Newbie 848 - The Bunny Mafia Family - over finally!

[broncofaninmd]

Sorry, addressed this yesterday, but must've forgotten to hit submit.

Unvote: MichelSableheart.
Vote: Jase

Please answer all questions addressed to you.

It seems a bit early to vote me for "not answering questions"...this seems a bit suspicious, and I'd like you to address it. Now, I said three votes was too much because it's only one more vote and there could be a quick lynch.

It's actually kinda funny that you vote me for not answering a question when you completely ignore my post 62.

This post specifically claims hes suspicious of you for voting him for not answering questions.
Not for answering questions fast enough.

???

No, no I was suspicious because he voted me for not answering questions before waiting a reasonable time to answer.

Really??

It's actually kinda funny that you vote me for not answering a question when you completely ignore my post 62.

Then explain this? [/b]

[Jase]

1. Give me an amount of time that is reasonable to you. It's an aggressive statement, sure, but it doesn't cloud the issue. Instead, it evokes stronger emotion from the targeted player, and takes away the likelihood that scum will look over their posts closer, and answer based on personal opinion instead of what might necessarily be better for their side. So I will continue to make such phrases in the future as I see fit.

2. Why is it my duty? If I do not believe the statement will lead to a mislynch, it doesn't really matter. If the issue presses itself, I am obliged to answer. But until then, I have no obligations whatsoever. If you find a misunderstanding, press it.

3. It's called scumhunting. I have a suspicion, and will continue attacking you until you can manage to defend fully against them. Normally, OMGUS voting isn't a good way to do so, which is still what I view your vote as. Make your suspicions clearer by utilizing quotes if you want to change my mind, as well as the minds of others.

I appreciate the numbered paragraphs. Thank you sir.

1.A reasonable amount of time...well if they haven't posted I would say until they do post (However voting them for lurking is another matter) How can you say it doesn't cloud the issue when you imply that I've said or implied something that a) I didn't, b) is wrong, and c) is extremely scummy. You will have to clarify the third sentence for me, I'm not sure what you mean.

2.I disagree whole heartedly. It is up to you to make sure that you're understood because such misunderstandings make it difficult to get an accurate read on you.

3.Ok, so, my version of events here, you ask me why three votes are too much at this point in the game, then you wait roughly a day, and I haven't posted yet, so you vote me, claiming that I'm not answering questions. Slightly less than a day after that I answer the question (apparently to your satisfaction), and declare suspicion of how quickly you vote me based on the accusation that I'm not answering questions, I also point out that you ignored a post of mine (Post 62 was part of the answer from when you asked who my top suspects were and why, and I said, you, and I had to go but I'd qoute the reason later.). In your next post (directed at me) you misundertand the my suspicion for your vote and brush off your ignoring my post. I explain why I said you voted too early, I continue to show that I have a problem with you ignoring posts, then FoS and imediately vote you when I see that I don't have a vote placed. And that seems to be pretty much where we're at, we're still arguing over why I voted you, if you are responsible for explaining yourself when someone has a problem with something you say, and all that. What is it that you think happened here?

[Jase]

Sorry, addressed this yesterday, but must've forgotten to hit submit.

Unvote: MichelSableheart.
Vote: Jase

Please answer all questions addressed to you.

It seems a bit early to vote me for "not answering questions"...this seems a bit suspicious, and I'd like you to address it. Now, I said three votes was too much because it's only one more vote and there could be a quick lynch.

It's actually kinda funny that you vote me for not answering a question when you completely ignore my post 62.

This post specifically claims hes suspicious of you for voting him for not answering questions.
Not for answering questions fast enough.

???

No, no I was suspicious because he voted me for not answering questions before waiting a reasonable time to answer.

Really??

It's actually kinda funny that you vote me for not answering a question when you completely ignore my post 62.

Then explain this? [/b]

He voted me for not answering questions (when I hadn't posted since he asked it) and he blew off a post that I expected him to respond to...I'm not sure what you're getting at here...

[Jase]

Anyways...I'm going to bed now...that means that I won't be posting for AT LEAST eight hours. I just want to make sure nobody mistakes my absence for the ignoring of any questions that may be asked while I'm not here.

[Tehstefan]

Jase, I have to say, I don't like your defense. Its not so much what your saying, but how hyper defensive you are. You shouldn't be so worried and defensive. Still, that's a small scum tell at this point.

broncofaninmd, however, is giving off far more scummy vibes to me. He seems to be drilling in on one player, and completely ignoring everything else. He seems to me to be trying to start a bandwagon, and I simply don't like how he's going about it. The bit about ignoring the post concerns me too.

