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

[AndyTony]

The issue isn't clear, I'm happy to address questions, really - - your issue seems to be that you're not sure what to make of my gameplay.

Emp - - His meta drove me to strike up conversation with him. He has played MANY MANY a game where he'll vote people for anything, especially when it's small and unsupported, so the vote in the white noise stage from him struck me as "Uh oh...is he starting this soon?" - so I asked a few questions. It was indeed agreed that both parties dragged that out - I hadn't done anything scummy, either.
The semantics was about "Joke/Random" - but the issue was to know whether it was "Serious" or the ABSENCE of it being "Joke/random" - - when it was cleared up, it was dead for me

Ekim - - Had he not mentioned any position on how he plays and feels about white noise stages (which I'm not used to at this point in my gameplay) I would have been full in my rights with my position and suspicions.

I'm not assuming everyone agrees - I'm not sure where that statement comes from and in all fairness, people would have to post a bit more for me to get that impression, no?

Clu - Im at L-1. Do you see scumtells or are you, UP, and Emp going to keep me there? This game isn't big enough to have mistakes to learn from in the lynching process.

And I'm thinking scum is either waiting to hammer, or on the wagon already (both) - I'm confident UP is one, he's too eager for a lynch with me at L-1.

I don't want anyone to comfortably think the second is on the wagon as it would give immunity to anyone that hammers me for all of these amazing reasons that merit the lynch of a person in this town and in no way risks everyone regretting it the next day - It's quite the case: "Not sure what to make of his behavior or gameplay...death **shrugs**" - -

Please - if everyone could just PLEASE present me with scumtells and questions, I just want to address them, otherwise, I need to understand what you're trying to kill here...

Same page??

[Empking]

The above post was AtE.

Its also strongly against his town play in the same set up where he was very strongly for a quick lynch.

[AndyTony]

I'm appealing to common sense and diplomacy -

And now it's a waiting game for me to hear from everyone else.

[fuzzylightning]

Emp: What were his lies, in detail?

And my vote is staying right where it is, I am not getting a good vibe from Emp and he disappears at will and reappears to avoid a prod, I am not liking this lurker at all.

[Empking]

FL: I've posted more words than you, I've posted more posts than you and I've only missed one day. How am I the lurker?

The lies are (off the top of my head): AT saying our votes weren't random and more importantly him saying Clu had agreed with him when it was clear Clu hadn't.

[AndyTony]

FL: I've posted more words than you, I've posted more posts than you and I've only missed one day. How am I the lurker?

The lies are (off the top of my head):

AT saying our votes weren't random

and more importantly him

saying Clu had agreed with him when it was clear Clu hadn't

.

His case: "Me lying"

Lie 1/Bold 1:

Me saying the votes weren't random was an opinion and perception - - it's fair to say I was

incorrect

however there's no way I can lie about such a thing
-------------------
Lie 2/Bold 2:
I said that Clu agreed I wasn't lying - -

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

You have no case. I'm on L-1 and there are no scumtells/evidence on me

I'm not surprised that Emp has a vote on me without evidence/a strong case, but Clu and UP are curiously confident with a lot of doubt in their posting.

UP - - admitted that I tried to help town (with the FL question)
-------admitted that there are no scumtells on me
-------His case has absolutely NOTHING on me except for his opinion on my behavior (which he further admits can be terribly wrong, in an attempt to distance himself from responsibility when I don't flip scum)!!!

Clu - - I still urge you to re-evaluate your case as well

---------
Everyone get back to this, please - I feel like I'm losing my mind! Nobody has a problem with this?

Confirm Vote: Uncle Pain

- he's opportunistic and his case is scummy - I'm alive because his partner could be on the wagon and can't quicklynch -

[ekiM]

One doesn't need to be confident to place a vote. And you shouldn't be quaking in fear and resorting to appeals to emotion just because you're at L-1. Quicklynching would be moronic for town or for scum.

AndyTony, why do you take my explanations for my "planning" post at face value? Couldn't I just be lying about why I didn't random vote?

When reading post 87 I was surprised when UnclePain voted for AT. It seemed like his whole post up until that point was leading to the opposite conclusion.

Clu, if you had to decide right now whether AT would be lynched today or not, what would you choose?

Waiting on another post from maadneet.

[AndyTony]

I took it at face value because it wouldn't be concrete to call it scummy (as in no chance it could be towny)- - when looking back, you explain you hate white noise stages because they're "retarded" - - you said your meta was to not vote random, so I looked into it and it checked out, this isn't the only game where you've done that.

