Ragian wrote:@aage, how do you suggest that we move forward if you don't want jmf to claim? Whom would you like to hear a claim from? I see you and mets are voting for chapcrap. Care to elaborate or reiterate or anoter ate?
Sure. "Lowkey fishing for counterclaims to a vague roleclaim."
(Does 'repeate' count?)
His defense was "dont bandwagon me bro", as well as drawing a false dichotomy on my FoS towards Mets, so obviously I am keeping my vote on him. Since then he's said little, and none of it sense. He hasn't even bothered to respond to my post, even though he clearly reads them based on his comment to Tobi.
Several other people have made other arguments, some of which even hold water.
So yeah, I'd suggest you guys either shit or get off the pot and we proceed to look at chap et al. The metaphor is appropriate because this wagon on jfm is a shitshow, it's just bullying the guy into a fullclaim. BuJaber has already pointed most of the flaws out. Several people, much like you, Ragian, have thrown up their hands and said "well what do you suggest we do instead?" BuJ has tried pushing Mets, but nobody seems interested. Nobody seems to know what to do, and everyone is content to attack jfm for his premature claim -
an action indicative of inexperience, not alignment - whilst we all wait for the fabled pro town hero.
There are several things I'd like to do instead. I'd like to push chapcrap to take a proper stand instead of constantly diverting the discussion away and ignoring people. I'd like to look at Pika's posts more closely, since he is extremely active and his posts are very long but don't seem to say much. I'd like to have another look at Mets - even though we share the view that this wagon is bad, the way he goes about showing it is not effective (and therefore kinda scummy) because he only pokes small holes in it one small post at a time without giving an alternative. I'd like to look at Skoffin, who doesn't even concern herself with discussion any more and simply calls for jfm's lynch - I suspect she's trying to avoid a Mitch situation by killing him off early. That's four people, but we don't really have time to crack down on four people, so I'm happy to start with the first on the list. Incidentally, my vote is already on him, so what are you waiting for?
I'm also gonna throw in this little gem, you guys can accuse me for putting words in your mouth all you like:
pika wrote:A note to jfm10: if you are town-sided (and telling the truth therefor), please do not further clarify your role unless pushed by general agreement to do so, i.e. unless you reach 7+ votes against you. To do otherwise would further hurt town.
dakky wrote:@Tobikera ... I agree we should get someone to L-2 but your reason sucks.
chapcrap wrote:I basically agreed with the L-2 strategy..
ragian wrote:The agreed upon convention is that if you're at L-2, you reveal your role. If you don't, you will be pegged as anti-town and most likely lynched for anti-town behaviour.
tobikera wrote: I just wanted to get everyone to focus on one person, get them to L-2, and get some more info. Nothing personal. jfm10 seems to be everyone's player of choice, which I am unsure about, but to maintain my actual intent I will join that wagon.
UNVOTE
VOTE jfm10
Ok, so the convention is that we vote someone to L-2 and only then do they claim. Glad we cleared that up..
chapcrap wrote:@jfm I agree with Tobi on the claim. Is there a reason to not say your species? It does not make sense to me. Your role (protective) is a lot more potent information than your species and you gave that up like it was a tictac. Are you just waiting for L-2?
