Mini 852- Crayola Catastrophe Game Over (Post 1158)

[chamber]

oops

[Budja]

If I do so regardless of alignment though it should be an irrelevent point

Its bad play as town (in most cases) and it is a meta that would help you as scum. So I don't care if it is your meta. Either give a good explanation of why you behave that way or don't expect my vote to move.

[SocioPath]

Considering you still have your vote on me from what I thought was a random vote, what exactly don't you like?

Well lets see...

Vote: Chamber

Trying to appear townie by being concerned over a quick bandwagoning. I see no real reason to think of that as a threat at the point of his unvote. It looks to me like he is trying to gain townie points. Town shouldn't have to try to do that, it should come natually and his comment did not feel natural.

FoS: ChiboSempai

For seeming too willing to please or go along with others (both with his vote and his unvote).

Beginning of page 2. Also your first post. Also no random vote. Nope you went straight to "scum hunting".

This post is condemning charter for "Trying to appear townie", "trying to gain townie points". You essentially state that everything he has done seems forced. And yet, gaining that after a couple of one-liners off him in the first page, its YOUR post that comes across to me as forced.

Actually...

Unvote; Vote: ChiboSempai

I think he is a little more likely to be scum. Though I wouldn't mind either of those two being run up with a few more votes. Chamber, you aren't off the hook yet; I've got my eye on you.

Stating that you want them to be "run up" after a first page analysis.

Anyone who tries to vote for someone because they have an unreadable color will earn my vote from this point forward. There are much easier ways to deal with being able to read them (such as highlighting all their text with your mouse).

A silly blanket statement that can't be enforced.
You can't lynch someone based solely on them voting for a person over an off color.

Nor did you follow up on your apparently hollow threat. I voted you for an even more ridiculous reason, and yet you shrug if off as a random vote. I already made a random vote. And you were already calling out people with their random votes. And yet you ignore a blatantly obvious post that is right up your alley? Is that because it was targeted towards you? You didn't want to OMGUS yourself especially after calling someone else out on it with your NEXT post after my vote?

I dislike it when people look like they are attempting to breadcrumb in an obvious way. It looks as if that's what you are doing, blatantly breadcrumbing something. Players shouldn't need to breadcrumb, if they ever should claim, then they way they play their role should dictate whether the claim is believable, not some looney post at the beginning of the game.

I dislike role fishing. Especially in your obvious way.
Nothing more hypocritical than someone stating that they don't like the revealing of power roles than saying "HEY! YOU ARE SAYING YOU ARE A POWER ROLE!"


And thats why my vote will stay where it is currently so far.

[semioldguy]

Your vote didn't match my criteria specifically enough, as you voted for being readable color rather than unreadable. Though I considered voting for that anyway. Instead I ignored it and pointed out something I thought deserved more attention.

[ChiboSempai]

Vote: Chamber

until he can explain his posts at least. actions need a reason

[Josh Lyman]

Meant title. what I get for not double checking posts.

sig = signature

Still doesn't explain why you don't explain your votes, just that you don't.

That is correct. If I do so regardless of alignment though it should be an irrelevent point. I just don't feel like explaining myself right now, maybe another day.

This is a game of, first and foremost, communication. If you don't "feel like" explaining yourself, perhaps you shouldn't "feel like" playing.

unvote
vote: chamber

[Budja]

I think its L-2 BTW. No lynching yet

Your vote didn't match my criteria specifically enough, as you voted for being readable color rather than unreadable.

Dislike this, both vote reasonings are basically the same and it was obviously intended to provoke you for your earlier comment regardless. Why should it really make a difference in your eyes?

Note that I disagree with most of Socio's post.
Chambers L-3 comment did look like a typical scum-trying-to-look-town comment for one.

[Budja]

Whoops EBWOP

I think its L-2 BTW. No lynching yet

Your vote didn't match my criteria specifically enough, as you voted for being readable color rather than unreadable.

Dislike this, both vote reasonings are basically the same and it was obviously intended to provoke you for your earlier comment regardless. Why should it really make a difference in your eyes?

Note that I disagree with most of Socio's post.
Chambers L-3 comment did look like a typical scum-trying-to-look-town comment for one.

[chamber]

I feel so loved.
Why I think something is irrelevant. Only that I do is important in determining my alignment. If you are going to vote for me for it anyway then you aren't playing in a protown fashion.

(and for the record its a lot harder to play as scum when you can't explain your votes.)

[SocioPath]

Why I think something is irrelevant. Only that I do is important in determining my alignment. If you are going to vote for me for it anyway then you aren't playing in a protown fashion.

(and for the record its a lot harder to play as scum when you can't explain your votes.)

Wat.

[chamber]

Why I think something is irrelevant. Only that I do is important in determining my alignment. If you are going to vote for me for it anyway then you aren't playing in a protown fashion.

(and for the record its a lot harder to play as scum when you can't explain your votes.)

Wat.

If you don't understand something you are going to need to be a lot more specific.

