Mafiascum.net

Ke a gut player at all actually - you seem like you build cases on a regular basis and point fingers at popular fallacies like amished tell

Those arent gut level play indicaters... Those are signs of bad logic.

You dont seem like*

Keyboard was hibernating

also you just reference another action based tell "backing down" is niether a scumtell or a towntell its something that people do--- referencing these actions or any actions without tying it to a motive or taking the bigger picture into consideration. a town player will generally naturally do that because they are looking for scum - a scum player often misses this because they are looking to point fingers

That post was horribly fragmented excuse my posting... I think you know what i meant by this tho --- actions are not tells on their own. Never have been never will be... Scum often forgets to paint the scenery of motive when pointing fingers because they arent actually looking for scum

That wasn't the point and I'll thank you to stop misrepping me.

oddly enough, although I analyze the crap out of game stuff it's almost all gut-initiated. It takes a long track record of accurate gut before other players trust overtly gut-based play that doesn't include analysis.

p-edit GM is talking about a post of AlexisTay3's that pinged for me. It looked like AlexisTay3 was backing down in order to avoid conflict, since he commented that he hadn't expected GM's hostility in reply. AA9 replaced in for him. That ping kept me concerned about the slot, but on its own wasn't a basis for voting. Conflict avoidance, though often scummy in an otherwise assertive player, has be taken in the context of the player's overall style and personality.

I was using an anectdote to assert. That you arent exibiting gut-level play --- using the example you mentioned... The point of your post indeed WAS to paint yourself as a gut level player to excuse your bad pushes --- when in fact they were not gut pushes they were reason based pushes --- horribly bad reasoned pushes --- such as your amished tell push on me.

also when someone has a legitimate complaint about your play and also happens to say something else that is debatable - i see you choosing to debate semantics over responding to the actual point very often. Is that gut level play? Or avoiding the issues and diverting it to intellectual debate?

Example or it didn't happen.

LOL

I am being serious.

It's not possible to defend oneself against accusations unless they are true.

EBWODP: properly defend oneself

I dont build cases for the most part IMO every player here will recall aat least one instance of you doing all of the above on thier own without my help because you have done it so often. Why waste my breath proving to the person that im trying to lynch that my statements are valid.

Ur so cute.

And with that you join the sole other person on my "AVOID AVOID AVOID" list.

awwwww

My feelings are hurt n ow that wasnt very nice


can you really blame me for not trying to appeal to the person i think is scum? I never understood why a towny would do that

Maybe hes just mad that i wont feed him examples so he can make a point by point excuse for them?

She*

Lol how many times have i done that

I don't think we should ever be lynching a PR with no cc. Not today at least. But then there's a chance theres no JK and scumGM has lucked out.

If scum claims a pr they have a 50% chance of "lucking out" its not like its a slim possibility

By not being willing to lynch a pr claim you are basically saying you arnt willing to lynch scum because there is 0 reason why mafia wouldnt claim pr under threat of a lynch

What?

Because I won't lynch a claimed PR, I'm not lynching scum? Where's the sense in that? What if gm is the jk?

ikeep in mind mac - as evidenced in vote intents all around - this lynch can easily be switched to you--- i dont want to do that. But if this fails i will revert back to voting you most likely

Pedit: i already explained the sense in it.. SCUM WILL CLAIM PR ON THE WAY OUT ALWAYS in this situation

as a matter of fact mac everyone has expressed willingness to vote you aside GM

Im starting to wonder if this is a case of hardbuddying

So you are saying that I should vote GM on the basis she could be scum claiming PR and not PR claiming PR, and then further add to this by saying if it's not GM, it's me?

this is me being fucking practical, no one has expressed intent to vote gm after she claimed.