|
Day 1
Feb 26, 2010 19:46:33 GMT -5
Post by special on Feb 26, 2010 19:46:33 GMT -5
poor choice of words on my part. Invalid would have been better maybe? And it really doesn't matter how many points tip Jenny over the edge in my analogy. Bruno and MaryAnne would hold an equal share of responsibility. They're both Town so they have the same motivation. So, if you loan me 3 bucks, and I give you back 2, we would be even?Egad, this isn't that difficult to understand. a 3 point vote is worth 50% more than a 2pt vote! You admitted that you cast a 2 pt vote to be 'less accountable' If you are Town, then you want your vote to be worth as much as you can. It's your weapon against the Scum. You really are worried that your vote record will be used against you. I can't believe it's another Day 1 and I'm seeing you as Scummy. The only thing holding me back right now is that your Town play is pretty Scummy as a rule. But it's not going to hold me back for very long.
|
|
Meeko
FGM
I raccoon it's time to play Mafia
Posts: 2,474
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day 1
Feb 26, 2010 20:06:21 GMT -5
Post by Meeko on Feb 26, 2010 20:06:21 GMT -5
Meeko, luv, and Sister[sic]let me ask you this. If the deadline approached and the person you are voting for was just a vote or two behind, would you change your vote to a 3pt vote to push them ahead of someone else you obviously find less Scummy?
If so, do you think that late vote switch might not appear to be 'gaming the voting system' and if you are Town, wouldn't you want to avoid doing that?
If not, then are you willing to allow other players votes to be worth 150% of what your vote is worth?
No, I would not.
It is because this does game the system, that I would not do it. This does not mean that all town votes need to be 3 point affairs. We have more options than just 3 points.
If you update your vote after you make it, you should have reason to. Please post those reasons at the time you update your vote. If you do not provide reasons at this time, then I would suspect you are gaming the system.
We must guard against a third or second slot vote getting promoted to first slot, with out reason. There should be no discount given in regards to promoting a second slot vote to a first slot. If you move your second [or third] slot to your first slot, you should have a good reason. That reason should be public as well.
I am fearful that scum will make a vote in their second or third slot, and then feel free to change that vote to their first slot, with little to no explanation or reason.
And, I believe the spread from 2 to 3 is 50%, not 150%.
At the time I made my two point vote, I had no pressing reason to vote at three points. The historical record of Day 1 votes would have kept me at two points, if the game had not moved from that point.
I now have a reason to vote at 3 because I can see no reason for Nanook's force against me, unequaled to the other 2 point voters at the time. Nanooks attempt to get others to join him, as well as the underlying smudge on me [Meeko always does that] was enough to move me and get me to vote three points.
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 26, 2010 20:08:46 GMT -5
Post by peekercpa on Feb 26, 2010 20:08:46 GMT -5
Peeker: If all you have at the end of the Day is a 2pt vote on a clean-noser, does it not logically follow that that is the player you find the most suspicious and therefor they are deserving of a 3pt vote? actually, i currently most suspicious of nook, NAF, you and sis in that order. nook for calling out meeko for playing for himself but not saying shit about paul saying that he would vote someone else to save his ass. NAF because of the "clean nose" comments that i have alluded to upthread. you because your vote really stinks. holy crud. sis because she finally got stones and accoutability after i called her on it. maybe she was going to do it anyways. but the fact that it was basically an omgys vote on a crappily snipped quote makes me think that there is an agenda. ok, fuck it you talked me into it (or i talked myself). unvote allvote 3 pts nanook vote 2 pts NAF vote 1 point sisvote one million fos's cookiesthis may or may not be where i land. but shoot gotta start somewhere. now i feel so cheap and humiliated.
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 26, 2010 20:12:53 GMT -5
Post by peekercpa on Feb 26, 2010 20:12:53 GMT -5
and btw, nook if you are scum you will try to save your ass.
