By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General Discussion - Twas the Night Before Christmas-Mafia Round 35

TruckOSaurus said:
Wonktonodi said:

I know hence the italics :P but it would have been fun to say now you have two votes ToS by your own thoughts this should be enough pressure to get you talking.

if it was bothering you why didn't you post it before? why not even make a reply to me before when I was mentioning the things that you say also bothered you?

You are saying why you did post after. I am wondering why it took you so long? Especially when the very thing was being talked about before he came back.

You figured it out with your last sentence, it was being discussed by other people, it wasn't necessary for me to make a post to parrot what was already said.

so you are willing to vote on those points yet you aren't willing to say I agree with them or add anything when there is discussion?

I don't feel satisfied with your answers but I doubt I will get more out of you at the moment.  Plus I did commit myself to a big argument againts hat.

So for now

Unvote: ToS

Vote: Hat



Around the Network
Final-Fan said:
I will be voting Wonk pretty soon if he fails to "break them all down".

If he manages to allay my suspicion, I'd probably be willing to No Lynch since this day has seen a lot of activity already.


This will take a little while.



Wonktonodi said:
hatmoza said:
Wonktonodi said:
TruckOSaurus said:
Vetteman94 said:
TruckOSaurus said:

If it weren't for the fact that I ALWAYS end up thinking you're scum, I'd be changing my vote to you right about now.

I am assuming its due to what is basically a bandwagon vote, so why not the same suspicion towards Wonk?

Wonk's vote was also unnessary but it was made practically at the same time as mine so he gets the benefit of the doubt.

Did you even read anything I was posting before I voted?

I was talking about putting pressure on him before he even revenge voted. The best way for that is through votes. I'd argue that not only is my vote necessary but so is STs and we could even use a vote or two after that.


And then this defensiveness...

I'm 'ah keep my EYE on you.

did no one read my post saying i wanted to put presure on marcus except prof?that now makes it vette tos you and moreno

get it together guys

I know why you claim to have voted, but to me it looks quite suspicious that ToS votes to put some pressure on MDJ only to have you vote very shortly afterwards to do the same.  To me it looks no different to ST's vote as a bandwagon vote .  And I will continue to treat it as such.

And since you asked, any more than 1 vote for someone is putting pressure on them.   



Wonktonodi said:
TruckOSaurus said:

You figured it out with your last sentence, it was being discussed by other people, it wasn't necessary for me to make a post to parrot what was already said.

so you are willing to vote on those points yet you aren't willing to say I agree with them or add anything when there is discussion?

Maybe you feel the need to increace your participation with posts that bring nothing new to the table, I don't.



Signature goes here!

hatmoza said:
TruckOSaurus said:
Wonktonodi said:
theprof00 said:
These responses sure are taking a long time.


at lease you got one maybe we should put two votes on ToS and see what the pressure does.

Unvote: Hat

Vote: ToS

Two votes is not enough for pressure, you said so yourself, don't you remember?

 

That was ... pretty epic.

as epic as this?

"I know hence the italics :P but it would have been fun to say now you have two votes ToS by your own thoughts this should be enough pressure to get you talking."

I think you're all being retarded with this pressure talk. I literally LOLed when Vetteman made a meta definition for what pressure is. I'm starting to get a "paranoid" read on several of you, making me lean town.



Around the Network
theprof00 said:
Linkzmax said:
Why is it an issue? Character claims carry no penalty. Role claims do. See: "all that trouble" that hat went through.

 

I'm asking, why is it even an issue to address people and clarify the difference between role claims and nameclaims?

It's not hard. It's simple basic English.

Unless you think I'm missing something?

It's simple basic English that at least two people had already messed up.



hatmoza said:
Hephaestos said:
Linkzmax said:
"i hate you. this is so not fair. uh i'm cool. your putting to much pressure on me buddy but i will rise or die. which ever comes first?" SO does not fit with "MarcusDJackson [...] was Gate Keeper-Town Vanilla."

I can't believe Baal would switch people's roles post-start like that.

pressure could indicate cop/doc too... if that were the case, I see no problem switching a vanilla townie for that role in order not to change the balance with the modkill.


hmmm this is very interesting.

 

Let me just make something clear. One of my posts above may imply that I inherited some kind of ability. I want to make this clear because I don't want to get killed by mafia thinking I'm a plain town turned doc or cop. I am not a cop or doc. Stay away from me scum. I don't want to die first night. I plan to stick around for a while. Cyclops vanilla town will do.

That would just suck. It's like adding insult to my already injured ego. Kings should never be simpletons.

I see the post you're referring to, but that was clearly more of a vanilla softclaim.

I didn't think roles actually were switched, but I was taking a page out of your book and trying to get Baal to mod-confirm/deny something.



Final-Fan said:
Linkzmax said:
Final-Fan said:
theprof00 said:

@ST

Vengeful mafia, eh? I've never seen that as a mafia role. Sounds similar to anti-town survivor. Wishful thinking or an excuse?

