Mini 425 Generic Western Mafia- Game over!

[gorckat]

I did that to point how idiotic it looks to vote for someone with no added context.

Answers for CTD soon?

*******************************************
Day 2, Fifth official vote count:


Paradoxombie (2): gorckat, mustafa15
mustafa15 (1): Thesp
Raffles (1): Peter Venkman
DeathSauce (1): CrashTextDummie
CrashTextDummue (1): DeathSauce

Not voting: TeamQuiggan, Paradoxombie, Occult, Raffles

10 alive, 6 to lynch.

[Peter Venkman]

Almost forgot about this:

Why do you think scum would kill a claimed vanilla?

I thought it was more interesting that someone who had as much suspicion as he was nightkilled. His vanilla claim was what anyone would do Day One, regardless of role.

Not liking this at all.

You think someone with a role would announce it day one?

What don't you like?

-Peter

[DeathSauce]

Hmmm, CrashTextDummy finds a tiny inconsistency and tries blowing it up into major thing, where have we seen this behavior before?

Stuff like this pisses me off. Internal inconsistencies tend to be among the more reliable scum-tells in my experience, so when I see one, I point it out. If the person being inconsistent can't explain it away, I tend to think he's scum. Evidently, the majority of the town either agreed with me or didn't feel bothered to present a feasible counter-wagon. I do not appreciate at all the way you're trying to pin this one on me in an attempt to discredit my legitimacy.

I can see your point, if it's an inconsistency that actually means something. The way I see it, you are picking meaningless points of trivia that anyone could interpret in different ways and trying to blow them up into scum-tells. It even worked, somehow, in getting VRK lynched. And you may have missed that I, in fact, did try to start a counter-wagon.

Oh yes, when we lynched VRK, a TOWNIE over nothing!

When are you planning to make up your mind on this matter anyhow? It's easy for you to say

now

that we lynched him over "nothing", but yesterday you didn't seem to think that way:

I still am suspicious of CTD and Peter's motivation. I disagree with some of the reasoning behind their votes on VRK. But I have to admit they might be correct.

:shrug: Yes, I admitted that you might be correct. That's a far cry from agreeing with you or changing my vote to agree with you.

Why do I get the feeling that you're much more interested in making various people appear in a bad light, instead of actually hunting scum? You've done at least 3 U-turns when it comes to your opinion of me and the wagon on VRK, and while I acknowledge that it's quite natural to change your opinion over the course of a game as a townsperson, I'm growing increasingly wary of it in your case.

VRK and pickem were absolutely convinvced that you and Peter were scum, pickem was even willing to vote himself to prove it ( a bad strategy I admit). Why are you trying to pretend that episode never happened? Why do I get the feeling you you are much more interested in making various people appear in a bad light?

I am keeping my vote on you, for now in large part due to your somewhat obvious bussing of PV in post 745.

[CrashTextDummie]

I can see your point, if it's an inconsistency that actually means something. The way I see it, you are picking meaningless points of trivia that anyone could interpret in different ways and trying to blow them up into scum-tells. It even worked, somehow, in getting VRK lynched.

Again, it's easy for you to say

now

that it was just a "meaningless point of trivia" because we know VRK was town, but we (and that includes you, based on that other quote of yours I pointed out) didn't know that yesterday.

By the way, it's good to know that you're the high authority on which inconsistencies are meaningless and which aren't, I'll run them all through you in the future.

And you may have missed that I, in fact, did try to start a counter-wagon.

Emphasis on a

feasible

counterwagon. You tried to start a counter-wagon on another townie, which

may just be

why it didn't take off.

:shrug: Yes, I admitted that you might be correct. That's a far cry from agreeing with you or changing my vote to agree with you.

It is indeed a far cry. You don't have to place a vote in order to approve of or move along a band-wagon. By saying that I might be correct, you indicated that you're not entirely opposed to a VRK lynch without committing to it yourself, which is something scum often like to do.

VRK and pickem were absolutely convinvced that you and Peter were scum, pickem was even willing to vote himself to prove it ( a bad strategy I admit). Why are you trying to pretend that episode never happened?

Because it never happened.

Why do I get the feeling you you are much more interested in making various people appear in a bad light?

Nice comeback.

Could we get an update on your suspicions please? Last I knew you "saw no reason to move your vote from Thesp" and were FoSing Occult and Peter Venkman. Before that, you felt like gorckat, Paradoxombie and Occult were "throwing a blanket of suspicion" on you. I'm kinda losing track here.

I am keeping my vote on you, for now in large part due to your somewhat obvious bussing of PV in post 745.

Please outline in detail why you think I am scum with Peter Venkman.

[CrashTextDummie]

You think someone with a role would announce it day one?

I think I have never seen someone with a role claim vanilla unprovoked on D1, and I don't see why anyone would.

What don't you like?

The fact that you didn't answer the question.