[semioldguy]

I thought it would look like I was stretching my original intent and that would look bad. I didn't want to make an additional excuse for a poor vote. Even moreso because I saw something that was more worthy of comment. So I commented on that instead as it would be more productive and progress the game/scumhunting

[semioldguy]

Actually I think it's L-1

Unvote

[semioldguy]

Vote: Budja

For misrepresenting L-1 as L-2. Could have drawn an accidental quick-lynch without the hammer knowing they hammered.

[Kirbyoshi]

chamber, I don't think why you think something is irrelevant. In fact, I think it's extremely relevant. In addition, you should explain why you're so averse to giving us a simple reason for why you're not giving us any concrete cases,

which is what this game is based on

. You're still digging yourself deeper, as evidenced by the votes pouring in on you.

If you don't "feel like" explaining yourself, perhaps you shouldn't "feel like" playing.

QFT

[chamber]

chamber, I don't think why you think something is irrelevant. In fact, I think it's extremely relevant. In addition, you should explain why you're so averse to giving us a simple reason for why you're not giving us any concrete cases,

which is what this game is based on

. You're still digging yourself deeper, as evidenced by the votes pouring in on you.

If you don't "feel like" explaining yourself, perhaps you shouldn't "feel like" playing.

QFT

Knowing the reason for why I believe something is only useful because it lets you evaluate weather I truly believe it or not. Given that there is evidence that I do believe it out there for you guys to go get (title included) why I believe it becomes mostly irrelevant.

[semioldguy]

You guys are basically calling for a policy lynch on chamber, which is just as anti-town as the claims you have of him. Even players who play in anti-town ways will have tells that will out them when they are scum as opposed to town. Policy lynching avoids and ignores actual scumhunting.

[SocioPath]

Knowing the reason for why I believe something is only useful because it lets you evaluate weather I truly believe it or not. Given that there is evidence that I do believe it out there for you guys to go get (title included) why I believe it becomes mostly irrelevant.

Your stances and your thoughts are ridiculous. Esentially what you are saying, is that you could very well go through an entire game just posting 'vote' and 'unvote' and typing anything else is unnecessary, because screw REASONING! We certainly don't NEED to know WHY you think ANYTHING! Just that you DO what you DO! The reasons as to WHY just speak for THEMSELVES! I mean, YOU don't have to explain yourself, they can just read the thread, and then READ YOUR MIND as to WHY you vote the way you vote!

Screw this guy. Seriously.

Unvote
Vote: chamber

There is zero reason to let this guy live.

He takes the game of mafia, and just turns it into a crap shoot. I've never even seen or heard of a more anti-town way of carrying oneself.

[SocioPath]

You guys are basically calling for a policy lynch on chamber, which is just as anti-town as the claims you have of him. Even players who play in anti-town ways will have tells that will out them when they are scum as opposed to town. Policy lynching avoids and ignores actual scumhunting.

Its to the point that his anti-town methods can actually detract from the enjoyment of the game. Winning or losing only comes secondary to enjoying oneself. And with his stances, viewpoints, and ideologies...or lack thereof...I can personally do without that.

[chamber]

I just asked to be replaced out because the people in this game don't seem to enjoy the way I play. I hope you don't hold it against whoever replaces me, as it is something I do as all alignments.

[SocioPath]

I just asked to be replaced out because the people in this game don't seem to enjoy the way I play. I hope you don't hold it against whoever replaces me, as it is something I do as all alignments.

Oh, well that is just swell. At least you have the decency to do that, I'll give you that much.

Unvote

Now where was I...

Vote: semioldguy

[Josh Lyman]

Unvote

That's rather irritating.

[Battousai]

Vote Count:

Chamber (4) – Manzcar, Kirbyoshi, Budja, ChiboSempai
Budja (3) – Pomegranate, GreenDude, semioldguy
semioldguy (2) – chamber, SocioPath
GreenDude (1) – Snow_Bunny
Snow_Bunny (1) – Nachomamma8


Not voting (1): Josh Lyman

With 12 alive, it takes 7 to lynch!


Chamber asked asked for replacement. Deadline will not be extended.

[GreenDude]

unvote

I only wanted to lynch Budja cuz he was racist but he's changed his faith.

vote:Sociopath

Your stances and your thoughts are ridiculous. Esentially what you are saying, is that you could very well go through an entire game just posting 'vote' and 'unvote' and typing anything else is unnecessary, because screw REASONING! We certainly don't NEED to know WHY you think ANYTHING! Just that you DO what you DO! The reasons as to WHY just speak for THEMSELVES! I mean, YOU don't have to explain yourself, they can just read the thread, and then READ YOUR MIND as to WHY you vote the way you vote!

Screw this guy. Seriously.

Unvote
Vote: chamber There is zero reason to let this guy live.

I think Chamber was misunderstood and sociopath sounds like he is trying to explain what chamber is saying and get an easy townie kill because he says it doesn't matter whether chamber is townie or not.

Sociopath is even saying to screw chamber. In my opinion screwing would mean lynching without adequete reason.

I don't think that a theme game will have just vanilla townies and mafia. There will be interesting roles and chamber might have something important.

And just because chamber is requesting a replacement doesn't mean he's scum, he might be an important townie who if lynched could ruin the town.

[GreenDude]

@mod: Sorry, still getting used to doing the different colors.