Epignosis wrote:I am willing to vote sprityo, LC, or DDL of those three names.
DDL is, let's say, a kind of incendiary guy.
I agree with the initial idea behind DDL's case against LC. LC has latched onto a few things DDL said that admittedly don't make complete sense, but are just used to augment the core of his rhetoric. LC took those things, and now is trying to completely invalidate DDL's case, regardless of the good points he made about LC.
LC was blendy and noncommital as hell, up until DDL posted a case on him. LC then dedicated himself to poking holes in that case, and trying to lynch DDL, who is an easy-ass target at this point due to how he racked up the votes on D1.
It's not genuine.
It's not real baddie-hunting.
It's an OMGUS, despite how many discrediting adjectives LC uses to describe DDL's case.
Then there is truly no defense against someone who builds a case against you that is shored up with inaccuracies, misrepresentation, and "things that admittedly don't make sense". In your world, this is a great way for a baddie to take a Civ down and get away with it.
So, the case against me is that I'm "blendy and non-committal", and that I believe DDL is intentionally twisting the facts to make me look worse.
You were accused of being blendy, non-commital, and not doing any real baddie hunting.
Instead of, I dunno, doing actual baddie hunting, you just continually attack the guy who brought it up in the first place.
The guy, in this case, also being the biggest and easiest target due to his posting style and how D1 barely ended without him being lynching.
You're taking the path of least resistance by going after DDL. If you would've actually proved me wrong by trying to work on other cases and reads, I wouldn't be pushing your lynch right now.
I wasn't impressed with your efforts after N1. I put some pressure on you to step up and baddie hunt. Then you turned around and did the easiest thing possible, and tried to dress it up as baddie hunting by speaking of everything DDL did in the most condescending and judgemental way that you could.
You're the one misrepresenting things by posting nonsense like this:
Long Con wrote:
DrWilgy wrote:
Long Con wrote:
DrWilgy wrote:Vote spread is consistent and bueno. What are the cases for DDL, LC, Sprityo and Sig?
Also didn't we already off Sprit? What did New Sprityo do to warrant lynch 2?
I'd like to say, for the record, that there IS no case against me.
Why do you have 2 votes then?
Gut.
Sincerely going after baddies, ain't what you're doing here.
You just need to get to know me better, my friend. I play more passionately when it's about me.
Metalmarsh and Spacedaisy were both dancing with suspicion of me based on PURE gut. It's not nonsense.
Mmmhmm. Pullin' out the meta card. Jeez, you must not have much left.
Gut reads are just logical cases waiting to be made. Just because MM and SD didn't vocalize what I said doesn't mean they didn't think it, subconsciously or otherwise.
also, distancing.
Re: A Mafia of Unfortunate Events [DAY 2]
Posted: Sun Dec 25, 2016 11:36 pm
by Epignosis
Soneji wrote:
Long Con wrote:
insertnamehere wrote:THE CASE AGAINST LONG CON
Epignosis wrote:I am willing to vote sprityo, LC, or DDL of those three names.
DDL is, let's say, a kind of incendiary guy.
I agree with the initial idea behind DDL's case against LC. LC has latched onto a few things DDL said that admittedly don't make complete sense, but are just used to augment the core of his rhetoric. LC took those things, and now is trying to completely invalidate DDL's case, regardless of the good points he made about LC.
LC was blendy and noncommital as hell, up until DDL posted a case on him. LC then dedicated himself to poking holes in that case, and trying to lynch DDL, who is an easy-ass target at this point due to how he racked up the votes on D1.
It's not genuine.
It's not real baddie-hunting.
It's an OMGUS, despite how many discrediting adjectives LC uses to describe DDL's case.
Then there is truly no defense against someone who builds a case against you that is shored up with inaccuracies, misrepresentation, and "things that admittedly don't make sense". In your world, this is a great way for a baddie to take a Civ down and get away with it.
So, the case against me is that I'm "blendy and non-committal", and that I believe DDL is intentionally twisting the facts to make me look worse.
The defense is to point out what you consider to be twisting of the truth then let othere decide if they agree. Tunneling hard on someone for a reason that you as a biased party can't without great difficulty be dissuaded from is a bad idea. Focus your efforts elsewhere. That you have done little else this day phase then argue about DDL twisting your words isn't a good look.
The case against you is that D1 you had no strong reads then jumped on the spirityo wagon, D2 you went full OMGUS on DDL. You're not contributing anything to the game outside of supposedly uninformed or biased votes.
Soneji, you already voted. Do you think LC is bad?
