Mafiascum.net

Vote Count 2.02

RedCoyote

( 0 )

²

( 0 )

A_Stone

( 1 ) ²

Mac

( 0 )

Mr E Roll

( 0 )

goodmorning

( 2 ) EspeciallyTheLies , Mr E Roll

EspeciallyTheLies

( 0 )

Not voting:

RedCoyote , A_Stone , Mac , goodmorning

With 7 alive, it takes 4 to lynch.

Deadline is in

In post 573, goodmorning wrote:See, the problem here is you expecting tne to play it sane.

And how did you know that TNE wasn’t playing in a sane manner?

goodmorning wrote:Besides not being around, what reason would the doctor have for failing to vote the other main wagon? Unreason.

That’s what I asked you since when I said his failure to vote A_Stone was scum motivated and you said that was “Major Bullshit”.

goodmorning wrote:Seemed to know that what theory was going to be wrong? Your theory of a gm-tne scumteam? [sarcasm]Gee, I wonder.[/sarcasm]

My theory that it was TNE/A_Stone team with A_S being the power role. I don’t see any way you could have misunderstood what I was saying.

In post 576, Mr E Roll wrote:

In post 573, goodmorning wrote:See, the problem here is you expecting tne to play it sane.

And how did you know that TNE wasn’t playing in a sane manner?

I've played tne several times. I am aware of the uniquenesses of his playstyle.

goodmorning wrote:Besides not being around, what reason would the doctor have for failing to vote the other main wagon? Unreason.

That’s what I asked you since when I said his failure to vote A_Stone was scum motivated and you said that was “Major Bullshit”.

Which is why I answered "Unreason."
But in all seriousness, probably just not being around. Maintenance of "vanity crusades" sounds like tne to me; I find it probable that he just missed deadline/the hammer.

goodmorning wrote:Seemed to know that what theory was going to be wrong? Your theory of a gm-tne scumteam? [sarcasm]Gee, I wonder.[/sarcasm]

My theory that it was TNE/A_Stone team with A_S being the power role. I don’t see any way you could have misunderstood what I was saying.

Have you read my posts? I've had a consistently strong townread on Stone for quite some time, so any theory you might have with Scum!Stone I will of course be rather sure is wrong.
As for misunderstanding - I've not looked at the thread since it closed for Night. I've been on vacation. You will forgive me for mainly remembering my own thoughts rather than those of others.

I probably look bad by not voting.

VOTE: A_Stone

I want others to acknowledge the point I made, because it totally has flipped my read of AS.

A_Stone, could you please post a reads list?

- f

In post 578, RedCoyote wrote:I probably look bad by not voting.

VOTE: A_Stone

I want others to acknowledge the point I made, because it totally has flipped my read of AS.

Why do you care if you look bad RC?

In post 568, RedCoyote wrote:I am a bit concerned with AS still. I don't really care for that answer. I don't want to beat a dead horse, but I think AS was doing like how attorneys do when a judge sustains an objection? Then the judge tells the jury not to remember what was just said, but you can't really "unremember".

Is this the point you want acknowledged? I agree with your analogy, but don’t really see any scum motivation for A_S talking to a dead TNE so I’m not sure why it changed your read on him so dramatically. Maybe I’m just missing your point.

In post 580, Mac wrote: Why do you care if you look bad RC?

This is a pretty good question. RC do you think Mac, GM and A_S look bad for not voting yet today?

Eh, ok then.

In no particular order:

Mac and RC seem pretty genuine, although I don't really get what RC is talking about.

MER seems genuine, and the TNE thing that pinged my scumdar a bit is nullified,

GM, My mind tells me scum, for things like refusing to acknowledge why she was voting Mac instead of MER when MER had more support for a lynch when she stated she was 100% sure. Then again my gut is screaming town due to posts like #350, I've never really seen scum do things like that, I would have expected scum-gm to out her reasoning to avert suspicion, which she has not done. I also have a hard time seeing #357 coming from scum. Her case showed work had been put into it, but I'm not sure how she could have done work if all she kept in her mind was her basic reads, so I don't feel she was entirely honest about only keeping 'I think these people are scum' in her head.

