Mafia 73: NEGWLTWWWTKY - Abandoned!

[Toaster Strudel]

Don't forget that the two players that started this game with a policy vote on me (MoS and Quagmire) are the only two players that are still voting for me. Therefore, their continued denial of said policy vote is bound to be met with some skepticism, and counter-reactions such as KaleiÐoscøpe's.

[Toaster Strudel]

Extracting Yosarian's comments on Kal's vote for MoS:

"what I am doing is attacking Kaleidoscope because his MOS vote looked

incredibly scummy

, the reasons he gave for it were simply not pro-town and I want a better explanation from him." Emphasis mine.

"It looks more like he was thinking that everyone was mad at MOS at the moment." How many votes did MoS have at the time? Two? Three?

Yos - it sounds to me like you're willing to vote left and right, but you'll not willing to be part of an actual lynch.

I don't know what it means, just observin', that's all.

[Shanba]

As a sidenote, any players who had not posted since the votecount before last was prodded. Mert and Sir T are going to be replaced due to continually failing to respond to or pick up prods.

[Quagmire]

I feel like I should be saying something right now because the discussion is on me. However, I'll refrain unless people have any specific questions into my behavior becaues this argument is between Yos2 and TS. I'd like to note that I'm still voting for TS and none of my intentions have changed since I posted content last.

I do have questions.

Did you omit to mention hasgfas on purpose, or accidentally?

Is there anything about him worth talking about? I see nothing that sparks my eye.

Also, I'd like the following from you:
Please give your opinion of Peers.
Please give your opinion of hasdfgas.
Please give your opinion of Yosarian2.
Please order these 3 players on a scale from town to scum.
Please provide appropriate quotes to support any statements that you make.

The only one of these that I'm going to answer is something that I've already answered. I refuse to do anything that you request me to do because no matter what I say, you're never going to believe a word that I say and nothing I say or do will ever remove your annoying and worthless "conspiracy theory" on me.

Anything anyone says or does is a catch-22 to you; you look for ways to back up what you think in that crazy tiny little noggin of yours instead of trying to take a look at what's actually happening. It is because of this that I'm never going to cooperate with anything that you tell me to do.

It is also partially because of this behavior that I'm voting for you. But I've already detailed that.

You might read that last sentence and think that it's a policy vote. Well, it's not. Please note the post where I've looked up your scummy behavior

in this game that you oh-so-conveniently ignored

and respond to me when you stop being so thick-skulled. Thanks.

CAN WE PLEASE JUST AGREE ON SOMEONE TO KILL?

I would be voting for you if TS wasn't such a worthy candidate.

[Toaster Strudel]

Did you omit to mention hasgfas on purpose, or accidentally?

Is there anything about him worth talking about? I see nothing that sparks my eye.

Really? Nothing at all?

Also, I'd like the following from you:
Please give your opinion of Peers.
Please give your opinion of hasdfgas.
Please give your opinion of Yosarian2.
Please order these 3 players on a scale from town to scum.
Please provide appropriate quotes to support any statements that you make.

The only one of these that I'm going to answer is something that I've already answered. I refuse to do anything that you request me to do because no matter what I say, you're never going to believe a word that I say and nothing I say or do will ever remove your annoying and worthless "conspiracy theory" on me.

I am not asking you to make statements of fact that can be verified with the scientific method. I have asked for your

opinions

about three players, Peers, hasfgas, and Yosarian. This is not something for other players to "believe" or not "believe" but rather, to allow us to evaluate whether or not your agenda is pro-town.

We need to be able to evaluate YOU, Quagmire. This is why we shouldn't let you get away with jerking us around, avoiding to claim, and now, refusing to commit to an opinion that may give us information concerning your alignment.

This being said, if you read my earlier posts with care, you might have noticed that I am rather inclined to think that you are town, and that Yosarian, MoS, and hasfgas positioned themselves to look good in the event of what they might have known was a mislynch.

We still need to have your opinion on players other than myself. You need to put some effort in the game. I happen to think that you can be very intelligent if you choose to apply yourself.

Anything anyone says or does is a catch-22 to you; you look for ways to back up what you think in that crazy tiny little noggin of yours instead of trying to take a look at what's actually happening.

That's patently untrue; I don't let players get away with slapdash, flawed arguments and yes, I can be stubborn. But I am in fact pleased with hasdfgas's response, much less so with Yosarian's, and I can't figure out what Peers is up to.

You should be aware that, after you and MoS have announced that you want to policy-lynch me, your continued voting for me amidst fresh denials of policy-voting looks like it is the both of you that are looking "for ways to back up what you think in that crazy tiny little noggin of yours instead of trying to take a look at what's actually happening." No?

