Open 140 - Trendy and Subversive C9 v3 (OVER) before 781

[ekiM]

What I meant by saying I don't want to get into a semantic argument is that I do not care, at all, if you use the word plan or not, and I am not interested in discussing it.

In my first post I said what the set-up was and what I think people should do in certain situations. You got a problem with that? Why?

If you think my suggestions might be malicious, try and explain why it's not good for the town to do what I suggest. Don't say "there's just no way to know!" --- exercise your judgement.

[AndyTony]

I'm not telling you it's malicious - I can't prove your intentions, I'm sharing my INTERPRETATION
---------------------------------------------------------
Point 1

In my first post

I said what the set-up was and what I think people should do in certain situations

. You got a problem with that? Why?

- - Those certain situations, are things in the future. When you say what people should do in the future, you are planning.

-- When someone makes a plan on their first post. On the first page. I regard it as trying to take a leadership role. To appear as a pro-town leader.

-- When someone TRIES to appear that way, they are manufacturing identity and immunity in my opinion. Township is recognized in gameplay naturally. Not made.

And plans alone cast narrow minded veils on gameplay at times. It's best to play the moments that come, all games are different IMO.


----------------------------------------
That's what I

HAVE

been saying, that's where I raise an eyebrow, that's why I inquired.

Your reaction to it is

POINT 2

What I meant by saying I don't want to get into a semantic argument is that

I do not care, at all...

I

offered my thoughts

on the set-up, because I thought it would help.

Other people were free to do the same. Or not.

You haven't made me feel free to express my opinions...

Saying you're open minded to other people's opinions, yet in the plan itself acknowledging such, and still making statements of "But you SHOULD do this..."

And when I give MY opinions, you prefer to be ignorant to them, or not want to acknowledge them.

I find this to be hypocritical, and it seems like you're running away from what was initially a simple resolution - I told you I was happy to agree to disagree...
--------------------------------
POINT 3
In your desperation, you

Does this "no plans, ever" philosophy apply only to Mafia or do you apply it in other walks of life?

Personally attacked me, which I think goes against the grain of what you suggested was your analytical and calculated style - - why lose composure enough to do that?
-------------------------------

I'm interested in what others have to say on the subject.

Those are points = my position and opinion, and the final one is a point telling you why at this moment I'm simply uneasy with you.

I can pass it off, I mean was it a slip of frustration? An the hyocrisy of saying ppl could share opinions and you not caring for them?

We can have our difference of opinion and let the game play out - - I was clarifying how I felt about the situation - you can relate, yes?

[Clu]

@Empking. No, it isn't true, but I don't think AT was lying, just getting the semantics mixed again.

How so?

You said (Paraphrasing) "It was a joke vote", he said (paraphrasing) "We agree it wasn't a joke vote."

I don't see the semantics.

AT apparently assumed that when I said that whilst a vote could be not entirely random, it could still be a joke, that I meant 'Not random = not joke'

... Yeah, actually, I don't see where you got that from AT.

Overall, although my vote was a joke, or random, or whatever the heck you want to call it, I'm perfectly content to let it sit where it is for now.

[Clu]

EBWOP

*epic facepalm*

What the above post SHOULD have been:

This is less an observation on the discussion itself than the players, but hey.

ekiM doesn't apparently want to be drawn into discussion on things he doesn't consider useful, which I suppose is fair enough. However, there is a fine line between 'not useful to the game' and 'personally disadvantageous' - obviously scum wouldn't want to get involved with debates that would cast suspicion on them. Just a possibility.

AT, I notice, has been lashing out practically every time somebody has disagreed with him, and that's making me a bit wary of him in general. I'm not totally sure what to make of his play, but I don't like how he skirted around this issue by addressing somebody else - essentially changing the subject.

@Empking. No, it isn't true, but I don't think AT was lying, just getting the semantics mixed again.

How so?

You said (Paraphrasing) "It was a joke vote", he said (paraphrasing) "We agree it wasn't a joke vote."

I don't see the semantics.

AT apparently assumed that when I said that whilst a vote could be not entirely random, it could still be a joke, that I meant 'Not random = not joke'

... Yeah, actually, I don't see where you got that from AT.

Overall, although my vote was a joke, or random, or whatever the heck you want to call it, I'm perfectly content to let it sit where it is for now.

[AndyTony]

@Clu-

I haven't lashed out at anyone, I've been clarifying and more than willing to agree to disagree - - is that unreasonable?

ekim lashed out at my logic, and personally attacked.