|
|
Meeko
FGM
I raccoon it's time to play Mafia
Posts: 2,474
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day 1
Feb 26, 2010 20:13:01 GMT -5
Post by Meeko on Feb 26, 2010 20:13:01 GMT -5
So, if you loan me 3 bucks, and I give you back 2, we would be even? Egad, this isn't that difficult to understand. a 3 point vote is worth 50% more than a 2pt vote! You admitted that you cast a 2 pt vote to be 'less accountable' If you are Town, then you want your vote to be worth as much as you can. It's your weapon against the Scum. You really are worried that your vote record will be used against you. I can't believe it's another Day 1 and I'm seeing you as Scummy. The only thing holding me back right now is that your Town play is pretty Scummy as a rule. But it's not going to hold me back for very long. Ed, That is precisely my point. 3 != 2 So, how can someone who votes at 2 be held to the same level as someone who votes at 3 ? Please show me where I said that I don't understand that 2 and 3 are separate and different numbers. Stop smudging. You admitted that you cast a 2 pt vote to be 'less accountable' Which instance was this? Funny that the significant fact of it being a Day 1 vote is not present here. Funny still, that we are talking about a vote I unvoted.
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 26, 2010 20:16:32 GMT -5
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Feb 26, 2010 20:16:32 GMT -5
Well peek, I think your vote justification and vote method really stunk at the time I made my vote for you. You are making more sense now.
Unvote: Peeker
I cannot seem to stress enough how nonsensical it is to me to be making only #2 votes.
|
|
Meeko
FGM
I raccoon it's time to play Mafia
Posts: 2,474
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day 1
Feb 26, 2010 20:19:27 GMT -5
Post by Meeko on Feb 26, 2010 20:19:27 GMT -5
WHAT?!
Am I playing the same game here?
Peeker just goes Apeshit voting for everyone, and that gets an Unvote?!
Yet, I try for obvious sarcasm, and people think I am too stupid to make any sarcastic remark at all? [My 2 bucks back on a 3 dollar loan comment. I was trying to make a point with sarcasm. I know 2 does not equal 3. If the rest of the players knew that, we would be getting somewhere.]
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 26, 2010 20:19:37 GMT -5
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Feb 26, 2010 20:19:37 GMT -5
I am aware of that. But if we don't punish anti-Town play, especially on a Day like today where there isn't a whole lot of other things going on, then we're just giving scum a blank check to do whatever they want. I'm not willing to do that under the guise of "Oh it's just meeko being Meeko". Can someone please show me where I said I would never make a 3 point vote? I was asked why I made a 2 point vote. My response, in so many ways was because it is a first day vote. Here is the problem: If I make a 2 point vote on Day 1, and I am wrong, I believe that I am less responsible for the mislynch than a 3 point voter. Scum would love nothing more than to force mislynches AND to NK town.
Instead, if I am coerced into making a 3 point vote, on Day 1, which historically goes bad for town I believe it will be more of a problem down the line when someone tries to start a bandwagon on me.
I see this as a Damned if you do, Damned if you don't situation. The lesser of the two evils is to place a two point vote on a Day 1 vote than a three point vote.
I do not see how voting on Day 1 is anti-town. I do not see a reason for it to be punished.
Punish those who don't vote at all then.
That would make a LOT more sense that voting someone who frankly is a bit vote-shy, given historical evidence.
This is the post wherein you describe the #2 vote as a way to try and secure less responsibility (read accountability) for participating in mislynches so that the Scum will have a harder time using your participation in mislynches to spin suspicion toward you.
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 26, 2010 20:22:29 GMT -5
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Feb 26, 2010 20:22:29 GMT -5
Peeker stopped his nonsensical #2 voting and presented justification for all of the votes he made. Better justification, I think, than his initial vote on Sister. That is enough for me to back off for now.
|
|
Meeko
FGM
I raccoon it's time to play Mafia
Posts: 2,474
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day 1
Feb 26, 2010 20:26:36 GMT -5
Post by Meeko on Feb 26, 2010 20:26:36 GMT -5
Peeker stopped his nonsensical #2 voting and presented justification for all of the votes he made. Better justification, I think, than his initial vote on Sister. That is enough for me to back off for now. And the fact that he filled out all three slots.
We aren't considering that to be a scum move? I thought we had pretty much concluded that "town" would vote in only one slot, and were pulling teeth to nail down if that vote would be at 2 or 3 points.
