Mini 518: Underground Mafia, The Nightmare is Over!

[Jitsu]

Post 84:

Usually my gameplay is seen is heavily scummy right from the get go, so it's just a different feeling for me.

Post 90:

I've noticed that in games where I'm mafia, people tend not to suspect me for a good while, cause I tend to play more cautious.

So, which one is it? It seems like you are contradicting yourself here.


Post 86:

God I am such a bad pro-town player.

Are you trying to make a (not so) subtle play here that you must be pro-town because you say your play is so awful? I don't think I'm buying that. It sounds like a self-fulfilling prophecy to me -- it's like you are trying to use existing bad town play to excuse/explain even more scummy behavior.

In my opinion, saying you're a bad pro-town player is more than a bit of a cop out. From the games I've read, many of the best scum are really good town players too, so it seems to me that it would be a benefit to you to try to play better as town.

[curiouskarmadog]

I'm not sure what your asking of me karma dog...

Yes, I was surprised that no one had voted me yet, only because I am used to being voted for on page 2-3 in most games. This game was an oddity for me. I was also referring to korlash not voting me, in addition. I hope that makes sense.

think you might ahve skipped over this post..

wow, what a post.

if you like to keep things at a fast pace, why do you want to slow it down a bit? SO when you are mafia, you are more cautious? Cautious, like trying to slow the game down a bit?


this is really what I want to know.

[curiouskarmadog]

the above post is referencing my post 91

[Miztef]

OK.

So, as town, I tend to be completely careless with my actions, impatient, and jumpy.

However, as scum, I tend to play more cautiously, and keep myself under the radar. That's why in game's where I'm civilian, I tend to be attacked quite early on, and many times I stay the center of attention for long periods of time.

This game is going crazy fast in my opinion, even for my impatient self. That's why I feel it should be slowed down slightly. I'm not talking about everyone lurking or anything like that, just a little more thought to things, instead of super fast accusations on many people.

@jitsu: Yes, that "god, I'm such a bad pro-town player" was a not so subtle 'ploy'. However, it's mostly me just being frustrated. I'm not terribly good at playing scum either, I just enjoy the game. I don't pretend to be very good at it.

I'm not sure how those first 2 lines are contradicting, as a pro-town player, I am seen as scum quickly, as a scum player, usually it takes a while longer before suspicion comes my way. Does that clarify?

[Jitsu]

I'm not sure how those first 2 lines are contradicting, as a pro-town player, I am seen as scum quickly, as a scum player, usually it takes a while longer before suspicion comes my way. Does that clarify?

Yes, thanks.

[Anata112]

I've noticed that in games where I'm mafia, people tend not to suspect me for a good while, cause I tend to play more cautious. When I'm town, people tend to jump at me right away, since I play however I feel like ><.

Sorry Miztef, but this statement really jumps out at me. I have never understood why someone would say something like this. So am I supposed to assume now that you're a townie because you're expressing your opinions more freely? How do I know that you're not scum trying to play townie?

Even your subsequent explanation:

However, as scum, I tend to play more cautiously, and keep myself under the radar. That's why in game's where I'm civilian, I tend to be attacked quite early on, and many times I stay the center of attention for long periods of time.

It still doesn't make sense to me how I should interpret this. Are you claiming yourself to be a townie then?

It's interesting to me that you haven't been voted yet (if I recall correctly), yet you're claiming that everyone is jumping on you.

Anyways, I usually don't vote until I have more information. I'll be around to see how this discussion continues.[/quote]

[NabakovNabakov]

Vote Count as of Post 104

Sudo_Nym (1):

Mexal

curiouskarmadog (1):

jerubbaal

Korlash (2):

Abstract Actuary, Miztef

Miztef (1):

curiouskarmadog

Mexal (1):

Sudo_Nym

Not Voting (6):

Jayalay, Anata112, GunslingerKB, Korlash, oEJo, Jitsu

[Mexal]

I just got back from vacation. I will reread and find out where we stand tomorrow at work. But for now, there are two things I wanted to respond to because they irked me in my brief read.

What the hell, man? Did I not put the disclaimers in there, or did you just not read them? Your post tells me that you didn't read the whole thing, merely skimmed it and hoped we wouldn't notice.

