Print

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

[Mormota]

I am extremely dissatisfied. I ask follow up questions, and they are immediately ignored by Powder Miner and Mormota. Neither of you use any links ever when summarizing your argument either, which is terrible. Do you two really expect us to reread the entire thread for posts supporting your case? Throw a couple of relevant links in there!

I was rather occupied so could only make a short post. If you mean this:

Are you saying you no longer find me suspicious? If so, why?

Because you are making clear arguments, presenting your case well and otherwise act exactly the way I myself would expect a townie to act. Were I the doctor, I'd be hard-pressed but probably protect you. Hard-pressed because I do not like ignoring my initial suspicions, but you are currently the only one of people beside me who are active and pressing people.

Quote from: Orangebottle on September 02, 2011, 10:33:16 pm
IronyOwl

Quote from: Mormota on September 03, 2011, 03:10:01 am
Powder Miner

These could easily be red.

I am willing to accept advice, even though I am getting tired of arguing against Powder Miner simply because (And I'm growing tired of saying this) he brings up arguments he does not back up with anything, and instead of responding to my questions, he brings up something shady and so poorly worded it makes my head hurt.

I hope that satisfies you Orangebottle, and I half-understand your FoS, but please could you elaborate on why you find me suspicious?

[Powder Miner]

Oh. I just clicked something on accident AND THE ENTIRE POST I WAS WORKING ON GOES AWAY! ARGH! Also, how exactly do you link to posts?

[Darvi]

Spoiler: Like this: (click to show/hide)

[Orangebottle]

I hope that satisfies you Orangebottle, and I half-understand your FoS, but please could you elaborate on why you find me suspicious?

Ah yes. It was partially the answer to my question, and partially the huge tunneling match with Powder Miner in day 2.

"Now Orange," you ask,"How was my answer suspicious at all?"

You see, you should always be suspicious of everyone who isn't completely confirmed as townie in some way. Since that is impossible in this setup, due to the possible presence of the godfather, you should still be (slightly) suspicious of me. The fact that you aren't implies that you might be 'in the know', as the Mafia is. Irony and Jim are free to correct me on this if I am horribly wrong(but I don't believe I am).

Oh. I just clicked something on accident AND THE ENTIRE POST I WAS WORKING ON GOES AWAY! ARGH! Also, how exactly do you link to posts?

Most browsers will restore the text if you hit the back button. This is no excuse to have not posted a response yet.

[Powder Miner]

I am extremely dissatisfied. I ask follow up questions, and they are immediately ignored by Powder Miner and Mormota. Neither of you use any links ever when summarizing your argument either, which is terrible. Do you two really expect us to reread the entire thread for posts supporting your case? Throw a couple of relevant links in there!

I'll start doing that. nayway, I never noticed your question. Now that you linked me to it, the answer is that no, I have been so caught up in fihgting Mormota that I have not really paid attention to anyone else. Time to fix that.

Powder Miner: I have a hard time trying to read any argument you make, and what I can read seems to be you using OMGUS to death, calling Mormota dumb, and saying they're ignoring you when they clearly aren't. I have to admit that I'd do the same in Mormota's case(if they were actually ignoring you), but because I don't enjoy reading terrible writing.

Sigh... this part is just a wreck... Anyway, I'm sorry about the unreadability of my arguments, that's being fixed. However, to your other points.

I have been using his OMGUS as an argument (Me "jumping on him" is not a valid reason- "jumping on him" is simply me quesitoning him to suddenly and aggressively for his liking. AKA me attacking him. He voted me for continuing to attack him, (including using his FoS which I was just calling an OMGUs to press him on), and then that is an OMGUS. Also, I never called him dumb... where the heck did you get that from? Yes, I did indeed say he was ignoring me (although I mainly said that he was ignoring parts of my posts). How, however, was he "clearly not" ignoring me? You need to back that up, or the point is moot. You do explain that I said he was ignoring him, and that I do not debate. However, trying to make him look innocent of tunneling (he's not, although i admit I am most likely guilty of it too, which is what that phrase is doing) needs backing up or it's just buddying. Not scumbuddying mind you, since obviously one is dead, but plain buddying.

