Mini 673 - Game Over!

[Lord Gurgi]

Yo. Reread. Scum is fuzzylightning and Simenon. I'll start with Simenon.

Vote: Simenon

.

[Lord Gurgi]

Maybe Darox is scum.

[Lord Gurgi]

Yo. Reread. Scum is fuzzylightning and Simenon. I'll start with Simenon.

Vote: Simenon

.

fuzzylightning is dead. What are you trying to pull?

Insanity. Fuzzylightning was a joke, he deserved to get lynched something hard.

[Lord Gurgi]

Yo. Reread. Scum is fuzzylightning and Simenon. I'll start with Simenon.

Vote: Simenon

.

Mind explaining why?

Meh. Your vote is on me because IH needed replacing, and because he never explained a vote. I don't need to give you anything. Try again when you have some decent reasoning behind yours.

[Lord Gurgi]

Regardless this does not change the fact that Gurgi basically refused to explain his vote. When someone asks you to do something, you do it unless you have a good reason not to. Saying you didn't give good reasons for a vote so I won't even explain mine is not a good reason.

The point is, that although you call his move scummy, it seems to have inspired to do some work rather quickly. For disagreeing with him, it looks like you may have been trying to indulge him afterall.

You really aren't making much sense right now. At all.

It makes perfect sense. Suddenly you add more to your argument as soon as I say it sucks. Even now, it's pretty horrible, but the point is, that you only sought out information once you had to.

In other news, I favour hascow coming out with his investigation.

[Lord Gurgi]

Regardless this does not change the fact that Gurgi basically refused to explain his vote. When someone asks you to do something, you do it unless you have a good reason not to. Saying you didn't give good reasons for a vote so I won't even explain mine is not a good reason.

The point is, that although you call his move scummy, it seems to have inspired to do some work rather quickly. For disagreeing with him, it looks like you may have been trying to indulge him afterall.

You really aren't making much sense right now. At all.

It makes perfect sense. Suddenly you add more to your argument as soon as I say it sucks. Even now, it's pretty horrible, but the point is, that you only sought out information once you had to.

I didn't add anything new. You simply misread it as me voting for IH because he needed replacement, which was never the case. And instead of saying that it sucks, how bout you explain why it sucks. And you still have not explained your vote on sim. I can't understand why you would refuse to do this if you were town.

Why would I do it as scum?

[Lord Gurgi]

Because you don't actually have a reason for your vote, and you can't simply switch it since someone questioned you about it?

I don't see how that answers the question of

why

, but more why

not

.

[Lord Gurgi]

Hi.

[Lord Gurgi]

The reason for my vote is that I was hoping to actually get this game moving. You guys missed the last lynch, and you suck for it. Simenon actually did seem the scummiest to me when I reread, and I'm surprised no one has looked at him as sternly as they have me.

[Lord Gurgi]

Simenon:
----Negative
-Lots of pressure votes
-Theory not application
-Attacks the way an argument is made, not the argument
----Positive
-Calls people on horrible logic
-Hates people who caused the no lynch
-Actually did what he said he would

[Lord Gurgi]

Hey hascow, what about you, who are you suspecting? Or are you content to just bother us?

[Lord Gurgi]

Hey hascow, what about you, who are you suspecting? Or are you content to just bother us?

nobody has really struck me one way or the other this game for some reason. Maybe a reread will help that.

[Lord Gurgi]

Hey hascow, what about you, who are you suspecting? Or are you content to just bother us?

nobody has really struck me one way or the other this game for some reason. Maybe a reread will help that.

?

[Lord Gurgi]

Can you explain why my entrance is scummy?

[Lord Gurgi]

I was in the middle of writing an argument when I realized I was basically quoting all of Gurgi's first few posts. I told people what I did which gave me my impression of Gurgi, and I think anybody who looks at his early posts can see exactly where I'm coming from better than I can explain. Jumping into a game with seemingly random accusations and no arguments or helpful insight is scummy.

All those who said that generalisations are scummy: look up.

Hascow: When I asked

why

it was scummy I actually wanted reasons, not just saying

because it is

. Understand what I mean?

I could pump out a quote scheme and say something that looks like a really convincing argument, but then, I'm not seeing much like that from anybody else, either. Hascow enjoys pouncing on me for this, when I copied the format of Simenon with changes to include the positive and negative.

Also, I support massclaim, I don't really see a case on strife, especially that thing that hascow coughed up, but I would settle for it over a nolynch again.

