Star Wars Mafia (Game Over)

[farside22]

Because your post had multiple points already yet you still threw in that fluff. Mentioning posts that aren't relevant makes you sound like you're just going through the motions saying as much as you can. Not only that but you don't vote, and you just sit back for three pages and then criticize rvs wagons. The whole thing looks artificial and questionable.

I think this is a stregth at best. The second part about the vote is fine, the first part I disagree with completely.

@Hp: I appologize I thought you voted for K-7 forget what I asked from you in my catch up post.

@ Kast:

-If your objection is against mentioning irrelevant posts, then why did you suggest that I should have more analysis of those irrelevant posts?

I read it as him saying even mentioning that something on the page is irrelevant was unnecessary and in his view trying to pack your post into something more then it was.

Yeah right like you would have been satisfied if I escalated pressure on Kast?

yes it would have I would have considered it less cowardly. I see scum tuck up and run (yes that was a dick reference for those who missed it) more often then town.

[TwoHeadedCyclops]

We didn't push for a lynch, and we were the earliest on the wagon.

It made his pbpa looked more like scum scum hunting than town scum hunting to me.

See my earlier post. Assuming Semioldguy wasn't completely wrong about K-7 (that he always refuses to take part in the RVS stage), there was no more reason to vote for him, but you joined that bandwagon after. Post 95, so I also don't see how you "were the earliest on the wagon", or do I really missed your point here?


I'd also like to hear what makes you think Kast's summary was scum looking?

We were the second vote on the k7, so we started the actual wagoning. We voted before k7 didn't vote. That's not why we voted him, but I was the one who mentioned that point too. Also, Killa said himself that he was open to random voting, so he doesn't always not do it. Also if you feel that reason is no more, why don't you focus on the people who clearly voted him for that reason?

As far as I can tell my partner voted just to make the biggest bandwagon. It is a little late for such bandwagoning, but in his defense, there aren't any really good bandwagons otherwise, and nothing suggests he wanted a lynch or really suspected k7.

[wolframnhart]

Cheese and rice will my friggen post not go to a "problem loading page"????? ><

Let's try again..

@Farside
No reason, just felt like moving my vote at the time and the Wreck wagon was just were i ended up. Had more votes gone their way i would have unvoted since I don't see anything scummy from them.

@CMAR
No i wasn't talking about you in my comment about k7, was talking about a different ongoing game.

Well for the reason to unvote, see the post itself. My only reason to vote Dana was to get him posting, which he did although his post didn't add much. About not voting, I didn't see the point. I believe twoheadedcyclops had no votes at that time (might have been wrong here, didn't count) so a FOS would seem to have the equal effect as a simple vote.

Also, I don't think its time to "vote" yet. (As in trying to seriously getting people lynched or to L-1/L-2) There are plenty of votes already (mostly on K 7 and Wreckstar) and those guys started talking. At first I thought it was scummy not to take part in the RVS stage, but apparantly, also according to you, its very normal for K-7. Since we got that cleared out, I was surprised to see twoheadedcyclops join the K-7 bandwagon right after, which I described as "late". About Wreckstar's bandwagon, I also commented that it seems mostly random or based on disliking him.

I could simply vote for him now, since he'd be a considerable alternative now. (3 votes if I include mine? Sorry, its late so I fail at counting) However, I obviously wouldn't call for a lynch yet. Or will it be scummy now that I vote after being pressured into voting? Guess I'll find out soon enough.

