Mafiascum.net

Seems kinda reaching, Matt.

↑ MattP wrote:Psyche, do you think that Thor's soft pushing away of the dicknose wagon reads scumbuddies?

#1 Psyche buddy read.

Oh, wait, that's a derp tell - nevermind.

@Psyche - nah, your antics actually haven't been that helpful on the whole to anyone but you (maybe) and you haven't shared those functionally.
Why'd you attack Matt for having a town read? How was that town read done in a scummy manner?

↑ Thor665 wrote:

↑ MattP wrote:Psyche, do you think that Thor's soft pushing away of the dicknose wagon reads scumbuddies?

#1 Psyche buddy read.

Oh, wait, that's a derp tell - nevermind.

@Psyche - nah, your antics actually haven't been that helpful on the whole to anyone but you (maybe) and you haven't shared those functionally.
Why'd you attack Matt for having a town read? How was that town read done in a scummy manner?

Seemed like Matt was saying that with too little to back it up, suggesting that some of it may have been based on scum knowledge.

My antics are awesome and helpful to everyone. >.>

What does "shared those functionally" mean?

↑ BK201 wrote:

↑ Bricktoes wrote:BK, I have little problem with you voting around for reaction and pressure, but you don't have a single vote that isn't following somebody else. Do you plan on doing a single thing on your own?

page 7.

Yes, this post was on that page. How
does that answer my question?

↑ BK201 wrote:Actually I brought up Matt on my own. I was considering voting him.

While you're in consideration, are you going to actually vote someone on your own in this game? Better yet, go ahead and respond to this post.

↑ Psyche wrote:My antics are awesome and helpful to everyone. >.>

Nah, if that were the case they would be my antics.

↑ Psyche wrote:What does "shared those functionally" mean?

You're reaction fishing without bothering to explain the reactions you've netted. Maybe you play the cards close to your chest - maybe you're just acting this way to appear like you're scumhunting. Better's choice, really.

@Dicknose - Are you seriously advocating that anyone who doesn't start a wagon is scummy?

I want to explore Matt's 122, but am going home right now.

@Psyche- That was a pretty bad fake dayvig. What did you expect from it? And I know someone asked something about it, but your answer seemed lacking.

@Psyche - going back to look, you never even fielded Matt's accusation that you were dismissing an obv. town tell that YOU should have also grokked. Deeper thoughts on that?

I don't care if his votes turn into wagons, but either he's scum going along to get along or town letting himself be led around.

Or town agreeing with a case that also encapsulates his own conclusions and supporting it. How do you tell the difference?

When I'm scum I start wagons, and when I'm town I start wagons. I lead both ways because that's my personality. There are follow scum, but usually those are follow town too. Do you know he is aggressive as town? Otherwise this seems like a playstyle attack, yeah?

Shouldn't you be omgusing Matt or sheeping me on Psyche by this stage?

I wouldn't say I'm a follower or a leader. I either vote with people I agree with or if I notice something nobody else has brought up I bring it up. Seems like what any decent player would do.

As far as the post you linked, I already answered that before you asked it for basically a 2nd time. Why am I responding to scum? I'm too nice.

No, you responded asking if I meant one thing and I clarified that I meant another. You can go ahead and respond to what I actually said anytime.

↑ Thor665 wrote:

↑ Psyche wrote:My antics are awesome and helpful to everyone. >.>

Nah, if that were the case they would be my antics.

↑ Psyche wrote:What does "shared those functionally" mean?

You're reaction fishing without bothering to explain the reactions you've netted. Maybe you play the cards close to your chest - maybe you're just acting this way to appear like you're scumhunting. Better's choice, really.

@Dicknose - Are you seriously advocating that anyone who doesn't start a wagon is scummy?

There really is no need to do anything but respond to the posts in the thread and pick out those I find suspicious. Which I'm doing. Systematically.

And, of course, I'm not done fishing, yet. Nothing really substantial has entered my consciousness yet. No, I am not going to make a "So this is what I think of reactions to post X" everytime I do something. I comment on what I feel like.

You seem to be overestimating how seriously I take my purposive craziness. I'm just posting with fervor and picking up on whatever I can. >.>

↑ Thor665 wrote:@Psyche - going back to look, you never even fielded Matt's accusation that you were dismissing an obv. town tell that YOU should have also grokked. Deeper thoughts on that?

Don't know what grokking is. Also, how are you using the word "field"?

I do not understand this post.

↑ Thor665 wrote:Or town agreeing with a case that also encapsulates his own conclusions and supporting it. How do you tell the difference?

When I'm scum I start wagons, and when I'm town I start wagons. I lead both ways because that's my personality. There are follow scum, but usually those are follow town too. Do you know he is aggressive as town? Otherwise this seems like a playstyle attack, yeah?

Shouldn't you be omgusing Matt or sheeping me on Psyche by this stage?

That point probably is solely playstyle, but if he's town hopefully he'll at least think a little bit more before just following someone else's vote.

I didn't see anything when I went through Matt's iso before, but I'm about to do so again.

↑ Bricktoes wrote:BK, why did you only vote Psyche at Ascosmist's prompting, continue to focus on why Ascosmist is scummy for about five posts, only explain your Psyche vote at prompting, and continue to make two posts about who Ascosmist isn't scum with? Why do 14 of your 19 posts have to deal with Ascosmist, even after you started suspecting Psyche?

↑ BK201 wrote:Matt, can I see a couple completed town games of yours?

@Dicknose What have I not explained? If what you're asking is why still talk about acosmist but vote psyche, its b/c I'm not close to ready to lynch him. My vote on psyche was just cause, but it didn't seem to do anything.

