Your rage capslocks are an improvement but seeing as how it only came after a legitimate case debunking your so called crumb was made---- now would be the time to counter it with other data to skew the arguement in your favor so the rage capslocks are a bit too late to appeal to my emotions
Pedit: with 1 or 2 prs and 2 scum that should have no reason not to claim pr if being lynched (unless for some godlike wifom) there is a higher overall chance of a pr claim based on a BW being fake
Posted: Mon May 06, 2013 11:36 am
by Mac
Can you stop fucking acting like gm is 100% scum because that helps NO ONE. seriously, you can preach it all you like about me being unwilling to hammer scum but I'm of the opinion that I would be hammering a town PR at the moment. I've hammered despite claims before (see 1334) and been completely fucking wrong so I'm naturally unwilling to hammer ANY claimed PR without some sort of counter claim. Plus we're only hearing from less than half the people about this at the moment.
VOTE: Ineffective
I'm thinking this is the right vote for several reasons.
In post 1637, Ineffective wrote:I am seriously considering asking for claims in the order of goodmorning>mac>gif>VE>i dont care who goes after that... Does anyone else think this could be appropriate/benificial?
In post 1643, Ineffective wrote:Id have to say that with no claims my vote is best placed on goodmorning for now.... Im gunna look up some completed scumflips.
Pedit the problem with a d3 lylo massclaim is that mafia will almost ceartainly claim pr--- which could mix things up in the right sequence of actual prs. Today a massclaim would almost force mafia to claim VT--- also mafia wont be prepared as to who is claiming what . D3 generally seems apropriate.... But lets say mac is town and isnt lynched - he would be an obvious VTfor not claiming at l-1 and if mafia rolecopped outside of him that leaves mafia with an excelent chance of hitting a PRanyways.
If you genuinely think i am merely rolefishing i have to pause a moment and scofff - i am much more efficient at role-fishing than blatently asking if it would be acceptable to massclaim
Dat first quote... mixed the order up here but it's fucking stupid and even more WIFOM as "I'm not so stupid to be so blatant" - note the "mafia will claim VT today" - trying to hammer GM for claiming jailkeeper.
I thouht you said earlier this is your word that is strictly used for taking notes with your ISO using ctrl f and isnt used to show any form of pointing a finger but rather that you find it genuinely interesting and need to look at it later? i believe this was a defensive reaction to someone accusing you of making a subtle push that couldnt easily be traced to you by using the word interesting?
How does a single. Post with nothing but the word interesting help you take notes?
note to self: 175 is interesting
In post 1735, Ineffective wrote:But shit... MAC's. "tomorrow will be lylo" commment really makes a man wonder.
could be an intentionally inserted "i dont have information as to my partners scum status"
could be a towny " i dont view him as scum therefore i have never considered the possibility that tomorrow may not be lylo"
could be a slip from a scum knowing town is being lynched....
In post 1739, Ineffective wrote:OK Mac..... I SaW IT QUOTED ON THE OTHER PaGE aND SaW GMs comment and thought it had merit - my bad - another pitiful attempt at GM spreading seeds of doubt
Ok the first quote is directly replying to gm whose asked about my lylo comment. where I have already it explained it to her. where
GiF was the one who brought it up.
Not GM. This is an attempt to twist it into being GM's fault and trying to spread scuminess for no reason, when in fact it was GiF. This is tunnelling of the highest order.
4) (the big one for me) - threatening me with a lynch
Spoiler: wall
In post 1771, Ineffective wrote: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
this is the part where I was reading earlier and I thought "hey, that's not fucking right." which kind of town member posts this? it's like threatening me to hammer gm, almost blackmailing me. I don't like it.
Ineffective, stop tunneling gm for a sec. Where do we go if she flips actual jailkeeper? Where do we go if she flips scum?
