Mini 811: Foggy Londontown Mafia - Over!

[qwints]

Please reread my post and come back when you understand that I am talking about null-argument bandwagons in particular. [@Quinn]


Could you possibly address me as if I

might

have an opinion you haven't though of? [@ Nef]

I'm not going to be hostile to anyone

. That's not a good playstyle, IMHO.

Do you have some kind of Strawman Mokina win condition or something? [@neku]

Being passive aggressive is a form of hostility.


In all seriousness, I really DON'T see the votes that have take place post-RVS as "null-argument" bandwagons. People are giving reasons for their votes. These reasons may not be based on a lot as it's early, but they are enough for people to understand where people are going. To me, a "null-argument" wagon would consist of players jumping on a wagon without giving any explanation.

I agree that we should not quicklynch, but that doesn't mean everyone should wait to vote until page 15 or 20. How else does one generate content besides attacking others and defending yourself?

Lastly, the problem with Hero was not that he was attacking a poorly formed argument but rather that he was explaining the reasoning behind someone else's actions. Let people speak for themselves about what they intended to say. Otherwise, there is one less opportunity for a scum player to slip up.

[kikuchiyo]

The semantics of FC's post did not make him seem remotely scummy, so at the time I didn't even consider kikuchiyo's question an attack. I thought she'd just misread his post, and I completely agree with Hero - pointing out an error in someone else's case isn't scummy at all.

Kiku was fabricating a case because FC didn't say exactly what she would in his situation.

Now I am confused. Earlier you agreed with my "case".

I went back to look at Far_Cry's post ... seems as if we each read it differently the first time. I thought it was referring to Lowell's absence, whereas you thought there was a second reason. Misunderstanding, sorry to pin a semantic attack on you.

FC hasn't actually resolved whether or not there's an additional reason besides Lowell's absence, but he should. The point about the scumvenience of said vote was good call; duly noted.

I am not sure why you would backtrack like this. You admitted it wasn't a semantics argument, but now you are dismissing my original point. Now, FC has been caught in a lie about his amount of experience. Voting someone who is lying is "anti-town"?

I'm not going to be hostile to anyone. That's not a good playstyle, IMHO. But here's one for you. Did you suspect Lowell for anything other than lurking? We still want to know.

Now we're back to agreeing with kik?

In fact, Mokina said Hero was doing good scumhunting this game. Has anyone seen it?

Please read my posts - the only time I've ever complimented someone on scumhunting, it was directed at you and qwints via post quoting. I made no mention of Hero - he hasn't been scumhunting at all, to my knowledge. Do you have some kind of Strawman Mokina win condition or something?

Sorry, you are correct. On reread I notice you are talking about me and qwints.

I'm really getting sick of this. You're making up reasons to vote for other people, with no basis at all, post-RVS, then not listening to the input of the rest of us. I cite the way you dealt with Hero, who also tried to explain that it might be a semantic attack ... you steamrolled right over him. It's antitown and

FoS: kiku

-worthy at the very least.

Yet you agree with my suspicion of FC? Puzzling.

I am not sure why you seem to be so emotional over today's events, but this post seems erratic.

[Hero764]

Because many of the others just havent posted much. You've made as many posts as anyone in the first few pages, yet none of them really have any scumhunting content. Its like you're posting just to keep up appearances/defend yourself and FC, instead of helping town.

I have too many posts so I'm scum? And why the hell shouldn't I defend myself? I was only defending FC in the sense that I thought kiku's case was pretty stupid.

And I probably shouldn't say this or I might be 'defending' FC, but he never lied about his experience. He said he was a first time player on this site, not forever.

Um no, I shouldn't HAVE to ask for your opinions. Participating in the game is your obligation. Added suspicion since you have no opnions thus far. *I agree with Dank since I just read his post*

Explain how not having an opinion is scummy =/. Looks like you're just attacking the easiest target tbh.

You make no sense Hero, "If I find something scummyu I'm not just going to sit back and wait for someone to ask me about it." followed by "If you wanted my opinion on what had gone on so far (nef/mokina) then to ask."

