Open 99: Mayo Clinic (Game Over!) before 703

Wall-E · Post Post #250 (ISO) » Tue Nov 11, 2008 9:20 am

Honestly... I'm being lazy. I built a half-assed case based mostly on gut and got dogpiled for it, so I'm going to hang back and see what else develops. On the upside, what I did inspired some discussion, so I don't feel too bad.

Mirth · Post Post #251 (ISO) » Tue Nov 11, 2008 10:07 am

"Is is just me, or are those medical sales people going a little too far?"

VOTE COUNT

Wall-E - 3 - [Nameless, Plum, charter]

GnKoihi - 2 - [Stef, Kmd]
charter - 2 - [Wall-E, GnKoichi]

Nameless - 1- [TonyMontana]
Stef - 1 - [animorpherv]
Kiro - 1 - [orangepenguin]
TonyMontana - 1 - [Kiro]

Not Voting - 1 - [Mana_Ku]

Edit; animorpherv1 replaces puta

animorpherv1 · Post Post #252 (ISO) » Tue Nov 11, 2008 10:25 am

/confirm.

Hello, I'm replacing.

I'll be re reading.

animorpherv1 · Post Post #253 (ISO) » Tue Nov 11, 2008 10:29 am

Wall-E wrote:I think players should be forced to claim targets each day starting tomorrow morning. Thoughts?

My imidieate thoughts. scum.

vote:Wall-E

Getting everyone to claim there actions wouldn't work, and would only help the scum.

Nameless · Post Post #254 (ISO) » Tue Nov 11, 2008 11:36 am

Wall-E wrote:My case on Nameless and charter, scumlords:

Wall-E wrote:That deflates quite a bit of my own personal suspicion, actually.

Wall-E wrote:Upon review of your defense, it's ad hom. and bewildered sarcasm with very little content.

Wall-E wrote:Meh, you're right that it's not the most airtight case,

Wall-E wrote:I haven't dropped the case on Nameless,

Wall-E wrote:I built a half-assed case based mostly on gut

Wall-E · Post Post #255 (ISO) » Tue Nov 11, 2008 11:41 am

animorpherv1: At the time, we were discussing that option amongst others. I stand by the question, as setup discussion in a mini like this is par for the course.

@everyone: Don't lynch me for doing what everyone else should be doing (scumhunting/building cases).

Don't quicklynch me under any circumstance. Only warning.

Wall-E · Post Post #256 (ISO) » Tue Nov 11, 2008 11:42 am

I'd also like to point out: Both people I attacked are on my wagon. Regardless of the reasons, that's downright coincidental.

Kmd4390 · Post Post #257 (ISO) » Wed Nov 12, 2008 4:15 am

Wall-E wrote:I'm going to hang back and see what else develops.

Wall-E wrote: Don't lynch me for doing what everyone else should be doing (scumhunting/building cases).

Wall-E · Post Post #258 (ISO) » Wed Nov 12, 2008 8:17 am

Kmd4390 wrote:
Wall-E wrote:I'm going to hang back and see what else develops.

Wall-E wrote: Don't lynch me for doing what everyone else should be doing (scumhunting/building cases).

Are there subtle things being said about me? Are they bad? Explain more serious.

Nameless · Post Post #259 (ISO) » Wed Nov 12, 2008 11:24 am

Contradicting yourself is kind of a bad thing.
Contradicting yourself is a really good thing!

One of those sentences was sarcastic. Can you guess which one? (Hint: It's not the first.)

Wall-E · Post Post #260 (ISO) » Wed Nov 12, 2008 11:26 am

I see no contradictions there.

Wall-E · Post Post #261 (ISO) » Wed Nov 12, 2008 11:28 am

I'd like you to comment on what exactly you are implying by quoting me a bunch like that. Tell me what specifically you mean by each thing.

Taking the context out of all those snippets is not scumhunting.

Nameless · Post Post #262 (ISO) » Wed Nov 12, 2008 1:05 pm

Are you addressing Kmd or I in the above post?

