Open 67 Two of Four (a7) Over! before 578

Near · Post Post #2 (isolation #0) » Tue Mar 18, 2008 10:39 am

Vote Erratus Apathos

Is that latin?

Near · Post Post #7 (isolation #1) » Tue Mar 18, 2008 2:58 pm

OMG, I am sorry. I didn't know what your name meant.

Unvote: Erratus Apathos

Near · Post Post #28 (isolation #2) » Sat Mar 22, 2008 7:17 am

vote: farside22

for not voting.

Near · Post Post #36 (isolation #3) » Tue Mar 25, 2008 7:10 am

farside22 wrote:I've been waiting to see is Near replies to my comment. Typically I run across hypocritical = scummie. Call it OMGUS. His vote is crap with hypocritical reasoning.

vote: Near

Naturally, I knew I was being "hypocritical" when I voted you for not voting. But from my perspective I know I am not a scum, and since we were the only two people who didn't have a vote at the time, I voted you.

On the other hand, voting someone for not voting this early in the game is pretty stupid. However you didn't point this out.

Confirm Vote: farside22

Near · Post Post #37 (isolation #4) » Tue Mar 25, 2008 7:12 am

Wait, shaft.ed. What does that mean? mozsuggs is not dead, is he?

Near · Post Post #40 (isolation #5) » Tue Mar 25, 2008 9:09 am

Erratus Apathos wrote:
Near wrote:On the other hand, voting someone for not voting this early in the game is pretty stupid. However you didn't point this out. Confirm Vote: farside22
If you know it was stupid why were you doing it?

I was prodded and I had to make a post and I decided to vote.

However, doing stupid things in the beginning could be helpful getting clues as to who the scums are. Just like in this case.

Farside responded to my post seriously. I am lead to think this way because he cited "hypocrisy" and voted me. In the mind of a scum, he is concerned that people find him suspicious. So it's natural for scum to get defensive. The fact that farside pointed out my hypocrisy, and accused me in the same way because of it, he is admitting his scuminess without putting much thoughts into it. This is a behavior of a scum.

Near · Post Post #41 (isolation #6) » Tue Mar 25, 2008 9:09 am

farside22 wrote:
Erratus Apathos wrote:
Near wrote:On the other hand, voting someone for not voting this early in the game is pretty stupid. However you didn't point this out. Confirm Vote: farside22
If you know it was stupid why were you doing it?
Better question is did he notice I vote and then unvote due to quick lynch people like mozsuggs in the game who is not paying attention?

Seriously? This makes you look less scummy?

Near · Post Post #43 (isolation #7) » Tue Mar 25, 2008 11:39 am

shaft.ed wrote:
Near wrote:Wait, shaft.ed. What does that mean? mozsuggs is not dead, is he?
sorry that's mod flavor for "he has been prod'd and hasn't picked it up yet." Will be more clear if people prefer.

Now that we know what it means, i'm cool with it

Near · Post Post #45 (isolation #8) » Tue Mar 25, 2008 12:40 pm

farside22 wrote:
You voted for me for not voting, that is your quote. Yet if you are voting on me for not voting it is faulty logic based on the fact that I did vote and unvoted do to some people be dumb asses. I admited the OMGUS, but stated that I waited on you to respond to my earlier comment. Noted you didn't respond till I voted. Reason?

Are you trapping me to say "I didn't read your first post until you voted me" and then are you going to cite that there is another game that I made a post in between the time your two aforementioned posts?

How is this important? I really don't remember/know the reason. Nor do I think it's worth discussing.

farside22 wrote:You voted for me for not voting, that is your quote. Yet if you are voting on me for not voting it is faulty logic based on the fact that I did vote and unvoted do to some people be dumb asses.

Not sure exactly what you mean here. But let me clarify myself. Voting for you for not voting was stupid. I was in a hurry and was responding to a prod. It was your response to my vote that made you scummy.

Near · Post Post #47 (isolation #9) » Tue Mar 25, 2008 3:06 pm

Lowell wrote:I think there's a good chance you're both townies barking up the wrong tree, based on everyone's seeming lack of enthusiasm for jumping in with opinions.

What makes you think that neither of us are scums?

Near · Post Post #52 (isolation #10) » Wed Mar 26, 2008 7:09 am

farside22 wrote:You posted on March 24th. Game: Mini 568 - Nubigena (Day 1)
So yup looks like you waited to say something till I voted against you.

Do you find me scummy because of this?

Near · Post Post #67 (isolation #11) » Fri Mar 28, 2008 12:37 pm

shaft.ed I have a question about the mechanics of the pregame. You said that exactly two roles without duplicates are selected from doctor, cop, miller, and roleblocker. Is this picked randomly (e.g. dice roll?) or did you pick two out of those 4 based on what you think is fair for this game?

