Mini 884 - Last Man Standing (Over)

[pwnz]

Let's wait before everyone else to join the party, shall we? Porkchop, Ben, Amished, ConfidAnon, pwnz, don... Explain a stance on the argument Ecto and I just had, and take a firm stance, and give (1) reason why. "I agree with so-and-so" is not a good answer. Also, please answer all questions asked of you. Thank you, and have a nice day.

Can I take the stance that you are both retarded and I hate you both? That's how I feel. *hic

[Ectomancer]

and you didn't stop to think that any of it might be important? You clearly see me trying to squeeze a straight answer from him, you might go "Hey Nacho, just answer the stupid question", or you might say, I see where he's coming from, I don't see that he's being scummy. Hell, if you were just watching closely to see what would come of it, I could accept that, but you're just skimming with disinterest? For Nacho's benefit, the scum motive in this case would be a general sitting back and waiting until he could see which town wagon had the best momentum to join. Until then, no need to really pay much attention or do more than skim...

[Ectomancer]

Let's wait before everyone else to join the party, shall we? Porkchop, Ben, Amished, ConfidAnon, pwnz, don... Explain a stance on the argument Ecto and I just had, and take a firm stance, and give (1) reason why. "I agree with so-and-so" is not a good answer. Also, please answer all questions asked of you. Thank you, and have a nice day.

Can I take the stance that you are both retarded and I hate you both? That's how I feel. *hic

Sure, take that stance. I expect 2 paragraphs, one for each of us, consisting of at least 5 sentences in each explaining why we are retarded. We already know why you hate.

[don_johnson]

and you didn't stop to think that any of it might be important? You clearly see me trying to squeeze a straight answer from him, you might go "Hey Nacho, just answer the stupid question", or you might say, I see where he's coming from, I don't see that he's being scummy. Hell, if you were just watching closely to see what would come of it, I could accept that, but you're just skimming with disinterest? For Nacho's benefit, the scum motive in this case would be a general sitting back and waiting until he could see which town wagon had the best momentum to join. Until then, no need to really pay much attention or do more than skim...

don't be a hypocrite. i don't "clearly see" anything. just because i'm not paying attention to your whiny little ass doesn't mean i'm not paying attention.

every game of mafia i've been in starts with some huge drawn out argument between two assholes who disagree over whether water is really wet or the fact that it is simply not dry.

why don't

you

comment on the really crappy projection of being "jumpy" that confidanon seems to have passed off while

avoiding answering

one of the simplest questions in mafia?

[Vi]

I like d_j's list, but not because they haven't explained their RVS votes so much as because they're already flying under the radar.

Unvote: don_johnson

Let's see, VP Baltar, Sotty7, Amished, maybe ConfidAnon and PorkExpress... Oh hay, may as well go with the statistically probable one.

Vote: VP Baltar

(L-6)

[Ectomancer]

Haha Donkitty has claws

There is no hypocrisy in asking you to comment on the leading wagon that has taken up half the games posting, as opposed to not commenting on a comment you made without even a vote. I'm supposed to take you seriously? You were the one posting tl;dr pal. Why do you care about ConfidAnon not answering a question, and not about Nacho actively refusing to answer? Don't need to fling mud where mud already exists?

[Amished]

I don't see the blatant scumminess from Nacho that you all do, apparently, and I view Ecto as a tunneled townie. There you go.

Awww, Vi, vote with me, it's a good vote and there's a bandwagon starting! If you join now, I have sweets

[Sotty7]

Both him and DJ are jumpy, but nacho more so than DJ. Interesting.

What's jumpy about Don?

Hmmm . . . I see absolutly nothing scummy about d3x questioning Nm8, and it's a stretch to call it scum trying to get out of two RVS votes. Note to self: If Nm8 flips scum, Sotty is suspicious for this defense.

Yeah I admitted that is a stretch. I am trying to figure just what made d3x pick Nacho's vote, say over my vote to question.

Note to self, if d3x flips scum Confid is suspicious for this defense. See what I did there?

Right now, Nacho is obviously scummy . . . but not enough so that it warrants a vote from me yet.

What? What does warrant a vote from you?

Would you be reacting the same way if you weren't being voted for? Just wondering. Because as of right now, a few people share your suspicions... They just don't express them as... colorfully as you do.