This caught my eye.
1)Voted to get dana posting, but even though he says dana's post wasn't much, he isn't going to keep pressuring dana, just gonna leave it be.
2)Doesn't think it's "time to vote yet" but at the end of his post votes anyways
3)because another person said it was normal for k7 to not vote in RVS FC drops his case or investigation, whatever you want to call it, against k7
4)THC is a "considerable alternative" more or less to me means "people think he is scummy so that's where i am going" and so even though he won't call for a THC lynch, he is going to vote him anyways since he will be the third vote against him.

unvote, vote FC

[wolframnhart]

FINALLY

[Kdub]

Vote Count

d3x (1)

- AlmasterGM

farside22 (0)

-

wolframnhart (0)

-

ooba (1)

- DragonsofSummer

Kast (1)

- hp [leaves]

Toon Fighter (0)

-

Konowa (0)

-

hp [leaves] (1)

- Scott Brosius

CryMeARiver (0)

-

Dragon Phoenix (1)

- CryMeARiver

Wreck Star (2)

- ooba, bv310

killa seven (4)

- Vel-Rahn Koon, Dragon Phoenix, danakillsu, TwoHeadedCyclops

Vel-Rahn Koon (0)

-

AlmasterGM (0)

-

Scott Brosius (0)

-

danakillsu (0)

-

totallynotmafia (0)

-

FC Groningen (3)

- Konowa, semioldguy, wolframnhart

semioldguy (1)

- totallynotmafia

TwoHeadedCyclops (4)

- d3x, farside22, Wreck Star, FC Groningen

DragonsofSummer (0)

-

bv310 (0)

-

No Lynch (0)

-

Not Voting (3)

- Kast, Toon Fighter, killa seven

22 votes available, 12 votes needed to lynch

Deadline is May 8, ~4 pm PDT

[Wreck Star]

[Reck]

player 1:I'm voting you before you start lurking
player 2:I'm trying to get better

What about that suggests anything OTHER than the lurking-in-question as the topic of conversation?

[TwoHeadedCyclops]

Ah in my last few posts I called WS as WC, my mistake

@3PO-
-To be clear, you claim that you seriously think BV posted that he is intentionally trying to be scummy. Is this correct?

Lurking isn't automatically scummy. In fact it's automatically not if a player does it all the time, and that is the accusation. Also he could have been joking.

--Also, why is it bad if WS attacks a player who is lurking and you think has promised to continue lurking?

Well im not a big fan of lurker hunts but I don't think I've expressed any issue with WS over that.

@3PO-
I still don't see your answer for why you said I should have posted more analysis on the irrelevant fluff.

I don't think you should have posted more I think you shouldn't have mentioned it at all. By mentioning it you are just summarizing the irrelevant and showing you are focused on just throwing out as much as you can as opposed to only posting relevant scumhunting.

If your focus is finding scum, why would you even mention things that have nothing to do with alignment? If your focus is looking like you're reading and posting actively then it makes more sense. Hence, "scum scumhunting". The suggested intent is different.

[TwoHeadedCyclops]

Yeah right like you would have been satisfied if I escalated pressure on Kast?

yes it would have I would have considered it less cowardly. I see scum tuck up and run (yes that was a dick reference for those who missed it) more often then town.

Well you sound like president Bush now. I'm not gonna quagmire the game over my dick size. /end of argument

[TwoHeadedCyclops]

[Reck]

player 1:I'm voting you before you start lurking
player 2:I'm trying to get better

What about that suggests anything OTHER than the lurking-in-question as the topic of conversation?

I thought it was lurking that he was trying to get better at. Anyone who didn't know what lurking was or thought he was making a joke would think that. And it's easy to think it's a joke with the OMGUS. I know you called me challenged, but I find it funny that you still can't think outside that box.

[Dragon Phoenix]

My original vote on FC Groningen was without any purpose, but his recent posts smell scummy to me. In particular his attempt to derail the leading bandwagon, which can be either because it was on a scum buddy or more likely if the wagon rolled on and if we would find out we lynched a townie he would say day two that he was against that lynch and focus on the wagoners. His "not time to vote, vote:" action also does not sit well with me.

Unvote killa seven
Vote FC Groningen

[totallynotmafia]

I agree that FC Groningen's vote is suss, particularly where he pointed out that he didn't think that THC should be lynched despite still voting for him, I did the same kind of thing as scum in my newbie game where I voted for someone and then qualified it by saying it was just a vote for pressure (I was pulled up on in too). I think scum are likely to over-explain and over-qualify everything they do, such as this from FC:

unvote because Dana posted, although its a vote out of nothing and partially fluff.

