Skyrim Mafia Endgame: Hail Sithis! (3/18) Skyrim Wins!

[jak111]

At, so that is pointed toward me, I thought it was in general in the ways you worded it before.

Skimming does equal inactivity because they are not active enough to read it over, hence inactive. Under your logic I can come in here and post about unicorns and I won't be considered inactive? Noted for future games together then. Activity around you seems pretty easy to do

Also, I have checked your response to / again and again, in fact that's where my question about how I'm on some sort of bandwagon came from. So answer it legitly or be shunned. I'd like a legit case against me, not something you can't even support your own idea for. You say you consider me being the "only bandwagoner" When you're hitching a ride with Cowboyz vote with NO reason. I've given my reasons, you show some courtesy and do the same.

The ball is back in your court PCM. Let's see your case of me being a bandwagoner. Don't bother with anything after my vote, because obviously somehow in my vote I bandwagoned Cowboyz for no reason what so ever, eh?

[/]

@ pancake, yeah I missed your vote, sorry. But yours an edoc's votes on cowboys were joke votes, they obviously don't stick when things get serious, why do count them towards a "bandwagon"?
by that logic you should be voting me for bandwagoning jak!

Har har.

I know sometimes when I joke vote, that player gets pressured and I'll keep my vote there for the sake of productivity. If they get close to lynch, though, I'll usually be the one to pull back and allow for a claim. So I don't see a problem with counting those votes. If jak's logic had been better I may well have done something to that effect with cowboyz. Jak's the only one I consider a bandwagoner in this case though, as the bandwagon never got off the ground.

Fair enough, I personally don't consider it a bandwagon until someone latches on to an actual case without much reason of their own, isn't it more underhanded to latch onto a bandwagon with an earlier joke vote with absolutely no reason? Still, I do that too. unvote
I absolutely don't consider what jak did a bandwagon, the game just started, and he put out a serious vote for whomever seemed the scummiest, it's not like there's going to be a lot of legit cases right off the bat, something needed to start, who was joking or not at the time shouldn't be relevant imo. I find cowboyz skimming scummy too, not quite enough to throw out a vote atm, but let's just see if anyone else is willing to throw out more than a one liner in this game.

[Iron Butterfly]

I think Jak became Mr. Serious because he likes to control and steer the flow of game conversation. He got serious because he wants others to get serious like him.

PCM took him to task.

here is something that bothers me though. Why do some people always point it out as scummy behavior if someone agrees with someones point of view? It would seem to b more of a mafia tactic to try to link two people together as mafia know who each other are. Im not pointing anyone out but it has always bothered me when folks do this in games. Its so WIFOM.

[jak111]

here is something that bothers me though. Why do some people always point it out as scummy behavior if someone agrees with someones point of view? It would seem to b more of a mafia tactic to try to link two people together as mafia know who each other are. Im not pointing anyone out but it has always bothered me when folks do this in games. Its so WIFOM.

Just wondering, what is this referring to? Like which part of the case?

[XenHu]

Dear lord, the back and forth between PCM and Jak is making my head spin....

Fastposted by xenhu, "votes started flying" where are votes "flying"? it takes freaking 10 people to lynch and there are like four people with serious votes! On different people no less! are you just trying to sound popular by mentioning pancake's imaginary bandwagon?

Um, no, it has nothing to do with popularity. Perhaps flying was not the correct word, however, at the time of writing that post, votes were going back and forth, which is what I meant to convey.


-X

[XenHu]

Wow, way to mess up the tags, me.

The post should read:

Any further posts from PCM regarding this issue I WILL SKIM.

I'm not sure if sticking your head in the sand is really the kind of attitude you want to display if you're expecting people to side with your argument. In general, the only people that agree with ignorant people are those that are ignorant themselves. Something to keep in mind.

Fastposted by xenhu, "votes started flying" where are votes "flying"? it takes freaking 10 people to lynch and there are like four people with serious votes! On different people no less! are you just trying to sound popular by mentioning pancake's imaginary bandwagon?