And  I've also explained my other reasons multiple, multiple times. You can' forget that oh maybe I have more than one reason I'm suspicious of him?

In fact, you are guilty of ignoring me. Instead of answering my second question, you just acknowledge the post with a sentence responding to the text directly after it. You completely skip over the question. That is terrible. You'd have been better off not mentioning that post at all. 

I already explained I missed that question. Moving on.

Furthermore, your perception of OMGUS is entirely incorrect.

OMGUS - Oh My God U Suck, a vote on someone else simply because they voted or attacked you

The first reason it wasn't an OMGUS? It was originally an FoS, not a vote.
The second? Because Mormota actually had a reason to vote for you.

Powder. I want a response that I can read. At the very least, make a quote from each point of this post, and respond to each individually before moving on to the next. For example:

Well, this is just really mistaken. Really really mistaken, or just more blatant buddying. You need to notice how I didn't vote him for the FoS "OMGUS". You need to notice how I was pressing him with it. His reasoning for that FoS was that I was "jumping on him", aka questioning him too suddenly and aggressivley for his liking. That's fine and all, so I grabbed it and used it to press him more, talking about how it was an OMGUSs, (I do in fact take Fingers of Suspicion seriously), and then he voted me because apparently all my reasons were false. I had already explained they were not, and he had been ignoring that. (Ooh wow I accused him of ignoring me again Ohhhh). The only other thing I see in that voting post is some weird crap about how I'm apparently reminding myself to be aggressive.

An OMGUS is still an OMGUS even if you slap an excuse on it. I had explained how my reasons were not fake, and he ignored it and voted me anyway, for attacking him, despite what he said about me having false reasons. It was an excuse, based upon tunneling.

So for all these ridiculous statements and all this buddying, I'd have to vote YOU, Orangebottle.




Unvote Orangebottle. Look at that. I voted you and slapped an excuse on. Wouldn't you consider that still an OMGUS (at least if it was a real vote)? I would.

Next, reply to Mormota.

[Powder Miner]

I am willing to accept advice, even though I am getting tired of arguing against Powder Miner simply because (And I'm growing tired of saying this) he brings up arguments he does not back up with anything, and instead of responding to my questions, he brings up something shady and so poorly worded it makes my head hurt.

The "something shady and so poorly worded it makes your head hurt." WAS the answers to your questions. For you not to know that means you did not read it. Just because it is "shady and makes your head hurt" is no excuse not to read it, and it's further tunneling, when according to your buddy Orangebottle you were "clearly not" tunneling. Really. It's time to take thi from being a simple tunnelfight to something a lot better.

I WOULD find someone else suspicious, but Orangebottle already takes the spot. You and him, Mormota, are my list of suspects. He has pretty blatant buddying in that post (Why would he do that?, you might ask, because he did FoS you after all. Why? Well, because we're both inevitably going to get lynched due to this fight, most likely me first. He wants to look town if/when YOU get lynched for my townflip, or when you just get lynched.)

[Powder Miner]

Arg, broken quote tag. the first paragraph in there is him, the rest is me.

[Mormota]

I have been using his OMGUS as an argument (Me "jumping on him" is not a valid reason- "jumping on him" is simply me quesitoning him to suddenly and aggressively for his liking. AKA me attacking him. He voted me for continuing to attack him, (including using his FoS which I was just calling an OMGUs to press him on), and then that is an OMGUS. Also, I never called him dumb... where the heck did you get that from? Yes, I did indeed say he was ignoring me (although I mainly said that he was ignoring parts of my posts). How, however, was he "clearly not" ignoring me? You need to back that up, or the point is moot. You do explain that I said he was ignoring him, and that I do not debate. However, trying to make him look innocent of tunneling (he's not, although i admit I am most likely guilty of it too, which is what that phrase is doing) needs backing up or it's just buddying. Not scumbuddying mind you, since obviously one is dead, but plain buddying.

