Skruffs: 5 (Cogito Ergo Sum, Dragon Phoenix, LoudmouthLee, Oman, VitaminR)
LoudmouthLee: 3 (Adele, Skruffs, Zindaras)
Cogito Ergo Sum: 1 (Mgm)
Dragon Phoenix: 1 (PlaysWithSquirrels)
logicticus: 1 (Mastermind of Sin)
Mgm: 1 (jeep)
I have a history with Skruffs. And while I find his posting somewhat odd and scummy, I don't want to have him at 7 votes. My experiences with quicklynches lately made me not want to keep my vote on him. While I'll agree that it is less likely in a game with this kind of player list, I'm going to have to put the blame with Pavlov on this one.Dragon Phoenix wrote:Zindaras: don't know what to make of him. Inconsequential posting, attacked Scrubbs vehemently onyl to drop him the moment the wagon gets underway, to switch to LML on gut. Hm. IGMEOY.
I didn't vote you for putting MGM after no lynch...Skruffs wrote:Also interesting: VitaminR immediately jumping to answer questions I have posited to LML, while at the same time, supposedly, voting me for putting MGM after no lynch. Please look back on that in later days, everyone.
Yay, dictionary quotes. Regardless of the official definition, we both know the pragmatic meaning of 'misrepresentation' in a mafia game, especially when you're accusing someone of it, includes intent. How can you find LML scummy for misrepresentation and then argue that misrepresentation isn't wilful?Skruffs wrote:Misrepresent: to represent incorrectly, improperly, or falsely.
phail.
What? I didn't vote you for defending yourself (and I don't like how MGM copies this blindly later, btw). I voted you for defensiveSkruffs wrote:The reasons for voting me? FOR BEING DEFENSIVE.
Hmm. I'm really sorry, VitaminR. I thought when a townie had four.. no wait five with your vote, votes on him 3 pages into the game for only wanting to lynch a few of the possible suspects for STATED REASONS, that he had the right todefend himself.
IF it is scummy for a townienotto roll over and take it, please state up now, I'd hate to complicate your wagoning with points of defense. I can be quiet and let you get me lynched if you want.
This needs to be explained further. If it was satisfactorily explained, how does it make the people voting me for it reasonable? If you read it, you would see that I did not simply 'mimic the mod'... but let's pretend I did. This was my first post in the game. You think that this equivalent to a random-vote deserves the wagon I've gotten from it?logicticus wrote:Oh also one more thing.
The reason that LML jumped on skruffs to begin with (the no lynch followed by MGM), I think was perfectly explained by sckruffs in a later post when he explained he was mimicing what the mod did.
So I dont find the voting of skruffs to be scummy at all after that explanation.
Well, your wagon is really a combination of several things. In the beginning some votes were simply random and then a random bandwagon, happens all the time. There were a couple of people egging that wagon on.Skruffs wrote:This needs to be explained further. If it was satisfactorily explained, how does it make the people voting me for it reasonable? If you read it, you would see that I did not simply 'mimic the mod'... but let's pretend I did. This was my first post in the game. You think that this equivalent to a random-vote deserves the wagon I've gotten from it?logicticus wrote:Oh also one more thing.
The reason that LML jumped on skruffs to begin with (the no lynch followed by MGM), I think was perfectly explained by sckruffs in a later post when he explained he was mimicing what the mod did.
So I dont find the voting of skruffs to be scummy at all after that explanation.
I will respond to all posts later on tonight, but I appreciate not being quick lynched.
My belief: dice-tags and proven-random votes have no place, while arbitrary and possibly-random votes have a place.LoudmouthLee wrote:Are you saying that you agree with me? That was the point that I was making exactly. I don't understand your reason for voting me.Adele wrote:(Seriously, MOS, why not just say it's random, rather than that whole easily-fakeable demo??? There is no level on which I get that, and it even seems a slight "honestly, guys, I'm honest!" move, you know?)
Your belief: the opposite (this may simply be my delusion of what you're saying; if so, please clarify).LoudmouthLee wrote:I don't ever like people who "say" that random.org affected their diceroll. I feel much more relaxed when people use the dice function (as it cannot be editied, and you're aware of that.)
I wasMoS is being metascummy, LmL was (in my opinion) defending him. I'm choosing to make a big deal out of it.
Then weLoudmouthLee wrote:I wasattackinghim for being metascummy. I questioned the validity of his dicerolls.
God, Adele. Please read those posts again.
Go ahead, ignore post 116 - (sarcasm).jeep wrote:Okay, I've been asked why pro-town folks would want to use lists instead of a single vote. Well, because there is no reason not to, if you are pro-town. It's not that there is a compelling reason TO use the list. There is just no reason not to unless you are scum.
DP, you are correct that using a list before the deadline has no purpose. It didn't sink in that the lists would ONLY be used at the deadline. For some reason I thought that lists would be used more often. It's still not good policy to discourage people from using lists.
-JEEP
Don't back peddle. That is clearly stating:jeep, post 102, basically repeated post 119 wrote:The only reason I can see for NOT using a list in your vote is if you are scum and haven't yet figured out how you plan to make your list so that it reduces your risk while not tipping your hand.
My response was that there is no reason not to. I may have stated it a little more strongly than needed. If you notice, I only had a list of one in my first vote.In post 99, Mgm wrote: I don't particularly like using Concordet voting this early in the game when everything is still too hazy