Mafiascum.net

Are you still just responding to my posts, by the way? Not a good look at this point.

In post 572, Ythan wrote:

In post 570, LicketyQuickety wrote:

In post 569, Ythan wrote:

In post 186, LicketyQuickety wrote:VOTE: T3

For being so low energy. Can't talk about this read much, but I do think T3 doesn't have much vigor this game. He also isn't explaining himself very well. Both things point to him being red.

But since Hockey has played with T3 before I want them to answer if T3 was this low energy in the game they played together. Will check for myself.

I just really don't buy a lot of stuff you say and here's an example. I don't really think the points you started from are true, and I don't think the conclusion you draw from those points makes sense either.

I mean, when T3 actually agrees with me about this I'm not really sure why you would think these would be bad points.

He literally agreed with me that he wasn't explaining himself. Are you even reading the game?

He acknowledged he was low energy, I don't believe I saw him agree with the other. I still think they're illogical points to pick out and you didn't respond to the bit about how your conclusions don't make sense.

In post 573, Ythan wrote:

In post 571, LicketyQuickety wrote:

In post 198, T3 wrote:

In post 186, LicketyQuickety wrote:VOTE: T3

For being so low energy. Can't talk about this read much, but I do think T3 doesn't have much vigor this game. He also isn't explaining himself very well. Both things point to him being red.

But since Hockey has played with T3 before I want them to answer if T3 was this low energy in the game they played together. Will check for myself.

I'm very low energy because this is a stagnant newbie.

Like, plain black and white that T3 is agreeing with me. It's for a different reason, but it does say I had a point about T3.

Seriously Ythan, your case on me is BAD.

I'm perfectly content to let you hang if it means I don't hear anymore ATE for the rest of the game, tread lightly.

Where is the AtE? I dropped the AtE but I feel like you are being extremely unreasonable and are in a tunnel on another Town player for God knows what the real reason is.

In post 576, LicketyQuickety wrote:

In post 572, Ythan wrote:

In post 570, LicketyQuickety wrote:

In post 569, Ythan wrote:

In post 186, LicketyQuickety wrote:VOTE: T3

For being so low energy. Can't talk about this read much, but I do think T3 doesn't have much vigor this game. He also isn't explaining himself very well. Both things point to him being red.

But since Hockey has played with T3 before I want them to answer if T3 was this low energy in the game they played together. Will check for myself.

I just really don't buy a lot of stuff you say and here's an example. I don't really think the points you started from are true, and I don't think the conclusion you draw from those points makes sense either.

I mean, when T3 actually agrees with me about this I'm not really sure why you would think these would be bad points.

He acknowledged he was low energy, I don't believe I saw him agree with the other. I still think they're illogical points to pick out and you didn't respond to the bit about how your conclusions don't make sense.

He literally agreed with me that he wasn't explaining himself. Are you even reading the game?

In post 573, Ythan wrote:

In post 571, LicketyQuickety wrote:

In post 198, T3 wrote:

In post 186, LicketyQuickety wrote:VOTE: T3

For being so low energy. Can't talk about this read much, but I do think T3 doesn't have much vigor this game. He also isn't explaining himself very well. Both things point to him being red.

But since Hockey has played with T3 before I want them to answer if T3 was this low energy in the game they played together. Will check for myself.

I'm very low energy because this is a stagnant newbie.

Like, plain black and white that T3 is agreeing with me. It's for a different reason, but it does say I had a point about T3.

Seriously Ythan, your case on me is BAD.

I'm perfectly content to let you hang if it means I don't hear anymore ATE for the rest of the game, tread lightly.

Where is the AtE? I dropped the AtE but I feel like you are being extremely unreasonable and are in a tunnel on another Town player for God knows what the real reason is.

EBWOP

In post 575, Ythan wrote:Are you still just responding to my posts, by the way? Not a good look at this point.

Are you just tunneling me at this point?

You and I are the only ones in the thread. I've given reasons for my vote. What else do you want? Would you like me to hand feed you pealed grapes while you lay in bed?

You could act like you're town trying to salvage the predicament you're in by achieving a scum elimination, which you are not doing.

And I'm not going to repeat this a further time: stop trying to make this personal or I'll show you the difference between personal and impersonal!

In post 579, Ythan wrote:You could act like you're town trying to salvage the predicament you're in by achieving a scum elimination, which you are not doing.

What exactly are you expecting of me?

In post 581, LicketyQuickety wrote:

In post 579, Ythan wrote:You could act like you're town trying to salvage the predicament you're in by achieving a scum elimination, which you are not doing.

What exactly are you expecting of me?

Honestly this but I'm double checking before you hang.

EOD is coming up, and honestly LQ using Meta as their defense for being defensive isn’t a very good defense. I used meta to defend myself in another game but couldn’t show that I wouldn’t do that as scum is why it didn’t work. If you can give me multiple accounts of your defensiveness actually being NAI then sure I might believe the Pmeta.

For now I think this elimination should happen.

