Newbie 1060: It's a Murder Mystery (Game Over)

[Voidedmafia]

Uh, and quite a few of the previous games I've played have a NO ROLECLAIMING rule...

Spoiler:

Why would that be?! Whether it's in the game, when you're lynched, or once your side wins, your role will be displayed, so why put such a rule?

[Sarg338]

You really didn't know much of this game and it's rules at all when signing up, did you?

Plus, blaming everything on "i didn't knows the rulez!!" is nothing but your own fault for not reading anything on this site.

Also, playing the "I dont know what to say i give up" is a bad idea.

[snowjorden]

No ..the fact that when I say something, it does nothing but hinder me. And when I say nothing it does nothing but hinder me. So what should I do ..say something and have it used against me, or say nothing and give you nothing to use against me? I'll go with the latter.

[Voidedmafia]

No ..the fact that when I say something, it does nothing but hinder me. And when I say nothing it does nothing but hinder me. So what should I do ..say something and have it used against me, or say nothing and give you nothing to use against me? I'll go with the latter.

Spoiler:

I should also point out that one of the main things with this game is that we're supposed to effectively pick apart each other's posts to find meanings in them that can help us determine if they're scum or town.

Personally, you've got a decided noob-tell and null-tell from me, because the way you're acting either screams scum desperate to get people off his case, town desperate for people to also get off his case, or completely bewildered noob who probably should've paid more attention.

[Sarg338]

No ..the fact that when I say something, it does nothing but hinder me. And when I say nothing it does nothing but hinder me. So what should I do ..say something and have it used against me, or say nothing and give you nothing to use against me? I'll go with the latter.

Or you can, you know, actually build a defense to prove to everyone your not scum?

...Nah, you're right, that's a crazy idea.

[snowjorden]

Build a defense? Okay ..I'm a townie. As seen in this role;

Welcome to Newbie 1060, XXX!

You are a townie.

Town Abilities: As a citizen of the town, you have the right to vote.
Win Condition: You win when all threats to the town have been eliminated.
Confirmation: Please respond to this PM stating your role.

---

My proof? Well since it's against the rules to quote my original role pm from the moderator ..my proof is that no one else has claimed this role. So that's how I can prove that I have the role.

---

SERIOUSLY, what the fuck? You guys act like we have this massive stack of evidence in this file folder that I can just pull out and start scanning the documents and let you all read them. This is the FIRST fucking day. There is no building a defense. Seriously, you guys are clueless.

[mb53]

Or you can, you know, actually build a defense to prove to everyone your not scum?

...Nah, you're right, that's a crazy idea.

Or you can, you know, build an actual case against him, prove to everyone why he

is

scum?

....Nah, lets just pressure him into roleclaiming by yelling at him to build a defense when it is impossible to instead.

[Voidedmafia]

Build a defense? Okay ..I'm a townie. As seen in this role;

Welcome to Newbie 1060, XXX!

You are a townie.

Town Abilities: As a citizen of the town, you have the right to vote.
Win Condition: You win when all threats to the town have been eliminated.
Confirmation: Please respond to this PM stating your role.

Spoiler:

It's a start, since saying such a thing might cast doubt as to whether or not lynching you is a good idea. However, you could just as likely be a scum fake-claiming than to be actual town, so it is a possible case of WIFOM.

My proof? Well since it's against the rules to quote my original role pm from the moderator ..my proof is that no one else has claimed this role. So that's how I can prove that I have the role.

Spoiler:

So you're saying that becasue no one has claimed VANILLA TOWNIE, you have that role?

Spoiler:

Spoiler:

Quite frankly, this is the most laughable part of your post here.

I kindly direct you to read the four kinds of setup we could have in a newbie game, as I see you still apparantly have not bothered to read the rules, or even skim those first three posts.

SERIOUSLY, what the fuck? You guys act like we have this massive stack of evidence in this file folder that I can just pull out and start scanning the documents and let you all read them. This is the FIRST fucking day. There is no building a defense. Seriously, you guys are clueless.

