Open 291 Frenenemies (+ other guy) - Game over: Wolves win!

[Glass]

chkscum

lol, anyways I reread and still do not see what I am missing. chk did not attack quaroath and quaroath seems to think that he was attacked. Help?

Pre-edit: you are already voting me aaah, thanks for keeping up.

[Crazy]

It could only kill the discussion if everyone has the same opinion I do... which I highly doubt. I felt the need to point it out because, to me, at that current moment, it's not worth much; NOW, however, it strikes me that Quar still felt the need to elaborate.

I'm taking "it strikes me" to mean that chk found it suspicious, which is silly, because Quar only really "elaborated" because you (Glass) pointed his choo-choo comment out to him.

I also dislike the way chk phrased that. I don't like when people avoid using the words "suspicious" or "scummy" and instead say crap like "noteworthy," "interesting," "odd," or in this case, "it strikes me." It's just really wishy-washy; either he's afraid to say "scummy" or he's just trying to fill up his posts. Bleh.

[parknourie]

I am Sry dat I Unvoted (wait, should I even be sorry?) but the reason why I unvoted is due to the fact that I could no longer get a reaction from chkflip due to Park's annoying heroism

What heroism?
I merely asked for some explanation since it was at the point that we get serious.
You are seriously getting on my nerves. Solidifying my vote here.

@Crazy - I understand your point, but Wizrak's "I'm here, I'm a retard, I'm not paying attention" attitude and his previous posts are making me to choose him as a stronger scum candidate.

@aaah - Reasons on the vote?
Guys, RVS stage is over...

[wizrak]

@Mod

"I'm here, I'm a retard, I'm not paying attention"

warning or replacement, cough*cough*

[Krazy]

Thin-skinned much?

Guys I'm really feeling this wizrak wagon.

[wizrak]

@Mod
I got test soon, can u plz find a replacement for me?
Thanks

[Quaroath]

Worst misrep I have seen in a while, although it is possible you just misread what chk said.

How? I know exactly what chk said, i have to believe you misread what I said to say I was misrepresenting the Ouroboros of logic that made chk think it was interesting that I elaborated.

Please tell me how I misreped there.

[parknourie]

@ Wiz - your replacement will die soon. Thanks for running away though.

[ThAdmiral]

vote count

Crazy - 1 (Jerbs)
Jerbs
Krazy
Quaroath - 2 (TheBigLebowski)
wizrak - 4 (smashbro_of_the_SSS, parknourie, Krazy, Glass)
Glass - 1 (aaah400)
smashbro_of_the_SSS
parknourie
TheBigLebowski - 1 (chkflip)
chkflip - 3 (Quaroath, Crazy, wizrak)
aaah400

wizrak is -2

I have prodded Jerbs, smashbro_of_the_SSS, TheBigLebowski

Have sent warning to parknourie

Have sent replacement confirmation pm to wizrak

[Crazy]

Thin-skinned much?

Guys I'm really feeling this wizrak wagon.

I'm curious; why does thin-skinned = scum?

[Quaroath]

wagoning = good for town
Albeit the way that wizrak is wagoning without any reasoning is counter-productive. I thought that this is what wizrak thought, but since his unvote for no apparent reason came up I am quite suspicious.

line 1 Wagoning is pro town
line 2 That wagon is anti town (which is how i interpret counter productive)

Good insight there (tongue in cheek) At this point wizrak has asked to be replaced, (yay) and I'm not quite ready to run the replacement to the gallows. I'm not saying we should ignroe wizraks actions but I'm going to give the replacement a couple days to try to not be so terribad. Wizraks voting pattern is horrible in the light of no reasoning behind them. It's definately suspicious but I think far to many people are jumping on this train way to fast. Some players just play... bad. This feels overly opportunistic.

lol wall void of content = worthy of unvote? Noted.
Can you tell me anything you learned from Quaroath's post besides:
-he is busy on friday-saturday
-he agrees with crazy on essentially everything

Answering questions is scummy. Gotcha.

I want to address this portion of your post directly maybe it'll help with explaining why I feel I didn't misrepresent chkflp.

The post wasn't empty of content, it was a direct answer to a question posed to me. The person that asked the question was satisfied with it. I'm pretty sure void of content =/= satisfactory answer.