If you DON'T find it scummy you could have posted that. Am I to assume you didn't find anything scummy about our conversation? I just don't believe that.

What's so hard to believe about that? And I DID say I didn't find it scummy, I was simply replying to your comment about how I haven't contributed much to the discussion.

Wat doesn't make sense to me is why Hero and Mokina were being "not hostile" towards me, trying to answer questions directed at me. I understand they hav cleared themseleves, but this sort behavior is somewhat erratic, to put it that way.

Way to restate what's already been said. What are you trying to do, make it look like you're being pro-town when you aren't? It seems pretty likely, since you haven't even been paying attention to my posts. I never answered a question directed at you.

FC: lying about your amount of experience is scummy, especially when you use your dishonesty to cast suspicion on someone else.

kiku: Making up a case is scummy. He never lied about his experience.

I like when my random vote stumbles upon a good lynch. What dank says is right, Far_Cry is trying to have his newbie cake, and eat it too.

So now we have dank, kiku, and Lowell all 'bandwagoning'(I know that isn't what it is, just can't think of a better word) on this false case. I bet you money one of them is scum.

Now, FC has been caught in a lie about his amount of experience. Voting someone who is lying is "anti-town"?

There you go again. How long are you going to use this as an argument?

vote: kikuchiyo

[dank]

I have too many posts so I'm scum? And why the hell shouldn't I defend myself? I was only defending FC in the sense that I thought kiku's case was pretty stupid.

Your strawman does not impress me.

And I probably shouldn't say this or I might be 'defending' FC, but he never lied about his experience. He said he was a first time player on this site, not forever.

When someone says "lay off, i'm new to the site", its implied that they are new to the game and looking for some slack, not that they're an experienced player.

Explain how not having an opinion is scummy =/. Looks like you're just attacking the easiest target tbh.

You must always suspect someone, or at least try to scumhunt to look for suspicious behaviors. By neither finding anyone suspicious, nor showing any sort of inititiave to scum hunt, it looks very suspicious. Keep in mind, scum know everyone is innocent, so they may have a harder time trying to find reasons to be suspicious of others, or even start cases themselves. Thats where it could be scummy.

kiku: Making up a case is scummy. He never lied about his experience.

Again uncalled for defense. I refuse to believe that you can't understand how his statement could easily be interpreted as no experience playing mafia (i'm sure thats what the majority of players here thought).

So now we have dank, kiku, and Lowell all 'bandwagoning'(I know that isn't what it is, just can't think of a better word) on this false case. I bet you money one of them is scum.

Because we're voting for you, we must be scum? Though Lowell hasn't provided much at all, how exactly are kiku and I bandwagoning when we're providing original reasoning for our votes?

[Hero764]

Your strawman does not impress me.

It wasn't strawman. Others haven't had 'scumhunting' content either. The only difference between me and them is my posts, as you said. Is there some hidden reason I missed in your post? Your neglectance of my second question is noted.

When someone says "lay off, i'm new to the site", its implied that they are new to the game and looking for some slack, not that they're an experienced player.

Except it was the RVS, and people use BS reasons all the time.

You must always suspect someone, or at least try to scumhunt to look for suspicious behaviors. By neither finding anyone suspicious, nor showing any sort of inititiave to scum hunt, it looks very suspicious. Keep in mind, scum know everyone is innocent, so they may have a harder time trying to find reasons to be suspicious of others, or even start cases themselves. Thats where it could be scummy.

I don't see how that matters. Scum can find reasons in posts just as well as anyone else. And I think it would usually benefit scum to throw suspicion onto someone. About as much as it benefits town.

Again uncalled for defense. I refuse to believe that you can't understand how his statement could easily be interpreted as no experience playing mafia (i'm sure thats what the majority of players here thought).

Doesn't matter what you interpret it is, based on his "10 games" post we know he couldn't have been playing the newbie card, and the two posts certainly don't contradict eachother like kiku seems to think here.