Re: A Mafia of Unfortunate Events [DAY 2]
Posted: Sun Dec 25, 2016 11:37 pm
by insertnamehere
DrWilgy wrote:Thank you LC.
General consensus. Do we think more baddies are openly discussing or hiding in the background?
The former.
2 baddie teams, plus a bunch of indies who just need to survive + propagate to live.
I'd bet on the baddies making sure they were heard, but not necessarily always around at the EoD, and the indies lying as far down low as they could, at least for the first part of the game.
Re: A Mafia of Unfortunate Events [DAY 2]
Posted: Sun Dec 25, 2016 11:38 pm
by Long Con
Soneji wrote:
Long Con wrote:
insertnamehere wrote:THE CASE AGAINST LONG CON
Epignosis wrote:I am willing to vote sprityo, LC, or DDL of those three names.
DDL is, let's say, a kind of incendiary guy.
I agree with the initial idea behind DDL's case against LC. LC has latched onto a few things DDL said that admittedly don't make complete sense, but are just used to augment the core of his rhetoric. LC took those things, and now is trying to completely invalidate DDL's case, regardless of the good points he made about LC.
LC was blendy and noncommital as hell, up until DDL posted a case on him. LC then dedicated himself to poking holes in that case, and trying to lynch DDL, who is an easy-ass target at this point due to how he racked up the votes on D1.
It's not genuine.
It's not real baddie-hunting.
It's an OMGUS, despite how many discrediting adjectives LC uses to describe DDL's case.
Then there is truly no defense against someone who builds a case against you that is shored up with inaccuracies, misrepresentation, and "things that admittedly don't make sense". In your world, this is a great way for a baddie to take a Civ down and get away with it.
So, the case against me is that I'm "blendy and non-committal", and that I believe DDL is intentionally twisting the facts to make me look worse.
The defense is to point out what you consider to be twisting of the truth then let othere decide if they agree. Tunneling hard on someone for a reason that you as a biased party can't without great difficulty be dissuaded from is a bad idea. Focus your efforts elsewhere. That you have done little else this day phase then argue about DDL twisting your words isn't a good look.
The case against you is that D1 you had no strong reads then jumped on the spirityo wagon, D2 you went full OMGUS on DDL. You're not contributing anything to the game outside of supposedly uninformed or biased votes.
I guess that, when I lay it out so clearly what DDL is doing, I can't imagine anyone honestly not agreeing. I don't feel like there's a lot of wiggle room there. I will take your words into consideration though; I do understand them.
And I had and have no reasonable defense for my Day 1 play. I just wasn't into it enough to form reads. It's just the time of year. It's not because I'm bad and I have some sort of mental block when I'm bad about forming reads. I have been able to do so quite adequately in the past. My lack of reads is based on the time of year, and not on the role I was given. It's not worth suspecting me over.
Re: A Mafia of Unfortunate Events [DAY 2]
Posted: Sun Dec 25, 2016 11:38 pm
by insertnamehere
Epignosis wrote:
Soneji wrote:
Long Con wrote:
insertnamehere wrote:THE CASE AGAINST LONG CON
Epignosis wrote:I am willing to vote sprityo, LC, or DDL of those three names.
DDL is, let's say, a kind of incendiary guy.
I agree with the initial idea behind DDL's case against LC. LC has latched onto a few things DDL said that admittedly don't make complete sense, but are just used to augment the core of his rhetoric. LC took those things, and now is trying to completely invalidate DDL's case, regardless of the good points he made about LC.
LC was blendy and noncommital as hell, up until DDL posted a case on him. LC then dedicated himself to poking holes in that case, and trying to lynch DDL, who is an easy-ass target at this point due to how he racked up the votes on D1.
It's not genuine.
It's not real baddie-hunting.
It's an OMGUS, despite how many discrediting adjectives LC uses to describe DDL's case.
Then there is truly no defense against someone who builds a case against you that is shored up with inaccuracies, misrepresentation, and "things that admittedly don't make sense". In your world, this is a great way for a baddie to take a Civ down and get away with it.
So, the case against me is that I'm "blendy and non-committal", and that I believe DDL is intentionally twisting the facts to make me look worse.
The defense is to point out what you consider to be twisting of the truth then let othere decide if they agree. Tunneling hard on someone for a reason that you as a biased party can't without great difficulty be dissuaded from is a bad idea. Focus your efforts elsewhere. That you have done little else this day phase then argue about DDL twisting your words isn't a good look.
The case against you is that D1 you had no strong reads then jumped on the spirityo wagon, D2 you went full OMGUS on DDL. You're not contributing anything to the game outside of supposedly uninformed or biased votes.