Why bother even giving a reason for unvoting if it was a random vote to begin with?

Unvote, Vote: FC Groningen

[FC Groningen]

Well for the reason to unvote, see the post itself. My only reason to vote Dana was to get him posting, which he did although his post didn't add much. About not voting, I didn't see the point. I believe twoheadedcyclops had no votes at that time (might have been wrong here, didn't count) so a FOS would seem to have the equal effect as a simple vote.

Also, I don't think its time to "vote" yet. (As in trying to seriously getting people lynched or to L-1/L-2) There are plenty of votes already (mostly on K 7 and Wreckstar) and those guys started talking. At first I thought it was scummy not to take part in the RVS stage, but apparantly, also according to you, its very normal for K-7. Since we got that cleared out, I was surprised to see twoheadedcyclops join the K-7 bandwagon right after, which I described as "late". About Wreckstar's bandwagon, I also commented that it seems mostly random or based on disliking him.

I could simply vote for him now, since he'd be a considerable alternative now. (3 votes if I include mine? Sorry, its late so I fail at counting) However, I obviously wouldn't call for a lynch yet. Or will it be scummy now that I vote after being pressured into voting? Guess I'll find out soon enough.

This caught my eye.
1)Voted to get dana posting, but even though he says dana's post wasn't much, he isn't going to keep pressuring dana, just gonna leave it be.
2)Doesn't think it's "time to vote yet" but at the end of his post votes anyways
3)because another person said it was normal for k7 to not vote in RVS FC drops his case or investigation, whatever you want to call it, against k7
4)THC is a "considerable alternative" more or less to me means "people think he is scummy so that's where i am going" and so even though he won't call for a THC lynch, he is going to vote him anyways since he will be the third vote against him.

unvote, vote FC

Alright

1 He voted and there were no serious/well based bandwagons so far so I didn't expect a well based vote. His activity is lacking compared to other's but he did post. If you want more of him, feel free to pressure him yourself.
2 Yes, my vote had other reasons. 1, I was asked to vote because it seemed scummy to withhold a vote, so I picked the best alternative there was according to myself. 2, I did and do not expect that this vote will lead to a lynch, but if Wreckstar or K-7 would get on 7 or 8, the odds might go up.
3 Yep, I'm new to this site so I don't know any of you or how you all play. Since no one bothered to argue against semioldguy, I assume he was right. Also considering no one voted for K-7 afterwards except twoheaded, I think he was right as well.
4 I'm not convinced twoheadedcyclops is scum, but I do consider him more likely to be scum right now. Why? See my earlier post(s) about him and also because I think both alternative bandwagons aren't well founded as I've said a few times before. K-7 for not partaking in discussions apparantly and Wreckstar for personal reasons. I think the bandwagons on these guys will lead to nothing unless some new facts about these guys come up, so I do think it would be wise to change to focus to other people.

[FC Groningen]

To the guys above me:


Dragon Phoenix:

I don't have to be scum to tell you that this will probably be a misslynch. See my earlier posts, these bandwagons were based on nothing so I don't see why we should keep pushing them. In fact, why do you consider it a good thing to keep these (leading) bandwagons going? Or do you have a different reason to either support the bandwagon on either K-7 or Wreckstar?


Totallynotmafia:

See my previous post. "I'm not convinced twoheadedcyclops is scum, but I do consider him more likely to be scum right now. Why? See my earlier post(s) about him and also because I think both alternative bandwagons aren't well founded as I've said a few times before. K-7 for not partaking in discussions apparantly and Wreckstar for personal reasons. I think the bandwagons on these guys will lead to nothing unless some new facts about these guys come up, so I do think it would be wise to change to focus to other people. "

Reason why I'm explaining all these actions is because I was asked to. Would be more scummy not to explain it at such times don't you agree?

[Wreck Star]

[Starbuck]

Sorry guys, I've had a crazy work week so far.

So it seems that Reckoner has dug us into a hole. Thanks a lot, Will.

Hopefully, I can be the Calm Tuesday to his Manic Monday.

