Open 354: Twin Trap in Morecambe (Concluded)

[daftnarwhal]

@don You said that there were two things worth commenting on. So why didn't you comment on them?

[Thomas]

FoS: Trevor

So why didn't the first one bother you?

OMGUS. ^

It's better to accuse someone of bandwagoning when you see it many times, not just once. It makes a case stronger the more you see it.

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.

Yes. Your conversation is clogging the thread with pointless posts.

I don't get any pro-town vibes from Trevor right now so my vote will remain for the time being.

[Jora]

Wait, bandwagoning is not a bad thing! How else the town could nail a scum? No one someone should be accused for doing it. The only thing that matters is motivation. I think both recent votes by Adc75 were good reasoned. Well, one may think that I saying this just for gain support to my case on DJ. Fair enough. At least the 1st Adc's non-RVS one, i.e. vote on me, was good mitivated, trust me on that.

[don_johnson]

@don You said that there were two things worth commenting on. So why didn't you comment on them?

i did:

ok. nothing really to comment on here. would like to see (1) opa and (2) narwahl explain themselves.

both of you made odd moves. i was giving you a chance to explain yourselves.

opa: w.o.w.

not sure what that was all about. i was trying to have a discussion with you. i am also not sure why you are not answering my question about comparing everyones reactions. if you were indeed waiting to see reactions, then you should be able to explain what it is about my reaction that was so vastly different from the other players reactions that it warranted your vote. you should also be able to explain why my reaction was so "voteworthy", that it caused you to end your gambit. i.e. you could have waited for everyone to react, but obviously saw something in my reaction which really ticked you off. is it really all that odd of me to expect the two players with unreasoned and unexplained votes to explain their reasoning. whatevz. good luck with that. my apologies if i said something rude, but i was just trying to clarify things. and pointing out things that you feel i should have commented on is a strange thing for you to ignore. i mean, seriously, how do you expect anyone to think you are town if you are just going to ignore perfectly reasonable questions?

[Sampson]

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.

You didn't check to see if he could be at L-1 before you voted?

Anyway, aside from that, I don't understand the foundation of opa's case on DJ. Asking for explanations for others' behavior is contributing, since it gives multiple perspectives/more information for the town to work with. I don't think it's hypocritical at all for DJ to ask that, which seems to be what opa is getting at in Post 79. I'd vote opa, but I'm not going to bring him to L-1 this early in the game. Which reminds me:

Unvote

.

I'm also wary of Adc. Outside of RVS, he hasn't done anything except vote while offering limited reasoning for doing so. I don't really see any hints of scumhunting, just voting.

[Jora]

@ don_johnson, are stupid?

I'm Jora.

i was trying to have a discussion with you.

Let's see:

brilliant.

unvote, vote: opa

cause that was the dumbest post i think i have ever seen. crap-crap-crap-crap-crap

You ain't doing it right. Mkay?

i am also not sure why you are not answering my question about comparing everyones reactions. if you were indeed waiting to see reactions, then you should be able to explain what it is about my reaction that was so vastly different from the other players reactions that it warranted your vote. you should also be able to explain why my reaction was so "voteworthy", that it caused you to end your gambit. i.e. you could have waited for everyone to react, but obviously saw something in my reaction which really ticked you off. is it really all that odd of me to expect the two players with unreasoned and unexplained votes to explain their reasoning.

I think you really should read Post 99.

C a r e f u l l y.

I've already answered. Again and again: your reaction was OK; I DID NOT VOTE YOU BECAUSE OF THAT; only narwahl's reaction was different;
As to why did I stop watching? It is none of your business. But, I will not make a secret of it. Simply, only two players was left: Sampson and Thomas. Sampson did not appered yet (preview edit: well he is now), and I think I saw Thomas watching the thread (excuse me if i'm wrong, i forgot to take a screenshot and not quite sure by now).

and pointing out things that you feel i should have commented on is a strange thing for you to ignore. i mean, seriously, how do you expect anyone to think you are town if you are just going to ignore perfectly reasonable questions?

Why the fuck are you said that? I've answered all your dumb questions. And they are not so perfectly reasonable as you think they are, they are dumb. Sorry.


NOW IS MY TURN TO ASK:

do not talk about ongoing games. both you and J should know this

Why are you mentioned [J] here? I thought it was only me who told about an ongoing game. It kinda looks strange, bro.

[Jora]

I don't understand the foundation of opa's case on DJ.