Unvote, Vote:broncofaninmd

What do you think of Jase's defense, and what other reasons do you have for thinking him scum? You seem awfully quick to jump on him for little reason.

[Incognito]

Vote Count #4 of Day 1

Sposh (1) <-~ MichelSableheart
Tehstefan (1) <-~ Sposh
TheBeanBurrito (1) <-~ StarOfTheShow
Jase (2) <-~ Nachomamma8, broncofaninmd
Nachomamma8 (1) <-~ Jase
broncofaninmd (1) <-~ Tehstefan

Not voting (2) <-~ TheBeanBurrito, sxizzor

With 9 alive, 5 will do it.

Tuesday, October 20th at 6 P.M. EDT.

[Jase]

Anyways...I'm going to bed now...that means that I won't be posting for AT LEAST eight hours. I just want to make sure nobody mistakes my absence for the ignoring of any questions that may be asked while I'm not here.

I'm mostly just irritated. At least from my point of view it seems a little silly that he's still clinging to this.

[Sposh]

Unvote, Vote: Bronco

I think that his questioning of Jase is just trying to

look

town, but isn't actually accomplishing anything! Particularly, post 100. I'd like to know what Bronco is trying to accomplish here.

[broncofaninmd]

jase says

I didn't say it was too early to vote me, I said it was too early to vote me for not answering questions.

In post 80

jase says

It seems a bit early to vote me for "not answering questions"...this seems a bit suspicious

Its a lie, and the way he uses the quotation marks he clearly means "for not answering questions" He even reiterates it in the same post

It's actually kinda funny that you vote me for not answering a question when you completely ignore my post 62.

Also his uneasiness is not sitting well with me. In post 63

jase says

My vote previously was a random vote, also I thought he had three votes(including mine) aand thaat thaat was entirely too much

He already posted why he unvoted, which by the way was a random vote, then when some one questions him, he adds to it. Once again this statement is not right. Bean burrito had 2 votes at the time. One random(his) and A OMGUS. In post 80 he claims

I said three votes was too much because it's only one more vote and there could be a quick lynch.

If he felt a quick lynch could happen, and he was worried about the vote count, why didn't he mention it before. His posts are full of lies and deceptive grammar.

[Nachomamma8]

1. Give me an amount of time that is reasonable to you. It's an aggressive statement, sure, but it doesn't cloud the issue. Instead, it evokes stronger emotion from the targeted player, and takes away the likelihood that scum will look over their posts closer, and answer based on personal opinion instead of what might necessarily be better for their side. So I will continue to make such phrases in the future as I see fit.

2. Why is it my duty? If I do not believe the statement will lead to a mislynch, it doesn't really matter. If the issue presses itself, I am obliged to answer. But until then, I have no obligations whatsoever. If you find a misunderstanding, press it.

3. It's called scumhunting. I have a suspicion, and will continue attacking you until you can manage to defend fully against them. Normally, OMGUS voting isn't a good way to do so, which is still what I view your vote as. Make your suspicions clearer by utilizing quotes if you want to change my mind, as well as the minds of others.

I appreciate the numbered paragraphs. Thank you sir.

1.A reasonable amount of time...well if they haven't posted I would say until they do post (However voting them for lurking is another matter) How can you say it doesn't cloud the issue when you imply that I've said or implied something that a) I didn't, b) is wrong, and c) is extremely scummy. You will have to clarify the third sentence for me, I'm not sure what you mean.

2.I disagree whole heartedly. It is up to you to make sure that you're understood because such misunderstandings make it difficult to get an accurate read on you.

3.Ok, so, my version of events here, you ask me why three votes are too much at this point in the game, then you wait roughly a day, and I haven't posted yet, so you vote me, claiming that I'm not answering questions. Slightly less than a day after that I answer the question (apparently to your satisfaction), and declare suspicion of how quickly you vote me based on the accusation that I'm not answering questions, I also point out that you ignored a post of mine (Post 62 was part of the answer from when you asked who my top suspects were and why, and I said, you, and I had to go but I'd qoute the reason later.). In your next post (directed at me) you misundertand the my suspicion for your vote and brush off your ignoring my post. I explain why I said you voted too early, I continue to show that I have a problem with you ignoring posts, then FoS and imediately vote you when I see that I don't have a vote placed. And that seems to be pretty much where we're at, we're still arguing over why I voted you, if you are responsible for explaining yourself when someone has a problem with something you say, and all that. What is it that you think happened here?

