Print

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

[Leafsnail]

So it's now prodding lurkers rather than because you don't know who's scum?

[Mephansteras]

So it's now prodding lurkers rather than because you don't know who's scum?

The two aren't mutually exclusive, you know.

Here, let me break it down for you:

I started the day voting for you because I thought "Hmmm, no clear idea of who's scum. Well, I was a little suspicious of Leafsnail and RNG. And RNG is dead, so I'll vote Leaf and see what happens."

Then I was horribly busy for a while.

When I had some time I went back through day 1 and decided that I wasn't sure enough about you to push for a lynch, so I unvoted. Having little else to go on, I decide to prod the lurkers into talking to try to get more information.

I prodded Kashyyk first, he responded, so I unvoted and voted RedWarrior0.

He didn't post, but it got close to the end of the day with 3 votes on me and only 1 on anyone else (and 5 people *still* not voting). I realized that I was probably going to get lynched and started making up a post with as much information as I had to help the town out after I was dead. While doing so, I realized that it was very possible that Webadict was a grinch who saw what gift I'd gotten and was trying to get me lynched. Hence my switch onto him.

At that point, it was maybe half an hour before the stated deadline. I didn't think my vote on him was going to prevent me from being lynched (I still had 3 votes on me), I simply felt that it was the best way for me to provide information to the town before I died.

That's it. No great scummy plan, no secret gambits. Just a townie without enough information trying to dig up more in the midst of a whole lot of nothing from half the players.

Trust me, this would have been a lot easier if I actually was scum. At least then I'd be able to MAKE a plan.

[Cheddarius]

You must be new to the game.

Most people don't say "If y'all'd rather lynch someone suspicious, I'll unvote him." In fact, you should never, ever say that, because you're saying that I'm not suspicious, that you'll be fine with bandwagoning, and that you think I'm useless (Go suck a lemon.)

In what way am I useless? Can you explain that one? Because I think your argument is very... useless and indescriptive. And if you can't do that, then explain how my absence is helpful. AND explain how it's more useful that anyone else's absence.[/quote]

Yes, I'm new. I don't think that you're not suspicious, just that I don't scumhunt well enough to really "know" who's suspicious at this point. I didn't say I was fine with bandwagoning, either, if by bandwagoning you mean people voting only because someone else did. But I am most certainly fine with not voting to let the more experienced people lynch who they strongly suspect. That's how the game is played, lynching who you suspect.
I said you were useless because I've read a few games, and it seems to me like you attack someone randomly, and people don't really listen to you. They seem to disregard your accusations as baseless (or was that Org? Maybe I got you two mixed up). And... I've said it before, so I don't really see what's so useless and indescriptive about my argument. It seems relatively easy to understand to me.

Cheddarius, you are either his partner or Scrooge.  He's trying to get webadict lynched since he's "Not useful", apparently, and that's better than lynching scum.  Also odd how he came in at the last moment and saved Meph from a lynch.

I don't think webadict's just not useful, I think he's a liability. See my previous post for why. Neither do I think lynching him is better than lynching scum. It's merely that I'm fairly new, and I don't have strong suspicions on anyone, so I don't have any scum to lynch. The coincidence is also addressed in my previous post.

I'm going to hold my vote on Cheddarius until I get some real suspicions. All we've got right now is a dislike of Webadct's SEEMINGLY random votes.

See above.

[Cheddarius]

Fixed first quote:

You must be new to the game.

Most people don't say "If y'all'd rather lynch someone suspicious, I'll unvote him." In fact, you should never, ever say that, because you're saying that I'm not suspicious, that you'll be fine with bandwagoning, and that you think I'm useless (Go suck a lemon.)

In what way am I useless? Can you explain that one? Because I think your argument is very... useless and indescriptive. And if you can't do that, then explain how my absence is helpful. AND explain how it's more useful that anyone else's absence.

Yes, I'm new. I don't think that you're not suspicious, just that I don't scumhunt well enough to really "know" who's suspicious at this point. I didn't say I was fine with bandwagoning, either, if by bandwagoning you mean people voting only because someone else did. But I am most certainly fine with not voting to let the more experienced people lynch who they strongly suspect. That's how the game is played, lynching who you suspect.
I said you were useless because I've read a few games, and it seems to me like you attack someone randomly, and people don't really listen to you. They seem to disregard your accusations as baseless (or was that Org? Maybe I got you two mixed up). And... I've said it before, so I don't really see what's so useless and indescriptive about my argument. It seems relatively easy to understand to me.

[Zai]

That's...not a threat. That's just stupid people following along, or people who agree with him that Meph is scum.

My point is that if he manages to lynch Mephansteras (a person he seems to have picked randomly), we're lynching random people, which is ill-advised.

It's not exactly random; he has an idea as town, but...doesn't really share why a lot of the time. As scum...it's either random or he picks who he would normally pick; only person who would know that is Web, and you can't trust what he says.

