensive and they should be voted.

[ShadowLurker]

Overdefensive = scum
No defense = scum

What is the perfect defense ShadowLurker?

Wow. I'd vote my other head for this. Please don't. Sprontalic seems to have dropped the overdefensive vibe, so for now

unvote

But I don't understand shadowlurkers vote. It seems that he is just trying to push any lynch, which is almost always a scum tactic.

FoS: Shadowlurker

I'm now going to send a PM to my other head explicitly outlining what

not

to do.

What the hell?

Name one person I pushed other than your pair.

This is a blatant misrepresentation and now I'm the happiest person on the Earth with my vote at the moment.

[ShadowLurker]

H2 da tizzle basically claimed scum.

Vote H2 da Tizzle

True, but somehow he figured this out without H2 da Tizzle even posting.

I think it's quite possible you picked a n00b to rile up so the town would bandwagon, so you get STD'S

FOS of disapproval

.

I'm not allowed to random vote?

Also, I'm pretty sure H2 da Tizzle plays on another site.

[ShadowLurker]

H2 da tizzle basically claimed scum.

Vote H2 da Tizzle

True, but somehow he figured this out without H2 da Tizzle even posting.

I think it's quite possible you picked a n00b to rile up so the town would bandwagon, so you get STD'S

FOS of disapproval

.

I'm not allowed to random vote?

Also, I'm pretty sure H2 da Tizzle plays on another site.

What other site would that be? I've just discovered the game of Mafia here, when I joined.

Well then I would be wrong, but usually first timers don't sign up for a theme game.

[ShadowLurker]

I'm trying to figure out wtf your point is SL?

You came in here and said that H2 claimed scum when he hadn't posted. You've then attempted to push his lynch for reasons which I really haven't understood yet. I'll agree that his assessment that you're trying to push any lynch for any reason is a misrepresentation of what you've done. You've tried to push -his- lynch for any reason, though.

The H2 claiming scum thing was just a little joke with a random vote. In fact, anything before he posted was obviously a joke. But then afterwards, theman posted and it was overdefensive. Then H2 da tizzle starts posting overdefensive things while themanhimself tries to do damage control. Rereading my posts again should help.

The latest thing was just some irrelevant point that H2 da tizzle decided to pick up.

[ShadowLurker]

I think SL's continued aggressive push for the H2/theman lynch is unnerving and suspicious.

Noncomittal I see.


Anybody who tries pulling the newbie card will have no mercy from me. This is a regular sized theme game, I will definitely not be letting anybody off the hook for the newbie card.

[ShadowLurker]

I am not against pressuring Eon, but to metagame a bit, "scummy and defensive" seems to be his ingrained playstyle. So let's be double-cool double-headed before we lynch this guy and his mirror image, and they turn out double town. Which is not to say that we should let the GlorkoS siamese twins off the hook.

THIS IS NOT POST RESTRICTION MAFIA

[ShadowLurker]

Besides, it's backwards, you need a reason to vote and not use the response to justify your actions.

Since when?

[ShadowLurker]

Finally, I did a (hopefully) thourough skim of the thread.

My top suspects:

ShadowLurker

- His vote on da Tizzle starts out as random (post #225) <Yes, SL you are allowed to random vote, but you've been pushing that random vote beyond the point of it being random.>, but he continues to agressively push it without providing a reasoning despite being asked for one (#181) only citing overdefensiveness (167).

I don't know about you, but if I'm bandwagoned for no apparent reason I'd get defensive too. Besides, it's backwards, you need a reason to vote and not use the response to justify your actions. ShadowLurker was goating theman/da Tizzle in becoming overdefensive to get a reason by his repeated accussations (223, 235, 251)

Your post numbres are backwards by the way. Following yours, I provided a reason before it was asked for one yet I called it random afterwards it was asked for one.

Also, you're saying my early vote on H2 da tizzle was baseless yet you don't explain how that makes me scum.

