Mafiascum.net

Okay with the Jebus pressure vote off and time running out I'm a lay my down my vote here:



I'm against a Cops lynch, and Krabs has done the most scummy things thus far. I feel good about his lynch.

Ric Flair v Shawn Michaels (Wrestlemania 24)

In post 676, Ravenpaw wrote:Okay with the Jebus pressure vote off and time running out I'm a lay my down my vote here:

Unvote: Jebus
Vote: Krabs

I'm against a Cops lynch, and Krabs has done the most scummy things thus far. I feel good about his lynch.

Hey raven, can you tell me why you are against a GCBC lynch? What do you see that I dont?

Also could you sum up what you think Krabs most scummy actions are?

In post 297, Ms Marangal wrote:I don't really understand why people vote when they don't think the person they are voting for is likely scummy, IMO you vote for a person because you believe that they are scum.

You're refining your suspicion to fit the correction, which shows you aren't analyzing new evidence.

In post 297, Ms Marangal wrote:Pjo's play was a major part of my discussion early D1 and I explained why I felt uncomfortable with his play. I explained what he was doing to make me feel like he was probable scum

Refresh my memory? That was a while ago and not really worth a vote, so I didn't care to memorize anything.

In post 502, Desperado wrote:More people should be voting ferret right now. He admitted he's been scummy in #477.

"he's admitted he's been scummy" is the worst scumtell in the entire world.

In post 551, Krab Bucket wrote:Claiming neutral, then demanding that a Vigi goes on one of the most pro-town players in the game at this moment in time?
Not to mention your flip-flopping makes me think Mitt Romney is part of your hydra.
I don't bye your claim one bit, and even if you are a neutral, why would you actively say you want a Vigi to kill what many players believe to be one of the most pro-town players at this point. Neutral or not, it seems you may be detrimental to our success.

Do I smell someone hunting for a third party? Yup.

In post 588, Fuzzyman wrote:

In post 483, GoodCopBadCop wrote:

In post 460, Svenskt Stål wrote: So... GCBC went from thinking that ferret was a bad vote to a good vote in like... 20 minutes?
He also doesnt specify how nero earned his vote.

Man thats alot of shit.

so its shit to scumhunt?

are you actually surprised that I wasn't invested in my unexplained vote on nero?

I dislike this post.

Purge.

In post 613, TheEsquire wrote:I'm kinda noob-ish when it comes to Mafia. I said I've played before a few times. Never once said I was good. That's not the greatest of excuses though and can only be used so long. What kind of follow-up are you looking for here. Serious question, and I'll give you all the opinions/answers you want if you give me an idea of what you want to know.

Hey, if you're having trouble, explain those "one of these is town, one of these is scum" reads.

Krabs, claim now.

Still the exact same shit nacho/kise. I want you deaded.

Ok.

Isn't it a bit premature to ask someone to claim at L-4?

Monkey, how would you feel with a GCBC lynch right now?

Lol nevermind.

All good.

Pretty good. I'm very iffy on some of the people on the Krab wagon(Malcom, GCBC, Skull, and raven specifically).

In post 685, MonkeyMan576 wrote:Pretty good. I'm very iffy on some of the people on the Krab wagon(Malcom, GCBC, Skull, and raven specifically).

Exactly, and you have C Snail and Ametyst aswell.

In post 682, MonkeyMan576 wrote:Isn't it a bit premature to ask someone to claim at L-4?

It's early, which is why I asked. The wagon off Krabs will probably end up in a lynch if it continues like this, and I would rather see what I'm working with. There are a couple other scumfucks in the horizon we deal with if Krabs is town, but that towniness gotta shine through first.

Krabs wrote:Of course I'm going to react if someone outright fucking demands that the Vigi goes on Sven (the most pro-town player here IMO). Also, I see that "reaction test" as an easy way out of GCBC, and by god, I honestly found it very scummy.

1. I didn't suggest any Vig should kill Sven, .
2. Explain how a reaction test can give off any scum vibes. You finding it "very scummy" seems like complete bs.

Desperado wrote:MY reaction to his fake vig was to ask him to claim in full. Yours was to vote him indiscriminately. You didn't even read his posts properly and had to be corrected later.

This is why Desp is town and you're scum.
---

Esquire wrote:@ GCBC: I don't find Sven scummy in the least. I find most of his posts helpful, informative, and very pro-town in content. I agree, there are a lot of them, some of them are useless and it does make it harder to catch up (speaking from experience in this game here),

but to even suggest an unannounced vig kill on him just seems like madness

and very anti-town. I dunno if it was going for a reaction or joking around or whatever it is you claim, it certainly wan't cool to do and doesn't help my opinion of you either.

