|
Toad, you keep on saying I'm likely, somewhat likely, sort of likely, or whatever likely to flip mafia, even though I deconstructed your case already. It's pretty scummy for you to remain only on me thus far when you yourself admitted that your case on me isn't solid, especially since you are still running for mayor on the platform of lynching me. Either prove I am scummy, or shove off.
You're point about vets, while logical, doesn't make any sense for why they should be elected. If a vet has a strong town 1 read, they should present it and push it as per normal. A vet doesn't need a mayor power, or even an additional vote to get their scumread killed, if they actually have a case. If you are suggesting that we let a vet have the power so that they can lynch someone without a full case presented, I can't agree with that, as the only person who can have a pass like that is maybe Palmar. Like I said, if you truly think that the mayoral election is utterly useless, let's elect Hyaach. It's also interesting how you seemed to push hard towards being mayor, even claiming, yet now you are starting to shy away. Unless you are suggesting that you are the vet who deserves the spot?
austin, I believe it was toad, not jaj who said it was manipulative.
I'm going to watch the Muppets, then post my case on who I think should be lynched. In the mean time, no one else has any other cases to present? Just because there is a mayoral election, doesn't mean that scumhunting shouldn't go on.
|
If you are interested in the job wiggles I can vote for you. ET has verbal support from others and between you two I prefer you as Leader.
|
On May 28 2012 07:46 Toadesstern wrote:Show nested quote +On May 28 2012 07:39 jaj22 wrote:On May 28 2012 07:11 Toadesstern wrote:
Also I have a super secret I haven't told about my super awesome powers which works against manipulation.
Ugh, AC flashbacks. I'm not really feeling this ET case. The main arcs seem to be: 1. Manipulating newbies by... promising to listen to them and not just dismiss them as useless? Fine by me. Wish everyone did that.2. Overstating the importance of the elected roles. True, but I'm not sure how this is a scumtell. 3. Not having much in his filter apart from mayor-agenda. Yeah, because it's all from three hours into the game. Not that ET's filter is squeaky clean (the part where he draws BH away from strongandbig is particularly interesting), but as you should have noticed, it's tough to campaign without doing anything suspicious. On that note, I'd be surprised if scum made much of an attempt at the elections. Without bodyguards, the risk (from campaign scrutiny) surely outweighs the reward. I think only the most ballsy scum players would bother. 1) is not manipulative toward newbies but towards everyone else. 2) well It's a mior point if he keeps ignoring contribution and talks about non-isssues instead 3) yeah agree About the last phrase: I'd say we should definitly look into people running for election without having a serious chance or without taking it serious. BH and Sinensis come to my mind on that matter because noone is going to vote something like that although it looks "brave" to troll like that because they'll get heat for that either way. So I agree, if someone is in that grey zone of "I am running for mayor" but isn't really that would be something to look for as well. On the first phrase: What alignment did I have in AC? :p
I guess jaj not necessarily drawing any conclusions, but he mentioned it and then Toad dismissed the idea that it was manipulative towards newbies.
|
Wiggles that last post was fantastic, I'm thinking I'll be supporting you now for mayor.
|
On May 28 2012 09:07 strongandbig wrote:
1. I am not running for mayor. In case that wasn't obvious from my earlier post "don't vote for people who haven't made a case for mayor but only for pardoner". I haven't said anything like "vote for me" since I realized that the runner up for mayor gets the pardoner rather than it being a separate election.
2. Sinensis are you still running for mayor? Do you still want to policy lynch grush? I'm pretty sure BH still does but idk about you.
3. MrWiggles, you've said a lot about pardoner but this is an election for mayor. Also, how do we know if you're town? Obviously the "I'm town" paradigm posted by the subject of suspicion should always be treated with several grains of salt, but it can still be useful to townies making up their minds so I'd like it if you could post one.
Yes I'm still running for mayor and am still for policy lynching grush. The only other candidate I would consider voting for, and only to consolidate to achieve the same agenda, is BlazingHand.
I do not think anyone should vote for Toad. If he really is a mason, which should be easy enough to prove if he is, I am confused by his claim; I see no benefit for town to him claiming.
If there are town players who do not support a policy lynch on grush, then Mr. Wiggles is looking like a safe choice for you. Though I hope everyone will at least consider the benefits to getting rid of grush early.
|
What benefits if he's town? The only benefit that moves me when we're talking about a lynch is the benefit of removing a sum from the game...because that is what the lynch is for.
|
On May 28 2012 11:55 VisceraEyes wrote:
What benefits if he's town? The only benefit that moves me when we're talking about a lynch is the benefit of removing a sum from the game...because that is what the lynch is for.
There are zero benefits if grush is town, but it is impossible to know his alignment and someone has to get lynched. The basis for the policy lynch is that I believe he is incapable of helping town, and very likely to help the scum team.
|
EBWOP: If a mislynch is going to happen, which in all likelyhood it will because that's the nature of day 1 lynches in big games, I would much rather lose grush than someone like, for example wiggles.
|
On May 28 2012 12:10 Sinensis wrote:
EBWOP: If a mislynch is going to happen, which in all likelyhood it will because that's the nature of day 1 lynches in big games, I would much rather lose grush than someone like, for example wiggles.
