First order of business: Toaster!
You are totally scum! Because after I called you on your wimpy playstyle, you instantly changed it to- well, blow me down, if it isn't a near-perfect replica of my own! (except for the fallacious arguments and general idiocy)
Now, you might call me some sort of twisted hypocrite for ragging on someone for doing what I tell them to- and you can, but its not going to stop me.
You see, you didn't acknowledge that I am right. You just went from wimp to warrior without a word- in the hope, maybe, that I would give up my attack on you on the basis that, hmm, maybe I read him wrong? Yeah, no. Whilst I love the new you, it is in such stark contrast to the old you that it becomes
even more obvious that you are trying to blend in with the crowd. Which is something that two kinds of players do: new/stupid town and bad scum. You extract yourself from the first category by not being new
or stupid, leaving you squarely in the second. Scum.
Allow me to illustrate my point further:
Pre-My Post:
And he gives up on the attack. Don't mess with the Tooninator.
Get a room, you two. ~ Funny comment. Sort of maybe an accusation of buddying? Maybe?
So Soli, how goes acting scummy to see who jumps on you? ~ Trademark wimp question. Maybe you are sort of not in favour of this tactic? Maybe? Probably better to wait for solifuge to literally say 'my tactic is not working' before accusing him of anything.
Otto: Are you going to be pretending to play in this game too? ~ WimpQuestion (tm) Is there an accusation in there? Is there even an actual question in there? What there isn't in there, is something concrete.
Org, why did you accuse Leafsnail of bandwagonning when he was the first vote on you?
Org, you never answered me. ~ But you don't have to, if you don't want to. No pressure, you know.
This has exploded out into completely baseless and apparently serious accusations being thrown everywhere.
Leafsnail: Would you prefer another rehash of the same questions over and over? ~ WimpQuestion (tm)
Oh right:
Ottofar: Who do you suspect besides ToonyMan? Why? ~ I ask because I don't want to actually do some proper scumhunting- too risky. Instead, I will approve or disapprove of the opinions of others.
If you are monster hunter, do not claim yet.
See reply 46 on the discussion thread- we don't necessarily have scum team X if we have a monster hunter who specializes in killing team X. Any information you'd have won't help us enough to be worth revealing yourself.
~ Cold hard facts. Nice, good, awesome. Not scumhunting.
So in other words, you're accusing him of random voting you and trying to get a whole bunch of other people to join in on his random vote and actually lynch you?
People are accusing me of that as well...it makes no sense.
Leaf's vote was first on him. Yours was third. See the difference? ~ Gasp! Do I hear a backbone here? Yes, that question is decidedly rhetoric (I hope)- an excellent solid foundation for some proper smackdown. Which you fail to deliver. Your attack fizzles out, without a conclusion.
RedWarrior said he would be gone on Thursday, not through Thursday. Any non-content beforehand is not excused. Let's see some content out of you, with less buddying. Why do people keep buddying Toony? ~ Two things
1)"Let's see some content"; Once again, you are not willing to create your own content- just commenting on others.
2)This is stupid. Lurking with an excuse is forgiveable. It is silly and not scumhunting to talk about it.
Solifuge: Who do you suspect? You've pointed some fingers, but not followed through with a vote on them. Anything you'd like to add? ~ Double WimpQuestion (tm)- Double the silly questions, still nothing concrete
And then! I idly mention that Toaster is scum, on the basis of the general feel of his above posts (that is, wimpy)
[Stuff about redwarrior lurking, spelling gets mentioned. Not pretty] ~ You know how I feel about this.
Nuke, any questions for me, or accusations to respond to? ~ Notice: Still wimpy.
AND THEN! I point out toaster's pathetic playstyle. I quote how he responded, then suggest how he should have responded:
Nuke, any questions for me, or accusations to respond to?
Feels like you don't want to hurt my feelings. Its like you are asking my permission to defend yourself.
Here is a better response:
Nuke, loving that 'no arguments, just slipping it in there' sort of thing. Maybe no one will see it? Maybe I won't see it, then you can call me on it later on, hmm? Gee, sorry to rain on your parade there, buddy. Anyway, unless you go ahead and support your self with some actual arguments, I just can't take you seriously.
