Mafiascum.net

Also, that was a typo copper, I meant to say 'His activity has ceased in that game too' but it's kinda irrelevant now because she's getting replaced.

Key wants to be a good mod but I can't agree with the kind of rules he is trying to enforce (if you feel insulted by something, then that something is by definition an insult), so I am replacing out.

Good luck to everyone (excluding TF).

Cheers.

Feel sorry for whoever replaces Cooper. Replacing into a confirmed scum slot is tough

Are you joking?
Sounds like you're actually proud of what you've wrought.

How is a disagreement over the rules scummy at all?
What has Copper done that is even remotely scummy?
All you've done is fucking argue. How can you correlate 'I don't like him and he's insulting me wah wah wah!' into 'He is scum'?

The reasons you gave for your vote a little while ago were flaky at BEST. How does a personality clash enhance them? If you want Copper's slot lynched, get a case on him and convince others to vote him. If it's reasonable and well written, others will follow.

Grow up. Grow a spine. I'm not in this game to get pissed off at people because they don't agree with me, I want to win.

Holy shit. You're not lynchbait, you're blacklist bait.

I'll stay in this game for the sake of everybody who wants a good game and I couldn't morally handle replacing out but TwoFace, despite seeming town to me, you really need to get your act together bro.

In post 479, Human Sequencer wrote:Are you joking?
Sounds like you're actually proud of what you've wrought.

I believe Copper is scum. Him replacing out doesn't change that. Am I proud of him replacing out? No cause it takes the joy out of it when that slot flips scum.

I don't think copper is scum for disagreement about the rules. I already said why I think he's scum and it had nothing to do with the rules.

Did I overreact about the VI thing? Probably but I've been in a bad mood and I already told him I didn't appreciate it. He did it again knowing that makes him in the wrong.

Flashes of TwoFace vs Titus from 1833. Which was TvT btw.

Let's stop this here guys.
For clarity, VI, is a legitimate and non rule violating term used to describe one's negative and distracting behaviour.
Mods can consider this as abusive though. So the topic remains subjective.

TF, your case on Copper amounts to basically - he used an incorrect definition of lynchbait to justify a vote while he knew the correct one?

Say for sake of argument that he actually believed that his definition was correct. Would that make him less scummy?

In post 222, TwoFace wrote:Right I saw you said it can be scum, but I disagreed with you and felt it was a scummy post. saying you will unvote when he gets to l-1 is bad play imo. It takes pressure off someone people are scum reading and also makes you seem like you weren't really committed to it. If that's the case why are you on it to begin with?

No him being wrong about the definition of lynch bait didn't make him scum. here is the best explanation of what makes him scum.

Ok, I missed that. I guess I see two sides to it. On the one hand it makes his vote less pressure and also disincentivizes others from actually putting Creeps to L-1. In a way it fixes Creeps at L-2 which is definitely odd. On the other hand, with newer players in the game a bad hammer is definitely not out of the question.

Actually something else is kind of weird about Copper but I'm not sure what it means.

In post 215, copper223 wrote: At least 1 of you that jumped on this is most likely scum.

Here he implies that he's checking out TB and TwoFace as potential scum for jumping on what he saw as a bad case. But 241 implies that the dichotomy is now between TF and me. I think his saying I came up with new reasons to suspect him (which was wrong) was a new reason for him to suspect me. I think this feeling is why I called his argument an advanced OMGUS. I don't think it's scummy though, since with the type of person Copper seems to be, I can definitely see town Copper trying to elaborately justify an OMGUS vote.

In post 321, copper223 wrote:VOTE: ThinkBig
You are next on the: why did you jump on the copper wagon list, you appear to also be game avoiding. I also want to hear your answer to Mort's questions.

Also let's look at this vote.

I mean first and foremost the blatant OMGUS

he accuses ThinkBig of game avoiding, and this was after ThinkBig had just made a bunch of posts both Friday the 4th and Saturday the 5th. There is no game avoiding so it is a blatantly false accusation when coupled with the fact it was in retaliation to being voted, makes cooper look very scummy.

I mean all of copper's votes have been bad and his reasons terrible. he basically attacks anyone who is coming after him.

I mean, your argument is part of why I voted him to begin with. But I accepted his explanation that bad hammers do happen - I assume you don't?

Pedit: his recent reads list contained more than OMGUS, in fact, you and I were both town on that list.

In post 488, MortFeld wrote:Copper trying to elaborately justify an OMGUS vote.

funny you say that as I was typing my most recent post

In post 490, MortFeld wrote:I were both town on that list.

no i was yellow which mean he thought I was possibly scum

In post 490, MortFeld wrote:But I accepted his explanation that bad hammers do happen - I assume you don't?

if he legitimately scum read him, why would he be worried about him getting hammered? When I think somebody is scum I am praying for somebody to hammer them, not backing off and even unvoting.

this means that his vote wasn't sincere. I don't see why he as town would do that, I can see scum implications which actually means my read on creep is probably wrong. His vote being insincere points to creep/copper scum buddies more than opposite alignments

I do concede bad hammers happen though. I played in a game where one happened recently even

Oh, I was yellow too. So potential scum but not scum scum.

In post 493, TwoFace wrote:

In post 490, MortFeld wrote:But I accepted his explanation that bad hammers do happen - I assume you don't?

if he legitimately scum read him, why would he be worried about him getting hammered? When I think somebody is scum I am praying for somebody to hammer them, not backing off and even unvoting.

this means that his vote wasn't sincere. I don't see why he as town would do that, I can see scum implications which actually means my read on creep is probably wrong. His vote being insincere points to creep/copper scum buddies more than opposite alignments

Copper voted Creeps very early, in post 33. At the time he made the lynchbait and unvote at L-1 comment in 108, most people didn't have any solid scum reads. Very shortly after he did so you even said in 125 that you had no concrete reads, your opinion of Creeps was that he's 'scummy but that's all'. With that game state, how is it reasonable to expect people to commit fully to their vote? And how is it scummy if they don't?

But see why can't that just be for effect? LAMIST and all that jazz. If he wasn't comfortable with him being at L2, why didn't he just unvote?

I'm not sure. Would be nice if we could ask him.

but you can't really trust his answer because if he is scum, he would just make up some BS answer. That is where you as a player have to evaluate his actions and determine if they make sense as town or scum. hence why I am pushing hard for his lynch. I don't see town motivation for his actions.

I agree that it doesn't make sense to state intention to unvote at L-1 instead of just unvoting at L-2. But why would scum be more likely to do this than town? If scum!Copper's goal is for a Creeps mislynch, he'd just leave his vote on and say nothing. I suppose it makes a bit of sense if Copper and Creeps are both scum, since his vote is an option select of sorts: someone else is lynched, Creeps stays alive and Copper's vote is on Creeps and not a townie; Creeps is lynched, it's a pretty reasonable bus. But I don't see a hugely convincing case on Copper from this.