Open 354: Twin Trap in Morecambe (Concluded)

[J]

Didn't I just ask that in my above post Trevor? ^^"

[Johhog]

VOTECOUNT 1.3

Sampson (2)

: don_johnson, }|{opa

(L-3)

Trevor

: Thomas

(L-4)

}|{opa (3)

: Guy_Named_Riggs, [J], Adc75

(L-2)

daftnarwhal

: Sampson

(L-4)

[J]

: daftnarwhal

(L-4)

Thomas

: Trevor

(L-4)

Not voting

: No one.

V/LA

: [J] (Nov 13)

With 9 alive it is 5 to lynch.

Deadline is (expired on 2011-11-25 04:36:09)

[don_johnson]

ok. nothing really to comment on here. would like to see opa and narwahl explain themselves.

[daftnarwhal]

Well nothing real substantial but those first few posts between you and GNR seemed off. Your comments seemed weird to me. I know that's not a lot to go by, but the interaction seemed a lot like J trying to distance himself from GNR a bit while buddying him a little, so I found that odd.

[Jora]

ok. nothing really to comment on here. would like to see opa and narwahl explain themselves.

Oh, yes? You, sir, ain't doing a thing and asking for compliance? Whoa!

My unsubstantial vote was made for the sake of reaction hunting.
You see, this game is going too slow. I understand that someone is comfortable with their unique playstyle (like Adc75), but someone is just mimicking it. It is well-known that the success of mafia is being guaranteed by the passivity of the town. Don't try to laugh it off, don_johnson, this is a serious offence.
Also, I dislike how J let the free pass here Post 58. Perhaps, he is sympathizing with don_johnson because of that another game in which they both are currently in. So I close my eyes on this.

VOTE: don_johnson

Please scratch the talk about ongoing games.

//Mod

[Jora]

Happy birthday, J!

[don_johnson]

brilliant.

unvote, vote: opa

cause that was the dumbest post i think i have ever seen. first off, there seems to be some accusation about me not doing anything. seeing as how there is not very much if anything at all to comment on besides your wierd vote switch and narwahl's behavior, i don't see how that is relevant. second, do not talk about ongoing games. both you and J should know this. third, J saying "hey dude, say something," and me offering a perfectly reasonable response is hardly "sympathizing". i'm not sure what "reactions" you were looking for, but mine was absolutely no different than anyone elses. so yeah. if you want to hang yourself with terrible logic. be my guest.

[don_johnson]

just noticed that's L-1. noone hammer please. if anyone wants to threaten and noone wants to get off, i would suggest a claim. its early, but you're "A-ha!" gambit deserves it imo.

[Adc75]

UNVOTE: Opa

[Adc75]

VOTE: Don Johnson

I believe we've found our first scum, girls and boys.

[Jora]

At first,

about me not doing anything...
there is not very much if anything at all to comment...

What if anyone including me, will use this logic? Is that what you want?

besides your wierd vote switch and narwahl's behavior

So my vote is bad? Mkay... Noted. But wait a minute, you saying this is only information you've got, yet you balming me for bringing it up?!

mine [reaction] was absolutely no different than anyone elses

That is simply not true.

if anyone wants to threaten and noone wants to get off, i would suggest a claim. its early, but you're "A-ha!" gambit deserves it imo.

Oh, thanks. It's very kind of you. But I think you would be better candidate for today's lynch. You just proved that you weren't interested in scumhunting and that all your true desire was to wait an opportunity while keeping this town inert.

[don_johnson]

I'd have to agree. It seemed odd to suddenly switch votes like that

That vote post just requires a vote.

Because it's a post containing a vote and nothing else?

I'm sorry Opa but I must vote you because my gut is not letting me let it go that your vote appears really bandwagony onto Sampson requires that you be looked into under sharper scrutiny.

