Mafiascum.net

7 to lynch

Gorrad: 2 (Albert B. Rampage, ZEEnon)
GLaDOS: 1 (GhostWriter)
Giuseppe: 1 (Green Crayons)
Seraphim: 1 (zwetschanwasser)
GhostWriter: 1 (Seraphim)
zwetschanwasser: 1 (LynchHimNotMe)
Korlash: 1 (Korlash)
Green Crayons: 1 (GLaDOS)

Not Voting: 3 (Gorrad, Giuseppe, PhilyEc)

Glados wrote:If I had wanted to give my reason right now, I would have done so while voting.

So what you are saying is you have no reason.

Phily wrote:You're right, I'd prefer pointing at them so they actually post though. No harm in it right? Its been Monday + St Pats day is tomorrow so it aint too serious about people not posting yet, just something to throw into the mix.

If someone hasn't posted yet I doubt you saying anything will make them. But sure, why not...

Korlash wrote:So what you are saying is you have no reason.

Hey, that's a great way of putting words in someone else's mouth. Why exactly are you misrepresenting what another player said?

Korlash wrote:If someone hasn't posted yet I doubt you saying anything will make them. But sure, why not...

You don't think putting a spotlight on lurkers usually de-lurkerfies said problem players?

I think I know why you're voting for Green Crayons, Glados. And IF its for the same reason(s) as to why I'm suspicious of him then you're pretty quick to notice. The fact that you dont want to reveal your reasons yet further makes me think we're on the same line of thinking here.

Posting this now because town needs to check out his behaviour after Guiseppe made his vote before it fades out of memories.

Green wrote:Hey, that's a great way of putting words in someone else's mouth. Why exactly are you misrepresenting what another player said?

Ha ha ha. Actually it's a good way to get someone to say something they previously refused to. And I'm not misrepresenting anyone. Glad voted someone and failed to give any reasons for it, so as far as I or you or anyone else in this game knows, she has none to give. now if she would like to change my mind on it, she's welcome to it.

Green wrote:You don't think putting a spotlight on lurkers usually de-lurkerfies said problem players?

If this was page 20 I might half agree with pointing out lurkers. At least then you are able to get the active lurkers to post a little more. However at page 2 anyone not posting most likely hasn't even seen or began to read the thread and so talkign about them or two them does nothing as they aren't even here to read what you are saying. And of course anyone who is lurking while reading the thread this early in the game... well... odds are they aren't going to answer your calls anyway.

Korlash: She said that she didn't want to reveal her reasoning at that time. You said that this shows that she has no reasoning. You're seriously maintaining that your charge (she has no reasoning) is not misrepresenting the facts (she declares that there are reasons, of which she does not want to reveal at this time)? Really?

Phily: Care to point out what specifically we should be paying attention to regarding my behavior towards Giuseppe?

Green Crayons wrote:Phily: Care to point out what specifically we should be paying attention to regarding my behavior towards Giuseppe?

Not yet, I will if I vote though, otherwise I'd be behaving unfairly. Seems it would only lead the town if I explained why the FoS, its their duty to pick up on what you've done till things get more serious. Tis too early to build up a case ;]

Green wrote:Korlash: She said that she didn't want to reveal her reasoning at that time. You said that this shows that she has no reasoning. You're seriously maintaining that your charge (she has no reasoning) is not misrepresenting the facts (she declares that there are reasons, of which she does not want to reveal at this time)? Really?

Yes, until she shows she has reasons there is no proof she actually does. And so I have to assume she has none until she comes forward and corrects me. The way I see it there is hardly ever a time (especially this early) to vote someone and withhold the reasons so I am pessing her to give those reasons. If you can show me a fact that she does in fact have a reason right now then you may hav a case against me for Misrepresenting the facts. But you can't, so ha ha.

Phily wrote:Not yet, I will if I vote though, otherwise I'd be behaving unfairly. Seems it would only lead the town if I explained why the FoS, its their duty to pick up on what you've done till things get more serious. Tis too early to build up a case ;]

What is with you people. "You would only lead the town by explaining the FoS?" No... You would help the town by not distracting us with worthless baseless FoSs and playing this stupid mindgame of Maybe I do/maybe I don't. As far as what he has actualy done if there is something worth a vote you better point it out, otherwise you better stop this shadow game or it will damage your point when you actually share it.

... Processing ...

Korlash, this is how stupid you sound:

Stupid Voice wrote:

HelloOoOoOoOo!

But I do agree that PhilyEc should not fear "leading the town" or "building up a case."

Yup calling me stupid. The age old mentality of the three year old when caught doing something wrong. I would have rather been the pride of my home town but whatever.

I think its a better idea to let people look into Green's behaviour rather than telling them what to think, if it was a vote then you'd be right in saying

Korlash wrote:You would help the town by not distracting us with worthless baseless

votes

and playing this stupid mindgame of Maybe I do/maybe I don't.

