Mini 1625: Redemption (Game Over)

[GuyInFreezer]

VC 1.07

istott(1):

Flames682

Originalchris (2):

Whomping Willow, droog

Whomping Willow (1):

Originalchris

Riddleton (1):

kuror0

Flubbernugget (3):

crazypianist1116, AWA, GGG

crazypianist1116 (3):

Flubbernugget, Naomi-Tan, Riddleton

Not Voting:

istott, Munkir

The deadline is Nov. 28, 9:40 AM EST.
Countdown: (expired on 2014-11-28 09:40:00)

[Flames682]

I believe I address this above, (and in fact in several posts since you originally posted this), but again I fail to see how my opinion that Flubber is antitown leads to me being scum. Please show me your train of thought here.

Because we've said that anti-town doesn't always equal scum

[Flames682]

Also I'm going to

UNVOTE:

for now.

[Flames682]

Scumreads right now are OC and Riddleton but I'll read ISO's tomorrow to get a read on everyone.

[AWA]

I believe I address this above, (and in fact in several posts since you originally posted this), but again I fail to see how my opinion that Flubber is antitown leads to me being scum. Please show me your train of thought here.

Because we've said that anti-town doesn't always equal scum

And I've said that since I don't have any strong particular reads of actual scum, I'm more concerned about removing players that will be obstructions toward lynching scum in future days where we have more connections to work with. Day One is almost entirely ad hominem, the connections I'm drawing are more meta than that.

[Flames682]

No one is anti-town enough to PL

[Munkir]

Oh my God.

Mod: Can you please delete the above two posts? This post is exactly the same, except with correct quotation and formatting.

-----
Except I've already addressed those points.

It's clear that Flubber is just trying to add chaos and confusion to the game, and I don't particularly care about the reason. That kind of posting style, behavior, and language serves only to distract from the true goal of the game, which is to eliminate the scum. Creating distractions OF ANY KIND supports the scum. That is why I am in favor of removing Flubber from the game.

This reeks of scum
Scum would be pretty happy with this "gay is a slur" nonsense
It gives them a chance to be genuine
Which scum will take for all it's worth

You're trying to justify a lynch as though flubber is making the ruckus
He's not.

How exactly does this "reek of scum"? I'm not happy with the "gay as slur nonsense", because as I stated, creating a controversy over something completely unrelated does nothing to actually help the town, and in fact is a detriment because it causes chaos and distraction. Which I said in the very post you quoted. Can you show me exactly how Flubber ISN'T making a ruckus? Because his insistence upon creating confusion, handwaving posts that don't necessarily conform to his own ideas, and posts such as 567 and 585 which directly demand specific players to state who they think are scum without providing any kind of context or rationalization don't help the town. The only possible reason that a player would make these kinds of moves are if they are scum or some other kind of anti-town role. Either way I am in favor of a lynch.

awa's post on flubber ("flubber's antitown, therefore scum") was scummy

I believe I address this above, (and in fact in several posts since you originally posted this), but again I fail to see how my opinion that Flubber is antitown leads to me being scum. Please show me your train of thought here.

@AWA

A few things

What post exactly did you state that "creating a controversy over something completely unrelated does nothing to actually help the town"?

I also took note of posts 567 and 585 as it raised a flag with me and while I disagree that this proves he is scum as he could just be town trying to play a straight forward game style.

Honestly I'm leaning crazypianist1116 being scum rather then Flubbernugget but that might just be because of that stunt he pulled awhile back with the super sarcasm as he defended himself with a lot of passion. If he had responded to post 516-517 with the same passion I would have marked him as scum right then and there though he likely knew this.

[Whomping Willow]

Lots of talk of Oc being in a lot of people's scumreads yet the wagon stalls.

And AWA has to be being deliberately dense at this point, he would be my firm 2nd choice for a lynch.

[Originalchris]

Last day of work for the week (did almost 80 hours), but still have to buy furniture/move to the new apartment over the weekend. I'm thinking Sunday at the latest I'll catch up and post something worthwhile. My apologies though to everyone for this week. Been pretty hectic.

[Flubbernugget]

Cp/oc??/awa scumteam.

[Flubbernugget]

That's not my argument.

Well your argument is based off assumptions of why I voted for you that are false so I'm at a loss.

Nope. I thought you were voting me b/c of 362. Terribad reason to vote me so I voted you.

You then change your reasoning to this "tone" argument which is basically nonexistent.

I'm voting for you

now

because you still have a bad reason, and because you didn't give a good reason to vote originally.

so who are my scumbuddies.

[GGG]

That's not my argument.

Well your argument is based off assumptions of why I voted for you that are false so I'm at a loss.

Nope. I thought you were voting me b/c of 362. Terribad reason to vote me so I voted you.

You then change your reasoning to this "tone" argument which is basically nonexistent.

I'm voting for you

now

because you still have a bad reason, and because you didn't give a good reason to vote originally.

so who are my scumbuddies.