1. I've never called him scum...
2. The bolded. How do you think one gets his reactions, by doing something normal?
---

Goat wrote:Please elucidate and be specific, and pretend I've had 17 beers. Because that's close to being accurate.

Don't use such a terrible excuse. If you're drunk, don't post until you're sober.

You can answer my question proper now.

@Goat - I mean, it would've been so easy for Bad cop to say "Oh ma gerd, I was so drunk when I made those posts". The drunk is excuse is a perfect excuse for scum.

- Good cop

In post 689, GoodCopBadCop wrote:@Goat - I mean, it would've been so easy for Bad cop to say "Oh ma gerd, I was so drunk when I made those posts". The drunk is excuse is a perfect excuse for scum.

In that case, I'm astonished you're acting so sober.

If you care to offer some analysis of what the hell I was rambling about, please feel free.

In post 687, xMALCOLMx wrote:

In post 682, MonkeyMan576 wrote:Isn't it a bit premature to ask someone to claim at L-4?

It's early,

which is why I asked.

The wagon off Krabs will probably end up in a lynch if it continues like this, and I would rather see what I'm working with. There are a couple other scumfucks in the horizon we

could

deal with if Krabs is town, but that towniness gotta shine through first.

In post 679, xMALCOLMx wrote:

Krabs, claim now.

In post 687, xMALCOLMx wrote:

In post 682, MonkeyMan576 wrote:Isn't it a bit premature to ask someone to claim at L-4?

The wagon off Krabs will probably end up in a lynch if it continues like this, and I would rather see what I'm working with.

There are a couple other scumfucks in the horizon

we

could

deal with if Krabs is town,

but that towniness gotta shine through first.

Malcolm is a very good vote.

In post 669, Nero Cain wrote:In post 66 Goat votes for Squid for voting Monkey. Angel agreed with this and GCBC also voted Monkey so its some selective scumhunting.

In 494 he calls GCBC scum but waits until 553 to vote them.

Then in 663 he's claiming that I have a vendetta against him for an obvious joke post. I mean yuck.

Pretty much all his other posts are fluff. I want your top 4 scum reads.

Fair. Stand by.

In post 692, Svenskt Stål wrote:Implies that you asked a question.

So?

In post 692, Svenskt Stål wrote:Who? And Why?
And what do you mean with "deal with if krabs is town?" Regardless of what he claims we can not for sure know that he is town... so are you talking about after a Krabs lynch?

I would be talking about the who and the why if I intended to talk about the who and the why. Currently, we are voting Krabs, who we believe is the best lynch. Deal with if krabs is town means that we will lynch someone else if we change our mind about Krabs.

In post 692, Svenskt Stål wrote:Implies that you know he is town.

In post 692, Svenskt Stål wrote:if Krabs is town, but that towniness gotta shine through first.

The conditional if carries through the complete sentence, regardless of whether you highlight it all green or not.

I need more coffee. I just posted this entire thing in another game.

In post 3212, The Goat wrote:

In post 646, Nero Cain wrote:lets get some votes on Goat.

vote:goat

To be fair, this is what raised my eyebrows as a "vendetta." Not just voting me, but calling for others to do so. Struck me as odd.

In post 647, Ravenpaw wrote:Why Goat again?

In post 648, Nero Cain wrote:Why not Goat?

Then this exchange. Seemingly without reason, and reluctance to GIVE a reason.

Then in post 669, after I call you on it, you do this:

In post 669, Nero Cain wrote:In post 66 Goat votes for Squid for voting Monkey. Angel agreed with this and GCBC also voted Monkey so its some selective scumhunting.

In 494 he calls GCBC scum but waits until 553 to vote them.

Then in 663 he's claiming that I have a vendetta against him for an obvious joke post. I mean yuck.

Pretty much all his other posts are fluff. I want your top 4 scum reads.

Again, I fluff on Day 1. Always have, always will.

Here's what I really dislike about your most recent quoted post - you're being very selective (if not flat-out lying) with your reasoning:

1) "In 494 he calls GCBC scum but waits until 553 to vote them. "

No kidding. Here's the actual post. I'm gonna bold a couple important parts.

In post 494, The Goat wrote:

In post 415, Nero Cain wrote:Raven: I don't really care for any of Goats 5 posts he was not posting here but still playing in his other gamea. Put your vote on him and lets see what he does.

If you read the game you're referring to, it's pretty damned evident I was phone posting and trying to prevent the town from doing something abysmally stupid.

For those who have commented on my slacking, I do that a lot on D1. The manic and outrageous finger-pointing and stick-poking wears on me, so, admittedly...I let others do it. I like to have fun on D1.

I said I will analyze and post tomorrow. And I will.

FWIW, my early read on Nero is town.

My early read on GCBC

is scum.

