Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Leafsnail]

Ugh, White Goo.  Whoever selected White Goo should be shot.  Webadict: Does the White Goo work like it does in #mafia, where everybody will flip the same role as the person who is White Goo?  Or is it "they flip their actual role with White Goo added on"?

Anyway with no deaths I guess we can probably avoid massclaiming again.

Mod: (Below quote is shortened to the relevant bit.)

UI.

Did you miss that vote when you did the votecount or does the day-end votecount read correctly?

NativeForeigner: Why are you using your lack of vote as an excuse not to play?

Is justification needed for a random vote? Is overreaction to a randomvote a valid reason to keep that vote? (hint: The answers are no and yes, respectively, and if you disagree, too bad)

That post wasn't a random vote, though.  It was your justification for keeping the vote, and that weird gambler's fallacy thing is not adequate justification.

Leafsnail: Who are your top two scumpicks?

1. NativeForeigner for making a big deal about his nonvote and nothing else.
2. Toaster, because I'm beginning to see a slight "Ask lots of useful seeming but ultimately inconsequential questions" pattern which he usually has as scum.

It'd be a good time for those people to explain themselves.

[Urist Imiknorris]

Is justification needed for a random vote? Is overreaction to a randomvote a valid reason to keep that vote? (hint: The answers are no and yes, respectively, and if you disagree, too bad)

That post wasn't a random vote, though.  It was your justification for keeping the vote, and that weird gambler's fallacy thing is not adequate justification.

No, it wasn't. His reacton to my vote is why I kept it on him.

[NativeForeigner]

NF
So about that non-voting ability, how do you think if would help you if you were the King?

I think it would help take some daily pressure off of me as king. I don't have to explain why I voted for who, I can't be accused of bandwagoning or laying down a bad hammer, I can easily explain why I wasn't NKed, etc. Though, I would much rather have an actual vote as King.

Leafsnail: Not at all. Day just started, last I checked, and Day 1 ended on a hammer before I got anything useful done.

If Toaster is your second pick, why haven't you asked him any questions?

[Leafsnail]

I think it would help take some daily pressure off of me as king. I don't have to explain why I voted for who, I can't be accused of bandwagoning or laying down a bad hammer, I can easily explain why I wasn't NKed, etc. Though, I would much rather have an actual vote as King.

Leafsnail: Not at all. Day just started, last I checked, and Day 1 ended on a hammer before I got anything useful done.

You admit that you picked your role so you wouldn't have to do anything.  And then claim that you are in fact doing something!  Golden.

Day 1 did indeed end before you got anything useful done (not on a hammer though).  That is the problem.

If Toaster is your second pick, why haven't you asked him any questions?

I'm sure Toaster is capable of seeing his own name in bold.

[Leafsnail]

EBWOP:

No, it wasn't. His reacton to my vote is why I kept it on him.

Why did you include it in your reasoning then?

[Urist Imiknorris]

No, it wasn't. His reacton to my vote is why I kept it on him.

Why did you include it in your reasoning then?

I didn't. I was answering his question re: why the fuck did I ask him that. I probably should have made that clearer.

[Urist Imiknorris]

EBWOP: Post=/=Preview.
Leafsnail:

You admit that you picked your role so you wouldn't have to do anything.

Where did he say that?

[webadict]

Ugh, White Goo.  Whoever selected White Goo should be shot.  Webadict: Does the White Goo work like it does in #mafia, where everybody will flip the same role as the person who is White Goo?  Or is it "they flip their actual role with White Goo added on"?

If a White Goo is alive, all players will flip White Goo.

[NativeForeigner]

You admit that you picked your role so you wouldn't have to do anything.  And then claim that you are in fact doing something!  Golden.

Day 1 did indeed end before you got anything useful done (not on a hammer though).  That is the problem.

I'm not exactly sure what you're saying here. Are you under the impression that I chose a voteless role intentionally? I didn't mention anything of the sort, so it's rather strange that you bring it up. I also mentioned that I didn't get the chance to do anything useful, so I really don't know why you're saying that I claimed otherwise. Can't think of a more convincing mislynch?

I was under the impression that it ended with Book's hammer.

If Toaster is your second pick, why haven't you asked him any questions?

I'm sure Toaster is capable of seeing his own name in bold.

I see no question. Poking Toaster accomplishes nothing. I'll ask again: why aren't you asking him questions? Surely you can do better than telling him to "explain himself".

[Leafsnail]

Where did he say that?

I think it would help take some daily pressure off of me as king. I don't have to explain why I voted for who, I can't be accused of bandwagoning or laying down a bad hammer, I can easily explain why I wasn't NKed, etc. Though, I would much rather have an actual vote as King.

I saw this and thought the initial question had been different ("Why did you choose a nonvoting role").  In any case, my accusation stands: "NativeForeigner is explaining how great it is to not have to do anything, while not doing anything until I kick him".

I'm not exactly sure what you're saying here. Are you under the impression that I chose a voteless role intentionally? I didn't mention anything of the sort, so it's rather strange that you bring it up.

I was under a slightly mistaken impression that changes nothing of relevance (that you were being useless and were using your votelessness as an excuse for being useless).

I also mentioned that I didn't get the chance to do anything useful, so I really don't know why you're saying that I claimed otherwise.   Can't think of a more convincing mislynch?

You did have the chance to do useful things - you made some 6 posts.  You just didn't actually do anything useful in reality before the clearly stated end of day.  That is the problem.

The last sentence is the most hilariously unconvincing LOOK AT ME I'M SCUMHUNTING I've ever seen.  It doesn't remotely flow from the rest of your post.  I love the way you suddenly spring into action when and only when accused, though (and then only to make passive aggressive swipes at the person who called you out for being useless).

