Orangebottle:Orangebottle:
Firstly, I'd like to point out the OMGUS.
Interesting. Why do you think, of all my attackers/voters, I'm only OMGUSing you?
I'm voting him because Toaster's logic started to seem more plausible, not because I'm blindly obeying Toaster. Perhaps that was worded poorly.
Still lazy.
I'm not sure what you want me to say here. I mean, I do, but I'm not sure what you're pretending you want me to say here because you're town. You want a full explanation for something in my own words? I doubt it, or you'd have asked for that. You want a lazy excuse of "he agrees with X, therefore bandwagon" to facilitate your bandwagon? Seems likely.
I'd also like more information out of him, because I don't have much yet. Do you object to me voting Darvi in an attempt to scumhunt him?
I'd have no problem with you scumhunting Darvi, if he was actually doing things. As-is, you're 'scumhunting'(read: you asked him a single question) a meta-lurker, which is useless.
So you advocate not hunting Darvi until he stops lurking. Brilliant. I wonder why I think he's your partner?
What would be an acceptable reason to vote Darvi to you?
I don't remember any reason to think that Darvi's scum yet.
And you don't advocate hunting him unless he's doing stuff already, meaning he's lurking town by default and there's no way to change that without being scum.
Tell me, why is Darvi, whom you have no read on, so absolutely townlike that voting him without some solid evidence is a scumtell, attempting to get evidence out of him is a scumtell, and him lurking too hard for anyone to get a read out of him (to say nothing of
accomplishing anything) is merely "within his meta?"
Finally, I never said three priests was impossible. I said I was dubious of it, and would like his opinion on it. Do you think fakeclaiming scum taking credit for a priest rez is impossible?
Yes. The actual priest would counter-claim, unless killed, in which case people would figure it out when the other two claimed. Why do you think fakeclaiming scum is more likely?
Which do you think is more likely- three priests or fakeclaiming scum taking credit for a slain one?
Three priests, due to the above logic.
So three priests is more likely than scum fakeclaiming priests because at massclaim everyone would realize four priests is too many.
Right. What's so magical about four that
that's the cutoff for someone obviously being a fakeclaimer, and why would that be enough of a deterrent for scum doing it that they never ever would?
Because I didn't want him getting anywhere near LYLO. Survivors near LYLO are dangerous, as are SKs(which is what I thought he was before he flipped).
He was an outed "SK" claiming to be willing to work for town. What about a puppet vig was so dangerous that he had to be dealt with on Day 2 to prevent him reaching LYLO?
Firstly, he was much less beneficial than you make him out to be. He could only kill every other day, for one. We'd be lynching and getting NK'd each day, resulting in two deaths every day. We'd have eight other players. Let's assume that we have two scum.
9p Lynch, Kill
7p Lynch, Kill, Toasterkill
4p -Endgame, depending on how many scum are left.
He'd have one chance to use his kill at all(and scum could've just NK'd him last night). It would actually get us to LYLO faster if we didn't hit scum at all.
This is ridiculously bad logic.
First of all, yes, he couldn't have gotten very many kills in before LYLO. That's still more than zero, and he'd be RBing in the process.
Secondly, trying to point out that misfires would drag us to LYLO sooner is beyond pointless. If we misfire a vigkill, it's hopefully on someone who we'd be wasting a lynch on if we couldn't anyway. Trying to say that this is somehow detrimental is akin to claiming we should nolynch for the same reasons.
Third, you are actually and honest-to-god using
he would soak up a scumkill as a reason why we should have lynched him instead. The horrors! We could have lynched someone else and let scum deal with him, good thing we didn't!
Didn't you have any better targets? Did you have any other targets at all?
I was suspicious of both you and Zombie for withholding information. Don't you remember that?
I remember that, but what I don't recall is any substance out of it. You told us both to stop dicking around and actually claim, then... sat around FoSing us. Was that your sole contribution that Day? It might have been, which is why I asked.
Overall, your logic is atrocious and your contributions are minimal. Pretty sure you're scum, and thinking you're the last active scum at that.
webadict:Why don't/didn't you ask Meph about this in full public view, and see what he says?
I don't know. It seemed like the sort of thing that should be fairly obvious, but I don't know.
Author
Topic: Supernatural 5 - Ended (Read 99591 times)