Big wall of text. Rather inconvenient to read. Anyways.

Here you claim my FoS to be an OMGUS. From what I managed to understand from the mess I quoted, however, you are stating that all this time, you didn't even take the OMGUS seriously, which was apperently your main reason up to this point? I don't even know what you are talking about.

Yes, you are saying I'm ignoring part of your posts. However, I asked you clearly to say which part of your posts I'm ignoring.

To this, you reply (your post between the last two linked posts), again pointing out how you disregard the fact you called it an OMGUS before the vote. You also fail to explain just what is it I am ignoring.

Here I brought up a number of points. You still claim it was an OMGUS with a false reason. Let me teach you a bit of English: A false reason is either not someone's true intention (Something which you obviously can't know, basing your arguments on it is thus rather silly) or a reason that is using false facts to come to a conclusion. Neither is true in our case. I had a reason, whether you find it justified or not.

You see, you should always be suspicious of everyone who isn't completely confirmed as townie in some way. Since that is impossible in this setup, due to the possible presence of the godfather, you should still be (slightly) suspicious of me. The fact that you aren't implies that you might be 'in the know', as the Mafia is. Irony and Jim are free to correct me on this if I am horribly wrong(but I don't believe I am).

There may be a little misunderstanding here. By suspicions, I always mean active suspicions. That is, if I find something actually suspicious about someone. I don't really think there'd be a need to point out how I'm suspicious of everyone else too.


You just posted, so let me handle this in one post.

The "something shady and so poorly worded it makes your head hurt." WAS the answers to your questions. For you not to know that means you did not read it. Just because it is "shady and makes your head hurt" is no excuse not to read it, and it's further tunneling, when according to your buddy Orangebottle you were "clearly not" tunneling. Really. It's time to take thi from being a simple tunnelfight to something a lot better.

My not knowing it is more likely because what you wrote does not make sense. You claim that I'm purposefully ignoring part of your posts, but when I ask you to tell me just what I'm ignoring, you don't point anything out.

I WOULD find someone else suspicious, but Orangebottle already takes the spot. You and him, Mormota, are my list of suspects. He has pretty blatant buddying in that post (Why would he do that?, you might ask, because he did FoS you after all. Why? Well, because we're both inevitably going to get lynched due to this fight, most likely me first. He wants to look town if/when YOU get lynched for my townflip, or when you just get lynched.)

And who would that someone else be? Empty words so far.

Also, your buddying theory has utterly no basis. As Jim said (In reply to me making that mistake, I might add): Do not try to give motives to people. You are trying to find something scummy in me, yet you completely failed to notice that? What are you paying attention to, if not what I and an IC said?

[Powder Miner]

I have been using his OMGUS as an argument (Me "jumping on him" is not a valid reason- "jumping on him" is simply me quesitoning him to suddenly and aggressively for his liking. AKA me attacking him. He voted me for continuing to attack him, (including using his FoS which I was just calling an OMGUs to press him on), and then that is an OMGUS. Also, I never called him dumb... where the heck did you get that from? Yes, I did indeed say he was ignoring me (although I mainly said that he was ignoring parts of my posts). How, however, was he "clearly not" ignoring me? You need to back that up, or the point is moot. You do explain that I said he was ignoring him, and that I do not debate. However, trying to make him look innocent of tunneling (he's not, although i admit I am most likely guilty of it too, which is what that phrase is doing) needs backing up or it's just buddying. Not scumbuddying mind you, since obviously one is dead, but plain buddying.

Big wall of text. Rather inconvenient to read. Anyways.

Here you claim my FoS to be an OMGUS. From what I managed to understand from the mess I quoted, however, you are stating that all this time, you didn't even take the OMGUS seriously, which was apperently your main reason up to this point? I don't even know what you are talking about.

