Bookitty wrote:Mastermind of Sin:
How do you feel about Quagmire joining you in your policy lynch, and quoting from another game in which he apparently also joined you there?
Quagmire is obviously being juvenile as usual. *shrug* Doesn't make him scum any more than not reading his role pm does.
Do you still feel your original "policy lynch" vote was justified for the reasons you gave?
I never felt my "policy lynch" vote was justified. Isn't that obvious by now. All the clues are there. I voted her early on Day 1 and abandoned it as soon as I had a case on someone else, later declaring that as my first "serious" vote of the game. If I felt my "policy lynch" vote was justified, I would have pursued it more.
Do you agree with policy lynches in general of players who are unhelpful and make the game less fun?
No, which is why I wasn't serious about it.
Are you generally in favour of other kinds of policy lynches?
No.
Do you now feel it was a mistake to try to "policy lynch" Toaster Strudel near the start of the game?
No. The point of the "policy lynch" was to get her attention. I was hoping that by taking action like that, even though it wasn't a serious vote, it would clue her in as to the detriment her playstyle has upon the game in general. I was hoping that she would take it as a hint and at least *try* to reevaluate her own playstyle so that the town could have a better chance of winning. She prides herself on "frustrating" scum, but I don't think she realizes how much
more
frustrating she is to a protown player.
Toaster Strudel wrote:MoS will never, ever, admit to being wrong about anything.
MoS was not policy voting me because I am "unhelpful and make the game less fun." I can't say the real reason why he's policy voting, but I do know what it is. It would ruin another game that is ongoing if I were to reveal his true motive.
I *think* I know what TS is referring to, but she's unequivocally wrong in her assumptions. The problem is, she assumes that I have some sort of agenda in one game that affects my play in another game. I severely frown upon basing my actions in on game upon something I'm trying to accomplish in another game, whether the agenda is protown or antitown. TS obviously doesn't know me well enough, because she thinks I don't have enough integrity to keep from doing that. My "policy vote" on TS/DGB occured in two games, and two games only. Neither of those actions were based upon an agenda in the other game.
If he was policy voting players that are unhelpful and make the game less fun, why isn't he policy voting Quagmire?
Because Quagmire *knows* that he's making the game less fun for people. He does it on purpose for his own enjoyment. He's incorrigible. However, I have a much higher opinion of your intelligence and your maturity than I do with Quagmire, so it was worth the effort to try and get your attention, since you obviously were unaware of the effect of your playstyle.
Blanket of Suspicion (BoS)
on all players that defend Quagmire, whose behavior in this game is absolutely indefensible. Either they are protecting a buddy, or they know it's a mislynch. Under the blanket: YagamiLight, MoS, Peers, Yosarian2, and hasdagas (though hasdagas' recent behavior makes me less confident that he might be scum).
Quagmire's behavior is unassailable, you mean. There is no adequate attack that paints him as scum. There is no reasonable agenda he could be trying to accomplish through his actions today.