Spoiler:

Spoiler:

Surely not as clueless as you.

You see, even on the first day, we've had at least five pages worth of information to debate upon and defend with, and debated and defended it has, and this seems to be something you've missed. Your previous games of 48 hours a day are seriously clouding your judgment. I highly suggest you take a break and seriously read over the first three posts before you post anymore, before you embarrass yourself any further.

mb:

Spoiler:

I think you miss my reasonings for my pressure.

see, his seeming obliviousness struck a chord within me, sounding off alarms in my head. This also prompted me to vote for him. Even if he has only played games where the days are 48 hours long, he certainly should've seen and been able to identify posts or comments that are fluffy and provide little to no information on the game. Not to mention that his defeatist attitude is not something we need now, for if he does survive to near the endgame or lylo, then this attitude could very well do the town in.

Spoiler:

If I pressure him to defend himself against this and either explain his attitude or whatever else, and he defends well enough to stop my alarms, I can drop my vote off him, though that shouldn't mean he should still squander and do nothing. However, if my pressure does nothing, as it seems to be doing right now, or sets him up to be more defensive (vibes which I'm also getting from his posts as well), then that probably means he's got something to hide, and continues to look suspicious.

Besides, despite how it might help him, I do not necessarily believe the role-claiming was a good idea, especially in light of what he's said surrounding said roleclaim.

Spoiler tag corrected. (Equinox)

[Equinox]

Vote Count 1.06

snowjorden (3) - GreyICE, Mhi200, Voidedmafia
mammut (2) - snowjorden, Primate
Primate (1) - mammut
Sarg338 (1) - mb53
Zensei (1) - Sarg338

Not Voting (1) - Zensei

With 9 alive, it's 5 to lynch.

The deadline is Friday, March 4, 2011 at 11:59 PM EST (UTC-5).

Mod Notes

Zensei is V/LA until February 18

[snowjorden]

Or you can, you know, actually build a defense to prove to everyone your not scum?

...Nah, you're right, that's a crazy idea.

Or you can, you know, build an actual case against him, prove to everyone why he

is

scum?

....Nah, lets just pressure him into roleclaiming by yelling at him to build a defense when it is impossible to instead.

At least someone realizes that it's impossible to build a real defense.

Build a defense? Okay ..I'm a townie. As seen in this role;

Welcome to Newbie 1060, XXX!

You are a townie.

Town Abilities: As a citizen of the town, you have the right to vote.
Win Condition: You win when all threats to the town have been eliminated.
Confirmation: Please respond to this PM stating your role.

Spoiler:

It's a start, since saying such a thing might cast doubt as to whether or not lynching you is a good idea. However, you could just as likely be a scum fake-claiming than to be actual town, so it is a possible case of WIFOM.

Or maybe I'm just picking one of the roles listed and posting it because you continue to ride my dick, like you want to be my girlfriend?

My proof? Well since it's against the rules to quote my original role pm from the moderator ..my proof is that no one else has claimed this role. So that's how I can prove that I have the role.

Spoiler:

So you're saying that becasue no one has claimed VANILLA TOWNIE, you have that role?

Spoiler:

Spoiler:

Quite frankly, this is the most laughable part of your post here.

It was meant to be laughable. It was meant to be a "fuck off" type of statement.

I kindly direct you to read the four kinds of setup we could have in a newbie game, as I see you still apparantly have not bothered to read the rules, or even skim those first three posts.[/b]

Actually I have read them. I read them initially when the game first started, but was so involved with running my own game on another site that I didn't commit them to memory. After it was brought up to me that the setup of the game was not 2-3, I went back and RE-READ everything once more. So no.. no need to go read them for a third time.

SERIOUSLY, what the fuck? You guys act like we have this massive stack of evidence in this file folder that I can just pull out and start scanning the documents and let you all read them. This is the FIRST fucking day. There is no building a defense. Seriously, you guys are clueless.

Spoiler:

Spoiler:

Surely not as clueless as you.