[Lord Gurgi]

PREVIEW EDIT: @Gurgi: jumping in and immediately claiming the scum includes a dead player

looks like scum trying to feign stupidity to me

. Also, you claimed Simenon was scum and then refused to elaborate. That is not pro-town in the least. Then when you did explain it, you decided to post in scummy generalities instead of explaining examples of what you saw that was scummy.

That is

something

but fails to tell me why that is scummy. Just that you feel that's what it looks like. You went over

what

I did that you feel is scummy.

[Lord Gurgi]

Hascow is criticising me for being general, strife is criticising me in general terms. Do I have that right?

In other news, I'll move my vote, to MadCrawdad, for Tomato not voting at the end of day one.

Unvote; Vote: MadCrawdad

. To cut off questions at the nub, it's a scumtell that I like.

[Lord Gurgi]

PREVIEW EDIT: @Gurgi: jumping in and immediately claiming the scum includes a dead player

looks like scum trying to feign stupidity to me

. Also, you claimed Simenon was scum and then refused to elaborate. That is not pro-town in the least. Then when you did explain it, you decided to post in scummy generalities instead of explaining examples of what you saw that was scummy.

That is

something

but fails to tell me why that is scummy. Just that you feel that's what it looks like. You went over

what

I did that you feel is scummy.

The part you bolded was also only one of multiple things I mentioned in that quoted section. You also refused to elaborate on your reasons for your Simenon vote when called out on it by scot because he didn't elaborate on his reasons for continuing to vote you. Please explain how you can consider that pro-town at all. I don't. Someone called you out, you should have elaborated. Instead, you flat-out refused. That is scummy, because it's simply distracting. You were too tied up in your petty argument with scot instead of helping the town by elaborating on your suspicions.

In addition, your generalities when you did decide to "explain" your Simenon vote were scummy. Generalities don't help anyone, because anyone can seem scummy if you generalize. Point out specific things they did that were scummy.

Plus, I went over what was scummy. Freaking defend those actions. I shouldn't have to point out to you exactly what you did wrong in every situation. Explain why you did what you did, Gurgi. Stop being so dense and explicitly refusing to contribute when people call you out on something because they did something you don't like.

You should, in fact have to explain everything, if you want me to.

1. I listed Fuzzylightning because I was being silly. I fail to see how that is scummy, except if you make the argument that it's distracting, however it has provoked some life into this game.

2. I refused to explain for Scot, because his vote against me was unexplained. As a result, he struggled to come up with something, that seems like a positive by your logic, at any rate.

3. What I was

trying

to get out of you was why these things were scummy, not what they were, I'm well aware of what those are. I don't feel that I need to explain why I am town, at least not until you have something serious against me. This, by the way, is not enough, to me.

4. Why do you not ride on Scot for not providing reasons for voting me in the first place? Why are you so dead set on me, instead of others who are doing the same? Do you know something I don't?

5. Here's the thing hascow, I was trying to get specifics out of you, not to list what I did that is scummy, in your opinion, but why that thing is scummy. That is me calling you out, and you parroting on what you were already saying.

6. Are you really arguing that you can be distracted by something, and thus it is scummy? That sounds like you're going the wrong way about things, something should be scummy, and perhaps distracting, not distracting and perhaps scummy.

[Lord Gurgi]

In addition to Gurgi not giving a reason for his vote, neither has Flameaxe (unless Scot's sexuality really could really have a correlation with his role assignment).

I'm actually straight...anyways, I'm not that worried about flameaxe as he always does shit like this. Much more concerned about Gurgi right now.

Also, I'm noticing this. This saddens me.

[Lord Gurgi]

2. I refused to explain for Scot, because his vote against me was unexplained. As a result, he struggled to come up with something, that seems like a positive by your logic, at any rate.

Um, no. I provided reasons for my vote on IH. I did not simply call IH scum and then vote for him. I gave reason for my vote. I elaborated on said reasons when you questioned my vote, and your whole reaction to that situation (refusing to explain vote, generally being unhelpful, not defending yourself) is scummy as hell. With that aside, this is horrible, horrible logic and in no ways justifying you refusing to explain your vote on sim.

I'm sorry Scot, but I'm explaining the truth, not what may or may not sound good to you. That's why I didn't explain to you. MadCrawdad seems to understand what I mean by you scrambling to make an argument.

[Lord Gurgi]

A) We don't know if I'll die tonight
B) Sanity isn't confirmed
C) it probably tells scum my sanity and may give them another target to go after

[Lord Gurgi]

2. I refused to explain for Scot, because his vote against me was unexplained. As a result, he struggled to come up with something, that seems like a positive by your logic, at any rate.

