Mafiascum.net

↑ VictorDeAngelo wrote:

↑ 2birds1stone wrote:
Victor, you said BooKitty was "taking RVS too seriously", you cannot tell me you didn't have an issue with ProHawk's play too.

Funny, that seems to be exactly what I'm telling you.

What was the difference between the way I was taking RVS seriously and the way Prohawk was taking RVS seriously, in your view?

What makes you think we were still in RVS at the time you commented, actually?

UNVOTE: . My vote was on Salamence and was an RVS vote. Thinking.

↑ Bookitty wrote:

↑ VictorDeAngelo wrote:

↑ 2birds1stone wrote:
Victor, you said BooKitty was "taking RVS too seriously", you cannot tell me you didn't have an issue with ProHawk's play too.

Funny, that seems to be exactly what I'm telling you.

What was the difference between the way I was taking RVS seriously and the way Prohawk was taking RVS seriously, in your view?

I'm going to spend time going over page 2 posts to explain why I thought you were taking it more seriously than he was. I found you too serious, I voted you, I have now moved on. Why don't you do the same?

What makes you think we were still in RVS at the time you commented, actually?

It was page 2, do I seriously have to justify that?

What are your thoughts on 2birds and Garmr?

Oh hey, we seem to be out of random vote stage. Good, I was never too comfortable with that, and coming back from a two year hiatus has not changed it.

So, Garmr. He was the first player who caught my attention, before the funny claims even, so I had a quick look at his past games to see who I was dealing with. One observation stood out - Garmr is good at staying alive. He has not only won but survived twice as scum, and has been endgamed several times. That gives me a town read on him. I can't think of a reason why he would have deliberately called attention to himself like this if he were scum. I could imagine a reason why scum could do that though - trying to look like carefree town. I have tried it myself in the past, not that it ever worked. I think Garmr is too experienced to try such a stunt, or to even need such trickery.

I don't know about 2birds, need to give him a closer look later. But, town on town fights are fairly typical for early game.

My vote stays on ProHawk. I did not like his initial vote, and in his ten posts he has said and done remarkably little.

Waffle is pinging my newbie scum radar. So is BooKitty (may be some associative action in there).

And there's no way anyone should like Victor's post 93, that "vote twice inside the same post" action is SUPER forced.

↑ VictorDeAngelo wrote:I'm going to spend time going over page 2 posts to explain why I thought you were taking it more seriously than he was. I found you too serious, I voted you, I have now moved on. Why don't you do the same?

Because assessing motivation is one of the clearest ways I know of to find scum. If you actually thought I was taking it more seriously, you wouldn't have to look up page 2 posts; you could just tell us what you were thinking at the time.

Also, I've seen games go out of RVS in page 1 if someone made a serious scumslip. I don't think we were in RVS at the point you made your comment. I want to know why you thought we were still in RVS.

I'm still null on Garmr. Not no-information null, but conflicting information null. I don't like his joke posts, but I also think they drew a lot of attention to him in the early part of the game. I'm not sure that's something scum would do. That said, I don't buy the "gambit" comment. Trying to act very very scummy isn't usually a productive way to catch scum in my opinion -- it's more likely to catch town who spot what they believe to be scumtells and vote accordingly. So still null on Garmr.

I'm still thinking about 2birds1stone. The "I am trying to look awesomely townie" thing is the exact opposite of Garmr's "I'm trying to look horribly scummy" and both seem odd from a town perspective.

Gun to my head, I'd probably vote 2birds1stone of the two mentioned. That said, they aren't the only two choices out there.

What do you think of Prohawk, Victor?

↑ massive wrote:Waffle is pinging my newbie scum radar. So is BooKitty (may be some associative action in there).

Not a newbie. Just so you know.

↑ Feysal wrote:Oh hey, we seem to be out of random vote stage. Good, I was never too comfortable with that, and coming back from a two year hiatus has not changed it.

So, Garmr. He was the first player who caught my attention, before the funny claims even, so I had a quick look at his past games to see who I was dealing with. One observation stood out - Garmr is good at staying alive. He has not only won but survived twice as scum, and has been endgamed several times. That gives me a town read on him. I can't think of a reason why he would have deliberately called attention to himself like this if he were scum. I could imagine a reason why scum could do that though - trying to look like carefree town. I have tried it myself in the past, not that it ever worked. I think Garmr is too experienced to try such a stunt, or to even need such trickery.

I don't know about 2birds, need to give him a closer look later. But, town on town fights are fairly typical for early game.

My vote stays on ProHawk. I did not like his initial vote, and in his ten posts he has said and done remarkably little.

When I want to look really town I usually get night one killed.

↑ Bookitty wrote:VOTE: Flubbernugget

The vote may not be on 2 stoned birds but I approve of that vote. Btw can you tell me why you're voting Flubber through I ask so you can appeal to my vanity.

Can I wait for a bit? I promise I will later.