We noticed.

unvote, vote: Mexal

I know, it seems a little OMGUSy, but at this point, this is the most legitimate reason I have to vote for anybody.

It doesn't matter if you put disclaimers. How does that change the point you were making? Basically what you were doing was throwing that idea out there to see if anyone latched onto it without thinking the idea through to see if it was good or not. If someone latched on to it, you could push it. If someone didn't, you had your disclaimers.

Your post doesn't seem OMGUSy, it

is

OMGUSy. No point downplaying exactly what you did when it's evidently clear.

And I kinda think its reaching to insinuate that I was trying to make it look like my incite. I personally thought it an interesting idea, but at the same time wanted to show him I was not as dumb as Mexal and fully understood where he was coming from.

Not as dumb as Mexal? Are you serious? I skimmed through the thread in 5 minutes and posted against an idea. You've spent the last 3 pages talking about how you dislike pressure votes since it's not a 100% exact way to find scum yet you criticize me for voting someone for pushing out an idea that clearly hurts the town? Tell me exactly how my reasoning above wasn't valid?


I'll post more later when I've actually read the whole thread.

[Mexal]

Ok. I'm catching up so some more things to post. I will note that I'm not the type of person who takes notes early then makes a massive post later. I'll wait til I have 2-3 things to talk about then I'll post. I'm not normally behind so this is my way of keeping up. So expect another post after this shortly if there is something else of note in the last 2 pages.

Miztef, you seem rather antsy to me. Seeking to hurry things along is very rarely in the town's interest, it's not surprising that your reactions have been met with a degree of hostility. It could just be impatience, but if it is, then you are correct.

There is a limit where taking too long is detrimental to the town. That line is definitely not now but be aware it exists.

As mentioned above, I am havious doubts that you saw the mass claim and missed Sudo_Nym's disclaimers. I mean if there was just one disclaimer, I could see overlooking it, but holy crap, that entire message was like one giant disclaimer with the full claim explanation buried somewhere in the middle. Sudo even put the word "stupid" in italics. Sure, there's a possibility that Sudo_Nym was trying to get away with innocently floating the mass claim idea, but ultimately, I agree with Korlash calling you on it and his FoS on you seemed to be a good response -- strong enough to send a message, but not overreacting. You did state your dislike of the mass claim, but people pretty much have to do that, as fighting for a mass claim would be suicide at this point. Given that Sudo_Nym was the player you attacked, I can understand his vote on you.

I didn't miss the disclaimers. I explained my reasoning above though I will mention one more thing about it.

I was able to guage his reaction. What did he do when I voted for him and said his idea was dumb? Turned around and voted for me. His defense was that he put disclaimers that it was a stupid idea, yet even with that, he still mentioned it. Why? If you know it's a stupid idea, why bring it up for discussion? Not to mention that when I called him on his self professed dumb idea, he then turns around and votes for me. I don't like it.

It looked like you were noticeably irritated that people were jumping on Mexal ("he's on god damn vacation"?). It certainly looked to me like you were jumping in to defend him and give him some excuses.

Sure, maybe Mexal didn't read closely, but Sudo_Nym was careful to include numerous disclamers. Given that you had to read a bunch of those disclaimers to even get to what Sudo_Nym was saying, I find it hard to buy the argument that he didn't read it carefully enough because he was on vacation.

Either Mexal had a really sloppy/hurried read (in which case his comments had limited usefulness anyway), or he just took an opportunity to jump on a wagon. I can't tell if you were being the voice of reason there, or helping out a scumbuddy.

Even if you did want to keep people from jumping to conclusions about Mexal, why didn't you just let Mexal answer in his own defense? You could still have posted afterwards, and we would have gotten a better read on him in the meantime.

This entire section was directed toward Mitzef yet it was about me so I'll respond.

I don't like what you're doing here. I bolded the part I don't like.

You assume that my response was dictated by a misreading and if it was, it wasn't useful. It wasn't a misreading. Then you say that I was taking an opportunity to jump on a wagon when I wasn't. The only response to his idea was a positive post from Korlash. So to say that I was jumping on a wagon is incredibly misleading of the actual situation since there was no wagon formed...or even thought about. At the same time that you're suggesting I started a wagon, you're also leaving open the idea that my vote was dictated by how poor/hurried my reading of the thread was. It wasn't. In essence, your entire post there is a discredit to my vote of sudo_nym.

