The Resistance IV

[eclipse]

Rein, your continued silence is not helping you. Get in here and say something, because if you lose it for the Resistance, I will be pissed.

[BBM]

Here's what I define as scum, in order from worst to eh. This holds across multiple games:

1. Telling the town to shut up/not vote; the less public info the town has to work with, the better for the mafia.

2. Knowing things that aren't public knowledge. An example would be, "So our doctor failed because of a safeguard" when no one has claimed such. Doesn't apply as much to this kind of game.

3. Demanding people vote a certain way with consequences in NOC, unless it's someone refusing to vote for a cleared cop's guilty or something equally clear-cut. Town only has thread info and their own role PM, without the benefit of OC. Perhaps what you see isn't the best course of action.

4. Getting mad when they lose control of the conversation; this tells me that they had some benefit from controlling it in the first place.

5. Having No Opinion On Anything, including votes. Most likely to make sure that "you were tunneling" fails.

6. Following opinions without forming your own. Some people aren't great at self-expression, so that's why I consider this one on a case-by-case basis.

7. Bad logic, but I can't assume that people see things FMPOV.

You hit at least four of these.

I hit 3, and I maybe hit 7. I definitely didn't hit 1, 2, or 6. For 4, you keep saying I got mad when you started to disagree with me. No. As I proved, I started suspecting you before you said anything, even if the logic I gave then wasn't the best, and then I started suspecting you more not because you were trying to wrest control of the thread from me, because I don't think I had control of anything, but that you were trying to wrest it at all. To me, I already kind of thought you were suspicious, and then you come in here with guns blazing and yelling at everybody, and the first thing I thought was that you saw that the spyteam had been correctly picked and were trying to change people's minds about it. For 5, the fact that I've voted yes for most of the missions doesn't change that I've still had an opinion.

Because you're objectively wrong. See, if you're Resistance, then the following can be derived:

- One of Rein/Elieson is a spy

- One of me/Kay is a spy

And since Marth's name isn't one of the four up there, it can be further objectively derived that if I am Resistance, Marth is as well. What problem are you having with this?

Now, from my POV, 2.1 shouldn't have passed (Proto said he didn't like it 'cause he wasn't in it), and 3.2 was badly played (all we learned was that Rein cooperated when it didn't matter what he did). From what I see, I would've sent a team that had Marth in it, and not say who I'd use the card on until the last minute.

I think the decision of who the card is used on should be a team decision, not made solely by the person who has it. Or who the card should go to should have been talked about more, and when I said that it doesn't really matter who it goes to, someone should have refuted that point.

The problem is you have yet to convince me you're not a Spy, and I'm the one in charge of the mission.

What I'm giving is my justification for voting no if that mission is proposed.

And keep in mind that you could be a Spy because you were on both failed missions. I have to let go of Strong Leader anyway. Your point?

My point is simply to remind people that it might be good to settle on something in the first 3 proposals. And you actually do have another Strong Leader card, Rein gave it to Proto when he was made leader for Mission 3.1, and I gave Proto the No Confidence card I got when I was the leader in 1.1.

Rein, your continued silence is not helping you. Get in here and say something, because if you lose it for the Resistance, I will be pissed.

I do agree with this.

[Tables]

I'm going to go prod Rein, any other mod requests I missed? I have to admit I mostly skimmed through, there's a LOT of discussion all of a sudden and I've got to go mod a game of Resistance on another forum (Whoo!).

For ease of checking, put any mod requests (as well as final actions) in bold to minimise the chance I miss them.

[riariadne]

Tried to crank this post out last night, didn't make any coherent sense because I was too damn tired. I emerge from this mountain of paperwork bullshit temporarily victorious.

Explanations for 3.1. A bit late, but better so than never. I did vote yes for this, because I felt the team was alright. I suppose I could have declined that one for information, too, and in hindsight, that may have been the smarter play (though it didn't end up mattering too much). Speaking of information, eclipse already linked Resistance 3, which was a pretty damn good example of getting voting trends even though the spies won. We aren't even a through a whole damn cycle of leaders and it's Mission 4.1, which limits what we can derive information from immensely. By the way, BBM, your standing on no votes a few pages ago was IMO pretty scummy, because as eclipse already said, votes don't lie- posts can. The same goes for you, Marth. What do you want us to analyze if not votes?

