Vector: Please don't miss out what I'm still asking you and dropping everything you've had.
You seemingly missed this, and don't wish to give a follow up based on a poor vote there.
I'm really feeling rejected on that matter and that you don't care as much as Toaster on it, but glad to just let the vote stick on dubious grounds.
ToasterTiruin:
Why should I insult others and try to aggravate them? That's never in my nature. The one above? Poking at your stupid reason of LYNCH ALL THIRD-PARTIES TROLOLOL.
I'll fully respond to you when I have more time (since your posts are longer and basically just rehashes) but the TL;DR is I'm still voting to see you lynched, and yes, largely because you're third party and third party is bad.
...You really are obstinate in failing to provide rational ideas here, aren't you. The bolded portion states your bias and incredulous thinking. Generalization that my posts are rehashes is a great way for passive-aggression on downplaying someone else.
I really like the atmosphere in this game in how it doesn't have any role-ist bias (stereotypes are the worst thing you can defend against, and it really inspires a feeling of hatred towards the idea, because that's what I'm feeling. Weak case. Total BS. Categorization. Generalization.
All because of your failures in the past)
-And feel like it's not leaking out of the ideas of concise logic and the spirit of Mafia.[/frickin'sarcasm - this is how pissed I am at certain people, but moreso when they commit utter scumtells and come off to most as..non-scum.]
Lenglon, ZU, NQT, ToonyMan, IronyOwl : You five out of the total audience have stated insight and/or interest towards this debate here, what is your read and view on this?
Especially in Witches' Coven.
Actually, I'll throw one at you for now, since it sticks out so hard:
> He's using bad logic and metaknowledge to back up his vote.
> He's using spurious claims (that lie thing I pointed out? Yeah.) to back up his case on me.
> He's not being definite about his case on me, but rather use the fallacy of appealing to ignorance to prod at me.
> Wasting a vote on a third-party mainly because of said metaknowledge without explaining the context WHY he's doing so or why he's believing I claimed in the first place, but coming off from that tangent.
1. Without metaknowledge, your claim becomes this: "Hey guys I'm not town but you can totally trust me, okay?" Answer: no, I don't.
2. What lie?
3+4: These are bullshit. I have been loud and clear about why I am voting you. I am voting you because you are claimed third party, and third party is very likely bad. There's other details I've posted that I'm all done repeating myself over.
Oho. 'Especially in Witches' Coven'. Emphasis much? For what reason.
1. Yeah, sure. Prove it from your frickin' viewpoint enough to not go off as handwaving everything else I say. Especially in:
2. Read for once. You're really coming off as desperate to lynch a third-party based PURELY on previous events. IN OTHER GAMES. What I see there is more of a subtle push in the face of wasting a lynch than not.
3-4. Loud and clear in the notion of tooting your confabulous horn. Meaning: Spouting nothing but loud words and aggression without the essence of one who is scumhunting. The bolded portion plays truly to possibility and outguessing a moderator instead of doing anything rational, or even reasonable. The orange portion is a subtle diversion from instead of quoting the EXACT phrase or statement, and backs up my view of you quoting entire passages without even stating why or how they exactly matter. Which leads back to my initial case on you regarding NQT.
Why don't you respond to that first, Witch.
ToonyManI do mind my own death, but am unsure on the repercussions. General repercussions, as it would affect everyone involved. The cases against me..aren't understandable, really. Voting people because they're third-party? That's a run-off cause, and needs expounding. Those who are doing such aren't expounding but bringing in a can of spoiled worms: metaknowledge. If you'd like a point, Toaster speaks about third-parties and if they're benevolent, why aren't they town. I answered to my best knowledge why, but the real answer is if you'd ask the mod what he's thinking.
What do you see about the cases against me, ToonyMan? I detect the presence of that 'Even if' which comes off to me as you subtly inserting your doubt on those cases.
Uh well, Toaster is being lazy (I seem to remember them voting NQT for "almost certainly being third-party" and Vector is being even worse. Your ward on me could be seen as brownie points (buddying), but buddying one person wouldn't really save you. Toaster has the best case on you with more facts, Vector has the "off-feeling" bit that she used against me in the opposite manner, heh...I think she also said because you're third-party which would make sense.
If 'lazy' is the best adjective you're applying to him, then perhaps I'm seeing him in a totally different view. I'm curious about that notion--what exactly is 'lazy' on him?
...Brownie points? New word to know. Anyway: buddying? How in the world could that be buddying? How does Toaster have the best case on me? What points convince you of it, and are there any points that don't?
