Mafiascum.net

Not really, that was a reaction test that didn't work.

I'd say we left RVS at 47

↑ Belisarius wrote:Not really, that was a reaction test that didn't work.

I'd say we left RVS at 47

Does this mean your vote on Cheery Dog is no longer random?

↑ SafetyDance wrote:Oh hai GM, I DIDN'T GET INVITED TO THE CAPS LOCK PARTY!!!!!111

[b[Vote: Goodmorning[/b]

Because, OMGUS

Yeah, I'm too tired right now, will read through the thread tomorrow, hi all.

OMG I CAN'T EVEN RVS PROPERLY. MY LIFE IS ONE HUGE FAILURE. WHY IS MY CAPS LOCK KEY STILL ON?!?!?!

↑ goodmorning wrote:
Hi Safety, don't flake this time. It makes people think I'm scum and lose Town the game in horrible LyLo.

↑ goodmorning wrote:

↑ Cheery Dog wrote:Zai made me /in this, and Safety I mentioned to remind him that I find him readable. Also I noticed him /inning in queue.

Erm, I guess I know your town game too so, IGMEOU? And kwll basically threw away that slot, you guys got a gimme.

↑ Cheery Dog wrote:

↑ implosion wrote:

↑ Cheery Dog wrote:

↑ implosion wrote:

↑ Cheery Dog wrote:

↑ implosion wrote:
Why not?

You announced a feeling someone is scum, but you voted randomly instead. It's keeping us in RVS longer which makes it a problem.

Au contraire - my vote on goodmorning was anything

but

random.

So accidental, arbitrary, by chance or haphazardly?

None of the above. In fact, it contained intent.

*anagrams*
right it's just a coincident that your vote wasn't on the person you were calling scummy, got ya.

Wait dammit I don't have enough T. Tents are silly places to be in anyway.

Elaborate for the masses please.

↑ Cub Daigoro wrote:Someone's likely to hit scum in RVS. Why not me?

Oh look, self-confessed bussing.



Also, time is arbitrary, RVS doubly so. It's completely subjective and based on the person. Null

I think to make this game interesting for me I'm going to have a shot of whiskey next Friday for every question Implosion answers with a question.

↑ Nobody Special wrote:

↑ Cub Daigoro wrote:VOTE: Nobody Special

I know you only as a god, untouchable by mere mortals. Let's see how you play.

Man, you are going to be SO DISAPPOINTED.

I completely agree with you, NS. Know this, I will tunnel the fuck out of you today to get you lynched if you start lurking here. Would like to nip this in the bud early. K thx.

Tbf, it does apply to everyone else.

Where the bloody hell are you?

Btw Gamma, you can't count in your VCs. How many players?

↑ Cub Daigoro wrote:

↑ Belisarius wrote:Not really, that was a reaction test that didn't work.

I'd say we left RVS at 47

Does this mean your vote on Cheery Dog is no longer random?

Nope. I have only weak townreads (on you and implosion, for trying to end RVS) at this stage.

Really? Trying to end RVS, while pro-Town, doesn't have to come from Town.
And it's not like RVS really helps Scum any.
Besides which some people can't stand RVS as any alignment.
If that's what's giving you weak townreads, I'm not too convinced.

That said, I do have something of a weak townread myself on implosion mostly for the early reaction test.

@Safety: LOLOLOLOLOL
DISMAL FAILURE, SIR

"I think to make this game interesting for me I'm going to have a shot of whiskey next Friday for every question Implosion answers with a question."
Totally asking him a million questions then.

"And kwll basically threw away that slot, you guys got a gimme."
WELL
BUT
WHATEVER, I CALLED THE SCUM D1 AND NOBODY LISTENED

↑ Cub Daigoro wrote:Someone's likely to hit scum in RVS. Why not me?

Why not you indeed. Whether or not NS is scum is irrelevant here - my point isn't solely that you're voting the same person that you voted in RVS. It's that your reasons, rather than feeling like genuine attempts to scumhunt, feel like extensions of your RVS vote - that is, to keep your vote on NS without having to look elsewhere.

Cub Daigoro wrote:Are you satisfied with NS's responses?

Not really, but two things. First of all, I've found NS historically difficult to read. Second of all, I found a better reason to vote for someone (namely, you).

People wrote:Seems to me we left RVS around post 20 or so.
I'd say we left RVS at 47

No. "Leaving RVS" is not a concrete post. It's a fluid transition, and trying to find a single post that ends RVS is absolutely useless with respect to... y'know, finding scum?

Belisarius wrote:Nope. I have only weak townreads (on you and implosion, for trying to end RVS) at this stage.

This is a really bad reason to townread me (and people in general, but me). I actually used to (I don't anymore) make a point as scum to look helpful in getting out of RVS. Wanting to get out of RVS isn't exclusive to town.

That said, I do have something of a weak townread myself on implosion mostly for the early reaction test.

That wasn't a reaction test. It was more me being bored.

Although it is a better reason to townread me.

Well, the whatever-it-was then. Regardless it's the sort of thing I wouldn't necessarily expect from scum.