Next: I said this in response to this:

Now, which comment is more odd - Quaroath's choo-choo comment without him actually being on the wagon or the fact that Glass felt it necessary to point out the obvious? Neither. They're both dismissable.

Saying something's dismissable doesn't do anything except kill a possible discussion point. Why'd you feel the need to point that out?

It could only kill the discussion if everyone has the same opinion I do... which I highly doubt. I felt the need to point it out because, to me, at that current moment, it's not worth much; NOW, however, it strikes me that Quar still felt the need to elaborate.

This though is just ridiculous. You pointed out the glass/me interaction and that it might be off, (thereby implying a question), so I answered it (the implied question). Answering questions is scummy. Gotcha.

The only part you pull from that quote is “Answering questions is scummy, gotcha” Way to strip away the context of the quote.

Followed by this:

At the end, I think I'll unvote: vote: chkflp for getting his knickers in a knot and portraying me answering two peoples implied questions and saying that its odd that I did so.

He said no such thing. He said:

I felt the need to point it out because, to me, at that current moment, it's not worth much; NOW, however, it strikes me that Quar still felt the need to elaborate.

Worst misrep I have seen in a while, although it is possible you just misread what chk said.

The fact that he thought out loud saying “it strikes me that quaroath had to elaborate” is like waving a flag saying “hey look, this might be scummy, but I’m not going to say it because I don’t want to take a stance.” I don’t feel that I misrepresented what he did at all. It wasn’t striking before I answered the question, but it was afterwards? Then why ask the question in the first place?

If you still feel I misrepresented what he said, I'm willing to agree to disagree, I just don't feel that I did.

[Krazy]

I'm curious; why does thin-skinned = scum?

Oh, it doesn't, it just makes me feel better about the wagon. I mean, that was a pretty tame insult compared to what I've seen on pretty much every thread of this site.

So yes, it was "sort of" a joke. More like, "At some point, I just want you to be scum so I can feel better about wanting to lynch you."

[Crazy]

Okay... but why does wizrak having thin skin make you feel better about the wagon?

[Jerbs]

sorry

ive been busy

catching up now

[Krazy]

Okay... but why does wizrak having thin skin make you feel better about the wagon?

Like this: "The thin-skinned overreaction of wizrak makes me not want to play with her, so I want to lynch her. Thus I want her to be scum, so I feel better about wanting to lynch her." Does that make sense? It wasn't really a funny joke to begin with, and is just dreadful when I have to break it down. Was it really that hard to follow?

[Glass]

wagoning = good for town
Albeit the way that wizrak is wagoning without any reasoning is counter-productive. I thought that this is what wizrak thought, but since his unvote for no apparent reason came up I am quite suspicious.

line 1 Wagoning is pro town
line 2 That wagon is anti town (which is how i interpret counter productive)

Incorrect. Note the "without any reasoning" portion in line 2. That is a very big difference.

The post wasn't empty of content, it was a direct answer to a question posed to me. The person that asked the question was satisfied with it. I'm pretty sure void of content =/= satisfactory answer.

1. The question crazy asked was rhetorical.
2. Not true, it is very easy to give a satisfactory answer void of content. Let's say you ask me what my favourite colour is. I say green. My answer is both satisfactory and contentless.

The only part you pull from that quote is “Answering questions is scummy, gotcha” Way to strip away the context of the quote.

Yes, because posting quotes in quotes in quotes extremely irritating to read and write and in this context is entirely unneeded since I took the part of the sequence out that I wanted to comment on. If people need clarification of what I am saying they can look back a couple of posts.

The fact that he thought out loud saying “it strikes me that quaroath had to elaborate” is like waving a flag saying “hey look, this might be scummy, but I’m not going to say it because I don’t want to take a stance.” I don’t feel that I misrepresented what he did at all. It wasn’t striking before I answered the question, but it was afterwards? Then why ask the question in the first place?

If you still feel I misrepresented what he said, I'm willing to agree to disagree, I just don't feel that I did.

Sigh, I guess it is just a gross misinterpretation on one of our parts. To me "it strikes me that" = "It now comes to my attention that". But you and crazy seem to think that "It strikes me that" = "It strikes me as odd that". Would love for chk to comment on what he meant.

