[Basic] Jaws: Game Over - Town Wins

[Darthe]

Death has a place in the game, indisputably.  Allowing yourself to be killed and pushing for it are different however.  And I think that what I am saying about individuals acting town is being misrepresented.  

 

The town has a limited knowledge base.  They need to play to the best of their ability to achieve a scum lynch.  Thus doesn't mean acting a way that any individual isn't or being disingenuous.  It also doesn't mean that you can post willy nilly like people are want to do lately because "who cares if you die, you're a townie?"  That shiz wastes a ton of time.  Mafia should be the only ones that have to work at looking town.  The rest should simply work at not looking anti-town.

 

Note: This also means you don't advocate lynches because people are wrong.  People are wrong all the time, its not good foundation for a lynch unless they're stupid.

[dapianoplay3r]

But some people just can't hell being stupid?

[Darthe]

So kill them until they learn better and haze them for costing us wins =p

[dapianoplay3r]

I cost wins.... Sometimes

[Darthe]

=p we all do

[Basel Gill]

  On 4/25/2013 at 5:06 PM, Darthe said:

Technically, everyone should try to be super townie. The difference is that Basel looked fake doing it.

And just how did I look fake? Voting without making a case is the hallmark of lazy, half-assed play, and it tells me that someone isn't fully committed to the game. I think it should be obvious that those who care about the state of mafia on DM will want everyone in a game to commit themselves to it. I asked Hybrid the reasons behind his vote, and he made a point of refusing to give them. I'd have done the exact same thing whether it was me or anyone else he was voting for. So why shouldn't I call him out for it?

[John E. Kelley]

You feel pretty strongly about this, don't ya Basel?

[peacesells]

Although I think Basel was playing the "teach you how to play mafia role" which I find very scummy...I find Hybrids immediate latch on to my reasoning highly suspicious as well.

 

I mean..if he was willing to vote with a hidden reason...why latch on to my reasoning without ever explaining his previous reasoning?

 

At this point I'd say that Hybrid is the scummier of the two.

[dapianoplay3r]

Interesting

[Basel Gill]

  On 4/25/2013 at 10:57 PM, Ishmael Forsaken said:

You feel pretty strongly about this, don't ya Basel?

Just a bit.

 

  On 4/25/2013 at 10:58 PM, peacesells said:

Although I think Basel was playing the "teach you how to play mafia role" which I find very scummy...I find Hybrids immediate latch on to my reasoning highly suspicious as well.

 

I mean..if he was willing to vote with a hidden reason...why latch on to my reasoning without ever explaining his previous reasoning?

 

At this point I'd say that Hybrid is the scummier of the two.

Bold: not "teach you how to play mafia"... more like since I felt Hybrid's apparent lack of commitment was detrimental not just to this game, but possibly DM mafia in general if players can't play committedly, it was necessary to say something. If he had voted for someone else without giving a reason, then I would have still tried to pry out his thoughts in the hopes that either town-Hybrid had caught something I missed, or he would make a slip and reveal himself as scum.

 

Italic: This, but also his eventual "explanation" seemed to rest on posts I had made after his original vote. The reasons he gave don't even seem relevant to why he voted me, because they were for things I hadn't said yet.

[Darthe]

  On 4/25/2013 at 11:11 PM, dapianoplay3r said:

Interesting

[dapianoplay3r]

Not sure if ditto or questioning

[Hybrid]

  On 4/25/2013 at 10:43 PM, Basel Gill said:

 

  On 4/25/2013 at 5:06 PM, Darthe said:

Technically, everyone should try to be super townie. The difference is that Basel looked fake doing it.

And just how did I look fake? Voting without making a case is the hallmark of lazy, half-assed play, and it tells me that someone isn't fully committed to the game. I think it should be obvious that those who care about the state of mafia on DM will want everyone in a game to commit themselves to it. I asked Hybrid the reasons behind his vote, and he made a point of refusing to give them. I'd have done the exact same thing whether it was me or anyone else he was voting for. So why shouldn't I call him out for it?

 

 

Asking me to explain my vote isn't the issue here.

[Hybrid]

  On 4/25/2013 at 11:35 PM, Basel Gill said:

 

Italic: This, but also his eventual "explanation" seemed to rest on posts I had made after his original vote. The reasons he gave don't even seem relevant to why he voted me, because they were for things I hadn't said yet.

 

 

I was pointing out the scumtells you were making in response, not explaining my initial vote.  Now we can add misrepresenting my words to the list.

[dapianoplay3r]

Basel or peace are the way to go methinks

[peacesells]

  On 4/26/2013 at 2:08 AM, dapianoplay3r said:

Basel or peace are the way to go methinks

Basel or Hybid imo.

