Mafiascum.net

Thor be Laing scum traps..

EBWOP - Laying.

Yeah, farside.

Be manly.

VOTE: thor

whispersilk (2) - MagnaofIllusion, Thor665
popsofctown (2) - Riceballtail, enomis
Thor665 (2) - SnakePlissken, whispersilk
MagnaofIllusion (1) - IceGuy
SnakePlissken (1) - farside22
Nachomamma8 (1) - StrangerCoug
Riceballtail (1) - popsofctown
Yates (1) - jerobbo
jerobbo (1) - Yates

Not voting (1) - NachoMomma8

Just a quick clarification while I'm here.
Being 'marked as a killer' does not affect your alignment or win condition in any way.

↑ Thor665 wrote:

↑ farside22 wrote:Why suck up to MoI?

Why, should I suck up to you instead? I could do it if you'd like, but I don't think you're being manly and trying to lead a lynch so you look weak and scummy and not worth sheeping or sucking up to.

↑ farside22 wrote:This again!
Ugh please not again. I don't have time to argue about PL.

Oh, snap, sorry, I forgot it was obv. stupid. Who should we be lynching then? Because policy looks like a great start right now.

I was just wondering why MoI.

I was more thinking about the last game you talked about PL and I called you scum for it.

popsofctown wrote:Yeah, farside.

Be manly.

I could push for you lynch again in this game. It went so well the last time.

Besides my boobs get in the way of any manliness

In regard to Whispersilk – Post 28 is the kind of post we can expect from her if we get posts at all. There really isn’t going to be much to read her with.

I expect her response will be something along these lines – “I always lurk Day 1 it’s my playstyle”. Sorry, doesn’t cut it anymore. You don’t get a free pass to not make yourself readable if you are scum and to make yourself an easy mislynch for scum later on if you are Town.

I’m going on record now Whisper – I don’t expect to live long and if you don’t provide what I consider an acceptable level on content Day 1 and aren’t lynch expect a Contract with your name on it N1.

--

Thor wrote:I dunno - I'm just sucking up to MoI, frankly. I presume she flaked/hyper-lurked at some point.

No you aren’t. You are clearly ‘Teehee’ reaction fishing. Why try to disguise it? I say revel in it!

--

Pops wrote:Legit strat. Then shoot him night one. His spirit will watch over you and guide you to victory.

That’s only a valid strategy if you aren’t too damn stubborn to listen to the sage advice.

--

Stranger wrote:If I see anything's that's the problem, I interpret it as Thor665 supporting a policy lynch, which I'm against in most cases.

Really? Do you have a Policy of disliking those who suggest Policy Lynching? If so do you ever vote them?

--

Farside wrote:Why suck up to MoI?

Worried Thor and I will form a Voting block and destroy your scum team Farside?

↑ MagnaofIllusion wrote:

Stranger wrote:If I see anything's that's the problem, I interpret it as Thor665 supporting a policy lynch, which I'm against in most cases.

Really? Do you have a Policy of disliking those who suggest Policy Lynching? If so do you ever vote them?

I do dislike and vote people who suggest policy lynching as it tends to be anti-information; however, I've been accused of policy lynching policy lynchers (in a game where I was scum, if I remember correctly), so I have to be careful with my accusation of this. Thor665's post looks closer to a random bandwagoning stage post, and even though I'm against the RBS as well, fighting the stage is unproductive.

The RVS stage is pretty much over in my eyes, so I will UNVOTE: ; however, nobody stands out as scummy and it's a little late for me to think right now.

↑ StrangerCoug wrote:I do dislike and vote people who suggest policy lynching as it tends to be anti-information; however, I've been accused of policy lynching policy lynchers (in a game where I was scum, if I remember correctly), so I have to be careful with my accusation of this. Thor665's post looks closer to a random bandwagoning stage post, and even though I'm against the RBS as well, fighting the stage is unproductive.The RVS stage is pretty much over in my eyes, so I will UNVOTE: ; however, nobody stands out as scummy and it's a little late for me to think right now.