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 26, 2010 20:30:58 GMT -5
Post by special on Feb 26, 2010 20:30:58 GMT -5
Egad, this isn't that difficult to understand. a 3 point vote is worth 50% more than a 2pt vote! You admitted that you cast a 2 pt vote to be 'less accountable' If you are Town, then you want your vote to be worth as much as you can. It's your weapon against the Scum. You really are worried that your vote record will be used against you. I can't believe it's another Day 1 and I'm seeing you as Scummy. The only thing holding me back right now is that your Town play is pretty Scummy as a rule. But it's not going to hold me back for very long. Ed, That is precisely my point. 3 != 2 So, how can someone who votes at 2 be held to the same level as someone who votes at 3 ? I interrupt this post to Vote: Meeko with a 3 point vote You're admitting as much that you wanted to be held less accountable for your vote. That should not even be a consideration for a Town player. Our vote is our weapon. By your reasoning, you'd be even less accountable for a 1pt vote. So there would be no accountability for a non-vote. If you really are Town, stop worrying about being accountable and start....oh..I don't know..being accountable. Please show me where I said that I don't understand that 2 and 3 are separate and different numbers. Stop smudging. I wasn't smudging, I was questioning you. Smudge appears to be another word you aren't quite using correctly. You admitted that you cast a 2 pt vote to be 'less accountable' Which instance was this? Funny that the significant fact of it being a Day 1 vote is not present here. What difference does it make when your motivation for voting is not to find and eliminate Scum, but to avoid accountability? Funny still, that we are talking about a vote I unvoted. No, it's not. It's like a relationship, you can't 'unsay' something. You said it. It's anti-town at least. It has strong Scum motivations. Taking it back doesn't mean it never happened. [oog] a little math. 3 is 150% of 2 and, of course, a 2 point vote is worth about 67% of a 3 point vote. [/oog] Now, to be clear, I'll make a couple of comments to your answers to my question: 1. If the deadline approached and the person you are voting for was just a vote or two behind, would you change your vote to a 3pt vote to push them ahead of someone else you obviously find less Scummy? you answered 2a. If so, do you think that late vote switch might not appear to be 'gaming the voting system' and if you are Town, wouldn't you want to avoid doing that? This question isn't really valid anymore 2b. If not, then are you willing to allow other players votes to be worth 150% of what your vote is worth? I'm left assuming that you had your 2 point vote on someone, you wouldn't change it to 3 if you couldn't find a better place to vote. So, you are willing to let someone else's vote be worth more than yours. And your specific reason is so that you'll be less accountable, correct? And, before you fail to answer the question, I am aware that you now have a 3 point vote on someone else and have withdrawn your 2 point vote. Your motivation at the time is what I am questioning, not what you've done since then.
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 26, 2010 20:33:08 GMT -5
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Feb 26, 2010 20:33:08 GMT -5
I'm personally not willing to commit to or advocate for a policy that everyone should use, but I am just fine speaking out against policies when they make no sense to me.
I've stated that I'll be taking my votes one at a time, and for toDay I am comfortable putting a 3pt vote down on whoever I find most suspicious, as soon as I decide who that is.
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 26, 2010 20:53:03 GMT -5
Post by Nanook on Feb 26, 2010 20:53:03 GMT -5
nook for calling out meeko for playing for himself but not saying shit about paul saying that he would vote someone else to save his ass. Are you skimming Peek? Because I already adressed this exact point. It's a totally different situation. And meeko, I didn't vote you because you used a 2 vote on someone. I don't care what level people use, as long as their reasoning is sound. I do care that someone is SPECIFICALLY using a 2 point vote SOLELY so they can have less suspicion on them in the case the person they are voting for comes up Town. There is no reason WHATSOEVER for a Townie to hold that though process. There's a TON of reasons for a scum/PFK to do so.
|
|
Trepa Mayfield
FGM
Does Not Follow Directions
The only kind of panda worth preserving.
Posts: 989
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day 1
Feb 26, 2010 20:55:46 GMT -5
Post by Trepa Mayfield on Feb 26, 2010 20:55:46 GMT -5
Vote Count: Peeker 1. Nanook, 2. NAF, 3. Sista' Meeko 1. Nanook, 2., 3. Redskeezix 1. paulwho..., 2., 3. Luvbfwc 1., 2. mentalguy, 3. Sister Coyote 1., 2. peekercpa, 3. Nanook 1. Meeko, 2., 3. Special Ed. 1. Meeko, 2., 3.
Meeko (6): (Nanook 1st), (Spec. Ed 1st) Nanook (6): (Meeko 1st), (peeker 1st) Paulwhoisaghost (3): (Redskeezix 1st) peekercpa (2): (Sis Coyote 2nd) NAF (2): (peeker 2nd) Mentalguy (2): (luvbfwc 2nd) Sister Coyote (1): (peeker 3rd)
|
|
Trepa Mayfield
FGM
Does Not Follow Directions
The only kind of panda worth preserving.