I haven't voted because of the three that I most think are scum, you, Meph and Chedarius, two would get me accused of bandwagoning, and the other might just look suspect to me for the same reason I look suspsect to others, he's saying a lot and doing nothing.

OH MY GOD YOU'RE NEW AND POSSIBLY SCUM

Self-preservation is scummy. Townies (aside from Santa) have no reason to feel a need for self-preservation. There are numerous townies. There are only a few scum. When scum get lynched, they lose half their team. When a regular townie gets lynched, one of many will die (1/8 today). Townies can be useful in death; their suspicions can then be trusted more than they could be previously. Scum's use in death is possibly throwing town off their partner's tracks.

If you're vote is for legitimate reasons, then just vote. It doesn't matter if people scream WAGONWAGONOMG if you're actually voting for good reasons. If you just say, 'lol ya i liked wut web sed so i vote meph,' of course people will be able to legitimately scream BANDWAGONWUT, and in that case you need to get some fucking reasons. If you have good, legitimate reasons other than just 'he sed dat so i vote dat,' then you get to scream at the WAGONOMG crowd for being dolts and/or lazy scum.

I would've voted RedWarrior to try and get him to actually post something, but you've done that. So I'll call out Zai: Who do you think is scum?

I'm voting Sonearage, nimrod. Pay attention. She still needs to post more. I am not satisfied with "she young. she new. she no scum".

Also, Meph. If you're town and are telling the truth, you are an idiot. Now that you've revealed who you sent your letters to and that you got a present, scum will be slowly but surely picking off those players until they kill Santa. Which means we lose a day. Not good.

[dakarian]

Current Vote Count:

Mephansteras[2]: Leafsnail,
Webadict[2]: Mephansteras, Cheddarius,
Cheddarius[2]: Sonearage, Mr.Person,
Sonearage[1]: Zai,
RedWarrior0[1]: Webadict,

Not Voting: Pandarsenic, Kashyyk, RedWarrior0, Akigagak,

Deadline: Friday, 11pm EST

[Mr.Person]

But I am most certainly fine with not voting to let the more experienced people lynch who they strongly suspect. That's how the game is played, lynching who you suspect.

I don't think webadict's just not useful, I think he's a liability. See my previous post for why. Neither do I think lynching him is better than lynching scum. It's merely that I'm fairly new, and I don't have strong suspicions on anyone, so I don't have any scum to lynch. The coincidence is also addressed in my previous post.

You claim you want to lynch who you suspect. You refuse to suspect Webadict despite the fact you're voting him.

These statements do not jive with each other. Cheddarius is scum.

[webadict]

Fixed first quote:

You must be new to the game.

Most people don't say "If y'all'd rather lynch someone suspicious, I'll unvote him." In fact, you should never, ever say that, because you're saying that I'm not suspicious, that you'll be fine with bandwagoning, and that you think I'm useless (Go suck a lemon.)

In what way am I useless? Can you explain that one? Because I think your argument is very... useless and indescriptive. And if you can't do that, then explain how my absence is helpful. AND explain how it's more useful that anyone else's absence.

Yes, I'm new. I don't think that you're not suspicious, just that I don't scumhunt well enough to really "know" who's suspicious at this point. I didn't say I was fine with bandwagoning, either, if by bandwagoning you mean people voting only because someone else did. But I am most certainly fine with not voting to let the more experienced people lynch who they strongly suspect. That's how the game is played, lynching who you suspect.
I said you were useless because I've read a few games, and it seems to me like you attack someone randomly, and people don't really listen to you. They seem to disregard your accusations as baseless (or was that Org? Maybe I got you two mixed up). And... I've said it before, so I don't really see what's so useless and indescriptive about my argument. It seems relatively easy to understand to me.

... Do you have any idea what you're actually saying BEFORE you say it?

I'm attacking randomly? Is that why you're voting me, or is it because "People don't listen to me" (Which also can't be too true, or I wouldn't've gotten to how I am now. I will grant you that people refuse to listen to me when I refuse to give evidence, which I honestly can't blame them for.)

If you're on the Naughty list, you get coal whether you send a letter or not (unless of course the grinches steal).

Also. Webadict seems to me to be really weird today. I realize that he's always antagonistic and such, making dumb claims whenever he's town, but he has actually started a lynch on Mephansteras right now. This makes him a threat; we don't want someone like Webadict starting bandwagons on whoever he randomly haets on. Also, he has made some crazy claims ("Mephansteras is scum because I'm awesome") but later backed off with more reasonable claims ("Mephansteras is scum because he's lurking etc"), which sounds really suspicious to me.

And, if no one listens to me, then how did I start a bandwagon?

Also, I'm going to break this part down slowly:

If you're on the Naughty list, you get coal whether you send a letter or not (unless of course the grinches steal).