I see no question. Poking Toaster accomplishes nothing. I'll ask again: why aren't you asking him questions? Surely you can do better than telling him to "explain himself".

I want to see Toaster's reaction first.  Questions can wait until after then.

[Toaster]

Book:

Book:  Why Hapah over UI?

To avoid a tie.

I figured as much, but why not just extend?


UI:

Toaster:

Day ends in 9 minutes, folks.

Extend.

Content in a bit

Where's that content?

Coming now.  It didn't exist at that time- I realized that day was about to end so I extended- then counted votes and realized there was a hammer.  I didn't see the point in continuing before I saw Hapah's flip (especially since I expected it to start another round.)


Leafsnail:  I'm heavily distracted by other online activites- blame the RTD subforum in particular.


Native:  The action of redding a name still indicates who you suspect, whether it counts or not, so you should still "vote" people.


Anyway, pretty sure it's Urist I.  He's not doing any real hunting today, and yesterday he tried to be slick and set up a bandwagon:

Hapah: Why are you dismissing an accusation just because it contains the string "lurking"? Not all lurking is time-based. Why did you ignore that when it was pointed out?

Still voting Tiruin.

Hapah, you failed to so much as acknowledge my questions to you.

...before switching to a vote on him.

[Bookthras]

Imiknorris:

This is awful justification for a vote. Really? You've seen him be scum in many games, and "why the loaded question"? You didn't even ask him a question.

Is justification needed for a random vote? Is overreaction to a randomvote a valid reason to keep that vote? (hint: The answers are no and yes, respectively, and if you disagree, too bad)

But there was no overreaction, merely a "why the loaded question". You turned your random vote into a lynch vote with absolutely no justification. This makes you scummy. Then you voted Hapah "because there's a tie", again with absolutely no justification. This also makes you scummy.

I'm thinking you are scum. I'm also curious as to whether you do have that alternate kill on your nerfed role.

Can you elaborate on this please? What's the alternate kill?

The mafiakill, silly. Is there anything interesting you'd like to claim about last night?


Tiruin:

UI

Hmmm... So Native's voteless and the vote's tied... Hapah.

Why Hapah over NF?

Please justify your vote for Imiknorris. Do you think he's scum? Why?

Book:  Why Hapah over UI?

To avoid a tie.

So why not now?

Partly because he's not the only scummy one, but mostly because you voted him first, without justification, and then tried to goad me into following suit. Since we are at three-to-hammer, if I voted him now I'd place him at L-1, and the day is too young to allow a hammer, well intentioned or not. But your incitement to have it happen, with a vote without justification, is suspicious on its own. Please answer these:

You voted UI throughout D1, also without justification beyond "why the loaded question?" Did you think he was scum D1? Why? What did you do about it? Also: who else do you think is scummy? What do you think of Leaf's pressure on Native?


Toaster: Still waiting for that "content in a bit". What's Toaster's #1 scumtell?

Native: You are being too passive. How do you intend to find the scum today? What's your read on Toaster and Tiruin? Please ask each a question.

PPE: First, noted on Toaster's post. Brief answer is "I thought there were no extensions, and wuba has confirmed". Plus his vote on UI makes me happier I decided not to vote him. Toaster: Had he been at L-1, would you have hammered him just now?

[Toaster]

Book:  Ordinarily, I'd hate to hammer without giving him a chance to say something, but given the gametype that's less of a concern (IE no third parties.)  Probably, but realistically I'd have hoped there would have been more content from all parties involved to put someone at L-1.  If he had not improved in said theoretical content, then yes, I'd hammer.

[Urist Imiknorris]

Leafsnail:

I think it would help take some daily pressure off of me as king. I don't have to explain why I voted for who, I can't be accused of bandwagoning or laying down a bad hammer, I can easily explain why I wasn't NKed, etc. Though, I would much rather have an actual vote as King.

I saw this and thought the initial question had been different ("Why did you choose a nonvoting role").

Even though the question had been quoted right above his answer, in the very previous post to yours? Also, how would him choosing a nonvoting role reflect on his alignment?

Toaster:

Coming now.  It didn't exist at that time- I realized that day was about to end so I extended- then counted votes and realized there was a hammer.  I didn't see the point in continuing before I saw Hapah's flip (especially since I expected it to start another round.)

That's somewhat obvious, as the nine-minutes-before-day-end post is when you promised more content. I was talking about today, or was an attack on Hapah the only content you were going to provide?

Anyway, pretty sure it's Urist I.  He's not doing any real hunting today, and yesterday he tried to be slick and set up a bandwagon:

[snip]

...before switching to a vote on him.

I would have voted him earlier, but I have this tendency to not unvote people who haven't responded to me.

Book:

But there was no overreaction, merely a "why the loaded question". You turned your random vote into a lynch vote with absolutely no justification. This makes you scummy.

A why the loaded question and a vote. And when did I say it was a lynch vote?

Then you voted Hapah "because there's a tie", again with absolutely no justification. This also makes you scummy.

I thought my reasoning was clear from my line of questioning, but apparently I was wrong.

I'm thinking you are scum. I'm also curious as to whether you do have that alternate kill on your nerfed role.

Can you elaborate on this please? What's the alternate kill?

The mafiakill, silly. Is there anything interesting you'd like to claim about last night?

No.

[Toaster]

UI:  That was referring to more D1 content that was coming, before I realized that there had been a hammer.  The first post was a quick one knocked out to have something out there before a real meaty post came.