↑ goodmorning wrote:Really? Trying to end RVS, while pro-Town, doesn't have to come from Town.

That's why it's a townread. Still, I'll take it for now.

@SafetyDance: No. Policy lynches are shit. I won't vote you just for that but I won't support a policy lynch either.

And I wont allow someone as town more concerned about their lurking meta to cakewalk into a potential 1v1v1 lylo again because both parties want him kept alive. Fool me once....

I consider lurking in general to be a scum-tell anyway.

↑ implosion wrote:

↑ Cub Daigoro wrote:Someone's likely to hit scum in RVS. Why not me?

Why not you indeed. Whether or not NS is scum is irrelevant here

...Wut? What could possibly be more relevant?

↑ implosion wrote:- my point isn't solely that you're voting the same person that you voted in RVS. It's that your reasons, rather than feeling like genuine attempts to scumhunt, feel like extensions of your RVS vote - that is,

excuses

to keep your vote on NS without having to look elsewhere.

Why should I move my vote if I think it's a good wagon just because it was an RVS vote? Do you think people should just reflexively move off their RVS votes? If so, what's the purpose of RVS?

↑ Cub Daigoro wrote:

↑ implosion wrote:

↑ Cub Daigoro wrote:Someone's likely to hit scum in RVS. Why not me?

Why not you indeed. Whether or not NS is scum is irrelevant here

...Wut? What could possibly be more relevant?

I just read your iso and failed to come up with any kind of reason to vote me.

Would you kike to provide some reasoning now?

Don't use racial slurs, NS.

...Wut? What could possibly be more relevant?

Your motivation behind the vote. I'm arguing about alignment, not NS's.

Why should I move my vote if I think it's a good wagon just because it was an RVS vote? Do you think people should just reflexively move off their RVS votes? If so, what's the purpose of RVS?

I am absolutely not saying "anyone who keeps their RVS vote after RVS is scum." In fact, I'm trying to make it as clear as day that this is my point, although feel free to use it as a straw man.

My point is that , I believe that your prodding at NS is a product of you not wanting to do genuine scumhunting on other people, so that you can keep your vote passively on him.

I came to this conclusion by looking at your prodding and deciding that it didn't look genuine, or that it looked like excuses to not move your vote rather than questions that you sincerely want to know the answers to.

It's as simple as that.

↑ Belisarius wrote:Don't use racial slurs, NS.

Holy shit, how did I miss that.

Is a typo, I swear.

↑ implosion wrote:It's as simple as that.

Okay, I understand your case now. I would simplify it further as "gut". Fair?

↑ SafetyDance wrote:

↑ Cheery Dog wrote:

↑ implosion wrote:
None of the above. In fact, it contained intent.

*anagrams*
right it's just a coincident that your vote wasn't on the person you were calling scummy, got ya.

Wait dammit I don't have enough T. Tents are silly places to be in anyway.

Elaborate for the masses please.

I tried thinking of a synonym to random that contained the word "intent", however there weren't enough T's to be right. Then there was a pun on TENT to show that my whole post was a useless joke, obviously that didn't work and/or you're still tired.

Cub Daigoro wrote:

↑ implosion wrote:It's as simple as that.

Okay, I understand your case now. I would simplify it further as "gut". Fair?

Understanding a case against you, what is this? and then just discrediting it to gut, I don't like that at all.
UNVOTE:
VOTE: Cub Daigoro

↑ Nobody Special wrote:I just read your iso and failed to come up with any kind of reason to vote me.

Would you [like] to provide some reasoning now?

Out of your seven posts, one has content. It consisted of an OMGUS vote that you described as RVS well past RVS (IMO). You've done literally nothing else. I see no reason to move my vote.

↑ Cheery Dog wrote:
Understanding a case against you, what is this? and then just discrediting it to gut, I don't like that at all.

↑ implosion wrote:

...Wut? What could possibly be more relevant?

Your motivation behind the vote. I'm arguing about

your

alignment, not NS's.

Why should I move my vote if I think it's a good wagon just because it was an RVS vote? Do you think people should just reflexively move off their RVS votes? If so, what's the purpose of RVS?

I am absolutely not saying "anyone who keeps their RVS vote after RVS is scum." In fact, I'm trying to make it as clear as day that this is

not

my point, although feel free to use it as a straw man.

My point is that

in this specific situation

, I believe that your prodding at NS is a product of you not wanting to do genuine scumhunting on other people, so that you can keep your vote passively on him.

I came to this conclusion by looking at your prodding and

deciding that it didn't look genuine

, or that

it looked like excuses

to not move your vote rather than questions that you sincerely want to know the answers to.

It's as simple as that.

That's gut. What would you call it?

↑ Cub Daigoro wrote:

↑ implosion wrote:It's as simple as that.

Okay, I understand your case now. I would simplify it further as "gut". Fair?

Insofar as every case ever made by anyone in the history of the game of mafia can be simplified to "gut," fair.

↑ Cub Daigoro wrote:That's gut. What would you call it?

No Gut's feelings that can't be explained, implosion has explained his thoughts, therefore not gut.