Posts: 989
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day 1
Feb 26, 2010 20:58:44 GMT -5
Post by Trepa Mayfield on Feb 26, 2010 20:58:44 GMT -5
I should probably take this point to address the tie-breaking system in place, seeing as I have not addressed this already.
In the event of a tie in terms of points, the lynchee will be the person with more 1st place votes. If those are also tied, then the person with more 2nd place votes gets it. If those are also tied, then the shills cast the tie-breaking vote.
It may sound strict, but it should be noted that I used this system in the last game I ran with Borda without issue.
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 26, 2010 21:08:29 GMT -5
Post by ComeToTheDarkSideWeHaveCookies on Feb 26, 2010 21:08:29 GMT -5
Just a reminder of who all's playing. If my memory wasn't so bad I'd point out who I had forgotten was playing, but I'll just let you all come to your own subjective conclusions in that regard.
1. Sister Coyote 2. Meeko 3. Inner Stickler 4. BillMC 5. peeker 6. drainbead 7. Special Ed 8. luvbwfc 9. FCoD 10. NAF 11. redskeezix 12. Cookies 13. mentalguy 14. Total Lost 15. paul 16. Shaggy 17. Dirx 18. fluiddruid 19. Nanook
|
|
Meeko
FGM
I raccoon it's time to play Mafia
Posts: 2,474
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day 1
Feb 26, 2010 21:09:42 GMT -5
Post by Meeko on Feb 26, 2010 21:09:42 GMT -5
Ed, That is precisely my point. 3 != 2 So, how can someone who votes at 2 be held to the same level as someone who votes at 3 ? I interrupt this post to [][] Vote: Meeko with a 3 point vote [][] You're admitting as much that you wanted to be held less accountable for your vote. That should not even be a consideration for a Town player. Our vote is our weapon. By your reasoning, you'd be even less accountable for a 1pt vote. So there would be no accountability for a non-vote. If you really are Town, stop worrying about being accountable and start....oh..I don't know..being accountable. I wasn't smudging, I was questioning you. Smudge appears to be another word you aren't quite using correctly. What difference does it make when your motivation for voting is not to find and eliminate Scum, but to avoid accountability? No, it's not. It's like a relationship, you can't 'unsay' something. You said it. It's anti-town at least. It has strong Scum motivations. Taking it back doesn't mean it never happened. [oog] a little math. 3 is 150% of 2 and, of course, a 2 point vote is worth about 67% of a 3 point vote. [/oog] Now, to be clear, I'll make a couple of comments to your answers to my question: 1. If the deadline approached and the person you are voting for was just a vote or two behind, would you change your vote to a 3pt vote to push them ahead of someone else you obviously find less Scummy? you answered 2a. If so, do you think that late vote switch might not appear to be 'gaming the voting system' and if you are Town, wouldn't you want to avoid doing that? This question isn't really valid anymore 2b. If not, then are you willing to allow other players votes to be worth 150% of what your vote is worth? I'm left assuming that you had your 2 point vote on someone, you wouldn't change it to 3 if you couldn't find a better place to vote. So, you are willing to let someone else's vote be worth more than yours. And your specific reason is so that you'll be less accountable, correct? And, before you fail to answer the question, I am aware that you now have a 3 point vote on someone else and have withdrawn your 2 point vote. Your motivation at the time is what I am questioning, not what you've done since then. Wow Ed. Just plain wow. Since you jumped down my throat as well, say hi to Nanook for me. Yes. I would like to be held less accountable whenever I chose to place a 2 point vote instead of a 3 point vote. That would be the exact reason why I chose a 2 point vote. Town's weapon is the vote. I never said it wasn't Please tell me how good a weapon is, if you can't see where you are swinging it. Again, Town votes are in the dark. Some players don't feel as comfortable voting into the dark as others. Yes. If you don't vote for someone, you should not be held responsible if they are lynched. [ Did I really just have to type that?] At the same time, I don't know how more accountable I can be, than having placed a 3 point vote. With the exception of Peeker, I don't know off the top of my head if anyone else has made more than one vote. Smudge = to present someone not as the are. How is that for starters? If you don't like the word smudge, you are definitely insulting me, or at least my intelligence. Tell me you weren't malicious with this: Smudge appears to be another word you aren't quite using correctly. Tell me you didn't craft these words to hurt / insult / smudge me. The difference, is when it is Day 1. If I can't "Unsay" something, then your previous comment about me worrying about my vote record has just proven to be true. I should