Open 348 - JK9 Game over (Who won?)

[Pads]

*crickets*

[Pine]

Right then...wagon on Pom, go.

[Pomegranate]

I have to apologize for being busier than I had anticipated recently. I have a couple questions for Pine though: when did I spend considerable time defending myself against "Mattman's attackers"? And speaking of which, what problem is there at all with trying to get out from under "Mattman's shadow"?

[Pine]

You haven't spent "considerable time" doing

anything

. You had ten posts as of my case, and the first several were all spent distancing yourself from your predecessor. I'm not sure I can be clearer than that without quoting it myself with notes in the margin.

[apple_singer]

FoS: duckhunter

When voting, please give more reason than "he is scummy". That's about the worst argument you can make; it's not an argument at all!
Especially when placing someone at L-1, please give more reason. I will maintain this FoS until you provide a reason for voting.

Anytime when an inactive player comes out of nowhere and votes/attacks someone is a tad suspicious.

What was the point of this? Is it referring to me or duckhunter? (because we've all kinda been lurky) If I post, are you expecting me not to attack someone? Just to post fluff? That's very anti-town.

Right then...wagon on Pom, go.

This seems a tad desperate for a wagon IMO. I understand why you find Pom scummy; however, begging for a wagon seems like scum trying to rush a lynch or at least create pressure. Shouldn't your argument speak for itself, rather than having to explicitly ask for votes?

[Pine]

Desperate? Desperate would be pushing the wagon I was already on, not starting a new one. I want you lumps to

participate

, not lurk your hearts out. And you

just said

my arguments

do

speak for themselves, so what's your deal, Apple?

[Pomegranate]

You haven't spent "considerable time" doing

anything

. You had ten posts as of my case, and the first several were all spent distancing yourself from your predecessor. I'm not sure I can be clearer than that without quoting it myself with notes in the margin.

You're implying that it's scummy for me not to want to be associated with Mattman-- why? I replaced him, but I'm not him, and I can't account for anything Mattman did. So why is it so scummy?

[apple_singer]

Desperate? Desperate would be pushing the wagon I was already on, not starting a new one. I want you lumps to

participate

, not lurk your hearts out. And you

just said

my arguments

do

speak for themselves, so what's your deal, Apple?

1) Well you're currently on the Pom "wagon", so I don't really get your first sentence.
2) I'll try to stop lurking, but I've been busy.
3) I said I understood why

you

found Pom scummy; I actually don't find Pom's posts to be terribly scummy myself. I don't think he/she's done anything wrong really. If you're going for a lurker, this game is full of them. Why Pom?

[Pine]

I don't think any of those really deserve serious answers. I've already stated my case, and deadline approaches. This thread needs to get off its ass and do something.

[ConSpiracy]

Random fact #7

I am watching a baywatch lookalike commercial while typing this.

I apologise for my lack of activity again. There are four players in need of a prod, but I feel like a dictator if I would count them as prods.

Votecount

Pads (0)

-

smallpeoples343 (0)

-

apple_singer (0)

-

Pine (0)

-

[L] (2)

-

Pads, smallpeoples343

Pomegranate (1)

-

Pine

duckhunter4242 (2)

- Skenvoy,

pomegranate

Skenvoy (1)

-

duckhunter242

No lynch (1) - [L]

Not voting (1)

- apple_singer

With

8 alive

, it takes

5 to lynch

.
Day 2 ends on

Thursday November 17rd 4 p.m. GMT+1

. That is

(expired on 2011-11-17 10:00:00)

from now.

[Pine]

Please count them. People who aggressively lurk and won't engage should be replaced and/or threatened with replacement.

[Skenvoy]

Gah, sorry! I've no time now, but I'll be back in 15 hours.

[smallpeoples343]

Hello,

I've been glancing at this thread from time to time. I get the point on Pom, but I don't think it's that effective.

[Pine]

Hello,

I've been glancing at this thread from time to time. I get the point on Pom, but I don't think it's that effective.

Here, have a waffle jacket:



Or would you like to hedge your bets a little more?



(Yes, the above is intended as a subtle indictment of your masculinity, or lack thereof. Less subtle now, I suppose. I am also aware that it is technically a topiary.)