Yes, you are saying I'm ignoring part of your posts. However, I asked you clearly to say which part of your posts I'm ignoring.

Oh wow you really misunderstood. I had called it an OMGUS because for one, I take FoSs seriously, and also to continue to press you, so you would crack. You did, voting me, and THAT is the OMGUS I have been using. I would think it would have been obvious by all the explaining I've done but oh well. You ignored my answer to your questions, the thing tht makes your head hurt, judging by the facy you state I never answered your question.

To this, you reply (your post between the last two linked posts), again pointing out how you disregard the fact you called it an OMGUS before the vote. You also fail to explain just what is it I am ignoring.

Huh? I explained exactly why I said that was an OMGUS, twice. If you didn't notice that, you've got to be tunneling.

Here I brought up a number of points. You still claim it was an OMGUS with a false reason. Let me teach you a bit of English: A false reason is either not someone's true intention (Something which you obviously can't know, basing your arguments on it is thus rather silly) or a reason that is using false facts to come to a conclusion. Neither is true in our case. I had a reason, whether you find it justified or not.

I answered that post earlier, disproving your claims that my reasons were false.. Anyway, the first one is exactly it. YOu are using it as an excuse for the vote, and I have already disproved it several times. In case you need a little reading comprehension workup.

You see, you should always be suspicious of everyone who isn't completely confirmed as townie in some way. Since that is impossible in this setup, due to the possible presence of the godfather, you should still be (slightly) suspicious of me. The fact that you aren't implies that you might be 'in the know', as the Mafia is. Irony and Jim are free to correct me on this if I am horribly wrong(but I don't believe I am).

There may be a little misunderstanding here. By suspicions, I always mean active suspicions. That is, if I find something actually suspicious about someone. I don't really think there'd be a need to point out how I'm suspicious of everyone else too.


You just posted, so let me handle this in one post.

The "something shady and so poorly worded it makes your head hurt." WAS the answers to your questions. For you not to know that means you did not read it. Just because it is "shady and makes your head hurt" is no excuse not to read it, and it's further tunneling, when according to your buddy Orangebottle you were "clearly not" tunneling. Really. It's time to take thi from being a simple tunnelfight to something a lot better.

My not knowing it is more likely because what you wrote does not make sense. You claim that I'm purposefully ignoring part of your posts, but when I ask you to tell me just what I'm ignoring, you don't point anything out.

In the case of that post, yes it was a textwall. Yet I've had to wade through your textwalls as well, and I have done it. And where did you ask me to tell you what parts of a post you were ignoring? In that case, it would be the part where I explain that I am not using false reasoning, and that therefore that was an excuse.

I WOULD find someone else suspicious, but Orangebottle already takes the spot. You and him, Mormota, are my list of suspects. He has pretty blatant buddying in that post (Why would he do that?, you might ask, because he did FoS you after all. Why? Well, because we're both inevitably going to get lynched due to this fight, most likely me first. He wants to look town if/when YOU get lynched for my townflip, or when you just get lynched.)

And who would that someone else be? Empty words so far.

Also, your buddying theory has utterly no basis. As Jim said (In reply to me making that mistake, I might add): Do not try to give motives to people. You are trying to find something scummy in me, yet you completely failed to notice that? What are you paying attention to, if not what I and an IC said?

That someone else is Orangebottle. Not-so-empty words.

It does have basis, as Orangebottle defends you, saying you clearly did not tunnel when the majority of opinions I have seen so far is that we were both tunneling each other, (as we were in a tunneling fight not just me tunneling you. The further reasoning is Orangebottle saing you never actually OMGUSed and that you had a reason to vote me, despite the fact that I discounted that multiple times. And of course I'm finding something scummy in you. What do you mean I "missed that" I didn't say you were buddying, like you seem to think I did. I said Orangebottle was buddying you. Really, what are you talking about? If I'm finding scum out, I need to point out scummy things they do.