I've been more than diplomatic.

- -praytell - - What are your thoughts on post 76?

[Empking]

AT: Do you honestly believe that ekiM is the personal attacker or the game and you're a victim?

[AndyTony]

What I believe is that people are regarding my posting as rants that don't deserve to be read (post 76) - - I have thoughts and opinions and would like them treated with the same consideration anyone would deserve - and that involves at least acknowledging them in detail

So Clu - and everyone else - I'd like some input

[ekiM]

@AndyTondy:

You say you are opposed to forming plans because it might narrow our minds to future possibilities. I asked if you apply this philosophy to other things besides Mafia. This is not a personal attack, it is a genuine question. I'd say in most human endeavors it's generally better to approach things with a plan you that are willing to update or deviate from as circumstances dictate than to have no plan at all. Why should the game of Mafia be any different?

You're also wary of players who post plans, because they may be scum. They may be trying to lead the town astray, or they may be trying to gain townie credibility for themselves.

When someone gives you advice, you should engage your critical faculties and try and determine whether you agree that it would be helpful to follow that path. If you determine that it would not, it may be that the advice giver was giving advice in bad faith, and that could be worth looking into. What makes no sense is discarding all advice on the grounds that it could potentially be coming from scum.

If you are concerned that a player is acting in a pro-town manner to curry favor with the town rather than out of a genuine desire to see the town succeed then you ought to be able to say

why

you think that is what is happening in that specific case. I, personally, do not see any need for a page of white noise before I start posting content.

Apparently you feel like I don't want you to express your opinion. I can't do anything to help you there, apart from to say that that isn't the case. Express away! I must warn you though, I can't promise that I will always find an opinion valid, well thought out, or immune from criticism. Everyone has a misguided opinion sometimes, and they should not be afraid to have people criticize them for it.

ekim lashed out at my logic, and personally attacked.

If you can't stand having your logic critiqued, you're going to have issues playing with me. I won't just accept someone's opinion as inviolate by virtue of it being an opinion. I call bad logic as I see it.

I haven't personally attacked you.

@Clu: I said I don't want to discuss semantic issues such as whether or not I was "planning" or not. I find it pointless. If you ever feel like I, or anyone else, am avoiding something that would be disadvantageous to discuss, don't hesitate to get on my, or their, case for it.

[AndyTony]

I'd like to start by thanking you for reciprocating the diplomacy - your post is straightforward and clarifying.

If you are concerned that a player is acting in a pro-town manner to curry favor with the town rather than out of a genuine desire to see the town succeed then you ought to be able to say

why

you think that is what is happening in that specific case.

The "why" - is because it was so early.

The reason it was early, is because of your position on white noise random stages.

Do you see where our signals got mixed up, here?

I don't have an FoS or Vote on you because if I embrace your position on white noise stages, it makes sense that you would make a suggestion EARLY - - it would have otherwise been scummy to me.

I wanted to clarify WHY I was curious about it, you've answered it by expressing your position on not wanting to wait for the meat of things to get rolling, and that explains it.

I only wanted it to be understood why I found such an act odd.

What sucks is that in passionately trying to express and clarify, people are pegging me as antagonistic - - I think I'd like to get more input and conversations from other ppl before the day gets tight for time

[ekiM]

ok

[fuzzylightning]

AT: While all games are different, opens are the most likely to have plans stated, and they should be from the outset because you know the roles that could be out there and what the setup is most likely going to be, whereas in a closed setup yo u have no idea what roles exist outside of your own. I am not opposed to eKim posts in the beginning and I don't think that scum would come out that early and say what he said, especially considering his join date, as it suggests he is new to the site, and while I don't know his experience off-site, I don't see that as a scum gambit.

I agree with eKim's play at the beginning of the day and it goes along with his distaste for the random voting stage, however, I would suggest against setup speculation in games that don't have an open setup because that is often viewed as scummy.

[AndyTony]

Happy bday, FL!

[Uncle Pain]

It’s been two days this week and I’ve already spent about 20 hours at my office. And I’m not even a permanent employee, goddamn! I sincerely hope the work schedule will becoming more relaxed, I really want to post more. For now, please bear with me and my upcoming Wall o’ Text, it’s been a lot to read and reply to.

---

AndyTony

:

Your question to FL suggests a "flaw" and "argument"

This is because I think so, and because I think he tends to agree.

