Royal Family Mafia - Game Over!

[Canucklehead17]

Ok, Maz, here's what your problem is that I see. You are stating your opinion as fact. Example:

You were blatantly attempting to set up a 1-2 mislynch on Jack-->LL. Rather than defending yourself when I called you on it, you dismissed the attack via ad homming about my post count.

Say Maz, are you sure you've got that straight? You know what actually happened? I didn't think you did.

STD and I went into this looong discussion about that very accusation. If you would like to see my explanation, I suggest you go back and read my lovely chat with STD. I DID address the issue, but I DIDN'T address it to you. Reason being, as I've stated before, you simply sit around and post these little one and two liners, with no substance whatsoever. But the issue was addressed. I'm so sorry you were offended that I didn't speak directly to YOU.

I missed that part where you changed the fact that you tried to set up the 1-2.

Oh, wait. It didn't exist.

I never tried to set up the 1-2 in the first place. I explained that over and over(and over) again. If my explanation wasn't good enough for you, then fine, just say that instead of going on this "you never changed the fact that you were setting up the 1-2". There wasn't a fact to be changed.

You can answer things evasively. That's generally how it's done. For example, this entire post has been "evasive" on the issue of your 1-2 attempt, which - no matter how cutely you explain it away - is scummy as all hell.

You're contradicting yourself Maz. First you say I'm evasive, and that's proven when I don't explain the "1-2 attempt". Then in the next sentence, you say you don't care how cute my explanation was? Which is it? Did I explain it or didn't I?

Blind? I'm not holding your hand.

Mazzz, I don't see it! If you're going to accuse me of something, you have to let me know what I'm being accused of and where it's at! If I mis-quoted, I certainly don't see it, and I need your help in finding it. Otherwise, you can forget about any explanation, there's nothing else I can do!

I omitted the especially retarded parts, because I didn't want to dignify them with repetition of my responses. For one who criticizes my "one-liners", you sure employ them a lot in your attempted analysis - which, by the way, contains no content whatsoever.

Yep, glad you noticed. I did indeed use your little one-liners. Know why? To show you how truly annoying and stupid they really are. And yet, at the same time, I did provide very thorough analysis, and my post contained quite a bit of content. I addressed every single one of your accusations with legit defense. Was there something else you were expecting?

[Maz Medias]

I never tried to set up the 1-2 in the first place. I explained that over and over(and over) again. If my explanation wasn't good enough for you, then fine, just say that instead of going on this "you never changed the fact that you were setting up the 1-2". There wasn't a fact to be changed.

1. LL keeps going on and on about knowing who's townie and who's not. Obviously, as we all know, the odds of lynching scum on the first day are low. So if LL is sooo positive that he(she)'s right, then why not give it a chance? If Jack turns out to be a townie, then we can finally have a reason to knock off LL.

I don't see any interpretation of the latter that couldn't be considered a 1-2. You are saying "Let's go with LL, and if he's wrong, lynch him tomorrow." This is something you, being scum, would very much like; you already know that Jack is a townie, so when you get him lynched, you have an excuse to then waste the NEXT day "knocking off" LL. It doesn't help at all that you then afterward backpedalled, saying:

I believe it was YOU who first wanted LL lynched, because of your 'headaches'. Now I agree that LL is a tad crazy with his townie tells, and I decided to vote for him. On further thought though, you shouldn't just lynch someone because they're crazy with townie tells.

Here's your playstyle support, by the way. You're excusing LL's shit-tastic and useless concept of using process of elimination to determine who scum are, yet you are voting me because of my Day One hatred.

However, there did still appear to be a bandwagon forming against LL. So I thought to myself, "Self, why not come up with a solution to this?" The solution seemed simple enough...give LL a chance. See what happens, and then go from there.

Here, you're advocating that we trust someone with no actual argument against the person they want to lynch...

I'm not insisting that we lynch LL if Jack turns out to be townie, but it seemed to me that you and many others wouldn't have a problem with it.

...then aborting your previous 1-2 attempt by saying...

Either way, if Jack turns out to be townie, LL will have lost credibility and we can all shut him out the rest of the game.

... that "knock off" means "ignore", which nobody in this game is stupid enough to buy.

You can answer things evasively. That's generally how it's done. For example, this entire post has been "evasive" on the issue of your 1-2 attempt, which - no matter how cutely you explain it away - is scummy as all hell.

