CYOC #5 [5/16] ENDGAME [DINO DOWN]

by **Pikanchion** on Mon Oct 30, 2017 10:07 am

REDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDRED
REDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDRED
REDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDRED
REDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDRED
REDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDRED
REDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDRED.FOS: YouCallThatVariationsInRedDirtyDishSoap?REDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDRED
REDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDRED
REDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDRED
REDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDRED
REDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDRED
REDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDREDRED

by **Metsfanmax** on Mon Oct 30, 2017 10:15 am

I'm perfectly happy to vote Pikanchion for offering approximately zero substance so far.

by **Pikanchion** on Mon Oct 30, 2017 10:23 am

FOS: About?

by **mandalorian2298** on Mon Oct 30, 2017 12:01 pm

Pikanchion wrote:FOS: About?

@Bujaber The post that you are refering to still falls under a PR that says: "You may not write the whole post using only one color" since he didn't write anything.

But it is interesting how swiftly you understood Pika's ATTEMPT of disproving my thory and proclaimed "MANDY HAS BEEN DISPROVEN! MOVE ALONG, NOTHING TO SEE HERE!!!

FOS Bujaber for his quickness to defend Pika (illogically)

Look guys, I'm not about to go "Lion King" on you and argue to no end to convince 8 people to accept my point of view. I just want it noted that at this point I have both called that Pika is Scum and explained my thinking in a cohrent manner. You do wat you want, I'm happy to goalt about this after the fact. Peace.

by **BuJaber** on Mon Oct 30, 2017 1:26 pm

mandalorian2298 wrote:
@Bujaber The post that you are refering to still falls under a PR that says: "You may not write the whole post using only one color" since he didn't write anything.

Believe me I'd love a reason to vote Pika. He is not making this PR any easier. I just don't see think your reasoning is solid enough.

I specifically chose the word 'thinking' because of the possibility of this PR you quoted. But it is also the only PR I can imagine that fits. In fact it HAS to be a PR that is specifically written in the negative, so that he may ignore it without penalty. If the same PR was written "Your posts must contain at least 2 colors" or "You must write your posts in 2 or more colors" he would not be able to ignore it with an empty post.

So no, technically you're not wrong. There's just a very slim chance you're right. If you bring reasons other than the PR to lynch Pika, then we can discuss some more.

by **BuJaber** on Mon Oct 30, 2017 1:27 pm

BuJaber wrote:
mandalorian2298 wrote:
@Bujaber The post that you are refering to still falls under a PR that says: "You may not write the whole post using only one color" since he didn't write anything.

Believe me I'd love a reason to vote Pika. He is not making this PR any easier. I just don't see think your reasoning is solid enough.

I specifically chose the word 'thinking' because of the possibility of this PR you quoted. But it is also the only PR I can imagine that fits. In fact it HAS to be a PR that is specifically written in the negative, so that he may ignore it without penalty. If the same PR was written "Your posts must contain at least 2 colors" or "You must write your posts in 2 or more colors" he would not be able to ignore it with an empty post.

So no, technically you're not wrong. There's just a very slim chance you're right. If you bring reasons other than the PR to lynch Pika, then we can discuss some more.

by **BuJaber** on Mon Oct 30, 2017 1:29 pm

Pikanchion wrote:FOS: About?

Also, totally skimmed over this. Look at this post. How many colors? HOW MANY COLORS?

by **kwanton** on Mon Oct 30, 2017 5:27 pm

Metsfanmax wrote:I'm perfectly happy to vote Pikanchion for offering approximately zero substance so far.

