Pikmin Mafia - Game over

[armlx]

And the lack of case this time is not due to meta-read, it's due to not having the time to post it.

Your post implies you have one.

[JDodge]

That doesn't answer the question that well.

[armlx]

I feel it does. You make a vote and make statements that imply there is a large case behind it, and I will be interested in hearing what you have to say so I can respond.

[JDodge]

I feel it does. You make a vote and make statements that imply there is a large case behind it, and I will be interested in hearing what you have to say so I can respond.

No, not really. "Because you imply that you have one" is not a real reason for wanting one. If I had a bridge to jump off of, would you want one too?

[armlx]

I feel it does. You make a vote and make statements that imply there is a large case behind it, and I will be interested in hearing what you have to say so I can respond.

No, not really. "Because you imply that you have one" is not a real reason for wanting one. If I had a bridge to jump off of, would you want one too?

What are you trying to say here?

How I see it:

You vote me and say you have a case.

I ask for said case.

You try to get out of giving said case on semantics.

[Greasy Spot]

I would vote for Jdodge...but my vote is already there. He is very difficult to play with.

[Claus]

Hello Pikmins! So, did anything interesting happen?

...

Thought not. Let's pick a few interesting posts:

A little late, but is there a reason for a Kison lynch?

Well, my vote was for him climbing in both the gorrad, Jdodge_1 and GS wagons yesterday. Climbing in two competing wagons (Gorrad and JDodge_1 were at each other's throats) seems like a good way for scum to hedge their bets.

Kison (694): Your avatar is fugly.

Gorrad (695): Did you have any reason to believe JTP is town? I forgot.

Kirby (697): While "old Jdodge != new Jdodge" is a valid point, I don't like this post. He seems to be trying to threaten Jdodge_2 out of his vote. While I'm pretty sure this won't work regardless, this kind of behavior is scummish to me.

Kirby: do you have anything on Jdodge_2's predecessor that you find scummy? Or are you finding jdodge_2 scummy for the same reasons you found jdodge_1 scummy?

Jdodge_2 (699): I'm personally waiting for your case because:
1- you promised it
2- this game is already too slow. Help us get it moving.

700-704: does not make Jdodge_2's vote on armlx look valid.

[JamesThePhox]

Checking in from prod. Will respond with something in next couple days. Vacation is almost over.

[Gorrad]

Not particularly, no. I just don't think he's as scummy as GS.

[mikeburnfire]

Vote Count!
With 14 alive, it will take 8 to lynch.

4 JamesThePhox (dcorbe, Kison, Xdaamno, Claus)
3 windkirby (JamesThePhox, Nightson, The Jester)
2 JDodge* (Greasy Spot, windkirby)
2 Greasy Spot (skitzer, Gorrad)
1 Kison (armlx)
1 GhostWriter (GhostWriter)
1 armlx (JDodge*)

GhostWriter still hasn't responded to my prod. I'll give him a little more time, but if he doesn't post, expect a replacement soon.

[GhostWriter]

I'm here, I'm here. Sorry. I'd like to here the explanation as well. If he doesn't provide one, then I'll go ahead and place the vote that I'm thinking about.

[skitzer]

You make a good point, Claus, but I'm still more convinced on the Greasy Spot case. Although it looks like we are heading towards a JTP or windkirby lynch.

[windkirby]

do you have anything on Jdodge_2's predecessor that you find scummy? Or are you finding jdodge_2 scummy for the same reasons you found jdodge_1 scummy?

Since you asked, my reason for voting was to motivated JDodge to give an explanation on the vote. I planned to then examine said explanation to weigh whether or not he was, as it seemed to me he was doing, giving his vote for the sake of pretending he was being a good townie. And after all, he was townie in his last life; no one would really suspect him for doing the same thing twice, or at least, so he thought, hypothetically. At any rate, his continued refusal to give the explanation seems to indicate he is doing such (though I will hold final judgment until his next response), and this is making my vote more than just a investigative tool. I may or may not remove my vote when he finally gives his explanation, depending on whether or not I find it believable, that is, if he ever does so at all.

