I'm scum for saying you're not a Jester? Uh huh.Mastermind of Sin wrote:If you don't know what the smoke and mirrors phrase means, look it up. It's a fairly common phrase.JordanA24 wrote:Yeah, you made a policy vote Day 1, contributed nothing that's useful to the game, and now you've got a bullshit vote against me that's for reasons that are best described as fiction, what do you mean by smoke and mirrors? How is 1 vote a wagon? How is being the 4th vote on a wagon starting it? Answer me those please.
You're applying a different definition of "wagon" than what I used, and I've already explained this. There was a lot of support for me being a Jester or scum, and many people had expressed suspicion of mewellbefore you placed your vote. The only reason I didn't have votes is because people suspected me of being a Jester more than anything else, so they didn't vote. You came along and suggested that I'm normal scum instead of Jester, and then later placed your vote to open the floodgates. It's all smoke and mirrors because you used a false dichotomy when you deflected the Jester talk, as I pointed out earlier. Your misrepresentation regarding me is why you are scum.
Maybe, but the post where I voted Peers wasMastermind of Sin wrote:What does your last question refer to? I don't recall saying anything about a 4th vote on a wagon. Although now that you ask that question, you should already know the answer. It's easy to be the 4th vote and start a wagon, if you're the one who presents the case that sets off their wagon. The location of your vote is NOT an indicator of your relationship to a wagon. Your other actions matter even more than your vote, so the implication that everything is dependent on when you voted is another illogical misdirection from you.
So, that pretty much shoots that theory out of the water.JordanA24 wrote:Unvote Vote: Peers
Maybe, but you could use that argument against an MOS every time he's accused of being scum. And since this is playstyle, it's a nulltell.Albert B. Rampage wrote:MoS is just inept. Let's lynch someone else.
You sure? You sure he isn't badly playing scum (or maybe, shock horror, town), or he may even be trying to WIFOM us into thinking he's a Jester (though with the potential of cops around, maybe this isn't the best tactic, although sometimes in Werewolf games, cops aren't that reliable I've found.) Or, you could both be scum, and you're trying to defend him, those are the vibes I'm getting right now.Albert B. Rampage wrote:Because its obvious.
Do I really have to spell this out for you again? How thick are you? You're scum for presenting a false set of choices when you said I was not a Jester, by implying that the only choices were for me to be scum OR jester, as if being town was not an option.JordanA24 wrote:
I'm scum for saying you're not a Jester? Uh huh.
4th vote is jumping on a wagon, which is what I accused you of. So how does you being the fourth vote shoot my theory out of the water again?Maybe, but the post where I voted Peers wasMastermind of Sin wrote:What does your last question refer to? I don't recall saying anything about a 4th vote on a wagon. Although now that you ask that question, you should already know the answer. It's easy to be the 4th vote and start a wagon, if you're the one who presents the case that sets off their wagon. The location of your vote is NOT an indicator of your relationship to a wagon. Your other actions matter even more than your vote, so the implication that everything is dependent on when you voted is another illogical misdirection from you.
So, that pretty much shoots that theory out of the water.JordanA24 wrote:Unvote Vote: Peers
Intimidating players that make good cases against you is scummy.Mastermind of Sin wrote:Do I really have to spell this out for you again? How thick are you?
It does. Especially on Day 1 where we're basically sending out feelers.Mastermind of Sin wrote:4th vote is jumping on a wagon, which is what I accused you of. So how does you being the fourth vote shoot my theory out of the water again?
Me too. But Quag not worth arguing with. Quag is at the top of the list of any vig worth his salt.Panzerjager wrote:I think Quag is scum
Wrong. You have to see where I'm coming from. I have MoS trying to intimidate me in every game. And one of the things that irks me is that he is so cranky and disagreeable that and a lot of players allow him to browbeat other players with nonsense. Only a few of the more experienced players will stand up to him, as Yosarian2 has in this game.Panzerjager wrote:I can see a TS/Jordan scum team.
Okay, I've waited, I've gotten no answer. He's voting for someone without a case and hoping to get them lynched quickly so he doesn't have to present a case.Sikario8 wrote:::mulls it over and eventually shrugs half-heartedly::Peers wrote:Wow. Under such a carefully thought-out and well-worded logical attack on me, I have no choice but to say every single part of your case is correct.Sikario8 wrote:IGME(andmyvote)OY: Peers
vote: peers
Of course, given that you have no parts to your case, it's rather easy.
Reasons, man, you need to give reasons!
Can we hurry and lynch him so that I don't have to provide any reason behind my vote...?