Mafia 119: MURDER AT HOTEL DEATH(GAME OVER)

[SnakePlissken]

V/LA Until Sunday PM as I am away for my Wedding Anniversary.

[LimMePls]

I thought I already answered your question at least twice CKD, try reading the game. I'm going throught the mass of vollk's posts right now so, I can't respond more then that.

This is absolutely hysterical. Yesterday CKD answered your question multiple times yet you hounded him demanding that he answer it again. Today CKD asks you a question and this is your response. The height of hypocrisy.

[CooLDoG]

@lmp, actually he didn't. Just for the record.

[curiouskarmadog]

and you let that go...why?

[LimMePls]

@lmp, actually he didn't. Just for the record.

???

[LimMePls]

If you think he is scum, why wouldn't you want it to end in a lynch?

Exactly! I did wantt it to end in a lynch, but the wagon stoped, and if you looked back nothing would have kept it moving, thus I saw horror who still looks slightly scummy. So I hoped on his wagon. That in turn got no place, and thus I settled for Nero as a day-1 lynch

.

This statement is contradictory to what you said. You said you wanted the wagon to go far, but not necessarily to a lynch. But you say that you felt he was scum. If you felt he was scum, why would you not want his wagon to go to lynch. You didn't answer this question at all.

Why do you want to know what Jack's concern is with post restrictions?

Because he's role fishing? I wanted an answer to that.

So you felt rolefishing Jack was an apporpriate response to Jack's rolefishing? Explain.

There are multiple situations where you feel the need to attack others for their votes. Calling all of those situations "lack of reasons" is ridiculous. Suppose this situation:

Person A: I think you should buy these widgets. They are really great widgets.
Person B: I'll take two of those widgets there.
Person A: Why are you buying those widgets!? You never said you liked those widgets!
Person B: Uh...

When you make a good case on someone, and others agree and vote with you, why do they have to type out a "case". You've already made the case. The whole purpose of a case is to persuade others that you are right. If you then question everyone who agrees with your case just because they didn't come up with it themselves, you look paranoid/scummy. And what if they'd just typed out a bunch of sentences that was just parroting what you'd already said. Wouldn't that be scummy? Isn't it understood when they place their vote without an explanation that they are being convinced by others to do so? Can't we infer from the above situation, that B is buying the widgets because he agrees with A that they are good widgets? Why does B have to say "Well, you are right. These widgets are awesome, for the following reasons... so I will buy some." That is ridiculous. People don't talk/act this way.

Lastly, I don't like the tone of your response at all. Why do you feel the need to write a sentence that responds to every one of my sentences? If you've already answered one of my points then why do you feel the need to say:

Is there a town reason to say it?

Yes, I think I have answered that above.

If so, then why is it scummy?

Ok, I have answered this many times above...

I don't understand why you would push so hard for someones lynch and then start questioning people when they agree with you and start voting.

read above

You called Looker scum. Why do you then question zwet's scum read of Looker?

really the same as above.

You spent pretty much all of D1 calling esp scum, but then at the last minute you help derail that wagon and go after Nero.

complete repeat question. I will answer it again.

Explain please. This makes no sense.

done, done, and done

that pretty much combined with the other things I have said answers this

Why do you repeat yourself over and over and over, and then try to sound annoyed that you have to do it? You could have just answered my whole paragraphs with a couple of sentences of your own. Instead you answer each of my sentences on its own, which of course leads you to repeat some of my points, and then sound annoyed that you have to repeat yourself. It looks like you are trying to pad your response to make yourself look better.

The questions in here still haven't been answered.

[DemonHybrid]

I was moderately disappointed returning to my living quarters to find Cooldog still amongst the living.

[PranaDevil]

I was moderately disappointed returning to my living quarters to find Cooldog still amongst the living.

You actively want a quick lynch of someone? Why?

[Jack]

I was moderately disappointed returning to my living quarters to find Cooldog still amongst the living.

You actively want a quick lynch of someone? Why?

[zwetschenwasser]

I was moderately disappointed returning to my living quarters to find Cooldog still amongst the living.

and yet you don't add new evidence to the case?