Everyone else, no not so much. You ..yea, I'm starting to think so.

You see, even on the first day, we've had at least five pages worth of information to debate upon and defend with, and debated and defended it has, and this seems to be something you've missed. Your previous games of 48 hours a day are seriously clouding your judgment. I highly suggest you take a break and seriously read over the first three posts before you post anymore, before you embarrass yourself any further.

We've had no information to debate upon. You guys pulled posts from other mafia games that people have played on this site and tried to use that for examples as to why people could or could not be town/scum in this game. Either way, those games have NOTHING to do with this game. That's fluff if I've ever seen it. Nothing is clouding my judgement, and I'm not embarrassed at all. I'm simply just having a good time getting my dick wet, glad you got a warm mouth.

mb:

I think you miss my reasonings for my pressure.

see, his seeming obliviousness struck a chord within me, sounding off alarms in my head. This also prompted me to vote for him. Even if he has only played games where the days are 48 hours long, he certainly should've seen and been able to identify posts or comments that are fluffy and provide little to no information on the game. Not to mention that his defeatist attitude is not something we need now, for if he does survive to near the endgame or lylo, then this attitude could very well do the town in.

Defeatist attitude? I don't think I've been defeated. I'm still in the game. I think there's just someone clinging onto my ball sack and hoping that every time I take a step they don't lose their grip. That, being you. If anything, the way you've latched onto me trying to *looks for that wikipedia page with mafia game abbreviations* (damn, can't find one) get me lynched seems like the biggest scum tell so far out of anyone.

Spoiler:

If I pressure him to defend himself against this and either explain his attitude or whatever else, and he defends well enough to stop my alarms, I can drop my vote off him, though that shouldn't mean he should still squander and do nothing. However, if my pressure does nothing, as it seems to be doing right now, or sets him up to be more defensive (vibes which I'm also getting from his posts as well), then that probably means he's got something to hide, and continues to look suspicious.

Besides, despite how it might help him, I do not necessarily believe the role-claiming was a good idea, especially in light of what he's said surrounding said roleclaim.

Defends well enough? Dude, you haven't made a single case against me. Nothing concrete or solid. You've simply used (in your own words) "fluff" to try and point a finger at me. Be more defensive, less defensive, no defense, Ron Artest type Defense.. it's whatever. Nothing is changing your attitude or opinion.

Unvote
Vote: Voidedmafia

- Not a revenge vote. Not a defensive vote. Not anything or anyway you will try to spin it. I'm voting for you because I think you're trying WAY to hard to get me lynched, like you've got something to hide yourself. That's it. That's all.

[snowjorden]

EBWOP: My last one got fucked up, and instead of previewing the post, I submitted it. So that LARGE block of quoted text is fixed here..

I kindly direct you to read the four kinds of setup we could have in a newbie game, as I see you still apparantly have not bothered to read the rules, or even skim those first three posts.

Actually I have read them. I read them initially when the game first started, but was so involved with running my own game on another site that I didn't commit them to memory. After it was brought up to me that the setup of the game was not 2-3, I went back and RE-READ everything once more. So no.. no need to go read them for a third time.

SERIOUSLY, what the fuck? You guys act like we have this massive stack of evidence in this file folder that I can just pull out and start scanning the documents and let you all read them. This is the FIRST fucking day. There is no building a defense. Seriously, you guys are clueless.

Spoiler:

Spoiler:

Surely not as clueless as you.

Everyone else, no not so much. You ..yea, I'm starting to think so.

You see, even on the first day, we've had at least five pages worth of information to debate upon and defend with, and debated and defended it has, and this seems to be something you've missed. Your previous games of 48 hours a day are seriously clouding your judgment. I highly suggest you take a break and seriously read over the first three posts before you post anymore, before you embarrass yourself any further.