This solidifies my vote on flubs. Day 1, unless you have the worst scum team ever, will not reveal buddies. Pushing for associative tells day one is scummy. This is really poor defense.

I really don't like AWAs voting because he sees flubs as anti town and he keeps pushing it as a good tactic so he has gone from null to lean scum, this could just be misguided town though so I need more from him. Not a day 1 lynch for me.

I really don't see the argument against CP. It appears right now to be based purely on tone which is poor even for day 1. I think the sarcasm was warranted as the accusation against him by Naiomi was such a mess that arguing against it was pointless when a demonstration made the point succinctly. The emotional tone of CPs arguments to me is consistent.

I want answers to my questions from OC once his schedule clears up. Mainly backup for his accusations of buddying and whomp misrepresenting people.

[Flubbernugget]

Do you understand what a fucking scum tunnel is?

[Flubbernugget]

Lets stop with the tone thing while we're at it. Tone is why I voted for him. Let's talk about why I'm still voting him. How is it okay for town to get incredibly hostile

only

when they're being scum read?

[AWA]

No one is anti-town enough to PL

Difference of opinion, then. I'll address everyone else later after class.

[crazypianist1116]

I want answers to my questions from OC once his schedule clears up. Mainly backup for his accusations of buddying and whomp misrepresenting people.

This.

[crazypianist1116]

How is it okay for town to get incredibly hostile

only

when they're being scum read?

Still a "tone" argument.

[crazypianist1116]

That's not my argument.

Well your argument is based off assumptions of why I voted for you that are false so I'm at a loss.

Nope. I thought you were voting me b/c of 362. Terribad reason to vote me so I voted you.

You then change your reasoning to this "tone" argument which is basically nonexistent.

I'm voting for you

now

because you still have a bad reason, and because you didn't give a good reason to vote originally.

so who are my scumbuddies.

So you think my reasoning is solid even if my "tone" is hostile

[droog]

munkir's posts are getting gradually more coherent
cant shake off the feeling of coaching there

[crazypianist1116]

Mod:

Did you prod Naomi?

[droog]

Except I've already addressed those points.

im not sure where
564 is where i lay them out
588 i repeat without explaining
you post next in 603-4, 610, 612, and 641

603 is only in response to 588
and most of 603 is about willow, not flubber
604 is mod prod
610 points back to 603
612 suggests anti-town = scum, exactly what i dont like
in 641 you ask me to reexplain

so if the part of 603 where you call me scummy for calling you scummy
is addressing an argument
then yes i agree

[droog]

How exactly does this "reek of scum"? I'm not happy with the "gay as slur nonsense", because as I stated,

creating a controversy over something completely unrelated does nothing to actually help the town

, and in fact is a detriment because it causes chaos and distraction. Which I said in the very post you quoted. Can you show me exactly how Flubber ISN'T making a ruckus?

Because his insistence upon creating confusion, handwaving posts that don't necessarily conform to his own ideas, and posts such as 567 and 585 which directly demand specific players to state who they think are scum without providing any kind of context or rationalization don't help the town.

The only possible reason that a player would make these kinds of moves are if they are scum or some other kind of anti-town role. Either way I am in favor of a lynch.

1) we all create controversy.
flubber /started/ it but we each chose to continue it
you're not anti-town reading everyone else for it

2) this is a completely different argument
i do not scum read you for thinking flubber is handwaving
or calling 567 and 585 scummy
i scum read you for proposing an 'anti town = scum' lynch

you are conflating a reasonable argument i did not critique
with an unreasonable argument i did critique

[Flubbernugget]

That's not my argument.

Well your argument is based off assumptions of why I voted for you that are false so I'm at a loss.

Nope. I thought you were voting me b/c of 362. Terribad reason to vote me so I voted you.

You then change your reasoning to this "tone" argument which is basically nonexistent.

I'm voting for you

now

because you still have a bad reason, and because you didn't give a good reason to vote originally.

so who are my scumbuddies.

So you think my reasoning is solid even if my "tone" is hostile

No I need to know how deep down this tunnel you are.

[Flubbernugget]

How is it okay for town to get incredibly hostile

only

when they're being scum read?

Still a "tone" argument.

Why aren't you answering my questions.

[droog]

I believe I address this above, (and in fact in several posts since you originally posted this), but again I fail to see how

my opinion that Flubber is antitown

leads to me being scum. Please show me your train of thought here.

you moved the goalpost again
i am not calling you scum for 'flubber is antitown'
i am calling you scum for 'flubber is antitown and therefore scum'
which i already explained:

This reeks of scum
Scum would be pretty happy with this "gay is a slur" nonsense
It gives them a chance to be genuine
Which scum will take for all it's worth

in short
you were the only player to try to take advantage of the situation
not by suggesting a pl for trashy behavior
but by suggesting it actually effected your reads