Because we're voting for you, we must be scum? Though Lowell hasn't provided much at all, how exactly are kiku and I bandwagoning when we're providing original reasoning for our votes?

Your strawman does not impress me. Reread my post dawg.

[dank]

It wasn't strawman. Others haven't had 'scumhunting' content either. The only difference between me and them is my posts, as you said. Is there some hidden reason I missed in your post? Your neglectance of my second question is noted.

I've laid out my reasons for finding you suspicious over several posts, including 1. your ugly post showing no initiative to scum hunt, 2. your overdefensiveness, which should not be there this early in the game unless you've got something to hide, 3. your insistant defense of FC, which also doesn't have much of a reason, 4. your lack of any content until lately 5. your large number of posts without any content (keep up appearances). There may be more i'm not remembering.

Your version of my reasons: "I post too much".

See the strawman yet?

Except it was the RVS, and people use BS reasons all the time.

Its the random voting stage, not the lying voting stage. You're not expected to lie and make stuff up in RVS that will have an effect on how people will view you for the rest of the game. Thats what he did.

I don't see how that matters. Scum can find reasons in posts just as well as anyone else. And I think it would usually benefit scum to throw suspicion onto someone. About as much as it benefits town.

Scum don't want to get tangled up in cases of people they know are innocent, because it may draw suspicion later. Scum want to coast through the game quietly, jump on some bandwagons, go along with town's wishes, not do any major scumhunting themselves, because guess what, they don't have to. The town will usually do it for them. they basically try to go unnoticed, and guess what buddy, that's what you did for much of this game.

Doesn't matter what you interpret it is, based on his "10 games" post we know he couldn't have been playing the newbie card, and the two posts certainly don't contradict eachother like kiku seems to think here.

i'm not going to repeat the same line I've used about 4 times to reply to this, go read my last post.

Your strawman does not impress me. Reread my post dawg.

Your entire post says the case on FC is not true (I like how you're still arguing to disprove a case that's got nothing to do with you).

Now, I admit, I had made a mistake here. I assumed, since you spent such a long post defending something, that this bandwagon thing was about votes on you. But not, it appears they're about your good ol' buddy FC.

That said, kik put a vote on him for a good reason. Lowell, indeed didn't provide much, and it would be nice to hear more from him. My vote wasn't even on him, it's been on you ever since I replaced into this game.

Yet somehow, you've got a concise list of 3 people where one of us is scum.

Excellent scumhunting, my friend. It seems you've turned the corner.

[nadroj15]

[quote author=Mokina]Hero has been saying what he understood from Far_Cry's statement.

While it's not particularly helpful to the town, it's not antitown either.

The line of inquiry is still open, and I would like to hear from FC as soon as possible.[/quote]

That bothers me. It sounds like you are trying not to take an opinion on that matter.

Sorry for being a lurker, btw. I've been busy, so I haven't had time to post, but I have been able to read the game. I'll be more active in the future.

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

Kikuichiyo, it seems like you've switched your vote an awful lot this game. I understand that you may have been swayed by the arguments of others and wanting to apply pressure on suspects, but one would think you'd stick to your guns a little bit instead of changing your mind every other post. Why are you being so wishy-washy?

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

Hero764, there's no reason for you to be defending FarCry like you have been. Answering the question for FarCry completely eliminated any information we could have gained from said question. Also, you don't believe that "having no opinion" is scummy. I fail to see your reasoning here. Anyone who has no opinion can quickly develop one in order to jump on a bandwagon without looking wishy-washy by changing their mind. That was a very scum-like thing to say.

Vote: Hero764

[/b]

[nadroj15]

Gah, my quote tags failed.

[Hero764]

I've laid out my reasons for finding you suspicious over several posts, including 1. your ugly post showing no initiative to scum hunt, 2. your overdefensiveness, which should not be there this early in the game unless you've got something to hide, 3. your insistant defense of FC, which also doesn't have much of a reason, 4. your lack of any content until lately 5. your large number of posts without any content (keep up appearances). There may be more i'm not remembering.

