Looking at the reads list I am going to
VOTE: Vezok
I’m also for supporting Zang and implosion but don’t support their top kills per Quilford’s list (Quil and SK)
Reminder people – do not vote anyone to L-1 today as we need CC’s replacement to hammer to prove Double Voting Status at L-2.
--
Tragedy wrote:Sounds like scum would obviously know who's going to be misexecuted for the Day, thus, agreeing to a certain obviously townie that would always get mislynched/misexecuted, just like the others.
Ok, so before thing one had been established about who the Town consencus for the Day Exectuion I came out and said I didn’t want to be Executioner (for the reasons I have stated) because I knew who the obvious mislynch was?
Insert face-palm pic here …
--
Cosca wrote:Where is the problem? We responded to a part of your post and quoted that part. That's standard practice. For instance, you yourself cropped that part of our post:
No, it’s standard practice to remove parts of the quote that don’t apply to the point being made. For example the aside about a ‘No Win Situation’ that I removed was pure game theory and had nothing to do with the point at hand – that you were portraying my reasons for voting you as solely ‘trying to get rid of someone who suspects me”.
Cosca wrote:There is simply no scum motivation in cropping a quote when everybody can read the original post a few posts before that.
Yes there is … most people don’t read back when looking at a Wall back and forth. This is pretty much established given that people usually tend to skim things that they don’t think apply to them (as shown by Scumhunter not seeing Tragedy bringing up the “Asking for Claim” discussion regarding the Night Execution).
I only noticed because it was my post and I knew what you were saying was a scummy, flat out lie.
There also isn’t a credible Town motivation to redact parts of a post that directly apply to the discussion at hand.
Cosca wrote:Except those suspicions only cropped up when you made your post. You NEVER before called us out on the N1 voting discussion after I noted I made a mistake, or on the Vezok read. This only became important after we suspected you.
1. The first part is a pure lie. Obviously I called out Iceguy on his scummy stance. You can read my ISO and see my back and forth where I question him about it. Just because your slot was overshadowed by scumtastic play by CC and Sleepy Day 1 doesn’t mean I didn’t observe and note your suspect play.
2. You didn’t call Vezok scum until today. Yesterday the slot was at worst Neutral. Why you are somehow attacking me for never calling you out before today again? If you didn't call him scum Day 1 I can hardly suspect you then for doing it ...
Cosca wrote:Of course you'd be all too happy to execute somebody who sees you as what you are.
Yes, I’m happy to execute someone I think is scum who sees me as someone who isn’t going to be snowed by crap attacks.
Cosca wrote:Our play is not scummy. You are constructing a case out of thin air.
Saying you aren’t playing scummy doesn’t make it so. It’s not just me that suspects you. If Quilford’s list is accurate Sleepy also considers you scum, Zang has you leaning scum, and Implosion, Tragedy and vezok all have you at best Neutral.
Cosca wrote:Vezok's "scum opinions" consisted of three scum reads without justification, one of which was codfish. He kept on posting in the game thread to give the appearance of content, and in other threads on the site.
Vezok’s play is easy to read. If you are expecting grand cases from him you are going to read him as scum everytime. He’s not prolific and not a great poster but his motivations can be discerned if you put a little effort (aka not just saying “He’s bad he’s scum”). Your grandstanding is either scum-play looking to attack the said easy target (traditional VI Vezok) or shows you don’t have a great grasp on Mafia, IMO.
I see you support my theory when you post this in your next post (I’ve bolded the important part)–
Also, his MoI attack is based on flimsy arguments, but attacking him doesn't seem like something scum would do.
Scum would concentrate on the easy targets, such as SK, not on MoI.
--
Scumhunter wrote:MoI, you stating you didn't want to be executioner could be for a number of reasons. Scum wouldn't want to be the executioner and put themselves at the forefront of the game too early on. You would have to explain your reasons for executing someone. Also, you stating you didn't want to be executioner is a way to buddy the town if you are scum. It's not like you were fervently saying "oh please no, stop coordinating your votes for me as night executioner". Your sentiment was an empty one meant to put people at ease and say oh well MoI isn't trying to run the show lets trust that he will get scum for us. That attitude is CLEARLY contradictory with not trusting other people's judgment. MoI executioner...BOOM, dead town pr.
^^ This is of what could be going on if you are in fact scum. I'm not saying you are necessarily scum but you are in the subset of 4 people [Jason, SK, Zang, MoI] that I would literally eat my hat if at least 2 of you aren't scum. I'm very very confident there are 2 scum in there at least.
1. Does the fence-post hurt here? You spend that long paragraph laying out very clearly why there is clear scum motivation to my play. You apparently disagree with my reasoning why it is Town play. Yet then we get the pull-back – you aren’t necessarily scum and I’m just one of a list that you will ‘eat a hat’ if there are not two scum there. Leaving yourself to go either way later. Scummy.
2. Zang isn’t scum. His posting style, like Vezok’s, is transparent. I know I’m Town so you are willing to ‘eat a hat’ (which is pointless rhetoric fluffery, BTW) that both SK and Jason are scum?
Scumhunter wrote:Oh and I obviously was reading the thread. I did see that Tragedy had said the same thing. I'm saying it again to reinforce that it is a valid point and that you need to be suspected a lot more than you currently are. You can try to play the "Scumhunter is an uninformed replacement" card, but just letting you know its bullshit. I spent several hours reading the game meticulously
so try another scum-appeal to drown out those voices you don't like to hear why don't you
1. Where are you lying … here or before? Because before you said you were disappointed no-one had brought up that fact. Yet it was CLEARLY brought up. This is a back-track of epic porportions (oh, I saw it and was just reinforcing it) which doesn’t make sense.
I’m not calling you an uniformed replacement. I think you are very much scum who skims things that didn’t directly apply to your interests (you’ve clearly established you that you think Tragedy must be Town … so you don’t bother reading her posts to look for alignment since you know it to be true if you are buddying that slot as scum) and tried grandstanding in attacking me and it backfired.
I love the bolded – attacking you on you crap suddenly is a scum appeal meant to drown you out and not scum-hunting … nice rhetoric there.
Scumhunter wrote:I'm not pushing for a MoI execution today, mainly because its possible he is town and will be useful as the game goes on (and also I doubt anyone but me would have the balls to make that execution today if given the power). That being said I think we would all be wise to strongly consider the fact that MoI is scum. There are far better execution options [Jason, SK, Zang] for today though.
Oh look, the fence-sitting goes into full effect.
I’m not pushing for MoI to be executed because he could be Town but we definitely should consider him scum.
Translation
– I want to discredit him but now have to back off as he’s blown up my arguments and is starting to apply heat to me.