You imply that I haven't tried to take a look at "what's actually happening." - OK - here's your chance. What IS actually happening, that I am missing?

It is also partially because of this behavior that I'm voting for you. But I've already detailed that.

Once again, you are betraying yourself; you have just stated that you are voting me because "'Anything anyone says or does is a catch-22 to you; you look for ways to back up what you think in that crazy tiny little noggin of yours instead of trying to take a look at what's actually happening" - that's policy-voting.

You might read that last sentence and think that it's a policy vote.

You're right, I do, because it is.

Well, it's not. Please note the post where I've looked up your scummy behavior

in this game that you oh-so-conveniently ignored

and respond to me when you stop being so thick-skulled. Thanks.

You have failed to convince anyone, and you are going nowhere with it.

[Toaster Strudel]

Everything that Quagmire has done so far in this game has amounted to SABOTAGE.

(1) Not reading his role PM - or maybe reading his role PM, who knows.
(2) Announcing that he has not read his role PM.
(3) Waiting until he was at lynch minus one to say that he had now read his role PM - maybe he did, maybe he didn't.
(4) Policy voting a single player, and not even bothering to look at anyone else. Making a "case" against that player that has all the credibility of a kangaroo court playing out a foregone conclusion.
(5) Refusing to commit himself to an opinion on any other player than the policy-lynch.
(6) Doing absolutely zero to try to assist the town in finding scum.
(7) Worse still, his "strategy" ("not" reading PM, policy-lynch blinders on, refusal to express opinion on other players) makes it much more difficult for the rest of us to find evaluate your alignment, and to link you to other players.

[Yosarian2]

[quote="KaleiÐoscøpe"]I actually made that comment of MoS' big letter post, which implied policy lynching. The reason I'm voting MoS is for his contradiction he states.[/quote]

Oh? What contradiction is that?

[Yosarian2]

"It looks more like he was thinking that everyone was mad at MOS at the moment." How many votes did MoS have at the time? Two? Three?

(shrug) I suppose I was being unclear there. What I meant was that it looked to me like he might be trying to take advantage of the situation where you got angry and said you were leaving the game, like he might have been trying to play on that emotion in order to make MOS look bad.

Yos - it sounds to me like you're willing to vote left and right, but you'll not willing to be part of an actual lynch.

I don't know what it means, just observin', that's all.

Eh. Yeah, I vote really easily and change my vote really easily on day 1, to try to get the game moving and to get reactions from everyone. On the other hand, if I have a bad feeling about a wagon later on, I try to not be on it.

[KaleiÐoscøpe]

http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... 894#839894
http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... 990#878990

[Toaster Strudel]

Yos - it sounds to me like you're willing to vote left and right, but you'll not willing to be part of an actual lynch.

Eh. Yeah, I vote really easily and change my vote really easily on day 1, to try to get the game moving and to get reactions from everyone. On the other hand, if I have a bad feeling about a wagon later on, I try to not be on it.

Mmmm... yeah... a'right... I would have guessed that working to reverse wagons would do the opposite of getting the game moving... anyway...

Care to comment on Quagmire now that he's allegedly acquainted himself with his role PM? In particular:

(1) Do you personally believe he is still policy/vendetta voting?

(2) Care to comment on his recent contribution, and how it fits with the rest of his contribution in the game? Maybe I missed something, and you have a sharp eye.

[Yosarian2]

[quote="KaleiÐoscøpe"]http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... 894#839894
http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... 990#878990[/quote]

Ummm....you have one link where he "policy voted" TS early in the game, and another link where he explained that he had unvoted TS at one point, thus ending his "policy vote", and then re-voted her later because she started to look scummy. He was pretty clear about that too, in that very post you quote:

[quote="MOS"]
Jordan, did you fucking miss the long period of time where I unvoted TS and voted you because I wasn't going to policy lynch her??? Did you also miss the part where I made a case against her and revoted for completely separate reasons that had nothing to do with a policy lynch? [/quote]

So, where, exactally, is this "contradiction" you speak of, Kalei?

[Yosarian2]

Mmmm... yeah... a'right... I would have guessed that working to reverse wagons would do the opposite of getting the game moving... anyway...

Getting the game moving means getting people talking, posting, arguing, attacking and defending, getting people to contribute, and just generally trying to make stuff keep happening, all of which helps the town gets information and keeps everyone active. When I say "Getting the game mvoing", that's not necessarally the same as "trying to end the day quickly".