[smallpeoples343]

I meant that I can see the argument from both sides. Pom's side included. (Yes, of course that was subtle. I had NO CLUE until I read the parenthesis)

[Pomegranate]

@PINE: PLEASE RESPOND TO MY QUESTION. KTHX.

You haven't spent "considerable time" doing

anything

. You had ten posts as of my case, and the first several were all spent distancing yourself from your predecessor. I'm not sure I can be clearer than that without quoting it myself with notes in the margin.

You're implying that it's scummy for me not to want to be associated with Mattman-- why? I replaced him, but I'm not him, and I can't account for anything Mattman did. So why is it so scummy?

[Skenvoy]

Liking Pine a lot. Town.

L's pretty good, too, although a few iffy posts. Leaning town.

Apple's a bit weird. Why the FOS rather than a vote for Duckhunter? It would've only put him at L-2. Leaning scum.

Pom...meh. Can't get a really good read. Both her and her predecessor are null, vaguely leaning scum.

Pads I do not like, much. Not posted a lot, and his posts seem a bit...off. Same question for Pads as for Apple - why not vote Duck at that point? You didn't post analysis at the time, simply unvoted without placing another - and when you came back, it was convienently after most other people had posted their points, so you could analyse the wagon without commenting on Duck. Leaning scum - could see a scumteam with Duck.

Duck, I have already posted my thoughts on. Nothing much has changed. Scum.

Smallpeoples is okay. Waffly posts, but getting a town feel from him. Leaning town.

People I want to lynch - Duckhunter, Pads.
People who fall in that middle area - Smallpeoples, Pom, Apple.
People I don't want to lynch - Pine, L.

Also, there's quite a bit of wagon hopping been going on in the last while. I think this is actually due more to town than scum, though.

Duckhunter needs to post n stuff.

[apple_singer]

@above -- it would have been L-2, not L-1? Whoops, I miscounted the votes apparently. If it was for L-2 I definitely would have voted.

Although right now, seeing the proximity to deadline and the fact that duckhunter hasn't posted in forever, I will

vote: duckhunter

[Pine]

@PINE: PLEASE RESPOND TO MY QUESTION. KTHX.

You haven't spent "considerable time" doing

anything

. You had ten posts as of my case, and the first several were all spent distancing yourself from your predecessor. I'm not sure I can be clearer than that without quoting it myself with notes in the margin.

You're implying that it's scummy for me not to want to be associated with Mattman-- why? I replaced him, but I'm not him, and I can't account for anything Mattman did. So why is it so scummy?

That was a serious question? Distancing from a scummy predecessor is tacitly recognizing your predecessor's scumminess and intentionally trying to get past it. I'm not sure how to respond further...I'd use "Why is the sky blue" for a similar question, but I can explain in detail the optical processes involved with that, so it's a bad example.

[ConSpiracy]

*sigh*
Duckhunter is going to be force replaced. [L] has about 20 hours left to respond or he will be force replaced as well.
Deadline will be postponed to two days after the replacement gets in.

[Pomegranate]

And what's wrong with tacitly recognizing my predecessors scumminess, or for that matter recognizing it vocally? Yeah, reading through I did find Mattman scummy, and honestly, you might have to spell out for me why you think that's a problem, because I honestly don't see why it's any sort of issue. Apologies.

[smallpeoples343]

*hopes for good replacement*

Hmm... kinda agree with Pom. Addressing a predecessor's scumminess is like answering a person's question. If not done, it just increases suspicion on the player.

[Pine]

Not really. The best thing to do would have just to move on with the thread and start fresh, only responding to direct accusations regarding the predecessor. Pom focused on predecessor first, then lurked to avoid notice. That's scummy.

[ConSpiracy]

Meji Fan replaces duckhunter4242 effective immediately.
You have (expired on 2011-11-18 05:00:00) till deadline. That's 48 hours from this post.

[Pads]

What [L] has been doing is way too bold for scum.

I used to think similar thoughts, but I've been shown that there's simply no such thing.

I have to keep reminding myself that everyone in this game other than Pomegranate and myself is inexperienced, which covers a multitude of sins.

Ah, mafiascum.net. It's not truly a game on your domain until someone broadly and dismissively insults everyone else in the game.

