Execution Mafia: Days of the Cold War GAMEOVER

[SleepyKrew]

I still very much think you're scum too

[Tragedy]

Tragedy
SCUM

Tragedy is like the only one I agree with.

Let's see how you guys are thinking...
> IMPLOSION/QUILFORD AGREES THAT I'M BEING UNCLEAR ABOUT MY READS.
> I FINISH MY READS (EXCEPT FOR SCUMHUNTER)
> THEN VEZOK AGREES THAT I'M SCUM (WITH NO EXPLANATION)
> THEN SK AND QUILFORD AGREES THAT I'M SCUM.

I don't see how your minds work, saying that I'm scum right away without a detailed case on myself. Am I missing something from here?

@MOI:

"What would be my scum motivation for specifically NOT asking to be Executioner?"

Sounds like scum would obviously know who's going to be misexecuted for the Day, thus, agreeing to a certain obviously townie that would always get mislynched/misexecuted, just like the others.

[Cosca]

We're retracting our Scumhunter read for now. More coming soon.

[SleepyKrew]

walawalawutwut

[SleepyKrew]

Eh fuck it I'm lazy, Scumhunter's been scumtastic and isn't reading the game, contradictions, blah blah blah

[SleepyKrew]

Also TownPRhunter, make up your mind. Am I scum or not? Cause I'm seeing a

lot

of waffling.

[Cosca]

Eh fuck it I'm lazy, Scumhunter's been scumtastic and isn't reading the game, contradictions, blah blah blah

Elaborate, please.

[SleepyKrew]

Eh fuck it I'm lazy

, Scumhunter's been scumtastic and isn't reading the game, contradictions, blah blah blah

Buuuuuuuuuut.
Generally scummy vibes coming off of him. Continually proving he's not reading the game. The waffle on me big enough to make the Belgians jealous. And stuff MoI said.

[SleepyKrew]

K so, I'd like one of these three to be killed today (no particular order):
Cosca
Tragedy
Scumhunter

[implosion]

> IMPLOSION/QUILFORD AGREES THAT I'M BEING UNCLEAR ABOUT MY READS.

This isn't the reason I'm suspicious of you. I'm suspicious of you because your scumhunting, for some reason, does not feel genuine.

[Scumhunter]

implosion, many before you have made the same mistake and ML'd Tragedy. Please trust me on this one at least for today. I have played 2 previous games with her and read through some of her other ones. This is definitely her town play. See the scum-game I linked of hers or look through some of her past games if you want. She is definitely town. Also what are your opinions on [MoI, Jason, Zeng, SK]?

SK, my handful of posts today have more content in them than your 178 combined posts of one-liners and useless, baseless finger pointing. Specific reads on all player slots NOW. I'm sick of your shit. Start being useful or hang. I spent a good 3-4 hours before I even made my first post reading the entire thread and producing reads on everyone. What exactly have you done? Jack shit. That's what. Implying I'm not paying attention to this game is fucking insulting.

[Scumhunter]

SK, how the fuck am I waffling on you? I've said over and over that I think very strongly that you are scum or at the very least incredibly anti-town. If you are town, PROVE ME WRONG. START BEING USEFUL. POST READS THAT AREN'T GENERAL BAD FEELING AND HAVE SOME ACTUAL INSIGHT. HOLY FUCK.

I don't want to focus too much on you right now, just on the off chance that you are the biggest VI I have encountered to date. I'd like more discussion on other slots, particularly [MoI, Jason, and Zeng].

[implosion]

Also what are your opinions on [MoI, Jason, Zeng, SK]?

Town, really no clue, town, scum.

I might look through some tragedy games if i feel like it later.

[Tragedy]

> IMPLOSION/QUILFORD AGREES THAT I'M BEING UNCLEAR ABOUT MY READS.

This isn't the reason I'm suspicious of you. I'm suspicious of you because your scumhunting, for some reason, does not feel genuine.

Oh right...
But this is about Quilford too.