     Admittedly I shouldn't have tried to give a reason for ORangebottle's buddying, but it is still buddying nonetheless.

[Reverie]

I'm back. Sorry, everyone.

Flandre: You voted for Mormota and then proceeded to do nothing for three days. Got a reason?

None that would excuse my absence, or my stale vote of Mormota. I simply saw something scummy in him, voted him, and disappeared to job-related business and the beginning of my vacation. It was more to pressure him than anything else, but I did a poor job of it. It ends here. Unvote Mormota.

IronyOwl: I have noticed that yours was the vote that delivered the lynch to scum Zombie Urist. Even if Jim pushed you to break the tie, it would have definitely benefited you to vote for Zombie to make you look like town. General parrotness would be a liability to you as his scum partner more than it would be to him, and is a weak excuse to vote for him on its own. You are a solid player that would need to either cover for him or get rid of the weak link yourself, and he is just a lurking novice that did not have a unique opinion.

Mormota, Powder Miner: The argument you two are having is absurd, and difficult to follow. I can only see that both of you are desperately trying to stay afloat. Your argument has a generally scummy feel to it, and I cannot where it originates between the two of you. Can I hear of what you two think of each other (and everyone else) outside of the OMGUS argument?

[Jim Groovester]

You see, you should always be suspicious of everyone who isn't completely confirmed as townie in some way. Since that is impossible in this setup, due to the possible presence of the godfather, you should still be (slightly) suspicious of me. The fact that you aren't implies that you might be 'in the know', as the Mafia is. Irony and Jim are free to correct me on this if I am horribly wrong(but I don't believe I am).

This is an unproductive attitude. You should only really suspect somebody if they give you reason to, and you shouldn't give everybody a small, default level of suspicion.

Just look at what people say in the game and make judgments from there.

Herp

Derp

Okay.

Okay.

What the fuck was so unclear about "Your arguments are invalid, go dig up new shit on somebody else," to understand?

Because I thought I was being pretty clear there. And what do I find when I come back? You two still arguing about the same goddamn shit.

There's not much that makes my blood boil in a Beginner's Mafia, but what does is when I get completely ignored and new players do the same shit I told them not to.

Quit your fucking argument. Go dig up new shit. On other people. I don't want to have to repeat myself again.

[Powder Miner]

Fine, fine... Well anyway might as well go for Orangebottle since I'm suspicious of him anyway...
Hmm... Orangebottle, can you explain why you said you were suspicious of both me and Mormota, but you went mainly for me and even defended Mormota with things that you haven't backed up when you're going for me, yet when it comes time to go for Mormota, you simply tell him that you should always be suspicious of everyone in Mafia. Why not FoS everyone them? It looks like buddying to me, and the FoS looks like an attempt to cover it up by me.

[Jim Groovester]

PRESENTATION

WHY AREN'T YOU WORKING ON IT

[Orangebottle]

I am extremely dissatisfied. I ask follow up questions, and they are immediately ignored by Powder Miner and Mormota. Neither of you use any links ever when summarizing your argument either, which is terrible. Do you two really expect us to reread the entire thread for posts supporting your case? Throw a couple of relevant links in there!

I'll start doing that. nayway, I never noticed your question. Now that you linked me to it, the answer is that no, I have been so caught up in fihgting Mormota that I have not really paid attention to anyone else. Time to fix that.

Here's another relevant question: how could you possibly miss the question when you responded to the sentence right after it?

I have been using his OMGUS as an argument (Me "jumping on him" is not a valid reason- "jumping on him" is simply me quesitoning him to suddenly and aggressively for his liking. AKA me attacking him. He voted me for continuing to attack him, (including using his FoS which I was just calling an OMGUs to press him on), and then that is an OMGUS. Also, I never called him dumb... where the heck did you get that from? Yes, I did indeed say he was ignoring me (although I mainly said that he was ignoring parts of my posts). How, however, was he "clearly not" ignoring me? You need to back that up, or the point is moot. You do explain that I said he was ignoring him, and that I do not debate. However, trying to make him look innocent of tunneling (he's not, although i admit I am most likely guilty of it too, which is what that phrase is doing) needs backing up or it's just buddying. Not scumbuddying mind you, since obviously one is dead, but plain buddying.