[Jack]

I was moderately disappointed returning to my living quarters to find Cooldog still amongst the living.

and yet you don't add new evidence to the case?

[horrordude0215]

CoolDog is scum. Lynch please.

Mod: Prod Looker?

He's still alive but hasn't posted since the 10th...

[vollkan]

Because I as a townie don't wish to be lynched. Simple as that read my sig. But, if you think about it you guys are wasting a perfictly good lynch on me which you could be useing on some one else who is scum. I don't want to make myself seem scummy if I'm town...

Ugh..more AtE

@volk #9 and 11, I was saying that Jack in himself was not playing overtly scummy, he was just playing anti town, but ESP came along and buddyed with Jack. This made the possibilty for Jack to be a scum buddy. And if you guys haven't noted, he is lurking now. Also to note Jack and esp did have a long back and forth, and Jack did buddy with esp.

You've ignored the main point of my post. You went from a vote of Jack, to saying his play was consistent with his meta and unvoting, then you again accuse him of being scum based on interactions with Espy.

It makes no sense to suspect somebody based on an as-yet unproven scumlink. And, as I said, there was NO buddying from Jack to Espy. In other words, you were suspecting Jack based on Espy's actions, which is just ridiculous because it entirely ignores the more likely prospect of Espy-scum buddying to Jack-town.

So don't say it "made the possibility" of Jack being scum. There is ALWAYS that possibility. The point is that you expressed clear suspicion of Jack for pretty dodgy reasons.

And now, as if to muddy the water, you wave your hands and point to Jack's current lurking (not a scumtell) and his back-and-forth with Espy (which has NOTHING to do with the point I made against you initially)

@26, tu quoque does exist. Sorry Vollk.

I never said it doesn't exist.

And that wasn't the reason I gave you a point there anyway.

In the end vollks case consits of mostly rants about Jack not being scummy, and I attacking esp/jack for no reason. For your information ESP fliped scum, So I was right about that one. What happens if Jack flips scum too? Will that make me town vollk?

That question is facetious.

The point is that at the time you made those attacks against Jack you had no reasonable basis for accusing him of scumlinks. It's incredibly 'convenient' that you are now implying that Espy's flip legitimises your position on Jack.

[Looker]

CoolDog is scum. Lynch please.

Mod: Prod Looker?

He's still alive but hasn't posted since the 10th...

Back up.

Votecount?

[DemonHybrid]

In response to Prana: Because all he's doing is flailing.

In response to zwet: No.

Because all he's doing is flailing.

[CooLDoG]

@vollk read the game. There was Jack to esp buddy. Sorry!

@DH, why am I scum?
@HD, why am I scum?
@Jack, whay am I scum?
@Vez, Why am I scum?
@CKD, because you were an ass and didn't answer after multipul tries, WHY AM I SCUM?
@snake, why am I scum?

That sums my thoguhts up. I can git why a2 and vollk are voting for me, but the rest have just been happy to lynch a townie.

[curiouskarmadog]

@CKD, because you were an ass and didn't answer after multipul tries, WHY AM I SCUM?
.

since you had an issue with reading the 2-3 posts that I explain in detail why I claimed yesterday, I was going to answer in a different way that maybe you could remember....and you were so close too, you dont want to know the answer anymore? why?

I thought/think you could be scum, because the fact you asked the question...sometimes scum want to look like they are scum hunting by asking questions...this question falls into the catagory of "whats the point"? you looked scummier when you avoided my questions and started avoiding my post once I backed you into the corner.....then, instead of getting your answer, you hammered a townie out of no where....THAT is why you look scummy.

the only reason I am not voting you currently, is the speed at which your wagon took off today....I am a little wary of it, but have no problem hammering you today if needed.

[curiouskarmadog]

@ looker, who is scum, you were pretty hot to trot to lynch a neighbor yesterday....well one pair killed scum, and one part of another (mine to be exact) is dead and flipped town....sooooo, I am a little surprised you are not barking up my tree today...

some content would be great from you.

[LimMePls]

If you think he is scum, why wouldn't you want it to end in a lynch?