With regards to one of Elieson's suspicions on me, the fact that I was on 2.1 (which failed) but not 1.1 (which succeeded) is not actually a strike against me. It is entirely possible that BBM (or you) could have withheld from sabotaging mission 1 so as to not limit which of you is a spy, and then did so on Mission 2.1 because it'd be effectively retarded not to. The fact that I was on one mission but not the other is almost completely irrelevant.

As for my other votes, I've already elaborated that my first two were for information more than once, have elaborated on my 3.1, and Mission 3.2 was sort of a go and see if we could catch the double sab and everyone else seemed pretty much set on it.

yeah okay i bet you all expected a bigger post well i'm not really eloquent, sue me

[Elieson]

I wouldn't have made the proposal with that team if I didn't think it had at least a pretty good chance of working out.

Here, let me throw this in.

Okay, let's take a look at things from the proposal for 2.1.

Yes: Elieson, BigBangMeteor, Kay, Marth,

No: apocalypseArisen, Luster Purge,

Now, from my own point of view, giving the card to Eli or BBM would be dumb as fuck. One of the two must have sabotaged¹. Similarly, Kay approved of the mission, though she approved of the last one too, so I'm not sure what's up with that. Perhaps she thought that getting three people essentially clear would be good, so she simply approved of the mission, as we could then go for the other 3 person mission and win instantly. Marth is even weirder², seeing as he approved of this one but not for 1.1, which is significantly less important of a mission. That doesn't look too good for the guy. From where I'm standing, Proto seems like the most sensible person to give a card, as it's easy to justify his approval for 1.1 as it being 1.1, and he simply didn't like the team this time around, so that's what I'm going to do.

Giving card to Proto.

I'll post more in a bit.

Again, I could see either of you or BBM just being new to the game and not understanding that just because you're on a team, the team isn't always good. Kay I'm less lenient on, as she's played before and knows this. Furthermore she wasn't actually on either team. Marth's votes are equally weird, especially when his stance was "for the heck of it". The fuck, man? Don't do shit just for the heck of it, do it because you think it's a good idea. ³Aside from myself, Proto strikes me as outstandingly pro-Resistance, having made that good post earlier, and being the only person who I believe is actually sensible with his votes (I can understand approving mission 1 to get it over with as it matters the least out of all the missions, and he didn't approve of 2.1 because he clearly wasn't comfortable with the team).

This was your post from over a week ago. It's the most recent post you made including any information whatsoever as to your thought processes. (well, it's 2 posts, but since they were back to back with no interruption, I just mashed them for convienence' sake.). Just thought I'd stick this back in the open, since it's all on the top of page 3, and we're on the top of page 9 (coincidentially, 9 days later).

Your logic hasn't changed with the 6 pages of discussion and 9 days to think things over? I could underline that quote, but instead i'll do something else. I'll use superscript to be unique.

¹You still are convinced that BBM and I are obviously the most potentially scummy people there are¹, so you didn't give us the card, since one of us blew the mission.

²Also, you find Marth weirder than the 2 of us, and Kay, for that matter.

So you gave Proto the card. Well Proto has since left the game, and has been replaced by a more active Eclipse. Any opinions on the new member in the game? Apparently, minimal, since you mentioned only one thing. You were referencing her link to Res3, where you only declared that voting cycles give information. It was more like a jump on Marth, using Eclipse's statements for reinforcement, which is kind of like sheeping.

³ Furthermore, you gave Proto the card, and have no qualms about doing so. This, after seeing the incredible deciet that Proto used in the previous Resistance game, it hasn't crossed your mind once that the person showing the most potential for informative debate could be stringing us along like puppets? If you thought so, you should at least let us know. If you didn't, shame on you.

Rein. This logic isn't what you entered the thread with. I've figured it out, Marth is trying his best to create logic, and Eclipse is born logic. BBM and Kay are interjecting here and there, and I won't get on you for being inactive. After all, we didn't really jump on Proto for the same thing, and let's face it, we all just wanted to hear you say something. Anything.

