Mini 507: Big Brother Mafia - Game Over

[ryan]

Way to go, bad grammer.

What I meant to say was why we shouldnt evict you (mneme and ryan). You was a plural indicating you two

Ah, I guess I see where you were coming but thank you for clarifying

[pablito]

There's gonna be some serious mass activity prods tonight. For those of you that I have prodded frequently (ie: probably more than three times during last voting cycle), I think I may just try to replace you in the next 24 hours.

EDIT:

three players were prodded

[DragonsofSummer]

This game seems to be stuck in a pattern of slowing way down around the nomination times. We need more discussion. Especially from the two nominees.

[Pug89]

This game seems to be stuck in a pattern of slowing way down around the nomination times. We need more discussion. Especially from the two nominees.

I agree. At this point in the game we know enough about the two nominees to have an opinion, but even so, I think a lot of the others are waiting for mneme and ryan to say something.

[pickemgenius]

Pickem -
If it's hypocritical, than it is scummy, right?
Why would you like to see chaos evicted thsi round instead of, say, Ryan?
And why are you giving mneme a pass?

I am not defending CHaos, but here is his reason:


I started to like PIckem, but I'm beginning to falter now, but I also realize he's generally a brash player and may just be stirring things up (which is good)

hypocritical in most circumstances is scummy. I can very well see somebody who is town do what he did, but it benefits scum moreso (my opinion.)


yes, at some point in the game i actually start to do stuff, and go after people. it happens.

I don't think i'm really giving mneme a free pass. I feel CO's reaction warranted more attention. Did I look at mneme's post and wonder about it... yes... did I want to see reaction from CO... in a way... was it what I expected CO would do? no.

I'll comment on the current noms later.

[ckillor]

i don't really have anything to say right now since neither nominiee has said much since they were nominated. i do think they were both good choices as nominees, and im pretty confident that we will probably lynch a scum team member

[Vel-Rahn Koon]

Well it's been pointed out that ryan and mneme have done a lot of talking today. Frankly I'm not sure what else they can say. It may be a good idea for all of us, in the interim, to discuss potential nominees for tomorrow.

[ryan]

This game seems to be stuck in a pattern of slowing way down around the nomination times. We need more discussion. Especially from the two nominees.

I agree. At this point in the game we know enough about the two nominees to have an opinion, but even so, I think a lot of the others are waiting for mneme and ryan to say something.

What would you like me to say? I'm (clearly already spoken out about mneme) obviously against mneme staying and believe he is scum and needs voted off.

[ChaosOmega]

[quote="FaerieLord"]The nominate / evict affair[/quote]

You'll have to clarify that for me.

[quote="FaerieLord"]Basically leaning on pickem since I replaced (apart from where pickem nominated him), then in a most hypocritical way accuses me of leaning on kscope.[/quote]

Really? I'd like for you to show that to me. And agreeing with him is not leaning on him. In fact, I posted about the similarity in your post and KaleiÐoscøpe's post before pickemgenius did. I would have posted before his FOS, but my computer locked up when I was initially typing it.

Hypocritical? There's a difference between having the same opinion as someone and pretty much copying someone's argument verbatim and re-wording it a bit right after they post it.

[Skruffs]

I will most likely be voting for Ryan. He's said enough already to make me at least fairly sure he is scum.

[KaleiÐoscøpe]

Still here, reading everything. Likely to vote Ryan if he doesn't present a good reason why I shouldn't

[ryan]

What would you like clarified KaleiDoscope?

Skruffs: I find it interesting how me going after you on Day 1 was deemed by you as "not giving me a chance to show you I'm town" (paraphrasing your words) yet you seem to be doing the same thing on me.

[mneme]

Sorry for making you wait, but I was away from Friday through monday (I seem to have a habit of being nominated just as I go on vacation; at least it was less disasterous this time than in the last one).

As I said in pre-debate, I think Ryan is scum because of his slip yesterday, because of his attempt to make heavy use of craplogic today (on multiple occasions; the hammer business as well as self-contradition in debate with me), and his tendency toward OMGUS voting. He's scum, and needs to leave NOW.

As far as I can tell, the only charges against me are that 1. people not liking my DoS nomination (nevertheless, my reasoning is, I think, sound). 2. my bandwagoning late today (um, yes? This is still mafia, and we still do try to vote people we think are likely to be scum that have bandwagons in preference to people we think are likely to be scum that don't, right?). The idea that I was trying to "get myself off the chopping block" by nomming Chaos was rather silly; it was pretty clear who had the advantage of a me/ryan debate, but -I- would rather have a choice between two people I think are scummy than just one person I think is scummy (as I said at the time). Basically, advisory nomination toward the end of the nomination period is deadline voting with slightly lower stakes -- and I'd prefer to play it that way. (the fact that I got singled out for this despite ryan and Chaos both -also- playing this way is fascinating; perhaps because I was clear about what I was doing rather than trying to disguise my intentions?)

[Skruffs]

What would you like clarified KaleiDoscope?

Skruffs: I find it interesting how me going after you on Day 1 was deemed by you as "not giving me a chance to show you I'm town" (paraphrasing your words) yet you seem to be doing the same thing on me.

