so let's see hereHiraki wrote:Vote: Erratus
His vote on Bill is crappola.
Whatever. Sounds like to me your trying to hide that your scum by trying to keep the focus on me.Barry Allen wrote:Hold on there, penpen - don't try to buddy up to me here. I still think you are either VI or scum.penpen wrote:Well alright how about bvoigt, he seems to be doing the whole active lurking thing too. And I think his case on me and Barry are complete bullshit.
btw Sub - THIS is pandering on penpen's part...trying to bring me into his argument like I'm going to back him up now...
You could have voted in your first D2 post, you know, before your V/LA.Barry Allen wrote:As for why I wasn't earlier with my vote...maybe it had to do the fact that I was V/LA.
Re-reading that exchange, you're right, I was asking about votes at the time, but I still think it's scummy that you wouldn't even clearly FoS the people you had just finished implicitly accusing. I'd like to hear your current read on Rob and penpen. Do you still think those votes against you were a counter-wagon?Barry Allen wrote:Let's get this straight. You did not ask me to "stand behind my accusation" - your REAL challenge to me was why I didn't change my vote to one of the folks who started the BW on me. I didn't and don't think OMGUS votes help the town...it just turns into "No YOU are scum" and "No YOU are scummier".
Newbie guides have nothing to do with my counter-wagon read. This defense is lame as hell. You're the one that thinks OMGUS is a scum-tell, not me. I think your refusal to engage your accusers out of fear of OMGUS is scummy.Barry Allen wrote:If you have a problem with that, fair enough - but I am not going to OMGUS just for you and your outdated guide list for scumhunting.
1. I did give an example of your pandering:Barry wrote:1. Not true - I've seen penpen try it, and others try it, but you have not given a single example of me "pandering". You may not like my votes, but this is simply not true.
2. I did not OMGUS defense, instead I defended NOT using an OMGUS vote - please keep that straight.
3. This is out and out false - I have stated my case on each and every person for whom I have voted, usually in the same post as my vote.
4. This is a modified JEEP's guide argument again, and it is as outdated now as it was before. If I were hammering for no reason (like our VI/Scum penpen) or if I threw in votes for no stated reason, I would get your point...but again I have stated my reasons for every vote and don't agree with your analysis. But, simply stating what number vote I was doesn't make me town or scum. Again, I've not sheeped and I have stated my reasons prior to voting each time I have voted this round.
2. I say it was OMGUS because you accused your wagoners of being on a counter-wagon. You didn't vote for them, but you might as well have called them scum. If you want to say it wasn't OMGUS, because you didn't vote, fine. We can make up a new name for accusing your wagoners without voting.Barry wrote:This and Rob’s later post are awfully convenient. If we are looking for a counterwagon, I believe we’ve found it.If you wish to follow it, remember who took you there.
lulzRobCapone wrote:examine note for fingerprints
I'd say this is a pretty bad post. You're making a lot of assumptions here about two players of undetermined alignments. You're also trying to ask me what penpen was thinking. I'm not sure penpen knows what penpen is thinking.mozamis wrote:looking at the grey ice lynch again. Are we just missing the obvious? penpen said "happy now zito" when he dropped the hammer. Zito was very keen to lynch grey ice.
It seems too dumb, but if penpen is noob scum, could he have blundered, in other words saying to scum partner zito "happy now"?
Or pen pen sheep townie and zito scum?
What say you zito? You seem to be sailing thorugh this game with a "of course i'm town attitude, everyone knows i'm town!"
But you were one of the main instigstor of the lynch.
You're really twisting what happened there. I've asked you to review those events already; when you do you can come back and explain this too.mozamis wrote:also zito, why have been anti bill all game, but as soon as grey ice was on Lynch-2 you voted for him? and encouraged others to hammer quickly?
overly enthusiastic townie or scum?
Scumvote dingdingding.Hiraki wrote:Vote: Erratus
Subgenius? The one you have listed as town?penpen wrote:Papa Zito wrote: @penpen: You're supposed to be voting Bill.
If I vote bill yall will just accuse me of sheeping or bw.
Not to mention I will then yet again be called "Dangerous" by none other than the great Subgenius.
We can't have that.
I keep telling you EA is town. And that's a stupid vote.RobCapone wrote:Zito, while I agree about hiraki, please explain your reasons
Townies aren't worried about image.penpen wrote:If I vote bill yall will just accuse me of sheeping or bw.
I agree with the vote, he did that d1 with Bill and I called him out to make a case and he refused.Papa Zito wrote:It's okay if you don't agree.
But that vote is completely wasted. Nobody is pushing EA. There's no wagon there. Voting EA without pushing him or providing a case means he's just parking his vote and hoping.