We've had no information to debate upon. You guys pulled posts from other mafia games that people have played on this site and tried to use that for examples as to why people could or could not be town/scum in this game. Either way, those games have NOTHING to do with this game. That's fluff if I've ever seen it. Nothing is clouding my judgement, and I'm not embarrassed at all. I'm simply just having a good time getting my dick wet, glad you got a warm mouth.

mb:

I think you miss my reasonings for my pressure.

see, his seeming obliviousness struck a chord within me, sounding off alarms in my head. This also prompted me to vote for him. Even if he has only played games where the days are 48 hours long, he certainly should've seen and been able to identify posts or comments that are fluffy and provide little to no information on the game. Not to mention that his defeatist attitude is not something we need now, for if he does survive to near the endgame or lylo, then this attitude could very well do the town in.

Defeatist attitude? I don't think I've been defeated. I'm still in the game. I think there's just someone clinging onto my ball sack and hoping that every time I take a step they don't lose their grip. That, being you. If anything, the way you've latched onto me trying to *looks for that wikipedia page with mafia game abbreviations* (damn, can't find one) get me lynched seems like the biggest scum tell so far out of anyone.

Spoiler:

If I pressure him to defend himself against this and either explain his attitude or whatever else, and he defends well enough to stop my alarms, I can drop my vote off him, though that shouldn't mean he should still squander and do nothing. However, if my pressure does nothing, as it seems to be doing right now, or sets him up to be more defensive (vibes which I'm also getting from his posts as well), then that probably means he's got something to hide, and continues to look suspicious.

Besides, despite how it might help him, I do not necessarily believe the role-claiming was a good idea, especially in light of what he's said surrounding said roleclaim.

Defends well enough? Dude, you haven't made a single case against me. Nothing concrete or solid. You've simply used (in your own words) "fluff" to try and point a finger at me. Be more defensive, less defensive, no defense, Ron Artest type Defense.. it's whatever. Nothing is changing your attitude or opinion.

Unvote
Vote: Voidedmafia

- Not a revenge vote. Not a defensive vote. Not anything or anyway you will try to spin it. I'm voting for you because I think you're trying WAY to hard to get me lynched, like you've got something to hide yourself. That's it. That's all.[/quote]

[Voidedmafia]

Spoiler:

In any case, going over GreyICE's and mhi's ISOs, I can see that between the three of us GreyICE and I have the most solid cases, though it's a toss-up as to who between the two of us has the more solid case.

Perhaps you would like to further explain your vote, mhi?

Or you can, you know, actually build a defense to prove to everyone your not scum?

...Nah, you're right, that's a crazy idea.

Or you can, you know, build an actual case against him, prove to everyone why he

is

scum?

....Nah, lets just pressure him into roleclaiming by yelling at him to build a defense when it is impossible to instead.

At least someone realizes that it's impossible to build a real defense.

Spoiler:

Spoiler:

You've just proven yourself wrong with this very post, snowjorden.

Build a defense? Okay ..I'm a townie. As seen in this role;

Welcome to Newbie 1060, XXX!

You are a townie.

Town Abilities: As a citizen of the town, you have the right to vote.
Win Condition: You win when all threats to the town have been eliminated.
Confirmation: Please respond to this PM stating your role.

Spoiler:

It's a start, since saying such a thing might cast doubt as to whether or not lynching you is a good idea. However, you could just as likely be a scum fake-claiming than to be actual town, so it is a possible case of WIFOM.

Or maybe I'm just picking one of the roles listed and posting it because you continue to ride my dick, like you want to be my girlfriend?

Spoiler:

Must you resort to ad hominems in your posts? I'm sure you can do better than this.

And I was simply saying what that might be, nothing definite there.

My proof? Well since it's against the rules to quote my original role pm from the moderator ..my proof is that no one else has claimed this role. So that's how I can prove that I have the role.

Spoiler:

So you're saying that becasue no one has claimed VANILLA TOWNIE, you have that role?

Spoiler:

Spoiler:

Quite frankly, this is the most laughable part of your post here.

It was meant to be laughable. It was meant to be a "fuck off" type of statement.