But seriously. Where is the information that you brought to the table before? Where is the urgency to press for information? It seems to me like you're just kicking back and watching the show as the spies pull a victory out of their hat, and it seems awfully easy to do from the scummy side. I'm extremely certain right now that you have something scummy going through your head right now. I can't confirm it, since I can't confirm anything right now. But please, you can do better.

[riariadne]

¹You still are convinced that BBM and I are obviously the most potentially scummy people there are¹, so you didn't give us the card, since one of us blew the mission.

Do you not agree that that makes sense from my own point of view? Really? Come on, man.

²Also, you find Marth weirder than the 2 of us, and Kay, for that matter.

Do those votes make sense to you? Because at the time they sure as hell looked pretty bad to me. Your votes had some reasoning, though I think we were all a bit haphazard about the whole thing- from his own standpoint, they don't really make any sense.

So you gave Proto the card. Well Proto has since left the game, and has been replaced by a more active Eclipse. Any opinions on the new member in the game? Apparently, minimal, since you mentioned only one thing. You were referencing her link to Res3, where you only declared that voting cycles give information. It was more like a jump on Marth, using Eclipse's statements for reinforcement, which is kind of like sheeping.

eclipse looks just as good as Proto did previously, which is to say pretty damn pro-Res. Do you expect me to find someone who is more active, who I already thought was pro-Resistance, and is right about many things more likely to a Spy? Because I don't.

³ Furthermore, you gave Proto the card, and have no qualms about doing so. This, after seeing the incredible deciet that Proto used in the previous Resistance game, it hasn't crossed your mind once that the person showing the most potential for informative debate could be stringing us along like puppets? If you thought so, you should at least let us know. If you didn't, shame on you.

So what? Did you really, truthfully want me to give a card to someone I think is more likely to be a spy? Since that's basically what you're telling me I should have done. Frankly, I don't agree with that one bit- why on earth would I try and benefit the spies from a mechanic that can be of great help to the Resistance? Maybe you enjoy shooting yourself in the foot, but I don't.

But seriously. Where is the information that you brought to the table before? Where is the urgency to press for information? It seems to me like you're just kicking back and watching the show as the spies pull a victory out of their hat, and it seems awfully easy to do from the scummy side. I'm extremely certain right now that you have something scummy going through your head right now. I can't confirm it, since I can't confirm anything right now. But please, you can do better.

Information is just as important as ever, man. Do you really think I'm actively trying not to post? I have no way of actually proving this, but I can assure you I'm certainly not. I've given my reasons for my votes, and I'll say it again- they don't lie.

[Elieson]

eclipse looks just as good as Proto did previously, which is to say pretty damn pro-Res. Do you expect me to find someone who is more active, who I already thought was pro-Resistance, and is right about many things more likely to a Spy? Because I don't.

I don't expect you to completely discredit the possibility of a more active, objectively intelligent, and talented poster, of being a Spy, simply because of cool use of words and a gut feeling.

So what? Did you really, truthfully want me to give a card to someone I think is more likely to be a spy? Since that's basically what you're telling me I should have done. Frankly, I don't agree with that one bit- why on earth would I try and benefit the spies from a mechanic that can be of great help to the Resistance? Maybe you enjoy shooting yourself in the foot, but I don't.

Not really. What I was getting at, if you didn't quite understand, was that given the information from past situations that you are fully aware of, you didn't cite or quote any of them. I expected your reasoning to be different. You just said "this is how it is" and rolled with it. Had you said "Well, I've seen instances where the spy was actually the best poster in the game, so I'm putting most of my faith into that poster as being trustworthy and Resistance", I wouldn't have said anything. Or hell, I probably would have said "Oh, you know that's a good point, I hadn't thought of that", because I've already admitted to being unaware of strategies and tactics.

Information is just as important as ever, man. Do you really think I'm actively trying not to post? I have no way of actually proving this, but I can assure you I'm certainly not. I've given my reasons for my votes, and I'll say it again- they don't lie.

I believe that you have life. I have 2 jobs, 2 kids, I know the drill of being busy and having a hard time posting. But, your posts have always had meat in them, and it just seemed that your post prior to this one really lacked any sort of substance. That's what I was really getting at. Something new, something out of the box, that we haven't heard already, like you've been doing. Not some mishmosh of words taken from one mouth and inserted into yours.

