Author Topic: Welcome to the NHK!! Mafia (Night Three) (Read 57635 times)

BT · « **Reply #180 on:** July 18, 2012, 07:30:16 AM »

So yes from what I gather you're comparing the mason claim to this

Quote from: ActionDan on July 17, 2012, 02:15:21 PM

Claim:

Town Lover Mason Miller Vengeful with Shadoweh. Dormio is town for figuring it out so quick

Get over yourself and start hunting for scum. Calling for Shadoweh to do it for you doesn't count.

Omba · « **Reply #181 on:** July 18, 2012, 07:32:53 AM »

What in the actual fuck. You'll note I'm voting you rather than Dan.

BT · « **Reply #182 on:** July 18, 2012, 07:38:56 AM »

And I have no idea why.

BT · « **Reply #183 on:** July 18, 2012, 07:40:23 AM »

Not because Dan is a good vote, but because you haven't bothered explaining or doing anything up to this point but criticizing cases that argue with your gut.

GMOFucker: Makin' GMOs To Fuck 'Em · « **Reply #184 on:** July 18, 2012, 07:55:36 AM »

BT, why's Bard worse than Shadowmeh right now? From what I could make of your earlier vote on him, you could vote Shadoweh for similar reasons and she's been pressing the case in a scummier manner.

I'm not really feeling the Bard wagon at all even after Edible's explanation - seems like a conspiracy theory since you don't actually get town cred for ending the rvs or being an early vote target. If anything, the latter just imprints you in peoples' minds as somebody they can compromise on if they don't like the late-day wagons. Bard needs to post updated reads though.

Don't see why PX is sniping NNR, NNR hasn't "done nothing" since early in the day and PX's NNR votepost did a better job of tiptoeing around anything of substance than NNR has. If I had to join a wagon it'd be him, assuming his wagon doesn't crumble overnight. After recent posts NNR reads derp and not scum, he needs to take a deep breath and re-read. Omba needs to be vigshot. That's about it.

BT · « **Reply #185 on:** July 18, 2012, 08:08:37 AM »

I don't see how they're similar, actually. Shadoweh's being horribly unhelpful but The only reason I'd vote her right now is what you noted yesterday about wagon potential, but that can also be explained by town gutting around.

BT · « **Reply #186 on:** July 18, 2012, 08:09:20 AM »

*Shadoweh's being horribly unhelpful but I don't see the scum part.

GMOFucker: Makin' GMOs To Fuck 'Em · « **Reply #187 on:** July 18, 2012, 08:18:43 AM »

She's content to ignore valid points in your defense so she can tunnel on a particularly weak ED1 vote without reconsidering. Also "BT feels scummy-nervous" is pretty weak since the reactions weren't disproportionate and you can say that about most people who are defending themselves without getting mad. Shadoweh you're online right now and can point out specific examples of how he's nervous and not just a townie caught up in defense if you disagree.

GMOFucker: Makin' GMOs To Fuck 'Em · « **Reply #188 on:** July 18, 2012, 08:19:02 AM »

(i won't see it until tomorrow tho because i'm going to bed)

Shadoweh · « **Reply #189 on:** July 18, 2012, 08:47:29 AM »

It's hard to read when I'm sleepy but hold your horses. -_- Believe it or not I'm actually reading other people's posts. I'm okay with the miller claim for now. There is some weird shit going on with this game already. I'm extremely worried that today is going to end in disaster.

Quote from: NekoNekoRex on July 17, 2012, 09:58:19 PM

And what's this about masons and lovers? Sounds like some RVS jokes to me. Masons and Lovers in two games in a row?

I'm ignoring every time someone calls me unhelpful because in my opinion I am helping point out someone being scum. That's pretty damn helpful. Picking out other observations, Dan at this point has posted nothing (explaining a point that stopped mattering eons ago and asking opinions on it) and Serela and Schezo teabagging Neko for flailing over his claim feels wrong to me. Edible's case on Bard is well-worded but just seems like a fancy way of saying Bard did something he always does then said it is something he always does. He doesn't feel like last game Bard to me.

huh what: Speaking of clinging to an early case you didn't answer my question. I'm asking you to look and answer instead of me telling you about my meta. Implying asking you to look at my play is me excusing myself with meta is disingenuous. To answer your second question, BT's town meta is to post hueg walls of text because he pretty much can't stop talking about anyone. I haven't compared his current behaviour side by side to his scum game yet but I don't think he sounds quite like his town self either.