I rather regard it as a misunderstanding over how one regarded a simple word

This is okay and I think I believe you here. Still you used it as an argument for some time without acknowledging Empking’s (quite valid, although a bit exaggerated) point of view. It’s okay to defend oneself – but one should always be open for other points of view.

hence, based on his meta, I understandably INQUIRED as to just how serious it was

My take on your posts is that you rather questioned his randomness. You didn’t just ask “Hey, was that a serious vote?”, it was a “Hey, that was a serious vote!” – a completely different, in my opinion oversensitive approach.

The "lies! Lies!" stuff bothered me because it had no base or reason or truth to it - - I don't like getting misrepresented when some random shouts nonesense about me - - I've heard this whole thing called a couple times an "Emp hole"

I agree that his reaction was not the best imaginable one either but I understand the reason behind it. “Emp hole” is a funny thing I will remember, though.

You seemed pretty friendly to ekim's position on our set up and role claiming - - can you express your thoughts in detail on the subject and explain your idea on the pros and cons to claiming?

Mmh, “friendly”. Everytime someone used this word connected to me, it was meant negatively because it implied buddying up. Do you mean it like this, too?
Regarding your question, I think claiming is generally a thing that should be thought through well. I’ve always been careful about claiming because I’m still quite new to this game and I feel that I don’t fully understand the problems coming with it. My last game taught me that massclaiming could sometimes be a decent move for the town to block some paths scum can take. In our setup, I think massclaiming is a dangerous thing because we have 1,5 valueable power roles to lose by this. I agree with ekiM that individual claiming should be done as usual: there is no need for claiming earlier or more often, there is no use in delaying claims if they are useful (when being at L-1 e. g.).

If you can't - - were you just agreeing with him to make nice?

Your unfounded attempt to connect me to him is noted.

I'm not gonna lie - you're not making me feel like it's alright to casually be opposed to it - - I'm not trying to grill you man, but you're implying I'm suspicious and made a personal attack on my private life and how I "plan" it - pretty uncool, dude -

Ok dude, take a seat, lean back, close your eyes, breathe in deeply, relax. Enjoy the silence of the moment. Then breathe out and feel the anger flowing out of your body. Now gently lean forward and open your eyes again. Enjoy what you’re seeing. You feel refreshed, you feel calm. You like the world, the world likes you.
Now read ekiM’s posts again. And realize that he didn’t attack you personally. And realize that he has absolute legitimate points.

I have thoughts and opinions and would like them treated with the same consideration anyone would deserve - and that involves at least acknowledging them in detail

I think this developed into some kind of mutuality. You yourself don’t seem to acknowledge other people’s arguments very well: Empking needed a lot of posts to show you that the whole vote matter was a misunderstanding. ekiM has a reasonable point of view and yet you insist on your own while criticizing his. It’s not that the players are born with not liking you or something like that; be open and friendly and others will be similar towards you.

In general, you make the impression to me that you try to draw everyone in meta-discussion: first the vote matter (which at least had some reason), now it’s the “Was it a plan or not?” stuff. I think I’m open to different approaches to this game but yours looks just plainly unhelpful for finding scum. And this I find scummy.

Unvote. Vote: AndyTony.

---

fuzzylightning

: I like your answer in #55 but there in one thing that strikes me:

I will admit, I am biased against Empking in most cases because he doesn't normally provide much help to the town.

FoS: AT

for bringing meta into the discussion. Every game is different, and just because someone played one way in one game doesn't mean he/she is scum or town based on the way he/she is playing in this game.

Don’t you think this is somewhat hypocritical? First you admit to use meta on Empking, then you attack AndyTony for using meta?

---

Empking

:

UP: Why do you think my accusations are stronger than AT's?

Because although I think you went too far by saying “AT lied”, you had a decent ground to stand on. AndyTony on the other hand just blindly guessed that your vote was meant serious and to join a bandwagon, something I simply can’t agree on. It just smells like deliberate misunderstanding.

---

ekiM

:

The sense I get is that AndyTony is trying very hard to initiate scumhunting in this game, but all his attempts seem weird to me. He's picking up on things I don't find scummy at all.

To be honest, I have the feeling that he is either behaving newbie-ish or he deliberately tries to provoke players. The first possibility can be striked out; but why provoke players he doesn’t know anything about, while at the same time it makes himself look suspicious? See above for my current conclusion on this.

… Of course, circumstances may dictate a deviation from the plan, but that doesn't mean it's preferable to have no plan at all.

