You want me to find every single one of your posts, analyze it, and present it back to you? I don't have time right now - but I will do that, because I can.
So, I'll be back with that, and what I think about it.
You don't have time and yet you'll do so anyway? How considerate.
Time allowed.
Unvote SirBayer. Vote Webadict for defensiveness.
Are you saying that people should be allowed to vote with terrible points? I clearly shot down all of your reasons and you incorrectly determine that this makes your points MORE valid?
"HEY! You don't have the right to vote me without good reasoning!"
In fact, just for that, I want you to go through every one of my posts and analyze them. For EVERYONE to see. Do it, because clearly I'd have had to've left more scumtells in there, and you know so much about scumhunting.
"I want you to go look though my posts for evidence. By seeing how little you have, you'll unvote me."
You did jump when it looked like Bayer was joining a bandwagon against you. According to General Mountainterror's Guide to Mafia, page 266, people getting overly wordy at being bandwagoned need to be bandwagoned further.
Wait... so the two people that were voting each other now suddenly find that bandwagoning me is the optimum idea?
Anyhow, back to the ludicrous evidence against me...
Jumping? Really? Why does it always take like five people to bandwagon me? Normal people get three. Me? I get five. I'm not even being voted for good reasons. If you're thinking that's jumping then you're insane.
What the hell do you even think I mean by jumping? By jumping, I mean some massive nervous reaction attempting to divert suspicion to me or frankly anywhere else - to prevent a lynch. And now you're just complaining about it!
Your evidence is... moronic! Yes, you shouldn't vote for someone without good evidence. He left RVS when he bandwagoned. It's fairly obvious. How does that make any amount of sense to vote someone with?!?
Random voting continues until you think you've got scum. I though Nirur was cleared (I've since realized otherwise) so I moved on. I didn't need good evidence, I needed a reaction, and I got one.
The second compelling evidence you've brought forth is equally terrible. Mostly because it's all true! I want him to find and list every occurrence where I'm scummy, so I can shoot him down that many times. I've already done so, but he's just waiting to get hit again and again and again.
This addresses... what?
No need to hide my posts.
WEBADICT, I AM VOTING YOU FOR A BULLSHIT REASON FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS
1. GETTING THE CONVERSATION GOING.
2. SEEING HOW YOU REACT TO GETTING VOTED
MR.PERSON YOU ARE CLEARLY SCUM!
Let us refer to the evidence. His name has a period in it. It is... a USERNAME! *gasps*
Furthermore, between the period and the following word there... LACKS A SAPCE! *more shocked gasps*
And if that weren't enough, your avatar is stupid. Go cry over business, pal. We all know Leno sucks, but who the heck cares that much? *startled gasps, a woman faints*
I therefore conclude that you are scum.
That or town.
Wasting perfectly good RVS? Come now, you're more experienced than that.
Explain, oh great one, what a perfect random vote would look like. It's RVS. You see what's there and you see what's not. Maybe you don't get it, but you're not any good, so I wouldn't expect you to. I never wasted anything, since I got a response. By your logic, Mr.Person also wasted his RV, as did dakarian and Diakron. You're such a nimrod.
You ask a question. You make conversation. You don't just vote. Am I wrong here?
Dakarian, if i had 3 apples and 2 of them are green what is the least number of cats on my lap?
Depends on three factors:
If the apples are in bite sized pieces:
C= X/4 cats
X= the surface area of your lap in square inches
C= the number of cats (the answer)
If the apples are whole
0
If the apples are covered in shrimp
7/0
Meanwhile
CobaltKobold why did Diakron give me such a useless question?
Why aren't you asking Diakron, dakarian!
This is the lamest thing ever. Why would you attack someone like that? It's still RVS, this has absolutely no foundation.
... Because it's RVS? Are you being serious? I wanted dakarian to talk more. There's so much fail in this...
Naaaw, I'm joking. I do stand corrected.
Unvote Dakarian
Nirur Torir care to rejoin us? i didn't get anything from you last time 
Looking for lurkers already, scumbag?
Indirect side attacks already, scumbag?
Again, I'm not sure you've completely grasped any concept in Mafia. Especially the RVS.
Did you ever follow up? Did you ever pressure him? Did you ever do anything with it? Nothing! Not a goddamn thing.
unvote
Why aren't you asking Diakron, dakarian!
Because RVS isn't for useless OMGUS. It's for reading people properly.
Webadict, you SAW me do this last time, saw the result. Why are you trying it again?
I saw you do what? Defend yourself? Deflect? Use meta? Be scummy? OMGUS? Yeah, I see lots of things, scumbag.