That is mighty interesting. You criticize Mitsef for possibly defending me (which wasn't very true considering my post was exactly what I wanted to post) yet at the same time, you're subtetly defending sudo_nym. Interesting.

[Mexal]

I've noticed that in games where I'm mafia, people tend not to suspect me for a good while, cause I tend to play more cautious. When I'm town, people tend to jump at me right away, since I play however I feel like ><.

Sorry Miztef, but this statement really jumps out at me. I have never understood why someone would say something like this. So am I supposed to assume now that you're a townie because you're expressing your opinions more freely? How do I know that you're not scum trying to play townie?

Even your subsequent explanation:

However, as scum, I tend to play more cautiously, and keep myself under the radar. That's why in game's where I'm civilian, I tend to be attacked quite early on, and many times I stay the center of attention for long periods of time.

It still doesn't make sense to me how I should interpret this. Are you claiming yourself to be a townie then?

It's interesting to me that you haven't been voted yet (if I recall correctly), yet you're claiming that everyone is jumping on you.

Anyways, I usually don't vote until I have more information. I'll be around to see how this discussion continues.

I agree with this post.

Miztef, what exactly is the point of making a WIFOM argument at this stage of the game, especially when you're under limited pressure? What were you trying to achieve?

[Miztef]

I suppose it is WIFOM. You can disregard it if you wish, but it's basically my only argument to counter why I'm impatient at this point. Basically, I have no other explanation for my actions other then, that's my playstyle.

I think I'm gonna move on from that now, but if you really wish me to explain it further, just ask me a direct question and I'll try to answer as best I can. (can't promise it won't be WIFOM though)

Although you are both suspicious of me, I find anata and Mexal playing well pro-town at this time.

Mexal's comment about jitsu caught me off guard, I didn't even realize what jitsu was implying. I was under the impression he was pro-town until that observation. Now it is questionable.

Karmadog gives me some confusion, although seems to be pushing for the same things as anata and mexal.

[Korlash]

I want to start with the quote, then answer a few things, then a little tid bit of stuff, then a good bye... table of contents... just so you know... Always nice... ok...

Not as dumb as Mexal? Are you serious? I skimmed through the thread in 5 minutes and posted against an idea. You've spent the last 3 pages talking about how you dislike pressure votes since it's not a 100% exact way to find scum yet you criticize me for voting someone for pushing out an idea that clearly hurts the town? Tell me exactly how my reasoning above wasn't valid?

First off I am sorry for calling you dumb. I admit it was unneeded and uncalled for. I had a bit of pent up rage from another game and that is never good. Ok that out of the way, if i have been "talking about how you(i) dislike pressure votes" wouldn't that make sense then that I jump at people who do put pressure votes on? It seems to me like your confusing logic here...

Also it's not that you voted him, it's that you just plain ignored half of his post and threw the second half out as an attack. I think taking things out of context is scummy.

Take the sentence "If I am mafia I would not vote you!" If you just take the "I am mafia" part and use it as an attack... Yeah... You see where I am going right? Granted, his statement is pretty different from the example sentence. But it is more or less the same concept.

Now to answer the Question: " Explain this" Well if people would stop trying to use false information against me... "

It was a tiny jokeish response to Jerubbaal's "Try not to ramble and make those ideas less clear than they are in your head. " notice the smiley in it.

@ jitsu: "If you had thought to mention this right away, you would have looked a lot less suspicious. "

If I had mentioned what? That it gave a lot of info for the town? I believe I did say that at some point.

Tid bits:

People keep mentioning over reacting, and Miztef did his thing on playing differently as scum and town. I am fully for and support the argument "If you are town you cannot be afraid to put yourself out there."
So I will always make myself a target by coming in hard and fast. In doing so I get info from others and they get info from me.
(Actually... I know I will jinx myself here.. but out of every game of mafia I have ever played... I have yet to actually be lynched! So i am kinda a 'man without fear' here. It helps us out a lot because of all the info we get, but it can be very dangerous to me if I am not careful.)
So you cannot be afraid to throw suspicion on yourself in order to get the info you want. If you are, you will lose a lot of opportunity to get that info and will make the game a little harder for the town in general.