Step by step, why do I suspecting him:
1. I don't like his RVS vote. Delilah? Too complicated IMO. But that is nothing compared to what he've done next.
2. He was too passive. Taking into account that he's the oldest player on site here, and we have rerlatively large number of newbies/lowposters I find this:

haha. obviously the latter. i'm out for a night of drinking. i'll read this from the start tomorrow in the AM. was kind of waiting for this to grow a few pages before jumping in.

to be serious crime against this town.
3. This post was truly amaizing and briliant: http://mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.ph ... 3#p3569153
4. OMGUS vote as of itself is a scumtell, besides he almost hammered me. Without any good reason.
5. He blatantly shitting the thread with misrepresentation of my case, instead of being constructive.

[Jora]

I'd vote opa, but I'm not going to bring him to L-1 this early in the game.

Could you elaborate, please?
Why do you think that I'm scummiest player here?
Because you don't understand my case? I don't remember since when this became a scumtell. Or because you're don_johnson's partner?
Why do I said this? You discredited both of me and Adc in the same post. Which is funny, because in the begining of that same post you accused DJ. Also, I saw over 9000 parties which were started from RVS-distancing vote from the major scum-partner, just like this:

vote: sampson

cause i'm in love with delilah. :/

[don_johnson]

@ don_johnson, are stupid?

I'm Jora.

then change your tag. it says opa.

Why the fuck are you said that? I've answered all your dumb questions. And they are not so perfectly reasonable as you think they are, they are dumb. Sorry.

now you have, yes. oh. except why you voted me. can you reiterate that please?

Why are you mentioned [J] here? I thought it was only me who told about an ongoing game. It kinda looks strange, bro.

you are wrong. you piggybacked a comment by J about me posting elsewhere on site. i was trying to be fair and not single you out, because J was the one who initially brought it up.

in post 99 you say you voted me:

You were passive, and more so, you told others that it was an Ok thing.

then you link to this post:

haha. obviously the latter. i'm out for a night of drinking. i'll read this from the start tomorrow in the AM. was kind of waiting for this to grow a few pages before jumping in.

so...

wtf are you talking about? i clearly stated that i planned on posting. my activity level varies from game to game. just bvecause i was "passive" for three pages does not make me an "advocate". it makes me "passive", which according to your own logic, is a towntell.

also, you have not answered the other question. you know, all those things i should have commented on? but whatevz. moving on.

Step by step, why do I suspecting him:
1. I don't like his RVS vote. Delilah? Too complicated IMO. But that is nothing compared to what he've done next.

its a biblical reference. its only complicated if you are a moron.

2. He was too passive. Taking into account that he's the oldest player on site here, and we have rerlatively large number of newbies/lowposters I find this:

haha. obviously the latter. i'm out for a night of drinking. i'll read this from the start tomorrow in the AM. was kind of waiting for this to grow a few pages before jumping in.

to be serious crime against this town.

since when is honesty a crime? also, as of post 99, thomas had two posts. and you saw him viewing the thread. and yet instead of waiting for his "reaction", you voted me for passivity. why the double standard when it comes to thomas?

3. This post was truly amaizing and briliant: http://mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.ph ... 3#p3569153

please expand. i have no ideas what you're getting at.

4. OMGUS vote as of itself is a scumtell, besides he almost hammered me. Without any good reason.

i didn't hammer you. and i have good reason if i did. omgus is not always a scumtell.

5. He blatantly shitting the thread with misrepresentation of my case, instead of being constructive.

FUCK YOU. i have been polite. i have asked questions. i have responded. it's not my problem that english is your second language.

[don_johnson]

ebwop: "now you have, yes. oh. except why you voted me. can you reiterate that please?" - yeah, you can ignore this, i think i finally figured out why you say you voted. just jump ahead and explain the disparity between your treatment of me and your treatment of thomas. thanks.

[Johhog]

VOTECOUNT 1.4

Trevor

: Thomas

(L-4)

}|{opa (3)

: Guy_Named_Riggs, [J], don_johnson

(L-2)

[J]

: daftnarwhal

(L-4)

don_johnson (2)

: }|{opa, Adc75

(L-3)

Adc75

: Trevor

(L-4)

Not voting

: Sampson

V/LA

: [J] (Nov 13)

With 9 alive it is 5 to lynch.

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

[Jora]

@ don_johnson
My second language is Kazakh, and English is my 3rd. I know you are scum and doing it on purpose, but still you are dumb fuck. No offence, but you deserved that title.