[SleepyKrew]

Wow, how manufactured a reaction can be in a 5 minute window.
Capstime.
OBVSCUM IS DEFINITELY NOT THE SAME AS ANTITOWN SO MAKE UP YOUR MIND
IT'S NOT MY FAULT YOU KEEP ASKING QUESTIONS THAT WERE ALREADY ANSWERED
ESPECIALLY ONES THAT WERE ANSWERED RIGHT BEFORE YOU ASKED THEM

PEDIT: DIESCUMDIE

[Scumhunter]

Sleepy Krew, what are your opinions on each slot in this game? I'd like a paragraph on each with reasoning for why their actions are town or scum motivated. For someone who reads the thread as thoroughly as yourself you should have no problem doing it

Refusal to do so will be treated as a scum claim.

[SleepyKrew]

When did I say I read the thread thoroughly? Walls make me shit myself...
You'll get your paragraphs (school hasn't even started yet and he's got me writing...). Eventually.

[vezokpiraka]

Hey.

Scumhunter is even worse than Chaos_Omega. Guess who shot up my list of suspects?

[Quilford]

> IMPLOSION/QUILFORD AGREES THAT I'M BEING UNCLEAR ABOUT MY READS.

This isn't the reason I'm suspicious of you. I'm suspicious of you because your scumhunting, for some reason, does not feel genuine.

Oh right...
But this is about Quilford too.

Something about Tragedy's posting is reading as disingenuous.

This is exactly what I wanted to say.

[SleepyKrew]

L
O
L

[SleepyKrew]

Maybe this?

L

L

[MagnaofIllusion]

Looking at the reads list I am going to

VOTE: Vezok

I’m also for supporting Zang and implosion but don’t support their top kills per Quilford’s list (Quil and SK)

Reminder people – do not vote anyone to L-1 today as we need CC’s replacement to hammer to prove Double Voting Status at L-2.

--

Sounds like scum would obviously know who's going to be misexecuted for the Day, thus, agreeing to a certain obviously townie that would always get mislynched/misexecuted, just like the others.

Ok, so before thing one had been established about who the Town consencus for the Day Exectuion I came out and said I didn’t want to be Executioner (for the reasons I have stated) because I knew who the obvious mislynch was?

Insert face-palm pic here …

--

Where is the problem? We responded to a part of your post and quoted that part. That's standard practice. For instance, you yourself cropped that part of our post:

No, it’s standard practice to remove parts of the quote that don’t apply to the point being made. For example the aside about a ‘No Win Situation’ that I removed was pure game theory and had nothing to do with the point at hand – that you were portraying my reasons for voting you as solely ‘trying to get rid of someone who suspects me”.

There is simply no scum motivation in cropping a quote when everybody can read the original post a few posts before that.

Yes there is … most people don’t read back when looking at a Wall back and forth. This is pretty much established given that people usually tend to skim things that they don’t think apply to them (as shown by Scumhunter not seeing Tragedy bringing up the “Asking for Claim” discussion regarding the Night Execution).

I only noticed because it was my post and I knew what you were saying was a scummy, flat out lie.

There also isn’t a credible Town motivation to redact parts of a post that directly apply to the discussion at hand.

Except those suspicions only cropped up when you made your post. You NEVER before called us out on the N1 voting discussion after I noted I made a mistake, or on the Vezok read. This only became important after we suspected you.

1. The first part is a pure lie. Obviously I called out Iceguy on his scummy stance. You can read my ISO and see my back and forth where I question him about it. Just because your slot was overshadowed by scumtastic play by CC and Sleepy Day 1 doesn’t mean I didn’t observe and note your suspect play.
2. You didn’t call Vezok scum until today. Yesterday the slot was at worst Neutral. Why you are somehow attacking me for never calling you out before today again? If you didn't call him scum Day 1 I can hardly suspect you then for doing it ...

Of course you'd be all too happy to execute somebody who sees you as what you are.

Yes, I’m happy to execute someone I think is scum who sees me as someone who isn’t going to be snowed by crap attacks.

Our play is not scummy. You are constructing a case out of thin air.

Saying you aren’t playing scummy doesn’t make it so. It’s not just me that suspects you. If Quilford’s list is accurate Sleepy also considers you scum, Zang has you leaning scum, and Implosion, Tragedy and vezok all have you at best Neutral.

Vezok's "scum opinions" consisted of three scum reads without justification, one of which was codfish. He kept on posting in the game thread to give the appearance of content, and in other threads on the site.