Posted: Mon May 06, 2013 11:36 am
by Ineffective
any arguement against the data that does not include other data is null and void as you proudly declared that you intentionally inserted "keep" and if you intentionally insert a word it doubles over natural occurances and should show some improvement in frequency no matter what the circumstance is
Posted: Mon May 06, 2013 11:37 am
by Ineffective
Wow mac- you are proving yourself to be scumbuddies with GM or entirely retarded- GJ - wp
Posted: Mon May 06, 2013 11:39 am
by Ineffective
and for the record IT WASNT A THREAT IT WAS A FUCKING FACT
YOU WOULD HAVE BEEN LYNCHED 100% AND IT CAN STILL HAPPEN
gm is the only person that doesnt fos you and you are the only person besides GM to fos me
BUDDY HARDER LOL
Posted: Mon May 06, 2013 11:40 am
by Ineffective
Well ffer mAnAges to feel better About you somehow now - but im not sure why
Posted: Mon May 06, 2013 11:41 am
by Mac
what the fuck are you talking about. seriously. i'm buddying no one. I'M BEING OBJECTIVE. A TRAIT YOU SEEM TO LACK.
it wasn't a fact because you don't know that it could've happened. also nice attempt to discredit the case - "scumbuddies or retarded." I'm flattered.
Posted: Mon May 06, 2013 11:42 am
by goodmorning
@1825: Look, I'm shit at crumbing and shit at playing PRs. You're asking me to disprove being scum. I'd do it in a heartbeat if any of the cases against me had any substance (or if the burden of proof were on me, which technically it isn't though this is a debate-type game so burden of proof arguments are somewhat tangential). They don't.
I see. I'm not entirely sure that makes sense (the math does, it's the logic I think is missing a step somewhere) but I see where you're coming from.
YOUUUUUUU GOOOOOO MACCCCC
Posted: Mon May 06, 2013 11:42 am
by Ineffective
Hey guys i unvoted the easy lynch and went after the scumfuck that i wasnt sure would be lynched had i died... Im obvious scum for saying i could always revert back to the easier lynch that seems to be aligned with the person i want to lynch instead I GUESS THAT MAKES ME SCUM LOL
are you going to try and get me lynched for buddying GM if she flips jailkeeper tomorrow?
Posted: Mon May 06, 2013 11:44 am
by goodmorning
@INE: No, you're obvious Scum for making assertions, not backing them up, and then pretending they didn't happen.
Posted: Mon May 06, 2013 11:46 am
by Ineffective
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
Mac if you are town and genuinely think im scum after making a near bulletproof series of reasons for a GM lynch i genuinely think you are retarded. It wasnt a defense to your case- i dont feel like i need to defend such a horribly constructed case....
Posted: Mon May 06, 2013 11:48 am
by Ineffective
Lolololololol
This couldnt be anymore obvious at this point - the two of you are spamming worthless shit and hard buddying each other. To cover up the fact that his crumb was entirely fabricated... and mac, despite not wanting GM to be lynched cant point to anything about GM being town... all he has given us is a silly excuse that since he claimed pr he wont vote him
Posted: Mon May 06, 2013 11:50 am
by Mac
hey, you know, sometimes prs claim prs too?
what do you make of the "arrested" breadcrumb since I'm pretty sure some of your case is revolved around "keep" or whatever.
In post 62, goodmorning wrote:Disagreeing with someone doesn't mean you're not on the same team.
Also. Case or it didn't happen, I don't want you guys to get in the habit of (and keep) voting without any reasoning at all.
You may not want to share ALL your reasoning right now (there are arguments about how it may help Scum, though I personally am for complete transparency at the moment), but at least one reason.
In post 209, goodmorning wrote:What I'm saying is that I expected you to react to my saying that I thought it was alignment indicative, but you didn't even bring it up (that I said it was alignment indicative).
And paring down quotes is par for the course, even suggested in this forum (just for future reference. I know some people have been quoting my quotewalls and it's totally cool if you break them down and take out the bits you're not responding to/interested in). I keep forgetting to say that, so now I've said it.
In post 860, goodmorning wrote:FFFFFFFF
KEEP ON KEEPIN' ON
YOU ARE SUPER COOL
KEEP IT UP
AND STUFF
In post 876, goodmorning wrote:Also let me repeat that if you want to vote me, keep a lid on and state intent first.
Here's various of GM's crumbs where I feel the 'keep' is delibrately inserted. Most, if not all of these keeps, are unnecessary and helping me believe her claim a bit more.
Posted: Mon May 06, 2013 11:54 am
by fferyllt
hey, can we slow down? I don't think pages of no u posts are going to help move the game forward. At some point VE needs to show up and catch up.
Posted: Mon May 06, 2013 11:54 am
by Mac
inb4lolonly4quotes
sometimes, that's all it takes.