@ Miztef: you say you voted me because I had the most votes on me (post 84) Yet... I believe curiouskarmadog also had three votes on him. So... Why me? I think you need to be a bit more specific. Unless I missed an unvote at some point.

@ oEJo : You know. You made me laugh at least twice... Thats hard to do. So... Keep it up =D

Now a good bye:

why do you have to be so active during the time I am working... Man... this game is going to keep me busy every day I get home isn't it? Oh well... Keep up the activity! I will check back in shortly!

[Mexal]

At the same time that you're suggesting I

started

a wagon, you're also leaving open the idea that my vote was dictated by how poor/hurried my reading of the thread was. It wasn't. In essence, your entire post there is a discredit to my vote of sudo_nym.

Sigh, this is why I hate no editing Anyway, I didn't mean to say

start

since Jitsu never implied that I started a wagon. He said I jumped on one...meaning one was already formed.

[Mexal]

First off I am sorry for calling you dumb. I admit it was unneeded and uncalled for. I had a bit of pent up rage from another game and that is never good. Ok that out of the way, if i have been "talking about how you(i) dislike pressure votes" wouldn't that make sense then that I jump at people who do put pressure votes on? It seems to me like your confusing logic here...

Also it's not that you voted him, it's that you just plain ignored half of his post and threw the second half out as an attack. I think taking things out of context is scummy.

Take the sentence "If I am mafia I would not vote you!" If you just take the "I am mafia" part and use it as an attack... Yeah... You see where I am going right? Granted, his statement is pretty different from the example sentence. But it is more or less the same concept.

Have you even read a single thing I've said? I have said several times that I read everything and made my post anyway. I have said several times that disclaimers are meaningless. Why are you still pushing this?

What exactly are you talking about in regards to pressure? I put a vote on someone for a perfectly valid reason. I did not go throw a vote on a player who had 3 votes on him to see him react. Therefore my pressure has absolutely nothing to do with what you spent your time arguing against. Someone has to put the first vote down. Someone has to exert that initial pressure. That has absolutely nothing to do with you argument about pressure votes therefore I wouldn't expect you to use that as a reason to justify your criticism of my vote. So no, it doesn't make sense.

[Korlash]

You know that caught my eye too. But I chalked it up to just a bad use of wording/mistake. we have been talking a lot about wagons here. And

technically

I believe you could call it a one vote wagon if it comes down to it.

And I can't remember if anyone had voted him before you... to tired to check ATM... Hopefully I can get another of you younger and fitter players to do it for me.. and bring me tea.. and a cookie... =D

[Mexal]

You know that caught my eye too. But I chalked it up to just a bad use of wording/mistake. we have been talking a lot about wagons here. And

technically

I believe you could call it a one vote wagon if it comes down to it.

And I can't remember if anyone had voted him before you... to tired to check ATM... Hopefully I can get another of you younger and fitter players to do it for me.. and bring me tea.. and a cookie... =D

What caught your eye?

One vote

is

a wagon. But you cannot jump onto a wagon if one isn't started.

And no one voted for him before I voted hence why I posted what I posted. Seriously, if you're going to make a post to me, at least have some semblence of what you're talking about.

[Korlash]

First off I am sorry for calling you dumb. I admit it was unneeded and uncalled for. I had a bit of pent up rage from another game and that is never good. Ok that out of the way, if i have been "talking about how you(i) dislike pressure votes" wouldn't that make sense then that I jump at people who do put pressure votes on? It seems to me like your confusing logic here...

Also it's not that you voted him, it's that you just plain ignored half of his post and threw the second half out as an attack. I think taking things out of context is scummy.

Take the sentence "If I am mafia I would not vote you!" If you just take the "I am mafia" part and use it as an attack... Yeah... You see where I am going right? Granted, his statement is pretty different from the example sentence. But it is more or less the same concept.

Have you even read a single thing I've said? I have said several times that I read everything and made my post anyway. I have said several times that disclaimers are meaningless. Why are you still pushing this?

What exactly are you talking about in regards to pressure? I put a vote on someone for a perfectly valid reason. I did not go throw a vote on a player who had 3 votes on him to see him react. Therefore my pressure has absolutely nothing to do with what you spent your time arguing against. Someone has to put the first vote down. Someone has to exert that initial pressure. That has absolutely nothing to do with you argument about pressure votes therefore I wouldn't expect you to use that as a reason to justify your criticism of my vote. So no, it doesn't make sense.