1. Everybody's sense of time is different. I still saw you online, so I thought you'd respond.

2. I don't need you to get a good read on me until I fall under heavy suspicion. If you get a good read on me and I'm a townie, guess who the scum NKs day one?

3. We're playing cat and mouse. I chase, you run.

[Nachomamma8]

Unvote, Vote: Bronco

I think that his questioning of Jase is just trying to

look

town, but isn't actually accomplishing anything! Particularly, post 100. I'd like to know what Bronco is trying to accomplish here.

I love how you're piggybacking right onto Teh's back. In fact, you just pretty much said the exact same thing Teh said, but in different words...

Unvote: Jase

Vote: Sposh

It's obvious what Bronco is trying to accomplish. He's trying to scumhunt; someone brought up the subject of Jase's scumminess, so he added his input to the argument. You basically agreed with the poster before you and voted who he did. Mind explaining that? Also, why is Jase or me not scummier to you than bronco?

[Incognito]

StarOfTheShow and sxizzor have been prodded.

[Tehstefan]

Unvote: Bronco

You answered my questions, and gave a decent, if not spectacular, reason for what you were doing. I'm going to be watching you, but for now, your just a FOS.

Sposh, what is with that? Your bringing nothing new to the table, surely you could try and find something new?

Vote: Sposh

I don't like how quickly you were to try to bandwagon, just like Nachomamma said. Also, you jump in randomly, and vote, without reason. Seems to me your lurking, which is a definate scumtell.

Nachomamma, from what I've seen, your pretty good about scumhunting, so what reads have you gotten on people?

[Nachomamma8]

Well, most players seem neutral to me, but there are two scummish players that are sticking out right now, and those people are Sposh and Jase.

Sposh doesn't seem to have the town's best interests in mind, as evident in his beginning posts, as well as by Michel's post 64 evaluation of him. It seems he's looking to lead a mislynch on the newer players, evident in post 68. He asks TBB why he unvoted,

even though he stated the very reason in the post before

. This, combined with the fact that he dropped it almost immediately afterwards, gives him scumpoints in my book. Then comes his almost immediate piggybacking on Bronco from Teh's read without providing any new information; instead, he simply rephrases it a bit.

Jase is fairly neutral, but he does have a few scummy bits. Notice all the contridictions he has in his defense from my attack; he votes me for voting him too early, then votes ME for voting too early. His main defense against my original attack is the fact that I refused to respond to his post 62; but if he had done his reading, he would've noticed that I already explained it in a response to Teh a bit back in post 59. Then, he comments on how he thought I was voting him for something unreasonable even though Michel's first vote was for something he even ADMITTED was a small scumtell, and votes me for doing so, an equally small scumtell.

[Jase]

jase says

I didn't say it was too early to vote me, I said it was too early to vote me for not answering questions.

In post 80

jase says

It seems a bit early to vote me for "not answering questions"...this seems a bit suspicious

Its a lie, and the way he uses the quotation marks he clearly means "for not answering questions" He even reiterates it in the same post

It's actually kinda funny that you vote me for not answering a question when you completely ignore my post 62.

Also his uneasiness is not sitting well with me. In post 63

jase says

My vote previously was a random vote, also I thought he had three votes(including mine) aand thaat thaat was entirely too much

He already posted why he unvoted, which by the way was a random vote, then when some one questions him, he adds to it. Once again this statement is not right. Bean burrito had 2 votes at the time. One random(his) and A OMGUS. In post 80 he claims

I said three votes was too much because it's only one more vote and there could be a quick lynch.

If he felt a quick lynch could happen, and he was worried about the vote count, why didn't he mention it before. His posts are full of lies and deceptive grammar.

BWA!? What are you talking about? Where did I lie? I'm not entirely sure what you're referring to when you say that. Also why would you be suspicious of me for answering a question in grater detail than my previous reasoning? And finally I know that bean didn't have three votes on him, but that is what I thought at the time of my unvote.

[Jase]

1. Everybody's sense of time is different. I still saw you online, so I thought you'd respond.

2. I don't need you to get a good read on me until I fall under heavy suspicion. If you get a good read on me and I'm a townie, guess who the scum NKs day one?