1. I already responded to that and you said nothing about it. So I assumed you had let it go.
2. Making shit up about your own posts certainly isn't making you look better. Please quote where you said this, because I can't seem to find it. And how have I been "overdefensive" compared to just regular defensive?
3. Yeah, except I wasn't defending FC. If I was so focused on defending then why have I attacked him twice now?
4. Which applies to others.
5. "You have too many posts".

Your version of my reasons: "I post too much".

See the strawman yet?

Nope.

Its the random voting stage, not the lying voting stage. You're not expected to lie and make stuff up in RVS that will have an effect on how people will view you for the rest of the game. Thats what he did.

If he wanted people to view him that way for the rest of the game he wouldn't have gone out of his way to mention he had been in 10 games. And again, he never made up that it was his first game on this site, why are you so focused on this?

Scum don't want to get tangled up in cases of people they know are innocent, because it may draw suspicion later. Scum want to coast through the game quietly, jump on some bandwagons, go along with town's wishes, not do any major scumhunting themselves, because guess what, they don't have to. The town will usually do it for them. they basically try to go unnoticed, and guess what buddy, that's what you did for much of this game.

You assume all scum must act the same.

i'm not going to repeat the same line I've used about 4 times to reply to this, go read my last post.

I'm not sure which part of your last post you're referring to?

Your entire post says the case on FC is not true (I like how you're still arguing to disprove a case that's got nothing to do with you).

Now, I admit, I had made a mistake here. I assumed, since you spent such a long post defending something, that this bandwagon thing was about votes on you. But not, it appears they're about your good ol' buddy FC.

That said, kik put a vote on him for a good reason. Lowell, indeed didn't provide much, and it would be nice to hear more from him. My vote wasn't even on him, it's been on you ever since I replaced into this game.

Yet somehow, you've got a concise list of 3 people where one of us is scum.

Excellent scumhunting, my friend. It seems you've turned the corner.

It isn't true, because he didn't lie like you guys keep saying. (I like how you are still arguing for a case that is based on an obviously false pretense). He said it was the first game on this site. Where is the lie in that? Oh tell me please all knowing dank.

Kik's reason was a complete lie, how can that possibly be considered a good reason? What's with the unnecessary defense dank? And I know your votes been on me, did I ever say anything to the contrary?

[Hero764]

Hero764, there's no reason for you to be defending FarCry like you have been.

Haven't been defending him.

Answering the question for FarCry completely eliminated any information we could have gained from said question.

Hey, quit attacking the easiest target without even reading my posts. I never answered a question for him.

Also, you don't believe that "having no opinion" is scummy. I fail to see your reasoning here. Anyone who has no opinion can quickly develop one in order to jump on a bandwagon without looking wishy-washy by changing their mind. That was a very scum-like thing to say.

That still doesn't make it scummy to not have an opinion on something. And I did have an opinion on it to an extent(I assume we're talking about the Mokina/nef discussion?), I said neither of them looked particularly scummy.

[dank]

My god you're thick.

1. I already responded to that and you said nothing about it. So I assumed you had let it go.
2. Making shit up about your own posts certainly isn't making you look better. Please quote where you said this, because I can't seem to find it. And how have I been "overdefensive" compared to just regular defensive?
3. Yeah, except I wasn't defending FC. If I was so focused on defending then why have I attacked him twice now?
4. Which applies to others.
5. "You have too many posts".

1. This has been discussed by me and others in multiple posts, and your responses have been pretty unimpressive. You haven't convinced anyone and the suspicion remains on you. Trust me, nothing's been let go.

2. I'm not going to help your lack of attention at what I post by pointing out specifically where I said what. I pointed your you being oddly defensive of both of yourself and FC several times, as have others. (Hint: Posts 78, 88, 90, 103. I bring up the word "defensive" in those posts for a reason.

3. You've been defending him like crazy.

4. Yes

5. Yes.

When you add 4 + 5 however you get suspicious. If you also throw in 1, 2 and 3, you get scummy.

