That's not the point. The point is that you weren't pushing Toony because you thought he was scum, you were pushing him because he was scummier than Jim.
Yes, that is correct. I pushed the person who acted the scummyest until I thought they were scum, then I lynched the person I thought was scum. If we don't push people we see as being scummy, then we don't get anywhere.
Max: You continue to misrepresent Pandarsenic's posts against you, despite the fact that you should know better at this point. Pandar was attacking your reasoning, not running to Toony's defense, and him calling you out to vote him was him trying to:
1) Aggravate you.
2) Show that you weren't willing to act on your scumpicks.
Well, he didn't manage to aggravate me, and I was willing to act on my scumpick, so if those were he's reasons for attacking me, he had pretty poor reasons. Attacking me to try and make me back down from Toony makes a lot more sense.
You can give me all the attention you want. What makes my "not much" worse than, say, Jokerman or Irony?
The other stuff with the not much, although I suspect
Irony as well.
So let's make it clear: what is your current read on Jim?
And Pandar didn't chainsaw anyone. He flipped town- he motives were obviously townie.
Not scum. He could be anything, but he is not reading as scum on my radar. I'm leaning towards third party, for no coherent reason.
And would you care to look at Toonys role? He was a guard. For panda to protect he's guard
is a townie move.
Max: Where'd you go? You had by far the most posts in this thread, but then you throw a bonkers accusation at me and vanish. You've had time to help people with their philosophy homework- why not post here?
Well, I hate to pull out excuses, but you asked, so between
1. Spending some time with family commitments
2. Getting sick enough to be unable to get out of bed for a day there
3. Getting entrenched into lylo on another game
I sort of neglected this game. Mafia takes a little more time and effort than trolling philosophical debates. Still, Better now and that other game is over, so should have more time here now. Allow me to begin to redeem myself with some catch up.
Now, I should thank
Vector for showing herself. This should be fun.
I'd like to add that I taught him, during the BM that just finished--and before the time of this particular post by many meatspace days--to direct the town by addressing it with allegations. You can find it in my first post of that particular game, if you would like a reference.
Why yes, you did show me that, by doing it yourself, and you were townie... Assuming that I my intention is to manipulate into a mislynch based on my language choice is guessing at intention, something you taught
not to do, and as such I would assume you are doing this to try for a mislynch.
We've already covered why it wasn't a chainsaw defense, and why anyone with half a brain cell to rub should have seen that immediately.
But then...
Ah, but I beg to differ. I don't agree that it wasn't a chainsaw defence, and so any argument based on the assumption that I agree to this is invalid and a lie, yet you continue. You also use very emotive language to try and shame me out of taking a stance that it was a chainsaw defence, so that your assertions can be seen as true. The phrase 'why anyone with half a brain cell to rub should have seen that immediately' is there with the hope that I will not challenge this argument out of fear of looking stupid, and if I leave this lie unchallenged then Vectors other point can be taken on merit.
This one also gets points for uncharacteristic runons and sentence structure. Put it in the jumpiness category as well.
It's 'uncharacteristic' for me to use runons and be jumpy? Have you...
Read what I say? And in the last game you commented that I was very paranoid and jumpy. 'uncharacteristic ' is a lie.
Overreaction, and, of course, preparing the post-death bandwagon onto his lynchers. Screams noobscum.
The best bit is that even if you manage to lynch me, when I flip scum, it will make it clear that I was right. Your scum, and now that there is a tie your throwing a vote on, close to the end of the day too.
Ah, yes. He isn't confident in his attacks because he has no one backing him, and that is because he turns to others supporting him... in order to know who is town and who is scum.
Either you have some self-esteem issues I didn't know about, Max White, or this makes just as little sense as it seems to at first, second, and seventeenth glances.
Another of those points Vector doesn't want me to address by trying to appeal to emotion and implying that for me to make sense I have have self-esteem issues.
Most* townies don't know other townies. They can't be 100% sure of scum. That is the idea of the game. Scum know who is scum. When they lynch they can be certain in their lynch.
*Toony and Panda and an exception, because Toony was a guard, so he knew Pandas alignment.
Furthermore, this post was completely ignored by Max White. I seem to remember some other person taking issue with not this particular instance, but a different accusation entirely shoveled under the floor ornament.
No, I addressed those points once I had what I needed to address them. Blatant lie.
Asks three "strong players" for their night actions; as we all know, he did this in hope of getting some sort of information out of a townie.
Nope, I didn't ask for roles, read again. I asked if information should be shared if your about to die, even though scum will also find out. I never asked for anybodies information.
... You ask us about our roles, and your explanation when questioned is that you want to know if you should claim before you die? Oh yeah, THAT makes sense.
Yeah, that was EXACTLY what you were hoping for and expecting out of asking for claims. Lord, you make so much sense that you should be teaching logic and a freakin' university or summat
No, I did not ask for your roles. In fact the question I
did ask demanded a boolean response, that is a yes, information is 'worthwhile for the town', or 'no, we shouldn't reveal anything that might be useful to scum'
Vector is trying to push this point, but truth is asking if somebody
should reveal is not asking them
to reveal. There is a difference, one is fishing for roles, but I was fishing for guidance.
Covers it up by accusing Groovester of tunneling.
Just for the record, if I get lynched, 'I want tunnelled to death' on the coroners report. Jim was interpreting everything I said as scummy, and not questioning anybody else, tunnelling.
You didn't ask if it would be appropriate to share any info. You asked us to share info. You asked other people for their information. You are not responding to the questions asked or statements made at all, and there is STILL no demonstrated reason with any sort of logic behind it for your actions.
You guys get the idea by now... I have been over this, twice. Vector really wants this as a selling point.
Ah, yes... this is why. Three good players. Ask them for their night actions, and then... the good players who know what they're doing have their roles revealed, and... what was the town supposed to do, exactly?
No, three good players all either encourage or discourage revealing info before death. The town, or in this case me, are meant to take the advice.
I can't really add much to what Toaster already had to say in his own defense.
This post is already getting bulky, I will address Toaster on he's own points.
Author
Topic: Paranormal 19.5 - Game Over! (Read 66913 times)