Soneji, you already voted. Do you think LC is bad?
If I said "there is no apparent reason for why Epi thinks LC is good," would you agree with that assessment?
Re: A Mafia of Unfortunate Events [DAY 2]
Posted: Sun Dec 25, 2016 11:38 pm
by sprityo
DrWilgy wrote:Thank you LC.
General consensus. Do we think more baddies are openly discussing or hiding in the background?
Hiding in the back
Re: A Mafia of Unfortunate Events [DAY 2]
Posted: Sun Dec 25, 2016 11:39 pm
by Jackofhearts2005
DrWilgy wrote:Thank you LC.
General consensus. Do we think more baddies are openly discussing or hiding in the background?
I think business around Christmas time don't target one alignment over another.
Re: A Mafia of Unfortunate Events [DAY 2]
Posted: Sun Dec 25, 2016 11:41 pm
by Soneji
DrWilgy wrote:Thank you LC.
General consensus. Do we think more baddies are openly discussing or hiding in the background?
The majority of votes at the moment are on active players with strong opinions, that would indicate the former. That its the middle of the holidays muddies the waters.
Re: A Mafia of Unfortunate Events [DAY 2]
Posted: Sun Dec 25, 2016 11:41 pm
by insertnamehere
Long Con wrote:I guess that, when I lay it out so clearly what DDL is doing, I can't imagine anyone honestly not agreeing. I don't feel like there's a lot of wiggle room there. I will take your words into consideration though; I do understand them.
And I had and have no reasonable defense for my Day 1 play. I just wasn't into it enough to form reads. It's just the time of year. It's not because I'm bad and I have some sort of mental block when I'm bad about forming reads. I have been able to do so quite adequately in the past. My lack of reads is based on the time of year, and not on the role I was given. It's not worth suspecting me over.
You have no defense, but you have a bunch of excuses that you feel discredits anyone who suspects you?
Sure, LC.
Re: A Mafia of Unfortunate Events [DAY 2]
Posted: Sun Dec 25, 2016 11:41 pm
by Epignosis
insertnamehere wrote:
If I said "there is no apparent reason for why Epi thinks LC is good," would you agree with that assessment?
There's an apparent reason.
I'm just not spelling it out.
Re: A Mafia of Unfortunate Events [DAY 2]
Posted: Sun Dec 25, 2016 11:41 pm
by Long Con
insertnamehere wrote:Mmmhmm. Pullin' out the meta card. Jeez, you must not have much left.
You are really hard to talk to when you get settled in like this.
Gut reads are just logical cases waiting to be made. Just because MM and SD didn't vocalize what I said doesn't mean they didn't think it, subconsciously or otherwise.
Well, I await their logical cases. They both had trouble saying a single thing that made them WANT to think of me as bad.
also, distancing.
In case they are my baddie teammates.
Re: A Mafia of Unfortunate Events [DAY 2]
Posted: Sun Dec 25, 2016 11:42 pm
by Long Con
Epignosis wrote:
insertnamehere wrote:
If I said "there is no apparent reason for why Epi thinks LC is good," would you agree with that assessment?
There's an apparent reason.
I'm just not spelling it out.
I'm as interested as anyone to know. It's quite perplexing.
Re: A Mafia of Unfortunate Events [DAY 2]
Posted: Sun Dec 25, 2016 11:43 pm
by Long Con
insertnamehere wrote:
Long Con wrote:I guess that, when I lay it out so clearly what DDL is doing, I can't imagine anyone honestly not agreeing. I don't feel like there's a lot of wiggle room there. I will take your words into consideration though; I do understand them.
And I had and have no reasonable defense for my Day 1 play. I just wasn't into it enough to form reads. It's just the time of year. It's not because I'm bad and I have some sort of mental block when I'm bad about forming reads. I have been able to do so quite adequately in the past. My lack of reads is based on the time of year, and not on the role I was given. It's not worth suspecting me over.
You have no defense, but you have a bunch of excuses that you feel discredits anyone who suspects you?
Sure, LC.
Actually, my mouth came with its own words built in... but thanks for offering to help.
Re: A Mafia of Unfortunate Events [DAY 2]
Posted: Sun Dec 25, 2016 11:43 pm
by Epignosis
INH's urge to get LC lynched leads me to believe INH is sincere in his nonsensical rampage. INH is good or independent. Maybe bad, given two teams, but I don't think that's the case.
Re: A Mafia of Unfortunate Events [DAY 2]
Posted: Sun Dec 25, 2016 11:43 pm
by Epignosis
Long Con wrote:
Epignosis wrote:
insertnamehere wrote:
If I said "there is no apparent reason for why Epi thinks LC is good," would you agree with that assessment?