[riariadne]

I don't expect you to completely discredit the possibility of a more active, objectively intelligent, and talented poster, of being a Spy, simply because of cool use of words and a gut feeling.

Not really. What I was getting at, if you didn't quite understand, was that given the information from past situations that you are fully aware of, you didn't cite or quote any of them. I expected your reasoning to be different. You just said "this is how it is" and rolled with it. Had you said "Well, I've seen instances where the spy was actually the best poster in the game, so I'm putting most of my faith into that poster as being trustworthy and Resistance", I wouldn't have said anything. Or hell, I probably would have said "Oh, you know that's a good point, I hadn't thought of that", because I've already admitted to being unaware of strategies and tactics.

I suppose that's a good point about sort of being obtuse about the whole ordeal. But I am still feeling reasonably confident in their playerslot because of good posts, starting plenty of discussion, and their votes. Is that a more adequate explanation?

I believe that you have life. I have 2 jobs, 2 kids, I know the drill of being busy and having a hard time posting. But, your posts have always had meat in them, and it just seemed that your post prior to this one really lacked any sort of substance. That's what I was really getting at. Something new, something out of the box, that we haven't heard already, like you've been doing. Not some mishmosh of words taken from one mouth and inserted into yours.

Okay, that's fair. I guess iust a lot of the thingd that I had wanted to say had already been said because od how behind I am. Sorry for being a bit sour about that.

[Elieson]

Yes Rein, That is. You acknowledged the playerslot as reasonably comfortable, and backed it up with reasons. That's a meaty post to explain your trust in Proto/Eclipse, and it was like 2 lines.

---

Anyway, I think we've all posted sufficient information regarding our feelings.

I want Eclipse's opinion on what she's ready to do. She has 2 cards to play with, and the only way she can use either of them for this mission is if we are 100% sure that we can agree on and count on a crack team of 4 to take on this mission. Her cards will not benefit the outcome of this proposal, like Kay's card did.

---

One other point I want to make, Eclipse's cards don't hold a ton of power, but they do offer her the ability to step in on a potential 5th proposal for Mission 4, and it allows her to proc a force failure on it.

Meaning that if Eclipse is a spy, and she wanted to, on Proposal 4.5 (or if we make it, 5.5), she could seize control of the team and make herself the leader with one card, and use the other card to force a vote failure, yielding in a point for the Spies by default and costing us the game.

Eclipse has a lot of power now. Not only in her position with posting, but in .5 proposal control. No offense Eclipse, but that's a lot of power to have, and as Pro-Res as you are, you're not 100% in the clear.

[Bluedoom]

You didn't say it's unnecessary or less useful at this point. You said it was stupid. A blanket statement, and a dumb one at that. Votes are concrete. This is a good thing. How would your votes say nothing about how you vote?

Marth has officially made himself look scummier than I thought he was a few hours ago. Congratulations, Marth, now please, if you are Resistance, starting making sense so I don't screw up by suspecting you.

Ok, let me clarify, because I know I've seemed to contradict myself here. Eli said that he's rather see people discuss "Who would you send on mission X" rather than voting trends.

Since we instead have team suggestion before proposals, we get better info from these than voting trends, considering Votes are just words which may or may not express the player's opinion so far, but team suggestions are paragraphs which help us have a better view. Votes also don't mean much- my votes for the first two missions had little logic to them, yet you can't say I'm a spy just because of that. Same way, people can also lie about the justification of their votes- its not like these votes will prove who's scum and who's not. In my eyes at least, the only info I get is Mission results. In fact the only time voting trends really mattered was Mission 3, and I regret having voted yes to the second proposal. I should've thought that out better. We don't want to assess voting trends this round because we're in a do or die situation - I'd rather we accept the first or second proposal.

But let's take voting trends of this game. I'm going to try and assess what's the thing here:

Mission 1: I agree with you fully that assessing voting trends on a mission that is guaranteed to succeed would be unreasonable, mainly because it doesn't really state anything. The spies obviously won't let themselves out. Hell my 'no' vote doesn't mean anything either, because even if I was a spy, why would I keep voting no and put my buddy on the team, only for him to not sabotage it? In fact I would take Rein's no as a sign of a spy because there's nothing to assess.