That's like Schrodinger's Cat. Everyone is that cat but the observer, unless that observer is scum, except that that doesn't mean that every other potential observer is town either, so it's still like that, except you know who your teammates are, as opposed to the town. But, to the town, every person is scum and town at the same time until that person is dead, where their alignment is shown.
Showed you.
ToonyMan, if you were on the scumteam, who else would you pick to be on it with you, amongst the current players?
Me, Myself, and Irene.
Vote Webadict for faux attitude.
See? This is why I wish I had an Assassin Bot...
See, Webadict, this is where my complaints come in.
It's not just that Panda does it, it's why Panda does it. It's because he's nervous. Anyone just keeps talking when they're nervous, and you're doing the same here.
And your argument is... what? I don't even know. It's not clear what you're attacking, nor what point you're making. In fact, there isn't a point there. Just saying that... what, nobody is town and nobody is scum, just the same? You don't address his issue, you don't - this isn't even a response!
And then you threaten to kill somebody.
Oh wait, I thought it was a run-on sentence! I thought that was a scumtell! Now it has some use for analysis?
It is still about the run-on sentence. That's what the WHOLE GODDAMN FIRST PARAGRAPH IS ABOUT. That should've been plenty obvious, but it's more convenient to ignore it, isn't it?
Because, really, you're not doing any analysis. You're twisting words. I threatened to kill someone? No. I don't have a way to kill someone. It was saying I'd be happy to kill them provided there was a way, but not that I was going to.
And yet it shows the same intent, doesn't it?
I used Schrodinger's gun on you.
You're maybe dead.
You won't know until I post.
Included for thoroughness' sake. Nothing special.
Just like the rest of your analysis 
You 'see' a lot of things but don't act properly on them.
Casual pokes about scum then a mess that amounts to "you may be town or scum". Nice way to weaken your own stance. Am I town, scum or the 'maybe town maybe scum' mess you thought was more important to mention than any actual scummy behavior?
Now how about a REAL attack without the bet hedging?
Meanwhile, cute to see that you're still interested in killing off folks just because they annoy you.
What's wrong with that? I don't see anything wrong with that, especially if I had a free Daykill. Wouldn't you want to get rid of someone you couldn't read? I don't see how that's scummy.
But, it's nice to see you're freaking out, trying to find anything you can. I mean, it's not like you to be so demanding on things, nor is it like you to simply ignore everything I said to straight up attack me. Basically, you're dodging all of my attacks to attack me, which is incredibly scummy of you, scumbag.
I'm not the one who OMGUS'd here (Well, I OMGUS'd Mr.Person for the fun of it), nor am I the one that is attacking their attacker without defending. I mean, it's like you don't really care about answering questions. You just want to see someone lynched. You're making no attempt to defend yourself, nor are you really attacking.
So, instead of making vague argument about my scummitude, why not a real attack, scumbag? Because if you're going to royally contradict yourself, then why are you even bothering?
I'd want no scumbuddies. I'd rather be in a cult of some sort.
You 'see' a lot of things but don't act properly on them.
Casual pokes about scum then a mess that amounts to "you may be town or scum". Nice way to weaken your own stance. Am I town, scum or the 'maybe town maybe scum' mess you thought was more important to mention than any actual scummy behavior?
Now how about a REAL attack without the bet hedging?
Meanwhile, cute to see that you're still interested in killing off folks just because they annoy you.
Why didn't you ask him "Why are you taking such a multi-sided stance?"
Which, btw, I am now asking Webadict. Why are you taking such a multi-sided stance? By that, I mean, why are you saying the possibilities? What purpose does it serve?
I was thinking a lot about Schrodinger's Cat ... today? Yesterday? I don't remember when. Just that I was and wanted to talk about it.
See, he's not responding to your argument because there wasn't one. You can't call him out on attacks that didn't happen.
Right, so my other attacks on him are equally not attacks. That's cool.
You accuse me of twisting words?
Unvote
Happy now?
dakarian.
Aso, SirBayer, which questions were you asking me? The "Not making sense" thing? I dunno. Maybe you're taking some drugs that stop you from comprehending. Maybe you got dropped on your head. Whatever it is, I'm sure it's merely temporary.
Dismissing a question.
I'm supposed to answer that question? You're setting unrealistic goals here. Your questions was "Why can't I understand you when I normally do?" Here's my answer: How should I know? If you understand me when I'm scum or when I'm town, then what's stopping you now? Therefore, I'm pretty sure it's your fault.
Perhaps. And yet until I brought it back up, you simply let it slide. I hadn't developed why it didn't make sense, why I didn't like it, until later, but the fact you let it go still... grates me.
Lacking anything better to do with my time, I'll try to revive the activity by posting who everybody is voting for, my perceived reasons for why they are voting that person, and my own feelings of town/scum.