There's an apparent reason.
I'm just not spelling it out.
I'm as interested as anyone to know. It's quite perplexing.
Should I doubt my civilian opinion of you?
Re: A Mafia of Unfortunate Events [DAY 2]
Posted: Sun Dec 25, 2016 11:43 pm
by sprityo
so for DDL, here are the two posts that i really can tell of him talking about LC and why he doesnt like him:
Dragon D. Luffy wrote:I just cared that you had enough commitment to the game to judge people but not enough to make more commited votes than the one you made. That came across as rather hipocritical.
You know what, we're coming back to this as well.
If I had been accusing someone else of not having enough suspicions, or not being involved enough to make an informed vote, THAT would be hypocritical.
Me called Glorfindel out on his "vindicated" claim was a self-contained disagreement with one post. There is NOTHING hypocritical about that. Maybe if I had also made a similar post earlier somehow wherein I claimed to be vindicated in my views, and THEN put Glorf down for the same.... THAT would be hypocritical.
However, none of that happened. Your assessment of "that came across as rather hypocritical" is yet another example of DDL intentionally twisting things to make me look bad.
I'll be satisfied if just ONE person out there can understand this.
It sounds like you are just angry.
Now to figure out whether you are angry because you think I'm treating you unfairly (so civ) or because you think I'm suspecting you for the wrong reasons and didn't earn the right to scumread you (so bad).
Dragon D. Luffy wrote:
sig wrote:
Dragon D. Luffy wrote:
Elohcin wrote:I'm sorry I haven't been here. We've been moving. I see I have 12 pages to catch up on. Anyone want to give me a quick summary. I hate to ask, b/c I really despise it when others ask after not participating. But I feel like I have a good excuse. On top of moving this week, all three of my kids have gone through a stomach bug. So I was packing and moving AND getting very little sleep. Summary please?
Some people want to lynch spirit because he replaced Glorf after he said some pingy stuff. He seems to be the main wagon here. I don't see any other big ones.
And it falls within his scum meta.
Why LC?
He is around, he is paying attention at every big discussion, and he is posting his opinions, but not committing to anything. He spent a long time talking about how he didn't know who to vote for on d1, but then at the end he was okay with pushing the nearest wagon around.
Long Con wrote:Lemme go look at sprityo...
Mmm. not a lot there, even within the few posts he has. Ok, sorry sprityo, but it's follow this, or kinda randomly go elsewhere. I'm going to just vote sprityo, and basically cross my fingers. I really have no suspicions right now.
And right after that, he was accusing Glorf of voting for bad reasons:
Long Con wrote:
Glorfindel wrote:And there you go... vindicated again!
Damn, yo, what vindication? What if DDL is a baddie? Your vote would have tied them up, and maybe changed EVERYTHING. It's a scotche early to be proclaiming "vindication".
What if I was bad and you had "randomly" voted for me instead of spirit, LC? Wouldn't that have changed everything either?
Eh... that kind of noncommital playstyle is just the kind of player I like to vote for. It usually works, at least on NF.
the second quote more-so, but it seems the whole reason DDL began to poke at LC was due to LC being "non-commital" circa day 1. Not to say this is the only thing DDL has done, he also prodded into quin about, uhhh, stuff. And decided to back off. Maybe he did so to pursue the LC vote since it was an easier option at the time? who knows.
And lookin at LC, well, its a lot of arguing that DDL is bad because he "twisted [LC's] words" around. But where that's the arguement against DDL, the arguement against LC is "non-commital"
I will say LC looks worse in his frustration towards the situation, but i dont think it's fair for DDL to push a lynch on something as small as not putting forth effort, especially on this early game day.
So if i have to, which im considering not to if possible, i would vote for DDL
Re: A Mafia of Unfortunate Events [DAY 2]
Posted: Sun Dec 25, 2016 11:44 pm
by insertnamehere
Epignosis wrote:
insertnamehere wrote:
If I said "there is no apparent reason for why Epi thinks LC is good," would you agree with that assessment?
There's an apparent reason.
I'm just not spelling it out.
Re: A Mafia of Unfortunate Events [DAY 2]
Posted: Sun Dec 25, 2016 11:44 pm
by insertnamehere
Epignosis wrote:INH's urge to get LC lynched leads me to believe INH is sincere in his nonsensical rampage. INH is good or independent. Maybe bad, given two teams, but I don't think that's the case.
better nonsensical than nonverbal.
at least that's what the doctors tell me.