Full ack on your position here. Absolutely sensible.

---

Clu

:

ekiM doesn't apparently want to be drawn into discussion on things he doesn't consider useful, which I suppose is fair enough. However, there is a fine line between 'not useful to the game' and 'personally disadvantageous' - obviously scum wouldn't want to get involved with debates that would cast suspicion on them. Just a possibility.

I guess this is a valid observation but I tend to agree with ekiM here. I’ve learned that meta-discussion is usually pointless and doesn’t help finding scum at all. ekiM openly distances himself from such discussion, which – to be honest – is some kind of town tell for me. It may of course be his personal interest to be like this but he also serves town by behaving like this.

[AndyTony]

In general, you make the impression to me that you try to draw everyone in meta-discussion: first the vote matter (which at least had some reason), now it’s the “Was it a plan or not?” stuff. I think I’m open to different approaches to this game but yours looks just plainly unhelpful for finding scum. And this I find scummy.

Unvote. Vote: AndyTony.

Uncle Pain, you've put me at L-1 with what I feel isn't a very strong case.


1.I had a dispute with Emp over the use of the word random - - And the second dispute was with ekim over a misunderstanding (that was resolved)
2. I haven't tried to loop anyone in on meta discussion, that's not a goal in anyway - - can you please elaborate?
3. You state that I'm "unhelpful in finding scum"

Are you suggesting you would like me lynched for the sake of utility?
Do you think you help the town when you opporutnistically L-1 me instead of discuss with others - you're sure they're all innocent, you've heard enough from them all, have you?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
The questions you're asking FL, by the way - - take a deep breath, do some Uta Hagen exercises and Stanislavski's four brothers and find ideal centre - - - now open your eyes, read the forum, and see where I already address the hypocrisy you point at FL

fuzzylightning

:

I will admit, I am biased against Empking in most cases because he doesn't normally provide much help to the town.

FoS: AT

for bringing meta into the discussion

Don’t you think this is somewhat hypocritical? First you admit to use meta on Empking, then you attack AndyTony for using meta?

Yours ^

Mine ...

FoS: AT

for bringing meta into the discussion.

Every game is different, and just because someone played one way in one game doesn't mean he/she is scum or town based on the way he/she is playing in this game.

In all fairness, your bias is a form of basing your gameplay and regard for a player on meta as well - I'm just the first to have voiced it. And I too have seen serious votes in the random stage/weak arguments for votes - and it's from Emp mostly - - for anyone that's played with him, he'll vote someone passionately with very little to go on, hence I inquired about the vote, I didn't attack.

FL brought up the "Meta talk" you held against me - -he pushed the subject, I wasn't trying to steer ANYONE toward meta - I mentioned it once, but in NO WAY tried to start a discussion on it, I stick to my opinions, ppl stick to theirs -

Are you trying to take the reins on my scumhunting here? You say I don't contribute or help town, yet my questioning is good enough for you to steal/use? That's hypocritical
------------------------------------------------------------------

In general, you make the impression to me that you try to draw everyone in meta-discussion: first the vote matter (which at least had some reason), now it’s the “Was it a plan or not?” stuff.

So you start your case on me saying I try to draw people into meta discussion - can you elaborate on how I try to draw ppl into

discussing

meta, and how I try to draw them into it? Were there multiple attempts?

"The first vote matter" - - can you elaborate on how this constitutes a reason to put me at L-1? I didn't vote or FoS, I made an inquiry

"Was it a plan or not?" stuff? - - Did you read the last few posts between ekim and I, and see where our misunderstanding was? What was scummy?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I think I’m open to different approaches to this game but yours looks just plainly unhelpful for finding scum. And this I find scummy.

Unvote. Vote: AndyTony.

You're open to different approaches, but want to vote me for mine? - Can you elaborate?

What makes my approach different? Of asking people questions regarding posts - - Please elaborate

Unhelpful for findins scum? - - Can you elaborate on how putting me at L-1 for these loose and unclear reasons makes you feel confident I'm scum?

or are you sticking to calling me unhelpful? that's your reason? You want to make an early utility lynch?
--------------------------------------------------------------------
This whole thing stinks and seems opportunistic - - I don't like being on L-1 without having seen an actual case laid out with evidence - concrete evidence -

I ask that everyone please consider Uncle Pains action in putting me at L-1 and to further re-evaluate their votes on me. I believe before him, I have a vote laid on me in addition to the random stage vote - - if in re-evaluating, you take your vote off, it is appreciated.