I would really appreciate not making statements like "quaking in fear" - - they offend me, they have nothing to do with the game, and the only purpose they serve is to tar and feather a player - - you're subliminally telling anyone who reads that statement that I must be scum and am terrified right now - - This is an internet game. On a forum.

And I'm not appealing to emotion - there's no "please don't lynch me" - "please believe me" - - it's not me begging people to invest in things like personality or gut feeling - - what I'm doing is NOT an appeal to emotion - -

I'm showing you guys (without leaving any room to leave something out in my post) that the three cases on me are NOT enough to lynch me!

We lynch scum - - nobody has proven I'm scum - - nobody had any scum evidence on me - - I'm just amazed this isn't clicking.

This is a game I regarded as intellectual - - Why is nobody jazzed at the idea that I'm a victim on a scum wagon?

ekim - - that's all you had to say about EVERYTHING? You wanted to know why I didn't persecute you for having a style of playing this game (no random votes)? That's because I don't like getting persecuted for MY style of playing the game and could relate

--You were surprised by UP? That's it? Ekim, what are your THOUGHTS on the idea that UP is potentially scum for this?

--What are your thoughts on Empking having a vote on me with no case?

[Uncle Pain]

AndyTony

:

I'm not surprised that Emp has a vote on me without evidence/a strong case, but Clu and UP are curiously confident with a lot of doubt in their posting.

So Empking has the “right” to vote whoever he wants for whatever reason, just because he’s Empking? I think his vote on you weighs just as much as Clu’s or mine and should not, never be underestimated.

Oh, and just to show you a mirror: you’re whining about how you get attacked/criticized the most. Well, look at me, I’m currently the most verbose attacker of you – in consequence, you attack me the most. By the way, Clu hasn’t brought up a better reason to vote you yet, but all you say to him (again) is “I still urge you to re-evaluate your case”, not even a FoS. Correct me if I got something wrong but this smells hypocritical.

So, about your voting reasons against me:

UP - - admitted that I tried to help town (with the FL question)
-------admitted that there are no scumtells on me
-------His case has absolutely NOTHING on me except for his opinion on my behavior (which he further admits can be terribly wrong, in an attempt to distance himself from responsibility when I don't flip scum)!!!

1. The original quote from #93 is: “You bringing it up, too, is a sign for me that you may be interested in helping town.” Please notice the use of the word “may”. I did
   not
   say “look, he helps town” but rather “hmm, could be helping the town”. I’ll file this under
   taken out of context
   if you’re okay with that. You totally overestimate the meaning of this remark because my general impression of you was and still is leaning a lot towards scum (which is obvious from my posts, I think). You know, I’m not only looking for scummy points about you but also for townish points and frankly I don’t see a problem with that. It’s of course your decision to just ignore my opinions on you being scummy and just focus on my (few!) points about you being townie. For my part, I will always consider the whole picture.
   
2. Another one that I’d like to file under
   taken out of context
   – or rather
   deliberately misquoted
   ? Original quote from #93: “I agree they were not scumtells by themselves but I find his behaviour scummy in the context of things”. As a late Christmas present, I’ll rephrase it for you: If anyone states that there is nothing inherently scummy about both your meta discussions, I have to agree. On the other hand, seen in the context of the whole game, things look to me that you twice tried to push the discussion into directions that aren’t actually useful for hunting scum. And since hunting scum is crucial for us townies, it should be the priority task for everyone of us. So your behaviour struck (and still strikes) me as un-townish, which I take as a scumtell. If you want to criticize my original wording because it was unclear, I apologize.
   
3. Well, I didn’t only say “I think you’re scum” but I laid out my reasons and how I came to this conclusion. So NOTHING (sic) is not true. If you want to counter my case, please show me where my reasoning went wrong. About my “attempt to distance” myself from my own statements, well, please read the paragraph properly: “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.” This is a sign of a small remainder of insecurity about my vote. So small that I say in the last sentence that my vote stands. Think about it, how should I use this as a Day 2 argument in case you don’t flip scum?

In the end, your case against me looks mostly OMGUS: you’re afraid of the lynch and go for the sincerest attacker of yours.

---

ekiM

:

When reading post 87 I was surprised when UnclePain voted for AT. It seemed like his whole post up until that point was leading to the opposite conclusion.

Why? What made you expect a different conclusion?

Waiting on another post from maadneet.

QFT.

[Empking's Alt]

--What are your thoughts on Empking having a vote on me with no case?

I do have a case.

[Clu]

AT: You did

not

say I agreed you weren't lying.