Re: A Mafia of Unfortunate Events [DAY 2]
Posted: Sun Dec 25, 2016 11:45 pm
by Epignosis
insertnamehere wrote:
Epignosis wrote:
insertnamehere wrote:
If I said "there is no apparent reason for why Epi thinks LC is good," would you agree with that assessment?
There's an apparent reason.
I'm just not spelling it out.
Then you should vote to ly-
Oh, you can't.
Re: A Mafia of Unfortunate Events [DAY 2]
Posted: Sun Dec 25, 2016 11:46 pm
by Epignosis
All of the discussion right now is on LC. I say we drop it and move ELSIEwhere.
Re: A Mafia of Unfortunate Events [DAY 2]
Posted: Sun Dec 25, 2016 11:47 pm
by sprityo
Epi, youre the one that said youre voting for one of LC, DDL, Sprityo.
Has that changed then?
Re: A Mafia of Unfortunate Events [DAY 2]
Posted: Sun Dec 25, 2016 11:47 pm
by DrWilgy
insertnamehere wrote:
Epignosis wrote:INH's urge to get LC lynched leads me to believe INH is sincere in his nonsensical rampage. INH is good or independent. Maybe bad, given two teams, but I don't think that's the case.
better nonsensical than nonverbal.
at least that's what the doctors tell me.
Don't like to them INH
Re: A Mafia of Unfortunate Events [DAY 2]
Posted: Sun Dec 25, 2016 11:48 pm
by insertnamehere
Long Con wrote:
insertnamehere wrote:Mmmhmm. Pullin' out the meta card. Jeez, you must not have much left.
You are really hard to talk to when you get settled in like this.
I'd say I'm still somewhere above you in terms of tunnel vision-ing and hyperbole.
Re: A Mafia of Unfortunate Events [DAY 2]
Posted: Sun Dec 25, 2016 11:48 pm
by Long Con
Epignosis wrote:
Long Con wrote:
Epignosis wrote:
insertnamehere wrote:
If I said "there is no apparent reason for why Epi thinks LC is good," would you agree with that assessment?
There's an apparent reason.
I'm just not spelling it out.
I'm as interested as anyone to know. It's quite perplexing.
Should I doubt my civilian opinion of you?
Not at all, I just don't know what I did to make you have that opinion.
Re: A Mafia of Unfortunate Events [DAY 2]
Posted: Sun Dec 25, 2016 11:49 pm
by insertnamehere
Epignosis wrote:
insertnamehere wrote:
Epignosis wrote:
insertnamehere wrote:
If I said "there is no apparent reason for why Epi thinks LC is good," would you agree with that assessment?
There's an apparent reason.
I'm just not spelling it out.
Then you should vote to ly-
Oh, you can't.
At least, I hope you're lying. Otherwise, we may be screwed.
Re: A Mafia of Unfortunate Events [DAY 2]
Posted: Sun Dec 25, 2016 11:49 pm
by Epignosis
sprityo wrote:Epi, youre the one that said youre voting for one of LC, DDL, Sprityo.
Has that changed then?
I didn't say exactly that.
Epignosis wrote:I am willing to vote sprityo, LC, or DDL of those three names.
Re: A Mafia of Unfortunate Events [DAY 2]
Posted: Sun Dec 25, 2016 11:50 pm
by DrWilgy
Epignosis wrote:All of the discussion right now is on LC. I say we drop it and move ELSIEwhere.
Who do you think I should vote for Epi and why?
Is the discussion involving LC a bad thing? why should we move elsewhere?
Re: A Mafia of Unfortunate Events [DAY 2]
Posted: Sun Dec 25, 2016 11:50 pm
by insertnamehere
DrWilgy wrote:
insertnamehere wrote:
Epignosis wrote:INH's urge to get LC lynched leads me to believe INH is sincere in his nonsensical rampage. INH is good or independent. Maybe bad, given two teams, but I don't think that's the case.
better nonsensical than nonverbal.
at least that's what the doctors tell me.
Don't like to them INH
I really don't, Wilgy.
What your stance of LC, Wilgy?
Hey, that kinda rhymed. I'm so clever.
Re: A Mafia of Unfortunate Events [DAY 2]
Posted: Sun Dec 25, 2016 11:51 pm
by Long Con
insertnamehere wrote:
Long Con wrote:
insertnamehere wrote:Mmmhmm. Pullin' out the meta card. Jeez, you must not have much left.
You are really hard to talk to when you get settled in like this.
I'd say I'm still somewhere above you in terms of tunnel vision-ing and hyperbole.
I gave a Snow Dog opinion, you know. I haven't been 100% about DDL.