I think UnclePain is scum because he is:

Opportunistically

putting me at L-1 (weak case)

Hypocritically

saying I'm unhelpful and can't scumhunt, yet using my own questioning

Utility Lynching

intentions behind his vote

Those are my three positions on him.

There are above quotations for my references if you all need.

Vote:Uncle Pain

-------------------------
Uncle Pain, that's how you vote someone. You find them scum, and can connect it to things clearly. You don't disagree with them asking people questions and opportunistically try to have them lynched for utility purposes - - I find that extremely scummy.
--------------------------------
For those of you who aren't like Uncle Pain,

I trust you will please question me on anything you like - - if you find a single thing SCUMMY about me, please present it and I'm happy to address it. That's all I can do at this time - let the L-1 heat begin...!

[fuzzylightning]

fuzzylightning: I like your answer in #55 but there in one thing that strikes me:

I will admit, I am biased against Empking in most cases because he doesn't normally provide much help to the town.

FoS: AT for bringing meta into the discussion. Every game is different, and just because someone played one way in one game doesn't mean he/she is scum or town based on the way he/she is playing in this game.

Don’t you think this is somewhat hypocritical? First you admit to use meta on Empking, then you attack AndyTony for using meta?

Was it a little hypocritical yes, but also if you read it in context it really isn't. I criticized AT for trying to use Emp's meta to determine alignment, while I was merely admitting that I have trouble taking anything that Emp says for anything, but I will not let that affect what I believe his alignment to be, if that makes sense. If it is unclear then just let me know and I will try to explain.

[AndyTony]

I never used meta to determine his allignment - in fact I never called him town, or scum - I clarified to you that his meta made me bias to his nature and I therefore asked him a question.

FL - - you only had that to say after the last couple posts?

You had no thoughts on the current situation?

Does anyone in this town, for that matter?

Maadnet, emp, Clu? No wonder I'm getting a weak quick lynch with no evidence of scum on me - - I'm the most active and it's being taken advantage of

[fuzzylightning]

AT, before you start accusing me of not having thoughts, when I was writing the post, and yes it did take me 20 minutes to write that post because I had received a phone call during that time, so bear with me that I didn't see your post until now.

Honestly, UP what are you trying for, if you are putting him at L-1 you better have a better case than something based on a few misunderstandings that were ironed out, as none of them are clear enough scumtells to lynch someone over. Honestly, I want everyone who has a vote on AndyTony to put out reasons as to why they feel he is the best lynch for today.

Mod: Can we get a vote count ASAP

, no one vote until the count is up.

[maadneet]

Finally back.

To be honest, I didn't see Empking's vote as being much of a joke vote, but not a very serious vote either. The joke voting stage usually sparks much-needed discussion for the start of day 1; thus, not random voting could be considered slightly anti-town. It's a very weak reason, but it at least has some logical backing to it.

What I really don't get is how AT could have mistaken fuzzylightning's vote for a non-"random vote". I believe it was pretty clear what Empking meant by random voting, and even by your definition fuzzylighting's first vote wasn't serious - how did it relate to Empking's gameplay?

That being said, I haven't seen any strong evidence pointing to AT actually being scum. Hopefully I'll have some time to get my thoughts more straightened out soon.

Unvote

[Uncle Pain]

AndyTony

: First, some clarification. Because you seem to need it.
The word “meta” is not only used as an abbreviation for “metagaming”. In fact, whenever I speak of metagaming, I use the word “metagaming”. What I meant with “meta discussion” has nothing to do with metagaming but means a kind of discussion that is more abstract and less concrete. See here for more information. Just to be sure, I’ll put another disclaimer in my signature.

1.I had a dispute with Emp over the use of the word random - - And the second dispute was with ekim over a misunderstanding (that was resolved)

Both of them took a lot of posts to get through and were – in my opinion – unnecessary had there been more comprehension from your side. Hence I concluded that you did that deliberately.

2. I haven't tried to loop anyone in on meta discussion, that's not a goal in anyway - - can you please elaborate?

But you made this impression to me, strongly that is. I mean, argueing for 20 posts about what the difference between “not random” and “serious” is? Give me a break. Argueing for another 20 posts about if ekiM’s thoughts were actually a plan for town? Give me another break. This is so unrelated to the actual game that I call it meta discussion. Your contributions so far have circled around these two subjects and although I’d like to be refuted, I don’t see a good reason to put so much energy in two useless discussions while losing sight of our real task: finding scum. Unless you

are

scum. Which brings me to your third point…

3. You state that I'm "unhelpful in finding scum"

Do you actually think your posts so far have helped the town? They may have helped you – but as I see it, you alone. I’m not saying that there have been a lot substantial posts in this game but at least the others didn’t try to bother with meta discussion.

