Micro 900: Autumnal Mafia (Game Complete)

Wimpy · Post Post #325 (ISO) » Mon Nov 11, 2019 10:20 am

In post 322, Datisi wrote:"there's not enough evidence to suggest anyone was scum [on page 2]" implies you cannot have a serious vote on page 2

You were also saying your page 2 vote was serious

Sorry chief the math checks out

that is where you are wrong though. You can place a serious vote and not think somebody is scum. Happens all the time. Used to happen when I played here, I am pretty sure it happens now especially since i did it...

Wimpy · Post Post #326 (ISO) » Mon Nov 11, 2019 10:22 am

In post 323, Datisi wrote:
In post 321, Wimpy wrote:1. I dislike when people come in and reference past games and vote them for it
This is still a *gasp*
policy lynch

And it changes things because you accuse Mena of lying when he said you were trying to policy me

So

Well good thing I wasn't actually trying to policy lynch you and I legit just thought you were scummy thus making menal's accusation a lie.

Thanks for confirming what I already knew. menal is a compulsive liar

I can't promise I will spell your name, half the time I don't even remember it

Datisi · Post Post #327 (ISO) » Mon Nov 11, 2019 10:23 am

"evidence to suggest someone is scum" =/= "think somebody is scum", don't twist it

Like if you placed a "serious" vote
Then there must have been evidence to SUGGEST I am scum
Which you literally confirmed, because your reasoning was "referencing past games"

Which is literally "evidence to suggest"

Wimpy · Post Post #328 (ISO) » Mon Nov 11, 2019 10:25 am

In post 148, Wimpy wrote:I did however say based on past experiences I have seen scum act awkwardly in rvs and do the exact same thing you did.

This right here makes it not policy, and actually makes it experienced based.

I don't understand how you can be ok with all of his other lies but OH NO, don't accuse him of lying about policy votes.

Datisi · Post Post #329 (ISO) » Mon Nov 11, 2019 10:26 am

Wimpy's reasons of voting me:
1) thought I was violating site rules
2) disliked that i referenced a past game
3) thought referencing a past game is scummy

Literally 66.67% of your reasons to vote me were

Policy

Pedit: i still don't see a single place where he lied
But as said i will go over it again once I get some sleep

For now I'm tackling the simpler stuff

Wimpy · Post Post #330 (ISO) » Mon Nov 11, 2019 10:27 am

In post 327, Datisi wrote:"evidence to suggest someone is scum" =/= "think somebody is scum", don't twist it

Like if you placed a "serious" vote
Then there must have been evidence to SUGGEST I am scum
Which you literally confirmed, because your reasoning was "referencing past games"

Which is literally "evidence to suggest"

no you are absolutely wrong. a player can place a serious vote and not be sure if that person is scum or not.

Wimpy · Post Post #331 (ISO) » Mon Nov 11, 2019 10:28 am

In post 329, Datisi wrote:Pedit: i still don't see a single place where he lied

they are in the spoiler

Datisi · Post Post #332 (ISO) » Mon Nov 11, 2019 10:29 am

In post 330, Wimpy wrote:
In post 327, Datisi wrote:"evidence to suggest someone is scum" =/= "think somebody is scum", don't twist it

Like if you placed a "serious" vote
Then there must have been evidence to SUGGEST I am scum
Which you literally confirmed, because your reasoning was "referencing past games"

Which is literally "evidence to suggest"
no you are absolutely wrong. a player can place a serious vote and not be sure if that person is scum or not.

I am not saying you were sure

I am saying there was evidence to SUGGEST

Wimpy · Post Post #333 (ISO) » Mon Nov 11, 2019 10:29 am

In post 330, Wimpy wrote:no you are absolutely wrong. a player can place a serious vote and not be sure if that person is scum or not.

please don't tell me I need to go find actual completed games to prove you wrong. I really don't have the time the waste but I will if you really aren't going to concede this.

Wimpy · Post Post #334 (ISO) » Mon Nov 11, 2019 10:30 am

In post 332, Datisi wrote:I am saying there was evidence to SUGGEST

no there wasn't

Datisi · Post Post #335 (ISO) » Mon Nov 11, 2019 10:30 am

Wimpy · Post Post #336 (ISO) » Mon Nov 11, 2019 10:32 am

players can place serious votes on people that they think are scummy and that's it. They do not need any other reason than "Hey I think that guy is scummy so I am going to vote him"

They don't have to have evidence suggesting that person is scum.