In light of Pops' random guessing stage I see not one but two scum-driven statements / actions in this post.

First person to correctly identify them and join me in voting StrangerCoug gets a delicious Internet Cookie*

UNVOTE: Whisper
VOTE: StrangerCoug

* - Disclaimer : Your definition of delicious or what constitutes and actual cookie may vary from mine. No actual cookie will be delivered.

↑ farside22 wrote:I was just wondering why MoI.

And I was answering - why not? If you can't tell me why I shouldn't, then I hardly need to explain why I should. Yes?

↑ farside22 wrote:I was more thinking about the last game you talked about PL and I called you scum for it.

I'll guess I was scum in that game.
I'll also put money down that whoever I said we should policy lynch - that I wasn't voting them for very long that day.
I also bet I can show multiple times of me suggesting policy lynch as town.
So...either vote me or go do something useful, like vote someone, I suggest Whisper...we're policy lynching her. <--srz face
Unless you think she's town because of that...

↑ MagnaofIllusion wrote:No you aren’t. You are clearly ‘Teehee’ reaction fishing. Why try to disguise it? I say revel in it!

I personally think I do both - generally about half the players 'get it' and the other half don't and it's just more info in my mind.

EBWOP - oh, contest...next post.

↑ Thor665 wrote:So...either vote me or go do something useful, like vote someone, I suggest Whisper...we're policy lynching her. <--srz face

Makes my thinking easier.

VOTE: Thor665

↑ MagnaofIllusion wrote:

↑ StrangerCoug wrote:I do dislike and vote people who suggest policy lynching as it tends to be anti-information; however, I've been accused of policy lynching policy lynchers (in a game where I was scum, if I remember correctly), so I have to be careful with my accusation of this. Thor665's post looks closer to a random bandwagoning stage post, and even though I'm against the RBS as well, fighting the stage is unproductive.The RVS stage is pretty much over in my eyes, so I will UNVOTE: ; however, nobody stands out as scummy and it's a little late for me to think right now.

In light of Pops' random guessing stage I see not one but two scum-driven statements / actions in this post.

Hurm...

The against policy lynch being accused of policy lynching policy lynchers thing is funny, mentioning he has to be careful of that and pulling in scum meta is certainly odd as far as mindset goes.
His read on my actions proves at least two people in this thread understand what I'm actually doing, which is actually a nice sanity tell to my mind.
About all I've got besides that is declaring RVS is 'over' but not actually having it over for yourself, because if it's 'over' then you ought to have a serious vote.
I have seen town do that derpy "RVS=over - Unvote" crud before though.

All I've really got is the one, being specifically mindful of being lynched and moving to avoid it despite personal opinions of what is best for the game.
Secondary is...I guess the no direction after RVS thing ends, though if that's it I disagree with the tell.

OKAY!



I got it by looking back. On Page one he actually tossed some dirt at me for all being about policy lynching, then all of a sudden this page he seems to understand what I'm actually doing, add that to the odd mental defense mindset and suddenly we have a guy who's just stirring around tossing dirt and forgetting when he's tossed it because he's not actually forming reads based off his real play opinions, and add into that the defense mindset at cost of town and we have a solid scumtell for Page 2.

@farside - my bad, we're actually policy lynching Stranger Coug - because it's my policy to lynch scum.

↑ StrangerCoug wrote:

↑ Thor665 wrote:So...either vote me or go do something useful, like vote someone, I suggest Whisper...we're policy lynching her. <--srz face

Makes my thinking easier.

Awesome! Now I'm also OMGUSING you, that proves my reads are awesome.

So, which am I doing? Policy lynching via evil, or fishing for reactions? I'm not sure I know where you stand yet.

↑ Thor665 wrote:About all I've got besides that is declaring RVS is 'over' but not actually having it over for yourself, because if it's 'over' then you ought to have a serious vote.
I have seen town do that derpy "RVS=over - Unvote" crud before though.