Care to comment on Quagmire now that he's allegedly acquainted himself with his role PM? In particular:

(1) Do you personally believe he is still policy/vendetta voting?

No, not really. Like I said earlier, I thought it was fairly suspicious the way you were trying to actually lynch him for that instead of just trying to pressure him to act in a more pro-town way, it looked to me like you might have been a scum trying to get an easy lynch there, and that was when I started to suspect you. He appears to have also come to the concluson you were mafia around this time, and I can't blame him for that.

(2) Care to comment on his recent contribution, and how it fits with the rest of his contribution in the game? Maybe I missed something, and you have a sharp eye.

This is a fair point, though, and an interesting one. Other then attacking you and defending himself, there hasn't really been a whole lot of content in his posts since the point where he claims to have read his role PM, and he hasn't even gone into a lot of detail about why he's attacking you either. So, Quagmire, I would also like to hear what you think about different people in the game; as we don't really have any information on you until about 10 pages ago like to hear a little more about your current thoughts about the game.

[Toaster Strudel]

[quote="Yosarian2"][quote="KaleiÐoscøpe"]http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... 894#839894
http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... 990#878990[/quote]Ummm....you have one link where he "policy voted" TS early in the game, and another link where he explained that he had unvoted TS at one point, thus ending his "policy vote", and then re-voted her later because she started to look scummy. He was pretty clear about that too, in that very post you quote:[quote="MOS"]Jordan, did you fucking miss the long period of time where I unvoted TS and voted you because I wasn't going to policy lynch her??? Did you also miss the part where I made a case against her and revoted for completely separate reasons that had nothing to do with a policy lynch? [/quote]So, where, exactally, is this "contradiction" you speak of, Kalei?[/quote]
Yosarian, it's painfully obvious; to me anyway.

Both MoS and Quag have announced policy votes. MoS unvoted me at some point, and he even voted for a couple of people prior to the announcement, early in the game. Quag has yet to pay attention to a player other than his policy votee.

Both policy voters are the only players voting for me, and we're what? Page 33? 34?.

In this context, it's easy to see why Quagmire's "case" against me reeks of kangaroo court justice, and MoS's temporary unvote hasn't shaken off the smell of policy vote.

I doubt their policy vote denials fool anybody. Their actions bely their words.

[Yosarian2]

[quote="Toaster Strudel"]
Yosarian, it's painfully obvious; to me anyway.

Both MoS and Quag have announced policy votes. MoS unvoted me at some point, and he even voted for a couple of people prior to the announcement, early in the game. Quag has yet to pay attention to a player other than his policy votee.

Both policy voters are the only players voting for me, and we're what? Page 33? 34?.[/quote]

Meh. They may have more inclined to vote for you for other reasons, but that dosn't mean they don't also legitmatly suspect you. A does not invalidate B.

And I'd much rather if you'd let KaleiÐoscøpe try to explain his own scummy actions and defend himself rather then you jumping in and doing it for him, thanks.

[Toaster Strudel]

[quote="Yosarian2"]They may have more inclined to vote for you for other reasons, but that dosn't mean they don't also legitmatly suspect you. A does not invalidate B. [/quote]One has to decide what makes the most sense; legitimate reasons to suspect me, or making up reasons to cover up the continued policy votes? My vantage point is biased of course.

[quote="Yosarian2"]And I'd much rather if you'd let KaleiÐoscøpe try to explain his own scummy actions...[/quote]Tit for tat! You did that to me when I was trying to get answers out of Peers! Or least I think it's you... ...and I think it was Peers...

[Quagmire]

I am not asking you to make statements of fact that can be verified with the scientific method. I have asked for your

opinions

about three players, Peers, hasfgas, and Yosarian. This is not something for other players to "believe" or not "believe" but rather, to allow us to evaluate whether or not your agenda is pro-town.

We need to be able to evaluate YOU, Quagmire. This is why we shouldn't let you get away with jerking us around, avoiding to claim, and now, refusing to commit to an opinion that may give us information concerning your alignment.

OK. I haven't noticed anything incriminating about any of them, so I don't concern myself with any of them right now.

We still need to have your opinion on players other than myself. You need to put some effort in the game. I happen to think that you can be very intelligent if you choose to apply yourself.

No, you don't. And get your condescending BS out of the way.

You should be aware that, after you and MoS have announced that you want to policy-lynch me, your continued voting for me amidst fresh denials of policy-voting looks like it is the both of you that are looking "for ways to back up what you think in that crazy tiny little noggin of yours instead of trying to take a look at what's actually happening." No?