You claimed he was completely ignoring you. He wasn't. Furthermore, when did I ever try to make Mormota look innocent of tunneling? I called both of you out on it at the start of the day. I'm not trying to make Mormota look innocent. I'm trying to get the scummier of the two tunnelers lynched because he is obviously scum.

Well, this is just really mistaken. Really really mistaken, or just more blatant buddying. You need to notice how I didn't vote him for the FoS "OMGUS". You need to notice how I was pressing him with it. His reasoning for that FoS was that I was "jumping on him", aka questioning him too suddenly and aggressivley for his liking. That's fine and all, so I grabbed it and used it to press him more, talking about how it was an OMGUSs, (I do in fact take Fingers of Suspicion seriously), and then he voted me because apparently all my reasons were false. I had already explained they were not, and he had been ignoring that. (Ooh wow I accused him of ignoring me again Ohhhh). The only other thing I see in that voting post is some weird crap about how I'm apparently reminding myself to be aggressive.

So, you found a rather passive player, did something that they considered scummy(being really aggressive) and did it? To make yourself look scummy? How can I be sure you weren't just baiting them into voting you so you could scream "OMGUS!!!!", and add that to your argument against them?

An OMGUS is still an OMGUS even if you slap an excuse on it. I had explained how my reasons were not fake, and he ignored it and voted me anyway, for attacking him, despite what he said about me having false reasons. It was an excuse, based upon tunneling.

It isn't if you have an actual, valid reason to vote for the person voting for you, which you immediately dismissed as an excuse.

So for all these ridiculous statements and all this buddying, I'd have to vote YOU, Orangebottle.




Unvote Orangebottle. Look at that. I voted you and slapped an excuse on. Wouldn't you consider that still an OMGUS (at least if it was a real vote)? I would.

It has some logic behind it. Flawed logic, but nevertheless.

That vote/quick unvote was pretty scummy actually. Do you even care where your vote is? Were you just applying pressure to get me to back off?

Let's face it. The quick unvote shows that you're unsure of whether your argument is correct or not, and you're just trying to look active so that you don't get lynched. Not working, dude.

It does have basis, as Orangebottle defends you, saying you clearly did not tunnel when the majority of opinions I have seen so far is that we were both tunneling each other, (as we were in a tunneling fight not just me tunneling you. The further reasoning is Orangebottle saing you never actually OMGUSed and that you had a reason to vote me, despite the fact that I discounted that multiple times.

There are a few problems with your logic here:
1)I'm not actively defending Mormota. I'm actively attacking you.
2)I never said Mormota wasn't tunneling. In fact, I was the first to point out that you were both tunneling each other.You seem to be slinging the acronyms and words around with no idea about how they work or what they mean.

Tunneling is what happens when one player attacks another, and focuses solely on them, looking at nobody else at all.

Fine, fine... Well anyway might as well go for Orangebottle since I'm suspicious of him anyway...
Hmm... Orangebottle, can you explain why you said you were suspicious of both me and Mormota, but you went mainly for me and even defended Mormota with things that you haven't backed up when you're going for me, yet when it comes time to go for Mormota, you simply tell him that you should always be suspicious of everyone in Mafia. Why not FoS everyone them? It looks like buddying to me, and the FoS looks like an attempt to cover it up by me.

You know, if people could actually read your posts, you would've been jumped on like Mormota on day 2.
I went for you because:
1)You're scummier.
2)Your logic and arguments can range from somewhat understandable to completely ridiculous at times. Like your current reasoning about 'tunneling'.
3)The majority of your posts are largely incomprehensible.