ETL, I personally never really liked the way ETL and 2 kinda swayed to thinking each other were town, it seemed planned. Then again, I'm paranoid . Although I can definitely understand his vote on GM, the reads, even though I thought work had been put into them, weren't really all GM had shined them up to be.

2, I like -f's posts, they seem genuine to me, -b's posts are quite annoying though, although I quite like that he's toned it down. His blatant tunneling is non-sensical and *in my opinion*

In post 495, ² wrote: No, you're not going to claim, because we're lynching A_stone.

- b

This was a bit terrible.

------------------------------------

In post 568, RedCoyote wrote: I am a bit concerned with AS still.

In post 578, RedCoyote wrote: I want others to acknowledge the point I made, because it totally has flipped my read of AS.

What did I do overnight to change your minute concern into a full scum read?

Or are you just overthinking it.

In post 582, A_Stone wrote:Eh, ok then.

In no particular order:

Mac and RC seem pretty genuine, although I don't really get what RC is talking about.

MER seems genuine, and the TNE thing that pinged my scumdar a bit is nullified,

GM, My mind tells me scum, for things like refusing to acknowledge why she was voting Mac instead of MER when MER had more support for a lynch when she stated she was 100% sure. Then again my gut is screaming town due to posts like #350, I've never really seen scum do things like that, I would have expected scum-gm to out her reasoning to avert suspicion, which she has not done. I also have a hard time seeing #357 coming from scum. Her case showed work had been put into it, but I'm not sure how she could have done work if all she kept in her mind was her basic reads, so I don't feel she was entirely honest about only keeping 'I think these people are scum' in her head.

ETL, I personally never really liked the way ETL and 2 kinda swayed to thinking each other were town, it seemed planned. Then again, I'm paranoid . Although I can definitely understand his vote on GM, the reads, even though I thought work had been put into them, weren't really all GM had shined them up to be.

2, I like -f's posts, they seem genuine to me, -b's posts are quite annoying though, although I quite like that he's toned it down. His blatant tunneling is non-sensical and *in my opinion*

In post 495, ² wrote: No, you're not going to claim, because we're lynching A_stone.

- b

This was a bit terrible.

------------------------------------

In post 568, RedCoyote wrote: I am a bit concerned with AS still.

In post 578, RedCoyote wrote: I want others to acknowledge the point I made, because it totally has flipped my read of AS.

What did I do overnight to change your minute concern into a full scum read?

Or are you just overthinking it.

"genuine" = "townish"?

Who are your scum reads?

- f

^^ I am assuming ETL, GM and 2? Correct?

- f

In post 582, A_Stone wrote:the reads, even though I thought work had been put into them, weren't really all GM had shined them up to be.

I shined them up to be shit, so...?

I really want to see RC's answer to Mac's question.

In post 580, Mac wrote:Why do you care if you look bad RC?

Touche. Very good catch on your part. I phrased that badly. To clarify what I meant, I see no reason why I shouldn't have been casting a vote already, and am embarrassed that I hadn't done so already. I hope that mistake on my part won't negatively influence my creditability because it was an oversight and not purposeful.

---

MER 581 wrote:but don’t really see any scum motivation for A_S talking to a dead TNE so I’m not sure why it changed your read on him so dramatically. Maybe I’m just missing your point.

Why not? It very much stuck out to me.

He specifically told tne "I saw you online though". He didn't say, for example, "tne says he's busy, but I saw him online". No, he addressed AS directly.

If he didn't expect him to respond, why did he ask him a direct question? Why did he address him directly?

If he did expect him to respond, what was the motivation behind disputing a dead man's stance (that he was busy)? I contend the motivation was that he thought he would get the last word in. As we saw in post 547 however, that wasn't tne's last word.