Um, no, it has nothing to do with popularity. Perhaps flying was not the correct word, however, at the time of writing that post, votes were going back and forth, which is what I meant to convey.


-X

[jak111]

It is not that I am ignorant. But I am tired of reading the same thing over, so unless he brings some evidence that I BW'd Cowboyz to the table, I'm not going to bother with his posts against me. For with not answering my questions, while twisting my words, and not bringing forth his complete case on me. I call that ignorance. If he's going to accuse me of something he should be courtesy enough to bring evidence to the table. If not, his posts against me are fluff that are not worth my time responding to fully.

[cowboyz]

Where did I say they were at each other?

In your previous post.

This sums up my argument in your own words. One can`t go after the other for the exact reason that they`re not posting much.

And in your next paragraph, immediately after you asked that question.

What you keep failing to realize, which to me is a pretty simple thing to get if you read it, is that Cowboyz called Dazza out on something that he was doing himself.

is that Cowboyz called Dazza out on something that he was doing himself.

Cowboyz called Dazza out

Cowboyz called Dazza out

If he called him out, they're against each other. I don't think you even know what you're arguing right now.

I mentioned Dazza in my posts because Cowboyz mentioned him in his, he did not state the other names so whom else should I talk about?

How about this?

I'm not trying to make a case on the inactives. I was basically pointing out that if we are going after people for not contributing, there would be better choices than Dazza at this point in time.

And since I said I would:
People that haven't even thrown out a joke vote as of last vote count
IB(made comment)
jrl33
crazy
kager

Nice skim.

PCM nailed it. I can barely comprehend the half wit logic jak is using. Thanks for clarifying.

I have already explained the inactivity nonsense. Can't be any more clear.
I never called Dazza out. (wtf is jak talking about?)
PCM isn't trying to protect me so much as destroy your weak ass case you made by....using simple logic.
Jak you keep mentioning that I went after Dazza. Im quite worried about your reading comprehension m8. If the posts PCM made don't clearly show you how retarded your untrue argument is, then I dont know what will help you.

Cowboyz has a chance to get rid of my vote on him, for it's only a simple mistake that I pointed out, then you try to make it into something it is not. He simply needs to explain his thought process on the believing Xenhu's post on Dazza and not bothering to check for himself.

Once again, it's pretty clear PCM just blew your case away. I already responded to my mistake as far as going off Xenhu's post and PCM quoted everything to make it as easy as possible for you to get it. Maybe you just want me to speak up for some reason and this would make you feel better? You can keep your vote on me. It just makes you look scummy when someone clearly shows your case to be super faulty and yet you continue to pursue it with no evidence whatsoever.

Also, you kept referring to me as a hypocrite for me calling out inactives and going after Dazza(didnt do either) while being inactive myself(not so much) and jump on me for skimming a small part(which I explained), 1 for 4. Yet the same time you skim yourself(me calling out Dazza, which never happened), which would make you
A. skimming hypocrite hence OMG mafia!! (using jak logic) = fail
B. retarded = probable (if we were to follow your logic, you just made a case on yourself)
C. wanna be super duper mafia hunter super leader on D1 and have everyone follow his nonsense = bad for town
D. Scummy for having someone point out every hole in your case and yet still pursue it
E. All of the above

Happy cinco de Mayo

[Iron Butterfly]

here is something that bothers me though. Why do some people always point it out as scummy behavior if someone agrees with someones point of view? It would seem to b more of a mafia tactic to try to link two people together as mafia know who each other are. Im not pointing anyone out but it has always bothered me when folks do this in games. Its so WIFOM.

Just wondering, what is this referring to? Like which part of the case?

Just an observation Jak. Your assertive that's all.