Vezok’s play is easy to read. If you are expecting grand cases from him you are going to read him as scum everytime. He’s not prolific and not a great poster but his motivations can be discerned if you put a little effort (aka not just saying “He’s bad he’s scum”). Your grandstanding is either scum-play looking to attack the said easy target (traditional VI Vezok) or shows you don’t have a great grasp on Mafia, IMO.

I see you support my theory when you post this in your next post (I’ve bolded the important part)–

Also, his MoI attack is based on flimsy arguments, but attacking him doesn't seem like something scum would do.

Scum would concentrate on the easy targets, such as SK, not on MoI.

--

MoI, you stating you didn't want to be executioner could be for a number of reasons. Scum wouldn't want to be the executioner and put themselves at the forefront of the game too early on. You would have to explain your reasons for executing someone. Also, you stating you didn't want to be executioner is a way to buddy the town if you are scum. It's not like you were fervently saying "oh please no, stop coordinating your votes for me as night executioner". Your sentiment was an empty one meant to put people at ease and say oh well MoI isn't trying to run the show lets trust that he will get scum for us. That attitude is CLEARLY contradictory with not trusting other people's judgment. MoI executioner...BOOM, dead town pr.

^^ This is of what could be going on if you are in fact scum. I'm not saying you are necessarily scum but you are in the subset of 4 people [Jason, SK, Zang, MoI] that I would literally eat my hat if at least 2 of you aren't scum. I'm very very confident there are 2 scum in there at least.

1. Does the fence-post hurt here? You spend that long paragraph laying out very clearly why there is clear scum motivation to my play. You apparently disagree with my reasoning why it is Town play. Yet then we get the pull-back – you aren’t necessarily scum and I’m just one of a list that you will ‘eat a hat’ if there are not two scum there. Leaving yourself to go either way later. Scummy.
2. Zang isn’t scum. His posting style, like Vezok’s, is transparent. I know I’m Town so you are willing to ‘eat a hat’ (which is pointless rhetoric fluffery, BTW) that both SK and Jason are scum?

Oh and I obviously was reading the thread. I did see that Tragedy had said the same thing. I'm saying it again to reinforce that it is a valid point and that you need to be suspected a lot more than you currently are. You can try to play the "Scumhunter is an uninformed replacement" card, but just letting you know its bullshit. I spent several hours reading the game meticulously

so try another scum-appeal to drown out those voices you don't like to hear why don't you

1. Where are you lying … here or before? Because before you said you were disappointed no-one had brought up that fact. Yet it was CLEARLY brought up. This is a back-track of epic porportions (oh, I saw it and was just reinforcing it) which doesn’t make sense.

I’m not calling you an uniformed replacement. I think you are very much scum who skims things that didn’t directly apply to your interests (you’ve clearly established you that you think Tragedy must be Town … so you don’t bother reading her posts to look for alignment since you know it to be true if you are buddying that slot as scum) and tried grandstanding in attacking me and it backfired.

I love the bolded – attacking you on you crap suddenly is a scum appeal meant to drown you out and not scum-hunting … nice rhetoric there.

I'm not pushing for a MoI execution today, mainly because its possible he is town and will be useful as the game goes on (and also I doubt anyone but me would have the balls to make that execution today if given the power). That being said I think we would all be wise to strongly consider the fact that MoI is scum. There are far better execution options [Jason, SK, Zang] for today though.

Oh look, the fence-sitting goes into full effect.

I’m not pushing for MoI to be executed because he could be Town but we definitely should consider him scum.

Translation

– I want to discredit him but now have to back off as he’s blown up my arguments and is starting to apply heat to me.

[MagnaofIllusion]

Given the most recent events I'm going to revise my Scum reads as follows

Cosca, Scumhunter and Jason are the players I would support execution on.

I've removed Tragedy due to the buddying displayed by Scumhunter. I can't see them as scum together and I have a stronger read on Scumhunter at this juncture than Tragedy.

[SleepyKrew]

Can we do Cosca first?
UNVOTE:
VOTE: vezok
MoI for NightExec again hooah.