worry not only about my vote record, but my unvote record now as well. I'm left assuming that you had your 2 point vote on someone, you wouldn't change it to 3 if you couldn't find a better place to vote. How are we defining "better place to vote" ? When I find a better argument than the one I am currently using [as represented with my votes] I will articulate it, and make the corresponding votes and unvotes. This would go for both changing point value, and changing player. I would expect everyone to do the same. If votes do not meet this test, I believe that eventually Town will be able to see though it. Scum need to make up reasons to vote town. Those reasons, if provided, will be decidedly more weak. So, you are willing to let someone else's vote be worth more than yours. And your specific reason is so that you'll be less accountable, correct? When I vote for someone, I want to make sure I have a reason to vote them. If we are forced to make votes, or an increase in vote points with out reason, we are no better off than scum. I am not sure how I can have that much control over another player's votes. I can only play the best game I know how. I can't make someone else do anything. I don't see how I get to let anything happen here. If I vote at 2, that does not mean someone else MUST vote at 3. If someone else wants to risk voting 3 points on a player. They are free to do that. Just as I am free to vote 2 points on that player. There is no way that I have made a 2.5 vote on that player. I will not accept any argument that says I have. Apparently, Ed (and Cookies for that matter) would like to hold other players responsible for their play. And, before you fail to answer the question, This is a smudge. Pure and simple. I don't care what you want to call it. This misrepresents me. My motivation to hedge on a Day 1 vote? Because it is a Day 1 vote. Finally, why exactly is your vote on me?Are we voting to force players to only make 3 point votes? What comes next, Will you vote me simply because I wont vote for the person you are voting for? Scum would love for that to be in effect.
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 26, 2010 21:29:53 GMT -5
Post by The Real FCOD on Feb 26, 2010 21:29:53 GMT -5
All I have to say is that it seems like Ed and Meeko are going back and forth at each other a lot and it feels staged to me.
Therefore, Vote: 3pt Ed Vote: 2pt Meeko
--FCOD
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 26, 2010 21:35:33 GMT -5
Post by special on Feb 26, 2010 21:35:33 GMT -5
Wow Ed. Just plain wow. Since you jumped down my throat as well, say hi to Nanook for me. I'm not jumping down your throat. I'm voting for you. Yes. I would like to be held less accountable whenever I chose to place a 2 point vote instead of a 3 point vote. That would be the exact reason why I chose a 2 point vote. Town should not want to be held less accountable. They should want to find Scum. This is precisely what makes me think you might not be Town. Yes. If you don't vote for someone, you should not be held responsible if they are lynched. [ Did I really just have to type that?] You don't see the failure in this type of thinking, do you? See, if my goal was to avoid being held accountable, then all I would have to do is either not vote at all (I'd never vote for the lynchee) or make sure I voted for whoever wasn't leading. That way, I'd never be held accountable for my votes. This is a brilliant strategy.....for Scum For Town, all it means is that we're so afraid of being lynched, that we let that cloud our judgment. At the same time, I don't know how more accountable I can be, than having placed a 3 point vote. With the exception of Peeker, I don't know off the top of my head if anyone else has made more than one vote. True, now, after taking heat, you've changed your approach. Smudge = to present someone not as the are. How is that for starters? That's not exactly it. I'm trying to understand your reasoning. And, I'm saying that your reasoning seems to have very strong Scum (at least non_town) motivation and pretty much no Town motivation. Your motivation seems to be self-preservation. That's a Scum or 3rd party motivation. If you don't like the word smudge, you are definitely insulting me, or at least my intelligence. Tell me you weren't malicious with this: Smudge appears to be another word you aren't quite using correctly. Tell me you didn't craft these words to hurt / insult / smudge me. I apologize if you were hurt by those words. You should be aware by now, that I play this game aggressively. I feel that it's more telling to see how someone reacts under pressure than it is to see how they react when coddled. If I can't "Unsay" something, then your previous comment about me worrying about my vote record has just proven to be true. I should worry not only about my vote record, but my unvote record now as well. I will look for Scumminess in things people are doing or have done in this game. That