[ghostly447]

It is not that I am ignorant. But I am tired of reading the same thing over, so unless he brings some evidence that I BW'd Cowboyz to the table, I'm not going to bother with his posts against me. For with not answering my questions, while twisting my words, and not bringing forth his complete case on me. I call that ignorance. If he's going to accuse me of something he should be courtesy enough to bring evidence to the table. If not, his posts against me are fluff that are not worth my time responding to fully.

I dont like hopping on BW's, especially since I just got back, but Jak overall seems to be conveying more of a scummy case. PCM broke it down to the point where it became clear Jak had really no case. The thing that gets me the most is the Jak will now refuse to throw any sort of response at PCM because PCM cant find solid evidence...On D1...But last time I checked, a case proven completely false=....Evidence.

So with that, I will unvote if needed and vote Jak

I hope this is a good enough post. From what I could tell, there wasnt much more I could add that hasnt been said. I just got back and havent been on for about 40-46 hours, so thats all ive got for now! But I plan to get more active.

[pancakemix]

At, so that is pointed toward me, I thought it was in general in the ways you worded it before.

Skimming does equal inactivity because they are not active enough to read it over, hence inactive. Under your logic I can come in here and post about unicorns and I won't be considered inactive? Noted for future games together then. Activity around you seems pretty easy to do

Technically, yes. But then your offense would be "not contributing". Pick your poison.

Also, I have checked your response to / again and again, in fact that's where my question about how I'm on some sort of bandwagon came from. So answer it legitly or be shunned. I'd like a legit case against me, not something you can't even support your own idea for. You say you consider me being the "only bandwagoner" When you're hitching a ride with Cowboyz vote with NO reason. I've given my reasons, you show some courtesy and do the same.

The ball is back in your court PCM. Let's see your case of me being a bandwagoner. Don't bother with anything after my vote, because obviously somehow in my vote I bandwagoned Cowboyz for no reason what so ever, eh?

My responses were good enough for /, but based on his statements I do have to concede that what you did wasn't bandwagoning. However, I still believe you were trying to plant the seeds of a bandwagon. There were votes in place, and with yours the scale started to tip. If not for your terrible grounds, I'd have probably kept my vote there, as I said before. A good starting point for the exposure of information.

I'll admit, it's not a STRONG case. I never said it was. The poor logic was always the tibia of the argument. And based on the responses that are coming, I think that's starting to show.

Not that I think you'll admit to that. No, I think you're going to cry out because I'm not actually accusing you of bandwagoning, then you'll tell me how I skimmed your post and didn't answer your question, then scoff at how I "can't provide evidence" for my "baseless claims". Who knows? Now that cowboyz has offered his own defense, you might even vote me.

Ah, but I should stop reading ahead in the script, shouldn't I?

[jak111]

Aye, IB, I'm aggressive for town, people tend to hate that about me

Cowboyz, don't start going around like JG did in Bulge mafia and throwing insults to people on them unless you only refer to the game play.
As for the rest of your post, I think you keep referring to PCM way to much for my liking. You pretty much let your partner work your defense for you, which was a horrible defense at that, then you come in and pretty much in that post if I summed it up to a few sentences would be:
"PCM already told you so I'm going to just keep mentioning that and cast insults every few sentences to look cool "
But in all seriousness to your defense, I find it poor. It's either all referring back a few pages or to PCM's posts.

If anything I would assume dazza has a shitty boring VT role since he wanted to quit.

In this sentence alone you called him out whether you skimmed or not (which you admit to in your next post). Whether Dazza said he wanted to quit before or after role pm's, this post draws attention to his inactivity, while you were not contributing anything really yourself. You both had the same reasons for not posting anything useful.