It's still RVS, but I don't see people still random voting to stir up activity.
01. Webadict - RV on Dakarian.
02. Leafsnail - RV on Diakron. Diakron has yet to respond.
03. SirBayer - RV on me when the game started.
04. Mr.Person - Not voting.
05. Diakron - RV on me for lurking for 3 hours. Has not posted since then.
06. Dakarian - Pressure on Webadict to try to read him?
07. Jokerman-EXE - RV on Eduren. Has not posted since then.
08. Nirur Torir - Voting for SirBayer. Bayer's only attempt at scum-hunting was to vote me with a joke RVS question when the game started. He behaved as though stressed when I pointed out that he was dodging a question, insisting that he's not scum. He is slow to respond, as though waiting for advice from somebody.
09. Eduren - Voting Mr. Person for sidelining. Mr. Person has responded that he would be right back with hard questions for somebody. He has not yet returned after 10 hours.
10. ToonyMan - Voting Webadict for meta reasons
11. tehstefan - RV on Leafsnail.
12. Vector - RV on Bayer.
13. CobaltKobold - RVS question at Vector. Vector has responded.
Pandarsenic: when does the day end?
Bayer, why aren't you even trying to scum-hunt?
Now, what's your analysis on the situation?
Don't know what this means.
It's not the first time for you.
It's saying that he made an analysis but he didn't point out particular scummy people.
Well, there you go.
What's wrong with that? I don't see anything wrong with that, especially if I had a free Daykill. Wouldn't you want to get rid of someone you couldn't read? I don't see how that's scummy.
No. If I did that I'd be aiming to kill half the game by the end of day 1. Instead, I'd rather use my daykill to try to kill actual scum and work on READING people. Even unreadables spill the beans after a few days and there's usually people who look far worse beforehand.
If they're unreadable, then you can't read them. Simple as that, really, but you're acting like some sort of fool. You're trying your best to turn a molehill into a mountain. Do you even realize what you're saying? You're twisting words to fit some weird shape that's grotesquely wrong.
As far as I can tell, Webadict has supported Dak's conclusions in Beginner games. So I'm not quite sure what you're talking about here.
But no, I know just wanting to policy lynch isn't a scumtell (it's a null tell). Now worrying that I'd SEE it as a scum tell... that's not so pretty.
But, it's nice to see you're freaking out, trying to find anything you can. I mean, it's not like you to be so demanding on things, nor is it like you to simply ignore everything I said to straight up attack me. Basically, you're dodging all of my attacks to attack me, which is incredibly scummy of you, scumbag.
Web are you pulling the same "OMG that post right after RVS wasn't a not a good reason!" Mistake many many scum tend to do? I thought you realized by now HOW I manage the RVS.
... Are you calling me a bad scum player... Or... what? I'm not entirely sure what you're on about here. Who said RVS ended? Who said it even started? What is wrong in your head?
So, seriously, what are you accusing me of? Accusing you of not random voting? Because, honestly, you didn't make anything coherent in that statement.
Relates back to attacks that didn't happen.
I would take your attacks seriously if you did as well. Saying I'm unknown after throwing a blah's list of tells doesn't amount to much but a softballed attack. You want real answers? I want an accusation I can speak about, and without "nothing may be right" BS to hedge on later.
If I'm not attacking you seriously, then why are you reacting so seriously?
Because you're not attacking at all, so you're fairly obviously scum?
I'm not the one who OMGUS'd here (Well, I OMGUS'd Mr.Person for the fun of it),
I didn't OMGUS! (ok, I did..but)
No, I know you were being funny. I also know that comedy is easy to pull when you want to avoid breaking into a readable stance.
Are you pulling a Strawman Fallacy out here?
As far as I can tell, this is a weak dismissal of this argument.
nor am I the one that is attacking their attacker without defending. I mean, it's like you don't really care about answering questions. You just want to see someone lynched. You're making no attempt to defend yourself, nor are you really attacking.
Good job explaining yourself.
Myself, I want a read on you. That's the purpose of D1. You holding yourself back pretty well this game and it's bugging me. It's almost like you're ignoring things just to focus on me. Thus I'm going to see if I can break you before the day ends. I know now that you are something and it's NOT town, but I need more to see what you are.
Clearly, you don't know anything about anything, or you're choosing to believe as such. Personally, I believe the latter, since I'm not flinging accusations left and right, taking nothing and turning it into... complete absolute nothing.
Oh, and you're not really trying very hard if your goal is to break me. You've done so much better in the past.
So you're... taunting him? Dismissing the possibility of breaking? I don't like that, frankly.
So, instead of making vague argument about my scummitude, why not a real attack, scumbag? Because if you're going to royally contradict yourself, then why are you even bothering?