On bv310

Either way, I chose to OMGUS you because I was trying to make my point clear. Why are you so fixated on a single vote when there are 5 people voting for you? Just aiming for the easy target?

What point were you trying to make clear? It didn't seem to me like you had one in the first place.

I had asked you a question because I wanted to know why you thought OMGUS was a better way to go (gameplay wise) versus not OMGUSing. Please remember that was me asking that question and not Reck.

On Kast

Another game that I have to deal with your tl;dr posts! =P

However, a policy lynch on D1, especially one that's based on outside game meta, isn't going to help us find scum and is worse than random shooting.

Agreed.

Wreckstar wagon: Is there any reason behind this wagon?

This is what I was wondering. All I've really seen are a bunch of random votes.

It sounds like people are pushing a terrible case to discredit Reck.

Thank you.

On TwoHeadedCyclops

LoL at your FoS @ Kast in Post 66, this is what Kast does.

Voting me over this is just ridiculous WC. If the statements weren't ambiguous why did you wait for the clarification to vote me? Why is it scummy to misunderstand? Why did you react so strongly over a mere clarification? This seriously seems messed up to me and I will vote you for it if my partner agrees.

I don't find anything wrong with my/our vote on you.

You were one of the main people pressing this issue, and you backed off as soon as it was convenient for you to do so.

It's scummy to misunderstand when what was meant was being explained quite a few times over.

On Konowa

@Wreck Star: I think you are stretching things when you say that "he [bv] is trying to get better at lurking".

I have to agree with my counterpart here.

Konowa, have you ever played a game prior to this one with bv? If you haven't, then you really won't understand this.

On farside22

Wreck Star: why did you vote bv310 for lurking over other known lurkers?

I can't answer this question because I wasn't the one who placed the RVS vote. I know that both Reck and I have a disdain for bv's lurkiness.

On ooba

Two ways to take it:
a) I'm trying to get better at the game and lurk less
b) <sarcastic> I'm trying to get better at lurking

Reck, CryMeARiver say its "b" while Konowa says its "a".

What game are you reading? Because that's not what was meant at all.

Reck clearly understood what bv said as "a".

Why do you keep reaching with this?

Kast completely sums this up in Post 131.

On CMAR

That Wreck contradicts himself

Where is the contradiction?

Yeah, I totally misread that. By "my wagon" I thought you meant the one you were on, or something. Actually, looking back, I have no idea what I thought.

Holy fuck, seriously?

[bv310]

Star, I was trying to prove that I was committed to not lurking this game, so I voted for you to try and be like "See, now I'm really not going to do it" which didn't exactly work out, but still.

[Toon Fighter]

@ THC: You may not have felt pressured, but it certainly seemed like it

Vote: TwoHeaded Cyclops

[TwoHeadedCyclops]

@ THC: You may not have felt pressured, but it certainly seemed like it

Vote: TwoHeaded Cyclops

Why did you wait until there were more votes on me to vote me?

[ooba]

[Starbuck]

On ooba

Two ways to take it:
a) I'm trying to get better at the game and lurk less
b) <sarcastic> I'm trying to get better at lurking

Reck, CryMeARiver say its "b" while Konowa says its "a".

What game are you reading? Because that's not what was meant at all.

Reck clearly understood what bv said as "a".

Why do you keep reaching with this?

Kast completely sums this up in Post 131

"It's clearly a RVS wagon in the fact that it's not a serious wagon, but bv's OMGUS and

promise to not lurk this game

is something worth talking about."

I missed this the first time around. I was neither trying to discredit Reck nor trying to imply that bv was right if he lurked. I thought it was debatable what Reck\Bv exchange meant - I was wrong.

[TwoHeadedCyclops]

On TwoHeadedCyclops

LoL at your FoS @ Kast in Post 66, this is what Kast does.

Voting me over this is just ridiculous WC. If the statements weren't ambiguous why did you wait for the clarification to vote me? Why is it scummy to misunderstand? Why did you react so strongly over a mere clarification? This seriously seems messed up to me and I will vote you for it if my partner agrees.