You're contradicting yourself Maz. First you say I'm evasive, and that's proven when I don't explain the "1-2 attempt". Then in the next sentence, you say you don't care how cute my explanation was? Which is it? Did I explain it or didn't I?

Try reading what you fucking quote, then stop misrepping me. I JUST SAID that you can answer something evasively; if you don't understand, that means that just because you answered the question doesn't mean you weren't evasive about it.

Blind? I'm not holding your hand.

Post 265. You attribute Arafax' admonition to me, and then tell himme to "calm down, eh?" in the same defensive, haughty, holier-than-thou and altogether obnoxious tone that you'd been using since I called you on your 1-2.

I omitted the especially retarded parts, because I didn't want to dignify them with repetition of my responses. For one who criticizes my "one-liners", you sure employ them a lot in your attempted analysis - which, by the way, contains no content whatsoever.

Yep, glad you noticed. I did indeed use your little one-liners. Know why? To show you how truly annoying and stupid they really are. And yet, at the same time, I did provide very thorough analysis, and my post contained quite a bit of content. I addressed every single one of your accusations with legit defense. Was there something else you were expecting?[/quote]No, I fully expected you to post something that sounded good, but signified nothing. You didn't provide a "very thorough analysis" by any definition of any of the three words, your post contained about as much content as an episode of Super Sweet 16, you completely failed to defend against the only important accusation I've leveled against you for being lynched, and all the while you maintained a misinflated ego and disappointing transparency that praise seems to have made you oblivious to.

[IH]

XD Super sweet 16.

Of course that's besides the point. = / How omgus is this argument from C-Head, though I'm not sure how much scumminess is coming from it.

I'd like something else from Pooky. = D

[Maz Medias]

I don't see why he's being given a pass for having blatantly attempted one of the single scummiest things in the game.

[Zindaras]

Because IH is even scummier, in my eyes.

[IH]

Pheh, screw this. I'm going through this frickin argument, because I saw a very good point from Maz, and I feel C-head is just being stupid, while Maz is fueling it.

mmm.... I would say this might be the start of the C-Head and Maz argument. Post 408?

You are an idiot.

And all you ever do is go around posting one and two liners insulting or hastily voting. All LL was trying to do there was show an instance where his style of play worked, and you trashed it without so much as a look I'd be willing to bet.

Vote: Maz Medias

.....Why did that merit a vote? Did because he insulted LL?

An addition to above post:

BTW, LL had good reason to post that too, as he has been criticized the entire game about his 'style'. It was totally warranted, and your response was not.

......"LL is the greatest! Can I kiss his ass anymore?!"

In response to Jack asking that same question of "Why was it a scumtell for name calling"

As far as I can tell, MM has contributed very little to the game. MM voted for me, with a little two liner explanation. When I showed my displeasure over that, he responded with yet another one line insult.

And now he just flies over LL like nothing even happened. In the little bit of contribution area I see lurking, and in the hasty votes and name calling I see scummy characteristics.

This is just my opinion, but until Maz shows me something that this has not been his main style of play this game, this is where my vote shall remain.

mm, Some people just play like that. They just deign that that's all the explanation needed.

I find it interesting that you strongly support LL's playstyle, yet vote me for mine. Your hypocrisy is amusing.

I also find it funny that you're criticizing me of not contributing. My philosophy is not to say anything if it's not useful. I don't falsely inflate my post count nor do I try to pretend that I'm as prolific as someone like Fritzler. I do, however, play the game. Just because I'm not telling you my thoughts doesn't mean I'm not reading that thread and trying to determine who the scum are (rather than the townies, which is an illogical method).

LL's "strategy" working in a newbie game, where everyone is notoriously transparent, means nothing to me. The last sentence of your last post makes no sense. I voted for you because you pinged my 'dar strongly, and because you are an idiot who is a liability to the town.

I agree with STD. Falsely inflating your post count is fun! Not only that, but I think it's nicer to see your thought process. It is harder to follow your logic the way you do it sometimes.

Oh, let me further explain my vote on you, Canucklescum.

You were blatantly attempting to set up a 1-2 mislynch on Jack-->LL. Rather than defending yourself when I called you on it, you dismissed the attack via ad homming about my post count. You then dropped the argument completely.

Later, you attributed a quote to me when I was not the one who said it, and again never mentioned it again once I pointed that out.

You are evasive, deflective, clueless, transparent, and deserve to die.