3. We're playing cat and mouse. I chase, you run.

1. Fair enough. Though I still say it was too early, though if you thought that I was here because I was online I can see how you'd be suspicious.

2. So you've convinced me that you don't need to meticulously prevent yourself from being misunderstood, but I still say you ought to address anyone who has a problem with something you say.

3. Is that what you think is happening here? Really? Nothing you have said put's me in any danger.

[Jase]

Well, most players seem neutral to me, but there are two scummish players that are sticking out right now, and those people are Sposh and Jase.

Sposh doesn't seem to have the town's best interests in mind, as evident in his beginning posts, as well as by Michel's post 64 evaluation of him. It seems he's looking to lead a mislynch on the newer players, evident in post 68. He asks TBB why he unvoted,

even though he stated the very reason in the post before

. This, combined with the fact that he dropped it almost immediately afterwards, gives him scumpoints in my book. Then comes his almost immediate piggybacking on Bronco from Teh's read without providing any new information; instead, he simply rephrases it a bit.

Jase is fairly neutral, but he does have a few scummy bits. Notice all the contridictions he has in his defense from my attack; he votes me for voting him too early, then votes ME for voting too early

(I think you just said the same thing twice here, the reason I voted for you is because you didn't wait long enough to vote me considering your reason ie. too early, you still seem to misunderstand this)

. His main defense against my original attack is the fact that I refused to respond to his post 62

(No, my first defense was that you voted too soon.)

; but if he had done his reading, he would've noticed that I already explained it in a response to Teh a bit back in post 59

(Then why didn't you point me to this?)

. Then, he comments on how he thought I was voting him for something unreasonable even though Michel's first vote was for something he even ADMITTED was a small scumtell, and votes me for doing so, an equally small scumtell.

(So now Michels opinion is mine as well? It's true that I didn't think your vote was super scummy, but I did say that it was only a little suspicious, and you're the one who reacted super agressively.)

On an unrelated note, only a few of us are posting regularly, post more people, please.

[Jase]

As for bronco, well, frankly I think he's a little confused. At least he isn't sounding totally coherent to me.

[Sposh]

I don't need to add any new information when (A) there is none to add and (B) I agree with everything already said!

I think it's kind of hypocritical for Teh to vote me for repeating old reasoning... when Nacho had just said the EXACT SAME THING! He's voting me for regurgitating reasoning, which is what he just did!!!!!!!!!!

[MichelSableheart]

WTF is an L-1?
L1-3 for that matter.

L-1 is shorthand for Lynch -1, also known as 1 vote away from being lynched. In the current situation, we have 9 players alive. It therefore takes 5 votes to lynch. If someone is being voted by 4 people, he would need one more vote to be lynched, and therefore he is at L-1.

Bronco, I don't see the contradictions you are mentioning at all, though I'll have to take a close look at Jase' posts to make sure. When he says "I said it was too early to vote me for not answering questions." he correctly represents his previous posts, IMO. The same goes for "three votes is entirely too much" vs "one more vote would mean a quicklynch". That is further explanation, not a contradiction.

I'll take a thorough look at the posts thus far when I have more time available tomorrow.

[Tehstefan]

First of all, Sposh, exclamation points don't stack. No need to put more than one on. Secondly, I'm not voting you for regurgitating reasons. I'm voting you because your lurking, trying to find easy targets, and jumping on a bandwagon, instead of actually trying to scum hunt.

[Sposh]

Uhh... even more blatant hypocrisy.

It's obvious what Bronco is trying to accomplish. He's trying to scumhunt; someone brought up the subject of Jase's scumminess, so he added his input to the argument.

You basically agreed with the poster before you and voted who he did.

Mind explaining that? Also, why is Jase or me not scummier to you than bronco?

Is that not what you just did? You agreed with the poster before you and voted the same person... adding on more reasons to it doesn't matter, because when I tried to explain my own personal reasoning, you said I wasn't actually scumhunting, I was just regurgitating information! Does it matter if it's been said before if I agree with it and find it accurate?

In my opinion, you're looking for ME to be the easy target and jumping on MY bandwagon (I had the most votes at the time of your post... would that not make me the EASIEST target?).

[TheBeanBurrito]

I'm listening. Quite the conversation. I'm leaning towards Sposh. I won't be on today or tomorrow.

[MichelSableheart]

A quick post to let you all know that I made a beginning with the promised analysis, but didn't find the time to finish it, and won't be able to finish it today.

[Sposh]

I look forward to your analysis, Michel.