Spoiler:

Well, sorry to say, but that didn't quite work out the way you wanted.

I kindly direct you to read the four kinds of setup we could have in a newbie game, as I see you still apparantly have not bothered to read the rules, or even skim those first three posts.[/b]

Actually I have read them. I read them initially when the game first started, but was so involved with running my own game on another site that I didn't commit them to memory. After it was brought up to me that the setup of the game was not 2-3, I went back and RE-READ everything once more. So no.. no need to go read them for a third time.

Spoiler:

You still sound very flustered as if you didn't actually read them, which doesn't seem to add much to your post. Regardless of whether or not this part of your post was supposed to be funny, your purpose here seems to be lost.

SERIOUSLY, what the fuck? You guys act like we have this massive stack of evidence in this file folder that I can just pull out and start scanning the documents and let you all read them. This is the FIRST fucking day. There is no building a defense. Seriously, you guys are clueless.

Spoiler:

Spoiler:

Surely not as clueless as you.

Everyone else, no not so much. You ..yea, I'm starting to think so.

Spoiler:

If you insist.

You see, even on the first day, we've had at least five pages worth of information to debate upon and defend with, and debated and defended it has, and this seems to be something you've missed. Your previous games of 48 hours a day are seriously clouding your judgment. I highly suggest you take a break and seriously read over the first three posts before you post anymore, before you embarrass yourself any further.

We've had no information to debate upon. You guys pulled posts from other mafia games that people have played on this site and tried to use that for examples as to why people could or could not be town/scum in this game. Either way, those games have NOTHING to do with this game. That's fluff if I've ever seen it. Nothing is clouding my judgement, and I'm not embarrassed at all. I'm simply just having a good time getting my dick wet, glad you got a warm mouth.

Spoiler:

Oh, nonsense! Meta is, I'll admit, a flimsy evidence to use, but as I've said before, it can help in finding connections in player's posts and spotting patterns that may continue whether they're town or scum, and it's certainly not fluff--if used properly, anyways..

And still with that ad hominem? You're certainly not helping your case if you keep doing that.

mb:

I think you miss my reasonings for my pressure.

see, his seeming obliviousness struck a chord within me, sounding off alarms in my head. This also prompted me to vote for him. Even if he has only played games where the days are 48 hours long, he certainly should've seen and been able to identify posts or comments that are fluffy and provide little to no information on the game. Not to mention that his defeatist attitude is not something we need now, for if he does survive to near the endgame or lylo, then this attitude could very well do the town in.

Defeatist attitude? I don't think I've been defeated. I'm still in the game. I think there's just someone clinging onto my ball sack and hoping that every time I take a step they don't lose their grip. That, being you. If anything, the way you've latched onto me trying to *looks for that wikipedia page with mafia game abbreviations* (damn, can't find one) get me lynched seems like the biggest scum tell so far out of anyone.

Spoiler:

If acting like you don't care and are basically saying "go a head an lynch me, it won't matter anyways except that it'll prove you all wrong" isn't a defeatist attitude, then I don't know what is.

Spoiler:

However, my "latching on" has certainly gotten you to post something worthy to this thread, so it wasn't useless after all.

Spoiler:

I'm not sure what kind of abbreviation you're loooking for, however.

Spoiler:

If I pressure him to defend himself against this and either explain his attitude or whatever else, and he defends well enough to stop my alarms, I can drop my vote off him, though that shouldn't mean he should still squander and do nothing. However, if my pressure does nothing, as it seems to be doing right now, or sets him up to be more defensive (vibes which I'm also getting from his posts as well), then that probably means he's got something to hide, and continues to look suspicious.

Besides, despite how it might help him, I do not necessarily believe the role-claiming was a good idea, especially in light of what he's said surrounding said roleclaim.

Defends well enough? Dude, you haven't made a single case against me. Nothing concrete or solid. You've simply used (in your own words) "fluff" to try and point a finger at me. Be more defensive, less defensive, no defense, Ron Artest type Defense.. it's whatever. Nothing is changing your attitude or opinion.