In other words, I would guess that Maz found something scummy, and LL changed his argument a few times. Though I'm not sure how being "clueless and Transparent" are scum tells, unless he's transparent enough to look like he's scum?

Maz, I agree with you that Canuckle is transparent.

This transparency makes it obvious that he is a townie...

And that's the Response from LL of the argument = D

Holy Cow, MM. You sure do know how to post a humdinger. Full of false info, full of bull, full of scumminess I think. Shall we get started?

Da Maz Man wrote:
I find it interesting that you strongly support LL's playstyle, yet vote me for mine. Your hypocrisy is amusing.

Well, let's see, I think I've done anything but strongly support LL. In fact, if I remember correctly(and I DO remember correctly, unlike yourself), I was very much a criticizer of LL's style of play. I decided to go along this one time with LL, and either prove or disprove his theory for myself. Your lack of knowledge on my position is amusing.

Mazzie wrote:
ust because I'm not telling you my thoughts doesn't mean I'm not reading that thread and trying to determine who the scum are (rather than the townies, which is an illogical method).

Well, that's very interesting. Cause I could've sworn that it was quite expected that each and every player should contribute to the game as much as possible. Hum, but somehow you get the free pass to just watch and contribute little. I didn't know, please accept my apologies, it was my mistake.

Maz Maz Maz... wrote:
LL's "strategy" working in a newbie game, where everyone is notoriously transparent, means nothing to me.

Hey! You explained yourself! Bravo!

Maz Medias wrote:
You were blatantly attempting to set up a 1-2 mislynch on Jack-->LL. Rather than defending yourself when I called you on it, you dismissed the attack via ad homming about my post count.

Say Maz, are you sure you've got that straight? You know what actually happened? I didn't think you did.

STD and I went into this looong discussion about that very accusation. If you would like to see my explanation, I suggest you go back and read my lovely chat with STD. I DID address the issue, but I DIDN'T address it to you. Reason being, as I've stated before, you simply sit around and post these little one and two liners, with no substance whatsoever. But the issue was addressed. I'm so sorry you were offended that I didn't speak directly to YOU.

Maz wrote:
Later, you attributed a quote to me when I was not the one who said it, and again never mentioned it again once I pointed that out.

I'm sorry, but I don't remember that. If you will please tell me where that is, I will gladly correct the situation.

And finally, I get to address that ever so nice last line of yours.

Maz wrote:
You are evasive

Am I? I think I've answered every accusation so far, save the little quote issue you mentioned, and that was simply an oversight(IF it even exists).

Mazzzz wrote:
deflective

I only deflect incorrect accusations such as yours.

Maszszs wrote:
clueless

Actually, judging by what you posted, you're the clueless one.

Maz wrote:
transparent

Pro-town roles SHOULD be transparent.

Maz wrote:
and deserve to die.

Actually, you do.

I await your response with great anticipation.

1. You've done anything but strongly support LL? Bullshit.
2.Partially agreed
3.WTF? That's all you can say to that, where it looked like you voted him for insulting LL's response? "Bravo! You explained yourself"
4...... Alright, is yours and STD's word law about how things went down? There is a clear record, as you did make a statement about LL and Jack and wanting to lynch them. Why did you also seem to find it necessary to bring the one and two liners back into this either? That had nothing to do with it, unless it was about yours and STD's chat?
5.No comment
6, 7, 8, 9, and 10. Stop your omgus-y response bullshit. This did nothing but make you look like an asshole IMO.

One further point of my following of LL:

I'm not following him anymore...as I think is obvious by my vote.

Err... you voted Maz right after he called LL an idiot. I don't think it's that obvious.

*smiles sweetly*

I only called him clueless and said he deserved to die. My reasons being: He posted above and said very few things that were true, making him clueless...

and

He deserves to die because I believe he is scum.

I still look forward to his explanation of it all.

I repeat. Omgus crap.

*ahem*

Maz, you STILL are avoiding my post to you. I honestly want some answers, and want to know how your rant against me was founded. I seriously hope your recent behavior is showing others how truly scummy you are.

In case you need help finding it, it's on page 17, post 421.

It's amazing to me that you got off from explaining yourself, and no one other than me noticing. It comes mostly from Pooky's little yee-haw I suppose.

No, I'd mostly say because everyone dismissed it as something retarded.

*grins* Feeling a little closed mouthed lately Maz? I've asked you two or three times to explain yourself, and that's allllll you can say.

Confirm Vote: Maz Medias

.............