What do you expect him to say to this? “Actually no I wouldn't act this way if you voted someone else!” Yeah I don't see that happening. You are pushing Ecto's buttons as much as he is yours. It's not making this game a fun read.

if any of you have explained your random votes since and i have missed said explanations simply refer me to the post said information is contained within.

Mine was just a wagon vote. The player before my post voted d3x so I jumped on. That's all it was. Why is it such a big deal to explain RVS votes?

Unvote, Vote: Confid

The “So obviously scummy but I won't vote” thing pushed me over the edge.

[VP Baltar]

Right now, Nacho is obviously scummy . . . but not enough so that it warrants a vote from me yet.

What?

random votes should be the easiest votes to explain in the game of mafia. not sure why someone would avoid discussing it altogether.

What?

Yes I intend to ignore your questions. I have no intentions of playing that particular scum game.

I'll happily lynch you for ignoring his legitimate questions about your case.

Can I take the stance that you are both retarded and I hate you both? That's how I feel. *hic

How about you actually start playing the game? If not, feel free to die.

Vote: VP Baltar

(L-6)

Took you long enough.

Unvote, Vote: ConfidAnon

Not voting "obv scum"....priceless.

[Ectomancer]

Yes I intend to ignore your questions. I have no intentions of playing that particular scum game.

I'll happily lynch you for ignoring his legitimate questions about your case.

Bring your vote on. I'll happily hit you right back for your hypocritical refusal to do the same for Nacho when

he has been doing it the entire game

. Those questions are designed to do nothing but argue and create quote pyramids to drown the town in. I can point to any recent post about the matter to illustrate that most of the town is bored with the matter. Nacho at least recognized the truth of that and called for a truce for town to weigh in, while you seem to prefer to see quote pyramids?

Why does ConfidAnon deserve the vote more than pwnz? Let me show you how you should have done it:

ConfidAnon, what exactly do you mean by "Nacho is obviously scummy?"

Substance pwnz, today.

unvote, vote pwnz

[VP Baltar]

It's not that he's not explaining why he finds him obviously scummy. It's that he says he's obviously scummy but doesn't vote him. Does not compute.

Unless you're fencesitting scum, of course.

Mod, how about a votecount

[VP Baltar]

Sorry, forgot MM had one on the last page. nm.

[d3x]

Mod

- Please note the sig. I should be available for the rest of the day, but no promises after that. Sorry all, work is taking me to Texas for a few days.

Apart from that, large post follows. Sorry again, but I'm catching up on a lot that's happened in 1 day. I'll be answering in {mostly} chronological order.

--

Cases based solely on the rvs are bad cases and I doubt scum would play so poorly, but you never know.

Which is why my question to Nacho is all the more valid, imo.

--

I don't see what he is getting at as being scummy behaviour from nacho.

I assume then that you disagree with my 3rd point in p62? I do agree that the wagon that is following is a bit much, though. But I'll get to that in a bit.

--

If it's not a scum tell why do you need to watch out for it? Why was that part of the reasons you voted him?

As I said in the post you quoted here,

being defensive by itself

. That was not the only thing Nacho was doing. He was dodging and deflecting questions {which he still has not answered}.

the intensity of your questioning just didn't seem to fit the crime in my eyes.

We'll have to agree to disagree here. I don't think my questioning was that intense at all.

1.I asked if he his Vote was RVS.
2.I asked why he wouldn't commit to an answer.
3.I asked if he expected me to ignore that he deflected my question.

That was it.

--

why are you assuming anything in the first place?

Please tell me what I was assuming. If I recall correctly, my first post directed at you was a question so that I wouldn't have to assume. You did not answer and that sparked this whole discussion {between you and I}.

How does this make you feel?

While I'm wary that someone I find a bit scummy {due to the RVS extension thing} is following my lead, I don't have too much of a problem with Ecto's post. It would be rather odd for me to go after someone who shares the same opinion as me. I'm more concerned with a few of the others on my wagon, but nothing overwhelming for the moment.

Wow, an actual answer.

Lol! You are the one who has been refusing to answer things, Nacho. Where have I dodged your questions {or anyone's, for that matter}? Was your Vote on Ecto Random or not?