NQTTiruin
Only, you said you were on an errand from our father AND you also said you were out to stop a non-witch thread. I'm trying to put 2 and 2 together here.
Why did you even claim this early? It's unfathomable. You really don't like me questioning you, and I'm not even voting you. Also you omitted the point about magic which makes me think you're something magical.
...
'Our'?
@Orange: ...You misinterpret my comment about your questioning and place an I don't like your questioning me, instead?
This is very strange, NQT.
I meant 'your'— it was a typo. Are you saying that you do like my questioning then? If so, then why didn't you answer my mention of magic for the second time running?
And now my cynical side is saying you're copying Toaster's stubbornness in getting ideas and making me really want to snark at you. Did you miss the point where I said the difference lies in
how and not
the matter that you're questioning me?
...I don't even get why you're now appealing to the 'like/dislike' my questioning, because it's all coming off as you twisting words and words without getting straight to a point.
Next: That wasn't a question, it was a statement. It came off as an opinion, and I didn't poke at it because I didn't think it was important to do so.
But I'm seeing a lapse of information now that I get to the root of it.
Also you omitted the point about magic which makes me think you're something magical.
Omitted
what point about magic?
NQT: I'd really love it for YOU to address my questions now, at the moment. Every single one I asked you instead of you playing your own instead.
And on why in the world you're using current events to respond to others in OTHER GAMES, as another note.
As I explained in the other thread, I like to point to actual evidence from other games. I wasn't using the info in any way to build a case against anyone. You seem very touchy. Is there anything else you'd like to know?
[/quote]
...In the other thread.
Well, let me explain in this thread how I'm touchy
ABOUT THAT MATTER. It's great enough for you to use as frickin' evidence to others as something to base upon. It hurt me, deeply. It hurt me as a player and as a person. Where I saw it, makes me think that you didn't care enough to
read on what the person says and just generalize said person as a statement you could use.
If you think that's touchy, then try talking about people behind their back in public. I've faced more than enough of that and knew about it more than enough in my childhood, thanks. The emotional aspect is more due to trauma in my past than not, and I really hated you for that at the time.
So yeah, that's touchy. The cynicism. The assumption. The defensiveness. Yeah. Pretty much touchy in a personal way, but I discard that now that the nightmare has passed.
Ending note: Actual evidence--now that speaks more of you than not--especially when you're lacking information about the person.
But my intuition disagrees. It feels like you've something else against me that you aren't saying in public.
What are you hiding,
NQT?
LeafsnailLeafsnail— You see now that your recent reason for voting doesn't really make sense. He mentioned elimination before anyone else. Frankly, I think you are the witch here. In a game where the setting is of paramount importance you alone have refused to engage in the most rudimentary of ways. You are afraid of incriminating yourself with your name and profession. Barring having to break a tie, my vote is not shifting off of you until I we hear what your name and profession is. Reread the OP or PM the mod: this game is about the setting.
He did mention elimination, which I was pretty sure would count as quoting his role PM if he were town (and would according to the rules written in the OP). Apparently that isn't the case.
Hm, I detect a weird bit of inconsistency here. Your point on elimination being an exact seems pretty much a case to build on, why? Pre-LNCP clarification, that is.
PPE:
Unvote. Vote Tiruin. Tell us your win condition. Without knowing that it's best to lynch the confirmed non-townie.
I prefer you
read first.
Why is it 'best' to lynch the confirmed non-townie? Emphasis on the term 'townie' due to the idea you're subtly pushing there.
Well, take this with skepticism. All third-parties I play that aren't SKs are pro-town because I want to side with the less-informed team.
I'd like to point out that you killed two townies in Toon Mafia, after lying about being a pro-town third party. In other words, this statement is untrue. Why are you lying?
I love how you label people without reading the context they provide.
I said, before, that while I was an SK, I was UNABLE TO KILL ANYONE before completing my quota of RITUALS performed at the time. I was pro-town there, both in the notion of 'I'd like scum killed' and helping the town is a more of a reasonable application of my playstyle than not. Before that time, I was more of a vanilla RangerCado in the way that I could only fulfill my wincon if I stayed at home and did nothing.
...And the context here is really something I see you misunderstand, but prod at in a falsely accusatory way. But I get what you're trying to do.
Something else I would add on the matter would ease clarification but I would need to ask the Mod to tell it, which is ToonyMan. But I'm under the impression that in doing so, would breaches his rules on the point.
GAH PPE.