EPTOn May 29 2014 09:10 jabberwockzerg wrote:
come on bold
##vote: Meapak_Ziphh
come on bold
##vote: Meapak_Ziphh
Any last defense???
Detention Mafia - Page 30
| Forum Index > TL Mafia |
|
27ninjabunnies
United States2486 Posts
Any last defense??? | ||
|
Amiko
United States1725 Posts
| ||
|
jabberwockzerg
United States294 Posts
Don't think I'm overcoming the inertia on this one. Thanks boys and girls, it's been a wild ride. ggwp | ||
|
jabberwockzerg
United States294 Posts
On May 29 2014 09:39 Amiko wrote: Jabber if you are town give us some last thoughts even if you are going to die. Haven't been able to read today's posts very carefully, just got home. I'll give them an eye scrubbing and vomit some thoughts. | ||
|
Blazinghand
United States25550 Posts
Vote count: jabberwockzerg (11) - 27ninjabunnies, HaruRH, fuba (1) - sqrtofneg1 Meapak_Ziphh (2) - mderg, jabberwockzerg 27ninjabunnies (0) - Palmar(0) - Currently jabberwockzerg is set to be lynched! Day ends in PM me if you see a mistake! Remember, voting is mandatory! | ||
|
Amiko
United States1725 Posts
| ||
|
jabberwockzerg
United States294 Posts
On May 29 2014 09:55 Amiko wrote: Also, any reason you went for Meapak over Fuba? not really | ||
|
Amiko
United States1725 Posts
 | ||
|
jabberwockzerg
United States294 Posts
| ||
|
Blazinghand
United States25550 Posts
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/ndh2mIF.jpg) Night 1 jabberwockzerg the vanilla townie has been lynched! This night ends in 24 hours at 01:00 GMT (+00:00). Please get all night actions in to me and both of the cohosts before the end of the night. | ||
|
27ninjabunnies
United States2486 Posts
| ||
|
Amiko
United States1725 Posts
I've been in thread a little too long but I'll come back and try to read end of D1 and post some thoughts when I get back. FYI I prefer to talk at night, just not about roles or night actions by town or scum. If you don't want to talk at night because you are afraid of dying or something, please write up something so you can post it just before night ends or at the beginning of the day so the time isn't wasted. | ||
|
fuba
United States663 Posts
| ||
|
gobbledydook
Australia2593 Posts
On May 29 2014 07:09 fuba wrote: Looked at gobbledydook first, since his filter is shorter XD His initial reaction to bunnies' case, as well as his follow-up reaction to Palmar seem to indicate that he didn't read the entire case against jabber before disagreeing with it (twice), which I don't feel bodes well for him. I think his jump on the wagon also seems kinda strange, since the reason is kinda lame. I mean, there were plenty of ways in which jabber "admitted guilt", and the fact that he said a stone fell on him is the least of those. It's like he's not really thinking about the game. Problem with this is that it could just be general laziness, rather than him being scum. If jabber flips scum, this quote would make me think gobble is likely town. This was kind of jabber's last stand, and I don't think the scumteam would shoot down their ally like that. Unless it was some kind of elaborate plan to give gobble some slight towncred after the flip, but that's kinda out there. I do have to say that I don't entirely understand what that last sentence means. As for what he's said about MZ, I'd have to form an opinion of MZ for myself first XD First I must disagree with your criticisms of me, the gist of the case against jabber is that he went about lying to conceal information, and then backed that up with really shit defenses, the one which caught my eye at the time I voted him being the 'caught on a stone' argument. That was the last straw for me. If someone's town they just don't say they got 'caught' which implies they were thinking from a mafia mindset, where mafia can be 'caught'. Of course jabber follows with some more shit defenses, including his list of reads which has no reads actually, and I was criticizing that post for its lack of content. I don't understand how that is 'not reading the whole thread'. I feel that I am right in pointing out that he has made no contributions, which is something townies don't do. Now fuba, don't call the kettle black. Your vote didn't even come with any explanation whatsoever you just jumped on the bandwagon. Then when mderg questions you on your vote, you then come up with an explanation on why you changed from not lynching him to voting him. You hint at why you think he is guilty later on, without explicitly saying that *I think you are guilty because you are lying* or something like that. Why so non-committal? sqrtofneg1 has a good point here, you haven't contributed all that much to town except for making non-committal statements about jabberwockzerg. I don't think your 'lol' and then your one line answer to his accusation is anywhere near enough. Please respond to sqrtofneg1's accusations properly. In particular, show comprehensively what you have contributed to town as a townie, as I don't see much either. | ||