[Cosca]

Where is the problem? We responded to a part of your post and quoted that part. That's standard practice. For instance, you yourself cropped that part of our post:

No, it’s standard practice to remove parts of the quote that don’t apply to the point being made. For example the aside about a ‘No Win Situation’ that I removed was pure game theory and had nothing to do with the point at hand – that you were portraying my reasons for voting you as solely ‘trying to get rid of someone who suspects me”.

Of course they were relevant to the point at hand. It showed how you could make a scum case no matter what we did. And a "case" that starts with the desire to paint some player as scum and tries to find "arguments" for it - no matter how flimsy - is a scum move, not a scumhunting move.

There is simply no scum motivation in cropping a quote when everybody can read the original post a few posts before that.

Yes there is … most people don’t read back when looking at a Wall back and forth. This is pretty much established given that people usually tend to skim things that they don’t think apply to them (as shown by Scumhunter not seeing Tragedy bringing up the “Asking for Claim” discussion regarding the Night Execution).

So you're arguing that they are going to skim over your post, but read your quotes in our post in-depth, and are therefore going to misled because we removed a part that had nothing to do with the "argument" we were refuting?

I only noticed because it was my post and I knew what you were saying was a scummy, flat out lie.

There also isn’t a credible Town motivation to redact parts of a post that directly apply to the discussion at hand.

So you're stating there was no Town motivation for you to remove the part about the no-win situation?

1. The first part is a pure lie. Obviously I called out Iceguy on his scummy stance. You can read my ISO and see my back and forth where I question him about it. Just because your slot was overshadowed by scumtastic play by CC and Sleepy Day 1 doesn’t mean I didn’t observe and note your suspect play

You did not call me out after I admitted I made a mistake (I thought about majority voting, not about plurality voting).

2. You didn’t call Vezok scum until today. Yesterday the slot was at worst Neutral. Why you are somehow attacking me for never calling you out before today again? If you didn't call him scum Day 1 I can hardly suspect you then for doing it ...

You posted between our leaning scum read on Vezok and your post where you called us scummy. Why didn't you call us out immediately?

Yes, I’m happy to execute someone I think is scum who sees me as someone who isn’t going to be snowed by crap attacks.

Your theory simply does not add up. There is absolutely no scum motivation in anything we've done.

Saying you aren’t playing scummy doesn’t make it so. It’s not just me that suspects you. If Quilford’s list is accurate Sleepy also considers you scum, Zang has you leaning scum, and Implosion, Tragedy and vezok all have you at best Neutral.

We were considered town or leaning town until you expressed suspicions. People are simply sheeping you - and you know that people tend to do this.

Vezok’s play is easy to read. If you are expecting grand cases from him you are going to read him as scum everytime. He’s not prolific and not a great poster but his motivations can be discerned if you put a little effort (aka not just saying “He’s bad he’s scum”). Your grandstanding is either scum-play looking to attack the said easy target (traditional VI Vezok) or shows you don’t have a great grasp on Mafia, IMO.

So your argument is: Vezok is town because he doesn't post good arguments for his scum cases, but Cosca is scum because he doesn't post good arguments for his scum cases. Right then.

I see you support my theory when you post this in your next post (I’ve bolded the important part)–

Also, his MoI attack is based on flimsy arguments, but attacking him doesn't seem like something scum would do.

Scum would concentrate on the easy targets, such as SK, not on MoI.

What problem do you have with this quote?

Just so everybody can follow the discussion, here is a short version of MoI's "case" against us:
1. IceGuy made a mistake and thought the night executioner was elected by majority voting, not plurality voting. He therefore thought up a scheme which would have lead to the exposure of at least one scum player.
2. Vezok posted fluff and we called him out on that.
3. MoI was showing much less activity then he usually was, and we called him out on that. After he made a content post, we retracted our suspicion and agreed this post was enough to satisfy our activity requirements.

Yes. That's it. That's why he originally called us scum. After we responded to him, he added an additional point:
4. We cut out a piece of his quote irrelevant to our current argument. And then he did

exactly the same thing

in the process of calling us out for that.

I know you like to follow MoI, but ask yourself what the hell MoI is trying to accomplish here, especially since

he never called us out on 1. and 2. before we suspected him

.