In any case, regarding #254, what I'm pointing out is that you yourself seem unsure whether your case (which you never clarified, I might remind) is BS or not. The obvious implications are that is IS and that you appear moreso scummy for wavering back and forth about it.

charter · Post Post #263 (ISO) » Wed Nov 12, 2008 1:07 pm

I really want the lurkers to start participating more. I'm getting the feeling that all the scum are among them as the townies pick themselves apart...

GnKoichi · Post Post #264 (ISO) » Wed Nov 12, 2008 1:11 pm

charter wrote:I really want the lurkers to start participating more. I'm getting the feeling that all the scum are among them as the townies pick themselves apart...

Ditto. If we don't see a serious post from Tony, Mana, or Penguin by tomorrow morning, I think this would warrant a discussion.

charter · Post Post #265 (ISO) » Wed Nov 12, 2008 1:15 pm

That's nowhere near a comprehensive list there...
Stef? MK? Prolly forgetting someone else too (nothing personal).

Wall-E · Post Post #266 (ISO) » Wed Nov 12, 2008 1:41 pm

Nameless wrote:Are you addressing Kmd or I in the above post?

In any case, regarding #254, what I'm pointing out is that you yourself seem unsure whether your case (which you never clarified, I might remind) is BS or not. The obvious implications are that is IS and that you appear moreso scummy for wavering back and forth about it.

I assure you that the gaps in information in the quoted selections are making my snippets there appear self-conflicting. Nothing more. If you'd like to prove otherwise, be my guest. It's your case. I'll defend against anything you feel the urge to put into words.

Kiro · Post Post #267 (ISO) » Wed Nov 12, 2008 3:05 pm

I'm beating the dead horse again and also asking/demanding lurkers to post. It is not that difficult to at least post something in the topic once a day. We can't even worry about whether there's content worth analyzing until most/all of Town can meet this retardedly minimal standard.

Kmd4390 · Post Post #268 (ISO) » Wed Nov 12, 2008 3:36 pm

Wall-E, you contradicted yourself when you said you were going to sit back and let things develop and then said not to lynch you for scumhunting. The only hunting you have done was the bad case on charter and nameless.

Also, I agree about lurkers. They need to get in here.

Wall-E · Post Post #269 (ISO) » Wed Nov 12, 2008 4:50 pm

Kmd, SHOW me a BETTER case that YOU have built and let he who is without blemish cast the first stone.

I've copped to every flaw pointed out in my case. The case itself eventually deteriorated. Being wrong is a scumtell now?

charter · Post Post #270 (ISO) » Wed Nov 12, 2008 5:10 pm

No, but pushing a case and then giving up when questioned about it is a very strong scumtell.

orangepenguin · Post Post #271 (ISO) » Wed Nov 12, 2008 5:14 pm

Nameless wrote:
Wall-E wrote:My case on Nameless and charter, scumlords:
Wall-E wrote:That deflates quite a bit of my own personal suspicion, actually.
Wall-E wrote:Upon review of your defense, it's ad hom. and bewildered sarcasm with very little content.
Wall-E wrote:Meh, you're right that it's not the most airtight case,
Wall-E wrote:I haven't dropped the case on Nameless,
Wall-E wrote:I built a half-assed case based mostly on gut

unvote, vote: Wall-E

charter · Post Post #272 (ISO) » Wed Nov 12, 2008 5:15 pm

unvote, vote OP

orangepenguin · Post Post #273 (ISO) » Wed Nov 12, 2008 5:18 pm

You want reasons? Well, just look at the past page of discussion. He is just digging himself in a deeper whole, and contradicts himself.

Maybe I should've done what you didn't want me to do, and not post.

GnKoichi · Post Post #274 (ISO) » Wed Nov 12, 2008 5:31 pm

Charter: Good job. When the other lurkers post you can vote for them, too. This is really going to encourage a discussion. Also, one of the people you said I left off the lurker list I mentioned with a different abbreviation. The other gave his reason for voting for me and defended it a little while ago. I disagree (obviously) and it could have been more in depth, but it was posted recently.

Orange: We really have too much quoting going on. The lurkers, yourself included, need to let their own ideas be heard. Even if you agree with someone else 100%, you should say it in your own words. That's just my take on it.