I explained myself when I voted for you. If you're too lazy to change pages, you don't deserve my conversation.

*sigh* But I posted back to him afterwards, and he has yet to answer that. I attacked his arguments against me, and he has yet to answer to those! Here is the link to my post: http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... &start=400

Scroll down to post 421. Maz has NOT answered that post yet.

= /

Canucklehead17 wrote:

Mazzie wrote:
ust because I'm not telling you my thoughts doesn't mean I'm not reading that thread and trying to determine who the scum are (rather than the townies, which is an illogical method).

Well, that's very interesting. Cause I could've sworn that it was quite expected that each and every player should contribute to the game as much as possible. Hum, but somehow you get the free pass to just watch and contribute little. I didn't know, please accept my apologies, it was my mistake.

It's day one, and as you would know if you'd taken the time to do your homwork, I don't contribute to the clusterfuck that is such unless I see someone who really stands out in their scumminess - i.e., you, Mr. Mislynch.

Quote:

Maz Medias wrote:
You were blatantly attempting to set up a 1-2 mislynch on Jack-->LL. Rather than defending yourself when I called you on it, you dismissed the attack via ad homming about my post count.

Say Maz, are you sure you've got that straight? You know what actually happened? I didn't think you did.

STD and I went into this looong discussion about that very accusation. If you would like to see my explanation, I suggest you go back and read my lovely chat with STD. I DID address the issue, but I DIDN'T address it to you. Reason being, as I've stated before, you simply sit around and post these little one and two liners, with no substance whatsoever. But the issue was addressed. I'm so sorry you were offended that I didn't speak directly to YOU.

I missed that part where you changed the fact that you tried to set up the 1-2.

Oh, wait. It didn't exist.

Quote:

Maz wrote:
Later, you attributed a quote to me when I was not the one who said it, and again never mentioned it again once I pointed that out.

I'm sorry, but I don't remember that. If you will please tell me where that is, I will gladly correct the situation.

And finally, I get to address that ever so nice last line of yours.

Blind? I'm not holding your hand.

Quote:

Maz wrote:
You are evasive

Am I? I think I've answered every accusation so far, save the little quote issue you mentioned, and that was simply an oversight(IF it even exists).

You can answer things evasively. That's generally how it's done. For example, this entire post has been "evasive" on the issue of your 1-2 attempt, which - no matter how cutely you explain it away - is scummy as all hell.

Quote:

Mazzzz wrote:
deflective

I only deflect incorrect accusations such as yours.

Admission to deflection. I like.

Quote:

Maszszs wrote:
clueless

Actually, judging by what you posted, you're the clueless one.

Am I? It seems like I picked up on a slip by you, and you can't do anything about it except ad hom and pile flowery bullshit into posts.

Quote:

Maz wrote:
Pro-town roles SHOULD be transparent.

And scum shouldn't. That's where you messed up.

Quote:

Maz wrote:
and deserve to die.

Actually, you do.

I await your response with great anticipation.

I omitted the especially retarded parts, because I didn't want to dignify them with repetition of my responses. For one who criticizes my "one-liners", you sure employ them a lot in your attempted analysis - which, by the way, contains no content whatsoever.

Confirm Vote: Canucklehead17, and it's not moving.

1.No comment. Except about the word Clusterfuck. That is awesome.
2.....Are you saying he changed it, or... what here? Because he did change it.
3. = / Pheh, you are both so lazy.
4.agreed
5. no comment, other than it also sounds omgus
6.no comment
7.Sounds omgus also.
8.No comment.

Ok, Maz, here's what your problem is that I see. You are stating your opinion as fact. Example:

Maz wrote:
You were blatantly attempting to set up a 1-2 mislynch on Jack-->LL. Rather than defending yourself when I called you on it, you dismissed the attack via ad homming about my post count.

Canuckle wrote:

Say Maz, are you sure you've got that straight? You know what actually happened? I didn't think you did.

STD and I went into this looong discussion about that very accusation. If you would like to see my explanation, I suggest you go back and read my lovely chat with STD. I DID address the issue, but I DIDN'T address it to you. Reason being, as I've stated before, you simply sit around and post these little one and two liners, with no substance whatsoever. But the issue was addressed. I'm so sorry you were offended that I didn't speak directly to YOU.

Canuckle wrote:
I missed that part where you changed the fact that you tried to set up the 1-2.

Oh, wait. It didn't exist.