[ShadowLurker]

Finally, I did a (hopefully) thourough skim of the thread.

My top suspects:

ShadowLurker

- His vote on da Tizzle starts out as random (post #225) <Yes, SL you are allowed to random vote, but you've been pushing that random vote beyond the point of it being random.>, but he continues to agressively push it without providing a reasoning despite being asked for one (#181) only citing overdefensiveness (167).

I don't know about you, but if I'm bandwagoned for no apparent reason I'd get defensive too. Besides, it's backwards, you need a reason to vote and not use the response to justify your actions. ShadowLurker was goating theman/da Tizzle in becoming overdefensive to get a reason by his repeated accussations (223, 235, 251)

Your post numbres are backwards by the way. Following yours, I provided a reason before it was asked for one yet I called it random afterwards it was asked for one.

Also, you're saying my early vote on H2 da tizzle was baseless yet you don't explain how that makes me scum.

I don't consider overdefensiveness a good reason to vote someone when you are the one causing it in the first place, besides it only came after you repeatedly pressed for their lynch without having any sort of reason besides random.

If I have to explain why using bad reasoning to get someone lynched makes someone scum... I'm afraid I can't help you much. Bad reasoning leading to lynches is what scum do. Ergo someone who does it is scummy.

Also, Eon appears to be getting some heat, and it looks like I missed most of it during my reread. Can someone summarize the reasoning for their suspicions on him?

Overdefensiveness is a good reason. One vote shouldn't cause overdefensiveness.

[ShadowLurker]

Besides, it's backwards, you need a reason to vote and not use the response to justify your actions.

Since when?

*smack*

That was a random vote at the start so it did not reasoning.

I can't vouch for H2 da Tizzle's experience cuz I don't know it, but I think he's a n00b. Most n00bs are overdefensive because they haven't learned yet.

If you voted for MeMe and she was like, "WHAT! OMG SCUM!!!!!!" and voted you, then I'd see your point.

I hate it when somebody plays the noob card. But playing the noob card for OTHER PEOPLE?!?!

[ShadowLurker]

Sorry for having lurked, but stressful times have overtaken me. I agree with lordy for saying that we need to move beyond the random voting stage. On that note I'm going to

unvote

. When it is so random there is no way to choose who is really acting scummy. Now that H2 da Tizzle and I are back, and no longer lurking, I say people give good voting reasons, or unvote us. For some random craplogic reason we are the majority vote.

X

Why aren't more people voting obvious H2 da tizzle/themanhimself scum?

They aren't voting us because they know the truth. My other head is speaking for us both. There you have it.

SCUM

X

Overdefensive = scum
No defense = scum

What is the perfect defense ShadowLurker?

X

[ShadowLurker]

It's also noted that your other head made a rather convenient jump to the eon/re2fan wagon.

We made that decision together. Please don't single out my other head. Kthx.

I thought H2 da tizzle/theman was more scummy, he disagreed, but we both agreed that our vote remaining on H2/the wasn't going to accomplish anything as no one else was voting him.

Incidentally Shadow Lurker - posting Red X's as rebuttals is fairly futile. Please actually argue...

What was the point I was supposed to rebuttaling against?

[ShadowLurker]

I did NOT play the n00b card. I am saying that what you're calling scumtell is something that anyone would do had they not played a lot of games, not that H2 Da Tizzle is a n00b and we should forgive him.

Basically, I'm attacking your actions, not defending his.

But what do I know. I'm a n00b.

I disagree. People who are newbs are still likely to exhibit overdefensiveness as scum than town right out of the gate like that over a

random vote

[ShadowLurker]

45 . Save Pablito : spam I'm spending all this time chronicalling spam?

Yes.

+1 spam count.

:goodposting:

√

[ShadowLurker]

ShadowLurker

: Began the game with the style of irrationally pursuing one pairing (H2 and TMH), and then when this was responded to, tried to call it 'overdefensiveness' (which I disagree with: the wagon itself was not well-reasoned, and that was exactly what TMH pointed out).

