Wow. Lots of stuff. Good. I'll go through your points and give opinions, however before I do so I will point out that a) you failed to substantiate your previous statement: "You find every person in this game scummy", and b) you failed to point out where I'm "sooper-defensive".
But let's go through your stuff. Pardon me if I compress it a bit.
- Random vote on Janus, you know the drill.
- A fury of questions after the MOD (Ottofar) responds to him from the first question. Let it be noted that not a single play has posted yet and he has questioned every player with random vote question, which isn't helpful. Not many times does the random vote question win the game. I think it's because he wants to seem like he's helping while staying on the higher ground of questioning.
As I mentioned earlier, I generally toss questions to multiple people because I'm trying to get everyone talking and I need a read on four people, not one. And yes, I started a bit eagerly, but I had been jonesing for a game since PYS started, so I was happy to get the ball rolling.
- Some fun non-serious chatter [:3] with a side of Gambler's Fallacy (I think he admits to doing it on purpose (fun!, but I don't recall. Ridicolous post showing his faith in the Gambler's Fallacy, over eagerness in more questions towards Pandar.
Yeah, this and the puppy vs. kitten stuff show that I enjoy the game, and enjoy enjoying myself when playing a game. I make no apologies, and sneer at you guys for failing to even chuckle. But to each his own.
- Double posts telling everyone he's done posting for today. Now this is important. What I've noticed is when people play as Mafia they get anxious and therefore post a hell of a lot and don't want to make any mistakes. So they tell everyone when they're leaving and etc.
- Loves to double vote and double FoS people I see. That's fine and all, but when I get there I'm getting there. He even talks to the MOD some more, makes you seem involving right?
This by you is a scumtell? Flimsy one, since it boils down to "talkative dude is talkative", but whatever.
- Now this is his first response to me. In it he asks for evidence against most vote (of course), talks about us guys being no fun when he's probably being the most involved person here, and then he's a hypocrite by saying "I'm just town, don't lynch me." When I've seen you do the same thing before.
Of course you've seen it before. I even call it the "ToonyMan Defence". Here's where you've seen it:
I am town, hanging me wouldn't help at this rate.
... to say nothing of Pandar's "I am not". I don't see why you think it's hypocritical. But you are right: in that post I did ask you for evidence for your vote, something which
you have not yet provided, at least in your original terms. But more on this later.
I have a hunch that Toony is scum, but without his talking at all yet, how am I to validate it?
What can such a hunch be based off of? From whence is it originated?
From my gastric region, between my pylorus and duodenum. As hunches often do, it has no behavioural basis yet; it's just a hunch, a non-specific feeling that a proposition approximates reality without evidence to support it. Once conversation gets flowing, it'll be tested and supported or discarded based on evidence. But I mean, look at 'im; he must be scum. He even smells like scum.
...more coming up.
You have a ton of confidence in me being scum based on the area between your plyorus and duodenum. You even expect more to be more scum by the "...more coming up" which either means you know I'll be doing something scummy in the future (hah) or you're doing an anti-town move, otherwise known as tunneling just to get someone lynched, you've been thinking I was scum beforehand, no?
This is an interesting one. The "...more coming up" referred to my reply to Janus, which was long in the reading and typing, and didn't want him to think I was ignoring him; it had nothing to do with you.
But on the other, yes, I did have a hunch from the start that you were scum, based on nothing but a gut feel; I did expect you to act scummy subsequently, as that's what scum does, but I wasn't sure until you actually did. You'll notice that in that same paragraph it says "
it'll be tested and supported or discarded based on evidence." If you hadn't acted scummily, it would have remained a hunch and eventually discarded when better targets appeared... but you came in and promptly stepped knee-deep in the shit, turning an initially baseless hunch into an actual vote based on evidence.
Tunneling, however, it is not. Tunneling is to focus on one person to the exclusion of all others. If you notice, I carried out my conversations and even scumhunting ater only posting a single one addressed only at you. I'm not tunneling, I'm just not letting you go on your flimsy excuses. Since you know full well what "Tunneling" means, being the experienced player that you are, you must know this is not tunneling, so you are intentionally stating an untruth to colour other's perceptions. Interesting.
Starting here, again (counting other games) we see Zathras doing something moments ago which he considered anti-town and should be lynched for it.
[...]You responded the same way hypocrite.
This is the Pandar/I exchange. I asked him to be useful. He responded with "Are you scum"; "No, you?", "I am not", "Glad that's cleared". Meh. I was humouring Pandar, and trying to get him to talk. I don't see it as anti-town; please back that up and tell me where I said that. It's not particularly useful, but I see it as Pandar's equivalent to my puppy silliness, and I (unlike you humourless goons) am happy to play along. But we got right to business after that.
Putting sentences in bold doesn't do much, I know you think I'm scum. I wasn't here/there at the time to post anything. By constantly posting the same garbage again you are just trying to get repetition on your side, which yes, is an anti-town move that makes people start believing your bullcrap.
I posted it in isolation and addressed to you so I would be sure you wouldn't miss it. The first time was in the middle of a long quote-heavy conversation with Janus, so you may have glossed over it without noticing it. It's not "constantly posting the same", it's calling your attention to it. Once.
So that's it for your post.
If I don't respond to something you've said and I've posted after it you can kindly tell me something I've unwillingly missed.
Certainly:
- You said "You find every person in this game scummy". You have failed to provide evidence for this. It is a lie, and your long post didn't either retract it or substantiate it. You are a liar. Or did I miss it?
Other than that, what is your rationale for voting me? I'll try and summarise your points against me so far, let me know if I missed any:
- I am talkative, started the game eagerly, and indulged in silliness. These I grant.
- I am hypocritical because I use your (and Pandar's) own words right back at you (or him). Bullshit.
- I had a hunch on you. I did, but didn't vote you until you did something scummy.
- You say I'm tunneling on you, which I'm not and you know it. Patently untrue.
- I insist you substantiate your arguments. This is called scumhunting, dude.
Is that it? Did I miss something? Do you think it's enough for a vote?
As for me, my vote stays on you, for patently lying twice, and mounting a disingenuous, dishonest, scummy defence.
ToonyMan, you sir, are scum.
...more coming up (not about you, but my take on the Pandar/Archie exchange and pending answers thereof).
Poll
4 (57.1%)
Author
Topic: Vengeful Mafia 3 - Over, Mafia wins. (Read 26258 times)