Mission 2 : We're still clueless as to who might be a spy, as such, I would find no reason to vote no. BBM and Elieson obviously would vote yes, and Rein and Proto voting no still gives nothing significant- while trying to get voting trends is good and all, its also likely people will vote yes- they want to see mission results too you know? At least this is FMPOV. Also, why did you vote yes if you agree that voting trends are important info? You should've voted no.

Mission 3.1: I vote yes because at that point I was suspicious of BBM and you. I thought BBM was trying to not be in the mission, and I felt your jump on me was oppurtunistic, but I wanted to confirm it, so I'm sorry. If it was a single sab, I could get a hint that you could be the second spy, but if it was a double sab, FMPOV, 2 of Proto,Rein and BBM would be spies. This also means that I didn't want ItS card to be used, yes. I thought it'd be a hindrance because if we actually catch a spy, we still wouldn't know if he's a spy or not.

Mission 3.2: Since BBM and Kay would definitely vote no to a team I'm in, and Elieson most likely would vote no to a team I'm in, I honestly saw no hope in voting no anyway- I was looking the most scummy, I'd say. As I said, I regret this, because had I voted no, we could've got voting trends(ok, maybe no because everyone voted yes.)

Mission 4- As I said earlier, its too late to start going after voting trends now. As BBM said, within the first three proposals, we should accept. Hence the "AS OF NOW, NO POINT". Because I'm pretty sure what team I'm going to accept.

[BBM]

Rein, you still haven't given your current opinions on people, other than Eclipse.

Meaning that if Eclipse is a spy, and she wanted to, on Proposal 4.5 (or if we make it, 5.5), she could seize control of the team and make herself the leader with one card, and use the other card to force a vote failure, yielding in a point for the Spies by default and costing us the game.

Spy!Eclipse can actually force the loss on 4.4. Say a team is proposed for 4.4. It has no spies, so Eclipse uses No Confidence. Before we move to 4.5, Eclipse uses Strong Leader. He's the leader again, and can propose a team with a spy. If we accept it, we lose, if we say no, we lose.

Tables, what happens if two people use Strong Leader simultaneously? Would the person who gives the order first or second become the leader?

[Elieson]

Note: If two or more people want to resolve plot cards simultaneously (e.g. Strong Leader and Take Responsibility), they are resolved in player order, starting from the current leader.

Straight from the Rules, BBM

[Bluedoom]

BBM: I know you said it before, but Eclipse is a she. So is Kay.

Also getting a post up atm.

[BBM]

Damnit, I just keep defaulting to he. Sorry guys!

Also, Rein, sorry, you DID say something about other people. You mentioned that you agree with Eclipse in that Marth and I have been acting scummy. I've responded to that point several times now, so I'm saying it for the last time.

In my opinion, voting no only to prolong the mission (aka voting no with no regards to who's actually in the mission) doesn't give anyone information about you. If voting is a form of telling people what you think of them, how does voting no just for more info, or to prolong discussion, do that?

[Bluedoom]

Oh right Kay, sorry for getting at you on your Mission 2 choice. Forgot you had a concussion.

[Bluedoom]

Oh yes, I don't think Proto's voting was exactly good either. First a no in Mission 2, then another no in Mission 3 on a team which he thought was optimal? And then yes for the second proposal when he wanted the team from the first proposal? No eclipse, maybe you're trying to cover up that, but Proto's actions will remain questionable.

Yes Proto looks weird with his votes, but you've been shady too in my eyes.

Because you're objectively wrong. See, if you're Resistance, then the following can be derived:

- One of Rein/Elieson is a spy

- One of me/Kay is a spy

So Mission 2 told us that either Elieson, BBM, or Rein is a spy.

Mission 3 told us either Kay, Proto/Eclipse, or BBM is a spy.

The common thread here is me, obviously, but as I know that I am not a spy, in my mind, that clears Marth, because two different spies were behind the two failings, leaving no place for Marth.

Marth can only be a spy if I am, so if you guys trust me, Marth is cleared and should be on the next mission.

Sounds like you missed his post, and that was his point. Now considering you've been re-reading the thread, and the way you've been acting towards BBM, it is highly unlikely that you missed this post, and instead are coming up with conjecture.

Did you miss the part where I yelled at the town for that? By using the card on Rein, all we learned is that the scum teams can't be Rein/Eli or Me/Kay.