Re: A Mafia of Unfortunate Events [DAY 2]
Posted: Sun Dec 25, 2016 11:51 pm
by Epignosis
Epignosis wrote:
sprityo wrote:Epi, youre the one that said youre voting for one of LC, DDL, Sprityo.
Has that changed then?
I didn't say exactly that.
Epignosis wrote:I am willing to vote sprityo, LC, or DDL of those three names.
To be clear, that was in response to someone else. I may have meant "of those four names."
Re: A Mafia of Unfortunate Events [DAY 2]
Posted: Sun Dec 25, 2016 11:52 pm
by DrWilgy
insertnamehere wrote:
DrWilgy wrote:
insertnamehere wrote:
Epignosis wrote:INH's urge to get LC lynched leads me to believe INH is sincere in his nonsensical rampage. INH is good or independent. Maybe bad, given two teams, but I don't think that's the case.
better nonsensical than nonverbal.
at least that's what the doctors tell me.
Don't like to them INH
I really don't, Wilgy.
What your stance of LC, Wilgy?
Hey, that kinda rhymed. I'm so clever.
While I feel that I don't have enough information at this point to decidedly call him bad, your conviction makes me believe your case. I'm at this point trying to judge if you are wrong or not.
Re: A Mafia of Unfortunate Events [DAY 2]
Posted: Sun Dec 25, 2016 11:53 pm
by Epignosis
DrWilgy wrote:
Epignosis wrote:All of the discussion right now is on LC. I say we drop it and move ELSIEwhere.
Who do you think I should vote for Epi and why?
I think you should vote for the person you think is bad.
Jesus Christ.
DrWilgy wrote:Is the discussion involving LC a bad thing? why should we move elsewhere?
It isn't bad, but I think it's run its course.
Re: A Mafia of Unfortunate Events [DAY 2]
Posted: Sun Dec 25, 2016 11:54 pm
by Long Con
DrWilgy wrote:
insertnamehere wrote:
DrWilgy wrote:
insertnamehere wrote:
Epignosis wrote:INH's urge to get LC lynched leads me to believe INH is sincere in his nonsensical rampage. INH is good or independent. Maybe bad, given two teams, but I don't think that's the case.
better nonsensical than nonverbal.
at least that's what the doctors tell me.
Don't like to them INH
I really don't, Wilgy.
What your stance of LC, Wilgy?
Hey, that kinda rhymed. I'm so clever.
While I feel that I don't have enough information at this point to decidedly call him bad, your conviction makes me believe your case. I'm at this point trying to judge if you are wrong or not.
*LC's conviction becomes glum and kicks at the dirt*
Re: A Mafia of Unfortunate Events [DAY 2]
Posted: Sun Dec 25, 2016 11:54 pm
by sprityo
Epignosis wrote:
Epignosis wrote:
sprityo wrote:Epi, youre the one that said youre voting for one of LC, DDL, Sprityo.
Has that changed then?
I didn't say exactly that.
Epignosis wrote:I am willing to vote sprityo, LC, or DDL of those three names.
To be clear, that was in response to someone else. I may have meant "of those four names."
So you havent made up your mind but you wish to cease further talk about LC because- ????
Re: A Mafia of Unfortunate Events [DAY 2]
Posted: Sun Dec 25, 2016 11:55 pm
by Epignosis
sprityo wrote:
Epignosis wrote:
Epignosis wrote:
sprityo wrote:Epi, youre the one that said youre voting for one of LC, DDL, Sprityo.
Has that changed then?
I didn't say exactly that.
Epignosis wrote:I am willing to vote sprityo, LC, or DDL of those three names.
To be clear, that was in response to someone else. I may have meant "of those four names."
So you havent made up your mind but you wish to cease further talk about LC because- ????
Am I a teammate with LC?
Re: A Mafia of Unfortunate Events [DAY 2]
Posted: Sun Dec 25, 2016 11:55 pm
by insertnamehere
Long Con wrote:
DrWilgy wrote:
insertnamehere wrote:
DrWilgy wrote:
insertnamehere wrote:
Epignosis wrote:INH's urge to get LC lynched leads me to believe INH is sincere in his nonsensical rampage. INH is good or independent. Maybe bad, given two teams, but I don't think that's the case.
better nonsensical than nonverbal.
at least that's what the doctors tell me.
Don't like to them INH
I really don't, Wilgy.
What your stance of LC, Wilgy?
Hey, that kinda rhymed. I'm so clever.
While I feel that I don't have enough information at this point to decidedly call him bad, your conviction makes me believe your case. I'm at this point trying to judge if you are wrong or not.