In retrospect, no, I don't believe it was. I was very annoyed by the BW at the time, and the timing of the BW and the non-vote post that supported it looked suspect to me at the time. But, no, I no longer believe it was a counter-wagon. As for Rob, his posts have read more town...the only questions being that he is still alive after claiming tracker, and that while his claim to have tracked Ash may be true, it could also be convenient. Again, though, his posts otherwise seem to lean more town. As for penpen, I've already stated several times that he is either VI or Scum and I'm still trying to sort out which it is.subgenius wrote: I'd like to hear your current read on Rob and penpen. Do you still think those votes against you were a counter-wagon?
Now that you have to recognize that my V/LA makes your point less valid about why I voted "late" in the tally, you now want to redefine the terms of your complaint as state that I should have simply posted an immediate vote D2.subgenius wrote:You could have voted in your first D2 post, you know, before your V/LA.
This is another example of you redefining things...you call me out for not OMGUS'ing, I point out I've been consistent in my stand whether you like it or not, so you simply redefine things to imply a motivation for which you have no evidence...because you are making it up. To reiterate, I think OMGUS voting does not help the town, I thought it was bad enough that it was actually a part of my case on EA, and I still refuse to OMGUS vote. If you think that you should vote for me because I don't like OMGUS voting, that's your right...but don't try to twist this into something else while you're at it.subgenius wrote:Clearly, you didn't want to do it (OMGUS) because you thought it would look scummy, not because you feel it's unhelpful to town.
What part of my posts this round looks like I'm "refusing to engage my accusers"? There are a lot of things you can say about me, but "refusing to engage my accusers" doesn't seem to fit here....and once again you are trying to redefine things when you are failing to make a point.subgenius wrote: I think your refusal to engage your accusers out of fear of OMGUS is scummy.
THIS is your idea of "pandering"? Really? My simply stating that if someone BW'd me out of the round that you should remember who did it? Wait, I thought I was "afraid to engage my accusers", but HERE I'm "pandering" when telling the town to remember them when I flip town. You are not making a simple, straightforward case, but rather a series of unconnected and even contradictory arguments.subgenius wrote: 1. I did give an example of your pandering:Barry wrote:This and Rob’s later post are awfully convenient. If we are looking for a counterwagon, I believe we’ve found it.If you wish to follow it, remember who took you there.
I'm sure you CAN make up a new name - you've been redefining things all through your case.subgenius wrote:If you want to say it wasn't OMGUS, because you didn't vote, fine. We can make up a new name for accusing your wagoners without voting.
Once again redefining terms. Before you accused me of NOT making cases...now you have to admit I AM making cases, but you still want to call it the same thing you did before so now it's "making cases-style sheeping".subgenius wrote:3. It's easy to make a case and hop aboard. Just writing up a case doesn't mean you aren't sheeping.
I gotta admit Hiraki, this is quite a brilliant explanation for how voting Bill is crapola.Hiraki (iso 39) wrote:Vote: Bill
You want a case on Bill? Fine. I'm done with you, and you deserve it. Not for being a good boy though.
First, I go with his EA BW.
Second, post #148 was definitely not AtE.
Third, post #157.
You easily made this into something it didn't need to be. He's only explaining his stance, and apologize for what he's done. I've done that as town and scum. While I can't speak for Wikki, I don't see scum in this. Call this a difference in opinions, but I think he's trying to stretch the truth to get a lynch.Bill wrote:He basically groveled for the town's forgiveness after an L-1 vote that approximately two players even commented on. He invoked being a newer player and apologized profusely for "ruining" the game after a more experienced player asked him why he skipped the Newbie game queue. He's trying to be deferential and cover his bases all at the same time.
Hey, I can even use Bill Logic to find Billscum!
(b")bBill wrote:Attacking bad play may not exactly equate to finding scum, but the idea is that certain patterns of bad play are bad because they tend to reveal scum to be scum.
Anyway, fourth. This isn't really scummy, but it ticked me off.
But the problem is Wikki is new. So, um, wouldn't this not apply to the current situation at all, except that Wikki is new? I guess you could call this fruitless crap, but I don't care about it that much to be honest.Bill wrote:Another tendency of scum is to come to the early defense of players perceived as new, since they're more likely to make mistakes later in the game and make easy mislynch targets, so your defense here is also noted.
Fifth. Most of his opinions don't take a firm stance on the situation at hand. They just talk about it. ISO 8 is a good example of this. Especially at the end where he names Mocking his #2 scum read for being null. Not only does that look opportunistic, but it doesn't sit well with me.
I will admit his recent posts have gotten better, so I may take a better look at him, but he's my #1 scum read at this point.
P.E.
Good riddance.RobCapone wrote:so I will stay on Hiraki and you guys can do what you what, as i said if hiraki flips town you will never see me play another game on this site again.
and than Bill gets to L-2 and he avoids voting Bill and votes for somebody who votes BillI will admit his recent posts have gotten better, so I may take a better look at him, but he's my #1 scum read at this point.