Mini 380: Artifacts- Game over

[HackerHuck]

Your force and craplogic is the suggestion that Coron might have inside information because:
-He defended Jules
-Your words "...you should never defend someone unless you are absolutely sure of their role."

According to this "logic", I must now have inside information about Coron and Stewie must have inside information about you, but you fail to mention that.

You have made an assumption that because someone gave you advice on how you should play, everyone else is playing that same way. In your words - "craplogic".

[Nai]

"Craplogic" is, by definition, "false logic". There is no false logic, to me, that defending someone implies you have information about them. Mafia is not a game of trusting others and making aliances. As I've seen since playing, you don't just trust someone to be down and get your back, and thus get their back as well. It's a perfect way of getting yourself lynched because you backed mafia.

And, Hacker, you don't seem to be 'defending' anyone. I don't think agreeing with someone is the same as defending them. DEFENDING is arguing against another person to help someone in a predicament. This is especially prevalent with how Coron was defending Jules' vote, with complete and utter lies, not only misquoting the guy but doing so in such a way that made it seem there was actually substance behind the vote. AGREEING with someone isn't defending anyone, or helping save anyone from a lynch, in most cases. Its just admitting someone has a point that makes sense. This is what you have been doing.

[Norinel]

Please keep bolded stuff that isn't a vote/unvote or other note to the mod to a minimum to make scanning the thread for votecounts less distracting. (Especially if it includes the word "vote")

Vote Count:

lunalovegood- 2 (HackerHuck, Zindaras)
Nai- 2 (Coron, Jules)
Jules- 2 (conflux, Stewie)
Coron- 1 (Nai)
conflux- 1 (Nightfall)

Not voting (2): GreenLiquid, perfect62834

6 to lynch

[HackerHuck]

I will make my FOS case abundantly clear for you. I think that you're so certain Coron is scum that you are finding "evidence" where none exists. Coron didn't get the quote exactly right, but the meaning was the same. The part of Coron's statement that isn't in quotes is just an opinion, so I don't see how that can be a damning twisting of the words. I also don't see how you can make the leap that Coron must have inside knowledge about Jules based on anything he said.

Someone gave you advice on how you should play telling you
"...you should never defend someone unless you are absolutely sure of their role."

You have taken this advice and turned it into this "craplogic":
If Person A defends person B, then person A must have inside information about person B. That doesn't make sense. All your "advice" was telling you is that defending someone else can put your neck out on the line if you end up being wrong.

I'm perfectly willing to admit to defending Coron on this point, but don't twist things around and say I agree with him when I've explicitly stated that I don't.

Coron's defence of Jules was just Coron stating his opinion that it seems to be reasonable behaviour to FOS and then Vote without any new information. I don't agree with that opinion, but it certainly doesn't appear that he's trying to indicate that he's got some kind of inside knowledge.

I still have doubts that Coron is town and that's why it's just an FOS, not a vote.

This bit about defending or agreement is just semantics as you yourself have shown...

AGREEING with someone isn't defending anyone, or helping save anyone from a lynch, in most cases. Its just admitting someone has a point that makes sense. This is what you have been doing.

Um, it's perfectly reasonable imho.

Coron, it REALLY looks like you are trying to defend Jules right now.

[Stewie]

It also looks more like Stewie is placing something in his rear-end, rather than pulling something out.

???

[Zindaras]

Personally, I'm still happy with where my vote is. Luna's been lurking, and what she has said was pretty scummy. I'll have to reread the entire thread for Nai/Jules info, though.

[Nightfall]

It also looks more like Stewie is placing something in his rear-end, rather than pulling something out.

???

Lol, I know, out of that whole post he made that is what stuck out the most to me.

[Nai]

Hacker, he didn't state it as an opinion. That's the problem I have with that statement about Jules' vote. He states it as if its Jules reasoning for the vote, NOT as his own opinion why Jules placed the vote. The fact he got it COMPLETELY wrong from how Jules had ALREADY explained it is very suspicious.

You might be right. My suspicion of Coron might be affecting how I see his game. Then again, he might be scum and I'm the only one seeing it.

And when I said you were agreeing with him, that was choosing the lesser of two evils between 'agreeing' and 'defending'. If you want to go down on the record as defending the guy instead of just agreeing with him, all the more power to ya. But if he comes out scum, you'll be the first guy I vote after.

[HackerHuck]

Hacker, he didn't state it as an opinion. That's the problem I have with that statement about Jules' vote. He states it as if its Jules reasoning for the vote, NOT as his own opinion why Jules placed the vote. The fact he got it COMPLETELY wrong from how Jules had ALREADY explained it is very suspicious.

You might be right. My suspicion of Coron might be affecting how I see his game. Then again, he might be scum and I'm the only one seeing it.

Of course it's an opinion. What else does 'imho' mean? No one (scum or town) knows exactly what someone's intent was unless they have some special daytime chat power.

OK, so now you're stating that you're concern with his quote is that he is misrepresenting what Jules said when Jules explained his own actions. That is quite different from stating that he must have some kind of inside information. I can understand the former, but not the latter.

[Nai]

I'm saying both, Hacker. I'm saying that he's falsely recording what Jules' intent was to get Jules off the hook, which is both misrepresenting him AND defending him. And since he's defending Jules with a lie, it's even worse, making stuff up to save the guy. You see what I mean? I'm saying he's both misrepresenting AND defending Jules.

