Mini 388: DOOMsville II {Game Over!}

[Patrick]

Well his post said 'can we stop the silliness now?' That implies that he thinks the whole thing against him is BS. And earlier he voted Falcone for 'creating masterpieces out of shit'. Now he's saying he was deliberately provoking the attention by doing silly/weird things. Why was he trying to push ppl away from him if that was the case?

It seems like he's changing his defence from 'I'm not doing anything strange' to 'I was deliberately acting strange to start discussion'.

[ShadowLurker]

Umm.. no, I was simply doing random things to get discussion going. Apparently, people have been skimming as no one noticed the discrepency between my votes until I pointed it out myself.

What, so now you're saying you were deliberately acting strange/random just to get ppl talking? After you've spent most of your recent posts trying to defend your actions and saying there was nothing strange?

Can we stop the silliness now? On that note, we're also well past the random voting and half-assed stage. Plus, friday still has a lot of explaining to do.

Sounds like you actually wanted attention away from what you'd done. Now you say it was done in the name of conversation. I have to say I don't like that.
Anyway why do you say nobody noticed the discrepancy in your votes until you pointed it out? Didn't Ozy point it out?

Well his post said 'can we stop the silliness now?' That implies that he thinks the whole thing against him is BS. And earlier he voted Falcone for 'creating masterpieces out of shit'. Now he's saying he was deliberately provoking the attention by doing silly/weird things. Why was he trying to push ppl away from him if that was the case?

It seems like he's changing his defence from 'I'm not doing anything strange' to 'I was deliberately acting strange to start discussion'.

Please explain how I am changing my defense. The things earlier before I said "stop the silliness" were to generate discussion. The things afterwards were not and my real thoughts about what was going on. I've said there is nothing "strange" (clarify what you mean by this) about what I did as it was to generate discussion and especially not the confirm vote, which is true, but the point is, it still was to generate discussion.

[ShadowLurker]

Also, on your metagaming vs. Leper Mafia. On Leper Mafia, there was something to go off immediately, the random vote stage was basically non existent, if you notice, I started it off with something silly too "Vote Rathyr because my dice told me too" so really, there isn't any discrepency between what happened. It was just in Leper, the PBPAs and seriousness started immediately, and here, I felt we just had people who were trying to nitpick what I was doing for no reason so basically, your metagame arguments don't apply, and I urge you to look at other games if you want to look down that path.

[Patrick]

If the stuff you did earlier was to generate discussion, then I don't know why you were accusing ppl of nitpicking you. Your first vote on Ozy for vote hopping was questioned by Falcone, and you voted him for apparently making masterpieces out of shit. You strangely accused Falcone of setting up a false dilemna, you made that weird post which contained only quotes and w.t.f. and you confirmed a vote on kilmenator when you weren't voting her. All this you say to create discussion. But when it did create discussion, you told ppl to back off, stop nitpicking etc. I don't really get it.

The metagaming argument I assume you're targetting at Falcone since I don't think your play in Leper Mafia makes you look bad here.

[Turbovolver]

It seems like he's changing his defence from 'I'm not doing anything strange' to 'I was deliberately acting strange to start discussion'.

He never said that though. He hasn't said anything about the 'level of weirdness' of his play, and he hasn't really done much defense other than ask snide questions and/or request that people clarify their attacks on him.

You are really misrepresenting the situation here.

FOS: Patrick

[Patrick]

Maybe my above post fleshes it out a bit more. I don't think I'm misrepresenting the situation at all. I find it interesting that you seem to be keenly defending Shadowlurker, although to some extent I can see how his kind of behaviour could make him a ridiculously easy target for scum votes if he's pro town.

He never said that though. He hasn't said anything about the 'level of weirdness' of his play, and he hasn't really done much defense other than ask snide questions and/or request that people clarify their attacks on him.

Well ok, he hasn't said anything about his weirdness of his play so I suppose it's grammatically wrong to put it in ' '. Nevertheless I'm trying to find out the reasons for what he's done so far, because it wouldn't be the first time I've seen ppl tring to hide under the I was just generating discussion defence.

[ShadowLurker]

If the stuff you did earlier was to generate discussion, then I don't know why you were accusing ppl of nitpicking you. Your first vote on Ozy for vote hopping was questioned by Falcone, and you voted him for apparently making masterpieces out of shit. You strangely accused Falcone of setting up a false dilemna, you made that weird post which contained only quotes and w.t.f. and you confirmed a vote on kilmenator when you weren't voting her. All this you say to create discussion. But when it did create discussion, you told ppl to back off, stop nitpicking etc. I don't really get it.

The metagaming argument I assume you're targetting at Falcone since I don't think your play in Leper Mafia makes you look bad here.

Maybe my above post fleshes it out a bit more. I don't think I'm misrepresenting the situation at all. I find it interesting that you seem to be keenly defending Shadowlurker, although to some extent I can see how his kind of behaviour could make him a ridiculously easy target for scum votes if he's pro town.

He never said that though. He hasn't said anything about the 'level of weirdness' of his play, and he hasn't really done much defense other than ask snide questions and/or request that people clarify their attacks on him.

Well ok, he hasn't said anything about his weirdness of his play so I suppose it's grammatically wrong to put it in ' '. Nevertheless I'm trying to find out the reasons for what he's done so far, because it wouldn't be the first time I've seen ppl tring to hide under the I was just generating discussion defence.