You're hiding behind a screen of silly jokes and theory jargon. You're TRYING to be hard to read and trying to banter with the crowd. You are after me, but meh, when have you NOT been after me? It's almost like a reverse safe bet: most folks avoid me since I'm a hard read and a harder lynch. You run right into me because ..I don't know, but when you aren't after someone else or hunting, you go right for me.
I'm not doing anything. If I'm difficult to read, that's your fault. I can read myself very clearly, actually. But, seriously, why would I avoid you? When have I avoided you? I'm the one people avoid because they can't read me. I avoid nothing. Am I supposed to cower in your presence, sir? do others do so in my wake?
My God, you must be considerably conceited to make an argument like that.
More argument dismissal. One of Webby's strong points this game, scum-wise.
Result, you're hiding, and purposely. You're something big enough to affect your game. I want to know if that something needs to be lynched or not.
Oh wait. You KNOW I'm not Town, but you don't know if I'm good enough to be lynched? Yet, here you are with your vote on me. Flip-floppingest argument ever. Make up your mind and stick to it, even if it's dead-set on being ignorantly wrong.
In summary, vote yourself if you're trying to lynch scum.
No response, he's got a point.
Bolded are my comments.
1) Same argument applies to dakarian.
Which one now?
2) What is up with you and your dismissing excuse? That's so terrible! He pulled a Strawman Fallacy out. It's a FALLACY. You might need a dictionary for that one, but it's pointless to argue with someone using it.
I know what the goddamn fallacy is. I don't see it there at all.
3) Get your facts straight.
Explaining which might be nice.
Haha. And that's what I was looking for, Webadict.
Way to jump into the sky over something "minor". Hell, those points weren't good, but you leaping like a Mexican Jumping Bean was.
So Yeah. I feel justified.
Are you saying that people should be allowed to vote with terrible points? I clearly shot down all of your reasons and you incorrectly determine that this makes your points MORE valid?
Basically, two wrongs make a right in this case. I'm not even sure you know what leaping is. To leap into the sky would for me to fly to your house and rip out your trachea. Now, to say I leap a little bit might be more accurate, but I'm not going to let some nobody think they can tarnish my name by using the worst evidence available.
I'm not sure how you can even begin to assume that that is proper scumhunting. You didn't find scum the first time, you haven't found scum this time, and I highly doubt you'll find scum in the future! My goodness!
In fact, just for that, I want you to go through every one of my posts and analyze them. For EVERYONE to see. Do it, because clearly I'd have had to've left more scumtells in there, and you know so much about scumhunting.
So let's see what happened here! First, you tell me that I'm not allowed to vote with terrible points. So... I'm not allowed to Random Vote. And I'm not allowed to scumhunt when I'm out of options. And I'm really just not allowed to vote. Thanks.
You posted paragraphs in response to two quotes and a few lines. You're nervous and you're willing to attack anything.
If I miss scum, then I try again. I don't think I'm missing, you seem awfully frustrated with me.
And here it is.
I said you're not allowed to vote for terrible points. That's obvious. You left RVS when you voted me, because I had plenty of people voting for me. You therefore bandwagoned me without reason. You even admit to it. You also admit to not scumhunting in the same post.
No, if you miss scum today, you die. That's my compromise. If you lynch me, I will ask that everyone kill dakarian and SirBayer. Why? Because you're acting like an idiot and dakrain is acting like scum. You're pulling any argument you can out of nowhere. I mean, it's like you know I'm a Cop and really, really want to get rid of me. I don't know how you know, but I'm getting the feeling that you do.
So, in an effort to avoid getting lynched, you do what? You claim! You claim cop! You are dead as a doornail, Webadict.
Anyhow, I've got to go. If you all have nothing better to do, feel free to leave some more attacks on me. I can't possibly be bandwagoned enough.
Conclusion: Webby is either failing scum today or a jester.
Go suck a lemon.
Nirur, you seemed so certain that SirBayer was scum. What makes you think SirBayer is no longer scum, or at least less likely scum than Webadict?
I believe that my attacks are stronger if I always type as though the person being attacked -is- scum, and I just need more evidence in order to get them lynched, even if I'm not sure that they're scum. My targets won't know if they're really in the "I have you now, scum" category or the "You need questioning" category.
Having re-read Bayer's posts, I decided that I do not yet have enough evidence to launch a crippling psychological attack on him at this time, while Webadict is in need of more pressure.
Vector, I'd like to see your commentary on Webadict's behavior.
I do so enjoy smarter people. Let's have her.
Author
Topic: iPick [d5] 4/13 alive - Game over, citizen. Town wins. (Read 91496 times)