You've shown me plenty, though, Ryan, to suggest to me you AREN'T town.

Don't worry, when I vote, for whoever it is, it will be after I state my reasonings in a post at least a fwe hours before stating why IW ill be voting who I am voting.
IT won't be a blank post with just a vote in it that I can fill in later.
And I'm not going to vote someone without asking them the questions first, mneme.

[ryan]

mneme: Wow you want to talk about craplogic? Post 462, paragraph 3 looks like a load of crap to me. You had the upperhand in the debate? You are laughable, you are a whiner, you are scum and you need to go.

[Pug89]

At this point I'm leaning towards a ryan vote. I'm suspicious of both of them but the reasons I'm suspicious of ryan are more overt.

[ryan]

And once again somebody stating they are suspicious of me without reasoning, nicely done Pug, kinda like your play on Day 1.

[mneme]

Post 462, paragraph 3 looks like a load of crap to me.

You can't just call something craplogic and hope people will buy it. Labeling != logic, ryan.

Please, explain what you think is bad logic in that paragraph? Certainly, I'd like to know.

[Pug89]

ryan:
I've said why I was suspicious of you before, I don't feel the need to repeat it. You trying to throw suspicion on me isn't going to make it less likely I'll vote for you.

[ryan]

ryan:
I've said why I was suspicious of you before, I don't feel the need to repeat it. You trying to throw suspicion on me isn't going to make it less likely I'll vote for you.

So than it's fair if I say I think you're scum and that I've said it before without giving any evidence?

[ryan]

Sorry for making you wait, but I was away from Friday through monday (I seem to have a habit of being nominated just as I go on vacation; at least it was less disasterous this time than in the last one).

As I said in pre-debate, I think Ryan is scum because of his slip yesterday, because of his attempt to make heavy use of craplogic today (on multiple occasions; the hammer business as well as self-contradition in debate with me), and his tendency toward OMGUS voting. He's scum, and needs to leave NOW.

As far as I can tell, the only charges against me are that 1. people not liking my DoS nomination (nevertheless, my reasoning is, I think, sound). 2. my bandwagoning late today (um, yes? This is still mafia, and we still do try to vote people we think are likely to be scum that have bandwagons in preference to people we think are likely to be scum that don't, right?). The idea that I was trying to "get myself off the chopping block" by nomming Chaos was rather silly; it was pretty clear who had the advantage of a me/ryan debate, but -I- would rather have a choice between two people I think are scummy than just one person I think is scummy (as I said at the time). Basically, advisory nomination toward the end of the nomination period is deadline voting with slightly lower stakes -- and I'd prefer to play it that way. (the fact that I got singled out for this despite ryan and Chaos both -also- playing this way is fascinating; perhaps because I was clear about what I was doing rather than trying to disguise my intentions?)

1: First I didn't make a slip, I asked a question about something I wasn't sure of, would you have rather me not ask the question and continue to play wondering what the name meant?

2: You have been the only one to state I have craplogic and it's because it's against you (which shouldn't be a shocker) but using that as reasoning why I'm scum is just dumb

3: Your appeal to emotion is duely noted, but emotion doesn't no shouldn't win you votes in your favor

4: I made a statement about somebody hammering a proven townie, you went off on a tirade and than said you won the debate. HOW did you win? Explain that for me

5: You did nominate a player you heavily defended against me and did so close to a nomination process, if you don't think that doesn't look like saving your ass I can't help you there, I can lead a horse to water but I can't make him drink

6: I stayed true with both of my nominations during Day 2 process while others swayed, so telling me that I switched stuff (or implying) I did the same yet you were called on it isn't true one bit

[pickemgenius]

It may be a good idea for all of us, in the interim, to discuss potential nominees for tomorrow.

no.

i disapprove of the two nomsalot. i haven't seen nearly enough from either of them, to be sure one of them is scum, and I find it totally absurd to say that anyone has.

[pablito]

Vote Count

mneme (0):

ryan (0):

Vote not cast (8): ChaosOmega, ckillor, DragonsofSummer, pickemgenius, Pug89, FaerieLord, Skruffs, KaleiÐoscøpe

With 8 voters, it takes 5 to evict!

Vote Deadline: Saturday 3rd November 21:00 EDT

. This is 3 days from now. There will be no replacements from this point onward.

Failure to vote (when required) will result in modkill.

4 players were prodded

[Skruffs]

Well it's been pointed out that ryan and mneme have done a lot of talking today. Frankly I'm not sure what else they can say. It may be a good idea for all of us, in the interim, to discuss potential nominees for tomorrow.

Vel, did you discuss your own suspicions in any posts between the time you were nominated head of house hold and when you nominated ryan adn mneme? I know you said your suspicions in the post in which they were nominated, but you seemed to avoid it before hand, sayign you wanted to hear other people first.
I think if you want to discuss tomorrow, you should probably go first, since you are, technically, at least one 'cycle' behind everyone else.

[ChaosOmega]

I'm leaning towards voting for ryan. I'm still suspicious of mneme, but ryan's acting very defensive.