Mafiascum.net

Vote Count 1.11

RedCoyote

( 0 )

²

( 1 ) RedCoyote

A_Stone

( 2 ) ² , RachMarie

thenewearth

( 1 ) Mr E Roll

syndromeofatown

( 1 ) goodmorning

Mr E Roll

( 1 ) thenewearth

goodmorning

( 0 )

RachMarie

( 1 ) syndromeofatown

EspeciallyTheLies

( 0 )

Not voting:

EspeciallyTheLies , A_Stone

With 9 alive, it takes 5 to lynch.

Deadline is in

thenewearth is temporarily V/LA.

I'll try to consolidate here.

In post 234, RedCoyote wrote:That's just noise. That's cluttering the thread with junk.

I second this (regarding 2's prolific posting).

In post 241, goodmorning wrote: @Mr E: Why are you assuming you'll flip? Why mention flips now?

This is a good point. I've only ever said that as scum (I believe). Does anyone else find this an odd thing for Mr. E to say, or is it just a one-off thing?

In post 242, Mr E Roll wrote:I mention flips because that was what TNE’s reads/case on 2 seemed to be based on.

Obviously. Cases are based on the assumption of the suspect's flip.

In post 255, ² wrote:

In post 234, RedCoyote wrote:Maybe you posting 10 times more than every other player fools tne and goodmorning, but it sure as hell doesn't fool me. Quality > quantity.

Maybe I'm posting both quality and quantity.

- b

This post indicates otherwise, to bring up just one example (of many).

In post 256, ² wrote:

In post 237, A_Stone wrote:Btw, 2, the Spoilered part of my post was addressed to you

I'm sorry that I didn't get around to responding to it sooner.

- b

So.... where is your response?

In post 268, RachMarie wrote:Syndrome, atm I am leaning town on Squared... that may change when I get a chance to really look at the ISOs, but from what I have seen they seem to be ok, as for the heavy level of posting, both heads are really hyperactive types who post a shitaki amount, so yeah not good enough for a case on them...

As RC pointed out... it's not the quantity of posts that is disturbing, it is the quality (which is in the toilet).

In post 270, syndromeofatown wrote:UNVOTE: A Stone
VOTE: RachMarie

serious vote. explain later

And no. You took the time to post this, you might as well have given something of a reason, and then explained in more detail later.

: A_Stone is looking pretty scummy, but so is 2. Bussing maybe? I don't know, but I'm going back to 2; the recent posts have been nothing but distraction. There's been no real content, discussion or actual responses to anyone (go ahead, go look, I just did).

VOTE: 2

In post 276, EspeciallyTheLies wrote:This post indicates otherwise, to bring up just one example (of many).

I never claimed every single one of my posts lives up to these criteria.

- b

In post 276, EspeciallyTheLies wrote:So.... where is your response?

I responded to what I found relevant to respond to. If I missed something that you'd like me to respond to, point it out.

- b

In post 276, EspeciallyTheLies wrote:Conclusion: A_Stone is looking pretty scummy, but so is 2. Bussing maybe? I don't know, but I'm going back to 2; the recent posts have been nothing but distraction. There's been no real content, discussion or actual responses to anyone (go ahead, go look, I just did).

VOTE: 2

This is not true. Perhaps you're simple not emotionally or intellectually capable of understanding the concerns I've raised regarding A_stone. In fact, you thinking that this could be bussing would suggest just that. f will hate me for this post, but I'm not going to phrase it in any diplomatic way.

- b

And no. You took the time to post this, you might as well have given something of a reason, and then explained in more detail later.

Hey how about you don't tell me what to do or tell me what I can and cannot post and when. Thanks.

Liking SoaT a lot more for town, both for the vote and for the push back.

- f

In post 280, syndromeofatown wrote:

And no. You took the time to post this, you might as well have given something of a reason, and then explained in more detail later.

Hey how about you don't tell me what to do or tell me what I can and cannot post and when. Thanks.

I'm not and wasn't. And this still isn't an explanation of your vote on Rach.

