Newbie 1961 | Trees II | Over

[Plotinus]

Official Vote Count 1.07

---

Lynching

With 9 votes in play, it takes 5 to lynch.

Zenith

(4): Jamelia, tictac, ceejayvinoya, Suspicious

Suspicious

(1): Zenith

january

(1): Vorkuta

Jamelia

(1): FancyPants

Not Voting

(2): january, GeorgeBailey

Deadline:

(expired on 2019-10-26 08:30:00).

Mod notes:

[/area]

[Zenith]

"#44 you state that an L-1 is never a bad idea here"
I didn't say that. Also post #44 was made by Plotinus.


"and then you backtrack upon questioning in #126 that L-1 wasn't intentional, and it was supposed to be L-2 instead."
I never backtracked. I intended to vote for you, and would have done so regardless of whether I was voting you to L-1 or L-2.


"Because other unvotes occurred, you believed that clarification was unnecessary; this is despite being put under suspicion and getting questioned for this action. If the L-1 was a mistake, why didn't you say so immediately to clear yourself?"
Um no, because of the unvotes there was no reason to add the disclaimer stating that you were at L-1, because obviously you were no longer at L-1. Voting for you wasn't a mistake, as I've already explained. Clear myself of what?


"You double down in #161 that the L-2 was what you were aiming for, but an L-1 is fine and you have no problem with it; you admit that, however, it should have been given a warning. Which once again begs the question, why did you not offer a warning in the first place? What was left was a naked vote that, if you're town here, caused unneeded confusion."
Huh?? I didn't warn that you were at L-1 because I was putting you at L-2, or would have if Vork hadn't beaten me by a few seconds.


"If you would like to know my case, you'll have to do what you have demonstrated you haven't done and read my ISO."
I've read every single word of this thread. If you had said something along the lines of, "I think Zenith is scum because ___ " Then I wouldn't have asked. Do you actually think I'm scum, and if so then why?


"It shouldn't be my job to reiterate my posts/questions for you"
I don't recall asking you to do that.

[Suspicious]

Meant #34, in which you directly say:

What's wrong with an early L-1?

You did backtrack, because you never made your intent clear; this is something you could have established by clarifying your vote when it was first posed, instead of letting it sit. You would have cleared yourself of the suspicion laid on after the naked vote. Instead, you stayed out of the thread and let things proceed, which leads me to believe L-1 never bothered you. I didn't say voting me was a mistake either.

Once again, you could have offered a warning/clarification after the fact but chose not to. This leaves nothing but an empty vote that is glaring in context of the others, and it took time before you brought answers, which you are now denying.

Your earlier contradictions are scumleaning to me re: the shifting stances on the L-1 vote, which was intentional/not a bad idea until you decided to change your tune. #126, #129 and #130 are blatant misrepresentations of my posting, and your attempt to put my words in a negative light is noted; there is stronger language used here to imply I am jumpy/worried, which is quite the opposite.

You didn't ask me to bring up my posting, but the implication was there. My point being that, if you're town here, shape up your game and bring reasoning to the table, buckle down and answer questions. Ignoring/dodging isn't helping your case. I'd also like to know what the purpose of #140 was.

[Zenith]

For me to have backtracked, something would have had to change, but my intentions, opinions, and statements, etc have all been consistent. My stance on my RVS vote hasn't shifted at all, and nothing I've said has been contradictory.

I also haven't intentionally misrepresented anyone, doing so isn't my style. Sometimes I might over think things, or read into things that may or may not be there, like with the worried thing, but I always call it like I see it, and unlike you I'm careful not to twist people's words or claim someone said something when they didn't.

[Zenith]

Just a suggestion, but if you insist on disagreeing with my previous post, then perhaps you should post some clear evidence rather than more baseless accusations.