You said:

Think about it - I pointed out that the person he voted wasn't the only one who hadn't had a joke vote - I am indeed right as we agree -

That I agreed 'ekiM wasn't the only one who hadn't random voted' - which is nothing close to what I actually said. My vote is on you because you keep either dodging the question, taking statements out of context, or misinterpreting what people are saying to you.

Things like this:

[qupte="AndyTony"] I would really appreciate not making statements like "quaking in fear" - - they offend me, they have nothing to do with the game, and the only purpose they serve is to tar and feather a player - - you're subliminally telling anyone who reads that statement that I must be scum and am terrified right now - - This is an internet game. On a forum. [/quote]

I also don't like, considering in your arguments you've used phrasing such as 'In your desperation' which is pretty much

exactly

what you're crying foul about.

@ ekiM: I would have AT lynched. If I didn't think he was scum I would have unvoted to get him off L-1 and the risk of being hammered.

[AndyTony]

Uncle Pain, you're telling me Im taking things out of context, and then apologizing and rewording, that's backtracking - -

--You painted me as someone who was actively working against the town (completely opinionated) - - and then countered it by saying I could indeed be helping - - you DID say that

--You SAID "I agree they are not scumtells" and I held true to the last of your quote which was you thinking my BEHAVIOR is scummy -- which is still opinionated (and thus jsut as weak)

--And having me lynched, and saying things to the effect of "I could be wrong" IS distancing yourself - - and clearly you didn't read where I DID give you an example of what you would say day 2... here's another- - "Hey guys, I wasn't 100%, I even said it was possible he could be town, but you have to admit, he was pretty scummy" - - Though I wasn't scummy, was I? I haven't thrown around votes or FoS's willy nilly, I've made inquiries and clarified things.

--I didn't FoS Clu because I find you the most scummy for initiating this, Clu hasn't offered anything new to the case, his is seemingly the same as yours and just as weak - - I told him to re-evaluate instead of repeating what I said to you, to him.

--So far, your whole case is one big opinion, a gut feeling on me based on what? I haven't called people scum until you went Salem on me - - diverting the town and distracting would have to at some point involve me trying to call someone scum or start a wagon in the wrong direction - - you're making it sound like I've been building elegant cases, I had TWO conversations, man lol
-----------------------------------------
Your opinionated case referrs to the two conversations

Emp

Ekim

------------
Why, in the post where you vote me...

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.

Why agree it was a resolved misunderstanding and decide in a stream of consciousness post to at the very end, vote me?

You believe me, yet burn me regardless?....
-----------------------------------------

So my take on this is that AndyTony is overeager and/or overcautious;

while I find it noteworthy, I don’t think it’s a scumtell at all.

-----------------------------------------------
Emp - please regard the earlier post where I took your very two points against me, and showed you how they don't work. What is your case now?
-----------------------------------------------
Clu - - WHAT QUESTION?

What scumtells?

****Clu, everyone - you're all dodging MY question - do you all find it hard to make a clear list/case? What makes me scum, guys? It's kind of entertaining trying to figure this out lol

[Clu]

The question is this: Where did you get - "Think about it - I pointed out that the person he voted wasn't the only one who hadn't had a joke vote - I am indeed right as we agree -" - from?

I wasn't agreeing with you.

What strikes me as scummy?

Okay, for one thing, how you initially started off the whole thing with Empking, it looked to me like you were trying far, far too hard to get a scum reading where there was none. In that case, you're either taking scumhunting way too seriously or trying to make it seem like you're going all out to help out the town when you're not.

The other is based off this:

My vote is on you because you keep either dodging the question, taking statements out of context, or misinterpreting what people are saying to you.

I think it's pretty clear I

have

told you why I'm voting you. That last comment is exactly what I was referring to with the above little quote.

[AndyTony]

Uncle Pain's Case

• 
  My "Emp Conversation". I'm being accused of making big deals out of little things.
  

  To FL. I said

  I mentioned you to express a point to Emp - -
  
  I said

  your vote wasn't random

  , and you agree -

  I'm not telling you it was/wasn't serious, that's for you to decide

  .

  This is before I even have the head to head with Emp - I've already acknowledged any semantic issue, and clearly stated that his vote, I do

  not

  regard as serious!
  
  Emp's immediate post, following, is:
  

  Unvote
  
  Vote: AT

  
  
  This is a serious vote.
  
  AT

  lied

  . (

  Fl did have a random vote

  and its not like it was hard to find.)
  AT

  lied

  again. (i did random vote)
  AT acted like a single random vote on a player without any votes was trying to make a bandwagon.