[Peter Venkman]

I think I have never seen someone with a role claim vanilla unprovoked on D1, and I don't see why anyone would.

Uh oh... playstyle argument approaching! Personally, I think it makes more sense for a role to claim vanilla day one so they aren't the target of night kills. I might be incredibly off with my logic, but I'm letting you know how I think.

you didn't answer the question.

Gotcha, I thought it was implied, but I'll be direct.

I don't know

why PickEm was night killed. I think it was weird, and my question asking for theories was sincere.

-Peter

[CrashTextDummie]

Uh oh... playstyle argument approaching! Personally, I think it makes more sense for a role to claim vanilla day one so they aren't the target of night kills. I might be incredibly off with my logic, but I'm letting you know how I think.

Yay, playstyle argument!

1. There are people on this site who think you shouldn't claim

at all

if you are a vanilla townie. There are even people who have a policy of

lynching

everyone who claims vanilla townie.

2. It's a widely accepted policy to lynch all liars. It is therefore established that you should

not

lie as town unless the circumstances absolutely demand it. Most people are not able to recognize such a situation, which is why you probably shouldn't lie at all. It screws the town over most of the time.

3. Guardian had no reason whatsoever to lie in that situation (in fact, he didn't have any reason to claim in the first place).

Therefore, I find it noteworthy that your first thought seemed to be that scum must have figured he was lying about his role.

[Peter Venkman]

I find it noteworthy that your first thought seemed to be that scum must have figured he was lying about his role.

My question about the night kill choice was sincere, as I honestly found it confusing. If you want to contradict that, use quotes. Right now you are making stuff up.

The most interesting play by the scum is the killing of Pickim, he was a huge heat score, and one of the unfortunates on the bandwagon against VKM, I would've assumed that they could've kept him around and beat on him for a day, and knock off another 2 townies, but I digress.

This was similar to my train of thought. If PickEm were around today, he would be making the same goofy plays he was making Day One.

-Peter

[Peter Venkman]

Since I just sorted by TQ's posts I noticed he hasn't posted in seven days, and has only made seven posts.

Prod please.

-Peter

[CrashTextDummie]

My question about the night kill choice was sincere, as I honestly found it confusing. If you want to contradict that, use quotes. Right now you are making stuff up.

This is not about your question about the night kill choice.

PeterVenkman - Since you brought up the PickEm nightkill: Why do you think scum would kill a claimed vanilla?

I thought it was more interesting that someone who had as much suspicion as he was nightkilled. His vanilla claim was what anyone would do Day One, regardless of role.

[Occult]

PZombie, could you explain your voting record please (this time without avoiding the question) Below I put the quotes I found in regards to your voting record.


-Vote Guardian, says he is going a bit WIFOM and his reasons are no different from others (doesn't state any reasons)
-Guardian prods him for reasons and his reasons are: Too vocal for a newbie, Posts too much (so therefor he gets more scum tells), doesn't want to vote a lurker and he reserves thoughts on the subject
-Vote Avi (because he's lurking) after his saying he doesn't want to vote a lurker (this is AFTER support for an avi lynch rose)
-Vote for guardian (Saying he was voting just because he was a lurker, after saying he wasn't voting a lurker) no reasons, BTW
-In response to my question of if he had reasons, he says he already layed them out (Which he hasn't) and believes you should always have your vote on a person.
-In response to gaurdian asking if he has any contributions he says (No, no, nothing significant.)
-Unvotes PEG (as a new replacement allows him to come in without a vote) But he has already said that he thinks you should always keep a vote on someone.
-Tells DS that he isn't going to vote now b/c there is a deadline.
-Agrees with peter's argument and Votes PEG for not agreeing
-Foses DS, No reason
-Needs to be prodded for reasoning again, says that DS is leading an easy wagon against the leader of the previous wagon.

[Sefer]

TeamQuiggan has been prodded.

[Peter Venkman]

What don't you like?

The fact that you didn't answer the question.

Dude, list the damn question you say I'm avoiding. I have no clue what you are talking about anymore, and I'm tired of guessing.

-Peter

[CrashTextDummie]

Is there a particular reason why you're quoting this for the second time? The answer was satisfactory the first time around.

I am not trying to contradict anything, I was merely analyzing/commenting on that answer. I am also not accusing you of avoiding anything.

There's a running theme through a number of my games of people misunderstanding me, and it's starting to grind my gears. So before we run in circles some more, I suggest we drop this. I just wanted to get this stuff out for future reference, and don't expect any further answers from you at the moment.

Thank you.

[CrashTextDummie]

Is there a particular reason why you're quoting this for the second time? The answer was satisfactory the first time around.

I am not trying to contradict anything, I was merely analyzing/commenting on that answer. I am also not accusing you of avoiding anything.

There's a running theme through a number of my games of people misunderstanding me, and it's starting to grind my gears. So before we run in circles some more, I suggest we drop this. I just wanted to get this stuff out for future reference, and don't expect any further answers from you at the moment.