In post 281, ² wrote:Liking SoaT a lot more for town, both for the vote and for the push back.

- f

Weren't you the one talking about assessing actions based on whether it was town-motivated or scum-motivated? What town motivation is there in randomly voting someone and not sharing the thought process behind it? Maybe he saw something the rest of us missed? Instead of just explaining it, he gave me attitude.

In post 279, ² wrote:Perhaps you're simple not emotionally or intellectually capable of understanding the concerns I've raised regarding A_stone.

If you bothered to actually read anything I've said, you'd know how I feel about A_Stone. I just happen to think you may also be scum. Ad Hom isn't a good defense.

ehh he is prob town even with the attitude though...

hmmm tpp soon for a scum team, but makes me wonder... I vote for stone dude, and he had asked me about squared.,... makes no sense....

Am I supposed to just vote for 2 even if I dont think they are likely to be scum just cause peeps dont like how much they post?

I think we can do better than that...

Not like we are on deadline yet or anything...

I was reading this game, and I didn't feel like I was in it. Then I saw my facepalmcat and realized that I am in this game.

I am relatively sure I know who the scums are but it's just a really hard gut read and a fuckton of associative tells and my brain is going NO NO YOU CAN'T MAKE A CASE SOLELY ON ASSOCIATIVE TELLS D1 NO FLIPS YOU BIG STUPID IDIOT STOP THAT STAY OBJECTIVE but my gut is going NO NO I WANT TO SAY IT AND I AM TOTALLY RIGHT, IT SHOULD BE REALLY OBVIOUS BUT THEN WHAT THINGY AND BLAH BLAH WALRUS

Also it's quarter past 2am, so that probably explains that slightly but maybe not.

uhhhh...

When you come back after some sleep could you like rephrase that into something more understandable?

Thanks

In post 265, ² wrote:

In post 263, A_Stone wrote:You're overthinking this way too much, my vote on you *was* random.

Yes, the initial vote. Then you started tunneling. Then I asked you if it was random, which you didn't answer. Then, when you ran into some trouble, you unvoted me, asserting that the vote had always been random.

- b

Sorry, I thought that the random-ness of the vote was implied.

In post 187, ² wrote:A_Stone, is your vote on us still random?
- b

Yes, yes it was.

In post 264, ² wrote:

In post 263, A_Stone wrote:I still want to know why you had to ask, you said it wasn't obvious to you it was a player, and yet the post beforehand said he was giving him scumvibes? I don't see *how* the acronym wasn't apparent, everyone else understood it.

Yes you do, but you have to pretend not to at this point to backpedal out of this. It's not going to work.

- b

>.> Are you ever going to answer why the question had to be asked, or are you just going to make a case on how I'm backpedaling to the sunrise in your opinion

In post 266, Mr E Roll wrote:@A_Stone assuming your vote on 2 was random all that time why did you feel it necessary to Unvote at that specific time? You say it’s because we left RVS but without placing a new vote it doesn’t look like

you

left RVS.

It seems to me you took your vote off of 2 hoping to stop the back and fourth with him.

It also looks like you are trying to redirect attention away from yourself by asking for more content from some of the more lurkerish players.

1. I unvoted when I thought it was the general consensus that RVS was over, there was no point in holding my RVS vote after that point.

I'm still checking out who I'd like to vote right now, I'm thinking about 2 but I'd like to see a bit more, it's pretty much just gut and a bad feeling right now. I'd just like to step back and look at everyone a bit more before I make my decision.

2. Nah, I just felt I'd been keeping an RVS vote for too long, and that I should re-evaluate my reads, currently iso'ing people etc.

3. It's just something I do, I like to see activity from everyone.

In post 273, EspeciallyTheLies wrote:A_Stone's 230 is really bugging me. The responses in the spoiler come off almost

too agreeable

. Scum will often try to appease the concerns of the town in order to seem more friendly, and think it makes them look less scummy. 230 feels very scummy to me.

It's just a trait of mine, I'm quite apologetic irl too.

In post 285, RachMarie wrote:
Am I supposed to just vote for 2 even if I dont think they are likely to be scum just cause peeps dont like how much they post?

