So what you're telling me is you're SO CONFIDENT that Moratorium is scum that you feel the need to drop two votes on him, neither with reasoning, but as soon as I say something about it, you immediately unvote, and it's not because of me?
Amrun wrote:So what you're telling me is you're SO CONFIDENT that Moratorium is scum that you feel the need to drop two votes on him, neither with reasoning, but as soon as I say something about it, you immediately unvote, and it's not because of me?
What was so compelling about Moratorium that you ISOed him and voted him two separate times? What was so compelling about that same ISO that compelled you to unvote him?
You're asking me to believe the timing is a coincidence and I'm afraid I just can't take your word for it.
Why is panzer scum? Why not place your vote back on him? Where is that post you promised?
Still, by all rights, my suspion of pops is higher.
Amrun wrote:What was so compelling about Moratorium that you ISOed him and voted him two separate times? What was so compelling about that same ISO that compelled you to unvote him?
You're asking me to believe the timing is a coincidence and I'm afraid I just can't take your word for it.
Why is panzer scum? Why not place your vote back on him? Where is that post you promised?
Still, by all rights, my suspion of pops is higher.
Katsuki: C-Worl wagon, Antifinity Wagon, mentions lynching DK, been on or near all the wagons, Low-content poster. Likely scum.
KDub: Scumhunting, votes on Parabollocks based on three seperate occasions with light cases (small Para -> C-Worl exchange, vote reset testing, and poison testing), received poison vote which seems like a scummy power, likely town.
Bunnylover: Breadcrumbing that they are a Chocobo. KWEH. Lots of VI defense (on reckoner, on Vezo, on DK). Null.
Midnight's Sorrow: No posts for a week, posting consists more of descriptions of the game condition and very little scumhunting. Had a vote on me at one point but never really explained why. Was claimed as mason partner by Panzerjager. In isolation, leaning scum. With claim, leaning town, as there has been no counterclaim so far.
Chronopie: No posts since the 1st (stated Limited access). was on original C-Worl wagon. Null for Limited access claim.
LobsterCatapult: Setup speculation/interpretation, calls out MPR on "STOP THE FUCK VOTING GUYS", believes and then defends vezok's D1 cop claim (which vezok later states is a lie), scumhunts, VCA's, Town.
vezokpiraka: Claims cop, breadcrumbs that he isn't actually a cop, breadcrumbs that he's trying to entice scum to kill him N1, claims oneshot Commuter, if all of that is a scumplay it's a pretty damn good one. Town.
Hiraki: Purposeful low-content VI. Plays like this is EpicMafia. Most cases consist of "JUMP ON THIS SHIT RETARDS". Null.
HellloooNewman: Miller claim, DK VI Defense, then apparently makes DK his #1 policy lynch forever, then goes back to the Antifinity miswagon. "Scumdar=Raging" on a townflip. Leaning scum.
diddin: No posts since the 2nd, attempts a PL, rides Antifinity miswagon, defends Katsuki VI, defends DK VI, basically low content, leaning scum.
Panzerjager: RVS selfvote, "Gonna just go with the flow D-1 til the picture stops being so fuzzy.", votes 6 different ways, Claims Mason with Midnight's Sorrow and Pappum's rat. In isolation, leaning sucm. With claim, leaning town, as there has been no counterclaim so far.
MPR: Ponies. Is on all three early wagons. "STOP THE FUCK VOTING GUYS". Leaning Scum.
Quilford/Chesskid: Low content, votes have very little case information, Leaning scum.
bobsnox: Soft support of wagon of the hour, Hammered mislynch on Anti, some scumhunting. Null.
JP Salazar: Somewhat low contribution, scumhunts based on Reck's suggestion, "I have nothing to add, because this is getting stupid". Null.
Lowell: Low content, makes some evaluations on players. Is the Lowell I remember. Null.
DeathNote: Low content, puts up a reasonable defense to my early vote, feels more like town waiting for the smoke to clear than lurking scum. Leaning town.
Parabollocks: On all wagons, blatant case sheeping to put attention on bobsnox after being asked for a case that took a long time to emerge. Scum.
Amrun: Scumhunts, Content, reasonable arguments. Calling people out on their dumbshit. Town.
popsofctown: NOT the popsofctown i remember, is putting together coherent arguments, Amrun <-> popsofctown very much comes off as two townies arguing. Leaning town.
Men's evil manners live in brass; their virtues we write in water.
Amrun - Parabollocks kept saying he was going to provide a great case against me but never made good on that even after being prodded to do so by myself. His only attempt was basically sheeping you with what you said against me. Moratorium summed it up pretty well above.
My guess right now is that the are multiple third party groups with wincons mutually exclusive to eachother, and then there is town, scum, and SKs, who have traditional win conditions mutually exclusive to eachother. Before I thought people would be wagering chips on which way people were gonna flip. But folks is gettin shot.
In 220, Reck not only says something criticizing Bunny for policy lynching, but also makes a case on Antifinity entirely revolving around Antifinity's focus on the minigame. You call this good posting. This posted Tues, May 31, 9:13am
Then, on Thursday, with 3 posts in between, you post this:
popsofctown wrote:I didn't vote antifinity. But at least you didn't bold my name.
Antifinity's setup speculation is only slightly scummy, especially after the meta. Reck-is-scum-but-imma-vote-elsewhere is significantly scummy though. People are on the right wagon for the wrong reason. Quite likely some of the wagon is third party minigamers who think his setup speculation is a minigamer-tell.
Antifinity is scummy but not scummy enough that I want to lynch four days into a 3 week deadline.
PB lynch is a nice place to vote though, for general sheeping
unvote, vote Parabollocks
This is just insane backtracking to me. How can you forget voting for someone? How is Antifinity's talk of the minigame dropped from :goodposting: when reck criticized it and worthy of a vote to only slightly scummy and not worthy of a vote? Not much changed in this time frame.
Later that same day, with several posts in between, you post this for your last post of the day:
popsofctown wrote:Oh, and FTR, Bunnylover does policy from time to time. She policy vigged in the last SE mafia.
Before that, bunny had said something about DK possibly getting vigged but was no longer advocating a policy lynch on DK.
DK said this in the post before your post:
DeityKabuto wrote:
popsofctown wrote:DK, being in 8 games inevitably causes your play to suffer in some of them. It's more enjoyable for other players if you have about half that many. There's a multitude of ways to entertain yourself on the internet if your mafia games are momentarily moving too slowly to fill all your free time.
Don't claim your PR. Unless you've fakeclaimed as town before, it'll probably kill off your lynch now that you've claimed to have some sort of PR
Damn. I wanted to see what Bunnylover would say, that would determine his alignment.
So your comment just seemed really out of place to me. Why did you feel the need to speak up in defense of bunny lover's policy vigging policy when it was attacked, but criticizing bunny lover's policy lynching is :goodposting:? It was really incongruous and the phrasing didn't seem genuine. Something about it just bugged the crap out of me, and I wanted, and still want, to hear your explanation of it. I didn't want to skew your response by pointing out what I'd seen, but since you insist, here it is.
And you can hem and haw all you want that you weren't around to derail the Antifinity wagon, but you were around up to a day before it and didn't do anything but put a weak vote on Parabollocks for sheeping. You knew Antifinity was being wagoned up and you chose not to fight against it.
And I did NOT support the wagon. It was impossible for me to support the wagon as I didn't exist in the game at that point. I explained already that if I had been around, I would have advocated testing the claim as much as we could, but you keep choosing to ignore that.
.