Do you agree with Ecto's former statement that you don't need a scum motive to vote someone?

First, I think you're taking this a bit out of context. Let me pull the reference so it's clear in everyone's minds.

There does not have to be an assignable scum 'motive' for your reaction. Instead it illustrates a mindset of a player who does not wish to divulge any information or be held to a specific opinion.

I believe he is saying that we don't need to fully know the Scum motivation behind something to consider it scummy. I generally agree with this, although it's a bit flimsy for my taste.

@Benmage and Porkchop:

Really? Is that the best you can come up with? "He's scummy because Ecto said so."

This.

@Ben: But when the RVS has already ended, is it scummy to attempt to extend it?

Where do you consider the RVS as having ended, Nacho?

--

Right now, Nacho is obviously scummy . . . but not enough so that it warrants a vote from me yet.

What would it take to make you Vote someone? What level of scummy comes after 'obviously scummy'?

HoS:CA

--

Mmkay, then demonstrate how my mindset can be attributed to scum by example.

Didn't I do this in p62? And wasn't it ignored? Is that a theme for you, Nacho? Or did you miss it 'wading through all the bullshit' of a 3 point post?

--

Also vote for d3x, and benmage, if I could.

Reasons?

--

I am trying to figure just what made d3x pick Nacho's vote, say over my vote to question.

Because I felt that Nacho's might be serious. Nothing more, nothing less. Had he answered, I would've dropped it right there.

The player before my post voted d3x so I jumped on.

Point and case.

--

Tl;dr. Sorry again, guys. I'll try and not make this a habit.

[pwnz]

Substance pwnz, today.

unvote, vote pwnz

Hey dude, what do you want me to say? Day one has been nothing but people arguing over jumpy play in relation to rvs, how long the rvs should last overall, bla bla bla. I mean, its not like I really have any sort of substantial arguments to make here yet, so why bother trying like some of these other hot-headed numb sculls? We don't know who anybody is yet, which means we have no clues, which means all day one is and ever will be is a guessing game, so lets just lynch somebody and get on with it. *hic

[VP Baltar]

pwnz, how experienced would you say you are at mafia? When was your last game prior to this one?

[Benmage]

You also thought post 61 was by porkchop express.

Quit making me look bad! But seriously i do need to read more carefully and not post off memory alone.

@Ben:

But when the RVS has already ended, is it scummy to attempt to extend it?

Are you saying that people who do "scummy" things should be excused? Because you DID say that "many things people see as 'scummy' both town and scum do from time to time". If not, what was the point of that statement?

Do you believe that the RVS is beneficial to town?

Bladdy bladdy bladdy ask some smarter questions please or dont mind me when i dont answer all of em. "Scummy to extend rvs"... Yes, no depends...bad question.

Next one: No you cant excuse scummy behavior, but you cant/shouldnt condemn people on minor things alone; usually...Things that are all wifom, would scum do this... would town do this etc etc crap like that. I've been in games where buddying, bussing, answering/defending questions geared toward another..things town, scum, just players do..and that was considered a case. Its sort've what I was referencing with that statement.

"Rvs benefical to town"...bad question...yes, no, i dont care...i like it, what do you think? How is it bad, how is it good? (see those last 2 questions I made...they sound like things you'd ask... quick meaningless questions to make me look like i'm being inquisitive hoooray)

[Ectomancer]

pwnz, how experienced would you say you are at mafia? When was your last game prior to this one?

I'm also baffled by that 2004 join date when combined with the play...

[Sotty7]

Why does ConfidAnon deserve the vote more than pwnz? Let me show you how you should have done it:

ConfidAnon, what exactly do you mean by "Nacho is obviously scummy?"

Substance pwnz, today.

unvote, vote pwnz

I thought you wanted to ride nacho's wagon to a lynch. Why the sudden change of heart?

The player before my post voted d3x so I jumped on.

Point and case.

? I don't get it.

[d3x]

@Sotty- Your Vote was clearly RVS, Nacho's wasn't. Hence my reaction was different.

[Ectomancer]

Why does ConfidAnon deserve the vote more than pwnz? Let me show you how you should have done it:

ConfidAnon, what exactly do you mean by "Nacho is obviously scummy?"