Anyways, onto other people.
@Krazy
Anything useful to say? I just did an iso on you and still find nothing that you have contributed to the game. It goes the same with people like TBL, aaah, wizrak and jerbs; but active lurking is much scummier than simply lurking.

[Krazy]

I just FoS'd wizrak for poor RVS play and they promptly quit the game. Despite my asinine jokes, my FoS is still on wizrak's role.

Honestly there's so few active players right now I'm finding it difficult to bite at anything. Crazy is greenish to me, I have a nulltell on you, parknourie's FoS just quit the game, and damn near the rest of the game is inactive. What should I be commenting on here?

You seem to be a bit interested in Quaroth right now, are you suspicious of him or only poking him?

[Krazy]

This feels overly opportunistic.

I would be more worried about the opportunistic nature of the current votes if there was enough active players for a lynch to actually be possible. Wagoning on a lynch is pointless if there isn't a quorum!

[Glass]

A bit of both I suppose, I would not poke at him if I was not suspicious of him. I cannot really make a case on him with such limited information. I also wanted to see wizrak say something which clearly is not going to happen now.

You should be commenting on anything that will get people to stop lurking and get into the game.

For example: aaah, why come in and just vote without any reason and run off? Are you so sure of glass being scum that you don't feel the need to contribute to the conversation?

[Krazy]

Honestly I was laughing so hard when I realized Aaah had voted for the same person twice without an explanation either time that I didn't deem it worth responding to. All of the lurkers are night-kill bait, if not lurking scum, until they get into the game and start contributing. In fact, since we have two factions, they might be both!

Unfortunately, of the lurkers, two of them literally have an RVS vote and an anti-prod post. They don't even have enough content for me to come up with something clever to draw them in.

[Krazy]

I know, why don't we discuss which order we're going to lynch the lurkers in?

I say we do Jerbs last, since I like his avatar. So how about this:

First wizrak (unless the replacement does some SERIOUS backpedaling)

then:
aaah400
(for not even realizing he was voting the same person twice)

then:
TheBigLebowski (for vanishing from multiple games simultaneously)

then:
smashbro (because I'm running out of reasons)

then:
Jerbs (because I like his avatar so he goes last).

Objections? Anyone?

[Crazy]

Honestly I was laughing so hard when I realized Aaah had voted for the same person twice without an explanation either time that I didn't deem it worth responding to.

But you

did

respond to aaah! Obviously you just made up this excuse on the spot.

UNVOTE: chkflip
VOTE: Krazy

[Crazy]

Another reason to lynch Krazy:

Thin-skinned much?

Guys I'm really feeling this wizrak wagon.

It's clear from this context that Krazy was intending to use wizrak's "thin skin" as a reason to lynch him. The way Krazy started backpedaling on this when I questioned him about it reeks of Krazy-scum. See posts #111 and #114 where he insists that he

didn't

intend it as a scum-tell.

[Krazy]

Indeed.

I can not tell how serious you are about this vote. Is this a real FoS or are you just bored and I'm the only one who responds frequently?

Oh I see it's real. I should just OMGUS you so that at least we'll have something to talk about other than me trolling wizrak.

[Quaroath]

@Glass #115 Fair enough. I misread what you posted (Or at the least didn’t understand what you were saying, thank you for clarifying)
Also, my favorite color is Purple! For the exact shade, see Barney the Dinosaur.
While I understand that in a very technical sense, an answer can be vapid and satisfactory; in the context of a mafia game it’s not really true. I wasn’t asked my favorite color; I was asked what I found notable about the game to that point… so I posted what I found notable. Rhetorical or not, it got me to read through the game and get involved with it… so, I guess it accomplished what Crazy wanted it to.

I also disagree with your stance on quoting (which if it isn’t already, will be obvious the longer the game goes on). I hate to have to go dig up posts to see what the context of a quote was. Because of this, it irritates me when others quote me out of context. I understand what you are saying; I just disagree with the methodology of forcing others to go digging around in posts.

@Krazy on 116 and 117: Plz don’t poke me, I bruise easy, and I’m ticklish. Nasty combo that. .
And I can’t help but agree on the lack of activity (pot lurkers, meet kettle (me)). I want the game to pick up so it doesn’t feel like 3-4 people playing a 13 player game. Not sure about the thin skinned argument between crazy and krazy (god help me late game keeping that straight). I don’t find either side particularly scummy atm.