Aye, my original case on Cowboyz was a small thing really to get into the serious day. But now it seems that his only defense can be to refer to PCM and cast insults. So don't worry PCM If he flips scum, I'll be coming for you. However PCM, again, you're wrong. Under my definition of being active, they must read everything as well. They're not active if they open up the game, look at one post out of 5 new pages, and then post, not even bothering with the other 74 posts. Also, it takes someone else post to actually get that I wasn't bandwaggoning? Are your thoughts about me biased or something because I'm after what seems to be your buddy in something, whether you two be masons, mafia, or 3rd party. But those are just my thoughts on how heavily defensive you are of Cowboyz. It's D1, the pressure will go somewhere, and you seem to be worried about whom it was (take note of that everyone, because that right there can give away more tells than wording).
Though where are my terrible grounds? I've justified my vote and you seem to want more. It was supposed to be a small case to start D1 officially, but you seem to have gotten very defensive of whom I chose to do it to, any reason in particular that you care to defend Cowboyz without letting him speak for himself, and then when he finally does he piggy backs off of your posts and you support him still? I don't know about you, but if someone tried to piggy back off of my posts without adding anything to the mix I'd be all up in their face unless I knew something about them others did not.

Ball is back in your court boys.

Also, note to anyone whom are submarining. Tomorrow I'm calling you out if you haven't contributed anything at all. The day is serious now and everyone should be active, not just PCM, (Cowboyz for a single defense), Xenhu, /, Leehar, and me.

[pancakemix]

1. I do not want more from you (please God, no...). You're just wrong. I've stated how too many times how.
2. That post in no way suggests cowboyz is calling dazza out. It's speculation. Read it carefully.
3. You are impossible to argue with because you will not argue with the same definitions. It is the only reason we're still having this discussion. The problem is, even if you DID say skimming you still wouldn't have a case, because he didn't accuse Dazza of anything.

[XenHu]

Aye, IB, I'm aggressive for town, people tend to hate that about me

I'm not sure that's something to be proud of. Even if you do have a legitimate point(and I'm not picking sides here), it's going to fall on deaf ears for most people simply because of your agression. Again, just my opinion. This whole thing between you and PCM seems to be a lot of hot air really, from both of you. Again, not picking sides, but how can you expect to have a proper argument when the two of you can't agree on the definitions of terms, let alone the argument's subject.

You say inactivity is defined by not posting and/or not reading the entire thread. PCM disagrees. You say cowboyz called Dazza out. PCM disagrees. Et cetra ad nausem. For the record, if anyone called out Dazza, it would be me. Remember?

Unvote, Vote serious game starting by tomorrow.

Seriously guys, we need to get heading in some sort of direction sooner or later, and two weeks is not that long to figure things out.

And what direction do you propose we go in exactly? I'm not quite sure what you expect. It's Day 1. It's pretty much the only day in the game where everyone is blatantly bullshitting, because there isn't anything else to do. Killing time by talking about PC vs Console is out, clearly.

Which is a shame, because I can't think of a better way to kill two weeks. ;p

My vote stands....

Why are you quoting this now? I have decide I will play since this and I am here.

I was right though as all the talk is of what is better PC or console. I don't care so I just skimmed everything.

Hopefully soon we will play mafia.

..unless this guy keeps ghosting through the game like this. Look, I don't care if you like the discussion at hand or not. Even stopping in to say 'hey, cut the crap' would be better than what you're doing right now. When I see this, it makes me think of scum.

FOS: Dazza

Your response will determine if you get my vote. I would encourage others to consider this as well.


-X

So because I don't know anything about the game or whether it is better played on PC or one of the consoles I must be scum?

That's not what I said, at all. Not even close.

I still don't see what I did wrong. Everyone here knows I have not played the game so I can't join in the discussion. I can play mafia so when we get to that it will be fine. I see all the talk of flavour and the PC/console debate as a great way for scum to appear active while really contributing f*ck all to the game.

Bullshit. I know nothing about the setting, I still find something to talk about. I don't know where this idea came from that this wasn't part of the game, but it's ridiculous. As I mentioned earlier, welcome to Day 1. This is part of the game! You can't just sit around and wait for tells and what-have-you, and not expect to get raked over the coals for it. It just doesn't work like that. At least, it never used to.


Unvote, Vote: Dazza

I'm not confident in your reading comprehension, or indeed, your ability to play the game. If it's this bad this early in the game, I'm not sure I want you around when it can get innocent people lynched.