(that sounds more correct to me)

Call it shadowy if you must but its me pointing out hes done something to earn him scum points. Rather than state what I think and get launched into some sort of redundant and stagnating debate over the event Im asking town to check out what happened and think up whatever they think is appropriate. Thus we can carry on and have that event noted.

Its nothing worth a vote, its worth paying attention to. At the moment I'm writing up about the game itself, drafting out what each posts means, is it townie, is it scummy and I'm thinking his behaviour stood out the most so far, nothing more.

... Processing ...

Korlash, sounding stupid is not the same as being stupid. But please, continue to read things into my posts which are not there.

... Processing ...



Why should others "think up" reasons to vote for Green Crayons? Your posts sound disingenuous.

.

PhilyEc wrote:Its nothing worth a vote, its worth paying attention to.

You mis-rep my point, try upgrading data analysis~
Its an FoS so people dont look past it like I almost did.

... Processing ...

PhilyEc wrote:<snip>Im asking town to check out what happened and

think up whatever they think is appropriate

</snip>

Why should others "think up" reasons to Green Crayons?

Your post encourages others to list various reasons to suspect or vote Green Crayons. This allows you to later choose any of them and say "Yes, this is what I was thinking."

Having laptop issues. Meant to post this earlier right after Phily's post 56:


I agree with Korlash, to some extent.

If you have legitimate and worthy suspicions, I think fear of "lead[ing] the town" is just about the worse excuse to neglect to reveal those suspicions. While I agree there are situations where reasons behind a vote or a FoS are sometimes best left unsaid until later (though few and far between), being afraid the town may agree with your suspicions (with the implication that they would be following suspicions with legitimacy) is incredibly counterintuitive.

I want to know what GLaDOS and Philly are thinking, to be honest. Say what you're thinking as you think it, or you may never get the chance to say it. That said, I see no reason to withhold the information, because if we could get more opinions on scum, than we could have more discussion, and thus, a better lynch.

I don't like the idea that Phil is trying to read GLaDOS's mind here:

PhillyEC wrote:I think I know why you're voting for Green Crayons, Glados. And IF its for the same reason(s) as to why I'm suspicious of him then you're pretty quick to notice. The fact that you dont want to reveal your reasons yet further makes me think we're on the same line of thinking here.

That feels off, and weird. And suspicious. I don't see anything really wrong with GC right now. You can't lynch him if you don't have support. Explain your viewpoint.

On the topic of Korlash, I feel he has been doing a bit of word-twisting, and that in order to prove he's been twisting the words, GLaD AND Phil should explain why they don't like GC.

Glados wrote:Your post encourages others to list various reasons to suspect or vote Green Crayons. This allows you to later choose any of them and say "Yes, this is what I was thinking.

Thats far more appropriate. In that case I'll just post what I've written about him so far (two A4 sheet summary of game made earlier). I guess I dont have to fear scum eating this up as me trying to mislead the town either since I now have to explain.


1) Guiseppe for out of game behaviour. (Adds Scum Points)
2) Glados challenge Guiseppe,
3) Green Crayon challenge Guiseppe, (Possible buddying?)
4) Guiseppe tries to press in-game behaviour (justification) claimed auto suspicion (sounds like intuition) seems to be a diplomatic one. (Pro town points for not tunneling).
5) Glados raises question over if post was random.
6) Guiseppe (Post 22) claims it was a 'good' random vote. The auto-suspicion was intended to mean unease over LHNM due to out of game behaviour.
7) Ghostwriter claims the vote has more real qualities rather than random.

Conclusion: Feel it was harmless enough a vote, he needed a reason as did everyone and chose out of game experience. Not as common for randoms but generally people do it to past players is they were scum in other games.
Keep an eye on Glados & Green.


(Has vote count scribbled in then moves on)
1) Green Crayon challenge Guiseppe, asks if theres any plan to bring up said meta info later on.
2) Giuseppe, "I'd be taking discussion forward" Agrees RandomVotes stink.
3) Green Crayon behaves unsatisfied , asks same question with clarity.
Nitpicks over information I found innocent enough from Giuseppe about the random vote.
FoS's Korlash for his joke vote on himself (Add Scum Points for reaching)
4) Zwets, "Didnt he (Giuseppe) unvote?"
5) Green Crayon, goes at Giu's random vote moreover, questions the true randomness behind the vote (Note: Meta info was his unease)
Asks me questions, answers would be good scum food, doesnt notice that I dont answer (Empty questions to look town?)
6) Korlash, pro town points noticing that those inactive doesnt entail suspicion this early into game. Seraphim does the same in different manor but Zwet strangely 3rds the notion even though the questions already there. (Might need more attention)
7) Glados, & seems to have picked up on what I have. Good analyser, possibly most town so far.
8) Seraphim: "Why change to GC?"
9) Glados, keeps reason to herself. (Could be retaining this information till theres more info to back it up with to appear more sure/Could be a pressure vote after seeing scummy traits).