Datisi · Post Post #337 (ISO) » Mon Nov 11, 2019 10:32 am

In post 334, Wimpy wrote:
In post 332, Datisi wrote:I am saying there was evidence to SUGGEST
no there wasn't

That's exactly the fucking point

If there was NO EVIDENCE to suggest I am scum

Then your serious vote on me - calling me scummy - is a lie
Because if something makes me scummy

That is literally the evidence to suggest I'm scum

Not make you certain I'm scum

To suggest I'm scum

Datisi · Post Post #338 (ISO) » Mon Nov 11, 2019 10:34 am

In post 19, Datisi wrote:VOTE: Menalque

Did you roll scum again?

Like this post
Is why you called me scummy

Like it's literally the "evidence to SUGGEST I'm scum"

Not prove
Not make certain

Suggest

Wimpy · Post Post #339 (ISO) » Mon Nov 11, 2019 10:34 am

In post 336, Wimpy wrote:players can place serious votes on people that they think are scummy and that's it. They do not need any other reason than "Hey I think that guy is scummy so I am going to vote him"

They don't have to have evidence suggesting that person is scum.

Wimpy · Post Post #340 (ISO) » Mon Nov 11, 2019 10:35 am

In post 339, Wimpy wrote:
In post 336, Wimpy wrote:players can place serious votes on people that they think are scummy and that's it. They do not need any other reason than "Hey I think that guy is scummy so I am going to vote him"

They don't have to have evidence suggesting that person is scum
.

Wimpy · Post Post #341 (ISO) » Mon Nov 11, 2019 10:35 am

In post 340, Wimpy wrote:
In post 339, Wimpy wrote:
In post 336, Wimpy wrote:players can place serious votes on people that they think are scummy and that's it. They do not need any other reason than "Hey I think that guy is scummy so I am going to vote him"

They don't have to have evidence suggesting that person is scum
.

Wimpy · Post Post #342 (ISO) » Mon Nov 11, 2019 10:36 am

how many more times do I need to quote it until it sinks in?

Datisi · Post Post #343 (ISO) » Mon Nov 11, 2019 10:36 am

In post 339, Wimpy wrote:
In post 336, Wimpy wrote:players can place
serious votes on people that they think are scummy
and that's it. They do not need any other reason than "Hey I think that guy is scummy so I am going to vote him"

They don't have to have
evidence suggesting that person is scum
.

This post is literally contradicting itself
Like the bolded parts

Are a literal contradiction

Evidence that suggests someone is scummy is literally what makes someone scummy

Like

Datisi · Post Post #344 (ISO) » Mon Nov 11, 2019 10:39 am

In post 333, Wimpy wrote:please don't tell me I need to go find actual completed games to prove you wrong.

Also what happened with you disliking meta??? It being a lazy way to play??? Referencing other games being

S
Ss
Scummy?

Wimpy · Post Post #345 (ISO) » Mon Nov 11, 2019 10:56 am

Sorry but scummy =/= scum. Last I checked that’s still true.

Wimpy · Post Post #346 (ISO) » Mon Nov 11, 2019 10:56 am

In post 344, Datisi wrote:
In post 333, Wimpy wrote:please don't tell me I need to go find actual completed games to prove you wrong.
Also what happened with you disliking meta??? It being a lazy way to play??? Referencing other games being

S
Ss
Scummy?

That isn’t meta. Nice try

Datisi · Post Post #347 (ISO) » Mon Nov 11, 2019 10:59 am

But how is "evidence suggesting (emphasis on suggesting) someone is scum" different than "someone being scummy"?

Like if someone is being scummy
Sure, it's not given that they're scum
But there is *something* that makes them look like it
And that *something*
Is evidence

Suggesting

(again emphasis on suggesting)
They're scum

Datisi · Post Post #348 (ISO) » Mon Nov 11, 2019 11:01 am

Aight cheers ot ain't a meta on anyone here

But it would still be referencing past games now wouldn't it?

Plum · Post Post #349 (ISO) » Mon Nov 11, 2019 11:03 am

Votecount 1.2

Wimpy

- 2 (Datisi, Menalque)

emps

- 2 (Wickedestjr, Luca Blight)

Menalque

- 2 (Wimpy, alimdia)

Datisi

- 1 (emps)

Not Voting

- 2 (Alduskkel, Iconeum)

With 9 alive it takes 5 to lynch.

Deadline:

(expired on 2019-11-18 23:00:00)