Mini 488 - Killings in Clich├®-town - Game Over!

[IH]

Thats pending on Desisteds alignment.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Votecount:

as of post 160

IH -

3

(

Trumpezia, poppinpuffin, D3sisted

)
D3sisted -

3

(

Kison, IH, Vollkan

)

SPAG -

1

(

Head_Honcho

)

Not Voting - Gatorguy91, Vollkan, Jenter Brolincani, SPAG, paradoxombie

With 11 alive, it's six to lynch.

[d3sisted]

So most of your points are about me seemingly "trying to sound scum".

What I'm curious to know is, where did you draw the line between genuine and fraudulent? Because clearly you imply that my statements are townie, so what exactly is tipping you off to make you think I am pretending?

Unless you just plain disagree with my statements, in which case I implore you to state a valid case.

[IH]

Desisted do you mean me?

[d3sisted]

Yeah.

[IH]

Well that doesn't sound like it applies to any of my points.

[Elias_the_thief]

Deadline: September 25th

Deadline Lynch Rules:

If no majority is reached, the player with the most votes will be lynched (with a 3 votes minimum required). If there is a tie, the player who has had the most votes for the longest will be lynched.


Vollkan replaces Slash.

[vollkan]

Okay, I am posting this as I read through and am posting in a hurry. So some points may be a little off at times. Correct me if some things I say are overlooking stuff.

Mason dies, yuck, bad start. Trump's comments about distancing from the NK seem a little odd, but I don't find it voteworthy like IH did.

Desisted gets a

FoS

from me for jumping around on Honcho, then becoming convinced Honcho is not the lynch and then suddenly becoming "convinced" one of trumpezia, Jenter, Kison, Eyceking is scum. I agree with Para and Kison on this.
I really don't like d3s's 107 because he says he doesn't need to justify saying someone looks protown (4 people actually) and he accuses Jenter and gator of looking opportunistic. Trump says d3s seems mostly playstyle and FoSes Jenter. Then Para swaps his vote to Jenter for opportunism. Frankly, I can't see this opprtunism really.

I agree with IH on d3s.

Vote: D3sisted

His opinion is just changing erratically for no reason and he constantly lashes out at those who accuse him. He bandwagoned on Eyceking very strongly for something which strikes me as totally mundane and now he is on IH.

[d3sisted]

...and vollkan comes to the scumbuddy's rescue with the bandwagon vote.

[IH]

OK desisted, so why is your vote on me?

Could everyone else answer that question?

[d3sisted]

I've noticed that IH is getting pretty tense about those pressure votes, including his case against me, which I see as an OMGUS response. What I mean is, I put a vote on him, and he instantly tries to deflect suspicion back onto me. Coupled with his post above, this is a very odd response I'm seeing.

[Jenter Brolincani]

I'm actually veering towards a desisted vote looking at the evidence...

[Kison]

I see no reason to change my vote.

Paradoxombie would be my second choice.

[Paradoxombie]

Trumpeiza is nowhere to be found, and poppinpuffin seems to have just been randomly bandwagoning. Is anyone particularly supicious of IH besides d3sisted?

[IH]

I've noticed that IH is getting pretty tense about those pressure votes, including his case against me, which I see as an OMGUS response. What I mean is, I put a vote on him, and he instantly tries to deflect suspicion back onto me. Coupled with his post above, this is a very odd response I'm seeing.

So instead of trying to shoot down WHY I'm asking, how about you, and everyone else, answers WHY your vote is on me?

silly scum trying to avoid answering questions.

[vollkan]

...and vollkan comes to the scumbuddy's rescue with the bandwagon vote.

I said in my first post here that I didn't like the fact you lash out against anybody who accuses you. I see it as OMGUS and a scumtell. If you think I am wrong, explain to me why. If you think I am scum, explain to me why. But just making comments like this doesn't do you any favours.

I've noticed that IH is getting pretty tense about those pressure votes, including his case against me, which I see as an OMGUS response. What I mean is, I put a vote on him, and he instantly tries to deflect suspicion back onto me. Coupled with his post above, this is a very odd response I'm seeing.

IH asked for the case against him to be explained by everyone on his wagon. It was not OMGUS "deflecting" onto you and nor did it seem rather tense. I want to see what you have to say to determine if I have missed something on IH. I don't think I have, but you seem so convinced about IH, so presumably you can articulate a coherent case rather than simply ranting and calling people scum.

Can I request that d3sisted be the first on the IH wagon to explain why he is on the wagon? I think that could be interesting.

[poppinpuffin]

Trumpeiza is nowhere to be found, and poppinpuffin seems to have just been randomly bandwagoning. Is anyone particularly supicious of IH besides d3sisted?

heh whats the difference between bandwagoning and getting a game started?
oh right... nothing

unvote

for nao...

[d3sisted]

Both of you, look back at the post where I vote IH, it's explained quite sufficiently why it's there.

[vollkan]

[quote="d3s"]
Activity in this thread is dismal...
I'mma Unvote; BW Vote: IH to see if it will spark any discussion. I invite anyone else to follow; maybe we can get something out of this.

And HeadHoncho, SPAG seems to have gone AWOL so I don't think pressuring him at this time will do any good. [/quote[

In which case, why do you immediately call me IH's scumbuddy just because I voted you?

If you were only voting IH for pressure, why does it make me scum for voting you? I'm scum because I choose not to join a pressure wagon and put IH at L-1 and vote because of actual suspicion?

[d3sisted]

Maybe I randomly vote and happened to hit scum. IH gets nervous for being put L-2 so quickly, and you leap onto a rival wagon.