Are you suggesting you would like me lynched for the sake of utility?

So, just for getting me right: if I haven’t completely lost my head, our task as townies is to find and lynch scum. This is – besides having fun – our ultimate game goal. In consequence, every townie should do his/her best to pursue this goal. If a townie doesn’t at least try to find scum, what is his/her purpose regarding the rest of the townies? To me, unhelpful behaviour is at least suspicious. In your case even twice. Hence my vote.

Do you think you help the town when you opporutnistically L-1 me instead of discuss with others - you're sure they're all innocent, you've heard enough from them all, have you?

I’m absolutely

not

sure who is who. But I’ve come to the point that you could well be one of the bad guys. There is nothing opportunistic about this, I just act according to my scumdar. I’m aware of the risk of L-1 and I’m willing to take the consequences. Don’t forget you’re still alive, you can still change things.

take a deep breath, do some Uta Hagen exercises and Stanislavski's four brothers and find ideal centre!

Glad you liked my therapy session.

FL brought up the "Meta talk" you held against me - -he pushed the subject, I wasn't trying to steer ANYONE toward meta - I mentioned it once, but in NO WAY tried to start a discussion on it, I stick to my opinions, ppl stick to theirs -

As I elaborated above, I meant something different with “meta discussion”. BTW, I admit I missed this post of yours so I didn’t realize you’ve brought up the hypocrisy argument already. You bringing it up, too, is a sign for me that you may be interested in helping town.

So you start your case on me saying I try to draw people into meta discussion - can you elaborate on how I try to draw ppl into

discussing

meta, and how I try to draw them into it? Were there multiple attempts?

Once again, see above for clarification regarding “meta discussion”.

"The first vote matter" - - can you elaborate on how this constitutes a reason to put me at L-1? I didn't vote or FoS, I made an inquiry

Please look at the whole picture, not at single points only. My vote on you is based on

both

your meta discussions. One of them and I could have thought “well, just a strange guy” but twice strikes me as an attempt to direct the discussion in a way not helpful for the town.

"Was it a plan or not?" stuff? - - Did you read the last few posts between ekim and I, and see where our misunderstanding was? What was scummy?

I saw that you resolved your issue. Still I find it very odd to begin such a (useless) discussion at all.

You're open to different approaches, but want to vote me for mine? - Can you elaborate?

What is there to elaborate anymore? To boldly quote myself: “yours looks just plainly unhelpful for finding scum.” For further elboration, look around in this post or my previous one.

What makes my approach different? Of asking people questions regarding posts - - Please elaborate

The more you ask me to elaborate, the more I wonder if you actually understand what I write. My problem with your approach, as stated before already (!), is not you asking question (which is basically a good thing) but the kind of questions you ask and the kind of discussion you arise with them and pursue.

Unhelpful for findins scum? - - Can you elaborate on how putting me at L-1 for these loose and unclear reasons makes you feel confident I'm scum?

Now we even have bad logic. I didn’t vote you because voting you makes me feel confident of you scum. That would be circular and an absolutely BS reason to vote. I voted you for your behaviour. See above for elaboration.

This whole thing stinks and seems opportunistic - - I don't like being on L-1 without having seen an actual case laid out with evidence - concrete evidence -

I’ve given you a lot of elaboration on my reasons and I’m fine with it. Besides, as you realize in your next paragraph, I’m not the only one responsible for you being at L-1.

BTW, what the hell is “utility lynching”? I smell another misunderstanding here…

Uncle Pain, that's how you vote someone.

Oh, please forgive me, Great Master o’ Votes, for even considering to criticize your infinite Mafia wisdom. SCNR.
Seriously, what is this acting up as an authority for?

if you find a single thing SCUMMY about me, please present it and I'm happy to address it.

Sorry for the sarcasm but I see how happily you’re addressing my points about you. They may not be waterproof but you still deny any scummity about them. Take a look over your own nose.