Pikanchion wrote:FOS: PostRestrictionsLikeThisAreStupidAndIRefuseToParticipateSeriously

I'd agree because the spam is starting to get very annoying. But the better option would be for the mod to just replace a player who admitted he's not playing seriously anymore

Vote: Replace Pika

by **Pikanchion** on Mon Oct 30, 2017 6:54 pm

FOS: WellThat'sIncrediblyDisingenuous
FOS: IRefuseToParticipateSeriouslyInThisStupidPRNotTheGameAsAWhole
FOS: EspeciallyRichFromSomebodyWhoRefusesToParticipateAtAllInDay1OfAnyGame

FOS: LogicError
FOS: NoColourSuppliedForUnvotes
Unvote: mandalorian2298
Vote: kwanton

by **mandalorian2298** on Tue Oct 31, 2017 3:23 am

BuJaber wrote:
Pikanchion wrote:FOS: About?

Also, totally skimmed over this. Look at this post. How many colors? HOW MANY COLORS?

"You may not write the whole post using only red color"

That was a trap. You fell in it. You defended him again without even considereing his scumhood.

*in a terrible Belgian accent* Monsieur Pika, before you twirled your mustache. But you and your partner did not count on Mandy! It is my mustache that will be twirled the last! 8-)

by **mandalorian2298** on Tue Oct 31, 2017 3:28 am

Pikanchion wrote:FOS: WellThat'sIncrediblyDisingenuous
FOS: IRefuseToParticipateSeriouslyInThisStupidPRNotTheGameAsAWhole
FOS: EspeciallyRichFromSomebodyWhoRefusesToParticipateAtAllInDay1OfAnyGame

FOS: LogicError
FOS: NoColourSuppliedForUnvotes
Unvote: mandalorian2298
Vote: kwanton

By a COMPLETELY UNINTENTIONAL accident, your vote stayed on me because your unvote was not green and thus not really an unvote.

But, if it counts, it will further prove that you are not bound by the rules that good Townies must abide, hostile mouse!

by **Skoffin** on Tue Oct 31, 2017 4:05 am

Aight. Pika's next post needs to be just normal and red like everyone else otherwise I'll concede he is following a different set of rules and I'll vote him. WHAT SAY YOU, PIKU?

by **Skoffin** on Tue Oct 31, 2017 4:08 am

BuJaber wrote:Huh when were you confirmed mitch?!

I too thought at first that Pika had an additional PR but given his last post is practically empty and the rest don't have an obvious pattern, I'm now thinking that isn't the case.

If I were the mod and/or the person responsible for the PR, I would be tempted to call Pika hostile too for his rebellious posts.
If anything this makes me think that Pika is town. And yes Mandy but using his own WIFOM defence against him is sort of WIFOM on it's own.

The scene mentioned a green aura thing who seems to be a sort of global shield. I feel that a power like this could indicate that there are quiet a bit of killing roles in the game. Plus the size of the game tends to mean there are 3rd party involved.
I want to remind you all of how eager skoffin was for night 1. Plus he's denying the investigative role so I believe he could be a Serial Killer.
Also, even though I don't think the spirits would be able to help us at all given the way they're described, others seem to think we might be able to use them so lynching skoffin could help there. Not to say of course that mitch isn't scum. But we want the discussions to move forward so let's go for controversial pick rather than safe pick.

Unvote Vote Skoffin

How does any of this make sense? It would appear that there is another party saying mandy is town, thus that spirit is likely telling the truth which means the others are full of shit and can be ignored.
So how does that help by lynching me? How does me claiming to be not an investigator automatically make me a SK? The f*ck bro

by **mandalorian2298** on Tue Oct 31, 2017 4:29 am

Skoffin wrote:Aight. Pika's next post needs to be just normal and red like everyone else otherwise I'll concede he is following a different set of rules and I'll vote him. WHAT SAY YOU, PIKU?

Hear, hear!

Also, if this means that the two of us are going to be Tango&Cashing in this game, I call dibs on Cash!

by **mandalorian2298** on Tue Oct 31, 2017 4:31 am

mandalorian2298 wrote:
Skoffin wrote:Aight. Pika's next post needs to be just normal and red like everyone else otherwise I'll concede he is following a different set of rules and I'll vote him. WHAT SAY YOU, PIKU?

