Open 67 Two of Four (a7) Over! before 578

[farside22]

Seriously no matter how I voted it is either I don't vote and Near votes for me for that stupidness or I vote for someone I find scummie and you vote for me for placing someone I find scummie who is avoiding answers by the way, how can anyone defend against either of these two both trying to make me looks scummie no matter how I vote.

You could explain why you didn't trust Moz to not put Jimmy at an early L-1, but did trust him not to put Near at an early L-1.[/quote]

I notice you completely ignore my comment to focus of Moz and also my reason for voting. Is there a reason you have ignored this twice now?
I don't trust Moz, but I think Near is scummie and his lastest post doesn't help. He never said it was random, he stated he was voting because I didn't vote and I called it a crap vote. It never looked like crap and I waited for an answer for days in which he ignored it.
For your comment about my post I waited for responses and responded as such. The vote was not quick and I haven't not received an answer on how I can get one person saying I'm not voting and voting on me for doing such and placing a vote on someone I think is scummie and receiving a vote because I put them at L-2. Can you explain how I can get voted for two seperate actions one in which i explained over and over on my scummie read from Near?

[Lowell]

Prod received. Sorry all, lost track of this game.

[Thorbjorn]

Hey, guys. Checking in. Sorry I have been neglecting. As they say, the shit hath hitteth the fan....eth with school. I will try to do a reread of the thread soon. It seems like there's something weird and artificial about the farside near arguement. I'll try and analyze that later when I have the chance.

[DoctorJimmy]

FoS: Near

for not explaining why farside is scummy despite being prompted to do so multiple times.

It would be a vote, but that would put him at L -1.

My initial vote on farside was a pretty random one. I looked at the vote count, and the only two people who weren't voting were me and farside. Responding to my prod, I ranom voted, stating that he didn't vote on anyone.

If farside had thought that my voting was random, I would not have find him suspicous. In fact, I would have expected it. If he completely ignored my post, I also would not have found him suspicoius. His responses didn't sound like a joke to me, and there are scummy elements to them:

I've been waiting to see is Near replies to my comment. Typically I run across hypocritical = scummie. Call it OMGUS. His vote is crap with hypocritical reasoning.
vote: Near

You voted for me for not voting, that is your quote. Yet if you are voting on me for not voting it is faulty logic based on the fact that I did vote and unvoted do to some people be dumb asses. I admited the OMGUS, but stated that I waited on you to respond to my earlier comment. Noted you didn't respond till I voted. Reason?

The fact that he noticed that I also didn't have a vote on anyone, he should have noticed that I am just random voting. However, if he thought I was making a serious accusation, he should have defended himself by saying that my argument is crap and question me/focused on why not voting equals scummy.

Instead, his defense was was by accusing me, calling "hypocrisy". He is saying that since I too didn't have a vote on anyone, it either craps my argument or I too should be suspected for a scum. This is what I didn't like about his argument. Instead of reponding to my argument with self-assured attitude, and pointing out where my argument fails, his main purpose seems to be attacking me in return.

His pointing out and self-crediting for stopping a quick lynch on mozsuggs isn't really helping his case either. Still, while I find this incident pretty suspicious, I also don't feel too strongly about it. So, I am going to unvote.

Unvote

Vote DoctorJimmy

for seemingly trying to find a reason to put join the bandwagon.

Trying to find a reason to join the bandwagon? It makes me scummy that I asked you why you found farside scummy and got frustrated at you ignoring my questions? I don't understand this at all.

Thanks for finally explaining your suspicion on farside, though.

[shaft.ed]

The intercom buzzes to life again: "You bastards have less than seven hours to decide who's not getting any money today!" and cuts back out just as suddenly. None of this wakes mozsuggs who's napping in the corner again.

Less than one week to deadline. If mozsuggs does not pick up his prod by tommorow he will be replaced

.

[farside22]

Near is saying his vote is random on me, but page one shows he voted for someone as a random vote commenting the name was odd. Then he just picks up a prod and does another random vote? Basically if you read through most people were done with the random phase when he voted and his reaction and wait time still hasn't been answered.

[Erratus Apathos]

Unvote, Vote: Lowell

His constant lack of scumhunting sets off my scumdar more than Farside. Not that I've changed my mind on her.

[Lowell]

Thusfar:
8- mozsuggs puts 3rd vote on farside
10- DocJimmy votes mozuggs for said vote
11- farside questions mozsuggs
13- mozsuggs apologizes, votes Lowell
15- Lowell declares moz town for being gutsy
21- thorbjorn disagrees, cites some random other game
28- Near votes farside for not voting
30- Erratus votes Lowell
31- Lowell explains post 15
32- Thor again respectfully disagrees
35- farside votes Near for hypocrisy (complaining about not voting while not voting)
36- Near confirms vote on farside
38- Erratus questions Near for strange tactic
40s- argument between Near and farside rages
46- Lowell thinks both might be town
58- moz returns, votes erratus for being "balanced" [?]
59- DocJimmy joins Near/farside argument on Near's side
62- moz explains "balanced" = "cautious"
63- thorb votes moz
65- erratus defends himself, votes farside for being overly worried about a quicklynch
74- Near unvotes, votes DocJimmy for bandwaggoning
81- Erratus unvotes, votes Lowell

Some thoughts:

Erratus Apathos

-

Unsure

. Easily the hardest player to read. Part of me wants to agree with moz's assessment that he's playing too "cautiously", but the other part of me thinks that makes no sense.

mozsuggs

-

TOWN

. Both post 8 and posts 58-62 by moz are a bit reckless. However, I believe his recklessness to be genuine. And while he explained his vote in 58 awkwardly, I actually do agree with the reasoning.