/facepalm

That referred to his demeanor, not his role (other than generic mafia). 

Did it now, what makes you so sure? A vengeful mafia would fit MJD's seemingly suicidal play, if he could take out someone else as well. Though the role itself is inherently anti-Mafia.(as in the game)

prof's accusation was very out there, but I don't like you stepping in on that one.

Obviously I was mistaken, but look at ST's language: 
"You're a vengeful mafia member, right? Come on, admit it."

It's not capitalized, and it's got "a" in front of it.  At the time I took this to mean he didn't mean it as a title or proper noun, but upon reflection I understand that that doesn't necessarily follow.  However, the kicker was "member".  This really drove home in my mind that he wasn't saying "vengeful mafia" the role, but "a vengeful member of the mafia" because he just revenge voted. 

ST's corrected me, but your question still had to be answered since it was about my own thinking on the matter. 

That's quite a good explanation actually. When you put it like that it's actually odd that ST really did mean his role rather than demeanor.



hatmoza said:
Wonk, I'm suspicious of you for a very specific reason. The ill-timed vote on MDJ. Add to that, you're getting way too defensive about my suspicion. I don't care what you said earlier, or what you said to prof. What I care about now is your bandwagoning and defensive attitude. Honestly, I would have expected you to have grown out of the revenge mentality by now.

This whole thing of you, and especially now, stinks. And yes, you are my top suspect at the moment. Even that explanation to apply pressure doesn't make any sense to me...

I mean listen to yourself. This is essentially what you are saying to ToS above, " Why didn't you see my post earlier? I per-emptively explained myself in a conversation with prof. How come you couldn't catch on to that and reach the same conclusion I have? My vote isn't that suspicious now, right?"

It's it's like you had that excuse ready, or literally pulled it out of your ass when people started to question your vote on MDJ. And it wouldn't have been so bad if you explained it once and moved on. I swear I wouldn't even still be talking about it if you weren't so damn defensive about it. ...


As FF requested the break down.  So fist I'll bring up him calling my vote bandwagoning. Before MDJ had come in and revenge voted hat. Here are some posts I had made.

me quoting MDJ and asking questions http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=4286552

me saying we should put pressure on MDJ  http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=4286558

me explaining to prof why I think we should put pressure on MDJ   http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=4286586

and after MDJ's revenge votes my vote saying it was time to put the pressure  http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=4286638

How he or anyone can try and argue my vote is a bandwagon vote is beyond me. I was arguing we put pressure on him and did just what I wanted to do.

 

Next up  his trying to say my apply pressure argument doesn't make sense. When it is pretty clear and sufficiently explained in the posts when I made them. My reasons came and then  when I saw MDJ had posted the vote it was a logical order to things. Hat is accusing me of making the case to put pressure on MDJ so I could latter use them as an excuse to vote. Really?  He thinks I was going to talk about putting pressure on MDJ and not vote for him? I was arguing that there should have been more votes to put pressure yet I am someone just jumping on a bandwagon? I don't know how any sane person could come to that conclusion.

He say that if I"Explained it once and moved on".   That is what I had done. Between the post where I voted and the post where hat suspects me I made one more post on the matter.  http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=4286770

It was at ToS since his defence of me to vette was only on the timing of our votes and had nothing to do with the fact I had been making the points. It was also me saying that I think only two votes isn't good pressure.

I had explained it one and moved on. Yet hat says if I had sone that he wouldn't have been suspicious of me yet after I had moved on he brings it up. Here are the posts where he mentions me.

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=4287122 mentions he doesn't like my vote

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=4287140 asks ToS about timing of out votes and thinks my vote mentioning pressure was copying ToS when I had been posting putting pressure on MDJ for a while and ToS post doesn't even use the word.

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=4287144 here he knows the the timing of my vote was the same as ToS yet in the post I am quoting he says this.

"I'm suspicious of you for a very specific reason. The ill-timed vote on MDJ"

So we know that's not the reason. He also says I'm too defensive about his suspicion when all I have been doing is pointing out that other players are playing poorly by not reading my post and jumping to bad conclusions. It just so happend hat had to keep pushing and now I am very sure he is scum. Trying to get the attention on me instead of a least one scum buddies who wasn't paying attention before.

He is going for the argument of defensiveness to try and diminish the fact that Vette Tos and himself had all made some errors. Morenoingrato seems to be just bandwagoning on the arguments of hat and latter ToS



Linkzmax said:
theprof00 said:
Linkzmax said:
Why is it an issue? Character claims carry no penalty. Role claims do. See: "all that trouble" that hat went through.

 

I'm asking, why is it even an issue to address people and clarify the difference between role claims and nameclaims?

It's not hard. It's simple basic English.

Unless you think I'm missing something?

It's simple basic English that at least two people had already messed up.

Yes I know. It's sad.