Maadnet, emp, Clu? No wonder I'm getting a weak quick lynch with no evidence of scum on me - - I'm the most active and it's being taken advantage of

You know, although many factors play a role in Mafia, it also applies here that man forges his own destiny. You act oddly, you get criticized. You continue to act oddly, you get voted. Show me your townish side and I’ll drop my vote.

---

fuzzylightning

:

Honestly, UP what are you trying for, if you are putting him at L-1 you better have a better case than something based on a few misunderstandings that were ironed out, as none of them are clear enough scumtells to lynch someone over. Honestly, I want everyone who has a vote on AndyTony to put out reasons as to why they feel he is the best lynch for today.

The issues may have worked out but I have a problem with how they were put up by AndyTony to begin with. It’s just too odd for me to believe it’s only oversensitive or overcautious. I agree they were not scumtells by themselves but I find his behaviour scummy in the context of things, as elaborated above. Of course I could be badly wrong about him and just take his posts the wrong way. But currently he doesn’t give me this impression so my vote stands.

[ekiM]

Second that call for a vote count.

I would like to hear more from maad and emp.

[Spolium]

--------------------------------------------------

Vote Count

L-1

AndyTony (

Clu, Empking, Uncle Pain

)

L-3

Uncle Pain (

AndyTony

, AndyTony

)

L-3

Empking (

fuzzy

)

L-4

Clu (

Uncle Pain

)

L-4

fuzzylightning (

maadneet

)

L-4

ekiM (

Empking

)

L-4

maadneet

With 7 alive, it takes

4

to lynch.

Deadline:

Wed 13/05/2009, 22:00 UTC (clicky)
--------------------------------------------------

[AndyTony]

@UP

--My bias on Emp (shared with FL) made me inquire about his actions - -I didn't threaten the town by risking a possible towny life by voting him, I simply got trapped in an Emp hole - that whole thing was a dead issue

--My encounter with ekim was not random or useless. I was FULLY justified to be suspicious aboud a plan being stated in the first post from someone on the first page - - our MISUNDERSTANDING was that I hadn't fully embraced the fact that ekim doesn't like white noise nonesense to start a game - - I had NEVER encountered it, and thus we discussed - - also resolved on both sides - - nothing wrong with my behavior - - I also, still, did not risk a possible towny life by voting him - - I inquired, asked questions, tried to understand more before making a solid vote - - when the understanding came, I found a peacefully ground and let it lie, I've got no beef with ekim.

Those two instances of my gameplay make you think I'm scum and should be lynched? No interrogation, no red flag questions, no solid concrete scumtells, you just want me lynched?

And you must understand that there was confusion in the use of "meta" - - it's a word that describes an "abstraction" from something - we often use it to refer to a player's past gaming (don't get me wrong, it CAN involve present ones, it just has more weight, I find, and orients more to past stuff)

That being said - - What is your case outside of the two above instances (which alone still mean nothing? What are you doing?)

You admit you overlooked my FL question, you admit I'm interested in helping the town.

You admit you haven't heard much from everyone and aren't certain who's who? Then why vote?

This will let me branch into what a utility vote is for you.

A utility lynch is when you don't lynch someone for being scum, but rather, not being (in the eyes of the person voting it) "the right kind of town" - whether that's following the herd, playing a certain way, etc. - - If anyone else on the board can add or adjust the definition, please do - - but the idea of it is lynching without knowing fully/caring the person it scum
------------------------------

So you said your case on me was my:
Gameplay within the two instances (Emp/Ekim)
I'm not helping the town
-----------------------------------

The Emp/Ekim were inquiries about white noise stage gameplay - - one person, I was suspicious based on previous games and asked a few questions before they too were guilty of dragging it out (the agreeable emphole). The second, if it weren't for the ekim's position on white noise stages, was perfectly unerstandable for me to be suspicious about!

You furthermore admit both were resolved.

You then admit I could be helping the town

You admit you're not certain of who everyone is

The issues may have worked out but I have a problem with how they were put up by AndyTony to begin with. It’s just too odd for me to believe it’s only oversensitive or overcautious.

I agree they were not scumtells

by themselves but I find his behaviour scummy in the context of things, as elaborated above. Of course

I could be badly wrong about him

and just take his posts the wrong way. But currently he doesn’t give me this impression so my vote stands.

