Open 87 - Baby Too Much Scum - Over before 641

[armlx]

At least Oman did have an explanation that made sense. I don't agree with his "anecdotal scumtell at all," but at least he had more reasoning for his vote than GR gave him credit for.

Your definition of reasoning is pretty loose.

[Crazy]

At least Oman did have an explanation that made sense. I don't agree with his "anecdotal scumtell at all," but at least he had more reasoning for his vote than GR gave him credit for.

Your definition of reasoning is pretty loose.

Reasoning: Oman's post #155
Non-reasoning: OMG YOU SAID WHY YOU WERE VOTING A PERSON! SCUM!

[farside22]

Oh dear me I forgot the alivnz95 morphed into skitzer. What an odd thing to happen.

votes:
Oman 2 vote: (Goatrevolt, Armlx)
Goatrevolt 1 vote: (Oman)
Netran 2 vote: (skitzer, Crazy)
Crazy 3 votes: (OGML, Netran, Rage)

Not voting




8 people 5 to lynch
Deadline August 17th 2:00pm PST

[armlx]

155 is a retroactive attempt to figure out how his logic could work that only occurred 4 pages after the fact.

[Goatrevolt]

At least Oman did have an explanation that made sense. I don't agree with his "anecdotal scumtell at all," but at least he had more reasoning for his vote than GR gave him credit for.

Reasoning: Oman's post #155

Um...how could I give him credit for reasoning that didn't come until over 100 posts after the fact? Seriously, wow....

Non-reasoning: OMG YOU SAID WHY YOU WERE VOTING A PERSON! SCUM!

First of all, that is his reasoning. Second of all, I think your defense of Oman is ridiculous.

Play by play:

Goatrevolt: Oman's logic for thinking me scum is wrong.
Crazy: But if that was Oman's real logic then it would make him look like scum. Therefore it can't be his real logic.
Goatrevolt: Um...
Crazy: Come on Oman, tell them what your real reasons were.

Long Intermission:

Oman: Here are my reasons. They are the same as my original reasons, but I've given slightly more explanation to them.
Crazy: There you go. I can't believe you didn't see that Goat. You give Oman no credit.

[Crazy]

Goatrevolt: Oman's logic for thinking me scum is wrong.
Crazy: But if that was Oman's real logic then it would make him look like

scum

a complete idiot that doesn't know how to play mafia

. Therefore it can't be his real logic.
Goatrevolt: Um...
Crazy: Come on Oman, tell them what your real reasons were.

Fixed for you.

[Oman]

Goatrevolt: Oman's logic for thinking me scum is wrong.
Crazy: But if that was Oman's real logic then it would make him look like

scum

a complete idiot that doesn't know how to play mafia

. Therefore it can't be his real logic.
Goatrevolt: Um...
Crazy: Come on Oman, tell them what your real reasons were.

Fixed for you.

Lol? Wow, way to go for insults over intellect.
'

Anyway, I can finally do what I've wanted to do for a while and that is

Unvote

with a reason: basically, his play isn't anything like Cog City, where we were mafia together.

[Crazy]

Lol? Wow, way to go for insults over intellect.

That wasn't an insult, Oman. I was saying that if your logic was as GR was interpreting it, it would make you look more like a complete idiot that doesn't know how to play mafia rather than scum. Obviously, that doesn't describe you, so I assumed your reasoning had more depth than it originally looked like.

[Goatrevolt]

Anyway, I can finally do what I've wanted to do for a while and that is

Unvote

with a reason: basically, his play isn't anything like Cog City, where we were mafia together.

I was wondering if that was going to happen.

Anyway, I'm still somewhat suspicious of Oman, but right now I simply think Rage has a better shot of being scum, and thus I will

Unvote, Vote Rage

I'm still anxiously awaiting skitzer's analysis, and I still think there is a fairly decent chance that he's scum based solely on meta arguments against alvinz.

[armlx]

Crazy: But if that was Oman's real logic then it would make him look like scum a complete idiot that doesn't know how to play mafia. Therefore it can't be his real logic.

This is the alternative to Oman being scum. I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt by voting him.

[skitzer]

At least Oman did have an explanation that made sense. I don't agree with his "anecdotal scumtell at all," but at least he had more reasoning for his vote than GR gave him credit for.

Your definition of reasoning is pretty loose.

This is definitely a Crazy thing.

[armlx]

At least Oman did have an explanation that made sense. I don't agree with his "anecdotal scumtell at all," but at least he had more reasoning for his vote than GR gave him credit for.

Your definition of reasoning is pretty loose.