Dat attitude...
Also dat logic failure.
You lynch people for acting scummy, not because they fucked you over in the last game. You threw out a huge red herring there by comparing wiggles to grush. Unless wiggles decides to claim scum, I'd bet every penny I own he won't be lynched today. Why? Because wiggles has been posting clearly, coherently, and in a protown manner. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize wiggles is a bad lynch, we're in no danger of "losing him". You're attempting to policy lynch grush (for the record policy lynches are retarded), because he's bad, not because he's scummy. Nobody wants to policy lynch wiggles, thus comparing grush to someone like wiggles is like comparing apples to oranges.
If you want to bring an actual case about why grush is scum then please do, until then both you and blazinghand can drop it.
|
On May 28 2012 12:10 Sinensis wrote:
EBWOP: If a mislynch is going to happen, which in all likelyhood it will because that's the nature of day 1 lynches in big games, I would much rather lose grush than someone like, for example wiggles.
What about one of the 15 lurkers instead of me?
|
So I just checked Grush's filter and he has 22 posts. Mostly one-liners, but a few half-decent posts in there too. His accusations are poorly-substantiated but fearless, and it looks like he's genuinely trying to help town. I think he'd be a terrible lynch.
Meanwhile Kenpachi has this:
On May 28 2012 08:57 Kenpachi wrote:Show nested quote +On May 28 2012 08:52 Kenpachi wrote:On May 28 2012 08:37 EchelonTee wrote:
Kenpachi, who do you think is scum? who do i think is scum you ask? ive been out today. reading thread too many paragraphs i dont want to read.
So ##FoS Sinensis
At this rate though I think I'm going to be recommending a lurker-lynch tomorrow. Should be close to a 50/50 shot if we actually manage to elect a town mayor. My current preference is Hyaach, for making one bad post and vanishing.
Also some posters (austinmcc and GambitX32 spring to mind) seem to think that one sensible-looking post is sufficient to get them clear of suspicion. It is not.
|
On May 28 2012 12:36 Meapak_Ziphh wrote:Show nested quote +On May 28 2012 12:10 Sinensis wrote:
EBWOP: If a mislynch is going to happen, which in all likelyhood it will because that's the nature of day 1 lynches in big games, I would much rather lose grush than someone like, for example wiggles. Dat attitude... Also dat logic failure. You lynch people for acting scummy, not because they fucked you over in the last game. You threw out a huge red herring there by comparing wiggles to grush. Unless wiggles decides to claim scum, I'd bet every penny I own he won't be lynched today. Why? Because wiggles has been posting clearly, coherently, and in a protown manner. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize wiggles is a bad lynch, we're in no danger of "losing him". You're attempting to policy lynch grush (for the record policy lynches are retarded), because he's bad, not because he's scummy. Nobody wants to policy lynch wiggles, thus comparing grush to someone like wiggles is like comparing apples to oranges. If you want to bring an actual case about why grush is scum then please do, until then both you and blazinghand can drop it.
That middle paragraph is what it sounds like when a point flies at high speed over someone's head. I have nothing to add other than: DUH. Of course wiggles isn't getting lynched today, because his posting is good. He is an asset to town, the opposite of what grush is.
And I'm not going to "drop it." That is my platform. You don't like it, don't vote for me. If I get elected mayor, grush is dying.
RE: grush
None of those 15 lurkers ruined my last game with poor play. Lurking has nothing to do with why I want you lynched.
|
|
|
Why are you so hung up on lynching Grush Sinensis? You seem to neglect that the fact that even if a mislynch is likely on day one it's still better to try to lynch scum than to lynch someone who thus far has been active and seems like town. At least BH conceded that if there was a substantiated target he would lynch them but you haven't done even that. Would you be open to a different lynch or not?
|
On May 28 2012 12:47 Sinensis wrote:Show nested quote +On May 28 2012 12:36 Meapak_Ziphh wrote:On May 28 2012 12:10 Sinensis wrote:
EBWOP: If a mislynch is going to happen, which in all likelyhood it will because that's the nature of day 1 lynches in big games, I would much rather lose grush than someone like, for example wiggles. Dat attitude... Also dat logic failure. You lynch people for acting scummy, not because they fucked you over in the last game. You threw out a huge red herring there by comparing wiggles to grush. Unless wiggles decides to claim scum, I'd bet every penny I own he won't be lynched today. Why? Because wiggles has been posting clearly, coherently, and in a protown manner. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize wiggles is a bad lynch, we're in no danger of "losing him". You're attempting to policy lynch grush (for the record policy lynches are retarded), because he's bad, not because he's scummy. Nobody wants to policy lynch wiggles, thus comparing grush to someone like wiggles is like comparing apples to oranges. If you want to bring an actual case about why grush is scum then please do, until then both you and blazinghand can drop it. That middle paragraph is what it sounds like when a point flies at high speed over someone's head. I have nothing to add other than: DUH. Of course wiggles isn't getting lynched today, because his posting is good. He is an asset to town, the opposite of what grush is. And I'm not going to "drop it." That is my platform. You don't like it, don't vote for me. If I get elected mayor, grush is dying. RE: grushNone of those 15 lurkers ruined my last game with poor play. Lurking has nothing to do with why I want you lynched.