Wow I totally need to check before I post...

Ok... First off I was in no way trying to push it, I was merely stating why I reacted as I did. I see now that I made a mistake by saying it was a pressure vote but thats what I thought it was.

So why are discalimers meaningless? I think in that situation they were perfectly logical. Someone asked him about it, so in order not to look bad, he answered. But admitted he knew it was wrong.

And as for your "perfectly valid reason" I personally think your reason is shitty and false. And if you did not expect me to use it as a reason to justify my criticism for your vote why did you even bring it up? I logically assumed because of your sentence that you were saying your vote was a pressure vote. My mistake there.

So can you answer me why you think an "initial pressure vote" is any different to me as any other "early pressure vote"? as far as I see it your trying to convince

me

personally that your vote does not follow my thinking of votes themselves. I find that a bit odd, but I suppose I would try to skirt my actions away from attacks other people have already done.

In short, I believe your reason for the vote is meaningless. "Disclaimers are meaningless" may make sense to you, but to take what someone said out of context and use it as an attack is not a good plan. I believe that if you feel a vote is good to put on someone you should not care what my feelings are on the matter. And I believe that the world is round, forever spinning with an infinite WIFOM games being played all over! Yeah.. deep I know...

[Korlash]

You know that caught my eye too. But I chalked it up to just a bad use of wording/mistake. we have been talking a lot about wagons here. And

technically

I believe you could call it a one vote wagon if it comes down to it.

And I can't remember if anyone had voted him before you... to tired to check ATM... Hopefully I can get another of you younger and fitter players to do it for me.. and bring me tea.. and a cookie... =D

What caught your eye?

One vote

is

a wagon. But you cannot jump onto a wagon if one isn't started.

And no one voted for him before I voted hence why I posted what I posted. Seriously, if you're going to make a post to me, at least have some semblence of what you're talking about.

DAMNIT!I hate being ninjaed... I even checked that time...

Ok that post was in response to post 112. you kinda put another post up after I had already begun mine so.. yeah...

I had no idea you were going to do a double post... I'm sorry... As for the "Jump on a bandwagon" thing... It could be confusion about how many votes he had on him at the time, a ploy to make it look like your an example for all the talk that just occurred, or a simple mistake because of that talk. If I am talking about bandwagons all day and then have to explain someone's actions. I might just say something about a wagon in there too. Be it accidentally or not...

Ok I just checked.. I was the last to post.. so If I get ninjed again I will lose it!

[Mexal]

Wow I totally need to check before I post...

Ok... First off I was in no way trying to push it, I was merely stating why I reacted as I did. I see now that I made a mistake by saying it was a pressure vote but thats what I thought it was.

Who said you were pushing anything? I merely stated you reacted positively to the suggestion.

So why are discalimers meaningless? I think in that situation they were perfectly logical. Someone asked him about it, so in order not to look bad, he answered. But admitted he knew it was wrong.

Why make the post in the first place? Why say there are things you can do that are efficient if you think those things are stupid? Hell, why even post that if you don't expect someone to question you on it? That's why disclaimers are pointless. You can easily suggest something with a disclaimer then when someone latches on to it and pushes it, you can follow it up. So even though you made a disclaimer, you can easily back away from the disclaimer since you're the one to post the idea in the first place. In other words, he's spitting out shit to see if it sticks even though it's a HORRIBLE idea for town. Get it yet?

And as for your "perfectly valid reason" I personally think your reason is shitty and false. And if you did not expect me to use it as a reason to justify my criticism for your vote why did you even bring it up? I logically assumed because of your sentence that you were saying your vote was a pressure vote. My mistake there.

Because I don't automatically believe when someone puts up disclaimers, my reasoning is then invalid? Hardly. If I believed everything everyone did then I wouldn't be very good at this game now would I?

So can you answer me why you think an "initial pressure vote" is any different to me as any other "early pressure vote"? as far as I see it your trying to convince

me

personally that your vote does not follow my thinking of votes themselves. I find that a bit odd, but I suppose I would try to skirt my actions away from attacks other people have already done.

