(03-29-2014, 09:51 PM)Granolaman Wrote: »Hear that Sotek? Your scrutiny of my every move and being the only one who wants me dead enough to vote me means we must be in cahoots. Let's go make blood pacts in the bathroom or something.

(03-28-2014, 04:44 PM)Truegreen Wrote: »Complexity does not usually imply Veracity. It is in fact the complexity of Slorange's claim that I have issue with.

(03-30-2014, 05:22 AM)bigro Wrote: »Wow rude. It's not very nice to call people wastes as a wise old badger once told me.
--

OK so it seems the only thing that I have directly been asked (post#230) is why I chose to vote for Nova in post #187 was because it was absolutely hilarious. They said in #186 that they didn't want a no lynch so I thought cheekily They don't want a no lynch so I'll give them a lynch.

Aren't I just terrible.

(03-30-2014, 01:15 AM)Nova Wrote: »Yeah I would be interested to know why Sotes is so quiet and why Granola is talking to him but I neeeed to hear from Sol

(03-30-2014, 10:10 AM)bigro Wrote: »It's pretty rude to just straight up tell someone they shouldn't be playing and are a waste

(03-30-2014, 06:04 PM)Sotek Wrote: »This game, with no posted deadline that I can see, on a forum I don't typically frequent, full of people who aren't bothering to participate by voting, has fallen way behind everything else.

(03-29-2014, 11:18 PM)seedy Wrote: »Akumu, you've been answering some of my points while not answering others. The main one you're ignoring is the point of my argument for your lynch: you've been very passive after putting your vote on eberron yesterday. You are not behaving like someone who genuinely wants to get people they think are scum lynched.

After voting eberron, you passively bemoan people leaving the bandwagon but make no effort to actually call anyone out for doing so. You make no effort to contradict anyone's argument as to why eberron should not be lynched. You make no effort to analyze anything new eberron has done as further fuel for the lynch. Instead you focus on people who haven't posted yet.

After I make these points, you answer with this:

Show Content

Spoiler

(03-21-2014, 04:00 PM)Akumu Wrote: »I remain firm in my belief that lynching someone now, even at random, is better for the innocent authors than not lynching. I was focused on the inactive participants because it seemed unlikely to get enough people to agree to a lynch on any one of the active participants, while I didn't think anyone would disagree that someone who didn't contribute for four days would be a big loss to the game.

I guess now that everybody has posted, that's out the window though!

I've stayed on eberron because, as I think I've said enough times by now, I am going to vote to lynch whomever I find most suspicious today, even if that level of suspicion is very low. Nothing anyone has done since I voted eberron has struck me as more suspicious than the agree-happy flip-flopping. Maybe I'm just not paying enough attention; I'd love to have more suspicious things pointed out. Is getting on a wagon in and of itself suspicious? After all, in order to lynch anyone, including Undercover agents, there has to be enough people voting that way. After the flip we can look at such things.

The only wagon that strikes me as innately suspicious is the one for No Lynch, as that action can only benefit Undercover. Am I beating a dead horse here, apologies to Susan? I guess so, but no-one's told me why I'm wrong about it so I can only keep believing I'm right.

You'll notice that while this DOES answer my question of why you've stayed on eberron, it does NOT answer my line of questioning as to why you've done nothing else to further the lynch. Your answer to why you instead choose to make vague comments about people you're not even voting for is very scummy (as I mention in my reply). You also say that you think the no lynch wagon is scummy, but AGAIN, leave it only as passive commentary instead of having opinions or analyses on individuals.

Anyways, here's what I say next, and your reply:

Show Content

Spoiler

(03-22-2014, 06:06 AM)Akumu Wrote: »

(03-22-2014, 05:24 AM)seedy Wrote: »You do realize that this translates to "I thought it would be too hard to get this person lynched, so instead I figured that lynching a non-active player would be easy and noncontroversial." That's...a really scummy thought process, you know? Also, random lynches are not better than no lynches. The whole POINT of "always lynching" is for the information. Picking someone at random and piling on would preclude that. As would piling on someone who hadn't even talked.
Not that I can really say you were trying too hard get those players lynched, since you just made a few vague posts and never voted for any of them. You've just passively stayed on eberron. I understand some of your arguments, but I don't feel you've satisfactorily answered your inaction...other than to say that you felt it would be 'too hard' to even try to push a lynch.

No, the point is killing scum, and the fact that with an odd number of living players lynching wrong has the same effect on number of mislynches as not lynching at all.

You pick ONE point out of the whole thing to reply to. It was before a deadline, but now that I've asked you to actually reply you make the frankly ridiculous claim that you already have.
Akumu, why do you openly profess your intent to pursue noncontroversial lynches? Why are most of your posts vague thoughts on noncontroversially scummy things being scummy with no real action behind them? Why haven't you said much about eberron today, since you apparently wanted them dead? What changed? What do you think of the people defending them? What do you think of me, with my no lynching and defending the person you want dead and voting for you?
You're playing at being active while trying as hard as possible not to make too many waves. You have opinions on courses of action but next to none on actual players.
Akumu, who do you want dead?

(03-30-2014, 06:39 PM)SleepingOrange Wrote: »Usually I'm leery of lurker-lynches since they're a pretty safe one for scum to start or get on (and scum are less likely to be idle than town), but with the dearth of information we have right now, it's a decent place to start and hopefully will result in more active players instead of just killing the ones that are inactive.