Um, no. I provided reasons for my vote on IH. I did not simply call IH scum and then vote for him. I gave reason for my vote. I elaborated on said reasons when you questioned my vote, and your whole reaction to that situation (refusing to explain vote, generally being unhelpful, not defending yourself) is scummy as hell. With that aside, this is horrible, horrible logic and in no ways justifying you refusing to explain your vote on sim.

I'm sorry Scot, but I'm explaining the truth, not what may or may not sound good to you. That's why I didn't explain to you. MadCrawdad seems to understand what I mean by you scrambling to make an argument.

No you are not. No matter how many times you say it, I provided reasons for my vote, and I elaborated on it when questioned. I did not scrambling. Anyways, lets imagine that what you are saying is true and that I never gave reasons for my vote. How does that justify you doing the same thing? Once again, even if you were correct, i never once refused to explain my vote. You did. You made a scummy move.

I can't make you like my reasoning.

[Lord Gurgi]

MadCrawdad, I don't see how being suspicious of you precludes me from agreeing with you.

[Lord Gurgi]

MadCrawdad, I don't see how being suspicious of you precludes me from agreeing with you.

Re-read your post.... you said that I agree with you (not the other way around). Maybe minor wording, but looks like you were pulling me in to back you up... kind of strange, especially if you really think I'm scum. Don't you think?

Agreeing works both ways, I'm not going to get into a grammar war here, point is we agreed, but once again, agreeing and suspicion are not mutually exclusive.

I assume that stark is going somewhere with all this.

[Lord Gurgi]

Would still like you to answer this question Hasdgfas:

Why aren't you curious of Simenon's motivation for his semi-claim?

I don't see that as a semi-claim, I see that as him thinking he knows the setup. Why would further speculation be a good thing?

Given the only information we have is that there are at least 2 scum and 1 survivor in the game, there's no way he could know more about the set-up without being a power-role. So the only motivation he has for saying 'I know something you guys don't' is to breadcrumb a power-role. And since that's completely unnecessary, as there are more subtle ways to do such things, I thinks it's either a scummy or a stupid thing for him to do. What pro-town explanation is there?

Or perhaps he just knows the setup? It's not a prerequisite to be a power role.

[Lord Gurgi]

MadCrawdad, I don't see how being suspicious of you precludes me from agreeing with you.

Re-read your post.... you said that I agree with you (not the other way around). Maybe minor wording, but looks like you were pulling me in to back you up... kind of strange, especially if you really think I'm scum. Don't you think?

Agreeing works both ways, I'm not going to get into a grammar war here, point is we agreed, but once again, agreeing and suspicion are not mutually exclusive.

I assume that stark is going somewhere with all this.

You said that I'm scum. You accused Scot of scrambling to make an argument. You then said that I agreed with Scot scrambling to make an argument. Regardless of what I said or agreed with, if I'm scum, why would you use anything I've said or done to back you up?

Sigh. Just because I suspect you, doesn't mean you can't understand my point of view. I've said this before.

[Lord Gurgi]

Pretty sure it goes without saying that scum lies, and eveyone who plays the game knows it. If you think someone is scum, you don't start pulling their posts (even those you might agree with) to help bolster your own arguments against another player.

Keep playing like you don't see the real issue here, Gurgi, but something definitely seems off.

So therefore we should take everything as lies and be paranoid. No, I'm going to take good logic for what it is.

[Lord Gurgi]

About how much, percentage wise, are you sure that Gurgi is scum in speculation?

if I had to give a number, 30%

From your perspective, 30% should be statistical.

could you explain what you mean by this?

If you 'know' you and your innocent result are not scum, then everyone else is 2/7 = 29% chance of being scum. Not trying to make an issue out of it, I just assume you never thought the math through (/number guy)

Woo! I'm 1% scum!

[Lord Gurgi]

I am the Doc.

[Lord Gurgi]

Oh, and FTR, IH protected Cow last night.

[Lord Gurgi]

We missed a lynch again?

[Lord Gurgi]

Tomorrow, LG, at 8 PM

Oh. Well, I recommend an FL/Darox lynch at this point. Those are the only feasible alternatives to myself, and thus:

Unvote; Vote: FaerieLord

[Lord Gurgi]

I actually plan to post sometime in the near future when my schedule allows.

So... Day 4 then? Or just for post game?