Posted: Mon May 06, 2013 11:57 am
by Ineffective
In post 1838, Mac wrote:hey, you know, sometimes prs claim prs too?
what do you make of the "arrested" breadcrumb since I'm pretty sure some of your case is revolved around "keep" or whatever.
and you didn't answer the questions in #1826
you must have misunderstood GMs post - he never said he breadcrumbed with arrested - he claimed that he was considering it and decided it would be too obvious---- an excuse to use such a comonly used word as a supposed breadcrumb when he never actually even crumbed with it before he claimed pr and merely used. It as something to make him look town WHICH ME AND FFER UNDENIABLY DISPROVED
Posted: Mon May 06, 2013 12:01 pm
by Ineffective
I Am AlternAting between rAge And lAughing my Ass off right now - im gunnA tAke A breAkk before i go on A full on bipolAr swing
Fml thAt CAps A thing is hAppening AgAin.... Im gunnA wAit pAtiently for gif or Z to fly in And hAmmer
if for some reAson this doesnt hAppen--- yAll CAn lynCh me--- if you promise you will lynCh goodmorning And mAC in sequenCe i will eVen self hAmmer
Posted: Mon May 06, 2013 12:11 pm
by VisceraEyes
Hi guys! Gosh what's going on in here?!
Posted: Mon May 06, 2013 12:17 pm
by VisceraEyes
Jailkeeper eh?
GM why you jail Z instead of your hardcore scumread EU? Did you crumb who you jailed at all? Because I have to say - judging from your "crumbs" I'd say you were in line to jailkeep feryl if you were going defensively, and because EU seemed to be higher on your scumpile at the end of the day yesterday (fmpov) the fact that you claim you jailed offensively aiming at Z leaves me having a hard time believing your claim.
Posted: Mon May 06, 2013 12:25 pm
by VisceraEyes
In post 1519, goodmorning wrote:Z, it's called a compromise vote. They happen frequently from players of any alignment, because a lynch, even on someone you think is Town, is better than a no-lynch (and who knows, I could have been wrong; she could have been Scum).
As for scumhunting less recently... [sarcasm]Oh, you got me. I have neither ideas nor certainty about the Scums and certainly don't know who we should lynch. Plus all kinds of suspects of mine have been posting stuff that would change my mind about them in every way.[/sarcasm]
Also this doesn't seem to me like a post from a townie to someone she reads as scum. Justifying her actions and stuff...whether it's meant to be justification to Z or to town, the fact that she's saying it TO Z kinda basically invalidates her scumread of him as fake as fuck imo.
In post 1838, Mac wrote:hey, you know, sometimes prs claim prs too?
what do you make of the "arrested" breadcrumb since I'm pretty sure some of your case is revolved around "keep" or whatever.
and you didn't answer the questions in #1826
you must have misunderstood GMs post - he never said he breadcrumbed with arrested - he claimed that he was considering it and decided it would be too obvious---- an excuse to use such a comonly used word as a supposed breadcrumb when he never actually even crumbed with it before he claimed pr and merely used. It as something to make him look town WHICH ME AND FFER UNDENIABLY DISPROVED
decided it was to obvious and opted for arrested instead. misrepping now.
In post 1708, goodmorning wrote:
I did crumb it, albeit not that well. I have used the word "keep" as often as I could fit it in edgewise (starting in post 23) and in my early example about the Blockbuster (post 98) I was arrested (I thought the phrase "send me to jail" was a wee bit too obvious, even for me).
In post 1838, Mac wrote:hey, you know, sometimes prs claim prs too?
what do you make of the "arrested" breadcrumb since I'm pretty sure some of your case is revolved around "keep" or whatever.
and you didn't answer the questions in #1826
you must have misunderstood GMs post - he never said he breadcrumbed with arrested - he claimed that he was considering it and decided it would be too obvious---- an excuse to use such a comonly used word as a supposed breadcrumb when he never actually even crumbed with it before he claimed pr and merely used. It as something to make him look town WHICH ME AND FFER UNDENIABLY DISPROVED
decided it was to obvious and opted for arrested instead. misrepping now.
In post 1708, goodmorning wrote:
I did crumb it, albeit not that well. I have used the word "keep" as often as I could fit it in edgewise (starting in post 23) and in my early example about the Blockbuster (post 98) I was arrested (I thought the phrase "send me to jail" was a wee bit too obvious, even for me).
More likely to be forgetting the specifics than intentionally misrepresenting.
the term "misrepresenting" gets overused in mafia IMO.
Posted: Mon May 06, 2013 12:33 pm
by Mac
well it is a misrep because he's saying GM didn't say that when she did. whether it's delibrate or not is another matter.