I never tried to set up the 1-2 in the first place. I explained that over and over(and over) again. If my explanation wasn't good enough for you, then fine, just say that instead of going on this "you never changed the fact that you were setting up the 1-2". There wasn't a fact to be changed.

Maz wrote:
You can answer things evasively. That's generally how it's done. For example, this entire post has been "evasive" on the issue of your 1-2 attempt, which - no matter how cutely you explain it away - is scummy as all hell.

You're contradicting yourself Maz. First you say I'm evasive, and that's proven when I don't explain the "1-2 attempt". Then in the next sentence, you say you don't care how cute my explanation was? Which is it? Did I explain it or didn't I?

Maz wrote:
Blind? I'm not holding your hand.

Mazzz, I don't see it! If you're going to accuse me of something, you have to let me know what I'm being accused of and where it's at! If I mis-quoted, I certainly don't see it, and I need your help in finding it. Otherwise, you can forget about any explanation, there's nothing else I can do!


Maz wrote:
I omitted the especially retarded parts, because I didn't want to dignify them with repetition of my responses. For one who criticizes my "one-liners", you sure employ them a lot in your attempted analysis - which, by the way, contains no content whatsoever.


Yep, glad you noticed. I did indeed use your little one-liners. Know why? To show you how truly annoying and stupid they really are. And yet, at the same time, I did provide very thorough analysis, and my post contained quite a bit of content. I addressed every single one of your accusations with legit defense. Was there something else you were expecting?

1....I believe that could be false.
2.He said you avoided answering it with "cutesy bullshit" not the way you said it.
3.Oh Em Gee. Just use the show all posts by canuckle, and look for it.
4.Yeah, to show you were "Awesome" by omgusing the hell out of him.

I'm not Quoting the above post of Maz either, I'm just going to comment on it (post 501)

1.Not outrageous.
2.Agreed with that.
3.mm hm
4.SCUMSCUMSCUM(C, not M)
5.^
6.Indeed
7.WOOO SOMEONE LOOKED IT UP!
8.I disagree. There was plenty of content in there. It was just... really really scummy.

Do you hate Iocaine powder? Do you believe there were shorebots?

I believe I am going to

unvote, vote:Canucklehead

[IH]

Damn quote tags! I previewed it four times, and my sister distracted me while I was trying to fix it and accidentally clicked submit.

When you see the numbers, thats where I started to respond.

[Maz Medias]

IG, I love you.

And there were so shorebots.

[IH]

How do I feel about them? they really piss me off.

I'd like to hear Canuckle's response.

[Canucklehead17]

I'd like to hear Canuckle's response.

Don't worry, you shall, just not right this moment. I need to head out and do a little last minute Christmas shopping right now. But when I return, I'll post my defense in full, going all the way back to my original offense.

[Canucklehead17]

Ok. *gathers together all his thoughts of the game*

I think it would be best to begin by going all the way back to where people first began voting for me:

Alright LL, I'll go along with you this one time, and we'll see what happens. Really only doing this cause of what STD pointed out in the post above you.

I may end up regretting this, but...

Vote Jack

Followed by:

Canuckle has just moved a rung down my townie ladder.

Well, I'm sorry to hear that, but I do have some logic following that kind of decision...

1. LL keeps going on and on about knowing who's townie and who's not. Obviously, as we all know, the odds of lynching scum on the first day are low. So if LL is sooo positive that he(she)'s right, then why not give it a chance? If Jack turns out to be a townie, then we can finally have a reason to knock off LL.

2. I mentioned in my post above that I was also following the logic of...YOU, STD! You said that if you were the vig, you'd take out Jack tonight. You had a good reason, because Jack was trying to get people to take out someone who posts a lot just because they post a lot. That seems pretty scummy to me, and apparently it did to you too.

And thus began the accusations of Canucklehead17. I'll admit, I worded my posts terribly. I guess partially because I'm not used to playing with mafia die-hards such as yourselves who pick apart each post so carefully. At any rate, it was terrible wording, and didn't correctly convey my intentions.

I think the best response showing how badly I worded my post would be by Ether in post 214.

Canuckle, someone being wrong isn't someone being scum, and therefore it's not a reason to "knock someone off."

I know this is true, but the phrase "knock someone off" is not what I meant. My thoughts rather, were to follow LL for one round and see how he does with his "townie tells" system, and then if LL was wrong, we could ignore him the rest of the game. Of course, I've posted this before:

I believe it was YOU(you being Twito) who first wanted LL lynched, because of your 'headaches'. Now I agree that LL is a tad crazy with his townie tells, and I decided to vote for him. On further thought though, you shouldn't just lynch someone because they're crazy with townie tells.