I disagree that, if you think the RVS is over, you have to have a serious vote. While it's unlikely that the person you're voting in the RVS is going to be lynched before the RVS ends, once things get serious, if it's clear that your vote is doing nothing then the most pro-town thing to do is unvote. Waiting to vote was to give me time to think about the game.

↑ Thor665 wrote:I got it by looking back. On Page one he actually tossed some dirt at me for all being about policy lynching, then all of a sudden this page he seems to understand what I'm actually doing, add that to the odd mental defense mindset and suddenly we have a guy who's just stirring around tossing dirt and forgetting when he's tossed it because he's not actually forming reads based off his real play opinions, and add into that the defense mindset at cost of town and we have a solid scumtell for Page 2.

Tell me one good thing policy lynching does in general (to answer the question in the other post, this is what I think you were doing; if you were fishing for reactions then I fail to see why you stated that you're taking the policy-lynching business seriously). With the exception of both LALs, all I see us getting from it is one person down based on very little if any game-specific information and at least one more from the Mafia kill. And where will we be on Day 2? I shudder to think.

↑ StrangerCoug wrote:

↑ Thor665 wrote:About all I've got besides that is declaring RVS is 'over' but not actually having it over for yourself, because if it's 'over' then you ought to have a serious vote.
I have seen town do that derpy "RVS=over - Unvote" crud before though.

I disagree that, if you think the RVS is over, you have to have a serious vote. While it's unlikely that the person you're voting in the RVS is going to be lynched before the RVS ends, once things get serious, if it's clear that your vote is doing nothing then the most pro-town thing to do is unvote. Waiting to vote was to give me time to think about the game.

↑ Thor665 wrote:I got it by looking back. On Page one he actually tossed some dirt at me for all being about policy lynching, then all of a sudden this page he seems to understand what I'm actually doing, add that to the odd mental defense mindset and suddenly we have a guy who's just stirring around tossing dirt and forgetting when he's tossed it because he's not actually forming reads based off his real play opinions, and add into that the defense mindset at cost of town and we have a solid scumtell for Page 2.

Tell me one good thing policy lynching does in general (to answer the question in the other post, this is what I think you were doing; if you were fishing for reactions then I fail to see why you stated that you're taking the policy-lynching business seriously). With the exception of both LALs, all I see us getting from it is one person down based on very little if any game-specific information and at least one more from the Mafia kill. And where will we be on Day 2? I shudder to think.

nah, Policy lynch is a great way to start a day as long as it doesn't go through just because of the 'policy'.
UNVOTE: popsofctown
VOTE: StrangerCoug

↑ StrangerCoug wrote:I disagree that, if you think the RVS is over, you have to have a serious vote.

That's fine - I didn't call it a scumtell anyway, just a derp tell, so - keep on trucking as you will.

↑ StrangerCoug wrote:Tell me one good thing policy lynching does in general

Well...if you *really* want to get into that discussion; 'In my opinion EVERY LYNCH is a policy lynch.'
It's my policy to lynch scum.
It's my policy to lynch the one unknown alignment voter on a wagon of confirmed town.
It's my policy to lynch for scumtell 'X'
All anyone ever does is take the word 'policy' out of it and add the word 'tell' and then act like they're somehow different.
The good thing policy lynching does is lynch people - and lynching people is a good policy for town (sounds joking, but is also serious)

↑ StrangerCoug wrote:(to answer the question in the other post, this is what I think you were doing; if you were fishing for reactions then I fail to see why you stated that you're taking the policy-lynching business seriously).

I'm going to choose to respond to this with a post I made in another game;

"When I said that it wasn't sarcasm...that was sarcasm."

I'm down with this lynch though, m0ar votes!

↑ Thor665 wrote:
I'll also put money down that whoever I said we should policy lynch - that I wasn't voting them for very long that day.
I also bet I can show multiple times of me suggesting policy lynch as town.
So...either vote me or go do something useful, like vote someone, I suggest Whisper...we're policy lynching her. <--srz face

Go provide links. So far, it looks like you're hoping enough dumb/lazy town players follow the MoI-suggested lynch, especially as you're pretty much sheeping him.