Thorbjorn

-

SCUMMY

. Posts 21 and 63 don't sit well with me. In post 21 he cites a random other game to "prove" that putting someone at L-1 is dangerous. This just seems off, like a post facto scramble to justify his positions. Post 63 is opportunistic as hell. He sort of politely slides in and votes for a bizairrely behaving Moz.

farside22

-

TOWN

. Post 35 sparks a weird discussion about voting between she and near. I think farside has the losing side of this argument, but I do beleive her belief in it is genuine. She's posted a lot and yet I don't have any particular suspicion of her. Hence town.

DoctorJimmy

-

SCUM

. Mostly it is his behavior during the P2 near/farside debate that puts him here. He looks like he's trying to foment further discussion while making a bit of a friend in Near. Also, he was quick to chastise and vote moz in post 10.

Near

- I had him in the scum category until he turned on DocJimmy in post 74. I'll put him as

unsure

.

unvote, vote DocJimmy

[DoctorJimmy]

DoctorJimmy

-

SCUM

. Mostly it is his behavior during the P2 near/farside debate that puts him here. He looks like he's trying to foment further discussion while making a bit of a friend in Near. Also, he was quick to chastise and vote moz in post 10.

How on earth is trying to cause further discussion scummy? I'm not sure where you've gotten this impression that I'm trying to make friends with Near, either. You referred to post 59, but that post consists of me being confused and asking Near to explain himself better, not of me entering the argument on his side.

[shaft.ed]

You look up at the scoreboard. It still reads Home: 5 Away: 2
mozsuggs's name is now in lights with two bulbs blaring next to it.
The clock reads 6:05:12 and is still descending

Vote Count

mozsuggs

(DoctorJimmy, Thorbjorn)

DoctorJimmy

(Near, Lowell)

Near

(farside22)

Erratus Apathos

(mozsuggs)

Lowell

(Erratus Apathos)

Second time mozsuggs has not picked up his prod within 48 hrs, he will be replaced regardless of his return. farside22, I noticed you were going to be LA over the deadline, I may consider extending the deadline until your return if people feel it neccessary.

[DoctorJimmy]

Unvote

. I'm not sure who I find scummiest at the moment, but I don't want to keep mozsuggs as the deadline lynch just for putting someone at L -1 on page 1.

[mozsuggs]

have i been relaced ? sorry, have been away.

check your inbox

[shaft.ed]

Greasy Spot replaces mozsuggs effective immediately.

[Greasy Spot]

A Hello! to All from your favorite Greasy Spot.

[Greasy Spot]

First of all

unvote:

I don't get the whole Near vs. Farside thing. Near votes Far for not voting which is a stupid reason at that time in the game. Farside is defending herself from Near who is trying to make something out of nothing (I think). I haven't quite firgured out where DJ fits in there yet. Where ever Farside is DJ is close by it seems. Could be nothing but will keep my eyes open. Generally I am all for a Farside Day 1 Lynch but I haven't seen any scumming yet from her so that can wait.

Unvote

. I'm not sure who I find scummiest at the moment, but I don't want to keep mozsuggs as the deadline lynch just for putting someone at L -1 on page 1.

I appreciate you unvoting me however it now moves you into the deadline lynch spot.


I have to go for now. I will elaborate more on Erratus Apathos, Thorbjorn, and Lowell later tonight.

[farside22]

You look up at the scoreboard. It still reads Home: 5 Away: 2
mozsuggs's name is now in lights with two bulbs blaring next to it.
The clock reads 6:05:12 and is still descending

Vote Count

mozsuggs

(DoctorJimmy, Thorbjorn)

DoctorJimmy

(Near, Lowell)

Near

(farside22)

Erratus Apathos

(mozsuggs)

Lowell

(Erratus Apathos)

Second time mozsuggs has not picked up his prod within 48 hrs, he will be replaced regardless of his return. farside22, I noticed you were going to be LA over the deadline, I may consider extending the deadline until your return if people feel it neccessary.

If people feel the need I would not oppose an extension. I see a few people are questioning me so I might be needed before the deadline to say something. This v/la is something I can't stop or change so if people would rather replace me I understand.

[Near]

Yes, I am also up for a deadline extension.

[Greasy Spot]

It doesn't matter either way to me.

[Lowell]

Extend, please.

[DoctorJimmy]

I'm fine with extending the deadline as well.

[shaft.ed]

I'll make a deal with everyone. If I see 10+ new contentful posts by tommorow morning I'll extend the deadline to Next Friday the 10th. Loopholes will not be counted.

[shaft.ed]

OK guys I'm trying to give you a break here. But after my call for content, not a single post. I'll give you a few more hours, but at this rate I see no reason to extend the lurkerfest.

[DoctorJimmy]

Given that I'm currently in the deadline lynch spot, I'd really like to see some kind of a response from Near and Lowell to my questions.

[Greasy Spot]

If farside is not gonna be hear then why don't we get rid of him now and move on to the next day?

[Erratus Apathos]

Given that I'm currently in the deadline lynch spot, I'd really like to see some kind of a response from Near and Lowell to my questions.

QFT, ignoring questions this close to deadline is really anti-town.

If farside is not gonna be hear then why don't we get rid of him now and move on to the next day?

Lynching someone who can't claim? I can't see how that could possibly be a good idea unless you're really sure she's scum.