Both of you. Mormota, Powder Miner. Listen to Jim's advice, goddamnit.
Now that that wall of bullshit is done:

Mormota, Powder Miner: The argument you two are having is absurd, and difficult to follow. I can only see that both of you are desperately trying to stay afloat. Your argument has a generally scummy feel to it, and I cannot where it originates between the two of you. Can I hear of what you two think of each other (and everyone else) outside of the OMGUS argument?

Hm. Now I have to ask myslef, "where have I seen this before?"

Mormota and Powder Miner:You two have been voting for eachother since you joined in the beginning of day 2. Do you have any other suspects? If so, list them and your reasons for being suspicious for them. If not, are you just going to keep tunneling eachother all day?

Oh right. Right there.

[Powder Miner]

I am extremely dissatisfied. I ask follow up questions, and they are immediately ignored by Powder Miner and Mormota. Neither of you use any links ever when summarizing your argument either, which is terrible. Do you two really expect us to reread the entire thread for posts supporting your case? Throw a couple of relevant links in there!

I'll start doing that. nayway, I never noticed your question. Now that you linked me to it, the answer is that no, I have been so caught up in fihgting Mormota that I have not really paid attention to anyone else. Time to fix that.

Here's another relevant question: how could you possibly miss the question when you responded to the sentence right after it?

By overlooking it. It's really not that hard with a tiny post like that.

I have been using his OMGUS as an argument (Me "jumping on him" is not a valid reason- "jumping on him" is simply me quesitoning him to suddenly and aggressively for his liking. AKA me attacking him. He voted me for continuing to attack him, (including using his FoS which I was just calling an OMGUs to press him on), and then that is an OMGUS. Also, I never called him dumb... where the heck did you get that from? Yes, I did indeed say he was ignoring me (although I mainly said that he was ignoring parts of my posts). How, however, was he "clearly not" ignoring me? You need to back that up, or the point is moot. You do explain that I said he was ignoring him, and that I do not debate. However, trying to make him look innocent of tunneling (he's not, although i admit I am most likely guilty of it too, which is what that phrase is doing) needs backing up or it's just buddying. Not scumbuddying mind you, since obviously one is dead, but plain buddying.

You claimed he was completely ignoring you. He wasn't. Furthermore, when did I ever try to make Mormota look innocent of tunneling? I called both of you out on it at the start of the day. I'm not trying to make Mormota look innocent. I'm trying to get the scummier of the two tunnelers lynched because he is obviously scum.

I mostly said he was tunneling parts of my posts that he didn't like, and some posts. I never said he was tunneling me 24/7. There's a difference.  I'm trying to formulate something to make or break my suspicions someone who is a fair bit scummy and seems to me to be cashing in on the whole tunnelfight. How about that?

Well, this is just really mistaken. Really really mistaken, or just more blatant buddying. You need to notice how I didn't vote him for the FoS "OMGUS". You need to notice how I was pressing him with it. His reasoning for that FoS was that I was "jumping on him", aka questioning him too suddenly and aggressivley for his liking. That's fine and all, so I grabbed it and used it to press him more, talking about how it was an OMGUSs, (I do in fact take Fingers of Suspicion seriously), and then he voted me because apparently all my reasons were false. I had already explained they were not, and he had been ignoring that. (Ooh wow I accused him of ignoring me again Ohhhh). The only other thing I see in that voting post is some weird crap about how I'm apparently reminding myself to be aggressive.

So, you found a rather passive player, did something that they considered scummy(being really aggressive) and did it? To make yourself look scummy? How can I be sure you weren't just baiting them into voting you so you could scream "OMGUS!!!!", and add that to your argument against them?

I found a rather passive player (I find that scummy), yes, and then I went in on him because I decided I should get into the action right then and there. No I did not do that to make myself look scummy. I'm sorry, Orangebottle, there are no Jester in this game, and frankly that point makes no sense. And to the next point in this paragraph, how can I be sure that you're not making ridiculous statements to get me to vote you so you can scream "OMGUS!!!!", and add that to your argument against me?!?!?! Why? Because it's ridiculous and WIFOMy. Didn't IronyOwl say something about not making ridiculous reasons to call someone scum? Because that's what I'm seeing.