Unvote
Vote: Voidedmafia

- Not a revenge vote. Not a defensive vote. Not anything or anyway you will try to spin it. I'm voting for you because I think you're trying WAY to hard to get me lynched, like you've got something to hide yourself. That's it. That's all.[/quote]

Spoiler:

Ever since you've started to actively post in this thread, you've been acting like you're on the verge of losing. But, if you insist on me having a case, let me ISO you.

ISO #0: Confused by Sarg's actually straightfoward post, yet goes in another direction entirely to vote mammut. Certainly it would be better to start with the first person you see as suspicious, which would be him since it's the first nonmod post in the game?
ISO #1: Mixed with fluff and content. I'm a little confused why you put scum in all caps, though I must apologize for not asking sooner.
ISO #2-4: Fluff
ISO #5: The first sign of indifference/pseudo-defensiveness regarding GreyICE's vote that he's kept ever since he unvoted me.
ISO #6: attacks GreyICE's suspicions, and brushes it off as eccentricity and seems to slight me in the process. And then he gets mixed up with how many people there are in the game, which also gives off hints of defensiveness. He also begins to appear scummy here.
ISO #7: I suppose the all caps are to make them more obvious. Anyways, rehashes the rules here. This is where he gets the first bit of flak for not reading the intro posts by equinox. Also defends his "paranoia" by saying he wants to address it whether he's at l-4 or l-1, which may point town more than scum.
ISO #8: Says that Sarg isn't scum, but doesn't say that definitively. You could say he's trying to distance himself, or just fencesit, but I'm not sure. I myself lean towards Sarg being town, anti-town at the most.
He then says that he, Sarg, and Zen are all town in his book, but again, not definitively. And he also learns that there are 9 players instead of 5. Arguably where a FoS would've most likely been placed.
ISO #9: Agrees with mb's argument (I forgot for whom), and goes on to cement his statment that he, Sarge, and Zen are all town to him. He also says that he has no definitive read on GreyICE.
Then he gets defensive about that mixup about how many players there were, and brushes off the rest of ICE's post there, which doesn't improve your standing much.
His defence towards mhi seems to contradict what he says. To me, it looks as if he's saying, "No, I'm not being overly defensive while I am over-defensive because I'm not!"...or something like that.
Then he also accuses mb, who brushed off the mislynch suggestion back in ISO7, of being scum for doing that, and does a good job of defending his position on that, in my opinion. FoS arguably sustained.
ISO #10: Catches mhi in missing a part of his post that responded to another part of a post. While the post still gives off hints of defensiveness, it's not as bad as before. A FoS might be lifted at this point.
ISO #11: Again either misread the rules or ignored them completely. FoS back up.
ISO #12: The post that made me vote for him. This and ISO11 were just too laid-back for my liking
ISO #13: If the defeatist attitude and defensiveness wasn't apparant in previous posts, this is where it really breaks through. He basically constantly tries to say that voting him is a bad idea, and still tries to play the ignorance card.
ISO #14: Brushes off another of my posts like nothing. This kind of play isn't what you try to do when you're at l-2 or l-1. And also flat-out states he's had a defeatist attitude for awhile.
ISO #15: Tries to tell me to lighten up, but the opposite can be said of him, for he does need to get a more serious tone.
ISO #16: Again with the defeatist attitude. Now he's grasping for excuses not to post anything at all, which hurts him more than it helps.
ISO #17: responds to my comment about the roleclaiming, which seriously surprised me. The no roleclaiming, that is.
ISO #18: More defeatist, and seems to think a mouth closed is a mouth trusted, but a mouth open is a mouth better understood.
ISO #19: Probably serious on the claim, and then he breaks down. Scum meter is ticking.
ISO #20&21:21 is just EBWOP, so I'll include it and 20 together. His response to me and to mb's defense. I'm not going to jump and say "scumbuddies!" but I do disagree with mb.