[quote="Hero764"Its the random voting stage, not the lying voting stage. You're not expected to lie and make stuff up in RVS that will have an effect on how people will view you for the rest of the game. Thats what he did.[/quote] You certainly haven't been defending FC.

You assume all scum must act the same.

Not at all. It's just a common behavior.

I'm not sure which part of your last post you're referring to?

Not sure what the issue about FC is?

Could it be

When someone says "lay off, i'm new to the site", its implied that they are new to the game and looking for some slack, not that they're an experienced player.

or

[quote="dank"I refuse to believe that you can't understand how his statement could easily be interpreted as no experience playing mafia (i'm sure thats what the majority of players here thought). [/quote]

or

vote Lowell

for picking on a first time player on this site.[/b]

Why say that? I can understand pointing out its your first game when you're new and want to be given some slack, since you're not too sure what's expected yet. But now, since your bragging that you've had 10 complete games, why were you trying to pull the noob card?

or even his reply:

I wasn't rly trying to pull out the noob card. I'm jus playin my game.

right.

It isn't true, because he didn't lie like you guys keep saying. (I like how you are still arguing for a case that is based on an obviously false pretense). He said it was the first game on this site. Where is the lie in that? Oh tell me please all knowing dank.

You

certainly

haven't been defending FC.

Kik's reason was a complete lie, how can that possibly be considered a good reason? What's with the unnecessary defense dank? And I know your votes been on me, did I ever say anything to the contrary?

You said "So now we have dank, kiku, and Lowell all 'bandwagoning'(I know that isn't what it is, just can't think of a better word) on this false case. I bet you money one of them is scum."

I'm bandwagoning on a "false" case, even though i'm not even voting for FC.

I see.

[Hero764]

My god you're thick.

Love you too.

1. This has been discussed by me and others in multiple posts, and your responses have been pretty unimpressive. You haven't convinced anyone and the suspicion remains on you. Trust me, nothing's been let go.

2. I'm not going to help your lack of attention at what I post by pointing out specifically where I said what. I pointed your you being oddly defensive of both of yourself and FC several times, as have others. (Hint: Posts 78, 88, 90, 103. I bring up the word "defensive" in those posts for a reason.

3. You've been defending him like crazy.

4. Yes

5. Yes.

1. Well then, please explain what was wrong with my response.

2. Kay. 78 wasn't even a post of yours. 88 you never mentioned over defensive, just that I had been defending myself. I ask you again, what the hell is wrong with that? 90 is the same thing. 103 you never mention me defending myself. So the only real problem you mention is my supposed defense of FC, which would make this the same as reason 3. Why would you make it seem like there's more 'evidence' stacked against me than there actually is?

3. Pointing out the scumminess of a case and defending are not the same thing.

When you add 4 + 5 however you get suspicious. If you also throw in 1, 2 and 3, you get scummy.

Too bad 1, 2 and 3 hardly qualify as reasons.

You certainly haven't been defending FC.

Glad we're finally on the same page.

Not at all. It's just a common behavior.

Its also a common behavior to throw the blame onto others, so what? This argument isn't going to go anywhere though, so I'll just drop it. It doesn't mean much anyways.

When someone says "lay off, i'm new to the site", its implied that they are new to the game and looking for some slack, not that they're an experienced player.

It was the RVS. How can you interpret it as anything except a joking reason? This isn't what I'm voting kiku for anyways. Its the fact that she said he lied about his experience when he hadn't.

I refuse to believe that you can't understand how his statement could easily be interpreted as no experience playing mafia (i'm sure thats what the majority of players here thought).

Then why go out of his way to say he was experienced? Already answered this one too, and this one doesn't matter anyways?

Why say that? I can understand pointing out its your first game when you're new and want to be given some slack, since you're not too sure what's expected yet. But now, since your bragging that you've had 10 complete games, why were you trying to pull the noob card?

It. was. the. RVS.

right.

Care to explain where he lied in his post?

You

certainly

haven't been defending FC.

Cool.

I'm bandwagoning on a "false" case, even though i'm not even voting for FC.

I see.