Oh and by the way, that's the defending Mormota I'm talking about. Right there

An OMGUS is still an OMGUS even if you slap an excuse on it. I had explained how my reasons were not fake, and he ignored it and voted me anyway, for attacking him, despite what he said about me having false reasons. It was an excuse, based upon tunneling.

It isn't if you have an actual, valid reason to vote for the person voting for you, which you immediately dismissed as an excuse.

So for all these ridiculous statements and all this buddying, I'd have to vote YOU, Orangebottle.




Unvote Orangebottle. Look at that. I voted you and slapped an excuse on. Wouldn't you consider that still an OMGUS (at least if it was a real vote)? I would.

It has some logic behind it. Flawed logic, but nevertheless.

That vote/quick unvote was pretty scummy actually. Do you even care where your vote is? Were you just applying pressure to get me to back off?

Let's face it. The quick unvote shows that you're unsure of whether your argument is correct or not, and you're just trying to look active so that you don't get lynched. Not working, dude.

*facedesk* *facedesk* *facedesk* It's called making a point. I wasn't actually voting you. I was proving the point that an OMGUS vote is an OMGUS vote despite excuses. I see no way you could think I was actuaqlly trying to vote you, given I made a space in between the vote and the unvote in the same post, along with an explanation of the point I was making. Well, I find two explanations. One, you're stupid, or two, you're desperately scrabbling for all the reasons you can get to lynch me. And I highly doubt you're sutpid, so that leads to the second reason.

You're scrabbling for reasons, no matter how ridiculous they are, just to get me lynched. Let's face it, dude.
And here's a hint, going no holds barred without real reasoning to try to get someone lynched doesn't make you look like town. Let's face it dude.

It does have basis, as Orangebottle defends you, saying you clearly did not tunnel when the majority of opinions I have seen so far is that we were both tunneling each other, (as we were in a tunneling fight not just me tunneling you. The further reasoning is Orangebottle saing you never actually OMGUSed and that you had a reason to vote me, despite the fact that I discounted that multiple times.

There are a few problems with your logic here:
1)I'm not actively defending Mormota. I'm actively attacking you.
2)I never said Mormota wasn't tunneling. In fact, I was the first to point out that you were both tunneling each other.You seem to be slinging the acronyms and words around with no idea about how they work or what they mean.

Tunneling is what happens when one player attacks another, and focuses solely on them, looking at nobody else at all.

There's a word for attacking someone to defend another, and that is the chainsaw defense. At this point though, I think you only want me lynched so you can get us to LyLo.

Fine, fine... Well anyway might as well go for Orangebottle since I'm suspicious of him anyway...
Hmm... Orangebottle, can you explain why you said you were suspicious of both me and Mormota, but you went mainly for me and even defended Mormota with things that you haven't backed up when you're going for me, yet when it comes time to go for Mormota, you simply tell him that you should always be suspicious of everyone in Mafia. Why not FoS everyone them? It looks like buddying to me, and the FoS looks like an attempt to cover it up by me.

You know, if people could actually read your posts, you would've been jumped on like Mormota on day 2.
I went for you because:
1)You're scummier.
2)Your logic and arguments can range from somewhat understandable to completely ridiculous at times. Like your current reasoning about 'tunneling'.
3)The majority of your posts are largely incomprehensible.


Both of you. Mormota, Powder Miner. Listen to Jim's advice, goddamnit.

1) Just saying "you're scummier" Is not a reason. Try again.
2) I can, and I am, say the same thing about you. This would be one of the "completely ridiculous" moments. Also, Mormota was tunneling. Everyone but you acknowledge that
3) Boo-hoo, hoo I'm not good at making posts. that i absolutely no reason to vot someone, and it's simply more scummy scrabbling for reasons.