Three random votes is not a bandwagon that should be attempted to be debunked by citing poor reasoning. It is part of the random voting stage. I also like how you completely fail to ignore H2 da Tizzle's actions.

Since that time, that has been SL's one and only "good reason" to vote for H2, I don't even agree with it, especially when I don't think "overdefensiveness" is even a very large scum-tell.

His latest posts are him simply disagreeing with people, and I can probably bet money that he will later quote this entire post and say something to the effect of "I disagree".

Funny how those two quotes work.

If anything, SL has been pretty much been a broken record this game, saying the same thing over and over, hoping others will eventually pick up the tune and play it for him.

And I'm the only one that has stayed on one person this whole game.. right.

Until they actually contribute something of content and give me a reason why I should not be suspicious of them then I'll continue to have my eye on them.

[ShadowLurker]

Bird1111

: Little content added to the game, and jumped on the Eon/Re2 wagon as it was gaining steam.

I'm also going to back up my other head on this one. We discussed this hop for quite a while and it was definitely not without reason.

[ShadowLurker]

In other words, you disagree, just as pj said you would.

Wow. Nice misrepresentation. And even if that was the point of the entire post, how does disagreeing make somebody all of a sudden scum? Great scumtell list you have there Everybody should agree all the time.

PJ didn't comment on that. He said Bird didn't add enough to the game in way of posting.

Don't try to comment on my rebuttal when you don't even read the original post. PJ commented about when bird1111 jumped on the wagon basically implying it was extremely oppurtunistic. So yes, he did comment on that.

[ShadowLurker]

SL seems to be doing the oldest scum trick in the book here.

"vote:you"

"Why are you voting me?"

"Hah! Now you're being overdefensive! Confirm vote: you!"

I really hate that logic.

Really, do I have to explain this again?

The "vote: you" was RANDOM.

I just decided to leave it on because somebody got riled up over three random votes.

[ShadowLurker]

you random voted him by accusing him of scum straight off the bat, cryptically saying he claimed scum.

Then you're like, OMG he's being overdefensive, which I still fail to see, even with the big Xs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joke

"Now that H2 da Tizzle and I are back, and no longer lurking, I say people give good voting reasons, or unvote us. For some random craplogic reason we are the majority vote."

Is screaming to get off him because they have three votes from random votes.

"They aren't voting us because they know the truth. My other head is speaking for us both. There you have it. SCUM"

A great non overdefensive response which I don't see how you can not see.

"Overdefensive = scum
No defense = scum"

A bit scrambling there for a misrepresentation.

[ShadowLurker]

I call bullshit on anybody claiming they didn't see a joke.

Me saying somebody claimed scum before they haven't even posted yet is so obviously a joke it's not even funny.

He had three votes, for completly illogical reasons, and was asking people to either stop voting for him or give reasons for their votes. Sounds like a perfectly rational response to me.

It was the RANDOM VOTE STAGE. If 5 people suddenly hopped on him and quicklynched him, I would be rather happy as our scum were revealed. But do you really think that would've happened?

The second one I actually agree with; if a person is attacked and dosn't defend themselves, then they get attcked for that. If a person is attacked and does defend themselves, they get attacked for being "overdefensive". It's complete craplogic, and I remember abusing that particular trap myself in my first couple of games as scum.

You're making statements about the case that weren't true here. 1) He wasn't really attacked unless you call random votes attacks, and 2) explaining your actions is extremely different from being overdefensive and calling everybody voting you scum.

The first one; eh, people were still voting him and refusing to explain why, so he got frustrated and called them scum. Not the best of responses, but hardly a scum tell.[/quote]

[ShadowLurker]

SL, these were your posts before he made that response. Can you honestly say that anyone would NOT intrepet these three posts as an attack?

All those posts were in the random vote stage. He hadn't posted yet, it should be

obvious

there's nothing concrete against him and a serious wagon wasn't to build up before he even got a chance to post.