Right back at you bro. You missed my point entirely. Comparing wiggles to grush is a red herring, if you can't see that then I really can't help you.
Also stating If I get elected mayor, grush is dying.
is ridiculous. You lynch someone because they're scummy, not because you don't like them.
Nobody will be voting Sinensis, thank you in advance for your compliance.
|
On May 28 2012 12:47 Pandain wrote:
You'll be replacing in soon enough, I suspect.
Oh yeah, I forgot Mattchew in my lurker list. No-one watches Starcraft all day, do they?
|
On May 28 2012 12:54 MajuGarzett wrote:
Why are you so hung up on lynching Grush Sinensis? You seem to neglect that the fact that even if a mislynch is likely on day one it's still better to try to lynch scum than to lynch someone who thus far has been active and seems like town. At least BH conceded that if there was a substantiated target he would lynch them but you haven't done even that. Would you be open to a different lynch or not?
How about this, you find me a confirmed mafia and I will happily support their lynch instead of grush's.
Hear that mafia? Go ahead and reveal yourselves now. -_-...
|
On May 28 2012 12:57 Sinensis wrote:Show nested quote +On May 28 2012 12:54 MajuGarzett wrote:
Why are you so hung up on lynching Grush Sinensis? You seem to neglect that the fact that even if a mislynch is likely on day one it's still better to try to lynch scum than to lynch someone who thus far has been active and seems like town. At least BH conceded that if there was a substantiated target he would lynch them but you haven't done even that. Would you be open to a different lynch or not? How about this, you find me a confirmed mafia and I will happily support their lynch instead of grush's. Hear that mafia? Go ahead and reveal yourselves now. -_-...
You're being useless right now, why don't you go find some mafia.
Seriously bro, if you're not actually interested in scum hunting then you're not helping the town and would thus make a decent d1 lynch.
|
On May 28 2012 12:55 Meapak_Ziphh wrote:Show nested quote +On May 28 2012 12:47 Sinensis wrote:On May 28 2012 12:36 Meapak_Ziphh wrote:On May 28 2012 12:10 Sinensis wrote:
EBWOP: If a mislynch is going to happen, which in all likelyhood it will because that's the nature of day 1 lynches in big games, I would much rather lose grush than someone like, for example wiggles. Dat attitude... Also dat logic failure. You lynch people for acting scummy, not because they fucked you over in the last game. You threw out a huge red herring there by comparing wiggles to grush. Unless wiggles decides to claim scum, I'd bet every penny I own he won't be lynched today. Why? Because wiggles has been posting clearly, coherently, and in a protown manner. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize wiggles is a bad lynch, we're in no danger of "losing him". You're attempting to policy lynch grush (for the record policy lynches are retarded), because he's bad, not because he's scummy. Nobody wants to policy lynch wiggles, thus comparing grush to someone like wiggles is like comparing apples to oranges. If you want to bring an actual case about why grush is scum then please do, until then both you and blazinghand can drop it. That middle paragraph is what it sounds like when a point flies at high speed over someone's head. I have nothing to add other than: DUH. Of course wiggles isn't getting lynched today, because his posting is good. He is an asset to town, the opposite of what grush is. And I'm not going to "drop it." That is my platform. You don't like it, don't vote for me. If I get elected mayor, grush is dying. RE: grushNone of those 15 lurkers ruined my last game with poor play. Lurking has nothing to do with why I want you lynched. Right back at you bro. You missed my point entirely. Comparing wiggles to grush is a red herring, if you can't see that then I really can't help you. Also stating is ridiculous. You lynch someone because they're scummy, not because you don't like them. Nobody will be voting Sinensis, thank you in advance for your compliance.
I didn't compare them. Don't believe me? I'll show you:
On May 28 2012 12:10 Sinensis wrote:
EBWOP: If a mislynch is going to happen, which in all likelyhood it will because that's the nature of day 1 lynches in big games, I would much rather lose grush than someone like, for example wiggles.
I said I would much rather lose grush, A NON-ASSET, than a valuable town asset, LIKE WIGGLES.
There isn't a comparison there. Everything you have typed in the last 10 minutes has been unsubstantiated.
Thanks.
|
On May 28 2012 12:57 Sinensis wrote:Show nested quote +On May 28 2012 12:54 MajuGarzett wrote:
Why are you so hung up on lynching Grush Sinensis? You seem to neglect that the fact that even if a mislynch is likely on day one it's still better to try to lynch scum than to lynch someone who thus far has been active and seems like town. At least BH conceded that if there was a substantiated target he would lynch them but you haven't done even that. Would you be open to a different lynch or not? How about this, you find me a confirmed mafia and I will happily support their lynch instead of grush's. Hear that mafia? Go ahead and reveal yourselves now. -_-...
Don't be pedantic. I meant that if there is a target generally thought to be mafia would you lynch them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
