In post 176, emps wrote:also fark, why do ur reads changed based off of ppls read on u?
In post 193, emps wrote:what do you guys think of farks reads being reactive to everyone elses reads on them?
I'm not adjusting reads based on words only, rather on actions. I had assumed (and i'm still not entirely convinced) that she was NOT aware her hammer vote was fake, since i genuinely thought speaking after having been lynched was going against the rules. I still think it should not be allowed: if you get lynched, you either prepared your testament in advance (like we used to do in old forum mafias through the [lastwill] command) or you go out silent. For this reason, i changed my mind on Selynee being townish.
Besides, you and Selynee are the only ones i changed my mind about. You said you weren't going to L-1 me and then two posts later you did, lol. More explanations on this on the my answers below.
In post 182, Sushi Martyr wrote:Selynee wrote:Nah, not against the rules. Also, if there was a real hammer against town page 6, person would be lynched 90% of the time D2. Not such a great deal for mafia.
Why is Notspam town?
@ Farkran: Can you answer the question at the end of it? That part confused me too (you putting NMSA at 70% town).
I understand you think of me as a newbie, and legitimately so since this is my first game in this forum, and my first mafia game altogether after more than 7 years. I'm not hiding behind the newbie shield though, i am getting tells from people's posts and actions. Most pro-town people at the moment are notmyspam, Menalque, possibly sushi. I also really didn't like epic posts, i'd like to hear more from him - skitter is hiding behind VLA so anything i say about her would be irrelevant at this point.
In post 217, Sushi Martyr wrote: In post 174, Farkran wrote: In post 173, Selynee wrote:Nah, not against the rules. Also, if there was a real hammer against town page 6, person would be lynched 90% of the time D2. Not such a great deal for mafia.
Why is Notspam town?
Are you saying anyone hammering town in d1 is going to be lynched d2? How optimistic of you. I like your style though, you really look like town when questioning like that. It's your actions that i am doubting.
@ Farkran: Forgive me if I'm being dense, but are you being sarcastic here?
Yes, i'm being overly sarcastic. Because, at one point during this day, someone WILL hammer a player and chances are it will be on a town vanilla due to sheer odds statistics. How in the world does that mean that whoever hammered him will be lynched in d2? I didn't like that reasoning at all. Someone has to be lynched, that i can agree with, but the way you do it gives tells.
In post 222, teacher wrote: In post 167, Farkran wrote: In post 159, teacher wrote:
Hammer testing tends town or partner. Why does it make you scumread them?
And emps, I always reread rvs. Some of the more useful associations are there, before scum get the feel of the room and can play into/against it as needed.
That didn't look hammer testing to me. Claiming (or speaking at all) after being lynched is against the rules if i am not mistaken. That looked more like genuine rushy bandwagon.
How do you define hammertesting?
It can’t be a bandwagon because they were already there. So answer the question: why does a second, and purportedly hammer (but not) - vote strike you as scummy?
Also, why is bandwaggoning scummy?
Try to see it from my point of view. If she wasn't aware of fakehammering, it would be a huge bandwagon move. I insist on saying she wasn't aware of it because it didn't made sense to me, since speaking after having lynched is against the rules - that's what i thought. There's even a line about "bah-posting". Could we actually get this mod-clarified? Can you speak after having been hammered or not?
Also, bandwagoning on the early train is one of the scummiest tells to me. That moved Selynee down my list of suspected scum.