Also, Eli and I cannot be spy buddies. Just food for thought.

I do agree with you on one point though. The card should have been used in the last minute, or, as I said earlier, not have been used at all just to get a 2 sab.

[eclipse]

I just got back from a stress test, and learned that my exertion BP is the average person's resting BP. This thread isn't helping my mood in the least. Thanks for posting Rein, now where the hell are you Kay?

Responding to SFMM2 and this, in order.

[eclipse]

Here we go. Here's my rule list, now linked.

1. Telling the town to shut up/not vote; the less public info the town has to work with, the better for the mafia. In Resistance terms, this means being against vetoing proposals. This was your first game-related post, no less.

2. Knowing things that aren't public knowledge. An example would be, "So our doctor failed because of a safeguard" when no one has claimed such. Doesn't apply as much to this kind of game.

3. Demanding people vote a certain way with consequences in NOC, unless it's someone refusing to vote for a cleared cop's guilty or something equally clear-cut. Town only has thread info and their own role PM, without the benefit of OC. Perhaps what you see isn't the best course of action.

4. Getting mad when they lose control of the conversation; this tells me that they had some benefit from controlling it in the first place.

5. Having No Opinion On Anything, including votes. Most likely to make sure that "you were tunneling" fails.

6. Following opinions without forming your own. Some people aren't great at self-expression, so that's why I consider this one on a case-by-case basis.

7. Bad logic, but I can't assume that people see things FMPOV. (do I need to link every single thing where you said vetoing things is bad?)

That's my opinion of you, and you are doing a horrible job of convincing me otherwise. Now, time for what I wanted to do, but couldn't. . .side time~! I will be basing this on votes/mission results, since those don't lie. EVER.

If you are Resistance

Elieson - Odds of BBM/Rein being a spy are really high; unfortunately, 3.2 didn't have Marth, which would've helped things a lot. You can also justify your string of Yes votes, as well, but it doesn't help the rest of us.

BigBangMeteor - Spies are one of Rein/Eli (mission 2) and Kay/me (mission 3). Oddly enough, you can't suspect Marth, even if he's never been on a mission.

apocalypseArisen - Out of everyone, you'd have every right to have a neutral opinion of Eli; it's very possible BBM sabotaged both, and is throwing you under the bus because you're not that great at defending yourself. If you think Eli's the spy, though, then it forces one of Kay/me to be a Spy as well.

Kay - You're certain that one of me/BBM is a spy, but not both. You don't have much else in the way of info, though.

eclipse - If BBM is not a Spy, then Kay must be a Spy; the other one would be one of Rein/Eli. If BBM is a Spy, the other one is anyone that isn't you. Literally.

Marth - Your innocence is directly tied to BBM, or so you think. Even if he is a Spy, it doesn't make you auto-Spy; it's very possible that he's a Spy and you're not experienced enough to figure out the second one.

If you are a Spy

Elieson - Rein and Marth are clear, no two ways around it.

BigBangMeteor - EVERYONE is under suspicion. How convenient.

apocalypseArisen - Elieson and Marth are clear.

Kay - Yours Truly and Marth are clear.

eclipse - Kay and Marth are clear.

Marth - BBM MUST be your partner; you being a spy clears everyone else.

It seems that there's a very high chance that Marth is clear, based on the virtue that you geniuses sent the same person on every single mission. I'm sending myself, for obvious reasons. After rereading my matrix, I'm inclined to think that Rein's the most likely to be Resistance out of the lot of you; he sure as hell didn't sabotage Mission 3, and neither did I.

I'll tentatively put this out, but unless I see amazing arguments, this will probably stand:

Me/Rein/Marth

I'll attempt to reply to everything else, but it's past my bedtime, and I need to be mobile tomorrow.

[eclipse]

I hit 3, and I maybe hit 7. I definitely didn't hit 1, 2, or 6. For 4, you keep saying I got mad when you started to disagree with me. No. As I proved, I started suspecting you before you said anything, even if the logic I gave then wasn't the best, and then I started suspecting you more not because you were trying to wrest control of the thread from me, because I don't think I had control of anything, but that you were trying to wrest it at all. To me, I already kind of thought you were suspicious, and then you come in here with guns blazing and yelling at everybody, and the first thing I thought was that you saw that the spyteam had been correctly picked and were trying to change people's minds about it. For 5, the fact that I've voted yes for most of the missions doesn't change that I've still had an opinion.