Also. Webadict seems to me to be really weird today. I realize that he's always antagonistic and such, making dumb claims whenever he's town, but he has actually started a lynch on Mephansteras right now. This makes him a threat; we don't want someone like Webadict starting bandwagons on whoever he randomly haets on. Also, he has made some crazy claims ("Mephansteras is scum because I'm awesome") but later backed off with more reasonable claims ("Mephansteras is scum because he's lurking etc"), which sounds really suspicious to me.

Webadict seems to me to be really weird today. I realize that he's always antagonistic and such, making dumb claims whenever he's town, but he has actually started a lynch on Mephansteras right now. This makes him a threat; we don't want someone like Webadict starting bandwagons on whoever he randomly haets on. Also, he has made some crazy claims ("Mephansteras is scum because I'm awesome") but later backed off with more reasonable claims ("Mephansteras is scum because he's lurking etc"), which sounds really suspicious to me.

Also, he has made some crazy claims ("Mephansteras is scum because I'm awesome") but later backed off with more reasonable claims ("Mephansteras is scum because he's lurking etc"), which sounds really suspicious to me.

but later backed off with more reasonable claims ("Mephansteras is scum because he's lurking etc"), which sounds really suspicious to me.

reasonable claims...sounds really suspicious to me.

I'm suspicious because the people I "randomly" go after have suspicious behavior. Quite an odd contradiction, considering that YOU'RE A MORON!

Your logic is beyond flawed. By your logic, Mephansteras is equally as scummy for starting a "bandwagon" (2 people is, by far, the worst bandwagon I've seen.)

It's like... It's like you have no idea what's going on. Like you can't tell what's happening, and puzzle piece don't fall into place: You cram them until they're so mangled that it MIGHT fit there now.

And the funny thing is you don't even think I'm suspicious! You just want people to lynch me because I can actually persuade people about someone's scumminess. Scumhunting isn't difficult. It's just a term. You're trying to find someone suspicious and get them lynched by being able to convince others of that person's scumminess through evidence. It's a process and definitely tough, but it's being a beginner doesn't stop you from being a logical, rational being.

My goodness, I'm going to try my hardest not to throttle you.

So, how is my being lynched useful, and why is it better than lynching someone suspicious?

[Cheddarius]

You claim you want to lynch who you suspect. You refuse to suspect Webadict despite the fact you're voting him.

I do not suspect Webadict. I want to vote someone suspicious to me. Therefore, I would vote someone else, but, I don't see anyone that strikes me as suspicious. I do not only want to vote who I suspect, I want most to vote who I suspect, but Web is all right if I can't find anyone strongly suspicious to me, which I cannot.

Another question about Webadict... is he often right?

[Mr.Person]

You claim you want to lynch who you suspect. You refuse to suspect Webadict despite the fact you're voting him.

I do not suspect Webadict. I want to vote someone suspicious to me. Therefore, I would vote someone else, but, I don't see anyone that strikes me as suspicious. I do not only want to vote who I suspect, I want most to vote who I suspect, but Web is all right if I can't find anyone strongly suspicious to me, which I cannot.

Another question about Webadict... is he often right?

So you're not going to try finding the scum? You're content to just lynch Webadict just because you don't like him?

What happened to this?

But I am most certainly fine with not voting to let the more experienced people lynch who they strongly suspect. That's how the game is played, lynching who you suspect.

[webadict]

You claim you want to lynch who you suspect. You refuse to suspect Webadict despite the fact you're voting him.

I do not suspect Webadict. I want to vote someone suspicious to me. Therefore, I would vote someone else, but, I don't see anyone that strikes me as suspicious. I do not only want to vote who I suspect, I want most to vote who I suspect, but Web is all right if I can't find anyone strongly suspicious to me, which I cannot.

Another question about Webadict... is he often right?

That depends really. It's better to say that I am more able to make sense of a situation, more able to help push the town to make a decision, more able to find scum.

And there's no possible way that no one strikes you as suspicious. Not even. You can't even find a good reason to vote me. You're okay with lynching anyone just because. How are you contributing to the discussion?

I've got a question and you better answer it well: Do you think you are better for the game than I am, and why or why not?

[Kashyyk]

Zai: Do you have any suspicions apart from sonearage? There are two Grinches after all.

[Sonearage]

I'm voting Sonearage, nimrod. Pay attention. She still needs to post more. I am not satisfied with "she young. she new. she no scum".

Zai tell me why do you think short posts are scummy?

[Leafsnail]

Mephansteras[2]: Leafsnail,

Oh noes!  You gave away the fact that I am a double voter .

Eh.  Unvote for now... I'm not convinced of Meph's innocence, but it may be better to get more discussion going now.

Zai tell me why do you think short posts are scummy?

Well, it would be helpful to at least post some suspicions, sonearage.

[Sonearage]

My suspicions are ZAI!