Substance pwnz, today.

unvote, vote pwnz

I thought you wanted to ride nacho's wagon to a lynch. Why the sudden change of heart?

Responses indicate a lack of interest and beating the same dead horse won't generate new useful content. Nor is anything further I do along those lines likely to alter his starting objectionable behavior. I also liked post 98 where he chose to take the opportunity to force others into the discussion rather than focus on a refusal to volley questions back and forth as VP Baltar did. All of that calls for searching for other likely suspects.

[ConfidAnon]

ConfidAnon, why so hesitant? If I'm OBVIOUSLY scummy, then I OBVIOUSLY deserve a vote. Right?

You've done scummy things in the thread, but doing scummy things don't neccessarily mean you are scum. Town and scum alike do scummy things, and my gut's telling me to hold off from voting you at the present time.

Unvote
Vote: ConfidAnon

Also vote for d3x, and benmage, if I could.

Any particular reasoning behind this?

if any of you have explained your random votes since and i have missed said explanations simply refer me to the post said information is contained within.

didn't notice sotty's and vp's right off the bat. confid's caught my eye because he actively avoided explaining his "random" vote when asked. random votes should be the easiest votes to explain in the game of mafia. not sure why someone would avoid discussing it altogether. also, not sure how asking "why?" in spanish is classified as an "overreaction" and relates to me being "jumpy".

Hooray for a post that's full of fail, courtesy of don_johnson!

In the quoted section, you've called votes random a few times. Random votes are just that, random. They require no explanation, they are just there to start conversation on Day 1. Please explain to me why a

random

vote requires justification?

Also, although it doesn't matter, I voted you because you were scum in a game where you got lynched and I got night killed right afterwards (ongoing, so can't specifically name it I don't think.)

note to confid: notes to self are explicitly not notes to self when published in thread. try a post-it pad.

post 85. no. no. no. please god... no.

top pick for scum: confidanon

So far what I'm picking up from you is that I'm your top pick from scum for OMGUS, because your argument about me not explaining my RVS vote is illogical. So I'm extremely happy with my vote at this point.

don't be a hypocrite. i don't "clearly see" anything. just because i'm not paying attention to your whiny little ass doesn't mean i'm not paying attention.

This does not make sense. Coherent posts please.

As for the requested stance on the Nacho/Ecto argument, I admit I've skimmed through the agument, I'll give it a thorough reread later when I've got a bit more time and then give my stance.

[Amished]

Right now, Nacho is obviously scummy . . . but not enough so that it warrants a vote from me yet.

Pretty much sums it up. Why would you keep your random vote (that you've now talked about random votes have no meaning); instead of voting for somebody obviously scummy? It's a sure sign of scum not wanting to vote for somebody (buddy, town, either way works; initially leaning towards town).

[ConfidAnon]

Pretty much sums it up. Why would you keep your random vote (that you've now talked about random votes have no meaning); instead of voting for somebody obviously scummy? It's a sure sign of scum not wanting to vote for somebody (buddy, town, either way works; initially leaning towards town).

Because my random vote has been given merit by don_johnson's play, and I like where it is right now more so than moving to Nacho.

Like I said in my 120, doing scummy things does not neccessarily make one scum. Townies do scummy things, and right now to me Nacho reads more as scummy town than scummy scum.

Amished . . . what is your opinion of my points on don_johnson (this question goes to everyone as well)?

[VP Baltar]

@ConfidAnon

What are your points on don johnson? That he questioned the reasoning behind your RVS vote?

Can you give me a quick bullet list of the "scummy things" you have seen from nacho?

Also, why do you say this:

As for the requested stance on the Nacho/Ecto argument, I admit I've skimmed through the agument, I'll give it a thorough reread later when I've got a bit more time and then give my stance.

Which I interpret to mean you haven't really been keeping up with their spat, while you also are speaking definitively about scummy actions from nacho? If you have only skimmed their back and forth, how can you be sure about your reads on those actions being scummy?

[Amished]

Well if you think people doing scummy things doesn't make them scum, why are you voting for anybody ever? What you did was scummy enough to earn a vote.

Let's see, you have your vote on DJ for being jumpy, but since DJ is more jumpy than nacho, DJ gets scum read and Nacho gets town read? Something like that sum up your position? Yeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaahhhh, not buying it.