Hear, hear!

Also, if this means that the two of us are going to be Tango&Cashing in this game, I call dibs on Cash!

Crap!

EBWOP

by **BuJaber** on Tue Oct 31, 2017 5:59 am

Okay fine mandy. You win you pumpkin. It's a popularity contest and your moustache is definitely sexier.

Everybody who thinks mandy is right vote pika.

Everybody who think I'm right vote skoffin.

Or better still give us new ideas. Me, mandy and pika should be banned from further posting until at least 4 others post

Skoff you have to split my reasoning in 2 separate independent parts:

1. I have a theory that you're sk. This has nothing to do with anything anybody has said. It's a very weak case actually. But when there is no evidence either way I refer to my gut. And my gut says I don't trust you.

2. Like I explained previously, I believe the whole oracle and spirit thing is more bad than good. We can't reliably believe anything they say on its face, we'd have to have someone else confirn the info. That means that the oracle and spirit are almost useless, they're just encouraging people to reveal extra information to everyone, which is a double edged sword. Even if we determine which of the statements are true, it won't tell us which, if any, of any future statements are also true. HOWEVER, of the people that commented so far, it seems the majority think that they can be useful. So in case they are right we lynch you (or mandy) and then we learn something about the relevant statements made about you. It could also indirectly tell us something about the crier; because again, others have told me that I cannot assume that the crier is always town.

by **Skoffin** on Tue Oct 31, 2017 6:40 am

Ok so your first point is that you think I'm a SK and that you have exactly no reason to think that, but you feel it to be true anyway? That is a very specific feeling you have there to be basing on nothing.

Second point seems to be you stating you think the oracle is useless but you want to test it out anyway. Even if you did lynch me it wouldn't say much about the crier, as the crier very specifically gave information on mandy - therefore you'd need to lynch mandy to test on that basis. :roll:

And if you can't assume the crier is town then the crier is a liar and mandy can't be trusted either, so again picking me of the two is strange.
I don't understand your reasons whatsoever as it all hinges on you assuming on a SK 'just because' want wanting to test a theory you don't believe in.

by **Pikanchion** on Tue Oct 31, 2017 6:48 am

Skoffin sucks almost as much as arbitrary PRs, happy?

by **Skoffin** on Tue Oct 31, 2017 6:48 am

booooooooo

by **Pikanchion** on Tue Oct 31, 2017 6:51 am

See, now nobody is happy. Well done ;)

by **BuJaber** on Tue Oct 31, 2017 7:12 am

TheForgivenOne wrote:An Anonymous voice is heard throughout town:

"Spirits say that Mandy has a town-role.

Only one of the three spirits always tells the truth.
One just says anything
One always lies"

This is the quote that explains my logic. The connection between lynching you and getting info on crier. Let's break it down, then you can send me to the loony bin if you want.
Spirit said many is town
Spirit said you are investigator
Spirit said pika is hostile.

Crier confirmed he visited mandy. If under others' advisement I consider the possibility of a scum crier then his confirmation means nothing. But if we somehow know that mandy is town then the crier will be town most likely. Otherwise why would he confirm him instead of advocate for a LAL.
So how can we know that mandy is town? Well if we confirm that the spirit claiming his innocence is the truthful one. So we need to disprove the other 2. Pika is hostile is vague, hostile might not be alignment indicative so we can't confirm or refute this statement if we lynch him. That leaves the statement about you. We lynch you and we'll know that either it was the truth in which case mandy can't be town or we lynch you and find out that it was lying in which case mandy and the crier would be confirmed.

I might be a hypocrite for giving reasons that assume the spirits cab be used to our advantage; but I am not wrong. Lynching you gives the most info plus if I am right then we kill sk. And there's always the slim chance you're scum.

We could also kill someone I'm 85% sure they're scum which is mitch. You want to prove mitch is scum just start a bandwagon then change it and start another then repeat and see how many of them he joins.