This is definitely a Crazy thing.

Was that a pun or a meta comment?

[skitzer]

meta comment. Except I must not tell you where. Must keep mouth shut.

I will have limited access from August 1st to August 15th. Some days I know I wont have access, some days I will, and somedays I'm not quite sure yet. Here is a tentative schedule:

Red

= No Access

Yellow

= Possible Access

Green

= Definite Access

August 1st

August 2nd

August 3rd

August 4th-August 8th

August 9th

August 10th

August 11th-August15th

[armlx]

meta comment. Except I must not tell you where. Must keep mouth shut.

Gotchya.

[Netran]

Expressed equal suspicion of both Oman and GR, but decided to vote for GR and later took it off when proven incorrect. Then he FoSed GR and took that off too. He did not consider other suspicions when pressuring GR, and didn't see GR's side until he had already taken a vote and FoS off of him. I want to know what Crazy thinks about why Goatrevolt is suspicious of Oman.

The issue is that this is a summary of events and not actual reasons

why

he thinks Crazy is scum. In other words, he put Crazy at 3 votes (L-2), but doesn't actually say anything to suggest that Crazy is scum. Bandwagon votes like this with weak or nonexistent reasoning definitely catch my eye.

I think I will never vote anyone based only (I know you have other reasons) on this because I see it as an implicit declaration (and I use them too).

At least Oman did have an explanation that made sense. I don't agree with his "anecdotal scumtell at all," but at least he had more reasoning for his vote than GR gave him credit for.

If it had happened that Goatrevolt "gave him credit for", he would have probably been accused of over-overreaction to Oman.

[farside22]

Prodding Rage whos last post was 07/28

Edit:
Rage has asked to be replaced. I will do as requested. Carry on

[Goatrevolt]

Rage has asked to be replaced. I will do as requested. Carry on

Rage! I wanted to see his response to my points against him.

Maybe he's trying the tried and true "replacement defense" where he simply replaces out at the first sign of pressure and hopes it dissipates.

I think I will never vote anyone based only (I know you have other reasons) on this because I see it as an implicit declaration (and I use them too).

I wouldn't necessarily consider it much of an implicit declaration. Let's see what he's said here.

1. "

Expressed equal suspicion of both Oman and GR, but decided to vote for GR and later took it off when proven incorrect.

" Lacking is any reasoning why these actions suggest Crazy is scum. Are scum the only ones who unvote upon being proven wrong? Are scum the ones who express equal suspicion of two players but end up voting for one?

2. "

Then he FoSed GR and took that off too.

" Missing is any explanation why the FoS and take off is scummy.

3. "

He did not consider other suspicions when pressuring GR, and didn't see GR's side until he had already taken a vote and FoS off of him.

" Is failure to take into account other suspicions a scum tell? Is failure to see someone's side a scum tell? You can argue that they were by suggesting that Crazy's behavior in these matters suggests a mindset of scum, but Rage did nothing of the sort.

My point is that he basically provided merely a summary of the events without any real indication or even implicit declarations of why those actions were scummy. This reeks to me of scum joining a bandwagon and faking reasons to be on it.

I mean, I could go through armlx's posts and say, "armlx first chose not to take a side in the GR/Oman debate. He later questioned Oman. Eventually he decided to vote for Oman despite originally not taking any sides" and then vote for armlx, but what am I really saying? I'm not showing how his actions are scummy, I'm merely just summarizing what he's done in a manner to suggest that I have legitimate reasons for that vote.

[armlx]

Maybe he's trying the tried and true "replacement defense" where he simply replaces out at the first sign of pressure and hopes it dissipates.

The only way to prove this is if the player is playing actively elsewhere on the site to the extent 1 game isn't an issue, and even then its fuzzy.

[Crazy]

Maybe he's trying the tried and true "replacement defense" where he simply replaces out at the first sign of pressure and hopes it dissipates.

Eww, do people actually do that? I think that if you get a replacement in a game, and then later your side wins, you can't count that as a win.

[Oman]

STop it, we're tangenting.

[Oman]

Question: Armlx, how do you feel on OGML and myself.

[farside22]

iamausername is replacing Rage. Thank you.

[armlx]

Question: Armlx, how do you feel on OGML and myself.

Well I'm voting you, and OMGL is bordering on lurking.

[Oman]

Question: Armlx, how do you feel on OGML and myself.

Well I'm voting you, and OMGL is bordering on lurking.

Didn't answer my question as to how you feel. Do you think I'm scum, scummy, worth pressuring, what? A vote is a lot of things.

[farside22]

bump for vote count