↑ Thor665 wrote:
The against policy lynch being accused of policy lynching policy lynchers thing is funny, mentioning he has to be careful of that and pulling in scum meta is certainly odd as far as mindset goes.
His read on my actions proves at least two people in this thread understand what I'm actually doing, which is actually a nice sanity tell to my mind.
About all I've got besides that is declaring RVS is 'over' but not actually having it over for yourself, because if it's 'over' then you ought to have a serious vote.
I have seen town do that derpy "RVS=over - Unvote" crud before though.

All I've really got is the one, being specifically mindful of being lynched and moving to avoid it despite personal opinions of what is best for the game.
Secondary is...I guess the no direction after RVS thing ends, though if that's it I disagree with the tell.

Unvoting when RVS ends is not a scumtell. It's not a tell at all, it's a matter of personal preference.

↑ Thor665 wrote:
Well...if you *really* want to get into that discussion; 'In my opinion EVERY LYNCH is a policy lynch.'
It's my policy to lynch scum.
It's my policy to lynch the one unknown alignment voter on a wagon of confirmed town.
It's my policy to lynch for scumtell 'X'
All anyone ever does is take the word 'policy' out of it and add the word 'tell' and then act like they're somehow different.
The good thing policy lynching does is lynch people - and lynching people is a good policy for town (sounds joking, but is also serious)

And here you're just distracting from the argument at hand. We all know what a "policy lynch" is, and an "it is my policy to lynch scum" does not fall under this heading.

---

↑ enomis wrote:
nah, Policy lynch is a great way to start a day as long as it doesn't go through just because of the 'policy'.
UNVOTE: popsofctown
VOTE: StrangerCoug

And there we have our opportunistic lurkerscum. This is your first post out of RVS and all you're doing is voting the prevalent wagon with a non-sequitur.

VOTE: enomis

Also willing to vote Thor.

↑ IceGuy wrote:And there we have our opportunistic lurkerscum. This is your first post out of RVS and all you're doing is voting the prevalent wagon with a non-sequitur.

VOTE: enomis

Also willing to vote Thor.

Lurker? For your information, my post count is the same as yours. Well, i admit its a non-sequitur vote because i never really explained my reasons.
@strangercoug:
1) Do you think starting a discussion about policy lynching will help us?
2) What are your reasons for voting thor? (as far as i can see, its only because you dont agree with him on the policy lynch discussion).

↑ MagnaofIllusion wrote:

First person to correctly identify them and join me in voting StrangerCoug gets a delicious Internet Cookie*

UNVOTE: Whisper
VOTE: StrangerCoug

* - Disclaimer : Your definition of delicious or what constitutes and actual cookie may vary from mine. No actual cookie will be delivered.

Colour me interested, cause I don't see it.

↑ Thor665 wrote:

↑ StrangerCoug wrote:I disagree that, if you think the RVS is over, you have to have a serious vote.

That's fine - I didn't call it a scumtell anyway, just a derp tell, so - keep on trucking as you will.

↑ StrangerCoug wrote:Tell me one good thing policy lynching does in general

Well...if you *really* want to get into that discussion; 'In my opinion EVERY LYNCH is a policy lynch.'
It's my policy to lynch scum.
It's my policy to lynch the one unknown alignment voter on a wagon of confirmed town.
It's my policy to lynch for scumtell 'X'
All anyone ever does is take the word 'policy' out of it and add the word 'tell' and then act like they're somehow different.
The good thing policy lynching does is lynch people - and lynching people is a good policy for town (sounds joking, but is also serious)

Apparently, you and I define policy lynching differently; none of your examples fit what I call a policy lynch. The first (if admittedly vague) and third are perfectly legitimate and the second makes sense as process of elimination. I define policy lynching as either lynching player X no matter what or lynching a player who does a singular action X no matter what.

So I will ask again, this time rephrased: What good does my definition of policy lynching get us?