MER 581 wrote:RC do you think Mac, GM and A_S look bad for not voting yet today?

As a general rule, it's bad practice to not be voting. It's always player and situation dependent though. Mac is asking the better questions, so it doesn't look as bad in his case. I do not like it from any of them though.

In post 586, RedCoyote wrote: If he did expect him to respond, what was the motivation behind disputing a dead man's stance (that he was busy)?

I don’t think his motivation was to dispute TNE being busy. I got the impression his motivation was to discredit 2’s position that TNE wasn’t online.

RC, what does it matter if A_S said to TNE directly that he saw him online? I am not seeing how AS saying he saw TNE online to a dead TNE is scummy. Like how does this result in A_S being scum and worthy of a vote?

I'm pretty interested in where GM's vote is considering how certain she was on the scum team during day one.

It's on either of you.

I keep thinking I had voted but obviously not.

I'm cool with lynching GM after A_stone. Havn't talked to f about it yet, though.

- b

If I feel they're genuine then I don't believe they're lying, and since I don't know who the town are then I feel that how truthful they are is a good gauge, and I haven't seen many slips from them.

Yeah, you're pretty much correct.

Although I have a weaker scumread on ETL,

-----
@RC, It was an exclamation not a question, and I don't see the problem, especially when I was correct.

In post 590, goodmorning wrote:It's on either of you.

I keep thinking I had voted but obviously not.

Vote: Mr E

Can you point me to a case for this vote, and one which is not "look at these interactions between soat and Mr E, they are scum."

In post 577, goodmorning wrote:As for misunderstanding - I've not looked at the thread since it closed for Night. I've been on vacation. You will forgive me for mainly remembering my own thoughts rather than those of others.

It seems like you are even having trouble remembering your own thoughts. Can’t remember if you placed a vote? In fact it looked like you even forgot who you was suspicious of until Mac reminded you. I think the vote came now because RC said people who weren’t voting looked bad. That's why there is no case accompanying it you rushed out the vote figuring you could wing something together later like you did yesterday.

In post 594, Mac wrote:

In post 590, goodmorning wrote:It's on either of you.

I keep thinking I had voted but obviously not.

Vote: Mr E

Can you point me to a case for this vote, and one which is not "look at these interactions between soat and Mr E, they are scum."

Uhhhhhh...

Not yet.

In post 595, Mr E Roll wrote:

In post 577, goodmorning wrote:As for misunderstanding - I've not looked at the thread since it closed for Night. I've been on vacation. You will forgive me for mainly remembering my own thoughts rather than those of others.

It seems like you are even having trouble remembering your own thoughts. Can’t remember if you placed a vote? In fact it looked like you even forgot who you was suspicious of until Mac reminded you. I think the vote came now because RC said people who weren’t voting looked bad. That's why there is no case accompanying it you rushed out the vote figuring you could wing something together later like you did yesterday.

This is silly. Yesterday was not winged, and further I am not particularly interested in RC's perceptions of the scumminess or lack thereof of non-votes.

I'm rather busy today, so it'll take me a while to make the case, but there is one and I will present it... eventually.

In post 593, A_Stone wrote:If I feel they're genuine then I don't believe they're lying, and since I don't know who the town are then I feel that how truthful they are is a good gauge, and I haven't seen many slips from them.

Yeah, you're pretty much correct.

Although I have a weaker scumread on ETL,

Can you explain what you meant in your 540 which was in response to buldermar's post 539? Because I see an implicit assumption in that post.

- f

In post 597, goodmorning wrote: I'm rather busy today, so it'll take me a while to make the case, but there is one and I will present it... eventually.

And do you have an equally compelling yet mysteriously absent case on Mac since you indicated your vote was basically a toss-up?

In post 590, goodmorning wrote:It's on either of you.

I keep thinking I had voted but obviously not.

Vote: Mr E

I know you are busy so take your time winging that one too.