Mini 571 - Movie Mafia - (Game Over)

[Jalathas]

Confirming is good.

[Jalathas]

Vote: Greasy Spot

For not understanding the rules.

[Jalathas]

Yes. Yes, seriously. Nope. I just like being different. You did remind me of something.

Change that to

InsignificantFoS: Clayman

I forget that his name shouldn't determine in anyway his role. Thanks!

Attempts at logic? On Page 1? Madness!

[Jalathas]

You are being a bit defensive, The Jester. It seems kinda like you're trying really, really hard not to offend anyone, which is making you stand out a bit to me.

Also, I believe(correct me if I'm wrong) that avinashv is a bit of a newbie. He only joined 11 days ago. "How are we proceeding" is a legitimate question for a new player. I agree with you, though, that it's not necessarily a discussion starter

[Jalathas]

vote: Jalathas

For voting me with a lame ass excuse that I didn't read the rules. Dude seriously, I believe this is the traditional "Joke Vote phase" to "break the Ice" so to speak.

unvote: Jalathas

He's only been here a few months so he might have not noticed the "Joke Vote" phase in these games.

Actually, that was a joke vote. On other forums I play on, pseudo-reasons like that are fairly standard.

How am I being defensive?

Avin said I overreacted for saying he was lying? It was a statement, not a "Oh my god, what the hell have you done?" I said, no not everyone has voted. Being technical, does not make someone defensive.

This is a random phase, because I'm not insulting someone I'm bad? That's some crap logic you have there.

As I said before, I like being different. What's the difference between a random vote and an insignificant FoS? I don't believe a random vote gives you any information, it's the bandwagon that actually gives you something.

I suppose what I should have said is that you're playing fairly defensively. Defensive has bad connotatons around here, it seems. Like I said, it seems like you're trying to post without offending anybody. That generally implies you've got something to worry about if you do make a blip on someone's scumdar.

[Jalathas]

EBWOP: By the way, when I say offend, what I mean is make someone suspicious.

[Jalathas]

unvote, vote jalathas

for over-explaining what a joke vote is

Unvote
Vote: Jex

For baiting

[Jalathas]

Gah! Clicked too soon.

For baiting me to look like a hypocrite.

[Jalathas]

Ow!

Sorry, guys. I've been busy, and not much has been happening, so I sorta stopped checking. I'm not quite sure where we go from here. The Jester was the only one who seemed vaguely scummy to me, and he's away for now.

[Jalathas]

Hi, everyone. Glad to be here.

Jalathas, just a couple of questions. About these posts:

You are being a bit defensive, The Jester. It seems kinda like you're trying really, really hard not to offend anyone, which is making you stand out a bit to me.

And,

I suppose what I should have said is that you're playing fairly defensively. Defensive has bad connotatons around here, it seems. Like I said, it seems like you're trying to post without offending anybody. That generally implies you've got something to worry about if you do make a blip on someone's scumdar.

Then,

EBWOP: By the way, when I say offend, what I mean is make someone suspicious.

Here’s my question. The Jester reacted in a very (nearly inexplicably) harsh fashion to Avinashv’s statement about everyone voting and his asking about how to proceed. And whether we go with your first phrase “without offending anybody” or your second, “make someone suspicious”, this seems hardly the way to do so. The Jester’s reaction to Avinashv’s post seemed to almost aim to both offend and arouse suspicion. So can you explain why you believe it was an attempt to do the opposite? Can you also explain how, logistically, it could have accomplished what you said you felt The Jester was trying to do?

He avoided the term lie, and later said he wasn't accusing avinashv of lying. Even his "walk on your own two feet" comment didn't seem particularly harsh to me.

This also applies to what may be an attempt on your part to suggest that The Jester’s initial refusal to make a random vote was an attempt not to offend or arouse suspicion. If eleven people are walking in one direction and one is walking in the other the other is more noticeable, I would think. But even if you sincerely believe that The Jester’s refusal to place an initial random vote was an attempt to avoid offending or arousing suspicion, how would that make sense given his immediate attack on Avinashv, which seemed certain to do both?

To use a variation on your metaphor, if everyone's pointing fingers, the one guy who doesn't seems to be more rational. Note that I never said his attempt was

working

, just that he was trying.

There is this, after Jex votes you for the admittedly not so great reason of over-explaining what a joke vote is:

You first vote Jex, which seems pretty pure OMGUS to me. You then put this face on it:

Gah! Clicked too soon.

For baiting me to look like a hypocrite.

Could you please explain how what Jex said would make you look like a hypocrite? Pendantic, sure, maybe. But why a hypocrite? And why would you consider this to be scummy, even if this is what he was doing?

Thank you for any answers.

I'd just defended my own pseudo-logical random vote. It seemed to me that he wanted me to argue that I hadn't over-explained, at which point he could claim, "My vote was no more serious than yours. How can you attack me for something you just defended yourself on?" Thus, hypocrite.