I wasn't sure what your question really was, took a guess and answered though. Guess was accurate.

↑ Bricktoes wrote:

↑ BK201 wrote: If what you're asking is why still talk about acosmist but vote psyche, its b/c I'm not close to ready to lynch him. My vote on psyche was just cause, but it didn't seem to do anything.

I'm asking why you're pushing on them in completely different ways. Your push on Acosmist was fairly hard and continued even after you had switched your vote, as opposed to pushing Psyche incredibly weakly and you've already backed off.

↑ Bricktoes wrote:

I didn't see anything when I went through Matt's iso before

, but I'm about to do so again.

Oooooh, ok

↑ Psyche wrote:You seem to be overestimating how seriously I take my purposive craziness. I'm just posting with fervor and picking up on whatever I can. >.>

You're the one who used it as a defense and started this line of discussion. I was actually pretty dismissive of it and remain as such.

↑ Psyche wrote:Don't know what grokking is. Also, how are you using the word "field"?

I do not understand this post.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grok (you should read more awesome books)
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/field (you should look at #25 under the use as a verb.

Now answer the question.

↑ MattP wrote:

↑ Bricktoes wrote:

I didn't see anything when I went through Matt's iso before

, but I'm about to do so again.

Oooooh, ok

I agree with that one actually, pretty wtf of a reply.
Okay, penis schnoz can be scum.

↑ Thor665 wrote:Process of elimination and your hair bugs me.
I've got multiple town reads you've attacked, also you did your little dayvig play and never drew conclusions from it, and have attacked Matt in a roundabout way for explaining a town read.
I call that scum enough to speed lynch.

Also forgot inexplicable soft PR claim...

↑ Psyche wrote:And I'm not a good token lynch choice. >.>

I thought that dayvig thing was a joke, tbh. It had all the legitimacy of a Justin Beiber baby-daddy claim.

The way I see it, MattP had the scummiest early play and Psyche is a waste of a vote. He is either a PR, as he soft claimed, and will be able to prove it tomorrow [if he can't, he's scum] OR he will be dead by morning as scum won't likely skip an opportunity to kill a PR [unless someone else stupidly claims so early].

Seriously. I have never been in a game moving this fast before.

Also, that flavor knowledge "tell" is a pile of crap. You either know the material or you don't and you state that. If someone wants to drop a breadcrumb, it's good to know how many people will pick up on it so you don't screw yourself.

↑ Thor665 wrote:@Psyche - going back to look, you never even fielded Matt's accusation that you were dismissing an obv. town tell that YOU should have also grokked. Deeper thoughts on that?

Er...Matt's accusation is invalid? Because his was not an obvious town tell?

↑ Yates wrote:

↑ Thor665 wrote:Process of elimination and your hair bugs me.
I've got multiple town reads you've attacked, also you did your little dayvig play and never drew conclusions from it, and have attacked Matt in a roundabout way for explaining a town read.
I call that scum enough to speed lynch.

Also forgot inexplicable soft PR claim...

↑ Psyche wrote:And I'm not a good token lynch choice. >.>

I thought that dayvig thing was a joke, tbh. It had all the legitimacy of a Justin Beiber baby-daddy claim.

The way I see it, MattP had the scummiest early play and Psyche is a waste of a vote. He is either a PR, as he soft claimed, and will be able to prove it tomorrow [if he can't, he's scum] OR he will be dead by morning as scum won't likely skip an opportunity to kill a PR [unless someone else stupidly claims so early].

Seriously. I have never been in a game moving this fast before.

Also, that flavor knowledge "tell" is a pile of crap. You either know the material or you don't and you state that. If someone wants to drop a breadcrumb, it's good to know how many people will pick up on it so you don't screw yourself.

lol usually no one comments on the softclaims and I have to try and interpret that

Let me be clear, though, I'm not claiming any role, PR or otherwise.

What's wrong with it? I didn't see anything scummy with Matt and looking again at the same posts I still don't. His shit case isn't scummy, either.

↑ BK201 wrote:I wasn't sure what your question really was, took a guess and answered though. Guess was accurate.

Let me ask differently. If you pushed hard on Acosmist thinking he was scum, why would pushing softly on Psyche get you good results? Was it "just cause" you wanted to look like you were scumhunting?

↑ Psyche wrote:And my dayvig play had no consequences at all. Didn't you notice?

I noticed your dayvig play resulted in you unvoting and calling Acosmist town. That isn't significant to you?

I think I unvoted Acosmist for some unrelated, or a body-of-work reason. No one really reacted to my fake dayvig. :/

↑ Psyche wrote:

↑ Thor665 wrote:@Psyche - going back to look, you never even fielded Matt's accusation that you were dismissing an obv. town tell that YOU should have also grokked. Deeper thoughts on that?

Er...Matt's accusation is invalid? Because his was not an obvious town tell?

So do you think Matt was lying when he said you should understand it, or just being derp full of himself and the tell?

↑ Psyche wrote:Let me be clear, though, I'm not claiming any role, PR or otherwise...

anymore

^Fixed that for you.^ You absolutely softclaimed to try to get people off of you and I'm not going to buy any other version of the story.

↑ Psyche wrote:

↑ Yates wrote:...Psyche is a waste of a vote. He is either a PR, as he soft claimed, and will be able to prove it tomorrow [if he can't, he's scum] OR he will be dead by morning as scum won't likely skip an opportunity to kill a PR [unless someone else stupidly claims so early].

lol usually no one comments on the softclaims and I have to try and interpret that

Do you not see how your softclaim is directly relevant to why people should not be voting for you right now? Also, do you not see why it will be essential for you to prove your claim tomorrow?

No. I did not softclaim to get people off of me. (there was not enough pressure for that)