Exactly! I did wantt it to end in a lynch, but the wagon stoped, and if you looked back nothing would have kept it moving, thus I saw horror who still looks slightly scummy. So I hoped on his wagon. That in turn got no place, and thus I settled for Nero as a day-1 lynch

.

This statement is contradictory to what you said. You said you wanted the wagon to go far, but not necessarily to a lynch. But you say that you felt he was scum. If you felt he was scum, why would you not want his wagon to go to lynch. You didn't answer this question at all.

Why do you want to know what Jack's concern is with post restrictions?

Because he's role fishing? I wanted an answer to that.

So you felt rolefishing Jack was an apporpriate response to Jack's rolefishing? Explain.

There are multiple situations where you feel the need to attack others for their votes. Calling all of those situations "lack of reasons" is ridiculous. Suppose this situation:

Person A: I think you should buy these widgets. They are really great widgets.
Person B: I'll take two of those widgets there.
Person A: Why are you buying those widgets!? You never said you liked those widgets!
Person B: Uh...

When you make a good case on someone, and others agree and vote with you, why do they have to type out a "case". You've already made the case. The whole purpose of a case is to persuade others that you are right. If you then question everyone who agrees with your case just because they didn't come up with it themselves, you look paranoid/scummy. And what if they'd just typed out a bunch of sentences that was just parroting what you'd already said. Wouldn't that be scummy? Isn't it understood when they place their vote without an explanation that they are being convinced by others to do so? Can't we infer from the above situation, that B is buying the widgets because he agrees with A that they are good widgets? Why does B have to say "Well, you are right. These widgets are awesome, for the following reasons... so I will buy some." That is ridiculous. People don't talk/act this way.

Lastly, I don't like the tone of your response at all. Why do you feel the need to write a sentence that responds to every one of my sentences? If you've already answered one of my points then why do you feel the need to say:

Is there a town reason to say it?

Yes, I think I have answered that above.

If so, then why is it scummy?

Ok, I have answered this many times above...

I don't understand why you would push so hard for someones lynch and then start questioning people when they agree with you and start voting.

read above

You called Looker scum. Why do you then question zwet's scum read of Looker?

really the same as above.

You spent pretty much all of D1 calling esp scum, but then at the last minute you help derail that wagon and go after Nero.

complete repeat question. I will answer it again.

Explain please. This makes no sense.

done, done, and done

that pretty much combined with the other things I have said answers this

Why do you repeat yourself over and over and over, and then try to sound annoyed that you have to do it? You could have just answered my whole paragraphs with a couple of sentences of your own. Instead you answer each of my sentences on its own, which of course leads you to repeat some of my points, and then sound annoyed that you have to repeat yourself. It looks like you are trying to pad your response to make yourself look better.

The questions in here still haven't been answered.

The questions alluded to here that went unanswered are still unanswered.

[Looker]

@ looker, who is scum, you were pretty hot to trot to lynch a neighbor yesterday....well one pair killed scum, and one part of another (mine to be exact) is dead and flipped town....sooooo, I am a little surprised you are not barking up my tree today...

some content would be great from you.

Votecount

[curiouskarmadog]

@ looker, who is scum, you were pretty hot to trot to lynch a neighbor yesterday....well one pair killed scum, and one part of another (mine to be exact) is dead and flipped town....sooooo, I am a little surprised you are not barking up my tree today...

some content would be great from you.

Votecount

that is not content...that is you asking for a vote count....and that post has nothing to do with what you were doing yesterday...so please comment.

[Looker]

STFU

Votecount

[PranaDevil]

Yeah... my previous feeling of Looker being town has been royally pissed away thanks to this amazing run of anti-town behaviour.

Seriously, since when did you need a vote count to actually provide some god damn content? The vote count's not about to change what people have said up until now is it? And if you really need to see what the vote count is before you can make an assessment... well the day's not all that old, go and do a damned count yourself.

[Looker]

Don't care; don't give a fuck; not in a hurry. We banked 3 extra days plus the standard deadline so whatev.

[PranaDevil]

And so wasting them helps us how?