VOTE: LicketyQuickety

E-2 if I counted right (I might not have, please do correct me)

Like, Ythan, you haven't answered a single one of my questions to you. You continue to tunnel on me. Then expect me to do something else besides engaging with you. You are being completely unreasonable. I've given my reasons for my vote. I'm voting a player I have been Scum reading since the beginning of the game. I've replied to the relevant posts from that person. If you are just asking me to tunnel a player who isn't even here IDK what to tell you.

Ythan stop

In post 583, StrangeMatter wrote:EOD is coming up, and honestly LQ using Meta as their defense for being defensive isn’t a very good defense. I used meta to defend myself in another game but couldn’t show that I wouldn’t do that as scum is why it didn’t work. If you can give me multiple accounts of your defensiveness actually being NAI then sure I might believe the Pmeta.

For now I think this elimination should happen.

VOTE: LicketyQuickety

E-2 if I counted right (I might not have, please do correct me)

See, I would have expected you to ask me to meta case myself before saying I haven't done that and therefore I am Scum. Who asked me to look into other games? Did you? I don't think you did. So for you to say, "LQ hasn't given quotes for when he's been defensive even though no one asked him to so he is Scummy."

If EOD wasn’t coming up very soon, it would’ve been separate things to say. Guess where we are. I’m in a hurry and don’t want no elimination to happen. Plus it barely affects what I’ve said about thinking your reaction to Ythan’s posts seem to me like scum being defensive and not wanting to be eliminated, or PR. Your post just seems to take what I’ve said and take out parts of what I’ve already said.

I screwed up with the last sentence. *You’re taking out what I’ve already said and ignored it here.

In post 587, StrangeMatter wrote:If EOD wasn’t coming up very soon, it would’ve been separate things to say. Guess where we are. I’m in a hurry and don’t want no elimination to happen. Plus it barely affects what I’ve said about thinking your reaction to Ythan’s posts seem to me like scum being defensive and not wanting to be eliminated, or PR. Your post just seems to take what I’ve said and take out parts of what I’ve already said.

Because it's old ground. That's why I'm not responding to the same lame case that has been made against me all game which is that I've been defensive. And then when I am not defensive I am somehow Scummy for not being defensive, at least to Marget. I can't win! This has been a very frustrating last few hours. Bad reasons, then bringing up past bad reasons, and a tunnel on me that is really poorly thought through then saying the reason for the vote on me was hardly impacting their read on me.

Yeah, if it looks like I'm frustrated, I am.

In post 589, LicketyQuickety wrote:

In post 587, StrangeMatter wrote:If EOD wasn’t coming up very soon, it would’ve been separate things to say. Guess where we are. I’m in a hurry and don’t want no elimination to happen. Plus it barely affects what I’ve said about thinking your reaction to Ythan’s posts seem to me like scum being defensive and not wanting to be eliminated, or PR. Your post just seems to take what I’ve said and take out parts of what I’ve already said.

Because it's old ground. That's why I'm not responding to the same lame case that has been made against me all game which is that I've been defensive. And then when I am not defensive I am somehow Scummy for not being defensive, at least to Marget. I can't win! This has been a very frustrating last few hours. Bad reasons, then bringing up past bad reasons, and a tunnel on me that is really poorly thought through then saying the reason for the vote on me was hardly impacting their read on me.

Yeah, if it looks like I'm frustrated, I am.

So first of all, not being defensive is not a justifiable reason to scumread, so if you could point out where Marget said that would be something to look into. However, you’ve basically been moving this conversation in circles at this point, repeating the same sentiment in a different way that doesn’t help at all.

I don’t agree with Ythan talking about ATE, but he is right. You could make a compelling scumcase to get everyone off you.

This was so uncomfortable to read. Also very unnecessary since it did nothing to change my mind and overall added nothing to the game. LQ isn't scummy because of whatever personal reason Ythan has against him; LQ is scummy because his ISO is full of flip-flopping and opportunistic pushes with flimsy reasoning.

VOTE: LQ

Sorry if this game got frustrating by the way.

There is no personal reason, despite the constant bullshit.

12

In post 591, Roden wrote:This was so uncomfortable to read. Also very unnecessary since it did nothing to change my mind and overall added nothing to the game. LQ isn't scummy because of whatever personal reason Ythan has against him; LQ is scummy because his ISO is full of flip-flopping and opportunistic pushes with flimsy reasoning.

VOTE: LQ

I'd love for you to tell me what pushes I'm made that are opportunistic. If you think my push on Clasko was opportunistic (that the only one I can honestly see as being read that way) then I'd say initially I really thought it was a slip until I thought about it more. I was excited we caught Scum and then I lost confidence in it.

If there's a reason why being flip floppy is a Scum tell, I'd really love to hear it. I think flip floppy more often comes from Town, but what do I know?

LQ is probably town ftr
VOTE: lq

In post 596, T3 wrote:LQ is probably town ftr
VOTE: lq

Way to hammer without a claim.

WAIT IM AN AN IDIIT

Not done with that reread but town reading Roden and maybe T3 depending on how I feel about the claim business at any given moment.