GC wrote:I agree with the doctor thing being a major scum tell. I thought it was so well established of a tell that nobody actually did it any more, to be honest. Just curious, though: Any other reasons for the vote?
Not really no. But it seemed like a good enough reason to vote at the time. i'll get back to you maybe at the end of this post if anythings change during the read up of new stuff though.
ZEEnon wrote:Please expand on this because it's making me HIGHLY suspicious of you.
You should try reading some of the more popular wiki entries.
Zeenon wrote:OMGUS votes are definitely a turn on to me. especially the blatantly obvious ones.
Same as before...
Zeenon wrote:
So you are saying that I am not allowed to congratulate the doctor on their correct prediction?
Sure but you will be auto bandwagoned for it
So you are saying that it is a BAD thing that nobody was killed?
No, only a scum tell to congradulate the doctor. Especially when you think that RB, Jailkeepers, No kills, and any other type of special ingame role could have equally been responcible for the lack of a dead person.
So you are saying that you would rather see somebody DEAD?
I'm taking this as a rhetorical question and not just some stupid attempt to throw false attacks back towards your attacker.
So you are saying that when nobody is killed, that it can't possibly be a doctor save?
Did anyone ever say that? I'll give you yet another benefit of the doubt here and not accuse you of that thing I said before.
*Bold is mine
Zeenon wrote:Medical Student: "What do you diagnose this patient with, DR. ZEE?"
DR. ZEE: "I think Green Crayons has come down with a bad case of tunneling.
For some reason his eyes can't see Albert B. Rampage doing the same thing.
This must be treated at once."
Kinda hard to base a tunneling accusation off one sentence... But yes I suppose you could make the same statement in regards to Albert. The question becomes does GC want to see more from him or does he wish to see more from Glad for other reasons?
Glad wrote:False dilemma. I suggest that ZEEnon neither confirm nor deny whether he is a Doctor.
Bullshit. There is no false dilemma in a proven fact. Anyone who does what he did is painted as scum to town and as doc to scum. Whether he is scum or doc or neither doesn't matter. he has been branded with the above average chance of being those roles to ther respective alignments. To every rule there will always be an exception, but those are, quite literally, the exceptions and not the norm.
zeenon wrote:I don't care what YOU or anybody else say players don't do,
I do what I want to do and that is final. Understood? Good. Continuing on..
Yes, and you will accept the consequences for those actions as well. In your case it is a building up of a wagon and based on my experience with this type of attitude it will definitly grow even bigger. Realize that by you excersizing yoru right to do whatever you want you gant us the honor of doing the same, which is voting you.
zeenon wrote:Why are you role fishing? PERHAPS i'm NOT the doctor, but i'm just congratulating the doctor.
Are you saying that is not acceptable town behavior?
That is exactly what we are saying. Sortof...
Zeenon wrote:This somehow makes it seem like you know that GLaDOS was last night's target.
Your "I would have expected Glad to die" comment fits thhis statement better then the one you quoted GC as saying.
zeenon wrote:Also, since there was a serial killer, it is more likely that there is only two mafia, but i'm not sure.
case in point death note mafia: 4 mafia, 1 SK, 1 Jester. In my experience most minis have 3 mafia regardless of third party roles. In a mini the Sk's most important goal is to eliminate the mafia, so having an SK present doesn't effect the number of mafia.
Phily wrote:Extreme WIFOMing, closing other options. Take into account that ZEEnon's been inactive for the first day and was then eager to make up for that. Hes most likely town in my opinion, just tried to look it too much in the beginning unfortunately.
It is not WIFOM. It is logic based on a sound principal created a long ass time ago and which has sense become somewhat of a universal truth. And are you seriously making the case "he lurked during day 1 and so his scum tell is more likely that from a townie"?
Phily wrote:I wonderful example of leeching, its scummy but not vote worthy. I'm currently considering a Korlash/Gorrad buddiness at the moment if anyones curious. Its worth consideration at least though at the moment its just a hunch. I'll be rereading to see if this is the case.
based off my purely random statement and Gorrad tacking onto a wagon that has so far been pushed entirely by GC(who wasn't actually on the wagon anyways)? you're talking out of your ass, only I am allowed to do that.
Just because it worked so well before:
Zeenon wrote:You say that congratulating the doctor is a definite scum sign?
I don't know about him but I believe most of the accusations have clearly stated it could also be a sign of a doctor.
Well I say that answering other people's questions for them is a scum sign.
Hmm... depends on the questions I suppose. Such as this for instance, I'm answering questions asked of another but they are linked very strongly to my vote. in this situation I would argue I have equal right to answer these questions. And as what Ser did is what I am doing I suppose this explanation might apply to him as well. If I can pull one of your weak ass rhetorical questions, are you saying it is pro-town to ignore things not directed at you even if you have important comments on the matter?
Have you ever stopped to think that, oh I don't know.. not everyone thinks the same way you do, perhaps?
have you Mr. "I don't care what you or anyon else thinks" I have a strongurg to call you a hypocritical asshole but I'll refrain because I'm not that sort of player... XD
Zeenon wrote:*sigh* Since it seems that in this game we are going to
vote people solely using the wikipedia definition of scum, I am obliged to do this:
FOS: Gorrad
Scum naturally like to hop on a growing bandwagon early on, while at the same time FOSing their partner.
I can see a connection between these two. This is the second pairing i've put Gorrad with,
so don't be surprised if my vote suddenly hops on to him.
Did you ever stop to think maybe some people actually felt this way regardless of what the wiki said? Did you ever think people agreed with the wiki not becuase it was the wiki, but because what it says sounds right to them? Also isn't it a little hypocritical to fos someone for voting based on what they believe is a scum action and then make a statement such as "Scum naturally will blank"? lastly, don't base a vote on unproven pairings with alive players. What if the people you have paired Gorrad with are both town? (Obviusly one of us is) What a waste of a vote and/or lynch should it happen. What if Gorrad is town and one of the two you paired him with is scum?
Zeenon wrote:&& YOU. How do you know that i'm either of the above?
Did GC ever say he "knew"? I was fairly sure he only ever said what you did suggested you were one or the other. Perhaps you could point this out to me.
Sorry for the long post... had to catch up...
@ GC: Well my orriginal vote was simply based on the dictonomy and as it was the begining of the day and the first vote on him I feel that reasoning was more then enough to justify the vote. As for now I still like the vote where it is simply becuase of what it has spawned. Zee's serious of Strawishy 'counter attacks' and his general attitude have not left me with the feeling the dictonomy is wrong, although I won't say it has effected the option of him being Scum or Doc too much. And before he tries one of his bogus attacks on me I am not fishing for his claim because I don't really care about it right now.