Why Opa?

ok. so J votes OPA for his post where he blatantly bandwagons sampson. both J and riggs inquire as to the reasoning of said vote. Adc then votes Opa because there is no reasoning attached. riggs questions Adc, Adc says, "well, you feel the same way..." J in 70 makes a good point, Adc says "no." no further explanation as to "why no?" narwahl votes J on "gut"(no explanation here either). J and trevor say "why?" dj says:

ok. nothing really to comment on here. would like to see opa and narwahl explain themselves.

which is basically the same thing that EVERYONE else was just saying, except dj didn't drop a vote on anyone(he was waiting for some explanations).

narwahl then says, well, basically nothing. just sort of confirms that his "gut" is based on "odd" feelings he cannot qualify or really explain.

then opa says he was "reaction hunting". votes dj, but doesn't really explain the vote. he says this:

It is well-known that the success of mafia is being guaranteed by the passivity of the town.

which is strange. because he seems to be accusing me of "passivity". which by his own logic would mean that i am more likely town. then says J gave me a "free pass". which again, makes no sense seeing as how the "pass" was depndent on a completely reasonable explanation. but whtevz. heres the funniest part:

UNVOTE: Opa

VOTE: Don Johnson

I believe we've found our first scum, girls and boys.

^^ yes. you read that right. but i digress. what do y'all think of this little exchange?

[don_johnson]

At first,

about me not doing anything...
there is not very much if anything at all to comment...

What if anyone including me, will use this logic? Is that what you want?

you did use that logic. you laid down a reasonless vote with no content. you justified it as "reaction fishing", which is entirely believable, but you singled out the most townie response to your gambit. doesn't make sense.

besides your wierd vote switch and narwahl's behavior

So my vote is bad? Mkay... Noted. But wait a minute, you saying this is only information you've got, yet you balming me for bringing it up?!

didn't say bad. i said wierd. and at this point i hadn't "blamed" you for anything. you voted with no reason. i said, i'll comment after you give your reason. then you said"i was reaction fishing", and you voted me for

waiting

for your explanation.

mine [reaction] was absolutely no different than anyone elses

That is simply not true.

please qualify the differences between Adc's reaction to your vote, J's reaction to your vote, Riggs' reaction to your vote, and my reaction. you may want to include narwahl's as well.

if anyone wants to threaten and noone wants to get off, i would suggest a claim. its early, but you're "A-ha!" gambit deserves it imo.

Oh, thanks. It's very kind of you. But I think you would be better candidate for today's lynch. You just proved that you weren't interested in scumhunting and that all your true desire was to wait an opportunity while keeping this town inert.

?? i said "noone hammer." i also explicitly asked that you not claim unless threat of hammer is proven and imminent. what "oppurtunity" was i waiting for? you have done nothing that screams townie imo, and your reasonless vote that turned into the "ahah" gambit is the scummiest thing i have seen so far. get back to me when you compare and contrast the reactions to your "gambit" and give me some sort of explanation as to why you thought my reaction was scummy.

[don_johnson]

opa: can you also please advise me as to what other topics of discussion i could have touched on while waiting for yours and narwahl's explanations. was there anything else of particular interest that i should have noticed and/or commented on? seeing as how noone else was really commenting on anything and the thread is so young, i am failing to see what else i could have touched on besides the two most obviously controversial votes so far in the game. and this is a serious query. thanks.

[Jora]

What a weird stream of consciousness! Huh. I'll try to reply, anyways. Sorry for delay, though. It's rather hard for me because English is not my 1st langusege.
\
Don't worry I have a simple question for your entertainment which made me laught every time I see an overdefensive scum's textwalls:

Why are you desperately burn the candle at both ends trying to prove to me that your good townie, while have a vote on me? If you think that i'm scum, you shouldn't be worried so much.

[don_johnson]

Why are you desperately burn the candle at both ends trying to prove to me that your good townie, while have a vote on me? If you think that i'm scum, you shouldn't be worried so much.