Section "No comment":

was kind of waiting for this to grow a few pages before jumping in.

does not make me an "advocate". it makes me "passive", which according to your own logic, is a towntell.

i have been polite.

brilliant.

unvote, vote: opa

cause that was the dumbest post i think i have ever seen. .....
so yeah. if you want to hang yourself with terrible logic. be my guest.

i didn't hammer you

just noticed that's L-1

and i have

good reason

if i did.

omgus

is not always a scumtell.

I voted you in Post #79. Not Thomas. Why? I had my reasons. It was, mainly: a)He did not "advocate". b)As far as i saw he was not posting much lately. At the moment of Post #79 I had just a gut. Thanks for making things so obvious in your next posts. Die scum!

then change your tag. it says opa.

No. It says }|{opa. Sitewide rules are applied, so be nice or GTFO.

[Adc75]

Chill out, Opa.

[don_johnson]

I voted you in Post #79. Not Thomas. Why? I had my reasons. It was, mainly: a)He did not "advocate".

according to you i "advocated" much earlier. you didn't vote me when i "advocated". you voted me when i stated i would wait to comment until after yours and narwahls explanation. your timeline is off so your reasoning doesn't make much sense to me. but whatevz. if you wanted to vote me for "advocating", you should have voted when i "advocated". it would have been much more clear. that said, i don't believe i "advocated" anything.

b)As far as i saw he was not posting much lately. At the moment of Post #79 I had just a gut. Thanks for making things so obvious in your next posts. Die scum!

"not much lately" or "not at all". as of post 79, i had more posts than he had.

then change your tag. it says opa.

No. It says }|{opa. Sitewide rules are applied, so be nice or GTFO.

if you want to count up all the ad hom and compare that would be fine. i'll play nice when you do.

[Adc75]

Does anyone else get a town vs. town vibe as this little spat plays out?

UNVOTE: DJ

We need something in this thread other than butt-hurt.

[Jora]

according to you i "advocated" much earlier. you didn't vote me when i "advocated". you voted me when i stated i would wait to comment until after yours and narwahls explanation. your timeline is off so your reasoning doesn't make much sense to me. but whatevz. if you wanted to vote me for "advocating", you should have voted when i "advocated". it would have been much more clear. that said, i don't believe i "advocated" anything.

Think of it as of coincidence. I was watching for some time, and when I feel that you scummy enough I made a probe vote. This is how the scumhunting work. You should know, it is not always possible to immediately tell whether a player deserves a vote or not. Some time for observations needed.
As of Thomas, by "not much lately" I mean "including elswhere on the site" Since it is a public information and everyone can check this out I can use it for my personal benefit of identifying for myself whom to suspect of lurking/flaking etc. Over. Discussion is prohibited by the rules. Stop it.

@ Adc75: Maybe you right. Maybe I just get tunneled. I need some time to rest, so then I can evaluate all pro- and against-. Just be aware, DJ is dangerous as a scum according to his signature. And I'm honestly shocked how many mistakes he've done this far. A lot of people on this site are getting immidietly bandwagoned and lynched every day for much lesser deeds.

Mod

: I'll take V/LA for a week.

[Johhog]

Mod

: I'll take V/LA for a week.

A week is pushing it imo, do you think you can muster a couple of posts during your V/LA?

[Jora]

Yep. And get back on Saturday.

[don_johnson]

Think of it as of coincidence. I was watching for some time, and when I feel that you scummy enough I made a probe vote.

no. you can't have it both ways. you said you didn;t vote me for this post:

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

you said you voted because i was "passive". now, if you "were watching for some time, and when i feel that you scummy enough i made a probe vote." in other words, something happened between my original "passive" post, and your vote on me that made up your mind to vote me. you are not being clear on what that something was. the above post is the only post i made in between those two events. so if it wasn't the above post, then what was it?

You should know, it is not always possible to immediately tell whether a player deserves a vote or not. Some time for observations needed.

thats fine. but you are not fully explaining what you "observed" that made you then vote.

As of Thomas, by "not much lately" I mean "including elswhere on the site" Since it is a public information and everyone can check this out I can use it for my personal benefit of identifying for myself whom to suspect of lurking/flaking etc. Over. Discussion is prohibited by the rules. Stop it.

i have no idea what you mean. i am currently in two games. i cannot give my full attention to either one at the same time. are you implying that i was sitewide lurking? or are you implying that i was lurking in this game? please clarify.

