In post 741, Icebox wrote: In post 35, Bulbazak wrote:/confirmed
In post 16, Klick wrote:
1. Are you Town? Give three sentences to explain your reasoning.
2. Who would you like to be Mafia with in this game?
1. Nope. I'm a monkey. Ook.
2. Maestro and Eddie Fenix
On a serious note, glad to see Fuzzy again.
He's really cool and easy to read.
If he's Mafia, he'll slip within 3 pages.
In post 486, Bulbazak wrote: In post 479, Icebox wrote:
I think Fuzzy is scum, because of lack of hunting, his out of character play, his survivalism. I disagree with DBK's and Bulb's cases that he is town. And it's clear to me he is having difficulty keeping his story straight. Further, his reads are extremely lazy. His comments on how I am playing shows a complete lack of understanding, that I think town would be able to recognize. They might doubt my scum hinting, but they will not deny it is there. It shows a real lack of interpretation or depth that I find is something newer scum have difficulty with.
I don't see the lack of hunting, nor his out of character play (
I've only completed 3 games with him, andI still can't read him
.). His survivalism is a good point, as scum is more apt to do it than town. I can also see where he has been constantly backpedaling. However, I think in order to convince the rest of the town, you're going to need some more concrete points, which means you need to refine your case a bit.
I thought I could read Fuzzy. He proved me wrong. Big woop!
In post 746, Icebox wrote:
Please say that you checked Rem's meta before you posted this.
I used to check meta a lot, but I'm too busy anymore. If I haven't played a game with you already, I'm unlikely to go out of my way to check your meta. I'm learning to rely more on what is in the actual thread.
In post 746, Icebox wrote:
In post 475, Bulbazak wrote:
This post is an extreme bit of WIFOM and CAN NOT have come from town. If town feels that they may be mistaken, they either don't mention it, or they downplay it in how they post, normally via vocabulary. Rarely do they say that they might be wrong, and they NEVER say "Unless we're on the same team." That bit of WIFOM does not help town one bit, and it weakens the town read on Klick and opens up doubt on what was a strong town read for many people. Town would never do that, because it plays against their wincon and is essentially a lie, since they know that they're not scum, so there's no reason to present that WIFOM to the rest of the town.
IF it was #302 by itself. But If you connect it with #301 (Which you should. You know. Which is was meant to be.), there's no WIFOM that you mentions.
Even connected with #301, it'd still be WIFOM for the reasons specified.
In post 746, Icebox wrote:
In post 478, Bulbazak wrote:
This is a game, and you need to play it as such. There is no outside motivation outside of the game of Mafia that should influence your play to that degree. If it is a personal belief against lying or deception, you're going to find out that you'll lose pretty quickly. Play the game, and play to win. If you are indeed using "trust tells", you are going to lose, and are playing against all future wincons, and are therefore a bad player. I'm assuming the opposite and using standard tells to determine your alignment.
Blah Blah Blah. What you said here implies that our slot is pitiful
town
that needs some coaching.
Well, seeing as how you outed yourselves as the seer, because you thought you saw breadcrumbing that wasn't there, yes, I think you're derp town.
Read the thread. I'm sure you'll figure it out.
In post 741, Icebox wrote:
In post 478, Bulbazak wrote:
Saying someone's logic is bad is not the same as explaining why it is bad. Gif's response is the equivalent of throwing poo, and I don't dignify such things with a response.
That was the whole point of #198. All I did was just say stuff that you said to us, which you called "throwing poo." See what I mean now?
Actually, I said that you were likely to be scum if TNE was scum due to some associative tells I had seen. You, however, just straight up called me scum with no reasoning attached, which you said was a way to say my logic was bad. My point is that simply saying or implying someone's logic is bad does little good compared to explaining why the logic was bad, and is thus the equivalent of throwing poo.
In post 746, Icebox wrote:
Sure. Whatever you say. But since we claimed already (and no counterclaim), we're not getting lynched. Too bad for you.
Except I have already unvoted you. I have no interest in lynching a PR, tyvm. I'm kinda annoyed that you didn't read current events and instead set off to start a fight, which does little good for town. I've clarified several points for you, but I'm assuming this will be the end of this stupidity. If you still want to fight, be advised that I'll simply ignore you, barring true stupidity on your part. Have a nice day.
Egg is casting a wide net in
#769. Called or implied that 6 people were scum.
In post 789, Syryana wrote:Bulbazak got really quiet after Icebox's claim. He's around and posting, but his responses after the claim have been very curt. Considering how hardcore he was going after Icebox prior to the claim, his silence surprises me. No opinions on Klick? No opinions on Icebox's claim? Is the claim legit? Are the other wagons legit? I think Bulba felt he had a good case on Icebox and pushed hard. When he discovered Icebox was the seer, he freaked out and got really quiet. Why? It's the main reason I think Bulba is scum; no reason to fade off into the background after your major scumread claims a PR unless you're trying to hide.
Except for the fact that people were posting in rapidfire succession last night. Because of that, I watched to see what the general consensus on the claim was and awaited a counter claim. When I saw none coming, I went back and checked several ISOs. When I was done with that (and catching up on what I missed), I immediately unvoted and voted for Fuzzy (one of the ISOs I read through). Did you expect anything more than that? Regardless of my read on Icebox, everything drops when there is a PR claim. Period. I've only been starting to get decent reads since then. I've had mostly nulls all game. Plus, I've been apathetic, so there's that.
In post 795, Autti wrote: In post 792, Syryana wrote: In post 791, Autti wrote:
Lies. I've actually been very attentively reading this game. Although when Bacde joined i'm now 5 pages behind. I just haven't had that much to post. I try to be a quality over quantity person. Although it seems my case on Icebox was so very very bad. Oh well.
Proof positive you are actively lurking.
UNVOTE:
VOTE: Autti
Eh. Do you really think i'm scummier than Fuzzy?
*twitch*