Mafiascum.net

Why are you interrupting me Wake?

Almost, do you have any reads now?

In post 120, Almost50 wrote:

In post 99, Wake1 wrote:Almost50 ———✶ I question podoboq's current vote. What do you think?

Not sure what you're talking about. Neither am I voting podoq nor is he voting me (at least on my count)

His current vote on me. What do you think about it?

In post 121, Almost50 wrote:Oh, I missed the last line. Get well soon, mate.

Thank you. It's been a rollercoaster.

In post 112, Titus wrote:If you think that my case might be sheepable,

If I did I would have been voting with you already regardless. A good case is a good case, besides I don't even know if this is single-ball, multi-ball, single-ball with 3P ..etc.

To me; SHEEPING would mean I have no preference myself (i.e. null read) so I would follow someone else's read. Notice that I said "on people I had no prior experience with" (I'm paraphrasing my own words)?? I won't be sheeping you on people I can read myself.

In post 112, Titus wrote:Doubly so given I don't have an obvtown gene and you know this.

yeah, but when you're scum you obv!scum sooner than later (at least to me).

In post 125, Titus wrote:Why are you interrupting me Wake?

Almost, do you have any reads now?

This isn't a 19-man face-to-face conversation. It's a message-board thread.

Please don't avoid my questions Titus. It's making me feel uncomfortable about your alignment.

You said that someone voting you means that person is scumreading you.

I say that's not necessarily true, because it isn't.

Instead of responding to my point you ask me why I'm interrupting you.

Me: Like why are you not being logically and why are you avoiding the point. Please respond to my points Titus.

In post 117, Dunnstral wrote:VOTE: Almost50

Good for you! I was wondering when THAT will happen, actually!

In post 125, Titus wrote:Why are you interrupting me Wake?

Almost, do you have any reads now?

Not really, no. But I know we need to keep the pressure on PV to keep him from lurking for the entire game!

VOTE: PeregrineV

P.S. I know he hasn't done it yet, but he is a well known and documented lurker, and bringing him back to game AFTER he starts lurking is harder than keeping him in it from the word go.

Almost50, do you see that Titus is avoiding my point against her?

More people need to be aware of this.

In post 129, Wake1 wrote:

In post 125, Titus wrote:Why are you interrupting me Wake?

Almost, do you have any reads now?

This isn't a 19-man face-to-face conversation. It's a message-board thread.

Please don't avoid my questions Titus. It's making me feel uncomfortable about your alignment.

1)

You said that someone voting you means that person is scumreading you.

2)

I say that's not necessarily true, because it isn't.

3)

Instead of responding to my point you ask me why I'm interrupting you.

4)

Me: Like why are you not being logically and why are you avoiding the point. Please respond to my points Titus.

Yeah, a vote at this point is a scumread from someone actively following along, or it's someone who has no desire to sort the thread, which is a scumclaim. Your vote says "I want this person removed from the game".

You're being semantic and interrupting my questioning trying to sort Almost and trying to play semantic games while interpreting someone else's read rather than letting them speak for themselves.

In post 126, Wake1 wrote:His current vote on me. What do you think about it?

Unfortunately I don't have a read on you nor on him. I don't think I've played with either of you before, so it may take me a bit longer to get a read on either/both of you.

My preliminary conclusion (and this is probably carved on water or sand at best) is that some players consider you a threat in this game. If they're town they're afraid of scum!you. If they're scum they're afraid of town!you.

Ok.. I've just ISO'd podoq, and I don't see why he called you that even before you posted when he said he didn't know you. The key here is whether he said that with tongue-in-cheek (i.e. you're actually friends), or if it came out of nowhere. Care to share?

In post 133, Wake1 wrote:Almost50, do you see that Titus is avoiding my point against her?

More people need to be aware of this.

I don't know how well you know Titus' play, but she does act stubborn at times. It's NAI of her. I'm looking for a couple of other things to get a better read on her though, so bear with me while I try to figure her out. (I do mean it when I say she's stubborn. She may even deliberately try to make herself hard to read for me just to prove me wrong if she though I was bragging I can read her or so. I've seen her get mod-killed on D1 along with RC bc BOTH were so stubborn to let go of a previous incident in a previous game. Oh, and both were town on that game if it matters at all).