Not a logical attack on your part, but clearly an attack. Compared to the attack, I'd hardly consider the initial response to be overdefensive; if anything it was a rather mild response considering the attack.

I'm sorry for bringing some fun into the game.

I'd still rather lynch mini neo, but with the deadline coming up, I'll settle for lynching the person slinging around crap logic and misrepresentations here.

You haven't even showed me a misrepresentation or any instances of crap logic yet.

In fact, you chose to ignore this.

The second one I actually agree with; if a person is attacked and dosn't defend themselves, then they get attcked for that. If a person is attacked and does defend themselves, they get attacked for being "overdefensive". It's complete craplogic, and I remember abusing that particular trap myself in my first couple of games as scum.

You're making statements about the case that weren't true here. 1) He wasn't really attacked unless you call random votes attacks, and 2) explaining your actions is extremely different from being overdefensive and calling everybody voting you scum.

[ShadowLurker]

So you were there to count the votes and see if it was a hammer, yet you don't choose to comment on anything going on.

[ShadowLurker]

Omg. SRSLY people.

Deadline doesn't mean you should just vote the person you think is most scummiest and most likely to get lynched and leave.

You can still have discussion, just because there is a deadline for today doesn't mean you can't analyze what was said during the deadline about other players tommorow.

Stop it with the freaking DEADLINE IS COMING, DEADLINE IS COMING, ALL PILE ONTO ONE PERSON AND WAIT UNTIL TOMMOROW

[ShadowLurker]

I don't really believe in a "random vote phase". Anyway, there is a difference between a single random vote and several logic-less attacking posts, Baby Jesus style.

I can't believe you are trying to prove the attacks were serious because it should be obvious they weren't.

I've got no problem with you attacking him to try to get a reaction, but his reaction was not scummy.

His reaction to those jokes were indeed, pretty scummy.

I think your discription of his reactons as "overdefensive" was a misrepresentation of what he did, and I think that you discribing your multiple attacking posts as a random vote was a misrepresentation of what you did. I also think that your entire attack on him was crap logic, which has been the point of my last several posts.

Omg.
1) He was over defensive, I have explained this several times over and over. Him telling people to GTFO unless they have a reason is the definition of overdefensive.
2 & 3) Those posts at the beginning of the game WERE NOT SERIOUS

(shrug) I hardly ignored it. The entire point of my last post was that he was really attacked, and even if we ignore those first three posts of yours he was CERTANLY attacked by the point he actually did anything that could remotely be called overdefensive.

-He was overdefensive over attacks that were random and not even serious.

-When he has been seriously attacked like he has now, he hasn't chose to comment at all, he's been absent these past few pages.

-Can you show me any other instances he was attacked before theman made that first overdefensive post? Because I'm almost 100% sure without even looking that there wasn't.

[ShadowLurker]

You haven't even showed me a misrepresentation or any instances of crap logic yet.

In fact, you chose to ignore this.

Oh, I get it -- this is another joke, right? Because Yos was pretty clear that the misrepresentation of which he speaks is "I wasn't attacking him, just random voting him" and he showed it by quoting three of your posts in which you were accusatory toward H2.

And yes, when one makes three posts all focused on being accusatory toward the same person, the fact that "it was the random vote stage!" is no defense. The random vote stage explains one such post. Three only serves to emphasize that you are voting that person, and the only reason to do that is that you really want them lynched.

Try reading the posts in context before you try making an argument.

[ShadowLurker]

bird1111/ShadowLurker - 6 - (Cogito Ergo Sum/Mgm, MBL/PJ, armlx/Nightson, TSS/Yosarian2, Pablito/STD, Fritzler/ibaesha)

My internet's down and will be down through the weekend it seems, so here's the most unimaginative lynch scene ever:

bird1111/ShadowLurker are dead, they were a townie.

'Tis night, choices will be due

Wednesday, October 11, at 6 pm EDT.

Boo.