What I'm trying to convince you of is that I voted someone because I thought their post was bad. You're arguing against people who are voting people for the saking of pressuring yet you're criticizing me for voting someone because I dislike them. You should, instead, be praising me for not putting a 4th vote on to see the reaction but rather voting them for an actual reason, whether you believe in it or not. I don't really know what you want or how you plan to go about finding scum but I will vote for and pressure people I dislike.

[quote="Korlash]
In short, I believe your reason for the vote is meaningless. "Disclaimers are meaningless" may make sense to you, but to take what someone said out of context and use it as an attack is not a good plan. I believe that if you feel a vote is good to put on someone you should not care what my feelings are on the matter. And I believe that the world is round, forever spinning with an infinite WIFOM games being played all over! Yeah.. deep I know...

[/quote]

He originally posted that he had ideas that were more efficient. When asked, he said his idea was stupid and that it revolved around a mass claim. He then somewhat justified his terrible idea by explaining how it could work. I then voted for him for suggesting a mass claim. Explain again how I took him out of context?

[Mexal]

Ignore that post above. I messed up the tags in several places so it's kinda out of order. I fixed the tags in this post.

Wow I totally need to check before I post...

Ok... First off I was in no way trying to push it, I was merely stating why I reacted as I did. I see now that I made a mistake by saying it was a pressure vote but thats what I thought it was.

Who said you were pushing anything? I merely stated you reacted positively to the suggestion.

So why are discalimers meaningless? I think in that situation they were perfectly logical. Someone asked him about it, so in order not to look bad, he answered. But admitted he knew it was wrong.

Why make the post in the first place? Why say there are things you can do that are efficient if you think those things are stupid? Hell, why even post that if you don't expect someone to question you on it? That's why disclaimers are pointless. You can easily suggest something with a disclaimer then when someone latches on to it and pushes it, you can follow it up. So even though you made a disclaimer, you can easily back away from the disclaimer since you're the one to post the idea in the first place. In other words, he's spitting out shit to see if it sticks even though it's a HORRIBLE idea for town. Get it yet?

And as for your "perfectly valid reason" I personally think your reason is shitty and false. And if you did not expect me to use it as a reason to justify my criticism for your vote why did you even bring it up? I logically assumed because of your sentence that you were saying your vote was a pressure vote. My mistake there.

How is it false? Because I don't automatically believe when someone puts up disclaimers, my reasoning is then invalid? Hardly. If I believed everything everyone did then I wouldn't be very good at this game now would I?

So can you answer me why you think an "initial pressure vote" is any different to me as any other "early pressure vote"? as far as I see it your trying to convince

me

personally that your vote does not follow my thinking of votes themselves. I find that a bit odd, but I suppose I would try to skirt my actions away from attacks other people have already done.

What I'm trying to convince you of is that I voted someone because I thought their post was bad. You're arguing against people who are voting people for the saking of pressuring yet you're criticizing me for voting someone because I dislike them. You should, instead, be praising me for not putting a 4th vote on to see the reaction but rather voting them for an actual reason, whether you believe in it or not. I don't really know what you want or how you plan to go about finding scum but I will vote for and pressure people I dislike.

In short, I believe your reason for the vote is meaningless. "Disclaimers are meaningless" may make sense to you, but to take what someone said out of context and use it as an attack is not a good plan. I believe that if you feel a vote is good to put on someone you should not care what my feelings are on the matter. And I believe that the world is round, forever spinning with an infinite WIFOM games being played all over! Yeah.. deep I know...

He originally posted that he had ideas that were more efficient. When asked, he said his idea was stupid and that it revolved around a mass claim. He then somewhat justified his terrible idea by explaining how it could work. I then voted for him for suggesting a mass claim. Explain again how I took him out of context?

[Korlash]

Well i won't say no to gaining as much info out of you that I can! ^^ I personally love how fast this game is starting!

Ok:

Who said you were pushing anything? I merely stated you reacted positively to the suggestion.

see this:

Have you even read a single thing I've said? I have said several times that I read everything and made my post anyway. I have said several times that disclaimers are meaningless.

Why are you still pushing this?

in short, you did.

Why make the post in the first place?

Because he was asked, by another player (a possilbe towny) to explain his other ideas. When you are asked to do something and do not do it then you look a little scummy. So I find it hard to imagine why you keep missing this very important issue here.

