Two-Headed Mafia 2 - GAME OVER!

[Thestatusquo]

*counts* Yeah. Pretty sure it's a hammah

[Save The Dragons]

I count 4 votes......

[Thestatusquo]

Oh. Never mind. I misread the votecount.

[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.

[Thestatusquo]

great.

So we have 3 competing wagons...

[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

[Thestatusquo]

I think I've made it abundantly clear where I'm at on all three major wagons. My position has not changed, nor has anything come up that has made me change my mind. So I felt no need to comment on that as such.

[Yosarian2]

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.

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.

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

[qutote]

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.
[/quote]

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.

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.

[/quote]

(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.

[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.

[pablito]

Save the Pablito will support with a

unvote: SV/lordy; vote: ShadowLurker/bird1111

if it gets things moving. We've all been about progress and getting us to consolidate votes, and the SV/lordy wagon is not moving anywhere and there are decent points for stopping that wagon.

[Courk]

Vote Count:

bird1111/ShadowLurker - 5 - (Cogito Ergo Sum/Mgm, MBL/PJ, armlx/Nightson, TSS/Yosarian2, Pablito/STD)

Eon/re2fan - 5 - (CDB/ziliu , Glork/MoS, Mini Neo/sprontalic, bird1111/ShadowLurker, lordy/spectrumvoid)

lordy/spectrumvoid - 3 - (Fritz/ibby, thestatusquo/ubertimmy, Eon/re2fan)

Glork/MoS - 1 - (Coron/DGB)

19 hours and 33 minutes until deadline!

Still waiting on responses from HyToFry and Mini Neo.

[the silent speaker]

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.

[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.

[Nightson]

SL says: They were just random votes!

tmh said: 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.

[Thestatusquo]

I do not want to hammah. I still think that Spectrum/lordy is a better play.

[Courk]

Since this is most likely the last time I'll be checking in before the deadline, I just wanted to let you know that Eon/re2fan is the current vote leader, as they had 5 votes first.

[Save The Dragons]

Day 1! 17 alive, 9 to lynch![/b]

by hammah, do you mean make sure he has more votes than the other wagon?

[bird1111]

SL says: They were just random votes!

tmh said: 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.

Why did you quote those two posts?

[Yosarian2]

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

"But I was only joking when I voted him and then followed my vote up with two other attacking posts" is hardly a good defense, SL.

And I can't believe you really think that "Either unvote me or give me a reason why you're voting for me" is an overdefensive irrational overraction to suddenly finding 3 votes on you for no apparent reason. Seems like a perfectly rational reaction to me.

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.

You can't just keep saying that and expect anyone to take you seriously, especally when you can't seem explain why you think THAT POST was scummy.

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.

Um, "give a reason for your vote or unvote me" is the "definiation" of overdefensive? Again, I'd say that asking for an explination for the three votes on him at that moment was a completly resonable reaction.

2 & 3) Those posts at the beginning of the game WERE NOT SERIOUS

Well, you certanly gave no sign of that, as you have kept your vote there all day and have continued to attack them pretty constantly.

[Mgm]

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

Talk about misrepresentation. Voting now is to either get a claim or a lynch, if we don't do that now we will have wasted the day. I'm not waiting untill tomorrow, I'm waiting for a claim.

[ChannelDelibird]

Prefer the Eon vote but will switch to SL if it becomes necessary for a lynch.

[Nightson]

Jeez, I didn't realize it was already the fifth. Someone needs to claim and soon.

[ibaesha]

Right now I'm liking a spectrum/lordy lynch over an SL/bird lynch. But I like an SL/bird lynch over an Eon/re2fan lynch.

And yes, I realize I pushed Eon/re2fan rather hard but I think that something productive came of it. I'm less sure they're scum (re2fan is scummier than eon) and more suspicious of those who took the chance to jump on their wagon as it gained momentum. And look who those are ... spectrum/lordy and SL/bird.

Taking into consideration the above:

unvote; vote SL/bird

Oh and by the way:

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

This really sounds like panic to me. You should know that it's perfectly reasonable (and standard) play for people to shift to the person they find most suspicious out of the leading vote-getters at deadline. Otherwise the day is wasted as Mgm pointed out.

[spectrumvoid]

I seriously don't like the tone of SL's latest responses. And I did a read, I also don't SL/bird's other posts. But I still think Eon/re is more scummy. With a deadline coming, I don't know what to do.

We now have 7 votes on SL/bird correct? I think I'll wait for a claim from SL. Because so many people have gone to SL/bird, and there's probably not enough time to start pushing.

[pablito]

a claim would make save the pablito severely reconsider the vote on shadowbird.