*LC's conviction becomes glum and kicks at the dirt*
It's alright, LC. You just ran out of adjectives to describe DDL and his case against you as wrong and illogical.
Happens to the best of us.
Re: A Mafia of Unfortunate Events [DAY 2]
Posted: Sun Dec 25, 2016 11:56 pm
by Soneji
Epignosis wrote:
Soneji wrote:
Long Con wrote:
insertnamehere wrote:THE CASE AGAINST LONG CON
Epignosis wrote:I am willing to vote sprityo, LC, or DDL of those three names.
DDL is, let's say, a kind of incendiary guy.
I agree with the initial idea behind DDL's case against LC. LC has latched onto a few things DDL said that admittedly don't make complete sense, but are just used to augment the core of his rhetoric. LC took those things, and now is trying to completely invalidate DDL's case, regardless of the good points he made about LC.
LC was blendy and noncommital as hell, up until DDL posted a case on him. LC then dedicated himself to poking holes in that case, and trying to lynch DDL, who is an easy-ass target at this point due to how he racked up the votes on D1.
It's not genuine.
It's not real baddie-hunting.
It's an OMGUS, despite how many discrediting adjectives LC uses to describe DDL's case.
Then there is truly no defense against someone who builds a case against you that is shored up with inaccuracies, misrepresentation, and "things that admittedly don't make sense". In your world, this is a great way for a baddie to take a Civ down and get away with it.
So, the case against me is that I'm "blendy and non-committal", and that I believe DDL is intentionally twisting the facts to make me look worse.
The defense is to point out what you consider to be twisting of the truth then let othere decide if they agree. Tunneling hard on someone for a reason that you as a biased party can't without great difficulty be dissuaded from is a bad idea. Focus your efforts elsewhere. That you have done little else this day phase then argue about DDL twisting your words isn't a good look.
The case against you is that D1 you had no strong reads then jumped on the spirityo wagon, D2 you went full OMGUS on DDL. You're not contributing anything to the game outside of supposedly uninformed or biased votes.
Soneji, you already voted. Do you think LC is bad?
I'd put him in my moderate scum category at this moment. The thing I got pinged by most was the remark about not wanting to split the inactive voters block, which could be chalked up to difference in game philosophy. That LC couldn't find much more merit in spirityo's D1 contributions then soup's one post giving excises for not being around is hard to justify though. Combined with him saying he doesn't have time to make other reads while he makes lost of posts defending himself/arguing about DDL, I can't see any reason to view him as townish.
Re: A Mafia of Unfortunate Events [DAY 2]
Posted: Sun Dec 25, 2016 11:56 pm
by Long Con
sprityo wrote:
Epignosis wrote:
Epignosis wrote:
sprityo wrote:Epi, youre the one that said youre voting for one of LC, DDL, Sprityo.
Has that changed then?
I didn't say exactly that.
Epignosis wrote:I am willing to vote sprityo, LC, or DDL of those three names.
To be clear, that was in response to someone else. I may have meant "of those four names."
So you havent made up your mind but you wish to cease further talk about LC because- ????
As much as I love talking about me, maybe we've explored the LC situation fully?
Re: A Mafia of Unfortunate Events [DAY 2]
Posted: Sun Dec 25, 2016 11:57 pm
by insertnamehere
Epignosis wrote:
DrWilgy wrote:
Epignosis wrote:All of the discussion right now is on LC. I say we drop it and move ELSIEwhere.
Who do you think I should vote for Epi and why?
I think you should vote for the person you think is bad.
Jesus Christ.
If LC is lynched and civ, which I don't see as likely, but still is a possibility, you don't have the right to be all smug about how you were right the whole time.
Posts like this illustrate why.
Re: A Mafia of Unfortunate Events [DAY 2]
Posted: Sun Dec 25, 2016 11:58 pm
by Long Con
insertnamehere wrote:
Long Con wrote:
DrWilgy wrote:
insertnamehere wrote:
DrWilgy wrote:
insertnamehere wrote:
Epignosis wrote:INH's urge to get LC lynched leads me to believe INH is sincere in his nonsensical rampage. INH is good or independent. Maybe bad, given two teams, but I don't think that's the case.
better nonsensical than nonverbal.
at least that's what the doctors tell me.
Don't like to them INH
I really don't, Wilgy.
What your stance of LC, Wilgy?
Hey, that kinda rhymed. I'm so clever.
While I feel that I don't have enough information at this point to decidedly call him bad, your conviction makes me believe your case. I'm at this point trying to judge if you are wrong or not.