is true. Just because it's in the past, doesn't mean it's not important. You did something that seems Scummy. You stopped doing it when you took heat for it and people voted for you. Does this mean that you aren't Scummy? To use an analogy, just because you hit the breaks and slowed down when you saw the cop car, doesn't mean you weren't speeding and shouldn't be held accountable for it. If someone else wants to risk voting 3 points on a player. They are free to do that. Just as I am free to vote 2 points on that player. And still you seem to be looking at the game from an avoid accountability point of view. We aren't risking anything when we cast votes. We're trying to find Scum! Our main tool is the vote. Apparently, Ed (and Cookies for that matter) would like to hold other players responsible for their play. Finally, why exactly is your vote on me? Are you asking this because I've been unclear? I find your actions Scummy. Your main motivation seems to be avoiding accountability. I find that a pro-Scum, pro-3rd party motivation. You continually espouse that motivation. It leads me to believe that you actually think it's in your best interests. The only doubt in my mind is because I cannot believe your Scum buddies aren't yelling at you in the Scum thread to change your story What comes next, Will you vote me simply because I wont vote for the person you are voting for? Scum would love for that to be in effect. This point has nothing to do with my vote. It's a diversion. a misrepresentation, if you will. I'm voting for you for displaying motivation that seems to be pro-Scum or pro-3rd party. Plain and simple.
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 26, 2010 21:36:41 GMT -5
Post by MentalGuy on Feb 26, 2010 21:36:41 GMT -5
peeker, based on where you voted each player, you apparently believe that Nanook is more scummy than NAF (which I disagree with, Nanook addressed the point you are hammering him on before you even brought it up). Anyway, assuming you really do feel he is the scummiest, if it came down to end of Day and NAF was in the lead by 1 point, would you unvote NAF so that Nanook would be lynched?
Meeko, it utterly baffles me that anyone could actually think they would be held less accountable for their only vote simply because it is worth one point less than someone elses. Second, why would you even want to be held less accountable (and especially publicly admit it). If you really think your case is better than mine, wouldn't you want your vote to count as least as much as mine.
At this point, I am really tempted to vote for Meeko. Not because I believe he is scum, but because at this point I feel like he has become the scum teams biggest asset. We have three or four players spending time interacting with Meeko (including me) that could probably be more fruitfully spent taking just a cursory look at several other players.
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 26, 2010 21:41:08 GMT -5
Post by special on Feb 26, 2010 21:41:08 GMT -5
All I have to say is that it seems like Ed and Meeko are going back and forth at each other a lot and it feels staged to me. Therefore, Vote: 3pt Ed [/color] Vote: 2pt Meeko [/color] --FCOD[/quote] Trust me, I learned my lesson on that one. There's no Conspiracy here I wanted to hold off, but I do think I learn a great deal from players when I apply pressure and engage them. Some games it works (Heroes, Princess Bride) some games, it doesn't (Cecil Pond ) I'll try to back off for now and allow others to discuss issues.
|
|
Meeko
FGM
I raccoon it's time to play Mafia
Posts: 2,474
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day 1
Feb 26, 2010 21:42:30 GMT -5
Post by Meeko on Feb 26, 2010 21:42:30 GMT -5
All I have to say is that it seems like Ed and Meeko are going back and forth at each other a lot and it feels staged to me. --FCOD Wow. While FCOD goes and reviews Conspiracy 3, I will assure him that we are not in cahoots. If anything, go ahead an research Crimson Glyph while you are at it. This is not a Mafia issue Ed and I are having. Once I know what issue [in multiple dresses, mind you] this is, I will let you know. - I honestly do not know why I have a 3 point vote from Ed here. This is what I do know :: This game is trying to tell me that 2 = 3. I know this not to be true. A previous game is trying to tell me that an Unvote = Vote. I know this not to be true. A game in recent memory is trying to tell me that there are game states where a town voting for town is a good thing to do. I know this is not true. But, you know, the interesting thing is this.While I know all of those three are false, I get a strange feeling that they are some how connected to each other.
|
|
Meeko
FGM
I raccoon it's time to play Mafia
Posts: 2,474
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day 1
Feb 26, 2010 21:44:25 GMT -5
Post by Meeko on Feb 26, 2010 21:44:25 GMT -5
Did we just witness the first confirmation of truth by way of simulpost?