1. Already responded to half of this.

2. "ZOMG SHE ASKED US FOR OPINIONS, AND YELLED AT US FOR NOT TALKING!" If that's your idea of me wresting control of anything, then you're sorely mistaken.

And since Marth's name isn't one of the four up there, it can be further objectively derived that if I am Resistance, Marth is as well. What problem are you having with this?

The part where you're Resistance.

I think the decision of who the card is used on should be a team decision, not made solely by the person who has it. Or who the card should go to should have been talked about more, and when I said that it doesn't really matter who it goes to, someone should have refuted that point.

I think the decision should be made by the people the card-holder trusts. Why the hell should I let someone who I'm strongly suspicious of tell me what to do?

What I'm giving is my justification for voting no if that mission is proposed.

That's nice, but you're 1/6 of the game. It's up to the other 4/6 whether or not it passes.

My point is simply to remind people that it might be good to settle on something in the first 3 proposals. And you actually do have another Strong Leader card, Rein gave it to Proto when he was made leader for Mission 3.1, and I gave Proto the No Confidence card I got when I was the leader in 1.1.

I've gotta ditch the one I just drew. Unless I see a compelling reason (i.e. if someone else paints a target on their head), I probably won't use Strong Leader. If I see a team I really don't like, and I think it's gonna cost the game, I'll use No Confidence.

Sounds like you missed his post, and that was his point. Now considering you've been re-reading the thread, and the way you've been acting towards BBM, it is highly unlikely that you missed this post, and instead are coming up with conjecture.

Post anything this remotely brain-dead again, and I will give you a small taste of what Life would've said if you said the same thing about him.

[BBM]

God damnit, I've never said that vetoing things is bad, I've said that vetoing things for a bad reason is bad. And in my opinion, more voting trends is one of those bad reasons.

I think the decision should be made by the people the card-holder trusts. Why the hell should I let someone who I'm strongly suspicious of tell me what to do?

You know, there are four other people on this team who are not you and me. Assuming for a second that you are not a spy and I am, and me and my spybuddy tell you to do something and everyone else tells you to do something different, it'd still be a team majority decision if you didn't follow my opinion and that of the other person you found scummy.

That's nice, but you're 1/6 of the game. It's up to the other 4/6 whether or not it passes.

Obviously. But I like giving proper justification for my votes.

On a side note, your new avatar is pretty cool, Eclipse.

[Tables]

Eclipse: Like, another 6 hours or so since I said the deadline(ish) would be? Lots of discussion moving the game, but let's try to back that up with actions.

[Elieson]

I gotta ask. Is it Table-Skitty, or Tables-Kitty. I keep assuming your name is the latter, but I would like to know, for the sake of not looking dumb when I refer to you as Skitty

[eclipse]

1. It's Tables-kitty. Check the Resistance 2 thread and the original SFMM thread for more details. . .especially the latter.

2. I'm rather disappointed that it took me screaming to get this much out of everyone. There's too many people who are Kefka-style waiters.

3. Since I don't see amazing logic anywhere. . .

Proposed Mission 4.1: eclipse, Rein, Marth

Giving Strong Leader to Rein

(because Rein is doing a better job of acting like Resistance than the rest of you)

[Elieson]

1. It's Tables-kitty. Check the Resistance 2 thread and the original SFMM thread for more details. . .especially the latter.

2. I'm rather disappointed that it took me screaming to get this much out of everyone. There's too many people who are Kefka-style waiters.

3. Since I don't see amazing logic anywhere. . .

Proposed Mission 4.1: eclipse, Rein, Marth

Giving Strong Leader to Rein

(because Rein is doing a better job of acting like Resistance than the rest of you)

@1. Sounds good, I'll check that out in a few. Thanks for the tip.

@2. At least we're all learning something. It sucks that it's this far in the game, but BBM and I are new, and now we know for the future (and for the rest of this game too).

@3. Fine. I'll vote, and we'll all discuss our votes later.

[Elieson]

Gais, have u all voted? If I find out someone was too lazy to pm 1 word to Tables, I'm going to assume more than inactivity.