Just be aware, DJ is dangerous as a scum according to his signature. And I'm honestly shocked how many mistakes he've done this far. A lot of people on this site are getting immidietly bandwagoned and lynched every day for much lesser deeds.

if you are readin ginto my sig, you should also realize that i have a better than average win-loss ratio as town as well. so that kind of logic is neither here nor there. but thanks for noticing. if you are going to start making meta arguments, however, go and do some actual research. don't just base it off my sig.

[Trevor]

I think voting Opa was well-reasoned at the time. Don's realization and admission of putting Opa at l-1 was a towny move.

[Sampson]

I'd vote opa, but I'm not going to bring him to L-1 this early in the game.

Could you elaborate, please?
Why do you think that I'm scummiest player here?
Because you don't understand my case? I don't remember since when this became a scumtell. Or because you're don_johnson's partner?
Why do I said this? You discredited both of me and Adc in the same post. Which is funny, because in the begining of that same post you accused DJ. Also, I saw over 9000 parties which were started from RVS-distancing vote from the major scum-partner, just like this:

vote: sampson

cause i'm in love with delilah. :/

No, it's that I don't think your case is rooted in logic. Town generally doesn't make internally inconsistent cases, since they're in a position where they are forced to use logic to scumhunt. It's perfectly reasonable to find an illogical case scummy. You're also putting far too much stock into an RVS vote.

As for my post which you find so questionable:

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.

You didn't check to see if he could be at L-1 before you voted?

Anyway, aside from that, I don't understand the foundation of opa's case on DJ. Asking for explanations for others' behavior is contributing, since it gives multiple perspectives/more information for the town to work with. I don't think it's hypocritical at all for DJ to ask that, which seems to be what opa is getting at in Post 79. I'd vote opa, but I'm not going to bring him to L-1 this early in the game. Which reminds me:

Unvote

.

I'm also wary of Adc. Outside of RVS, he hasn't done anything except vote while offering limited reasoning for doing so. I don't really see any hints of scumhunting, just voting.

I wasn't casting suspicion toward DJ. That was just something that confused me. I didn't know if he had made sure you weren't at L-1 before voting. (I still don't have an answer for that)

I don't see why I have to limit my scumhunting to one person. If I find certain actions or behaviors scummy, I'll bring it up. It had been a page since I last posted, so I had more content to cover.

Mod: You missed my Unvote.

Sorry, I've corrected it now. Please try to vote/unvote on a separate line in the future. Thanks.

//Mod

[daftnarwhal]

Does anyone else get a town vs. town vibe as this little spat plays out?

UNVOTE: DJ

We need something in this thread other than butt-hurt.

Yes, I very much get that vibe. It seems to have taken over the thread.

[don_johnson]

don't know. opa's hostility is tough to swallow, and i don't like his argument. but,

unvote, vote: Thomas

i'd be willing to compromise on this guy. he's been pretty innocuous so far.

[Thomas]

Wait, bandwagoning is not a bad thing! How else the town could nail a scum? No one someone should be accused for doing it. The only thing that matters is motivation. I think both recent votes by Adc75 were good reasoned. Well, one may think that I saying this just for gain support to my case on DJ. Fair enough. At least the 1st Adc's non-RVS one, i.e. vote on me, was good mitivated, trust me on that.

If we let people off for bandwagoning then scum could get by easily without being suspected.

Does anyone else get a town vs. town vibe as this little spat plays out?

I haven't taken a stance yet on this but I think this time could be better used scum hunting than this 1 vs. 1 argument, it gets us nowhere.

[Adc75]

*Bolded text added by me*

Wait, bandwagoning is not a bad thing! How else the town could nail a scum? No one someone should be accused for doing it. The only thing that matters is motivation. I think both recent votes by Adc75 were good reasoned. Well, one may think that I saying this just for gain support to my case on DJ. Fair enough. At least the 1st Adc's non-RVS one, i.e. vote on me, was good mitivated, trust me on that.

If we let people off for bandwagoning then scum could get by easily without being suspected.

Can you clarify if you think I'm being scummy, or are just referring to scum in general?

Does anyone else get a town vs. town vibe as this little spat plays out?

I haven't taken a stance yet on this but I think this time could be better used scum hunting than this 1 vs. 1 argument, it gets us nowhere.

I like that you're not ready to call anyone town yet.