Mafiascum.net

Jebus, I don't really like your format, and I agree with your assessment that AJ needs to contribute more. What happened to your promise on reading up on a few others later?

Nightfall wrote:Under pressure Gamma seemed to crack. Which is why he had my vote for day 1.

Gamma wrote: 1. when have i been acting like a sheep?
2. active lurking can be applied to you. don't accuse me of not being up to your activity standards, I have a life.
3. you're only saying this because charter called you out on it. So fuck this shit. I'm not listening to it at all.

I Agree that this part makes ooba/gamma suspicious and would like to hear ooba's side of the story.

Grimmy

Isn't my vote still on Nightfall?

Just to make sure -

Zilla wrote:Jebus, I don't really like your format, and I agree with your assessment that AJ needs to contribute more. What happened to your promise on reading up on a few others later?

I never got to it. Gamma was next, followed by Nightfall.

Also,

What's the reason for the change in vote?

You replaced Yawetog, who I found scummy. You are not scummy, and I tend to trust replacements, so I unvoted and went to my other choice.

On what grounds do I qualify as "not scummy?"

Jebus, why are you voting Alabaska? Why do you trust replacements?

Zilla, why do you think that a full summary of all players is a good idea? Who would be your second choice for scum?

Grimmy, what are your thoughts on Nightfall?

Jebus wrote:and I tend to trust replacements,

Are you pushing that as a positive trait?

Zilla, you qualify as 'not scummy' in that you haven't done anything scummy.

Nightfall wrote:

Jebus wrote:and I tend to trust replacements,

Are you pushing that as a positive trait?

Not really, I'm just saying that unless the previous player was obscenely scummy, I tend to write off the replacement as neutral until I get a good read on them.

Sorry guys, back from V/LA, I thought I had posted about it in the thread. Will definitely read/post before the deadline.

Alabaska behavior is both scummy and anti-town.

How so?

Spolium wrote:How so?

^ Seconded.

Haven't I already stated my reasons? To clarify: Asking for analysis when giving none of his own, voting for nightfall to "spice things up" or whatever, when I find Nightfall to be pro-town and trying to end a distracting conversation.

ac1983fan wrote:I find Nightfall to be pro-town and trying to end a distracting conversation.

Interesting. As far as I can see you've mentioned Nightfall only once, and that was when I was wasting my time debating a silly point.

You say that you "find [him] to be pro-town trying to end a distracting converstion". What are your reasons for finding him pro-town?

Also,

ac1983fan wrote:Honestly, if nobody had suspicions because of a random wagon, most games would never get out of the random vote stage.

Do a majority of games really rely on suspicion of random wagons to get out of the RVS? There are many ways to break out of the RVS, and I find that topic significant in that is the only game where I've seen RVS suspicion extend into D2.

Much as I loathe the idea of getting into another silly debate, can you substantiate your assertion?

Spolium wrote:

ac1983fan wrote:I find Nightfall to be pro-town and trying to end a distracting conversation.

Interesting. As far as I can see you've mentioned Nightfall only once, and that was when I was

questioning him

wasting my time debating a silly point.

You say that you "find [him] to be pro-town

and

trying to end a distracting converstion". What are your reasons for finding him pro-town?

I meant I find him pro-town because of that, and he just gives off a very pro-town feeling to me.

Spoil wrote: Also,

ac1983fan wrote:Honestly, if nobody had suspicions because of a random wagon, most games would never get out of the random vote stage.

Do a majority of games really rely on suspicion of random wagons to get out of the RVS? There are many ways to break out of the RVS, and I find that topic significant in that is the only game where I've seen RVS suspicion extend into D2.

Much as I loathe the idea of getting into another silly debate, can you substantiate your assertion?

Several of the games I've played in (all of them ongoing, unfortunately) got out of the RVS, in one way or another, due to suspicions cast towards random bandwagons.

ac1983fan wrote:and he just gives off a very pro-town feeling to me

Oh? Please, elaborate.

ac1983fan wrote:Several of the games I've played in (all of them ongoing, unfortunately) got out of the RVS, in one way or another, due to suspicions cast towards random bandwagons.

How unfortunate. I guess we can't touch that one with a barge pole, eh?

Spolium wrote:

ac1983fan wrote:and he just gives off a very pro-town feeling to me

Oh? Please, elaborate.

He's been more than willing to answer your questions regarding his statement, until it got to a point where you were dragging it out and were just distracting the town.

ac1983fan wrote:Several of the games I've played in (all of them ongoing, unfortunately) got out of the RVS, in one way or another, due to suspicions cast towards random bandwagons.

How unfortunate. I guess we can't touch that one with a barge pole, eh?

[/quote]
I don't even know what you're saying.... I can't link to any games because its against the site policy. I can't give specifics, because I don't want to break the rules. Several, if not a majority, of all the games I'm currently in have gotten out of the RVS because of a reaction to an RVS wagon. I don't like that you keep trying to distract the town with discussions about things not really all that relevant to the game. I'm not lying, I have no reason to lie.