"desperate" is an adjective you can choose if you like, but if you actually read my posts you will find they are well thought out and pose perfectly reasonable questions. just because i put a vote on you does not mean that i am 100% certain you are scum. while i find your knee jerk reaction to my seemingly innocuous post to be scummy and deserving of a vote, i clearly stated that i wanted noone to hammer and that you only claim under said threat. what i

have

done is give you an oppurtunity to explain yourself. atm, i do not see a better place for my vote, so i am fine with it on you. if you cannot answer my questions, then i will find you to be more likely scum. if you give me some reasonable explanation for your behavior, then i may retract the vote. so i'm not sure what "burn the candle at both ends" means, but i don't see how ignoring you would benefit the town. you placed an unreasoned vote, claimed it was a gambit and have made an unreasoned attack on me. address the issue. i am nothing if not reasonable. it behooves noone to be otherwise.

[Jora]

Well if ypu saying it was not desperate, so be it. I just stuck with all that quotes while you were continuing to post more. F* that long post!

The reason why I voted you at first place was your advocacy of possive playstyle. Not the reaction.

[Trevor]

unvote

,

vote:adc

That's the second time you've bandwagoned on a vote.

[Jora]

EBWOP:
Then you, DJ, proved yourself worthy of my vote.

[Jora]

Trevor, bandwagons are good. Only reckless are bad. The question therefore is: do feel no reasons for voting me or DJ? Why?

[Adc75]

FoS: Trevor

So why didn't the first one bother you?

[don_johnson]

opa, maybe i need to be more clear because you seemed to completely ignore everything i just typed:

1) at the time of my initial post which sparked your vote on me, "can you also please advise me as to what other topics of discussion i could have touched on while waiting for yours and narwahl's explanations. was there anything else of particular interest that i should have noticed and/or commented on?(from post 88)"

2) "please qualify the differences between Adc's reaction to your vote, J's reaction to your vote, Riggs' reaction to your vote, and my reaction. you may want to include narwahl's as well."(from post 87)

please answer these questions(requests). thanks.

[Trevor]

Both posts were part of the reason. The fact that you followed up on another vote and switched votes makes me vote you.

[Guy_Named_Riggs]

Wasn't the first vote RVS?

[Jora]

don_johnson, I don't find our conversation to be useful for town. I mean, I wish to get more intel on your alignment, but the only thing I see is that you are pissed. You know, this is not quite a town tell at all, even may be a scumtell. Needless to say, it could be easily faked.

if you actually read my posts you will find they are well thought out and pose perfectly reasonable questions.

I wanted to be polite, but if you insist. I'm sick of your "well thought and perfectly reasonable" questions. Please stop bullshit me.

1) at the time of my initial post which sparked your vote on me, "can you also please advise me as to what other topics of discussion i could have touched on while waiting for yours and narwahl's explanations. was there anything else of particular interest that i should have noticed and/or commented on?(from post 88)"

2) "please qualify the differences between Adc's reaction to your vote, J's reaction to your vote, Riggs' reaction to your vote, and my reaction. you may want to include narwahl's as well."(from post 87)

1) I have nothing to advise, think for yourself.
You should have been more active if you wanted to gain some trust. Don't tell me that it was hard. You were passive, and more so, you told others that it was an Ok thing. So, I voted you. I repeat, you have yourself to thank for that. You were scummy. And your OMGUSish reaction not helping at all.

2) Again. This is not related with my reasons for voting you. All I have to say is that you were wrong when you said about an equal reaction. I can tell the theory behind my hunting. By no means it is the only correct. It is just my belief. Here it is. The time for experiment was good: RVS stuck. Every one were looking for oportunities to say something. Of course, scums are less interested in that, but they should make new posts too. The only difference is the motivation. Scums already know who is who. Hence, if they find some noticeable thing, which can give them some townpoints, they hardly to ignore it. On the other hand, townie should interpret new phenomenon using his previously collected knowledge. So if he gained some strong tells before, or if he simply tunneled on someone, then he may just ignore new thing. This is to say, I have a townread on daftnarwhal. Now piss off, DJ.

P.S. Please refer to me as: Jora