He was scum in the last game I played with him, therefore he's scum now. That's an iron-clad case against you, mind as well give yourself up.
![Razz :P](./images/smilies/icon_razz.gif)
Because I'm new here and I don't know you. Does it really bug you that much that someone you've never met or played with is asking you to clarify your reason for voting?Crazy wrote:Why does a vote have to either be for a completely random reason or a completely real reason?
I don't know who Stoofer is. I don't care who Stoofer is.Natirasha wrote:See sig.
Huh?StrangerCoug wrote:Don't give us this newbie card crap.
Could be my mistake.. I'm thinking that Natirasha is telling me to look at Crazy's sig as an answer to my question. What is Natirasha referencing, then?Crazy wrote:How the hell is Mr Stoofer relevant to what Natirasha is referencing?Kublai Khan wrote:I don't know who Stoofer is. I don't care who Stoofer is.Natirasha wrote:See sig.
Ah. Sorry. Just got back from vacation, didn't realized your sig had changed.Natirasha wrote:At least our mod realized what I was saying.-TinVision- wrote:Natirasha is now V/LA. If activity levels don't pick up by Tuesday, a deadline may be imposed.
Well, popsofctown already answered for me. When Crazy voted for you, he gave an in-game non-meta weak reasoning behind his vote. All I asked was whether or not it was a random vote or a serious one. He asked me why I would ask such a question and I responded that I was new and didn't know him well enough (at all, really) to make that call.StrangerCoug wrote:When you attacked Crazy for making a semi-random vote, he responded by asking why votes have to be either completely random or completely serious. You answered by saying you're new, which 1.) is scummy and 2.) I see as BS anyway since your account is three months old.Kublai Khan wrote:Huh?StrangerCoug wrote:Don't give us this newbie card crap.
Heh. The only person here that I have played with and know his meta is Xtoxm. And in the game I played with him he lurked so much he had to be proded 2-3 times and was threatened with losing his IC status. He was scum in that game.popsofctown wrote:Let's get at the spirit of the rule instead of the letter Xtoxm. You haven't made a meaningful post this game. Are you lurking? Are you scum? Do you have somewhere you want to put suspicion or vote?
I know that different people has different playing styles and all.. But what the hell kind of strategy is that? You've pounced on the tiniest of scraps of "evidence" and you're refusing to keep track of who says what?StrangerCoug wrote:I have a strategy, and it involves hunting scum.Random voting has to end sometime, and I say it's perfectly acceptable to make two cases so soon. We know there are two mafia, and even though the chances of me being right about you and Natirasha are very low, that doesn't deprive me the right to go after you both. I think you're jumping to conclusions as to my wanting the game to end as early as you think I do.
I remember somebody defending Natirasha as someone who always self-votes in the random voting stage,but I'm not 100% sure who exactly it was and I'm too lazy to go back and check.
I'll throw a vote on him then. An "influx of work" could just be a lie to cover his lurking. He's made 3 posts (no meaningful content) in 8 days. If he honestly is so busy with work that he can't play the game, then he should have asked to be replaced. Since he didn't ask to be replaced, it means he has the time to play and he's just choosing to remain out of the spotlight and in the shadows.popsofctown wrote:I can't really FoS or vote {Xtoxm} yet, i don't know what's going on with him and that seems unfair, since there's a totally legit explanation for his actions. I'm very concerned though.
StrangerCoug wrote:OK, I know what I said, but have you checked Xtoxm's other games to verify that he's lurking? If he's active and contributing in his other current games while posting absolutely nothing of value here, then yes, your vote is legitimate. If this is a problem in multiple games, then I would not question his being so tied up with work if I were you.
Lacking any solid facts, assumptions are all the uninformed majority have to go on.StrangerCoug wrote:So basically, don't make assumptions.
It's not. I think their point is that when you're dealing with a town that makes rash impatient moves, then starting off Day 3 with a whopper of a lie might have actually worked.StrangerCoug wrote:May I ask how the hell that's pro-town?