The point of the matter, it generated discussion. Nitpicking will lead to this which it already in a sense: THAT WAS STUPID IF YOU'RE PROTOWN, NO IT WASN'T IT GENERATED DISCUSSION IT WASN'T SCUMMY, YES IT WAS, NO IT WASN'T, etc. The point of the matter is, we now have people's reactions to each other and more interactions and are beyond the random vote stage now.

I don't know what you mean that I'm hiding under the cover of "generating discussion defense" because my actions pre-taking the game seriously weren't intended to be anything, they were just for discussion and I can't really argue on the principle of whether it was smart or not or whether protown or antitown players would be likely to do that but I don't see the point in voting me for it because obviously, I'm NOT doing it anymore and I don't see how generating discussion puts you in a scum context.

[kilmenator]

I dont think it was the generating discussion part that got targetted. I think it was the way in which you generated the discussion. Why not throw out a No Lynch or something like that to generate discussion instead of how you were acting? And honestly I dont like how turbo seems to always be coming to the defense of SL. Maybe it is nothing, but I think that SL should defend herself because she is the one who put herself in this situation.

So, on to new topics. I would like to hear more from other people, and would like to hear their takes on what is going on.

[Turbovolver]

Patrick, ShadowLurker is right. This argument is going nowhere.

[ShadowLurker]

I dont think it was the generating discussion part that got targetted. I think it was the way in which you generated the discussion. Why not throw out a No Lynch or something like that to generate discussion instead of how you were acting? And honestly I dont like how turbo seems to always be coming to the defense of SL. Maybe it is nothing, but I think that SL should defend herself because she is the one who put herself in this situation.

So, on to new topics. I would like to hear more from other people, and would like to hear their takes on what is going on.

1) I'm a boy.

2) I am defending myself.

[Turbovolver]

I dont think it was the generating discussion part that got targetted. I think it was the way in which you generated the discussion. Why not throw out a No Lynch or something like that to generate discussion instead of how you were acting? And honestly I dont like how turbo seems to always be coming to the defense of SL. Maybe it is nothing, but I think that SL should defend herself because she is the one who put herself in this situation.

So, on to new topics. I would like to hear more from other people, and would like to hear their takes on what is going on.

I like the way you arbitrarily suggest no lynch as a better alternative to confirm voting somebody you aren't voting. Both are 'classically scummy' moves that are used early game solely to get things going, so I don't know why one would be better than the other. I get the feeling you don't either, and made that post up as you went.

Unvote: Friday-13th
Vote: killmenator

As for the defending ShadowLurker thing, I like to comment on everything I can.

[Patrick]

Patrick, ShadowLurker is right. This argument is going nowhere.

eh since when did that deter you from arguing about something

[Turbovolver]

Patrick, ShadowLurker is right. This argument is going nowhere.

eh since when did that deter you from arguing about something

I never want to argue in an argument that's going nowhere. Unfortunately I often take quite a while to realise that it's going nowhere, and/or get caught up refuting all the defamations being thrown at me.

When it's other people that are arguing it's much easier

[friday-13th]

just checking around here,will post tommorow,sorry,been busy...
by the way,i we havnt heard from rosso carne often,any one know what happened?or is he on lurker mode...

[kilmenator]

turbo said:

I like the way you arbitrarily suggest no lynch as a better alternative to confirm voting somebody you aren't voting. Both are 'classically scummy' moves that are used early game solely to get things going, so I don't know why one would be better than the other. I get the feeling you don't either, and made that post up as you went.

ummm... no lynch isnt always a scummy move. and i have NEVER before been in a game where someone confirm voted someone they were not even voting. and by what you just said, what SL did was a classically scummy move, why then are you voting me and not SL? and why have you been defending SL all game when you yourself just said that it was a scummy move?
i am comfortable with where my vote is and has been most of the game and could defintely see a turbo-SL pair as scum.

[kilmenator]

oh, and sorry SL for referring to you as a female...

[Turbovolver]

ummm... no lynch isnt always a scummy move.

No, in fact it's very rarely a scummy move. But when someone comes along and votes no lynch in the first few pages of the game, it's almost inevitable someone will call that scummy. This is what I mean by 'classically scummy' things.

and i have NEVER before been in a game where someone confirm voted someone they were not even voting.

Well yeah, maybe classically wasn't the right word. Point is they are both stupid things which would get labelled as scummy by knee-jerk players.

and by what you just said, what SL did was a classically scummy move, why then are you voting me and not SL? and why have you been defending SL all game when you yourself just said that it was a scummy move?

I myself don't think what he did was scummy at all.

[geraintm]

I want to write in this game, i really do. I have been following as best i can the Shadow/turbo/kil conversation, and right now i am finding they are just going round and round amoung themselves and not getting anywhere.
The issues they are discussing are (to me), minor ones and not going to be enough to convince enough other people to vote for a lynching, unless something comes up that hasn't been mentioned so far.

I know this might be weird me saying it as i don't feel i have said too much, but bird needs to be around more.
And does anyone know why you can't search for a person's posts anymore (says it is disabled) i can't work out if bird is lacking from the whole site or just this one game.

[Turbovolver]

The issues they are discussing are (to me), minor ones and not going to be enough to convince enough other people to vote for a lynching, unless something comes up that hasn't been mentioned so far.

What do you think about Friday's hyper-defensiveness?

[Machiavellian-Mafia]

Everyone please post to indicate that you are still here, thanks

[Patrick]

*stumbles in*

[bird1111]

Still here

[Ozymandius]

I'm here.

[Turbovolver]

Still here.

[friday-13th]

boo...
still here...that took long..