↑ massive wrote:Waffle is pinging my newbie scum radar. So is BooKitty (may be some associative action in there).

And there's no way anyone should like Victor's post 93, that "vote twice inside the same post" action is SUPER forced.

Vic's post looks more stream of concious than forced.

Garmr vs 2birds. What do you see?

↑ ProHawk wrote:Hey guys, News Flash.

↑ Flubbernugget wrote:VOTE: ProHawk

You're full of shit

This is not RVS. Unless Flubber is just saying I am shit because he wants to be a dick.

What is it?

Full of shit != is shit.

↑ Bookitty wrote:Can I wait for a bit? I promise I will later.

Ohh I wanted you to say because he vote on you was bad and you did something right.

↑ Bookitty wrote:

↑ VictorDeAngelo wrote:I'm

*not*

going to spend time going over page 2 posts to explain why I thought you were taking it more seriously than he was. I found you too serious, I voted you, I have now moved on. Why don't you do the same?

Because assessing motivation is one of the clearest ways I know of to find scum. If you actually thought I was taking it more seriously, you wouldn't have to look up page 2 posts; you could just tell us what you were thinking at the time.

Funnily enough, I realised I missed the word not out in the original post. lol. Either way I've moved on, deal with it.

Also, I've seen games go out of RVS in page 1 if someone made a serious scumslip. I don't think we were in RVS at the point you made your comment. I want to know why you thought we were still in RVS.

It happens but it's somewhat rare and it didn't happen here.

Gun to my head, I'd probably vote 2birds1stone of the two mentioned. That said, they aren't the only two choices out there.

They aren't and curiously enough I didn't ask because I wanted you to vote one of them, mere curiosity.

What do you think of Prohawk, Victor?

I'm fine with his questioning on page 2 and nothing has really pinged me one way or another. Null.

I voted Flubbernugget because VictorAngelo voted and unvoted him in the same post. That looked like distancing to me. The fact that Flubbernugget jumped on your wagon with what I view as non-reasoning made him scummy in himself. Flubbernugget also hasn't commented on either VA's vote or my vote on him. VA didn't comment my vote either, although it supposedly echoed his own suspicions in his "stream of consciousness" post.

That pings my scumdar hard enough that I'm comfortable with this vote and in fact this lynch.

Also I was waiting for Flubbernugget or VA to respond. Now they both have. Hence your explanation.

↑ Bookitty wrote:I voted Flubbernugget because VictorAngelo voted and unvoted him in the same post. That looked like distancing to me.

1

The fact that Flubbernugget jumped on your wagon with what I view as non-reasoning made him scummy in himself. Flubbernugget also hasn't commented on either VA's vote or my vote on him. VA didn't comment my vote either, although it supposedly echoed his own suspicions in his "stream of consciousness" post.

2

That pings my scumdar hard enough that I'm comfortable with this vote and in fact this lynch.

- This doesn't make sense. If you think the scummiest thing about Flubber is my interactions you should be voting me before him.

- And what was supposed to said about your vote. It was a naked vote that you said would be explained later. Why would anyone comment on it until you explained?

Read what immediately follows your 1.

And 2, I didn't really expect you to say anything about it. I did, however, expect Flubbernugget to say something about it, especially since he started posting exactly 12 minutes after I voted him. His ISO before that was abysmal.

Do you think Flubbernugget is scum, VA? Why or why not?

↑ Bookitty wrote:Read what immediately follows your 1.

And 2, I didn't really expect you to say anything about it. I did, however, expect Flubbernugget to say something about it, especially since he started posting exactly 12 minutes after I voted him. His ISO before that was abysmal.

In 116 you said you were waiting for me and Flubber to respond. Were you simply waiting for me to turn up and not mention it?

Do you think Flubbernugget is scum, VA? Why or why not?

I think the answer would be pretty obvious if you reread 93.

ITT: Bootkitty claims she is not a newbie, and then votes me for pre-flip associatives.

And I have no problem with Vic's vote on me right now.

**FoS on me.

↑ Flubbernugget wrote:ITT: Bootkitty claims she is not a newbie, and then votes me for pre-flip associatives.

Again, I voted you for your poorly supported vote on Garmr (that looked like an RVS vote, honestly, but NO ONE better be arguing we're in RVS now). The association between you and VA was noted but not the motivating reason; had it been, I might have indulged my OMGUS impulse and voted him.

I expected you to have some sort of response, VA, but I also didn't expect Garmr to jump out and ask me why I voted Flubbernugget. I figured some people would read Flubbernugget's ISO and look at his vote and figure it out. The fact that Flubbernugget didn't respond at all other than to comment on a whole bunch of other stuff didn't make me think I was wrong, though.

↑ Bookitty wrote:
I didn't really expect you to say anything about it.

↑ Bookitty wrote:
I expected you to have some sort of response, VA, but I also didn't expect Garmr to jump out and ask me why I voted Flubbernugget.

What sort of response did you expect without me saying anything, a telekinetic signal?