[Suspicious]

Break it down for me, then: what have I misunderstood? You said L-1 was fine, then it wasn't fine and should have been warned, and then your intent was L-2 all along. After I posted clarification on the posts you quoted for me, I established how you misunderstood me through either ignoring my whole posts or picking out what suited your narrative best. This is not baseless, and you dismissing it as such reeks of scum not having a good argument prepared.

It's telling to me that your first mode of attack on me was to ignore/dodge, then misrepresent, then make up emotions to fit your case, then insult. And you continue to dodge at this point.

[GeorgeBailey]

Nothing in Zeniths posts even hinted at L-1 possibly being a mistake.

It was pretty much this part

What's wrong with an early L-1?

Sounded more like an actual question than a defense.

Why the townlean on Vork?

Votes likes 46. There's obviously no intent to lynch, and it's purely to wake up stagnant players. I feel like scum would want the opposite.

Zen did answer the question about the lynch vote beforehand in #34. Was this insubstantial to you?

Absolutely. Just asking "What's wrong?" Isn't really an answer. He clarified later he intended to vote to L-2, but got beat to it.
Which is what I wanted, clarity. But not backing down from the L-1 stance is a little scummy.
It can take anyone to hammer someone at L-1 in RVS, maybe it's scum intent, maybe it's newb mistake.

@GeorgeBailey I was pretty sure from everything else you said that you had unvoted because it was too close to lynch. I’m curious what you expected from leaving it at L-1 if you believed nobody noticed

A mislynch simply. Could have been the guy you replaced, could have been another newbie (would most likely be another newbie).

@Georgebailey if you absolutely had to lynch someone now, who would it be and why?

...Probably Zenith. I mean nobody else has done really anything scummy or stuff that really stood out to me.
This stands out to me

I'm not afraid to put an RVS at L-1 if done properly.

Could you clarify "done properly"? I feel like L-1 RVS is incredibly risky at the cost of getting a rando lynched (which is more than likely going to be a town).

[Zenith]

Putting somone at L-1 is fine, I never said it wasn't fine. I did intend to put you at L-2. I have no issue with putting someone at L-1. When putting someone at L-1 the voter should state that the person is at L-1 to avoid accidental lynch. Someone should also state intent to hammer and wait for response before hammering. There is no contradiction here.

How specifically do you think I misrepresented you? If anything you have misrepresented me. You have flat out accused me of saying things which I never said. Where have I done this to you?

And instead of making claims without backing them up like you have done, I'll post a clear example proving that you have blatantly misrepresented me by putting words into my mouth which I never said:

#44 you state that an L-1 is never a bad idea here

Anyways, I need to sleep now. Keep in mind that if you manage to get me lynched before I return, all eyes should be on you after I flip town.

[Zenith]

I'm not afraid to put an RVS at L-1 if done properly.

Could you clarify "done properly"? I feel like L-1 RVS is incredibly risky at the cost of getting a rando lynched (which is more than likely going to be a town).

By done properly I mean stating for everyone to see that the person is at L-1, and stating that intent to hammer should be made and wait for response before hammering. Basic stuff that everyone other than a complete mafia newb should already know. Basic etiquette to reduce risk of accidental lynches, and intentional lynches disguised as accidental lynches.

[Suspicious]

For someone claiming to have read every single line of this thread, I don't understand how you can be this ignorant to my case against you re: misrepresentation. It is clear as day in my ISO unless you want to keep dodging, which you once again do here; I will continue to point this out until you decide to finally offer answers. Otherwise, it's clear from here you have no answers available and are getting trapped in a corner.

And I said #44 was a mistake and make a correction to #34, where you ask why an L-1 is a bad idea, the implication being that it is not. You continue that thought moving forward by stating an L-1 is a fine idea but should be clarified beforehand. What am I misrepresenting from you here? This is all in your ISO.

If I'm wrong, tell me why. Right now, you are stuck in a cycle of ignore-dodge-deny. If you're town here, once again, give answers to work with.

[Jamelia]

I’m working late tonight but when I get home I’ll post some general thoughts.