Go ahead. Read her posts in isolation for yourself. I'll wait.

...Done? No? Go back and read Pom's posts in ISO. Seriously. Go to the bottom of the page, click the "Display posts by user" menu, and select Pomegranate. Then click Go.

Done? I'm going to assume you have.

What is this, I don't even know.... If you're a townie, then in theory you're trying to convince me and others to see what you've seen. So, why would you put it on the reader to do the work for you. (a) That's really lazy and gives credence to the idea that you're just making it all up, and (b) you run the real risk of something getting lost in translation or missed.

If you want to show us something that Pom said, then show it. Put it in your post, don't make the reader do your job for you. I can understand if you feel like it's "everything Pom has said", but surely a few quotes can help illuminate your point, at which point the reader, if he's town, can reasonably be relied upon to do some follow up reading.

And since we're on the subject, I don't find Pom particularly scummy,.

Same question for Pads as for Apple - why not vote Duck at that point? You didn't post analysis at the time, simply unvoted without placing another

Clearly untrue (that I didn't post analysis).

I said that i didn't like the vote and removed myself from the wagon, obviously meaning that I found it and its caster scummy.

Also of relevance, is that I checked the forum about 2 minutes before walking out the door (the post indicated that I was short on time). I saw an immensely scummy vote on the wagon that I was currently supporting. Since I was going to be unable to check the game for a period of time, I felt removing my vote was the best play, with the intention of rereading and reconsidering the game once I had time to do so (which I did).

and when you came back, it was convienently after most other people had posted their points, so you could analyse the wagon without commenting on Duck.

That's a rather bold skew of reality there, almost to the point of being maliciously so. Here's a more straightforward retelling of what happened.

a) Duckhunter voted for you

b) You responded to him.

c) I posted, saying i didn't like the look of Duckhunter's vote, and unvoted. The obvious implication being that I no longer felt comfortable being on the wagon after such a scummy vote was put on it.

d) Five other people vote, FoS, or otherwise denounce Duckhunter.

Clearly, I waited to see what everyone else's opinion on my obvbuddy Duckhunter before chipping in. Oh wait, I was the first individual who is not Duckhunter or you to comment on Duckhunter's vote on you, and everyone else followed in

my

wake.

Once they had all posted, I then posted an analysis of what was said, which, ya know, is what a townie is supposed to do.

So, in review, while I did post analysis of the wagon/anti-duckhunter sentiment AFTER it happened (because I can't see the future)

I posted my opinion of Duckhunter BEFORE the masses posted their opinions on Duckhunter.

Which is the exact opposite of what you said. Care to rescind your blatant misrepresentation of reality?

In addition, I liked your use of the phrase "when you came back" there. Makes it sound like I was gone for a week. Yet, there was less than 36 hours between the two posts. On a similar note, [L] was actively posting until I made a case on her five days ago, and then she vanished. How about that for lurking? Why no mention of that? I don't even need to ask. (It's because you're buddying up to Pine and he says she's town).

Also, you have one choice for scum, and three other people who you are 'leaning scum' on. I can understand being suspicious of more people than there are scum in the game, but 'leaning scum' means that you think it's more likely that the person is scum than town. Do you think there are four scum? I would hope not. While this can perhaps be dismissed as a poor choice of words, it's harder to dismiss the notion that you're willing to lynch half the people in the game.

You're OMGUS'ing, which is scummy; you're distorting reality, which is scummy; you're buddying up with someone whose alignment you shouldn't know, which is scummy; and you would lynch half of the game, which is scummy. I clearly need to rethink my read of your 'town-like' tone.

[L] has about 20 hours left to respond or he will be force replaced as well.

Well, I had hoped to get a response from the person I accused, their actions not only being schizophrenic but incredibly anti-town. L's replacement, of course, can offer us no insight as to her behavior, and I imagine the case will fall through.

But seriously, she hammered a wagon without asking for a claim AFTER saying that giving the lynchee a chance to claim was really important. Then she agreed to a no lynch vote AFTER saying that no lynch votes were pro-scum. Why are there only two people that care about that?

I encourage Pom, Smallpeople and Applesinger to do something beyond defending themselves and giving passing opinions here and there.