However, there did still appear to be a bandwagon forming against LL. So I thought to myself, "Self, why not come up with a solution to this?" The solution seemed simple enough...give LL a chance. See what happens, and then go from there.

I'm not insisting that we lynch LL if Jack turns out to be townie, but it seemed to me that you and many others wouldn't have a problem with it.

Either way, if Jack turns out to be townie, LL will have lost credibility and we can all shut him out the rest of the game.

If you think my strategy is flawed, well that's one thing. To call it scummy and lynch me is another. If we have to fight this whole LL thing through the whole game, it's going to slow us down. I need to know for sure if he's worth paying attention to.

This is where Maz came in:

Vote: Canucklehead17 for blatantly trying to set up a 1-2 mislynch.

I responded to this with a very unfriendly post. Partially because this was very sudden as Maz had been lurking the whole game(either that or he had forgotten about it), and partially because I had already explained myself, but he didn't bother to mention that.

And while I'm looking at post 227, notice that Maz said I "blatantly" tried to set up the 1-2. Yet, later on, when I asked if it wasn't a bit obvious, STD told me it was very subtle and sneaky. So which is it?

Moving on, we do come to the point where I mis-quoted. I said that Maz said the following quote, but it was in fact Arafax. My apologies to both of you:

Also C-head....Why would you mention role claiming?...You have 2 votes on you (maybe 3)....IMO there is no reason to even mention claiming....I mean who doesn't role claim when they're about to get lynched?...Your posts just screams more over defensiveness.

Canucklehead not defencing himself but instead attacking the one voting him in attempt to make charges againts himself dissapear gives me scumwibes.

I did defend myself, and then attacked Maz because he apparently didn't bother with my defense.

I do not dispute that it was scummy and I would like to see Canuckle explain it.

See above.

Then we come along to STD's posts. His posts to me, and mine to him were quite long, so I won't quote them. However, you can find them at posts: 269, 273, 275, 289, 298, 299, 301, 303, and 310.

From then on, no major arguments or debates or whatnot til Maz.

And now I'll do my best to answer this page's posts from both Maz and IH.

I don't see any interpretation of the latter that couldn't be considered a 1-2. You are saying "Let's go with LL, and if he's wrong, lynch him tomorrow." This is something you, being scum, would very much like; you already know that Jack is a townie, so when you get him lynched, you have an excuse to then waste the NEXT day "knocking off" LL.

I say yet again, I have already addressed that point. Would you like for me to quote it yet again!?!

Here's your playstyle support, by the way. You're excusing LL's shit-tastic and useless concept of using process of elimination to determine who scum are, yet you are voting me because of my Day One hatred.

Actually, I'm doing anything BUT excusing it. I'm testing it...or was. And my vote for you is not based on hatred, but rather your lurking and uber little contribution to the game, which I stated in post 408:

And all you ever do is go around posting one and two liners insulting or hastily voting. All LL was trying to do there was show an instance where his style of play worked, and you trashed it without so much as a look I'd be willing to bet.

Vote: Maz Medias

If you'd like some samples of your posts, by all means let me know, and I'll give them to you.

Here, you're advocating that we trust someone with no actual argument against the person they want to lynch...

Actually, he has tried to give an argument, chiefly with his link to the game where it worked. He also gave us all a sample of his Excel work sheet. Of course, when he tried to give the link, you simply replied with:

You are an idiot.

How exactly do you expect him to have a chance at giving an argument if as soon as he gives it you call him an idiot? Good job there at giving everyone an equal chance.

You can answer things evasively. That's generally how it's done.

For example, this entire post has been "evasive" on the issue of your 1-2 attempt, which - no matter how cutely you explain it away - is scummy as all hell.

You're contradicting yourself Maz. First you say I'm evasive, and that's proven when I don't explain the "1-2 attempt". Then in the next sentence, you say you don't care how cute my explanation was? Which is it? Did I explain it or didn't I?

Try reading what you fucking quote, then stop misrepping me. I JUST SAID that you can answer something evasively; if you don't understand, that means that just because you answered the question doesn't mean you weren't evasive about it.