@Almost50

In post 71, AGar wrote:

In post 69, Titus wrote:Who said anything about speed murdering him?

Me.

His playstyle is beyond abrasive, it's centered on division of the town and generally just not fun to play with.

In post 72, podoboq wrote:I don't know this wake guy, but he sounds like an asshole.
VOTE: wake

My post was intended as a tongue in cheek respose to 71. I've never played with Wake before.

In post 136, Almost50 wrote:

In post 133, Wake1 wrote:Almost50, do you see that Titus is avoiding my point against her?

More people need to be aware of this.

I don't know how well you know Titus' play, but she does act stubborn at times. It's NAI of her. I'm looking for a couple of other things to get a better read on her though, so bear with me while I try to figure her out. (I do mean it when I say she's stubborn. She may even deliberately try to make herself hard to read for me just to prove me wrong if she though I was bragging I can read her or so. I've seen her get mod-killed on D1 along with RC bc BOTH were so stubborn to let go of a previous incident in a previous game. Oh, and both were town on that game if it matters at all).

I was modkilled. I didn't get modkilled. RC was using outside sources that were unattainable, and that was determined to be cheating. I was modkilled because modkilling RC without modkilling me would have framed me as scum and caused the town to burn a mislynch.

@Titus:

LOL. When was the last time you saw me following "logic" as you would expect it to be?? You've played with me more than anyone else in this game, so you should know better.

Need I remind you of me fake-claiming, then outright hard-claiming AND speculating about the setup (correctly) early on D1?? Where was "logic" in my play in that game?? Yet, if only the town listened to me early enough we might've won it still!!

In post 137, podoboq wrote:@Almost50

In post 71, AGar wrote:

In post 69, Titus wrote:Who said anything about speed murdering him?

Me.

His playstyle is beyond abrasive, it's centered on division of the town and generally just not fun to play with.

In post 72, podoboq wrote:I don't know this wake guy, but he sounds like an asshole.
VOTE: wake

My post was intended as a tongue in cheek respose to 71. I've never played with Wake before.

Ok, thank you

I guess that it's NAI then (your vote on wake). I'd consider it more of a RVS vote for now.

Almost50 gets a townread mostly for 113.
Titus's response to Wake is consistent with how I'd expect town to react.

Is NAI not alignment indicative?

In post 142, implosion wrote:Is NAI not alignment indicative?

Yes.

In post 94, Almost50 wrote:

In post 13, shannon wrote:Hi!

I only recognise one name here, so VOTE: Almost 50

I like the dog <3

Hi, shannon. I seem to remember the name but not recall what game we played together before. Care to refresh my rusty memory?

You subbed in to Newbie 1691, when I was already dead - I was watching closely, hoping for a town win that never happened!

In post 99, Wake1 wrote:
snippy snip

shannon

———✶

Closed Setups are pretty fun! If you would, how much game experience do you have?

Very little, comparatively. Three newbie games (one I subbed in so late it barely counts), one ongoing normal game. Record for completed games is two losses as town and a win as scum.

In post 139, Almost50 wrote:@Titus:

LOL. When was the last time you saw me following "logic" as you would expect it to be?? You've played with me more than anyone else in this game, so you should know better.

Need I remind you of me fake-claiming, then outright hard-claiming AND speculating about the setup (correctly) early on D1?? Where was "logic" in my play in that game?? Yet, if only the town listened to me early enough we might've won it still!!

So you're bragging about absolutely confusing the crap out of people for no reason?

Your play that game made it so easy to pocket you.

If you're town here, you need to stop and think.

In post 138, Titus wrote:I was modkilled. I didn't get modkilled. RC was using outside sources that were unattainable, and that was determined to be cheating. I was modkilled because modkilling RC without modkilling me would have framed me as scum and caused the town to burn a mislynch.

We lost that game regardless, but that's not the point. The point is you can be stubborn when you "want to be", and can be open-minded when you feel like it. That's all I'm saying. You can decide to play "with" the team, or you can decide to "play the team" in your own prerogative. At least that's how I perceive you. *Shrug*

In post 134, Titus wrote:

In post 129, Wake1 wrote:

In post 125, Titus wrote:Why are you interrupting me Wake?