Everything is decided by dice roll

Near · Post Post #74 (isolation #12) » Sun Mar 30, 2008 6:50 pm

DoctorJimmy wrote:
FoS: Near
for not explaining why farside is scummy despite being prompted to do so multiple times.

It would be a vote, but that would put him at L -1.

My initial vote on farside was a pretty random one. I looked at the vote count, and the only two people who weren't voting were me and farside. Responding to my prod, I ranom voted, stating that he didn't vote on anyone.

If farside had thought that my voting was random, I would not have find him suspicous. In fact, I would have expected it. If he completely ignored my post, I also would not have found him suspicoius. His responses didn't sound like a joke to me, and there are scummy elements to them:

farside22 wrote:I've been waiting to see is Near replies to my comment. Typically I run across hypocritical = scummie. Call it OMGUS. His vote is crap with hypocritical reasoning.
vote: Near

farside22 wrote:You voted for me for not voting, that is your quote. Yet if you are voting on me for not voting it is faulty logic based on the fact that I did vote and unvoted do to some people be dumb asses. I admited the OMGUS, but stated that I waited on you to respond to my earlier comment. Noted you didn't respond till I voted. Reason?

The fact that he noticed that I also didn't have a vote on anyone, he should have noticed that I am just random voting. However, if he thought I was making a serious accusation, he should have defended himself by saying that my argument is crap and question me/focused on why not voting equals scummy.

Instead, his defense was was by accusing me, calling "hypocrisy". He is saying that since I too didn't have a vote on anyone, it either craps my argument or I too should be suspected for a scum. This is what I didn't like about his argument. Instead of reponding to my argument with self-assured attitude, and pointing out where my argument fails, his main purpose seems to be attacking me in return.

His pointing out and self-crediting for stopping a quick lynch on mozsuggs isn't really helping his case either. Still, while I find this incident pretty suspicious, I also don't feel too strongly about it. So, I am going to unvote.

Unvote

Vote DoctorJimmy

for seemingly trying to find a reason to put join the bandwagon.

Near · Post Post #91 (isolation #13) » Wed Apr 02, 2008 10:52 am

Yes, I am also up for a deadline extension.

Near · Post Post #103 (isolation #14) » Sat Apr 05, 2008 6:30 am

DoctorJimmy wrote:Trying to find a reason to join the bandwagon? It makes me scummy that I asked you why you found farside scummy and got frustrated at you ignoring my questions? I don't understand this at all.

No it looks like you were trying to get on a bandwagon.

DoctorJimmy wrote:Thanks for finally explaining your suspicion on farside, though.

This makes me less suspicious. Because you thanked me. I know it's stupid, but it does.

Near · Post Post #124 (isolation #15) » Thu Apr 10, 2008 8:20 am

Responding to my prod. sorry for the absence. My thoughts coming up.

Near · Post Post #125 (isolation #16) » Thu Apr 10, 2008 8:36 am

I am not sure what to make of Greasy Spot's claim of cop. There are 2 power roles in this game, exactly 2 of: cop, roleblocker, doctor, and miller. So a scum claiming one of these roles, he would have exactly 50% chance of getting away with it.

The other 50% chance, where a real cop can counter claim against scum's fake claim, scums would have some chance of lynching the real cop based on persuasion, and in the worst case scenario find out who the cop is.

So, I can see scums making this claim right before he's about to be lynched. If he claimed miller, i'd be more inclined to believe him, as losing the identity of miller is not that bad for town...

On top of that, look at the way he claimed:

Greasy Spot wrote:Uh,...not me. I am the COP.

I'm not sure I buy it.

For now,

Unvote

while I do a re-read.

Near · Post Post #126 (isolation #17) » Thu Apr 10, 2008 8:53 am

Upon a re-read......

my vote goes to..........................

vote: Erratus Apathos

Die Scum. Everyone kill Erratus Apathos!

Near · Post Post #127 (isolation #18) » Thu Apr 10, 2008 8:54 am

is deadline tomorrow?

Near · Post Post #129 (isolation #19) » Thu Apr 10, 2008 9:01 am

Greasy Spot wrote:
Near wrote:Upon a re-read......

my vote goes to..........................

vote: Erratus Apathos

Die Scum. Everyone kill Erratus Apathos!
OMGUS much?

My voting on EA was more by process of elimination rather than specific thing he did that was scummy. Despite my doubting of your claim, i never thought your predecessor Moz was scummy, so for now I will give you a benefit of doubt.

Lowell doesn't feel scummy because he posted what looks like to me genuine scum hunting contents.

Doctor Jimmy - not sure.

Thorbjorn - scummy because he didn't do anything the whole game other than avoiding the spotlight.

farside- not sure

EA- scummy because he hasn't made any "commitment" posts.

I actually don't mind voting for Thorbjorn or EA. But I think either is the best lynch for today.