ActionDan · « **Reply #190 on:** July 18, 2012, 09:01:43 AM »

Quote from: Bardiche on July 18, 2012, 12:23:27 AM

ActionDan, is your jokevote now srs? :V

As of your response to #65, yes.

Your #28 and #29 imply more or less an equality between both me and Dormio for being bad by extending RVS. Your #34 is an addendum on your view of my and Dormio's posts in which you give an additional reason to consider our play scummy: for Dormio, you indirectly accuse him of being scummy by trying to hard to be a townie; for me, you directly accuse me of being scummy by tacitly claiming Scum. For my case, it sounds like you didn't really think about that when you first voted me and it was more a post-thought.

Despite my response that I wasn't trying to imply I was scum, your #66 tries way too hard to fit my actions to those of someone trying to invoke being anti-town to suit your claimed desire to go after anyone claiming or implying to be scum. I highly doubt your intentions because 1) claiming/implying to be scum during RVS is not that big a deal (opinions differ) and much more importantly 2) your #28 and #29 imply your main concern was the extension of RVS, not explicitly on the methods used to do so.

You changed your tune to suit your voting needs and are scummy because of it.

Only other person I'm looking at is Shadoweh
I don't find this question productive at all:

Quote from: Shadoweh on July 17, 2012, 06:17:09 PM

BT, how wasn't your vote extending RVS?

and the followup that it resulted in looks to be Shadoweh getting worked up and exaggerating BT's responses (e.g BT 'deflecting'). BT could of handled it a little better but Shadoweh's original questions were bad to begin with, and I don't sympathize that finds BT scummy due to her perception that BT was the scum hiding in the RVS stage, as I see nothing from her to support it besides trumped up charges of BT's answers being "Why Me".

-cut

I still don't understand why you find BT scummy.

Also you meant Px not Serela with the tea-bagging, but I agree that Schezo and Px's pursuit of the claim was selfish, bad, play. Not sure if scummy.

I'm not buying into Edible's case 100%, it's a case, but I feel my reasoning is more incriminatory.

ActionDan · « **Reply #191 on:** July 18, 2012, 09:03:41 AM »

Oh, and I'm not sure if it matters Shadoweh, but your prince/princess in is another castle.

Dormio Ergo Sum · « **Reply #192 on:** July 18, 2012, 09:53:49 AM »

I remember why I hated having both class and mafia at the same time.

Anyway, reading.

Dormio Ergo Sum · « **Reply #193 on:** July 18, 2012, 10:09:28 AM »

There's something I'm really curious about, Dan.
Are you really linked in some way to Shadoweh?

Anyway, Dan's latest post doesn't really change my opinion of him all that much.
OMGUS on Bard and recycling stuff said by others about Shadoweh being useless is his entire contribution to the game, after all.

As for BT, I find him suspicious for being rather defensive towards Dan and the selective reading thing, but this isn't enough for me to vote him over Dan.

Also, for the people hatin' on the wimmenz for doing nothing, what about DrRawr?
Speaking of which, where the hell is DrRawr?

Omba being all :gut: is a thing that I'll be rereading soon.

Dislike PX for rolefishing past miller and doing nothing else.

Okay will make another post to properly organize these thoughts.

Dormio Ergo Sum · « **Reply #194 on:** July 18, 2012, 10:20:21 AM »

So, uh, how is Omba getting away with a votepark?

Dormio Ergo Sum · « **Reply #195 on:** July 18, 2012, 10:21:54 AM »

I think I'm too tired to read more, I'll be back in a few hours if I don't pass out.

Being sick sucks.

Bardiche · « **Reply #196 on:** July 18, 2012, 10:51:21 AM »

Gonna read the pages a bit more closely, but uuuh, BT, Dan claiming Scum was your point. I just said that "Dan claiming Scum" would be more reason to vote him, not that it was my reason to vote him. Trying to misrepresent my initial vote due to "Dan claiming Scum" is kind of malignant, I'm not sure why you're trying to credit me for your vote reasons.

BT · « **Reply #197 on:** July 18, 2012, 11:04:12 AM »

Dormio, I explained why that's not the case, but whatever.

