TL Mafia XXVIII - Page 41

On July 19 2010 03:46 chaoser wrote:
It's already been established that not lynching someone on the first day is a horrible decision, why are you still pushing for it?

and that I am pointing out that you are contradicitng yourself by saying that abstaining is bad and abstaining yourself.

On July 21 2010 11:01 chaoser wrote:
Are you still going on about me? Pandain and I have pretty much squared away the problem he had with me:


THIS IS FROM HIM

"Did you see the "A final word" thing. That pretty much sums up this argument from my side. I'm saying that you criticizing youngmini for saying "hey lots not lynch people" and your decision to abstain both come from the same reason: We don't have enough info. And thus, since you criticize Youngmini, you are contradicting yourself.

Do I make myself clear?"

-----------------------------------------
Original Message: THIS IS FROM ME
In response to:




no where in there did I say I was against abstaining. I said not lynching someone on the first day is a horrible decision. Individuals abstaining doesn't mean no one will be lynched. I was against the plan of EVERYONE abstaining, not the idea of abstaining in general. Sorry, if I was confusing about that. No had feelings either way lol.

The contradiction comes from the fact that though I voted abstain because I didn't have enough information and yet I criticized youngminii (your) call for us all to "no-lynch" on day one because there wasn't enough information

I voted for Subversion because I didn't like the initial bandwagon on BrownBear and was starting to have doubts because of Subversion's perceived bad play in Day 1 as well as his "slip" that the mafia made no mistakes so far. If you're going to say, omg that's bandwagon too then every majority vote is "bandwagoning". To me, bandwagoning is when there's a huge amount of votes for one person over a very short amount of time. I don't think I bandwagoned. Also, after reading what Subversion has said as well as some things that Pandain stated in the thread, I've moved my vote off him.

Get off my back. Thanks =]

On July 21 2010 11:19 SouthRawrea wrote:
Um this is getting a bit too heated in my opinion but this may all just be coming from the fact that chaoser is furiously trying to get the town's suspicion placed on Subversion or he's reading wayyy too much into the words typed out by Subversion. This is his first game and I can emphasize with him because you don't quite think out every thing you type especially in your first game. If I try to help my team (because I've played a couple of forum games before) I generally type furiously without reading over what I've typed and trying to think how that would read to another player. Also, I'm pretty sure Subversion hasn't mentioned you. I do think you're trying too hard to tunnel him (not sure if that term is used here). However, it's not like you're voting him or anything which makes me inclined to think that you're just trying to defend yourself and help the village in general. I don't see why you'd go for Subversion instead of an inactive such as me.

##Vote Chaoser

I would abstain but we can afford a mislynch now and we have a bit of information to work with especially because the detectives have their reports and we have a claim. This generally works in our favour as there hasn't been a lucky kill for the mafia and there is alot more text to read upon for scumtells. Also we get more info now. (Not quite sure how this works in my head but I imagine a detective claim from someone getting lynched day 2 is much more convincing than one on day 1 especially because they have a report now)

On July 21 2010 11:36 chaoser wrote:
Oh, you too Pandain. The contradiction is hardly any contradiction and the only remaining part of your argument against me is that I was very suspicious of BrownBear but then moved on to Subversion when I clearly explain why I did in my post about voting for Subversion.

On July 21 2010 11:30 chaoser wrote:


You'll notice that 1) In my previous post I stated I no longer was that suspicious of him. 2) I'm not even voting for him anymore 3) I was initially arguing for BrownBear's lynch. So wrong on all three counts. Thanks for trying to misrepresent me though.

On July 21 2010 11:01 chaoser wrote:
I didn't like the initial bandwagon on BrownBear

On July 21 2010 11:30 chaoser wrote:
I was initially arguing for BrownBear's lynch.

On July 21 2010 11:39 SouthRawrea wrote:



1) It could very well possible you act that way because of the pressure beginning to build on you now shown with 2 votes +mine. 2) Addressed that already. 3) WUT

Explain #3

"chaoser is furiously trying to get the town's suspicion placed on Subversion"

On July 21 2010 11:38 Pandain wrote:


What? It's not much of a contradiction that you appear to be pro town by rallying against youngmini for advocating no-lynching yet all the while abstain yourself (thus helping the mafia).

Pandain United States. July 18 2010 10:44. Posts 428 PM Profile Report Quote #

Yeah I think we should lynch, just because isn't the mafia going to kill one of us by the next day?
Then again, I'd feel horrible if I lynched a good person. I might abstain, but I'll have to see both sides first. I'll decide later.

On July 21 2010 11:57 chaoser wrote:


So does that mean all abstainers are "helping the mafia?" If I remember correctly, you at one point also considered abstaining.



You also advocated against no-lynching in that quote up there as a response to Tricode.

Pandain United States. July 18 2010 10:44. Posts 428 PM Profile Report Quote #

Yeah I think we should lynch, just because isn't the mafia going to kill one of us by the next day?
Then again, I'd feel horrible if I lynched a good person. I might abstain, but I'll have to see both sides first. I'll decide later.

On July 21 2010 12:02 Pandain wrote:
Fuck it I sound mean. Here, I'll clarify more .

Read the bolded part above and you'll see my stance. I say "I MIGHT abstain", but that's just because this is my very first game so I had to see both sides. However, I said "I think we should lynch."

On July 21 2010 12:07 chaoser wrote:


Saying you MIGHT abstain means you have a similar thought process as me, that there's not enough information. And I already say that you were for lynching aka against, the no-lynch plan.