↑ Thor665 wrote:

↑ StrangerCoug wrote:(to answer the question in the other post, this is what I think you were doing; if you were fishing for reactions then I fail to see why you stated that you're taking the policy-lynching business seriously).

I'm going to choose to respond to this with a post I made in another game;

"When I said that it wasn't sarcasm...that was sarcasm."

*brain explodes*

↑ IceGuy wrote:

↑ enomis wrote:
nah, Policy lynch is a great way to start a day as long as it doesn't go through just because of the 'policy'.
UNVOTE: popsofctown
VOTE: StrangerCoug

And there we have our opportunistic lurkerscum. This is your first post out of RVS and all you're doing is voting the prevalent wagon with a non-sequitur.

VOTE: enomis

Also willing to vote Thor.

Where the hell do you get that enomis is lurkerscum?

UNVOTE: Thor665
VOTE: IceGuy

↑ enomis wrote:1) Do you think starting a discussion about policy lynching will help us?

No.

↑ enomis wrote:2) What are your reasons for voting thor? (as far as i can see, its only because you dont agree with him on the policy lynch discussion).

That was pretty much it, admittedly.

↑ MagnaofIllusion wrote:In regard to Whispersilk – Post 28

Farside wrote:Why suck up to MoI?

Worried Thor and I will form a Voting block and destroy your scum team Farside?

No. I always wonder why a player picks some person they don't know their alignment on page one and sheeps them. That whole scum do buddying thing you always forget about till it's too late.

↑ StrangerCoug wrote:

↑ MagnaofIllusion wrote:

Stranger wrote:If I see anything's that's the problem, I interpret it as Thor665 supporting a policy lynch, which I'm against in most cases.

Really? Do you have a Policy of disliking those who suggest Policy Lynching? If so do you ever vote them?

I do dislike and vote people who suggest policy lynching as it tends to be anti-information; however, I've been accused of policy lynching policy lynchers (in a game where I was scum, if I remember correctly), so I have to be careful with my accusation of this. Thor665's post looks closer to a random bandwagoning stage post, and even though I'm against the RBS as well, fighting the stage is unproductive.

The RVS stage is pretty much over in my eyes, so I will UNVOTE: ; however, nobody stands out as scummy and it's a little late for me to think right now.

↑ StrangerCoug wrote:

↑ Thor665 wrote:So...either vote me or go do something useful, like vote someone, I suggest Whisper...we're policy lynching her. <--srz face

Makes my thinking easier.

VOTE: Thor665

↑ Thor665 wrote:

↑ farside22 wrote:I was just wondering why MoI.

And I was answering - why not? If you can't tell me why I shouldn't, then I hardly need to explain why I should. Yes?

↑ farside22 wrote:I was more thinking about the last game you talked about PL and I called you scum for it.

I'll guess I was scum in that game.
I'll also put money down that whoever I said we should policy lynch - that I wasn't voting them for very long that day.
I also bet I can show multiple times of me suggesting policy lynch as town.
So...either vote me or go do something useful, like vote someone, I suggest Whisper...we're policy lynching her. <--srz face
Unless you think she's town because of that...

↑ MagnaofIllusion wrote:No you aren’t. You are clearly ‘Teehee’ reaction fishing. Why try to disguise it? I say revel in it!

I personally think I do both - generally about half the players 'get it' and the other half don't and it's just more info in my mind.

EBWOP - oh, contest...next post.

Actually the game I reference you were town, I was town and we argued for a bit on how you pushed the PL for pages on. I really hated the game and I got stressed by the argument and BS. I believe it was the superhero game in the large theme. All my reads were crap except Diddin.

↑ StrangerCoug wrote:

↑ Thor665 wrote:About all I've got besides that is declaring RVS is 'over' but not actually having it over for yourself, because if it's 'over' then you ought to have a serious vote.
I have seen town do that derpy "RVS=over - Unvote" crud before though.