Alabaska J wrote:I'm reluctant to vote charter just yet, as I always find him scummy, but I for the most part agree with Megatheory's analysis there.

Perhaps foreknowledge that charter would flip town, and wanting to add fuel to the fire without committing to a vote on him.

Alabaska J wrote:charter, too much wifom. We get into outguessing the mod if we nameclaim. This is friggin monopoly mafia. who the hell knows who will be on what side?

sounds like scum fishing for possible town power based on flavor.

Nitefell already said this, I don't like the borrowed logic...

ac1983fan wrote:He's been more than willing to answer your questions regarding his statement, until it got to a point where you were dragging it out and were just distracting the town.

That seems fair. Anything else?

ac1983fan wrote:I don't even know what you're saying.... I can't link to any games because its against the site policy. I can't give specifics, because I don't want to break the rules. Several, if not a majority, of all the games I'm currently in have gotten out of the RVS because of a reaction to an RVS wagon.

I understand that you can't discuss specifics, and I don't expect you to. It's just that you initially said "if nobody had suspicions because of a random wagon, would never get out of the random vote stage".

Now you've backtracked to "Several of the games I've played in (all of them ongoing, unfortunately) got out of the RVS, in one way or another, due to suspicions cast towards random bandwagons."; so you've gone back on "the majority", threw in the disclaimer "in one way or another" and conveniently we can't chase them up since they're all ongoing games. You've been on this site for two years - does this limited cross-section of ongoing games constitute a majority of games that you've played?

Seriously, I find it really odd that both you and Nightfall have done something along these lines in order to justify suspicion of an RVS wagon. Yeah, maybe I'm barking up the wrong tree, but I can't help but detect dishonesty there, whether or not I can posit a specific reason for it beyond the obvious.

I'm not lying, I have no reason to lie.

But of courshe you don't.

Spolium wrote:

ac1983fan wrote:He's been more than willing to answer your questions regarding his statement, until it got to a point where you were dragging it out and were just distracting the town.

That seems fair. Anything else?

Gut feeling makes me think he's pro-town.

Spoil wrote:

ac1983fan wrote:I don't even know what you're saying.... I can't link to any games because its against the site policy. I can't give specifics, because I don't want to break the rules. Several, if not a majority, of all the games I'm currently in have gotten out of the RVS because of a reaction to an RVS wagon.

I understand that you can't discuss specifics, and I don't expect you to. It's just that you initially said "if nobody had suspicions because of a random wagon,

most games

would never get out of the random vote stage".

Now you've backtracked to "Several of the games I've played in (all of them ongoing, unfortunately) got out of the RVS, in one way or another, due to suspicions cast towards random bandwagons."; so you've gone back on "the majority", threw in the disclaimer "in one way or another" and conveniently we can't chase them up since they're all ongoing games. You've been on this site for two years - does this limited cross-section of ongoing games constitute a majority of games that you've played?

Well, I actually stopped playing for about nine months to a year, and I can't remember how many games were gotten out of the RVS stage through reactions to RVS bandwagon from back when I used to play horribly back then... regardless, maybe I changed my verbage from a majority to several because it felt in my head that it was a majority, but, after looking, it may not actually be a majority, but at least several. In one way or another isn't really a disclaimer, just a rewording.

Spoilum, that's a pretty shabby case. There's no link to ac1983fan being scum for saying that suspicion on the bandwagon gets us out of RVS.

I'm more concerned about his unverifiable reasons for thinking Nightfall is town, just for being responsive. That's a shaky reason to think anybody is town. Scum can be just as engaging, and, most times, I catch them on being overly defensive. From my read on Nightfall, he hasn't been very pro-town at all, and has contributed little.

By conduct, I'd put Megatheory as being pretty pro-town, though I'm almost mistrustful that he's just being opportunistic, what with his focus on Charter. I'll admit, I totally disagreed with Charter's nameclaiming proposal, and his conduct afterward was VERY scummy, especially his lie about "You guys just lynched a power role" as a soft claim, and his refusal to fully claim afterward (because he lied). However, before that soft-claiming fiasco, there was less reason to think Charter was scum, and I don't like the top of page 4 where Alabaska and Gamma throw their votes on, AJ with no comment at all, Gamma with an unrelated comment about Megatheory and a random "stop following me."

Sadly, Gamma's been replaced. I can't ask if that was a random vote or not.

*forgot to wrap up on my comment about Megatheory*

Mega was the reason focus was turned on Charter to begin with, since he disagreed with the nameclaiming theory. Honestly, I agree with the assessment that it helps scum more than town, BUT, I think scum gain more from publicly refusing the nameclaim proposal than the negligible power-role information they may gain from the nameclaims.

There is also the chance that all the scum names ARE related, and they didn't want that to nameclaim for that reason. I think that's a longshot though.