[armlx]

You make a good point, Claus, but I'm still more convinced on the Greasy Spot case. Although it looks like we are heading towards a JTP or windkirby lynch.

I still support a dead Kison, though of those 2 I would prefer the later to the former.

[mikeburnfire]

Keep up the good posting, everybody. Prodding The Jester, dcorbe, and Nightson.

[The Jester]

I'm here.

I would also like to see that case Jdodge claimed to have.

I don't see a GS lynch for the weak reasons on it.

[dcorbe]

I'm here as well. I don't really see a GS lynch as productive for today. I'd much rather see the JTP lynch go through.

Though there's a strong case against GS I'd like to hear more of what he has to say first, and if need be we can build a stronger case for a GS lynch tomorrow.

[mikeburnfire]

Since no day should last longer than a month anyway,

sun sets on Friday the 13th, at 11:59 PM EST. (EST is -4 GMT)

If you do not have the necessary amount of votes required to lynch somebody at deadline, no lynch will occur and the game will go directly to Night Phase.

Also, you may have a

special visitor

on Day 4...

[JDodge]

I feel it does. You make a vote and make statements that imply there is a large case behind it, and I will be interested in hearing what you have to say so I can respond.

No, not really. "Because you imply that you have one" is not a real reason for wanting one. If I had a bridge to jump off of, would you want one too?

What are you trying to say here?

How I see it:

You vote me and say you have a case.

I ask for said case.

You try to get out of giving said case on semantics.

No, I am asking specifically

why a case is required to be presented on you at this time

.

[Greasy Spot]

I'm here as well. I don't really see a GS lynch as productive for today. I'd much rather see the JTP lynch go through.

Though there's a strong case against GS I'd like to hear more of what he has to say first, and if need be we can build a stronger case for a GS lynch tomorrow.

I'm sorry you came into this game late, but I don't plan on rehashing the earlier argument you are referring to. If you have another question ask away but if it refers to anything already mentioned then I won't be answering it as I feel I have explained it thoroughly.

[windkirby]

I feel it does. You make a vote and make statements that imply there is a large case behind it, and I will be interested in hearing what you have to say so I can respond.

No, not really. "Because you imply that you have one" is not a real reason for wanting one. If I had a bridge to jump off of, would you want one too?

What are you trying to say here?

How I see it:

You vote me and say you have a case.

I ask for said case.

You try to get out of giving said case on semantics.

No, I am asking specifically

why a case is required to be presented on you at this time

.

Not just armlx, but Claus and I have both also requested an explanation. You said you didn't give your case because you just didn't have the time, yet you certainly seem to have the time to continue arguing you don't need to say why you're voting, so... what's going on here? Voting is a way to get someone lynched, but if you truly believed armlx to be scum, wouldn't you be presenting your case to the other townspeople so that we would move towards his lynch? Not seeing the logic of you withholding your case, if there is one as you claim.

[Claus]

I'm here as well. I don't really see a GS lynch as productive for today. I'd much rather see the JTP lynch go through.

Though there's a strong case against GS I'd like to hear more of what he has to say first, and if need be we can build a stronger case for a GS lynch tomorrow.

^^^

I didn't know this guy was playing. wow.

[Nightson]

No, I am asking specifically

why a case is required to be presented on you at this time

.

Because people are asking for one.

[JDodge]

No, I am asking specifically

why a case is required to be presented on you at this time

.

Because people are asking for one.

And why are they asking one?

The main question here is why it is imperative that I present a case on a single person for the entire game to move onwards. Or do the people who are absolutely demanding one trying to keep the game stopped?

[armlx]

Jdodge, you vote someone and claim you have a case of reasons, and people are naturally going to be interested in why you are voting that person. When you fail to come up with said case, it makes it seem a lot like you were voting off stone nothing.