[Plotinus]

Vorkuta¹ has been prodded early^§ because I am going to bed. If they post before (expired on 2019-10-19 21:56:00), i won't count it as a real prod. If they don't post before (expired on 2019-10-21 10:58:00), I will start looking for a replacement.

^§ Prod timer runs slower on weekends.

[FancyPants]

Afk until Monday, world cup quarter final tomorrow and I'm either getting sad drunk or happy drunk.

V/LA noted --P

[Vorkuta]

[Vorkuta]

I think I'm at

{Sus, GB, FP}
{January, CJ}
{Zenith. Jam}
{tictac}

Also guys- this "he put the guy to L-1" discussion has been spanning on for 10 pages so....

[Vorkuta]

Vorkuta, what’s the point of putting a vote on me and telling me you’re looking for a reaction? Wouldn’t that just ruin the reaction test? And I asked this before but it’s probably buried: which of my lines made you mark me as nervous?

-your point being?
A vote on you is still pressure, regardless of the pretext under which I justify it
if others join then others join. If not then....
-I can't be bothered to comb through your ISO, find a quote which pings you as vulnerable for me, and proceed to have a back-and-forth. Suffice to say your opening (hi, I'm new, please be nice) and the next few afterwards left that impression on me and that's it.

[Zenith]

Really? You said:

you state that an L-1 is never a bad idea here

I never said that L-1 is

never

a bad idea.

And who's really being dodgy here? When I ask why you think I'm scum your response seems to be false accusations and telling me to re-read your ISO. Like, are you wanting me to make a huge wall of poo by responding to every single thing you've said in this entire game? If so, then you can duck off with that. If not, then get to the point already. This back and forth is quickly growing old and tiring while not actually getting anywhere fast.

[Zenith]

@Vork A vote claiming to be for pressure actually carries very little to no pressure. Specially when compared to a serious vote on a wagon.

[Suspicious]

Really? You said:

you state that an L-1 is never a bad idea here

I never said that L-1 is

never

a bad idea.

And who's really being dodgy here? When I ask why you think I'm scum your response seems to be false accusations and telling me to re-read your ISO. Like, are you wanting me to make a huge wall of poo by responding to every single thing you've said in this entire game? If so, then you can duck off with that. If not, then get to the point already. This back and forth is quickly growing old and tiring while not actually getting anywhere fast.

Haven't you read every single line of this thread? If so, answer the questions there instead of continually asking for them to be brought up. They're already there, so answer them.

Your open disregard towards me is bordering on infuriating. If you are town I don't understand how you're this ignorant.

[Suspicious]

I have already clarified my stance on you. I'd recommend a reread.

[Zenith]

If you would quit being dodgy by hiding behind your ISO, maybe we could get somewhere.

[Suspicious]

Yeah, no. I've repeated myself enough. This conversation will drag on as long as you want it to. I can only assume you're trying to frustrate me at this point.

Why should I engage you when you've proven you refuse to read my posts? If you want to have resolved, then you can see what I've posted; not because I am hiding, but because I am beyond exhausted with having to reiterate myself.

I've given your ISO more than enough time. Seems you can be bothered to offer the same initiative, if you so choose to scumread me.

[Suspicious]

Pedit: can't. Mobile sucks.

If I'm being unfair here than tell me. From my perspective you are just annoying the everloving shit out of me.

The questions are not hiding, they are wide out in the open. And not all of them are even asked hy me to begin with, but are from other players.

[Zenith]

Jesus, I haven't even checked in and I almost got bumped off.

VOTE: Fancy

Srs vote?

Do you believe it is?

Ok here's the first question in your ISO.
No I don't think it was a serious vote.

Happy now? I've answered a question from your ISO.

Yes I've read everything you've posted. No, I'm not going to write a response to everything you have posted. As I've already said, you can duck off with that. If you want a specific question answered, you could stop playing games and get to the point already.

[Zenith]

I could turn it around on you and tell you to read my ISO for your answers. I won't, but maybe this will help you see how ridiculous you are being?