All in all, his actions have proved to me to be defensive, defeatist, and rather scummy for the most part. Yes, I know I didn't insert much about how scummy the ISOs were, but in conclusion, I think you are scum, and my vote is staying where it is.

Spoiler tags corrected. (Equinox)

[Voidedmafia]

Spoiler:

And I would like to add that I have not used fluff, but rather I have pointed out that your posts have been very defensive or defeatist, or both, and that leads to you potentially being scum. And I've just pointed that out, too.

[snowjorden]

I'm seriously not going thru and addressing EVERY single point you just tried to make in post 161 because most of them are literally rubbish, but I will speak towards 162. IF (and that's a big IF) I have a defensive or defeatist attitude, it's only because nothing I've said thus far has stopped you from clinging to me. There comes a point when it becomes pointless to try and argue with someone. That point was reached pages ago when it comes to you and I. Nothing, and I mean, NOTHING I say ..has changed your mind. You are STUCK in this thinking that I'm acting as if I've already been defeated, or that I'm overly defensive. That's your thinking. Fair enough. I'm done trying to argue the point with you.

Moving on, anyone else got anything worth while to talk about or discuss?

[Voidedmafia]

I'm seriously not going thru and addressing EVERY single point you just tried to make in post 161 because most of them are literally rubbish,

Spoiler:

Come, now, must you completely disregard my argument? That doesn't help improve your station, unless it's painfully clear that you are in the right and I am in the wrong. Yet, I'm certain that is not the case.

However, I am not saying that I am right and you are wrong. I'm just saying you aren't right and I'm not wrong.

but I will speak towards 162. IF (and that's a big IF) I have a defensive or defeatist attitude, it's only because nothing I've said thus far has stopped you from clinging to me.

Lol... it's all good though guys. Keep em coming and see how much of a bad idea it is when all is said and done. I really got nothing else to say, and I'm sure this will be construed as me having an "attitude," but I'm almost at a loss as far as what to say here. Anything I've said, has done me no good. When in reality, I've said nothing out of the ordinary. I've NEVER played a Mafia game with a 3 week phase, they've only been 48 hours at the max, and excuse me for having other things going on in life and forgetting some of the things I read 6 pages ago.

Spoiler:

You think this isn't in any way shape or form evidence of a defeatist attitude? Keep in mind that was before my vote on you, and a couple posts before I began to pressure you, as well.

There comes a point when it becomes pointless to try and argue with someone. That point was reached pages ago when it comes to you and I. Nothing, and I mean, NOTHING I say ..has changed your mind. You are STUCK in this thinking that I'm acting as if I've already been defeated, or that I'm overly defensive. That's your thinking. Fair enough. I'm done trying to argue the point with you.

Spoiler:

Don't be rediculous.

Spoiler:

While many of the posts I've read do come off that way, I've noticed a remarkable decrease in defeatism in your posts, though your defensiveness hasn't really gone down. I suppose that's partially my fault, though.

However, you have at least tried to defend yourself, and I commend you for that. Your seeming ad hominems did not score many points with me, if any at all, but you have stepped out of the defeatist shadow, and that is worth something.

unvote

Spoiler:

I would still like you to try to respond to my reply without being insulting, however. Maybe it will sway the other two still on your wagon to get off.

Spoiler:

Of course, that may or may not happen, but you can still try.

[Sarg338]

Well, since Zensei is V/LA, I'll

Unvote

.

Snowjordan's vote on Voided looks INCREDIBLY scummy, and an OMGUS vote. No matter how many times you say it isn't, that doesn't make it true.

Doing a quick skim of his ISO, it all seems like fluff, rule confusion and "I'm not being defensive even though I'm yelling and cursing every post and not giving any defense whatsoever".

I'll look into it more in-depth tomorrow sometime.

[Voidedmafia]

Well, since Zensei is V/LA, I'll

Unvote

.

Snowjordan's vote on Voided looks INCREDIBLY scummy, and an OMGUS vote. No matter how many times you say it isn't, that doesn't make it true.

