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

[DoctorJimmy]

Vote: farside22

because I've seen that joke in the random voting stage three times now

[DoctorJimmy]

Eh, let's not put someone at L -1 on page 1.

Unvote, Vote: mozsuggs

[DoctorJimmy]

Accidental or intentional quicklynches from someone putting someone else at L -1 on the first page may be rare, but in a 7-person game they can be disastrous for the town so it's best not to even take the chance.

If nothing else, questions and reactions directed at someone who put someone else at L-1 early on frequently help to pull a game out of the random stage at the beginning.

[DoctorJimmy]

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.

I'm kind of confused by this. You admit that you were being hypocritical, yet you call farside scummy for accusing you of being hypocritical? I really don't see what makes this scummy.

[DoctorJimmy]

I'm still confused as to what makes farside's response to your vote scummy, Near.

[DoctorJimmy]

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.

[DoctorJimmy]

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:

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

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.

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.

Thanks for finally explaining your suspicion on farside, though.

[DoctorJimmy]

DoctorJimmy

-

SCUM

. Mostly it is his behavior during the P2 near/farside debate that puts him here. He looks like he's trying to foment further discussion while making a bit of a friend in Near. Also, he was quick to chastise and vote moz in post 10.

How on earth is trying to cause further discussion scummy? I'm not sure where you've gotten this impression that I'm trying to make friends with Near, either. You referred to post 59, but that post consists of me being confused and asking Near to explain himself better, not of me entering the argument on his side.

[DoctorJimmy]

Unvote

. I'm not sure who I find scummiest at the moment, but I don't want to keep mozsuggs as the deadline lynch just for putting someone at L -1 on page 1.

[DoctorJimmy]

I'm fine with extending the deadline as well.

[DoctorJimmy]

Given that I'm currently in the deadline lynch spot, I'd really like to see some kind of a response from Near and Lowell to my questions.

[DoctorJimmy]

Well she can't help find scum either, so she is a hindrance to the town.

Is her not being able to say anything or change her vote for the last few RL days of Day 1 really enough of a hindrance to lynch based on that, rather than who you find scummy?

[DoctorJimmy]

DoctorJimmy

-

SCUM

. Mostly it is his behavior during the P2 near/farside debate that puts him here. He looks like he's trying to foment further discussion while making a bit of a friend in Near. Also, he was quick to chastise and vote moz in post 10.

How on earth is trying to cause further discussion scummy? I'm not sure where you've gotten this impression that I'm trying to make friends with Near, either. You referred to post 59, but that post consists of me being confused and asking Near to explain himself better, not of me entering the argument on his side.

You still haven't responded to any of this, Lowell.

[DoctorJimmy]

DoctorJimmy

-

SCUM

. Mostly it is his behavior during the P2 near/farside debate that puts him here. He looks like he's trying to foment further discussion while making a bit of a friend in Near. Also, he was quick to chastise and vote moz in post 10.

How on earth is trying to cause further discussion scummy? I'm not sure where you've gotten this impression that I'm trying to make friends with Near, either. You referred to post 59, but that post consists of me being confused and asking Near to explain himself better, not of me entering the argument on his side.

You still haven't responded to any of this, Lowell.

I'm sick of waiting.

Vote: Lowell

His case against me is based on three things, as shown in the quote: 1. I tried to instigate discussion. 2. I tried to make a friend in near (he claimed that I entered the near/farside debate on his side). 3. I was quick to chastise moz for his L-1 vote.

1 is not scummy, 2 is incorrect, and I'm far from the only one to do 3. It's been over a week and he still hasn't addressed any of this.

Also,

FoS: Greasy Spot

for claiming that only scum would object to lynching someone who can't claim or defend themselves.

[DoctorJimmy]

vote: Thorbjorn

It's all contentless blather combined with a obsessive fear of players at minus one or minus 2.

DrippingGoofball replaces Thorbjorn effective now

-I laughed hard at that one

[DoctorJimmy]

And I reckon my hammer was hasty, but I am emotionally scarred by some other games I'm in with Day 1 lasting 86 pages. I just go yay! A game with a day that can end! Woot!

You hammered just to end the day?

FoS: DGB

[DoctorJimmy]

There's plenty more for you to say if you have an interest in hunting scum.

I will sometime this week.

I'd suggest you do so sooner rather than later, given that we have a deadline in a week and a half.

[DoctorJimmy]

Hmm...

DGB, I'm kind of confused why you spent so much time speculating on a Near/farside22 scumpairing, when we now know that Near was a townie.

I'm still somewhat suspicious of DGB. The day 1 hammer was rather scummy looking, and there were some good points in her accidental case against her predecessor.

Some of the things GS said towards the end of day 1 did look pretty scummy, but I'm hesitant to go for the lynch of a claimed cop, albeit one who has yet to give us any useful information.

I'm not sure about farside. A few of the points against her are valid, but I have gotten a general vibe of genuine scumhunting from her.

Erratus Apathos has struck me as being the most reasonable, clear-headed player in this game so far. I haven't seen much of anything scummy from him.

Overall, I'm definitely not sure enough to place a vote anywhere just yet.

[DoctorJimmy]

Speculating on the reason why farside hasn't been quicklynched seems a bit pointless to me... as we've just seen, it can be used to justify farside being scum or DGB being scum.

[DoctorJimmy]

Farside if you thought DGB was scum why didn't you vote her?

Is someone being hesitant to vote at LyLo really worth mentioning? Neither me nor EA have voted for anyone yet today either.

[DoctorJimmy]

EA has convinced me.

Vote: farside22

[DoctorJimmy]

Woohoo! Congrats to Lowell for correctly picking both scum back in post 82, and thanks to the rest of the town for not listening to him

But seriously, good game everyone, and thanks for modding, shaft.ed.

[DoctorJimmy]

Hi Five, DGB!