|
gobbledydook
Australia2593 Posts
To add some comments about jabberwockzerg flipping town: With the sort of lying bullshit he's pulled and his complete uselessness to town, I think objectively it was the right lynch. | ||
|
Chromatically
United States1700 Posts
| ||
|
fuba
United States663 Posts
On May 29 2014 10:11 gobbledydook wrote: First I must disagree with your criticisms of me, the gist of the case against jabber is that he went about lying to conceal information, and then backed that up with really shit defenses, the one which caught my eye at the time I voted him being the 'caught on a stone' argument. That was the last straw for me. If someone's town they just don't say they got 'caught' which implies they were thinking from a mafia mindset, where mafia can be 'caught'. Of course jabber follows with some more shit defenses, including his list of reads which has no reads actually, and I was criticizing that post for its lack of content. I don't understand how that is 'not reading the whole thread'. I feel that I am right in pointing out that he has made no contributions, which is something townies don't do. Now fuba, don't call the kettle black. Your vote didn't even come with any explanation whatsoever you just jumped on the bandwagon. Then when mderg questions you on your vote, you then come up with an explanation on why you changed from not lynching him to voting him. You hint at why you think he is guilty later on, without explicitly saying that *I think you are guilty because you are lying* or something like that. Why so non-committal? sqrtofneg1 has a good point here, you haven't contributed all that much to town except for making non-committal statements about jabberwockzerg. I don't think your 'lol' and then your one line answer to his accusation is anywhere near enough. Please respond to sqrtofneg1's accusations properly. In particular, show comprehensively what you have contributed to town as a townie, as I don't see much either. The reason you gave was a semantics argument, when there were actual legit reasons to vote him. I could probably pull up one for every person in the game if I wanted to. He explicitly stated that he was trying to conceal information in order to help himself. How is "caught" a stronger indicator of scum mindset than that? How is "a stone fell on me" the last straw, when he explicitly stated that he was misleading town for his own ends? I said you weren't reading the cases, which was a fact. It had been made clear that jabber was scum last game, so at the very least he wasn't "just plain guessing" about who was mafia. I'd have to reread my own filter to see why I was even willing to buy that it was a mistake. Like, there's no reason he shouldn't have known Chrom was town. In any case, your point that he could have just been guessing about the scumteam was disproven in the case that you were disagreeing with. Hence how you were disagreeing with the case without reading it. My reason for the vote, when it was given, was legitimate. Your reason, when it was given, was semantic nonsense. And you say I jumped on the bandwagon as if I wasn't one of the people who started it, lol. Like I just sat myself down and twiddled my thumbs. I'd be lying if I said you saw my whole thought process, because my mind goes crazy with possibilities, but you saw just about everything I found relevant about the jabber lynch. And I'm pretty sure I explicitly said that at least one thing I mentioned was scummy. I make sure to do that when I'm reasonably sure of something, because my thoughts are generally wishy-washy since, you know, as town I can't possibly know anything for certain aside from my own alignment. And I wasn't non-committal. After I voted the second time, and gave my reasons for doing so, I was there for good. My first post when coming back was reasserting that he should be lynched. How in the hell is that non-committal? And I concede, I only contributed thoughts primarily about one person. The person I thought was scum. You saw my honest thought process, which is kinda what town wants from its townies. How is that not contributing for town? And who says "contributing for town"? A townie would just say "contributing" because "for town" is implied. Who is trying to "contribute for scum"? (Point from paragraph 1 proven) It's interesting that you were upset that post landed after the deadline. It looks like you had your suspicions that my filter, containing almost exclusively reasons for jabber to be scum, was going to be proven "useless for town" before he even flipped town. However could you have known that? | ||
|
Chromatically
United States1700 Posts
On May 28 2014 19:44 Chromatically wrote: MZ, what's your reasoning for Palmar being scum? MZ answer this please, regardless of whether you hold the read now. What was your reasoning at the time? | ||
|
Alakaslam
United States17322 Posts
| ||
|
Alakaslam
United States17322 Posts
| ||
| ||