Read what I bolded Maz. You said, very clearly, that I have been evasive on the whole issue...and then you say I cutely explained it away. How can I be evasive AND explain myself at the same time?

and all the while you maintained a misinflated ego and disappointing transparency that praise seems to have made you oblivious to.

I'll have to beg your pardon on that one. What praise are you talking about?

And on to IH...

Why did that merit a vote? Did because he insulted LL?

Read it! I said I was voting for him because this was how he was playing, not because he insulted LL. He insults ANYONE he doesn't seem to like, and he's is very hasty in his voting and blah blah, I've already said it.

mm, Some people just play like that. They just deign that that's all the explanation needed.

How convienent.

Then IH posts my long argument with Maz. I won't re-quote the whole thing, simply IH's response.

1. You've done anything but strongly support LL? Bullshit.
2.Partially agreed
3.WTF? That's all you can say to that, where it looked like you voted him for insulting LL's response? "Bravo! You explained yourself"
4...... Alright, is yours and STD's word law about how things went down? There is a clear record, as you did make a statement about LL and Jack and wanting to lynch them. Why did you also seem to find it necessary to bring the one and two liners back into this either? That had nothing to do with it, unless it was about yours and STD's chat?
5.No comment
6, 7, 8, 9, and 10. Stop your omgus-y response bullshit. This did nothing but make you look like an asshole IMO.

1. Would you like proof I haven't been a supporter of LL?

*whistle tweets*

Just found something during my reading that is very interesting.

Well, everyone's methods and 'fishing' are fascinating, but we're still not really finding anyone who's scum yet.

Canuckle, if you're going to complain, please contribute while you're at it.

Ok, but then Maz posts this recently on Pooky's little yee-haw.

I want out of this game if ridiculous time-wasters like Pooky's scheme are going to control it.

It's a typical Maz post, but how does he get a free pass from complaining and not contributing?

...back to what I was saying.

As far as opinions on any players, I have to say LL confuses the living daylights out of me. He(or she, sorry I don't remember LL) always has some kind of unfounded suspicion, and it takes a full length editorial to explain.

LL, your posts do seem VERY strange most of the time. You're so...mysterious with your posting and logic that it's hard for people to believe you, or even understand you!

It seems to me that you are the only one during this first day who is drawing any ire or suspicion. I do appreciate you sticking up for me, but like I said earlier in the thread, I feel I may be getting set up. Everything you do just makes me raise an eyebrow...I'm sorry.

unvote...vote LuckayLuck

Now THAT'S support!

*whistle tweets again*

I just read everything since page 2.. All I got is a headache.

LL has to die.

unvote
Vote: LL

Why didn't I decide to follow STD instead of this wacky LL? Well the choise has been made and LL shall be my leader for this game.

Anyways I agree with those points but where my vote is is up to LL.

Err, Twito? What's up with that man?

Again, back to what I was saying.

You can read into my soul???

Ok yeah, you've officially begun to freak me out. Honestly, take it easy eh? You're straining yourself.

As far as what IH said in response to LL....THANK YOU! I've been thinking all of those things for quite a while, and I don't expect to be taken for a townie just because I would be waaaay too good as a mafia.

That's some very....thought out logic there LL, but again, I think you're trying a bit too hard, and you're heading for a lynching if you keep it up methinks.

Ok, so I think you get what I'm saying. I wasn't ever a supporter of LL. When I did follow him, it was simply to come to a conclusion as to whether or not LL had some merit to his townie tells.

Err... you voted Maz right after he called LL an idiot. I don't think it's that obvious.

And I voted for Maz because of the way he operates, not because he called LL an idiot.

I repeat. Omgus crap.

Well, you asked me to explain why I said he was clueless and deserved to die, so I did.

No, I'd mostly say because everyone dismissed it as something retarded.

I'm sorry to hear that, because I think Maz needs to die.

Ok, I think I've posted enough. I certainly hope all who've voted for me will read this through.

[Save The Dragons]

oh i wish i were a vigilante wiener
cuz then everyone would be in love with me

[IH]

...Sorry, but that's a fact of this site. Pooky comes up with hair brained schemes, Maz is an asshole to some people, and STD insists on having his splinter brown. I'm not sure how that is "convenient", but look at LL? He seems to be getting a free pass IMO because of his style, even though he's not asking for it...

I think.

And I voted for Maz because of the way he operates, not because he called LL an idiot.

You also voted for him right AFTER he called LL an idiot, which is what I said in that quote.

Also C-head, one post where you vote for LL doesn't mean you haven't shown him some support in this game.

