It's no less effective than the average random vote questions. I'll believe you if and only if you flip town and IronyOwl flips scum.
Which also aren't very effective. Plus, the point is to be the best situation out of all of them. So, being on par isn't good enough. But, I suppose it isn't the worst. I was just exaggerating a little.
I'm telling him that I think it's useless and that he can do better. He hasn't so far.
The same could be said of you. Just because your way and his way aren't the same, doesn't mean that his way isn't any less important or informational. In fact, by him explaining the events, you can find particular biases in the information, as opposed to point-by-point replies, which make it more difficult to.
And I don't feel like I'm rushing the game. Thus if you feel that I am, you must either feel rushed or believe that someone else does. Haven't heard anything to the effect.
IronyOwl posted that he felt relieved to know that there is no time pressure. So, someone did indeed feel rushed. And it was the person you were voting. I think if you ask him, he could say he felt rushed because of you. I can't speak for him personally, but I think it's possible and likely.
People in general, you in particular, have this warped idea that pressure and votes are inexplicatbly tied together. Pressure is getting someone to talk. IronyOwl was talking. You're talking. Voting has little to do with it.
It is one of the biggest parts of the game and is a way to create pressure; however, it creates pressure only in the form of bandwagons or on newbies.
Then you are completely missing the point.
Perhaps, but I find that any interpretation is possible. If I don't, I'll hit myself for it.
As for why I targeted you, I'll admit it wasn't a very good reason. I targeted you because I don't like you. I would absolutely love for you to be the Godfather and lynched Day 1. Not that it would put a dent in your ego, but so it goes.
I think there's some sort of anti-webadict club somewhere. You should join it. Plus, this doesn't explain how you think I'm scum.
Third Case: I stay on you until I'm convinced that you're not scum.
Right. Well, here's the deal: You can stay on me all day (That's what she said), but you're never going to know I'm not scum, so you can either:
A) Believe me. Unfortunately, your sorry state is still scummy because you refuse to acknowledge any evidence I provide, provide any more evidence for me to refute, or counter-refute my said arguments.
or B) Not believe me.
The only problem here is if you're a Townie, you're wasting a vote that could otherwise be helping the Town.
Lynch me. I'd love to vengekill you.
If you did have a vengekill, then we'd lose. Congrats.
Unvote self
Further reading evidences that you refuse to make any sort of response to it being pointed out that you're attacking everyone who looks at you, like some sort of rabid squirrel.
Now, as nobody added to my vote on me, I will officially dub anyone who states I was lurking or activelurking in this period a hypocrite for not voting me for the supposed offense when I basically invited them to.
Here's a very good question though: Why did you vote yourself at all? Couldn't you have managed a "I'm lurking right now" post without voting yourself? *sigh*
I just don't know anymore.
Wait what? What does 'cow us into buddying you' even mean? Buddying is something scum do. No matter how amusing it would be, I can't make someone scum.
Not true. Buddying happens from both scum and town. It's the town that usually gets screwed because of it though.
First Case: if someone votes with you, you'll either continue this line further, have your partner hammer, or jump onto the person that voted with you. Since you have fallacious arguments, it'd be easy to attack anyone that followed you, and even if you made yourself an enemy, your ultimate goal would be to get a lynch in. This involves attacking very fast and seemingly hard against several people, in hopes of getting one of them lynched. You'll also hide behind RVS.
- If someone votes with me before I'm convinced that you're innocent, then I'll continue to vote you.
- No, I'm not joing to jump onto the person who voted me. Why would I?
- You're stuck on this idea of my rushing the game. I maintain that I wasn't trying to and didn't actually rush the game.
- My stance is and always has been that RVS is bull, so why would I hide behind it. The whole point of scum hunting is to get people to talk, which I'm doing.
I FoSed you, and you jumped on me. So, you did OMGUS, if only a little bit. And, you did hide behind RVS. You used a fallacy to vote someone. So, if you truly think RVS is bull, then why did you use it as an excuse to vote? Either you think it's not bull or you weren't thinking IronyOwl was Town.
Second Case: if someone doesn't vote the person you're voting for, you'll jump off, claiming to have had some epiphany about their alignment after your attack. You can hide behind this because, of course, it was RVS, and "you didn't have anything better." This means if you do this fast enough, you can jump to someone who will eventually be scummy enough for you. Hence, the whole rushing aspect. So, your goal here is just to jump fast.
- If no one else votes you before I'm convinced you're innocent, I'll stay right where I am.
- If someone else becomes so scummy that I can't ignore them, then maybe I'll hammer. With the players in this game, I doubt that'll be an issue.
- If my goal were to jump fast, why have I only changed my vote once all game?
That last statement is pointless. It'd be scummier to keep jumping now that I've pointed it out. The other ones don't refute the evidence I provide
again!
Janus, are you some sort of gaping black hole for evidence? My God, man. You NEVER REFUTE THE EVIDENCE! You walk past it, sarcasm it, point out a similarity or two, or deflect. You just DON'T REFUTE EVIDENCE! It's like talking to a wall.
Author
Topic: Vengeful Mafia 4 - Game Over - Town Wins (Read 40665 times)