Quote from: Bardiche on July 18, 2012, 10:51:21 AM

Gonna read the pages a bit more closely, but uuuh, BT, Dan claiming Scum was your point.

Quote from: BT on July 17, 2012, 03:48:22 PM

I was pretty much joking around and you tagged along

Quote from: Bardiche on July 18, 2012, 10:51:21 AM

I just said that "Dan claiming Scum" would be more reason to vote him, not that it was my reason to vote him. Trying to misrepresent my initial vote due to "Dan claiming Scum" is kind of malignant, I'm not sure why you're trying to credit me for your vote reasons.

Quote from: Bardiche on July 18, 2012, 10:51:21 AM

Gonna read the pages a bit more closely, but uuuh, BT, Dan claiming Scum was your point. I just said that "Dan claiming Scum" would be more reason to vote him, not that it was my reason to vote him. Trying to misrepresent my initial vote due to "Dan claiming Scum" is kind of malignant, I'm not sure why you're trying to credit me for your vote reasons.

Why are you voting Dan, then?

BT · « **Reply #198 on:** July 18, 2012, 11:05:13 AM »

One quote too many there.

Dormio Ergo Sum · « **Reply #199 on:** July 18, 2012, 11:07:26 AM »

Quote from: BT on July 18, 2012, 11:04:12 AM

Dormio, I explained why that's not the case, but whatever.Why are you voting Dan, then?

I assume that this is in reference to the selective thing, but whatever you said didn't change my interpretation of aforementioned actions and so I will hold them against you 'til kingdom come.

Bardiche · « **Reply #200 on:** July 18, 2012, 11:55:17 AM »

Quote

Your #28 and #29 imply more or less an equality between both me and Dormio for being bad by extending RVS. Your #34 is an addendum on your view of my and Dormio's posts in which you give an additional reason to consider our play scummy: for Dormio, you indirectly accuse him of being scummy by trying to hard to be a townie; for me, you directly accuse me of being scummy by tacitly claiming Scum. For my case, it sounds like you didn't really think about that when you first voted me and it was more a post-thought.

This got lost in everything, but the point about you claiming Scum isn't mine, it's BT's.

BT's pretense of my vote reasons is slipping off from over-eager into Scummy territory, prancing around with this point. To couple it with his earlier demand I answer a question and subsequent turning that answer into "selling Dormio as Scum" by way of semantics and my response.

Cut by BT. For the reasons I laid out. Claiming connections with someone so early in the game is something Scummy because if he dies and flips Scum, I'd be looking at Shadoweh precisely due to this claim. Moreover, claiming stupid shit in RVS only invites others to claim stupid shit as well so we have a whole slew of stupid shit in RVS because everyone wants to be part of the stupid shit wagon. The first person to promote said stupid shit deserves a vote, and if that person is further content to look only at the one voting him to the exclusion of all else I'm content to invoke OMGUS and keep voting him.

Of the people voting me I think only Ediblah has a reasonable case, although I'm hoping he won't use it as an excuse to coast through the rest of the Day.

Claiming miller is null, I don't see why PX makes a huge stink about proving it or how he's sceptical. He's making useless noise, along with his joke about shooting Shadoweh and I grow wary. Your vote here kind of feels like a process of elimination: NekoRex has done something "hilarious" (explanation needed) in voting Schezo, then the rest is 'nothing'. Okay, fair enough. Then you call Serela suspicious for responding to your sketchy behaviour (what?), eliminate Ediblah and I from people to look at, cross off Omba as a vote target and land it on NekoRex.

Seems to me you owe us a case on NekoRex Scum.

I'm thinking there is definite scum between BT and ActionDan, given the former's zealous defence of ActionDan through attacking me for what I said about Dormio initially (and I think you've now abandoned that to parade I was claiming ActionDan claimed Scum as my reason for a vote?) and the latter's votesitting while saying very little about the rest of the game. It's nothing more than an OMGUS vote on me.

Don't like how BT asks me a question here but does not use the response in any way whatsoever to either propose I'm Scum or revise his view, seems like it was asking a question for the sake of looking involved. The only time you mention it is here, where you portray my case as being your jokevote reason. Let me remind everyone: this is your jokevote, and when I responded to it, you turn it around to portray it as my vote reason and champion it as something I proposed.