  What we learned at the end of the ENTIRE head to head was that when he said "Fl's vote was random" he meant "It wasn't serious"
  
  You see? I already said so!! The conversation was pointless, Emp is the one that pushed it, I spent the entire time being provoked by him calling me a

  Liar

  - - And I even said this to all of you!
  
  So what's scummy?[

Yet you still hold it against me, UP, even after saying it wasn't a scumtell - - it was an Emphole, and an unfair one, the first two posts before the whole things started prove that!

It was EMP who was twisting words and trying to distract everyone!

So my take on this is that AndyTony is overeager and/or overcautious; while I find it noteworthy, I don’t think it’s a scumtell at all.

But you still hold it against me.

• ekim conversation
  I didn't call ekim scum, tell him I suspected him, nor did I attack him. After I expressed my feeling against role claiming, he immediately after that post - before the conversation even built, said:

  You find planning ahead foolish? I would have thought the opposite belief would be more natural.

  He pushed it, not me.
  He passed judgement on my opinons and started the "planning" conversation - - I had an issue with talking about role claiming early, and he defended it by saying that planning ahead couldn't hurt (so to speak)
  
  We ultimately saw the error and it was cleared, but you all must understand that I'm not starting any of this, and it takes two to tango.

-------------------------------------------------
Clu - I felt that you agreed I wasn't lying. that's all I ever cared about, it wasn't about the semantics.
-------------------------------------------------

I'm not seeing scum yet.
------------------------------------------------------

Straight forward questions

If everyone could answer.

- - Can we agree on this - -

Are we going to Lynch scum right now?

If no, please re-evaluate, or explain why utility is appropriate and fair.

If yes, What is scummy about me?

Please list the evidence clearly.


*By evidence, I do hope we can connect to concrete quotes and such rather than gut feelings and opinions that you all doubt and could regret morning of day 2*

I would seriously regret joinging a game where one is guilty for not conforming to gameplay you're all comfortable with - - Yes. I'm over-cautious.

I feel like things would be more clear if we listed them as such

[AndyTony]

To add -

ekim is the one who didn't seem to like people being opposed to his ideas as you say I've been -

And that's just a point - no, ekim is not scum for it, I'm just saying that good evidence is something that can't look town like, and can't be applied to more than one person - otherwise, what am I doing on the chopping block?

[AndyTony]

**Limited access today - moving home from school for the summer

[Spolium]

ANNOUNCEMENT

I will be V/LA from now until Sunday evening, so keep up the good form. I'm sure you will behave yourselves!

Just as a reminder, once the hammer is dropped the lynch cannot be undone. You may continue conversing until I return if the lynch hits during my absence.

Toodles!

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

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)
--------------------------------------------------

[Clu]

[quote="AndyTony]Clu - I felt that you agreed I wasn't lying. that's all I ever cared about, it wasn't about the semantics. [/quote]

Yeah, but if you noticed, I then retracted what I said about my belief you weren't lying, as Empking pointed out that you'd effectively taken the exact opposite of what I had said as me agreeing with you.

If this helps: Yes, I in fact do think you are lying, because you said that I agreed with you on a point that I didn't. Either that, or you've managed to misconstruct something I've said to a ridiculous extent - which I don't think could have been an accident.

n fact, on that, would you prefer if people referred to them as 'Joke votes'? - It kinda takes away the connotations of the word 'Random' so yes: Fuzzylightning and Empking may not have made Random votes in the strictest sense, but they

were

Joke votes.

- I pointed out that the person he ((Empking)) voted wasn't the only one who hadn't had a joke vote - I am indeed right as we agree -

Parentheses mine.

Clu: Is that true or is AT lying again?

That was not in fact what I said. My point was whilst the vote was not truly random, it was still a joke vote.

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

In response to 'I pointed out that the person...'

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.

[quote="Clu]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. [/quote]

This, you as of yet have not responded to properly, insisting that the important part of what I said - that you weren't lying, is all you cared about. Thing is, I then changed my mind and asked you a question that you have been

repeatedly

avoiding.

That enough evidence for you?

[AndyTony]

That's absolutely not evidence enough for me and I'm ashamed that your gameplay has resorted to semantics as poor as you've tried to apply to ME.

There is confusion. It's with our definition of words - and now, you are the one holding it against me and allowing them to rein over.

Did I not, in my early posts, before the head to head with Emp - make it VERY clear that I did not find the votes to be random, however did not dictate if they were SERIOUS.

When you said that they were not joke votes in the strictest sense (as in, not automaically serious by not being jokes) - - were you not on the same page as me?