Nope. You're trying to be opportunistic. Now you're backing off, for whatever reason, saying that you're "satisfied" with their responses (and I guess willing to write me off as town, or something). I've thought that you were scummy since I looked up that post however long ago.

Once again, you are betraying yourself; you have just stated that you are voting me because "'Anything anyone says or does is a catch-22 to you; you look for ways to back up what you think in that crazy tiny little noggin of yours instead of trying to take a look at what's actually happening" - that's policy-voting.

No. I'm voting for you because I think you're mafia. Don't disguise it as something else.

You have failed to convince anyone, and you are going nowhere with it.

I don't care who I'm convincing or not, I'm just telling people what I think and hoping that they agree with me and lynch you.

[Toaster Strudel]

So, Quagmire, I would also like to hear what you think about different people in the game; as we don't really have any information on you until about 10 pages ago like to hear a little more about your current thoughts about the game.

Now that you've spit out your bile, Quagmire, Yosarian2 asked you the above question. Please answer.

[Shanba]

YagamiLight replaces Mert

[YagamiLight]

Hi, I'm going to read the 33 pages as quickly as I can. Post coming next year at the latest.
Seriously though, I'll post something after reading the first 11 pages before the 1st.

[hasdgfas]

wonderful. Some new eyes to see what we might have missed. Don't rush yourself though, we want good insight, not sloppy insight.

[Quagmire]

So, Quagmire, I would also like to hear what you think about different people in the game; as we don't really have any information on you until about 10 pages ago like to hear a little more about your current thoughts about the game.

Now that you've spit out your bile, Quagmire, Yosarian2 asked you the above question. Please answer.

What else am I supposed to say? I've put my thoughts out there; I think Toaster Strudel is scum. Nothing else is worth talking about at the moment. Nobody else has come up with a convincing argument to sway me and nothing's made me change my mind about what I think. So, until then, I have nothing additional to say.

I'll speak when I have something to say. Otherwise, you're just going to hear me say, "I don't have anything to say," if everyone continues trying to badger me about my thoughts on every single person in the game.

[Peers]

This game is almost two months old and still on day one. Can we possibly get a deadline please? I think it's safe to say we've been deadlocked for quite a while now.

[Toaster Strudel]

I submit this quote as evidence that Quagmire is continuing to policy lynch or is at the very least completely blindsided:

Although I would like to add that I'm glad you're leaving. I hope you leave the site for good.

I submit this quote as evidence that Quagmire continues to refuse to participate, after alledgedly reading his role PM:

I'm not going to claim anytime soon. This conversation is worthless. Stop trying to "lead discussion" somewhere, because it's not going to go anywhere. I'm not going to claim anytime soon. This conversation is worthless. Stop trying to "lead discussion" somewhere, because it's not going to go anywhere. [...] Lynching me would be stupid. I'm on the town's side. Toaster Strudel is mafia, from what I've gathered. That's all that I'm going to say.

I feel like I should be saying something right now because the discussion is on me. However, I'll refrain unless people have any specific questions into my behavior becaues this argument is between Yos2 and TS.

I refuse to do anything that you request me to do [...]

Nothing else is worth talking about at the moment. Nobody else has come up with a convincing argument to sway me and nothing's made me change my mind about what I think. So, until then, I have nothing additional to say.[...]Otherwise, you're just going to hear me say, "I don't have anything to say," if everyone continues trying to badger me about my thoughts on every single person in the game.

Paradoxically, Quagmire berates schismatized for non-contribution:

The burden of proof lies with the person making the assertion.

yeah but in a game with so little proof is this still relevant?

Start contributing please

[Peers]

Maybe he's sick of contributing to the same conversation over and over again. You go me to change my mind; congrats. It doesn't mean you should expect everyone to flock to your banner.

[Toaster Strudel]

Nine excellent reasons to lynch Quagmire:

(1) Jerked town around about role PM business.
(2) Needed to be at lynch minus 1 to allegedly read it.
(3) Has done absolutely nothing pro-town.
(4) Sabotaged all attempts for us to evaluate his alignment.
(5) His current strategy is to make sure he cannot be linked to any other player but one.
(6) Stubbornly policy voting a single player while denying it.
(7) Categorically refuses to answer questions - even from Yosarian who defended him earlier.
(8) This lynch will be informative of the alignment of the players that defended him, ie Yosarian, MoS and hasdfas.

(9) To completely refuse to involve oneself in the game in any capacity beyond a wholly useless policy vote, is thoroughly scummy.

That's the kind of thing a mafiosi might do in order not to compromise his buddies and leave no hints leading to them.

unvote, vote: Quagmire

- not for pressure, but for lynching.