I don't believe you have a VT role, and if you do, that's a really terrible way of convincing people. I'm willing to put my money where my mouth is. If you turn out to be scum, wonderful. If not, well, it will put us down by one townie, but you've brought this on yourself.

-X

Also, recall afterwards that when you started to go after cowboyz, I was put off by his response, as he tried to blame me for your view?

Yea I really didn't feel like going through all the PC vs xbox mod dragonfire nerd rage so I just went off what someone else quoted. Dazza did say that before we got our roles. I was just going off what Xenhu said, using that as FOS Dazza. I assumed Xenhu had common sense. I was wrong.

So, wait a minute. You read what I wrote, and then FOS Dazza based on an assumption that you made:

If anything I would assume dazza has a shitty boring VT role since he wanted to quit. Don't see him jumping ship being mafia godfather.

....and when someone points out to you that your assumption was based on false evidence, somehow it becomes my fault?

RIght on.

Considering I had written up a pretty good explaination for my vote, for you to just piggyback off of me(not even my vote explaination at that, you went off of my reasons for an FOS) and then try to throw me under the bus when you get called out for not paying attention is pretty brazen.

Now, on to the subject of Dazza.

Dazza, I have read your response to my vote. Here's the problem I am having right now. Mafia, as a game, often brings player's reputation into question, when considering when to vote, how to judge tells and what-have-you. The problem is, outside of a few, most of the players here are new to me, thus, I do not know what your past behaviour is like in other games. All I have to go on is what I see here. Yes, there are inactive players, as has been stated. That, I believe, is another issue which is making it difficult for me to judge your case. But here's the rub: Someone gets called out as inactive and we either get something like this:

I don't joke like joke votes anymore. The novelty has worn off.

I am a believer of letting the game evolve organically. I have no fear that the game will peter out due to lack of discussion. At this point it is what it is.

Trust me when I say that when I believe something is important I will comment.

Or we don't hear anything from a particular player, in which case they are truly inactive(and should be prodded, IMO). The problem with the above quote, and indeed, your response Dazza, is that, if we all took your stance, we wouldn't have a game at all. You have to spend a portion of Day 1 chewing the fat. Or there won't be a game to play at all. And often a good way to judge people early on is to see who hops in right away and starts talking crap in Day 1, and those that decide to sit around until a bunch of slip-ups have been made. Then they make one or two posts about how they think so-and-so is scum, vote, then shirk off until they can repeat the process later. Hell, you can even quote me as saying:

0_0

Two weeks of day one? Sweet Christ!

-X

Ugh, I forgot about this. Probably my least favorite part of the game.

Oh, what the hell. I have absolutely no knowledge of the setting whatsoever, but you can go ahead and throw my name into the hat.

Let''s see if this old crow has any fight left in him.

-X

I also can't stand Day 1, and I also don't have any knowledge of the theme. Yet, here I am, still posting. That's the point.
Anyways, I've gone on long enough.

Unvote
FOS: Cowboyz, Dazza, Jak

Dazza, you are off the hook in my eyes, for now at least. I'll have to wait and see what Day 2 brings. Whoever's corpse we find the next day will greatly influence my opinion of a few people, if indeed I am not killed in the night myself. Jak, earlier, it sounded like you were rushing everyone for a quick-lynch, and then, when the votes started flying you seem to just add your tally to the name that's highest. You are also defending Dazza's earlier lack of participation with:

The same could be said for you "Justify a bandwagon vote", though what I said, whether you believe it or not, is 100% true reason. It's early on in D1 and he calls people out for inactivity when he hasn't been that active himself. So either a.) He's a hypocrite or b.) He's a hypocrite. Whether it be for inactivity or "Not wanting to bother with the nerdtalk" Dazza has said he understands nothing of it, that's why he's not bothering with the talk too much. Prove me wrong and I'll withdrawl my vote from Cowboyz.