[Coron]

I was interperating. My interperatation did not seem like a stretch to me. You are allowed to have your opinion too.

I know I often do rereads of the threads, and often vote people based on old posts or even if their body of work is lacking.

Even if I've posted since these things have happened does not mean it's suspicious for me to vote you now.

If you find any of this incorrect that is your perogative.

[Nai]

But it's not your vote. The man in question, Jules, had already explained his vote: That he had nothing else and was just putting pressure on me. Post 79, his post:

I put FOS in all my games on the person I had voted on because all the evidence was lost. We're not going to get anywhere if we don't start putting pressure on again though so I the vote went on

Whereas you, Coron, say THIS to reason his vote:

Um, it's perfectly reasonable imho. He says "I remember I was voting him, I probably had a good reason FoS" Then he comes back later does a reread to decide what the best lead is and votes

It looks like you're trying to pull stuff out of your rear end.

Your post doesn't imply anything. You specifically say that it was his best lead, whereas he says it was just to put pressure. YOU come out with a random reason. Nowhere in his post, nor in the subsequent posts (I'm dizzy and woozy off of meds, so I'm not doing a full re-read right now), does he say it was because of a re-read that he put his vote back on. It was only because he had an FoS on me and wanted to put pressure on.

I don't think it's my "prerogative" that your reasoning is wrong: It's wrong because it's not what the actual voter said.

[Coron]

If he was just applying pressure to any random thing there were people with 2 votes(not 1) he could have voted.

A pressure vote isn't nessisarily a baseless vote.

Also this was a hypothetical not a like "This is exactly what happened" sorry if you misinterperated that.

However I do take your point. He did not elaborate on any reasoning for it, however I still feel you're pushing way too hard over some stupid random thing.

[Nai]

I see you as scummy, and I'm finding more reasons for other people to vote you that go on with your scummyness. It may seem that I"m grasping at straws, but I'm seeing you as scummy, and trying to convince the town that you are. Unfortunately, its not working well. Also unfortunately, NOTHING else is going on in this game, and its the only lead I have.

[lunalovegood]

Okay, first of all, Jules vote seemed to be a bit out of nowhere, and you should never vote if you can't state a reason behind it. And I still don't see your reasoning behind your vote. So I

Fos: Jules

for that. And Coron supports this, so I still find him scummy.

Then we have Nai, who says:

I remember being told, several times, that you should never defend someone unless you are absolutely sure of their role.

which is, obviously, idiotic. What if you're town, and you think they're town. That would be a good reason to defend them. Although I don't agree with either Jules's or Coron's reasons for voting for Nai, I think Coron can defend him stupidly if he wants, so

Fos: Nai

And for the record, I'm still

voting Coron

.

[Nai]

If you're town and their not, and you defend them and they end up scum, chances are you'll be lynched for defending them. That's the reason I've been told not to defend someone unless you know their role. If you're a town, you shouldn't defend someone unless you know their town. If you're scum, you can defend just about anyone, since you know they WON'T be scum. That's why I tend to be on the offensive with anyone that defends another person: Either they are town that know what they are defending (unlikely on day 1), or they're scum that know they are in the clear. See the logic?

[Coron]

I defend things I find reasonable and I will not appologize for it. If I see something I think is crappy logic I will say "HEY, THAT'S CRAPPY LOGIC". Doesn't matter if he can be seen as "defending" someone else.

[Stewie]

Hacker, he didn't state it as an opinion. That's the problem I have with that statement about Jules' vote. He states it as if its Jules reasoning for the vote, NOT as his own opinion why Jules placed the vote. The fact he got it COMPLETELY wrong from how Jules had ALREADY explained it is very suspicious.

You might be right. My suspicion of Coron might be affecting how I see his game. Then again, he might be scum and I'm the only one seeing it.

Of course it's an opinion. What else does 'imho' mean? No one (scum or town) knows exactly what someone's intent was unless they have some special daytime chat power.

OK, so now you're stating that you're concern with his quote is that he is misrepresenting what Jules said when Jules explained his own actions. That is quite different from stating that he must have some kind of inside information. I can understand the former, but not the latter.

That's all very nice, but can you clear up the point you made earlier about me putting stuff in my ass? Thanks.

[HackerHuck]

That's all very nice, but can you clear up the point you made earlier about me putting stuff in my ass? Thanks.

There's a flashy thing in your avatar that's giving you a rather odd grin...

[Nai]

But, y'know, it doesn't LOOK like a dildo, and Stevie is pre-puberty, so I don't think he could enjoy it anyways. Sick pedophile!

[Nightfall]

Um I think it's a christmas light... Can we get off the topic of Stewie's ass now?

[Norinel]

Seeking replacements for lunalovegood and perfect62834.

[Stewie]

Haha, I didn't think you were talking about my avatar.

Anyways, I still think that Jules is our better option, but Coron is also a good choice, particulary for the way in which he is defending Jules.

[Norinel]

Back again. I'll prod everyone this time, since I'm first.

[Zindaras]

Still playing. Also,

Unvote

, seeing how luna's going to be replaced soon. I do expect her replacement to provide more input, however.