I disagree that, if you think the RVS is over, you have to have a serious vote. While it's unlikely that the person you're voting in the RVS is going to be lynched before the RVS ends, once things get serious, if it's clear that your vote is doing nothing then the most pro-town thing to do is unvote. Waiting to vote was to give me time to think about the game.

↑ Thor665 wrote:I got it by looking back. On Page one he actually tossed some dirt at me for all being about policy lynching, then all of a sudden this page he seems to understand what I'm actually doing, add that to the odd mental defense mindset and suddenly we have a guy who's just stirring around tossing dirt and forgetting when he's tossed it because he's not actually forming reads based off his real play opinions, and add into that the defense mindset at cost of town and we have a solid scumtell for Page 2.

Tell me one good thing policy lynching does in general (to answer the question in the other post, this is what I think you were doing; if you were fishing for reactions then I fail to see why you stated that you're taking the policy-lynching business seriously). With the exception of both LALs, all I see us getting from it is one person down based on very little if any game-specific information and at least one more from the Mafia kill. And where will we be on Day 2? I shudder to think.

1) Your saying your vote on Thor for pushing a PL is scummy mostly because it's you. It's OMGUS and a bad reaction to his push on you.
2) As much as I'm not a PL I do see one bennifit from it. It gets rid of a useless player that more then always hurts the town by their bad play and lack of scum hunting because we all fucking know at this point that scum will not kill the useless player unless they are a PR.

↑ enomis wrote:

↑ StrangerCoug wrote:

↑ Thor665 wrote:About all I've got besides that is declaring RVS is 'over' but not actually having it over for yourself, because if it's 'over' then you ought to have a serious vote.
I have seen town do that derpy "RVS=over - Unvote" crud before though.

I disagree that, if you think the RVS is over, you have to have a serious vote. While it's unlikely that the person you're voting in the RVS is going to be lynched before the RVS ends, once things get serious, if it's clear that your vote is doing nothing then the most pro-town thing to do is unvote. Waiting to vote was to give me time to think about the game.

↑ Thor665 wrote:I got it by looking back. On Page one he actually tossed some dirt at me for all being about policy lynching, then all of a sudden this page he seems to understand what I'm actually doing, add that to the odd mental defense mindset and suddenly we have a guy who's just stirring around tossing dirt and forgetting when he's tossed it because he's not actually forming reads based off his real play opinions, and add into that the defense mindset at cost of town and we have a solid scumtell for Page 2.

Tell me one good thing policy lynching does in general (to answer the question in the other post, this is what I think you were doing; if you were fishing for reactions then I fail to see why you stated that you're taking the policy-lynching business seriously). With the exception of both LALs, all I see us getting from it is one person down based on very little if any game-specific information and at least one more from the Mafia kill. And where will we be on Day 2? I shudder to think.

nah, Policy lynch is a great way to start a day as long as it doesn't go through just because of the 'policy'.
UNVOTE: popsofctown
VOTE: StrangerCoug

↑ StrangerCoug wrote:
Where the hell do you get that enomis is lurkerscum?

↑ IceGuy wrote:
And there we have our opportunistic lurkerscum. This is your first post out of RVS and all you're doing is voting the prevalent wagon with a non-sequitur.

Yeah, sometimes I lurk on day 1, but not always, and MoI's view of my game style is probably pretty skewed seeing as during the two short lived games I've played with him, I was awol due to moving city and having no internet access, and being sick.

So thumbs up on your policy lynch MoI. Pretty scummy if you ask me.

Hi Thor, I missed you since Jungle Rep.

Don't think I've played with the majority of the rest of you.

↑ StrangerCoug wrote:

↑ enomis wrote:1) Do you think starting a discussion about policy lynching will help us?

No.

↑ enomis wrote:2) What are your reasons for voting thor? (as far as i can see, its only because you dont agree with him on the policy lynch discussion).

That was pretty much it, admittedly.

1)Why did you start the discussion then?
2)why did you vote after you unvote after the RVS stage if you do not have any idea who to vote?

@SC: Why did you switch to IceGuy? What is your thoughts on Thor's comments?