Again - - When you said they were not joke votes in the strictests sense - - did that not equate to when I said they were not random, yet not serious?
----

How was that a question? How was that something I could address when we had all agreed our semantics were messed up?

So after what I just pointed out - - I'm to understand that I'm scum?

That's amazing lmao

right on, buddy...

[ekiM]

AT: Stop being a hypocrite, please.

Vote: UnclePain

AndyTony is obviously confused town and UP is opportunistically pushing for his lynch. Anyone disagree?

Mod: prod maadneet?

[Empking]

AT: Stop being a hypocrite, please.

Vote: UnclePain

AndyTony is obviously confused town and UP is opportunistically pushing for his lynch. Anyone disagree?

Mod: prod maadneet?

I disagree.

What makes you think he's town?

[ekiM]

I was getting a strong townie feeling from his belligerence and insistence on arguing a corner when nobody was agreeing with him. I couldn't see scum aggresively arguing positions that were so widely rejected by the rest of town. However I've just finished another game with him where he was scum and did exactly the same thing, so it's quite possible my read was flawed.

Unvote

.

I've actually been working from the assumption that Andy was town for quite a while now. Back to the drawing board, I guess.

Really really want to hear from maadneet.

[AndyTony]

ekim - I understand your feelings on the meta in the last game, but the only thing that's different is that I didn't have votes laid on me, the pressure of L-1, and I hadn't fought nearly as hard.

- - On a side note, was there anything unclear on where I drew up the beginning of the head to head with Emp? Where I had made it clear about the difference between joke/random and serious and where my position was? - - It's important to me that everyone at least acknowledges it. I hadn't started some huge conversation, Emp did - - and I got sucked in trying to clarify that I wasn't a liar - - the whole thing was dead for me when it was done and over with but I feel like the whole town is making bigger deal out of it than it is, and in such a way that wrongfully makes it seem like I started the semantic argument.

[Clu]

That's absolutely not evidence enough for me and I'm ashamed that your gameplay has resorted to semantics as poor as you've tried to apply to ME.

That's irrelevant, to be honest. I'm not trying to convince

you

that you should be lynched. If our positions were reversed, then maybe you wouldn't be voting me off the same evidence. However, it's quite enough for me to go on to put my vote on you.

There is confusion. It's with our definition of words - and now, you are the one holding it against me and allowing them to rein over.

No, it's not about our definition of words, it's because you keep attempting to take what others are saying out of context, and saying that they have made remarks that they did not.

Did I not, in my early posts, before the head to head with Emp - make it VERY clear that I did not find the votes to be random, however did not dictate if they were SERIOUS.

Again, that's just wordplay. You might as well say 'Oh it isn't random because you gave a reason for it' - you're trying to pretend there's a distinction between two identical things. It's the 'Random Voting' stage whereupon people vote for frivilous or silly reasons, or even just pick a number and vote the person that has that number. I can't see how you're still insisting there's a difference between a 'random' vote and a 'non-serious' vote.

When you said that they were not joke votes in the strictest sense (as in, not automaically serious by not being jokes) - - were you not on the same page as me?

That's, again, not what I said. I said the votes were not

purely

random, as in, rolling a random number to get the vote, but in the spirit of what is meant by the 'random voting stage' - yes, they were joke/random/non-serious. So no, we weren't on the same page.

Again - - When you said they were not joke votes in the strictests sense - - did that not equate to when I said they were not random, yet not serious?

That's closer to what I actually said, but this is the first time you've actually properly touched onto it. And that's not the point either, because what you said was that I agreed (paraphrasing) 'the person Empking voted wasn't the only one who hadn't joke voted' - which is something entirely different.

How was that a question? How was that something I could address when we had all agreed our semantics were messed up?

Okay then: Where did you get "I pointed out that the person he ((Empking)) voted wasn't the only one who hadn't had a joke vote - I am indeed right as we agree -" from, when it was very clear that I had not agreed with you on that point?

So after what I just pointed out - - I'm to understand that I'm scum?

Again, irrelevant. I'm not trying to convince you that you're scum, that would just be odd. This would only make sense if you were defending somebody else I'd put my vote on.

That's amazing lmao

right on, buddy...

Honey, if you're going to complain about people saying things like 'quaking in fear' in reference to you, then be that derisive in your responses, I'm hardly going to think of you any more positively am I?

[fuzzylightning]

AT, please claim now, I see where Clu is coming from now, and while Emp may not have been right about you lying at first but the second point he brought up is spot on as you have clearly misrepresented what Clu was saying, and I am willing to hammer right now, but I want you to claim before I do anything more.