The next day, as I said I would, I analyzed and posted. Here's post 553.

In post 553, The Goat wrote:

In post 548, GoodCopBadCop wrote:

I will not stop my activity. Although it will drop when my battery dies.

It will hurt town if you don't...

You complain about lurkers when you're making catching up way harder for them. If I was a day Vig, i'd kill you now. You piss me off.

In fact:

Vig: Sven

Good riddance.

This was the icing on the cake.

vote GCBC

How on Earth is this not directly in response to something that happened BETWEEN my two posts? That's blatantly evident.

Nero, if you want to say, "I'm voting Goat and trying to get him to do something because he's being all fluffy", fine. It won't change my general D1 behavior, but I get it.

This just looks like you're making shit up, and made me tilt my head and wonder about your alignment for the first time.

That being said, thank you for asking for my top four reads, because it made me read.

My top four scumreads WERE GCBC, Desperado, Ferret, and Krab...but rereading and doing ISOs made me realize that I need to read this a little more thoroughly, because I didn't realize how diametrically opposed two of those scum reads are to the other two.

...and here it is without the quotes, so it looks less stupid.

______________________

In post 646, Nero Cain wrote:lets get some votes on Goat.

vote:goat

To be fair, this is what raised my eyebrows as a "vendetta." Not just voting me, but calling for others to do so. Struck me as odd.

In post 647, Ravenpaw wrote:Why Goat again?

In post 648, Nero Cain wrote:Why not Goat?

Then this exchange. Seemingly without reason, and reluctance to GIVE a reason.

Then in post 669, after I call you on it, you do this:

In post 669, Nero Cain wrote:In post 66 Goat votes for Squid for voting Monkey. Angel agreed with this and GCBC also voted Monkey so its some selective scumhunting.

In 494 he calls GCBC scum but waits until 553 to vote them.

Then in 663 he's claiming that I have a vendetta against him for an obvious joke post. I mean yuck.

Pretty much all his other posts are fluff. I want your top 4 scum reads.

Again, I fluff on Day 1. Always have, always will.

Here's what I really dislike about your most recent quoted post - you're being very selective (if not flat-out lying) with your reasoning:

1) "In 494 he calls GCBC scum but waits until 553 to vote them. "

No kidding. Here's the actual post. I'm gonna bold a couple important parts.

In post 494, The Goat wrote:

In post 415, Nero Cain wrote:Raven: I don't really care for any of Goats 5 posts he was not posting here but still playing in his other gamea. Put your vote on him and lets see what he does.

If you read the game you're referring to, it's pretty damned evident I was phone posting and trying to prevent the town from doing something abysmally stupid.

For those who have commented on my slacking, I do that a lot on D1. The manic and outrageous finger-pointing and stick-poking wears on me, so, admittedly...I let others do it. I like to have fun on D1.

I said I will analyze and post tomorrow. And I will.

FWIW, my early read on Nero is town.

My early read on GCBC

is scum.

The next day, as I said I would, I analyzed and posted. Here's post 553.

In post 553, The Goat wrote:

In post 548, GoodCopBadCop wrote:

I will not stop my activity. Although it will drop when my battery dies.

It will hurt town if you don't...

You complain about lurkers when you're making catching up way harder for them. If I was a day Vig, i'd kill you now. You piss me off.

In fact:

Vig: Sven

Good riddance.

This was the icing on the cake.

vote GCBC

How on Earth is this not directly in response to something that happened BETWEEN my two posts? That's blatantly evident.

Nero, if you want to say, "I'm voting Goat and trying to get him to do something because he's being all fluffy", fine. It won't change my general D1 behavior, but I get it.

This just looks like you're making shit up, and made me tilt my head and wonder about your alignment for the first time.

That being said, thank you for asking for my top four reads, because it made me read.

My top four scumreads WERE GCBC, Desperado, Ferret, and Krab...but rereading and doing ISOs made me realize that I need to read this a little more thoroughly, because I didn't realize how diametrically opposed two of those scum reads are to the other two.

In post 628, The Goat wrote:

In post 593, GoodCopBadCop wrote:@Goat - Aren't you going to respond to me challenging your first point on why i'm scum? Do you agree that you doesn't make sense?
---

Please elucidate and be specific, and pretend I've had 17 beers. Because that's close to being accurate.

This ffs. Stop ignoring it.

In post 698, GoodCopBadCop wrote:

In post 628, The Goat wrote:

In post 593, GoodCopBadCop wrote:@Goat - Aren't you going to respond to me challenging your first point on why i'm scum? Do you agree that you doesn't make sense?
---

Please elucidate and be specific, and pretend I've had 17 beers. Because that's close to being accurate.

This ffs. Stop ignoring it.

I'm debating whether I believe your whole "this was only a test" thing, still.