Now, Toaster's very. Next. Post.
Nah, Nuke, it doesn't always work that way. Saying "scum" at me then waiting to see what falls out is hardly hunting, nor is that pretty list you made hunting. In fact, reading back over it, I don't see a single attack at all! Don't even try to tell me you attacked me, because you didn't- you labeled me. Labels don't find scum.
I also notice that when asked to provide evidence, you use my prior post- which came after your list. Since I doubt you have a time machine, that means the previous determination was made without it. It's almost like you hadn't made your mind up why I was "scum" yet. I'm not here to play nice, nor am I playing burden of proof games with you. You can call anyone you like scum all day- just don't expect anyone to take you seriously until you can back it up. Hell, even a flimsy justification to get a reaction is better that the nothing you provided.
As to your question, it's very silly, but I'll answer it by saying that I don't care if anyone thinks I'm nice. If that doesn't work for you, too bad. I hunt by questioning people- maybe you should try it sometime.
You did remind me to check RedWarrior again, though. Despite knowing that he wouldn't be here today, he couldn't be bothered to come up with any detailed analysis, nor move his first post random vote. That's evidence he doesn't care- scummy. He loses his AFK shield after today though, so let's hope that this extension goes through- we're not done with this day.
...wow.
Just go ahead and compare this post to all that preceded it. Notice the aggression. Snap your fingers, mabye. Whisper 'daaang' to yourself. It's ok. I can hardly believe it too.
See how he at no point mentions anything suggesting I was right. Not even some snarky "Yeah nuke, I
was being to soft on you".
See how his behaviour matches up to what I suggested it should be.
In conclusion:
Toaster is quite probably scum, as evidenced by both his passive behaviour earlier and his sudden switch of behaviour. I believe that I have made my case in a faultless manner; however, if anyone has any questions, feel free to ask.
Second order of business: Ottofar!
1)Great that you can summarise the game so far. But I think we wanted either A) A Defence or B) Some Scumhunting. No one was looking for C) Opinion-less Reporting of Facts
2)WHY THE FUCK ARE YOU VOTING LEAFSNAIL. You mention him twice in your 'wall of text'. Neither event is incriminating in the slightest! You realise, I hope, that this looks very much like you are voting for some random townie, just so that you don't get lynched yourself. Which, by the way, is so scummy it hurts not only me, but also everyone who even glances at it on my screen as they pass by. Yes. The scuminess is obvious even to people who have
never even heard of mafia.3)And I'd like for you to tell me what you think! And defend yourself from the vast, vast array of attacks arrayed against you. I would like to know, for example, why you thought ToonyMan was scum a while back, and not simply a nice bandwagon opportunity.
Pretty much everything he [ToonyMan] has said has been scummy, and already quoted by someone. Besides, it is a bit hard to quote with a phone.
You are not still posting on a phone, I trust? Perhaps you would be so good as to explain yourself, then?
4)
I'd like to know, was this in any way better?
Well, I appreciate that you tried.
Just keep on trying. A proper defence would just make my day.
I am still totally voting for you, by the way.
Third and final order of business: Miscellaneous.
Let me sum up the arguments against me.
LOL U NO ANSWER RANDOM QUESTION FIRST TIME
Ok, done.
I would be simply chuffed if someone could point out why this guy should be lynched, because to be honest, that quote right there appears to be accurate.
Org: I said it before, I will say it again: Bah. I do not approve of your posting style, but as it stands, there are bigger fish to fry.
Prepost edit:
Unvote.
That was just to break the tie.
That being said, we're barely in the game and Org already has three votes. I'm rarely opposed to lynching Org, but three votes that quickly is suspicious. I'd say especially so for ToonyMan as the third vote.
then
Eh? Org can die for all I care, it would be more useful than he generally is. But pulling three votes that quickly makes me think that at least one scum is trying to get in an easy lynch. Same the other way when the votes turned to Leafsnail.
I also got scum feel from reply #100, but I don't know where that came from.
JanusTwoface
Huh? What are you even trying to say here? That Janus is ok with lynching org? Why is that voteworthy?
Author
Topic: Supernatural Mafia - Game over! (Read 41727 times)