Lacking the knowledge of a theme has nothing to do with Day 1 activity and can not be used as a scapegoat!. Case in point: Look up MountainLion's The Departed mafia game(It's in the archives, no I will not link it). I had(at the time), ZERO knowledge of the theme. And I was just as active then as I am now.

Now, it's late. I just got home from work and will have to work again early in the morning. I need some time to think about where my vote is going to go.

So, really, can we put this whole thing to bed? For the final time, I'm not saying either of you are right. What I am saying is that there isn't anything to be gained from further fighting between you two. It's pointless, other than to show agression for agression's sake.

-X

[jak111]

Fine by me, though my vote will not be lifted until another case is presented (Which in our fight let pretty much everyone slip by without much or nothing). Again, tomorrow I'm calling out inactives.

As for the aggressiveness, check my Meta game style It's how I roll.

[kageryuu]

[pancakemix]

Well I am glad that argument is done.

It was interesting but was getting a little bit longwinded lol.

Can we not write in dragon script anymore?

[pancakemix]

Well I am glad that argument is done.

It was interesting but was getting a little bit longwinded lol.

Can we not write in dragon script anymore? Please.

EBWOP

[everywhere116]

I would have been more impressive if you actually wrote in the Draconic language, instead of writing English with their letters.

[jonty125]

I would have been more impressive if you actually wrote in the Draconic language, instead of writing English with their letters.

I would have been more impressed if it actually helped us.

unvote vote jak

Any further posts from PCM regarding this issue I WILL SKIM.

How is this going to help anyone?

[dazza2008]

Fine by me, though my vote will not be lifted until another case is presented (Which in our fight let pretty much everyone slip by without much or nothing). Again, tomorrow I'm calling out inactives.

As for the aggressiveness, check my Meta game style It's how I roll.

It is how you roll but that is not a good thing. It makes you very active but just frustrates everyone else and makes them not want to post.

Every game is the same with you. You argue for the sake of arguing and how can anyone join in? You make little sense.

[nagerous]

I think Jak became Mr. Serious because he likes to control and steer the flow of game conversation. He got serious because he wants others to get serious like him.

PCM took him to task.

here is something that bothers me though. Why do some people always point it out as scummy behavior if someone agrees with someones point of view? It would seem to b more of a mafia tactic to try to link two people together as mafia know who each other are. Im not pointing anyone out but it has always bothered me when folks do this in games. Its so WIFOM.

+1

This is something that always grinds my gears. Especially in the early stages of the game, as the game continues however scum subtlety often goes out the window and it can be better blatantly illustrated by newer inexperienced players.

[jak111]

Fine by me, though my vote will not be lifted until another case is presented (Which in our fight let pretty much everyone slip by without much or nothing). Again, tomorrow I'm calling out inactives.

As for the aggressiveness, check my Meta game style It's how I roll.

It is how you roll but that is not a good thing. It makes you very active but just frustrates everyone else and makes them not want to post.

Every game is the same with you. You argue for the sake of arguing and how can anyone join in? You make little sense.

And if I wasn't aggressive we'd still be in joke vote stage with only a week left It annoys people but deep down inside they like it ;P

[jak111]

EBWOP, Forgot Jonty's post for a moment.

It helps people by stopping a meaningless argument that no one is going to win. Which I'm sure you'd be grateful for

[dazza2008]

Fine by me, though my vote will not be lifted until another case is presented (Which in our fight let pretty much everyone slip by without much or nothing). Again, tomorrow I'm calling out inactives.

As for the aggressiveness, check my Meta game style It's how I roll.

It is how you roll but that is not a good thing. It makes you very active but just frustrates everyone else and makes them not want to post.

Every game is the same with you. You argue for the sake of arguing and how can anyone join in? You make little sense.

And if I wasn't aggressive we'd still be in joke vote stage with only a week left It annoys people but deep down inside they like it ;P

So before you started playing games here they stayed in joke stage forever?