*LC's conviction becomes glum and kicks at the dirt*
It's alright, LC. You just ran out of adjectives to describe DDL and his case against you as wrong and illogical.
Happens to the best of us.
I just thought there was a combination of words that would get people to see what I see.
Nothing about it makes me bad though.
Re: A Mafia of Unfortunate Events [DAY 2]
Posted: Sun Dec 25, 2016 11:58 pm
by insertnamehere
Spirityo, GTH, what is your read on...drumroll...Long Con?
Re: A Mafia of Unfortunate Events [DAY 2]
Posted: Sun Dec 25, 2016 11:59 pm
by Epignosis
insertnamehere wrote:
Epignosis wrote:
DrWilgy wrote:
Epignosis wrote:All of the discussion right now is on LC. I say we drop it and move ELSIEwhere.
Who do you think I should vote for Epi and why?
I think you should vote for the person you think is bad.
Jesus Christ.
If LC is lynched and civ, which I don't see as likely, but still is a possibility, you don't have the right to be all smug about how you were right the whole time.
Posts like this illustrate why.
Tee Hee.
Re: A Mafia of Unfortunate Events [DAY 2]
Posted: Sun Dec 25, 2016 11:59 pm
by insertnamehere
DrWilgy wrote:
insertnamehere wrote:
DrWilgy wrote:
insertnamehere wrote:
Epignosis wrote:INH's urge to get LC lynched leads me to believe INH is sincere in his nonsensical rampage. INH is good or independent. Maybe bad, given two teams, but I don't think that's the case.
better nonsensical than nonverbal.
at least that's what the doctors tell me.
Don't like to them INH
I really don't, Wilgy.
What your stance of LC, Wilgy?
Hey, that kinda rhymed. I'm so clever.
While I feel that I don't have enough information at this point to decidedly call him bad, your conviction makes me believe your case. I'm at this point trying to judge if you are wrong or not.
Anything I can do to help?
Re: A Mafia of Unfortunate Events [DAY 2]
Posted: Mon Dec 26, 2016 12:00 am
by Jackofhearts2005
Finding INH to be more convincing than LC. Confused by the accusations of "no conviction" in INH. Seems to have some conviction from where I'm standing. I'm more worried about accuracy than conviction. Completely agree that LC's focus has been on discrediting DDL in general than addressing accusations of noncommitalness/blending, which I think was the most important point brought up. (I do agree with LC on the specifics of the Glor statement. But that goes back to attacking the accuser, not the accusation.)
Finding Epi's vague/wavering defense of LC to be utterly unconvincing. Then again, I'm used to an investigator being able to come out and say "I copped LC town" (or whatever). Not sure if this is normal Epi beating around the bush about night results. INH's discussion of a previous game and rock song titles leads me to believe it is not.
Re: A Mafia of Unfortunate Events [DAY 2]
Posted: Mon Dec 26, 2016 12:01 am
by sprityo
insertnamehere wrote:Spirityo, GTH, what is your read on...drumroll...Long Con?
Upset Towny
Re: A Mafia of Unfortunate Events [DAY 2]
Posted: Mon Dec 26, 2016 12:01 am
by DrWilgy
Epignosis wrote:
DrWilgy wrote:
Epignosis wrote:All of the discussion right now is on LC. I say we drop it and move ELSIEwhere.
Who do you think I should vote for Epi and why?
I think you should vote for the person you think is bad.
Jesus Christ.
DrWilgy wrote:Is the discussion involving LC a bad thing? why should we move elsewhere?
It isn't bad, but I think it's run its course.
Epi, you know damn well I don't know enough to make that call. Give me your opinion that's all I'm asking for.
Linki- I didn't mean to beat your conviction down LC. It's not that its not there, but I feel that I'm seeing Super INH right now (at least compared to how I normally see him).
Re: A Mafia of Unfortunate Events [DAY 2]
Posted: Mon Dec 26, 2016 12:03 am
by Epignosis
No. I'm not offering you anything more. I think LC is good. Find your own damn reasons and make up your own minds.
Re: A Mafia of Unfortunate Events [DAY 2]
Posted: Mon Dec 26, 2016 12:03 am
by Epignosis
DANCE!
Re: A Mafia of Unfortunate Events [DAY 2]
Posted: Mon Dec 26, 2016 12:03 am
by Epignosis
DANCE!
Re: A Mafia of Unfortunate Events [DAY 2]
Posted: Mon Dec 26, 2016 12:04 am
by insertnamehere
Epignosis wrote:No. I'm not offering you anything more. I think LC is good. Find your own damn reasons and make up your own minds.