I'm definitely liking what we're getting out of this pressure wagon.

In response to an earlier question, I consider IH to be nervous/apprehensive because he overreacts to a pressure vote, thinking it's a permanent vote and that I have reasons to back it up.

[vollkan]

Maybe I randomly vote and happened to hit scum. IH gets nervous for being put L-2 so quickly, and you leap onto a rival wagon.

I'm definitely liking what we're getting out of this pressure wagon.

Maybe IH is scum; I don't think so but I can't be sure. Nonetheless, I don't quite see why you are ignoring the suspicion I have of you. Again, you are deflecting it to make it seem like I am just conspiring against you, rather than acknowledging any legitimacy to my argument.

In response to an earlier question, I consider IH to be nervous/apprehensive because he overreacts to a pressure vote, thinking it's a permanent vote and that I have reasons to back it up.

But you yourself made it look like you had a reason for continuing to vote IH by saying this:

So most of your points are about me seemingly "trying to sound scum".

What I'm curious to know is, where did you draw the line between genuine and fraudulent? Because clearly you imply that my statements are townie, so what exactly is tipping you off to make you think I am pretending?

Unless you just plain disagree with my statements, in which case I implore you to state a valid case.

Maybe you did initially vote on the basis of pressure, but you have since started throwing accusations around with no basis at all, other than "getting tense" which I can't see any evidence for.

Puffin has unvoted upon discussion restarting but you seem intent on keeping it going, and it's looking like you are doing so in order to keep attention off yourself.

[d3sisted]

@Vollkan: Which question are you referring to?

I'm hardly bringing a case on IH; 151 is in response to his case on me, to which I feel I am fully permitted to respond.

When I put a pressure vote down to extract information, expect me to be analyzing the results. By calling it "throwing accusations around with no basis", you try to condemn this process, something I find to be incredibly ironic seeing as how you've effectively defeated the entire purpose of pressure voting.

I placed the pressure vote, then I looked at the responses and saw that IH is getting tense. This is arguably quite significant, so I commented on it to bring it into the light, and open it up for discussion. In no way am I using this to maintain momentum of the wagon (as you insinuate). I have explained why I see IH "getting tense", so if you still don't see it, that's hardly my problem.

Why do you suggest that I mimic Puffin's actions? I have my own thought process, I make my own decisions. I am liking the results of this pressure vote, thus I will keep my vote in the hopes that it will generate yet more discussion. If the case against IH builds strong enough, my vote will become permanent, but that's quite far off.

[IH]

Maybe I randomly vote and happened to hit scum. IH gets nervous for being put L-2 so quickly, and you leap onto a rival wagon.

I'm definitely liking what we're getting out of this pressure wagon.

In response to an earlier question, I consider IH to be nervous/apprehensive because he overreacts to a pressure vote, thinking it's a permanent vote and that I have reasons to back it up.

So me wondering why you're randomly on a wagon is nervous.

You know, not thinking that it's scummy for you to be on it.

Or to force players to present a case on me if they have one.

I'm nervous.

Got it

Also I was never at lynch minus two. It's 6 to lynch.

You also never answered my questions for how "you trying to sound scummy" was applicable to ANY of my points?

I'm not being tense, I'm playing this game.

[d3sisted]

How definite a statement for page 4.

I'm also unsure of your first string of logic of trying to seem town.

Yet here you say the opposite, don't you? Or are you trying to force a statement that,

to intentionally look like town,

I said "what do you mean by masons?" Just curious to how that is scummy.

I just realized this is in response to Trump, so doesn't apply.

Untrue, majorly. You are suspicious of them. WHY are you suspicious of them? unvote, vote:Desisted I'm just assuming you're just trying to either

A.Cast suspicion on someone, or B.declare suspicion on someone so you can say you've been suspicious of them.

Hey, isn't [establish suspicion without actual substance] what desisted did?

Bolded parts.

So me wondering why you're randomly on a wagon is nervous.

I've quite explicitly told everyone I bandwagoned to generate discussion. Yet you still think I'm on for real so rather than try to assist the discussion, you try to use it against me as evidence.

Also I was never at lynch minus two. It's 6 to lynch.

My mistake, L-3. But that just contributes to what I said earlier.

I'm not being tense, I'm playing this game.

Then justify it. Denial won't get you anywhere. Turn off the tunnel vision and tell me why Poppinpuffin's 144 is cleared, yet I'm in the spotlight.

[poppinpuffin]

Good point.
Response IH?

[IH]

unsure why you just bolded parts of my posts.

Also notice how you ignored my question.

I've quite explicitly told everyone I bandwagoned to generate discussion. Yet you still think I'm on for real so rather than try to assist the discussion, you try to use it against me as evidence.

Well. You're staying on it. You have no reasons. We're not in the random stage. You act like you have a case. You don't.

My mistake, L-3. But that just contributes to what I said earlier.

no it detracts from it.

Then justify it. Denial won't get you anywhere. Turn off the tunnel vision and tell me why Poppinpuffin's 144 is cleared, yet I'm in the spotlight.

Because she never claimed to have a reason.

I've noticed that IH is getting pretty tense about those pressure votes, including his case against me, which I see as an OMGUS response. What I mean is, I put a vote on him, and he instantly tries to deflect suspicion back onto me. Coupled with his post above, this is a very odd response I'm seeing.

This indicates you made a case against me and voted me for a good reason, and for me to avoid that case I deflected suspicion onto you. But I didn't deflect anything, because, well, there was nothing to deflect from. I'm just plain suspicous of you.