Hey, remember to read the parenthesis next time, they're part of the post too.

[Hero764]

EBWOP:

My god you're thick.

Love you too.

1. This has been discussed by me and others in multiple posts, and your responses have been pretty unimpressive. You haven't convinced anyone and the suspicion remains on you. Trust me, nothing's been let go.

2. I'm not going to help your lack of attention at what I post by pointing out specifically where I said what. I pointed your you being oddly defensive of both of yourself and FC several times, as have others. (Hint: Posts 78, 88, 90, 103. I bring up the word "defensive" in those posts for a reason.

3. You've been defending him like crazy.

4. Yes

5. Yes.

1. Well then, please explain what was wrong with my response.

2. Kay. 78 wasn't even a post of yours. 88 you never mentioned over defensive, just that I had been defending myself. I ask you again, what the hell is wrong with that? 90 is the same thing. 103 you never mention me defending myself. So the only real problem you mention is my supposed defense of FC, which would make this the same as reason 3. Why would you make it seem like there's more 'evidence' stacked against me than there actually is?

3. Pointing out the scumminess of a case and defending are not the same thing.

When you add 4 + 5 however you get suspicious. If you also throw in 1, 2 and 3, you get scummy.

Too bad 1, 2 and 3 hardly qualify as reasons.

You certainly haven't been defending FC.

Glad we're finally on the same page.

Not at all. It's just a common behavior.

Its also a common behavior to throw the blame onto others, so what? This argument isn't going to go anywhere though, so I'll just drop it. It doesn't mean much anyways.

When someone says "lay off, i'm new to the site", its implied that they are new to the game and looking for some slack, not that they're an experienced player.

It was the RVS. How can you interpret it as anything except a joking reason? This isn't what I'm voting kiku for anyways. Its the fact that she said he lied about his experience when he hadn't.

I refuse to believe that you can't understand how his statement could easily be interpreted as no experience playing mafia (i'm sure thats what the majority of players here thought).

Then why go out of his way to say he was experienced? Already answered this one too, and this one doesn't matter anyways?

Why say that? I can understand pointing out its your first game when you're new and want to be given some slack, since you're not too sure what's expected yet. But now, since your bragging that you've had 10 complete games, why were you trying to pull the noob card?

It. was. the. RVS.

right.

Care to explain where he lied in his post?

You

certainly

haven't been defending FC.

Cool.

I'm bandwagoning on a "false" case, even though i'm not even voting for FC.

I see.

Hey, remember to read the parenthesis next time, they're part of the post too.

I thought it was part of your recent post .

[Hero764]

Also: If defending people is so bad, why are you defending kikuchiyo?

[Far_Cry]

holy shit, ar we gonna say something about every sentence that everyone says?? this sounds crazy.

and i never lied about my experience. quote where I said that to prove me wrong.

and Lowell, i'm seriously tired of ur crap talk. can u say something good??

[Far_Cry]

My stances on people in this game:

dank- it seems like u and hero ar out to kill each other. i cant read u either.

Hero764- makes himself sound good and bad with just about every post. for now, I cant read him.

iamausername- suspicious. has kept a vote on me throughout the day without much explanation.

kikuchiyo- votes and unvotes a lot. can u make up ur mind?? this draws some suspicion.

Lowell- can only crap-talk. still suspicious in my opinion.

Mokina- has had some strange, erratic behavior, which makes her somewhat suspicious, so she is basically half n half.

nadroj15- hasn't said much. neutral for now.

Neferenom- neutral, but its hard to say something.

qwints- neutral, but hasn't been on the spotlight a whole lot.

Tenchi- to tell the truth, she draws a lot of suspicion. she has that kinda, stay out of the way attitude.

Wiirdo- no idea. hasnt said much.

vote Tenchi

lets see how this turns out.

[qwints]

tl;dr on the Hero v. dank argument.

Far_Cry, I don't quite understand the point of saying that you can't read, have no idea or are neutral on players - especially when that's over half the town. Town lists are generally a bad idea because they can basically turn into a To Kill list for the scum. As for your suspicions, do you have anything against iamusername besides OMGUS?