As for my first reason yes my first reason is weak but I've had it since day 1. Basically a bunch of small insignificant things that collectively make you a potential sk. I changed my vote to mitch and now back and I am by all means not committed to your lynch, but it makes sense to me.

by **Skoffin** on Tue Oct 31, 2017 7:25 am

your theory is dumb and I'll be back tomorrow to say again that it is dumb. Besides, if anyone here is going to be a SK it's obviously going to be Skittles.

by **kwanton** on Tue Oct 31, 2017 7:27 am

I got a PM last (irl) night from an anonymous voice that said that Skoffin is the Crier and that the spirit who was talking about Mandy is telling the truth.
I am not allowed to say anything else about the PM.

In light of that I'm willing to clear all three since this means the spirit that was talking about pika being hostile was either telling a lie or nonsense.

Also, pike if you don't like people asking for you to be replaced, then stop posting walls of spam

by **mandalorian2298** on Tue Oct 31, 2017 7:31 am

Pikanchion wrote:Skoffin sucks almost as much as arbitrary PRs, happy?

No! You did it twice and third time's the modkill! :mrgreen:

Bujaber, you fascinate me. Your main reason for suspecting me is that two, independent source, who confirmed me as Town (through Mod) might be BOTH be lying.

My vote stays on Pika. Even without the PR, I still have my two original reasons for suspecting him, plus Bujaber's defense of him.

Scum has been caught. Lynch them and then praise my name in hymns and limericks.

Fastposted: Also that proof stuff Kwanton just said.

by **BuJaber** on Tue Oct 31, 2017 7:43 am

kwanton wrote:I got a PM last (irl) night from an anonymous voice that said that Skoffin is the Crier and that the spirit who was talking about Mandy is telling the truth.
I am not allowed to say anything else about the PM.

In light of that I'm willing to clear all three since this means the spirit that was talking about pika being hostile was either telling a lie or nonsense.

Also, pike if you don't like people asking for you to be replaced, then stop posting walls of spam

Unvote

CYOC #5 [5/16] ENDGAME [DINO DOWN]

Re: CYOC #5 [15/16] D2 [Oh silent Night]

Re: CYOC #5 [15/16] D2 [Oh silent Night]

Re: CYOC #5 [15/16] D2 [Oh silent Night]

Re: CYOC #5 [15/16] D2 [Oh silent Night]

Re: CYOC #5 [15/16] D2 [Oh silent Night]

Re: CYOC #5 [15/16] D2 [Oh silent Night]

Re: CYOC #5 [15/16] D2 [Oh silent Night]

Re: CYOC #5 [15/16] D2 [Oh silent Night]

Re: CYOC #5 [15/16] D2 [Oh silent Night]

Re: CYOC #5 [15/16] D2 [Oh silent Night]

Re: CYOC #5 [15/16] D2 [Oh silent Night]

Re: CYOC #5 [15/16] D2 [Oh silent Night]

Re: CYOC #5 [15/16] D2 [Oh silent Night]

Re: CYOC #5 [15/16] D2 [Oh silent Night]

Re: CYOC #5 [15/16] D2 [Oh silent Night]

Re: CYOC #5 [15/16] D2 [Oh silent Night]

Re: CYOC #5 [15/16] D2 [Oh silent Night]

Re: CYOC #5 [15/16] D2 [Oh silent Night]

Re: CYOC #5 [15/16] D2 [Oh silent Night]

Re: CYOC #5 [15/16] D2 [Oh silent Night]

Re: CYOC #5 [15/16] D2 [Oh silent Night]

Re: CYOC #5 [15/16] D2 [Oh silent Night]

Re: CYOC #5 [15/16] D2 [Oh silent Night]

Re: CYOC #5 [15/16] D2 [Oh silent Night]

Re: CYOC #5 [15/16] D2 [Oh silent Night]

Who is online