Thank you.

[Occult]

?

Could you explain it to me then, CTD?

[gorckat]

I think the disconnect is the exchanges in 757 and 759. It is a bit unclear in those two posts what questions wasn't answered, what isn't about what question, etc...

[DeathSauce]

I agree gorckat, it seems like clumsy distancing, as I alluded to above.

[DeathSauce]

VRK and pickem were absolutely convinced that you and Peter were scum, pickem was even willing to vote himself to prove it ( a bad strategy I admit). Why are you trying to pretend that episode never happened?

Because it never happened.

Completely false. See posts 546 and 547. Page 21 of this thread, I believe.

It absolutely did happen.

[DeathSauce]

EBWOP: It's page 22.

[CrashTextDummie]

DeathSauce - are you going to make a habit out of ignoring my posts? I very much expect a reaction to my 753.

Here's a timeline of my exchange with Peter Venkman from my point of view:

1. I asked a question.
2. I felt that his answer was a bit evasive.
3. He answered again, clarifying.
4. I was satisfied.
5. I made a comment about those answers.
6. He felt that I was trying to contradict him.
7. I tried to explain that I wasn't.
8. Further miscommunication.
9. I get angry at this game.

That's about all I'm gonna say about this for the time being. I was trying to get a reaction from him, and I got a reaction. End of story.

EBWOP:

Completely false. See posts 546 and 547. Page 21 of this thread, I believe.

It absolutely did happen.

The fact that

you

act as if Peter and me are interchangeable is one thing (which I find

very

irritating, by the way).

But misrepresenting others to fit your needs is another matter.

Pickemgenius specifically said that he felt

Peter

was running the game. For you to say that he was willing to sacrifice himself to prove

my

guilt is an almost criminal lie.

Now answer the rest of my post.

[DeathSauce]

Did you read the posts in question? They specifically refer to the "CTD/Peter contingent".

That includes you. Accusing me of "misrepresenting others" is sheer hypocrisy, since that's all you managed to do in your above post.

I take it, by the way, that you do now admit that the incident occurred? If so, does that qualify as an 'internal inconsistency"?

Now answer the rest of my post.

I will answer the points that I feel need comment. As I have done in my last two posts.

[CrashTextDummie]

Did you read the posts in question? They specifically refer to the "CTD/Peter contingent".

Here's what he said. Complete quote:
"Good, Peter has been running this game, i'm surprised nobody else has noticed that, if it takes lynching me to realize that, then i'll be happy to be of service. "

Nowhere does he mention me.

He followed this up with more attacks on Peter.

None

on me.

He even quoted you again later:

1) I felt that the amount of suspicion leveled at VRK was inconsistent with the seriousness of his mistake. I actually still don't understand why it was such a big deal.

2)

Seeing Peter Venkman, who was the voice of reason throughout the first 18 pages, suddenly glom onto this trivial matter as if it was the scumtell of all time really raised my hackles.

3) This sentence

It's clearly better in this situation to lynch someone, so please get your act together, town.

was odd. We had a deadline fast approaching, there was no danger that someone wasn't going to be lynched.
Why was CTD so anxious for everyone to jump on the VRK wagon? To lessen the importance of his vote?
Maybe.

Wait, I wasn't the first to say Peter was running the game?

Again, he specifically, and only comments on the Peter part of your argument.

This does not

at all

translate into him being so sure that I am scum that he would sacrifice himself. It does not even translate into him being suspicious of me. About the only thing he ever said about me is that he felt my argument against VRK is weak.

I take it, by the way, that you do now admit that the incident occurred? If so, does that qualify as an 'internal inconsistency"?

I don't know why I'm even bothering with you anymore.

Yes, he was willing to get himself lynched because he was convinced of Peter's guilt.
No, he was not willing to get himself lynched because he was convinced of my guilt.

You claimed the latter. You're also just spouting bullshit at this point.

I will answer the points that I feel need comment. As I have done in my last two posts.

You don't think you should give an update on your suspicions when you've pretty much attacked everyone today while accusing

me

of spreading suspicion around?
You don't think you should substantiate your claim of a Peter/CTD scum-pair when all you came up with so far is that "it feels like CTD is distancing"?
You don't think you should explain your bizarre opinion that starting a counter-wagon on a townie is a good thing?

Then I'm more than happy to see you hang.

[Sefer]

TeamQuiggan has requested replacement; Guardian expressed an interest in replacing back in so I'm checking with him. Hopefully he'll accept and we'll be back to full again soon.

[Thesp]

I did that to point how idiotic it looks to vote for someone with no added context.

I don't believe you - I think you're trying to backtrack your visceral OMGUS which you perceive in retrospect to be scummy.

Unvote: mustafa15, Vote: DeathSauce.

I've found the entire CTD/PV exchange thoroughly uninteresting.