Why say there are things you can do that are efficient if you think those things are stupid? Hell, why even post that if you don't expect someone to question you on it? That's why disclaimers are pointless. You can easily suggest something with a disclaimer then when someone latches on to it and pushes it, you can follow it up. So even though you made a disclaimer, you can easily back away from the disclaimer since you're the one to post the idea in the first place. In other words, he's spitting out shit to see if it sticks even though it's a HORRIBLE idea for town. Get it yet?

He DID NOT ORIGINALLY SAY IT! Thus, because he did not say it he obviously did not think it was worth saying. But when asked he was forced to say it, so he added the disclaimer to reiterate that he did not support it. And I think you are reaching to assume that he was throwing out shit to see if it woudl stick because of that point right there.

How is it false? Because I don't automatically believe when someone puts up disclaimers, my reasoning is then invalid? Hardly. If I believed everything everyone did then I wouldn't be very good at this game now would I?

Personally I don't think you are good at this game anyways... >.> <.<

Kidding... seriously... that was a joke... Don't get to mad over it... >.>

actually the fact that you don;t believe him is good. The fact that you are ignoring the fact he originally thought the idea bad enough not to say and only brought it up BECAUSE HE WAS ASKED is what makes your reason invalid. Certain situations have certain limits to them, such as when you are on vacation I can easily see you making a mistake and overlooking things, thus I am more inclined to let a few mistakes pass by. Just like when you are forced to say something I do not hold my personally feelings on if I think it was a good or bad idea as the basis for my vote. I hold only how scummy/town it appears to be, and yes I add disclaimers into the mix for this.

What I'm trying to convince you of is that I voted someone because I thought their post was bad. You're arguing against people who are voting people for the saking of pressuring yet you're criticizing me for voting someone because I dislike them. You should, instead, be praising me for not putting a 4th vote on to see the reaction but rather voting them for an actual reason, whether you believe in it or not. I don't really know what you want or how you plan to go about finding scum but I will vote for and pressure people I dislike.

I wouldn't say so much I am arguing against people who are voting for people, i am more about arguing over the effectiveness of said vote. By all means vote vote vote... But do not base your strategy on a blind, reasonless vote... (that is my argument, not my statement towards you. I am not trying to say your vote is blind/reasonless.)

He originally posted that he had ideas that were more efficient. When asked, he said his idea was stupid and that it revolved around a mass claim. He then somewhat justified his terrible idea by explaining how it could work. I then voted for him for suggesting a mass claim. Explain again how I took him out of context?

You keep missing the fact he A) Did not originally say it, and B) he said it was a bad idea and instead are pushing that he is trying to in a sense hide behind a false disclaimer so he can jump one way or the other. He is not saying a massclaim is good, he is not lobbying for a massclaim, he is not trying to judge our reaction, he is merely answering a question of an idea he had in his head. You seem to be adamant that he is some massclaim wanting mafia that is trying to hide behind a disclaimer. I'm all for getting info from people but I feel like you are pulling a whole lot of unnecessary suspicion on yourself because you seem to be only focusing on your opinions and not what he actually said.

[oEJo]

Mexal, let me point something out.

I can think of a few things that would be more efficient, but they rely on people telling the truth (not something that's likely to happen).

He implies that he has an idea, however, it is moot, because the scumbags are going to lie, and so are the powerroles, because it wouldn't benefit them to tell the truth.

Then we have...

Really? I'd like to know what you've got in mind.

He was called out on it. To NOT say his silly idea right now would obviously be scummy, and he'd be lynched more or less on the spot.

So he explains his mass claim idea, explains WHY it won't work, and why no one is gonna do it... yet... you still think he's suggesting it. He wasn't.

What the hell is your problem? Let it go. Sudo obviously wasn't suggesting a massclaim.

Vote:Mexal

[Miztef]

@korlash: I was the 3rd vote on karmadog ><

[Korlash]

Ohhh snap my bad... ><

[Sudo_Nym]

Well, how do you like that? I come back from school, and find a whole bunch of posts. I'm attacked for my "idea", and scroll down to find that there isn't a widespread misunderstanding; just the same guy who I'm already voting for, and people who understand what was actually going on.

The downside is, you guys stole my rebuttal before I got a chance...