In post 1141, MafiaSSK wrote:I think I'll trust Cabd here in the spirit of NatMod. And if this goes like AA, well then, yeah.
VOTE: Selkies
Prove your towniness, Selkies!
this is your first d2 post
tru. And yeah, I've kept that vote ever since. Cabd gave me an opposing viewpoint that I believed more and more as the day went on.
Why would I just go with it right after I protected Selkies?
A. The read wasn't strong. But then why would I protect Selkies? Because Selkies was a townread and was at least giving content when no one else would.
B. Cabd, who also had been townreading Selkies, was seemingly significantly into his vote on Selkies.
C. Selkies never did prove their towniness.
That is total and utter bullshit. You voted Selkies twice early on, and never stated a townread on them. You started D2 swinging immediately, by that I mean you voted Selkies within 1 page of the start of D2 and stayed for pretty much forever. If you were just coming off of protecting him,
why would you do that?
This is explained above. But this vote is all types of wrong, and I'm honestly starting to think you might be scum, IK.
Posted: Mon Feb 17, 2014 6:40 pm
by Idiotking
The vote is because you're lying. I'm OK with gambits, but you're already claiming doc, and there is no good reason for you to lie about having protected Selkies. Meaning you are either dumb, or having to fake a protect on someone who is the top wagon at the moment, because you aren't actually the doc.
Also, your A,B, and C are just terrible, terrible reasons for your vote-following-protect. Just terrible, in ways that I'm not even sure how to put into words.
Posted: Mon Feb 17, 2014 6:43 pm
by Natirasha
Posted: Mon Feb 17, 2014 6:48 pm
by Idiotking
But screw it, I'm going to try to respond to them anyway.
In post 2200, MafiaSSK wrote:
A. The read wasn't strong. But then why would I protect Selkies? Because Selkies was a townread and was at least giving content when no one else would.
This would only make sense if you had absolutely no stronger town reads. Although from my reading you didn't state one, you also went completely incognito about halfway through D1. Now if you were still paying attention (like you say you did), then you would pretty much have to have a stronger town read. For example, Cabd. You apparently thought positively enough of Cabd to IMMEDIATELY sheep his vote against Selkies. This stinks of contradiction.
B. Cabd, who also had been townreading Selkies, was seemingly significantly into his vote on Selkies.
And this means... what? Isn't this only helpful to you if you had a townread on Cabd? And if you did,
then why wouldn't you have protected Cabd instead?
C. Selkies never did prove their towniness.
Unless you're dead,
that is impossible.
Posted: Mon Feb 17, 2014 6:58 pm
by Idiotking
In post 2138, MafiaSSK wrote:I really feel like we shouldn't be letting this wagon to less than 2 days. Can we end this soon so that there's no flashwagon?
Also, this sounds just scummy as hell.
Posted: Mon Feb 17, 2014 6:58 pm
by Aronis
GF-SSK scumteam?
Posted: Mon Feb 17, 2014 6:59 pm
by Idiotking
Now see, this might just be a thing.
Posted: Mon Feb 17, 2014 7:09 pm
by MafiaSSK
In post 2203, Idiotking wrote:But screw it, I'm going to try to respond to them anyway.
In post 2200, MafiaSSK wrote:
A. The read wasn't strong. But then why would I protect Selkies? Because Selkies was a townread and was at least giving content when no one else would.
This would only make sense if you had absolutely no stronger town reads. Although from my reading you didn't state one, you also went completely incognito about halfway through D1. Now if you were still paying attention (like you say you did), then you would pretty much have to have a stronger town read. For example, Cabd. You apparently thought positively enough of Cabd to IMMEDIATELY sheep his vote against Selkies. This stinks of contradiction.
Cabd was a townread. Just not a stronger townread, but i'll get to that in B.
Dude. It's one day until deadline. Selkies is the lynch. Stop trying to make a flashwagon happen. Especially a dumb one.
Posted: Mon Feb 17, 2014 7:12 pm
by Aronis
UNVOTE
VOTE: MafiaSSK
Posted: Mon Feb 17, 2014 7:14 pm
by Cabd
Just couldn't resist fake claiming PR could ya?
UNVOTE: VOTE: ssk
Posted: Mon Feb 17, 2014 7:15 pm
by Cabd
In post 2173, Cabd wrote:Scumdoc, town nurse, town vig.... Sounds utterly like something nati would do.
Also possible.
Posted: Mon Feb 17, 2014 7:29 pm
by MafiaSSK
I'm not fucking fake claiming. I'm telling the truth. My reasoning for Selkies was shit, fine. But it's the truth. I'm not the best player ever, nonetheless the best doc ever.
Can we lynch selkies now though? I was wrong. Selkies is scum.
Because you only think I'm scum because we disagree on the fundamentals of mafia.
Selkies has actual reasoning behind them.
And those reasons are...?
So my current original reasoning on Selkies comes down to a really one point:
Selkies was seemingly taking advantage of an apathetic town.
So part of the reasoning on my protect on Selkies was that they actually posted shit, right? There wasn't a lot of meaningful content Day 1, and when there was I feel like Selkies was dictating the general direction of it. Then, and this goes sort off of some of the reasons Bert posted, but Selkies pushes were weak and they weren't actively poking and prodding people as much as you would expect them too. Because they were in control. That's the only way I can see this.
The rest I feel like are adequately described by Bert and in detail. And yes, I am agreeing with his case. And yes I know you have a problem with that. And no that's not a valid reason to think I'm scum.
if you were looking for his case on us, he literally just gave it, in its glorious entirety, 3 posts ago
but yes, i'm absolutely fine with lynching between ssk/aronis/GF today.
cabd, fery basically wants your babies because they glisten with so much town. i told fery this yesterday, but we are fine with being part of the vig-pool tonight. don't announce your target--scum RB. but i'm assuming you ran that through your head when you claimed to start with.
Posted: Mon Feb 17, 2014 8:02 pm
by Selkies
In post 2216, MafiaSSK wrote:Selkies was seemingly taking advantage of an apathetic town.
holy shit
bert bitches at us for not leading town like we should be
you bitch at us for it
make up your mind goddamn
Posted: Mon Feb 17, 2014 8:03 pm
by Idiotking
I was hoping his case was more than just "Eh, Cabd says so."
Posted: Mon Feb 17, 2014 8:09 pm
by MafiaSSK
In post 2219, Idiotking wrote:I was hoping his case was more than just "Eh, Cabd says so."
How have we never played a game together? Because with the amount that I personally dislike you at right now, I think I would remember you.
I just don't like the way your wagon dissipated yesterday and your play seems nothing like
your super obv town posting in red wine mafia
.
I strongly suspect you are scum but if you aren't at least your lynch will be quite informative.
Some of your posts seem off. 1946 for example.
Also if you are town goodfather (another scum read of mine) will likely bite a bullet.
I was not super obvtown in red wine because of my posting. I was town because I got wagoned on day 1 and was in the lead for lynch. And by the end of day 2, we all knew two dead scum had been on my wagon. I was no threat to you guys even as town semi-confirmed by a scum-pushed wagon because my reads sucked and I wasn't making course corrections. I certainly wasn't leading town that game.
You were scum in that game, so you knew every stance I took was a town stance. Several town players retained doubts about me. Including Cabd iirc.