[dapianoplay3r]

Well it looks like we agree on basel atleast

[Hybrid]

Deadline's on Monday.  It would be nice to get something going before then.

[Basel Gill]

  On 4/26/2013 at 1:59 AM, Hybrid said:

Asking me to explain my vote isn't the issue here.

 

Asking you to explain your vote is exactly the issue. You made a lazy, pathetic, half-assed vote without even providing one word of explanation. You have gone out of your way to be evasive as to your reasoning when you were confronted about it. And you have continued to dodge the original question in every post you have made. In all this time, you STILL have yet to say why you voted me in the first place.

 

  On 4/26/2013 at 2:05 AM, Hybrid said:

 

  On 4/25/2013 at 11:35 PM, Basel Gill said:

Italic: This, but also his eventual "explanation" seemed to rest on posts I had made after his original vote. The reasons he gave don't even seem relevant to why he voted me, because they were for things I hadn't said yet.

 

I was pointing out the scumtells you were making in response, not explaining my initial vote.  Now we can add misrepresenting my words to the list.

 

I am representing your words perfectly, since you made a point of addressing replies rather than giving a direct answer to the question. Dodging the issue once more. Are you and Chuckles having fun in the QT?

[Basel Gill]

(Seriously thinking of outlawing any votes not including a case in the next game I mod. This is bad for mafia, and just contributes to the ongoing gradual decline of the game on DM.)

[Hybrid]

  On 4/26/2013 at 2:29 AM, Basel Gill said:

 

  On 4/26/2013 at 1:59 AM, Hybrid said:

Asking me to explain my vote isn't the issue here.

 

Asking you to explain your vote is exactly the issue. You made a lazy, pathetic, half-assed vote without even providing one word of explanation. You have gone out of your way to be evasive as to your reasoning when you were confronted about it. And you have continued to dodge the original question in every post you have made. In all this time, you STILL have yet to say why you voted me in the first place.

 

 

Misrepresenting again -- you strawmanned the "super townie" point by saying that all you did was ask me to explain my vote.  The "super townie" play was your long-winded mafia 101 lectures that followed it.

 

And now you're blathering on again about non-commitment . . . which is pretty hilarious given that a good number of the players have barely done anything besides check-in.

 

  Quote

 

 

  On 4/26/2013 at 2:05 AM, Hybrid said:

 

  On 4/25/2013 at 11:35 PM, Basel Gill said:

Italic: This, but also his eventual "explanation" seemed to rest on posts I had made after his original vote. The reasons he gave don't even seem relevant to why he voted me, because they were for things I hadn't said yet.

 

I was pointing out the scumtells you were making in response, not explaining my initial vote.  Now we can add misrepresenting my words to the list.

 

I am representing your words perfectly, since you made a point of addressing replies rather than giving a direct answer to the question. Dodging the issue once more. Are you and Chuckles having fun in the QT?

 

 

Yes, I was addressing your replies -- they are part of the game, you realize. 

[dapianoplay3r]

Good god basel you have one hell of a bee in your bonett

You were pretty nonchalant about my conpletely random chuckles stuff but when the shoe is on the other foot you throw your teddies

 

frankly the original reason is almpst obsoletw now. You are so caught up with trying to unravel that yove tangled yourself in a scummy arse web

lol

[Basel Gill]

  On 4/26/2013 at 2:37 AM, Hybrid said:

Misrepresenting again -- you strawmanned the "super townie" point by saying that all you did was ask me to explain my vote.  The "super townie" play was your long-winded mafia 101 lectures that followed it.

 

And now you're blathering on again about non-commitment . . . which is pretty hilarious given that a good number of the players have barely done anything besides check-in.

 

  Quote

Yes, I was addressing your replies -- they are part of the game, you realize. 

Yet another post where you go on about tangential issues without answering the question:

 

What was the original reason for your vote?

 

You talk about strawmen, and you point out that I asked you to explain your vote, which you then fail to do. And then you say you were addressing my replies... but never address your original vote. Dodging a direct question which is asked of you repeatedly is scummy. Evasiveness is scummy. So how about you drop the dumbass evasion and just answer the damn question:

 

What was the original reason for your vote?

[Basel Gill]

  On 4/26/2013 at 2:46 AM, dapianoplay3r said:

Good god basel you have one hell of a bee in your bonett

You were pretty nonchalant about my conpletely random chuckles stuff but when the shoe is on the other foot you throw your teddies

 

frankly the original reason is almpst obsoletw now. You are so caught up with trying to unravel that yove tangled yourself in a scummy arse web

lol

Dap, I am not trying to unravle anything. I am trying to get a dodging, evasive scum to give a straight-out, direct answer to a question. Because evasiveness is always scummy.

[dapianoplay3r]

What if it was just to see what raised its head?

 

You certainly got all uppity