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 26, 2010 21:45:45 GMT -5
Post by MentalGuy on Feb 26, 2010 21:45:45 GMT -5
After I made that last post, I thought about it and decided that even if Meeko is Town, he hasn essentially admitted that he is playing for himself and not the Town. That is not an attitude that will help Town to victory. I hope Meeko is scum or third party, but even if he is not I am still happy to
Vote: (3 points) Meeko
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 26, 2010 21:46:00 GMT -5
Post by special on Feb 26, 2010 21:46:00 GMT -5
I honestly do not know why I have a 3 point vote from Ed here. I think, since I've failed, I'll see if anyone else can explain it to you.
|
|
Meeko
FGM
I raccoon it's time to play Mafia
Posts: 2,474
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day 1
Feb 26, 2010 21:49:11 GMT -5
Post by Meeko on Feb 26, 2010 21:49:11 GMT -5
Apparently, Ed (and Cookies for that matter) would like to hold other players responsible for their play.
YES!!!!!!!
Ok Ed. Let's go R E A L S L O W here.
Apparently Ed [Meaning Ed] would like to hold other players [Meaning Meeko] responsible for their [Meaning Ed] play.
This is how I meant what I said.
Because you answered sooooooo Annie Sullivan on that, I think it would be in my best interest to ask you :
Is your answer to my clarified question still " Yes " ?
|
|
Trepa Mayfield
FGM
Does Not Follow Directions
The only kind of panda worth preserving.
Posts: 989
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day 1
Feb 26, 2010 21:49:46 GMT -5
Post by Trepa Mayfield on Feb 26, 2010 21:49:46 GMT -5
Vote Count: Peeker 1. Nanook, 2. NAF, 3. Sista' Meeko 1. Nanook, 2., 3. Redskeezix 1. paulwho..., 2., 3. Luvbfwc 1., 2. mentalguy, 3. Sister Coyote 1., 2. peekercpa, 3. Nanook 1. Meeko, 2., 3. Special Ed 1. Meeko, 2., 3. FCoD 1. Meeko, 2. Spec Ed, 3. Mentalguy 1. Meeko, 2., 3.,
Meeko (12): (Nanook 1st), (Spec. Ed 1st), (FCoD 1st), (Mentalguy 1st) Nanook (6): (Meeko 1st), (peeker 1st) Paulwhoisaghost (3): (Redskeezix 1st) peekercpa (2): (Sis Coyote 2nd) NAF (2): (peeker 2nd) Mentalguy (2): (luvbfwc 2nd) Spec. (2): (FCoD 2nd) Sister Coyote (1): (peeker 3rd)
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 26, 2010 21:55:03 GMT -5
Post by special on Feb 26, 2010 21:55:03 GMT -5
Apparently, Ed (and Cookies for that matter) would like to hold other players responsible for their play. YES!!!!!!! Ok Ed. Let's go R E A L S L O W here. Apparently Ed [Meaning Ed] would like to hold other players [Meaning Meeko] responsible for their [Meaning Ed] play. This is how I meant what I said. Because you answered sooooooo Annie Sullivan on that, I think it would be in my best interest to ask you : Is your answer to my clarified question still " Yes " ? well no, of course not. But I do want to hold players accountable for their play. Which is what I'm doing.
|
|
Meeko
FGM
I raccoon it's time to play Mafia
Posts: 2,474
[ Exalt | Smite ]
Karma:
|
Day 1
Feb 26, 2010 21:59:23 GMT -5
Post by Meeko on Feb 26, 2010 21:59:23 GMT -5
well no, of course not. But I do want to hold players accountable for their play. Which is what I'm doing. Ok. I have no problem with holding people accountable for their play. So then, please tell me, how I must account for a 2.5 point vote, if I make a 2 point vote, and another player makes a 3 point vote, and we are the only two players to vote for the player that gets lynched.
|
|
|
Day 1
Feb 26, 2010 22:04:19 GMT -5
Post by special on Feb 26, 2010 22:04:19 GMT -5
well no, of course not. But I do want to hold players accountable for their play. Which is what I'm doing. Ok. I have no problem with holding people accountable for their play. So then, please tell me, how I must account for a 2.5 point vote, if I make a 2 point vote, and another player makes a 3 point vote, and we are the only two players to vote for the player that gets lynched. I'm not ignoring you, Meeko, but this conversation has been fruitless. Perhaps someone else can explain it better.
|
|