Open 128 - C9 OVER! before 762

[sekinj]

Looker... you are just coming across as scummy by saying you have a case on claus, when you've made no such post, and then saying it is just to get him involved.
Why do you think your vote is going to force claus to get involved?
why does claus need to vote someoen right now?

[ryan2754]

Looker, telling Clause of the reasoning for your vote was scummy. I already said that I don't like what you have done with Clause. However his non-action and lurking are very anti-town, if you ask me.
In the game I played with Empking, he made votes like this before, and not really said much for reasoning. Thus, his playing style hasn't changed, and thus I don't see it as scummy.
This being said

Vote: Clausewitz

[millar13]

Ryan that almost looks like you were secretly telling off your scum partner of Looker.

WORD!

[ryan2754]

How so? What do you mean?

[millar13]

Looks like you are trying to make it look at if you suspect Looker, but have no real intention of following up in any way shape or form...by just voting for the guy, you effectively told him he was scummy for voting for....

THAT MADE NO SENSE

[ryan2754]

At least Looker is posting relevant game information...Clause...not so much. If he is continuing to Lurk, I'm going to vote for him.

[millar13]

Relevant doesn't mean someone is less likely to be mafia than a lurker.

A lurker can just be the action of a townie...who has no powers.

[sekinj]

or anyone who has rl issues. lurking is a null tell.

[ryan2754]

But if a lurker is someone with no powers, they are being extremely anti=town and not helping at all. If they are not going to talk and help, they are helping the scum. And right now, I don't have a pure suspicion outside of Looker, and again, at least he is posting game content that, when manifested in the later rounds, will further implicate or erode his scumminess. Not helping at all needs to be addressed.

Yeah, but RL issues usually get mentioned somewhere if it comes along. Even people who have school, etc. are able at the least to throw a post out there saying 'Hey, schoolwork is kicking my ass, I'll post something sufficient tomorrow.'

[millar13]

All you are doing is looking for something...which might very well not be there.

Mafia often like to blow things out of pro-portion or have the town look in the completely wrong direction.

How often, that scum right page after page offering "Advice" to fellow town members.

Plz ryan...shush ur mouf

[ryan2754]

All you are doing is looking for something...which might very well not be there.

Mafia often like to blow things out of pro-portion or have the town look in the completely wrong direction.

How often, that scum right page after page offering "Advice" to fellow town members.

Plz ryan...shush ur mouf

No, I'm not going to shush my mouf because that would be hypocritical. I'm not going to bow down and be quiet (and lurk) and succumb to the course that this game is taking.

[Stef]

PC problems are over now. Bought a new system. YAY! Happy moment over.

5'th vote count:

Clausewitz - (2) Looker, ryan2754 (L-2)
Empking - (0)
Looker - (1) zwetschenwasser
sekinj - (0)
millar13 - (1) Empking
zwetschenwasser - (0)
ryan2754 - (0)

Not voting:

(2) sekinj, Clausewitz, millar13

With 7 alive it takes 4 to lynch
Deadline: 7'th of April ( 2 weeks )

[zwetschenwasser]

Policy lynching lurkers is a nulltell, folks. However, it's quite interesting that Looker pretended to not know why I voted him.

[Looker]

Looker... you are just coming across as scummy by saying you have a case on claus, when you've made no such post, and then saying it is just to get him involved.
Why do you think your vote is going to force claus to get involved?
why does claus need to vote someoen right now?

Look, sekinj, I'm getting tired of repeating myself especially when my words are posted in a digital format that you can read over and over as much as you like and not continuously ask me to re-type. On top of that, you insist upon putting words into my mouth.

FOS Sekinj

. Once again: I don't have a case on clause, as you've just admitted in the above post saying that my vote was to get him involved - which it was.

As far as my vote forcing clause to get involved, no one's FORCING anyone to do anything. I figured I'd help the town organize its actions by getting more people involved in whatever I could/can and it's not like it's actually going to lynch him.

And I didn't say that clause HAD to vote someone, I only implied, or stated rather, that I'd remove my vote on him once he placed a vote on someone else, a tactic which I guess you've never seen before. This is an incentive (slightly, you've just blown it out of proportion) for him to formulate an opinion. (There's really an ironic solution to this tactic but whatever, he'll figure it out).

And as a matter of fact, it wouldn't hurt if you'd formulate an opinion and a vote yourself, that's your purpose. Say whatever you want.

Looker, telling Clause of the reasoning for your vote was scummy. I already said that I don't like what you have done with Clause. However his non-action and lurking are very anti-town, if you ask me.
In the game I played with Empking, he made votes like this before, and not really said much for reasoning. Thus, his playing style hasn't changed, and thus I don't see it as scummy.
This being said

Vote: Clausewitz

I don't see how my explaining what I was doing to clause is scummy, but I appreciate your input.

[zwetschenwasser]

Also, millar, what you're referring to is called a strawman.

[Looker]

@zwet: Whatchutalkinbot boy?

[zwetschenwasser]

You call This^ a response to me?

[sekinj]

I also wanted to know Sekinj's ruling on my case against clause; however, he/she (forgot to look) doesn't know enough to come to a conclusion. It's irrelevant anyway because i was simply placing pressure on clause and the both of you think each other are scum.

you said you wanted to know my ruling on your case (see above) against claus. and then you really stirred me up by saying I had just forgotten to look for said case. now you are claiming that you never intended a case against claus at all, just a motivational vote.

Why did you ask for my 'ruling' if no such case exisited?

[zwetschenwasser]

Because he's nervous scum.

[millar13]

Looker is scum...and if not, i will accept my punishment

[zwetschenwasser]

I endorse the above statement.

[Empking]

Policy lynching lurkers is a nulltell, folks. However, it's quite interesting that Looker pretended to not know why I voted him.

Policy lurking a player who's lurking or lynching a player with a lurker playstyle who hasn't lurked yet? Just want to clarfiy.

Zwet: Can you post your three main reasons against Looker.

[Clausewitz]

You're going to hat me for this but I have a GCSE on Tuesday and I have been preparing like mad. As you could imagine, recreational activities took a back seat to serious business so I have not had much time to play mafia. I will re read tomorrow when I will eventually have some free time. After Thursday I go to Poland for 4 days until Monday, If you deem this too long an absense then by all means replace me but that is not the outcome I desire. I apologize for any inconvenience.

[zwetschenwasser]

*throws hat*

Emp, shut up.

[Looker]

@sekinj: you're right, mistake noted, poor use of the term "case"; however, you could have ascertained from the phrase "simply placing pressure" that I had no such case. Either way, you're right, I stand corrected.

@zwet: You're like the gnat that keeps bitin but I can't find. What are you talking about...?