I want to see Mokina's response to kiku calling her out on a contradiction.

@Lowell, nadroj, and Wiirdo - post more.

[dank]

meh, i'm done arguing in circles with you Hero. I think we got all we're going to get out of that little exchange.

As far as defending kik, i'm defending the point I originally made about FC. kik happens to agree with it.

You, however, are defending something another player said. See the difference?

[Hero764]

Well dank, I would still like some answers to my questions if you don't mind:

What do you find wrong with my response in post 66?

What's wrong with defending myself?

[dank]

...I'm not repeating myself again. The arguments against post 66 have been beaten to death.

There's nothing wrong with defending yourself. Doing it as much as you have on the first few pages looks a bit odd, as if you've got something to hide.

[Hero764]

What the hell? No they haven't. Nef's the only one who replied to it, and all she really said was "I don't believe you."

I personally don't see anything wrong with my level of defensiveness. If you see something I did that was overdefensive then feel free to point it out. Otherwise - quit fabricating reasons.

[dank]

Post 66 contains the same stupid arguments we just spent a page arguing about. Do you really think they haven't been discussed?

Your defensiveness has been you trying, thickheadedly, to defend your slipup in post 46. Everything you've posted has been defending either you or FC, if you havent noticed. 95% defense, 5% scumhunting. That's whats wrong with it.


Anyway, i'm done arguing with you. Like I said, being as stubborn as you are, I don't think this argument will move anymore than it already has.

[Far_Cry]

tl;dr on the Hero v. dank argument.

Far_Cry, I don't quite understand the point of saying that you can't read, have no idea or are neutral on players - especially when that's over half the town. Town lists are generally a bad idea because they can basically turn into a To Kill list for the scum. As for your suspicions, do you have anything against iamusername besides OMGUS?

I want to see Mokina's response to kiku calling her out on a contradiction.

@Lowell, nadroj, and Wiirdo - post more.

I don't hav anything against iamausername; it just annoys me that she persists on starting something on me.

but seriously; i agree wit u that the guys above need to post a lot more (plus Tenchi)

[iamausername]

Your entire post says the case on FC is not true (I like how you're still arguing to disprove a case that's got nothing to do with you).

If it's a case in a game he's in, it's got something to do with him. A bullshit case is still a bullshit case whether or not it's being directed at me. Case in point: this case right here that you are pushing on Hero. He is entirely correct to say that FC did not lie about his experience.

iamausername- suspicious. has kept a vote on me throughout the day without much explanation.

You still haven't answered my question. Lowell was not the only person voting for you. Why did you single him out? It's not a hard question. Why haven't you answered it?

@Lowell, nadroj, and Wiirdo - post more.

Why am I not on this list? Why is Tenchi not on this list?

As far as defending kik, i'm defending the point I originally made about FC. kik happens to agree with it.

You, however, are defending something another player said. See the difference?

So if you were the one to say it originally, does that make kiku suspicious for defending something you said?

There's nothing wrong with defending yourself. Doing it as much as you have on the first few pages looks a bit odd, as if you've got something to hide.

No, it looks like he's got something to defend against, because because keep attacking him with terrible arguments like "You are defending yourself! You must be scum!" The more he defends himself, the more he gets accused of being 'overdefensive', and the more he has to defend himself, creating an inifinite feedback loop of craplogic.

Unvote, Vote: dank

[dank]

First of all, my reasons for voting hero were stated before page 5, and nothing on page 5 really changes anything. I'm not putting him into a trap, I already stated my case and voted a long time ago. He's trying to argue his way out of it, and refusing to listen to another opinion that people might share that isn't his own. That's what has him in the infinite feedback loop.

Second, why does he have to defend himself? He's nowhere near being lynched. The town hasn't turned against him. I merely presented my argument. There's no logical need to get this riled up over an accusation on page 5. His posts have all been defense as if he's about to be lynched, instead of pursuing those he sees suspicious. He hasn't scumhunted, he's only defended. Thats the issue.