I don't find anything wrong with my/our vote on you.

You were one of the main people pressing this issue, and you backed off as soon as it was convenient for you to do so.

It's scummy to misunderstand when what was meant was being explained quite a few times over.

Yeah I really pressed that "issue" of a misunderstanding that needed to be clarified. I really showed where my priorities lay. /s

I think you're just being vindictive as indicated by the vote after evidence of your assumption being right. Please don't answer this post though, I'm tired of arguing and your lame reading comprehension argument isn't even worth going over. I've expressed my opinion.

[wolframnhart]

1 He voted and there were no serious/well based bandwagons so far so I didn't expect a well based vote. His activity is lacking compared to other's but he did post. If you want more of him, feel free to pressure him yourself.

If you didn't expect a well based vote why bother voting him at all?

2 Yes, my vote had other reasons. 1, I was asked to vote because it seemed scummy to withhold a vote, so I picked the best alternative there was according to myself. 2, I did and do not expect that this vote will lead to a lynch, but if Wreckstar or K-7 would get on 7 or 8, the odds might go up.

So you voted because if you didn't it would seem scummy? I find scum are more worried about what people think about their actions. Why would THC have to be the best alternative? Because he had votes against himself? You could have looked at the other players and found someone else

you

thought was scummy, but instead you went where other votes and suspicions were.

3 Yep, I'm new to this site so I don't know any of you or how you all play. Since no one bothered to argue against semioldguy, I assume he was right. Also considering no one voted for K-7 afterwards except twoheaded, I think he was right as well.

You are new to this site, but not mafia if i remember correctly from your posts in the Queue, and when semi-old guy voted you and started asking you questions you "believed him" about K7 and now have gone towards THC.

4 I'm not convinced twoheadedcyclops is scum, but I do consider him more likely to be scum right now. Why? See my earlier post(s) about him and also because I think both alternative bandwagons aren't well founded as I've said a few times before. K-7 for not partaking in discussions apparantly and Wreckstar for personal reasons. I think the bandwagons on these guys will lead to nothing unless some new facts about these guys come up, so I do think it would be wise to change to focus to other people.

as far as i see this is the only real time you mention anything against THC:

<snip>FOS: Twoheadedcyclops for joining the K7 bandwagon this late.

Because he joined a bandwagon late. And how can you think that a bandwagon against someone who is not taking part in discussions (which is what you say about K-7) will lead to nothing?

[wolframnhart]

@Bv310

Instead of pointless one liners how about some actual posting?

[Starbuck]

On TwoHeadedCyclops

LoL at your FoS @ Kast in Post 66, this is what Kast does.

Voting me over this is just ridiculous WC. If the statements weren't ambiguous why did you wait for the clarification to vote me? Why is it scummy to misunderstand? Why did you react so strongly over a mere clarification? This seriously seems messed up to me and I will vote you for it if my partner agrees.

I don't find anything wrong with my/our vote on you.

You were one of the main people pressing this issue, and you backed off as soon as it was convenient for you to do so.

It's scummy to misunderstand when what was meant was being explained quite a few times over.

Yeah I really pressed that "issue" of a misunderstanding that needed to be clarified. I really showed where my priorities lay. /s

I think you're just being vindictive as indicated by the vote after evidence of your assumption being right. Please don't answer this post though, I'm tired of arguing and your lame reading comprehension argument isn't even worth going over. I've expressed my opinion.

[Starbuck]

You do realize that besides one other post that all the posts about that were from Reck. This was my FIRST TIME commenting on the entire situation.

I can understand if you are pissed at Reck, but do me a favor and take your douchebaggery somewhere else.

[Wreck Star]

[Starbuck]

I failz at logging out of my main account, but my point is clear.

[Wreck Star]

Also, unlike your hydra, we sign our posts.

You might want to pay closer attention to that.

[Wreck Star]

[Starbuck]

Except that last one, Lawlz.

But it's not like it wasn't obvious who it was coming from.