(Has vote count scribbled in then moves on)
1) Korlash, accuses Glados of having no reason (most likely knows there is one but wants to apply pressure)
Wraps up questions towards be about my blanket FoS.
2) Green Crayon, accuses Korlash of putting words in Glados' mouth. Seems obvious what Korlash is trying to do thus (Add Scum Points)
Brings talk up with Korlash/Phily to further question after it looked wrapped up.



3) Korlash makes it clear what he intended (pressuring Glados)
4) Green Crayons, challenges my FoS.
Takes Korlash very literally to press his arguement towards Korlash, seems to be reaching (Add Scum Points)

---

Thats what I got so far, *clicks to preview* *Adds italics to thought note*

To note, an FoS shouldn't get such a reaction, thus I'm reaching for another sheet *squints*

Glad wrote:Korlash, sounding stupid is not the same as being stupid. But please, continue to read things into my posts which are not there.

You're arguing the literal wording of specific insults now? Be my guest. Well you call me stupid or say I sound stupid it all means the same thing in the long run.

Phily wrote:Call it shadowy if you must but its me pointing out hes done something to earn him scum points. Rather than state what I think and get launched into some sort of redundant and stagnating debate over the event Im asking town to check out what happened and think up whatever they think is appropriate. Thus we can carry on and have that event noted.

You have pointed out nothing. we cannot note the event unless you tell us what event it is. The way you are speaking you seem to be fishing for everyone else to say omething before you get your own opinions on the books. YOU pointed out something and so YOU have to be the first to mention it. So tell us what event it is you sw so we can carry on and have it noted.

Phily wrote:Its nothing worth a vote, its worth paying attention to. At the moment I'm writing up about the game itself, drafting out what each posts means, is it townie, is it scummy and I'm thinking his behaviour stood out the most so far, nothing more.

... You can't just say someone's behavior stands out and not tell us where or how. It obviously isn't "standing out" if you don't even find it worth pointing out specifically. It almost sounds like you are trying to make the rest of us see something so you can take credit for it later. If you see something, pont it out. If you don't, stop wasting our time.

Giusepee wrote:On the topic of Korlash, I feel he has been doing a bit of word-twisting, and that in order to prove he's been twisting the words, GLaD AND Phil should explain why they don't like GC.

Exactly my point. I say what I say in the phrasing I say it in order to get results and answer unanswered questions. Some people might not like it but boohoo, it's a game of mafia deal with it.

@Korlash,
Due to amount of interest (wheter good or ill willed) I've provided my notes so far. I'll try being open since people want me to share my ideas more often instead of just one person demanding I explain. Anyways, he got the most scum points so far so I encourage people study him. Perhaps now they'll bother to cross check my notes with what they've seen.

... Processing ...

I do not approve of Green Crayons' attack on Giuseppe on the whole.

Green Crayons, Post 26 wrote:Second, do you plan on actually launching future discussion about item X or do you plan on just talking about launching future discussion about item X?

I do not like this. I cannot explain why in a manner I find satisfactory.

Green Crayons, Post 39 wrote:<snip>randomness is not all we have for our use in determining who to vote</snip>

At the time Giuseppe made his vote, randomness all we had. The fact that there were less random things by the time Green Crayons made Post 39 does not change the situation of Post 14.

Green Crayons, Post 39 wrote:"I'm randomly voting Player Y because of these reasons, but this vote is still random and you can't blame me because all we can do is randomly vote at this time!" ...Uh, what?

I disapprove of this characterization. It tries to lead readers into thinking there is a greater discongruity in Giuseppe's posts than there actually was. Giuseppe's vote was random in that it was not based off suspicion in the game.

I did not want to disclose the reasoning for my vote because this may have discouraged further attacks on Giuseppe which may have been informative. GhostWriter in particular I thought may have made a similar attack. We now seem to have moved beyond that issue, however.

~~~

I also noticed that Green Crayons did not follow up on his question in Post 39 to PhilyEc. However, (i) Green Crayons may have felt his question was indirectly answered, and (ii) I feel that asking questions without checking for answers is only a scumtell if it is done multiple times so as to create a pattern. Since a pattern had not yet formed, I saw no need to point this out.

GladOs, is your processing thing a post restriction? Also, I don't find it strange that I thirded a notion I found true.

I have no post restrictions.

What do you think about Green Crayons?

Scum, but I want Phily to answer first.

I think GLaDOS is just awesome. Right?

I do agree that there's some interesting discrepancies in GC's posting...but Phily, your entire "mystery shadow-in-the-dark" type thing does not help the town. Explain what you mean or stop talking altogether.

as for GLaDOS, it looks like there was a reason for your vote...why did you state that there was none?