He looks like he has an amazingly strong presence doesn't he, then suddenly we realize he's using a post to answer every question individually.

In post 269, goodmorning wrote:

In post 263, A_Stone wrote:

In post 241, goodmorning wrote:@Stone: Not off the top of my head.

I'll look into it a bit more then.

IIRC, the theory behind it is that Townies tend to be paranoid, which tenses them up.

Huh, I'd have thought it'd be the opposite, wouldn't Scum care wayyyy more about how they looked to the town, and try to look more uniform?

In post 283, EspeciallyTheLies wrote:

In post 281, ² wrote:Liking SoaT a lot more for town, both for the vote and for the push back.

- f

Weren't you the one talking about assessing actions based on whether it was town-motivated or scum-motivated? What town motivation is there in randomly voting someone and not sharing the thought process behind it? Maybe he saw something the rest of us missed? Instead of just explaining it, he gave me attitude.

Rach's posts so far this game have been terrible. buldermar and I have both brought her up in our convos. our experience (more bulder's than mine - I have played one completed game with her) is that she posts like this regardless of alignment, but it's still terrible. soat reacting to her posts the way he did makes town sense to us. My initial read of soat was town. It softened a bit toward null, but those two posts firmed the read back up, and to me that was comment-worthy.

- f

ouch love you too girl and bulder too ♥

I always suck on Day 1 uggh takes me a while to figure everyone out.

What I do know is that Syndrome can be tricksy from the Marathon game where he and CDB NKed NS and framed me to win, but overall I kinda have a gud town feel for him at this point... though he has not posted much....

I also know that ETL is very good so dont let her fool you with her join date.... She was scum in the game we were in together and she and her lurky loo partner (Kibbles) slid right into a victory... So will be watching her closely.

I cant remember if I played with scum Bulder before or not? I know fery was half of the Inno Kid in the game we were in together.

That being said, I still want a real case from him for his vote on me not just vote and be done with it...

In post 287, RachMarie wrote:uhhhh...

When you come back after some sleep could you like rephrase that into something more understandable?

Thanks

Basically, I have a really strong case if gut and associative tells are a really strong case, which intellectually they aren't.

Also I'm sad that you didn't mention that we have a game together :[

In post 291, goodmorning wrote:

In post 287, RachMarie wrote:uhhhh...

When you come back after some sleep could you like rephrase that into something more understandable?

Thanks

Basically, I have a really strong case if gut and associative tells are a really strong case, which intellectually they aren't.

Also I'm sad that you didn't mention that we have a game together :[

so...are you thinking hold on to the case and see if something objective develops? or lay out the case and see what others make of it?

- f

I am thinking hold on to it for now. Obviously I think soat is Scum, but some more individual scumtells would be really appreciated.

In post 289, ² wrote:Rach's posts so far this game have been terrible. buldermar and I have both brought her up in our convos. our experience (more bulder's than mine - I have played one completed game with her) is that she posts like this regardless of alignment, but it's still terrible

If her posts so far have been completely terrible why did you have her as a null read?

In post 294, syndromeofatown wrote:

In post 289, ² wrote:Rach's posts so far this game have been terrible. buldermar and I have both brought her up in our convos. our experience (more bulder's than mine - I have played one completed game with her) is that she posts like this regardless of alignment, but it's still terrible

If her posts so far have been completely terrible why did you have her as a null read?

meta. the overall lack of content is a good match for the borkgame I played with her (as part of another hydra), though possibly slightly worse than day 1 of that game. I didn't move off null in that game until day 3 iirc. My partner (orcinus) had her null-town based on his own prior experiences.

- f

In post 277, ² wrote:

In post 276, EspeciallyTheLies wrote:This post indicates otherwise, to bring up just one example (of many).

I never claimed every single one of my posts lives up to these criteria.

Why shouldn't they?

I can say that about each and every one of my posts, why can't you?

Should one have to, though? Seems a bit strict criteria for judging.

Ok so I'm actually liking syndrome bit by bit now.