[HackerHuck]

I just read everything since page 2.. All I got is a headache.

QFT


OK, I didn't go back as far as page two, but this page alone makes my head hurt. If the system crashes again, I'm going to blame it on IH, Maz and Canuckle.

[Canucklehead17]

...Sorry, but that's a fact of this site. Pooky comes up with hair brained schemes, Maz is an asshole to some people, and STD insists on having his splinter brown. I'm not sure how that is "convenient", but look at LL? He seems to be getting a free pass IMO because of his style, even though he's not asking for it...

I think.

I see, interesting.

You also voted for him right AFTER he called LL an idiot, which is what I said in that quote.

Granted. I just took the implied meaning.

Also C-head, one post where you vote for LL doesn't mean you haven't shown him some support in this game.

Again, granted. But I did show other quotes where I didn't support him. I wasn't really even supporting him when I followed his vote. I just wanted to figure out if I could bank on his assumptions or not.

Regardless, you and Maz both said I "strongly" supported him, which is simply not the case.

[Maz Medias]

Saying "hey let's do whatever he says today" counts as strongly supporting, I would think.

This post is intetionally one line long.

[Mariyta]

This game is very hard for me to follow. Posts that are so long I have to scroll on a 19" monitor make me very unhappy....

So far all I see are annoying people who type long posts, and one scummy person who is "blindly" following someone else in order to put blame on them when they lynch a town.

[Canucklehead17]

Saying "hey let's do whatever he says today" counts as strongly supporting, I would think.

But I didn't say that. Like I've said so many times, I was trying to find a way to test out his strategy of play. Do you understand what I am saying? I was testing, not blindly following.

This post is intetionally one line long.

nice.

So far all I see are annoying people who type long posts, and one scummy person who is "blindly" following someone else in order to put blame on them when they lynch a town.

Again, not

blindly

following. But no one seems to get that.

[Maz Medias]

This game is very hard for me to follow. Posts that are so long I have to scroll on a 19" monitor make me very unhappy....

So far all I see are annoying people who type long posts, and one scummy person who is "blindly" following someone else in order to put blame on them when they lynch a town.

Mine are relatively short. I know the pain of linguistic dreadnaughts, trust me.

[Mariyta]

So far all I see are annoying people who type long posts, and one scummy person who is "blindly" following someone else in order to put blame on them when they lynch a town.

Again, not

blindly

following. But no one seems to get that.

Yeah... wasn't talking about you. Your posts are too long for me to read. Try not quoting everything people post since the last time you logged on....

[IH]

= P Sorry Mariyta, I know the pains of a small screen. Hiding your taskbar helps, as does holding down control, and rolling your wheel down.

But thats beside the point.

Saying "hey let's do whatever he says today" counts as strongly supporting, I would think.

This post is intetionally one line long.

Mmmm, I count two lines.

oh em gee.

[Canucklehead17]

Sorry Maryita, I didn't realize you weren't talking to me. I went back to the recent vote count and saw who you've voted for. I was just wondering, is Twito's following of LL your main suspicion? You said you didn't read through my whole post because it was so lengthy, but about midway through I pointed out that Twito had said that LL "had to die", and then later on said he would follow LL no matter what. Seems very odd to me, and I'm not really sure what to make of it. Your thoughts?

[Mastermind of Sin]

This game is very hard for me to follow. Posts that are so long I have to scroll on a 19" monitor make me very unhappy....

So far all I see are annoying people who type long posts, and one scummy person who is "blindly" following someone else in order to put blame on them when they lynch a town.

I was just telling my roommate that today. I have a 19" widescreen monitor on 1900x1260 resolution, and I have to scroll 4 pages worth just to read one post. That's way overkill. You're playing mafia, not writing a novel.

[Fritzler]

This game is very hard for me to follow. Posts that are so long I have to scroll on a 19" monitor make me very unhappy....

So far all I see are annoying people who type long posts, and one scummy person who is "blindly" following someone else in order to put blame on them when they lynch a town.

I was just telling my roommate that today. I have a 19" widescreen monitor on 1900x1260 resolution, and I have to scroll 4 pages worth just to read one post. That's way overkill. You're playing mafia, not writing a novel.

im doing them both

im goign to put this in a book

so people will know how i got my beginning killing people and found innocent

[Cogito Ergo Sum]

Limited access starting soon, see sig, lynch Canuckle for me, thanks, bye.