Almost, do you have any reads now?

This isn't a 19-man face-to-face conversation. It's a message-board thread.

Please don't avoid my questions Titus. It's making me feel uncomfortable about your alignment.

1)

You said that someone voting you means that person is scumreading you.

2)

I say that's not necessarily true, because it isn't.

3)

Instead of responding to my point you ask me why I'm interrupting you.

4)

Me: Like why are you not being logically and why are you avoiding the point. Please respond to my points Titus.

Yeah, a vote at this point is a scumread from someone actively following along, or it's someone who has no desire to sort the thread, which is a scumclaim. Your vote says "I want this person removed from the game".

You're being semantic and interrupting my questioning trying to sort Almost and trying to play semantic games while interpreting someone else's read rather than letting them speak for themselves.

See I don't really agree with that, and I say that with all the respect in the world. I've seen players vote other people they didn't necessarily Sumread just to see what their reaction would be. Heck, I've done that in the past. So knowing that when you say voting someone means you Scumread the person I have to say 'wait, that's not true, and here's why.'

I feel like you're inappropriately attaching meanings to actions and, well, if you're Town Town wouldn't do that. It's not true that a vote on someone at this point is a Scumread from someone actively following along. It's not automatically true. But you also change the meaning mid-sentence by saying OR the vote's from someone who has no desire to sort the thread. Which is it, and why must it be either? And then you attach a further meaning onto the second option by saying it must be a Scumclaim. I'm sorry but you're not being logically accurate, and at this point I'm trying to understand if it's just honest mistakes or something more deliberate. Whatever the case this needs to be sorted out immediately.

It also looks like you're attaching yet another meaning to that vote, that the voter wants someone removed from the game. You can't assume that. Not if you're honest. The person casting the vote could also be looking for reactions.

What you mistake for semantics is me trying to pin down exactly what you're trying to say (and what you mean), and wanting you to slow down and clarify your ungrounded assumptions. I have the right to question you whenever I want so long as the Day is open, and so does everyone else to anyone else. I have zero reason to wait until you and he are done exchanging, because you can easily see my post in the feed and respond back eventually. It's not even something to argue about, and instead tells me it's a distraction to try and get me off you with my questions.

In post 135, Almost50 wrote:

In post 126, Wake1 wrote:His current vote on me. What do you think about it?

Unfortunately I don't have a read on you nor on him. I don't think I've played with either of you before, so it may take me a bit longer to get a read on either/both of you.

My preliminary conclusion (and this is probably carved on water or sand at best) is that some players consider you a threat in this game. If they're town they're afraid of scum!you. If they're scum they're afraid of town!you.

Ok.. I've just ISO'd podoq, and I don't see why he called you that even before you posted when he said he didn't know you. The key here is whether he said that with tongue-in-cheek (i.e. you're actually friends), or if it came out of nowhere. Care to share?

I'm a threat in general because I can hit very hard and be thoroughly provocative at a whim, depending on what's going on in my personal life.

I don't know podo at all, so I thought it strange the way he behaved. He could be an alt.

@Wake, Because you're incapable of drawing basic conclusions from the functions of votes doesn't mean that the rest of us can't. The only exception(s) to a vote = a scumread are 1) RVS (which we're out of) or 2) a policy lynch [which is akin to saying I don't that person is scum but they are infinitely pro scum. Using a vote for reactions still means the person wants that player, at any given time, dead more than any other player.

Rather than being semantic and checkboxing, do you have anything productive to do?

@Almost, Yeah, I can be stubborn. I'm governed by the information and situation in front of me. I'm very much so not into how it makes people "feel". I'm playing for my team to win without damaging people. Either you're playing pro-town, or pro-scum.

@all, Consider me voting either Wake or Almost, whichever has more votes.

TLeaning almost50. putting himself too far out there in a 1v1 to be scum

SLeaning Wake. i dont like the way he shows himself in his Titus interractions.


@ wake

Implosion seems to be legitimately getting reads on people Right now.
Why? are you SReading him