And the reason I'm voting you, again:

You're being opportunistic (L-1 for me with a weak case)
Utility lynching (You haven't proven or admitted I have scumtells)
Hypocrisy (Flip flopping on me being useful to town, taking my arguments - - if you couldn't read that post, how well could anyone trust you have read into anything else?)
-------------
You squashed your own case when your two points hypocritically got conradicted - - the two instances (you admit had no scumtells) - - boom, gone.

you're left with thinking I don't help town. As if that weren't a weak enough opinionated reason to try and get me lynched, you admit I'm helping and thus kill off your last reason - -yet the vote still stands because of....my behavior?

Yet - - you distance yourself in the above quote/post - - you distance yourself and make statements about how you could be terribly wrong about me.....I think you're trying to cover your ass when the mislynch goes down and people turn to you....so you can be able to say "hey...I SAID I might be wrong..." - - poor thing.

Your distancing is also added to my list of reasons on you. My vote stands on you sir, with a much stronger case.
---------------------------------------------------------------------

And for the record? There hasn't been any poor gameplay on my or anyone's part nor such that hurt the town - - You should know by now that every single post no matter how big or small helps us to determine people - - look what's happened here! I've had two conversations, yet here we are seeing a potential scum come out of the woodwork to attack me - you lol

And I think you should research Uta Hagen and Stanislavski, they're far from therapy, but if you're still interested (on a personal note) they're awesome.
----------------------------

The vote count is me at L-1 and a few people that still have their white noise votes on, I think.

Please, everone get back

[Empking]

AT, before you start accusing me of not having thoughts, when I was writing the post, and yes it did take me 20 minutes to write that post because I had received a phone call during that time, so bear with me that I didn't see your post until now.

Honestly, UP what are you trying for, if you are putting him at L-1 you better have a better case than something based on a few misunderstandings that were ironed out, as none of them are clear enough scumtells to lynch someone over. Honestly, I want everyone who has a vote on AndyTony to put out reasons as to why they feel he is the best lynch for today.

He's lied (one of which can not reasonbly be argued to be a misunderstanding or a difference of opinion) and attacked for silly made up reasons.

[AndyTony]

UP

In my re-read, I spotted you also called your case not waterproof

you then gave me sarcasm when I said present me with scumtells and I will address them - - your sarcasm doesn't make you look very good when you tell me they're there and later admit...there aren't...you say you don't have scumtells, just a vote on me for your opinion on my behavior that you admit can be terribly wrong?...yeesh...

---
so once again - if anyone has something to address with me, please do so and we can discuss -

Otherwise, there's UP's magical vote on me, a RANDOM vote, and Emp.

[Clu]

AT you're not getting votes on you because you're the most active, you're picking up votes because of how you're acting.

Furthermore, just because I say you're lashing out doesn't mean I constitue your posts as rants that aren't worth reading, I'm talking about your reactions. I don't know, maybe it's how you play the game, but whenever anybody disagrees with you or directs a criticism your way you come out with all guns blazing. Then, as soon as your 'misunderstandings' have been cleared up, you act like it can't be referred to and that since it's been 'solved' it is no basis for further examination.

Asides from that, you've attacked things such as the whole discussion on the semantics of random and serious etc. and then slammed into reverse as soon as it looks like you're not going to get anything from it.

You also continually assume that people are agreeing with you, and keep misconstruing what they're saying.

Nor have you acknowledged this issue:

EBWOP

*epic facepalm*

What the above post SHOULD have been:

This is less an observation on the discussion itself than the players, but hey.

ekiM doesn't apparently want to be drawn into discussion on things he doesn't consider useful, which I suppose is fair enough. However, there is a fine line between 'not useful to the game' and 'personally disadvantageous' - obviously scum wouldn't want to get involved with debates that would cast suspicion on them. Just a possibility.

AT, I notice, has been lashing out practically every time somebody has disagreed with him, and that's making me a bit wary of him in general. I'm not totally sure what to make of his play, but I don't like how he skirted around this issue by addressing somebody else - essentially changing the subject.

@Empking. No, it isn't true, but I don't think AT was lying, just getting the semantics mixed again.

How so?

You said (Paraphrasing) "It was a joke vote", he said (paraphrasing) "We agree it wasn't a joke vote."

I don't see the semantics.

AT apparently assumed that when I said that whilst a vote could be not entirely random, it could still be a joke, that I meant 'Not random = not joke'

... Yeah, actually, I don't see where you got that from AT.

Overall, although my vote was a joke, or random, or whatever the heck you want to call it, I'm perfectly content to let it sit where it is for now.

@ Uncle Pain: I tend to be that way: I prefer to have all of my bases covered and not leave anything that might be relevant out when I'm making a point.