I'm not sure why Dormio is defending me, it's kind of unsettling.

Bardiche · « **Reply #201 on:** July 18, 2012, 11:56:27 AM »

Actually, I'm confident enough to ##Unvote
##VOTE: BT

Getting voted for trying to end RVS is nothing new but the tenacity and misrepresenting to keep clinging to that case here is something new.

BT · « **Reply #202 on:** July 18, 2012, 12:21:39 PM »

Quote from: Bardiche on July 18, 2012, 11:55:17 AM

Don't like how BT asks me a question here but does not use the response in any way whatsoever to either propose I'm Scum or revise his view, seems like it was asking a question for the sake of looking involved.

Actually, I asked that question because between this post and this post I had no idea if you were actually suspecting Dormio anymore. Your answer confirmed that nothing changed so.. it's not surprising that nothing changed as a result.

Quote from: Bardiche on July 18, 2012, 11:55:17 AM

The only time you mention it is here, where you portray my case as being your jokevote reason. Let me remind everyone: this is your jokevote, and when I responded to it, you turn it around to portray it as my vote reason and champion it as something I proposed.

That's enough. It's not "my reason" because I never pushed for an actual serious vote with it. Had I ever treated it seriously you would be right here, but I haven't. You have. You're accusing me of passing it off as your reason even though here you are doing the opposite.

Bardiche · « **Reply #203 on:** July 18, 2012, 12:30:07 PM »

Quote

It's not "my reason" because I never pushed for an actual serious vote with it.

It is your jokevote reason since you jokevoted for that reason. I not once said I voted Dan for claiming Scum, you're the one who voted him for it, regardless of joke status.

BT · « **Reply #204 on:** July 18, 2012, 12:49:17 PM »

So I'm lost regarding what you actually find wrong here. I jokevoted for <reason>, you supported <reason> seriously, I say that supporting it was bad, you claim that I'm scummy for bringing up the reason in the first place. I never once attempted to sell it as your reason. What I did was say that supporting the reason was wrong. As a reply you shove the blame on me because apparently I'm shoving the blame on you, blame for something I didn't do.

BT · « **Reply #205 on:** July 18, 2012, 01:00:09 PM »

Meanwhile I'm getting lost in semantics and words trying to think this over. Sounds like a cue to try focusing on other things ~.~

Edible · « **Reply #206 on:** July 18, 2012, 01:27:04 PM »

I cannot support a BT lynch because the primary people voting BT are:

~Omba, who has been less than useless all day and has yet to have a reasonable opinion on pretty much anything, much less the person he's voting

~Shadoweh, who is focusing on a point that I can't comprehend as anything but next-to-trivial

~Bardiche, who I'm voting and hopped on the only wagon that wasn't him

In addition, still not seeing the validity of the case against him. My assessment of Shadoweh's case appears similar to huh what's, and Omba doesn't have a case at all outside of what appears to be snark and cheerleading.

Quote from: Ran Yakumo on July 18, 2012, 10:09:28 AM

Speaking of which, where the hell is DrRawr?

...

I just had to doublecheck the playerlist to see he was actually listed. <_< Oh dear.

BT · « **Reply #207 on:** July 18, 2012, 01:33:43 PM »

At the moment I take it Omba's mad at me for voting Bard. It's impossible to tell if he's scum so long as he acts like this. ...Which I guess is scummy. Do something please >_>

Meanwhile, reading while learning for big scary tests is a thing.

Omba · « **Reply #208 on:** July 18, 2012, 02:17:10 PM »

It's slightly ironic that the dude I'm voting is the one to get that I've actually made my point about one of the reasons I'm voting him. Yes, still holding onto a case I think is all kinds of bad is part of the reason I'm voting you. The initial gut read still holds and the way you reacted to me poking you is also pretty scummy.

re: Did Bard actually initially vote ActionDan for claiming scum. On closer read I can see how he said he didn't and how BT may have thought he did. But it's pretty irrelevant anyway since in neither case it makes a good reason to vote Bard for.

In other news Serela where are you. I'd kind of like to know if I actually want to kill you.
I'll need to take another look at ActionDan. Suffice to say I didn't like his last post.

Omba · « **Reply #209 on:** July 18, 2012, 02:33:18 PM »

Yeah, not liking Dan but he's nowhere near BT. Or a certain Serela post for that matter.