Doing a quick skim of his ISO, it all seems like fluff, rule confusion and "I'm not being defensive even though I'm yelling and cursing every post and not giving any defense whatsoever".

I'll look into it more in-depth tomorrow sometime.

Spoiler:

Even if his earlier posts are that way, his recent posts have been straying away from that mentality quite a bit. The only main thing that remains is the defensiveness.

[snowjorden]

^ quick note before i go have a smoke ..you TOLD me to be defensive. Lol..

[Mhi200]

Meh, Mhi is going to flake at somepoint

Sorry for asking so much later, but what did you mean by this?

Also, Voided's (relatively)sudden unvote seems suspicious.

[Primate]

I think both voided and snowjordan actually came out of that argument pretty well.

VOTE: Unvote: vote Mhi200

Also, snowjorden seems to be painting a target on anyone who is currently or will in the future attack him. A townie should be focused on finding Maf, dying on day one as a townie is not a very big loss to the town tbh (and is very liely to happen either way)
With there only being two Maf, on the other hand, they need to focus on staying alive, and maybe cause the occasional mislynch to accelerate the process of killing off the townies. While saying there is no need for defense, snowjorden seems to be very defensive, constantly claiming town.

I'd like to know who specifically you feel snowjordan was "painting a target on". Just the people, not why at the minute (feel free to say why as well if you want).

Also, Voided's (relatively)sudden unvote seems suspicious.

Why do you feel it suspicious?

[Mhi200]

Suspicious is the wrong word. Perhaps I should have left it at sudden. What I meant was that Voided has been onto snow for a while, and then without much change (imo) in snows argument (except for doing what voided

told

him would be less scummy [no defeatist attitude]) Voided just took the vote off.

I'm in a rush now, will be back in a few hours to find the post about the target.

[Voidedmafia]

^ quick note before i go have a smoke ..you TOLD me to be defensive. Lol..

Spoiler:

I know, but I do not know if I can say now if I expected the amount of defensiveness you showed me with our arguing.

Spoiler:

And smoking is bad for you! Stop that!

Suspicious is the wrong word. Perhaps I should have left it at sudden. What I meant was that Voided has been onto snow for a while, and then without much change (imo) in snows argument (except for doing what voided

told

him would be less scummy [no defeatist attitude]) Voided just took the vote off.

Spoiler:

Why is it sudden?

Spoiler:

I rode on him

because

of his defeatist attitude, and when it was obvious that he was not displaying that anymore, if at all, there was no reason to keep my vote on him.

I'm in a rush now, will be back in a few hours to find the post about the target.

Spoiler:

Actually, I would prefer if you'd explain why he would have painted a target on these people.

[Mhi200]

I rode on him

because

of his defeatist attitude, and when it was obvious that he was not displaying that anymore, if at all, there was no reason to keep my vote on him.

So you never thought he was scum? =/

As for suddeness, you were on him for pages, then in a single post seemed to change stance. I didn't even think it was worth a FoS, but just pointed it out in case someone else saw something I missed.

Seeing as Prim's only other mention of me was in agreement afaik,

FoS Primate

due to a

small

possibility of a chainsaw.

I'd like to know who specifically you feel snowjordan was "painting a target on". Just the people, not why at the minute (feel free to say why as well if you want).

Voided and anyone else who might attack him later on, imo. I assumed he was talking to everyone when he said 'guys'.

If you guys choose to try and move forward with this lynch ..well, that's a mistake and the town will lose..

On the other hand, your vote is remarkably inaccurate ..if your goal is to eliminate SCUM. Possible that you are in fact SCUM? ..maybe.

Lol... it's all good though guys. Keep em coming and see how much of a bad idea it is when all is said and done.

I'm sure I've forgotten to mention something, but meh.

[GreyICE]

I think both voided and snowjordan actually came out of that argument pretty well.

Ugh, please don't claim scumbuddy on day 1, this makes me sad

[Mhi200]

I think he's saying they're both clear, but it's up to interpretation.