Prozac's Basic Theme 4 - Murder in Marlowe - OVER!

[Aj The Epic]

Goddamnit stop quickwagoning my partner

VOTE: papa zito

Also hi Mollie

[Aj The Epic]

Nice.

I feel out of place.

(fear our join dates)

YOU MUST CONSTRUCT ADDITIONAL JOIN DATES.

[Aj The Epic]

...I might've but I'm not sure.

I made a "serious" post about avatars and my reasoning for a rubix cube at one point.

[Aj The Epic]

VOTE: spiffeh

You're calling SC's vote weak but then you vote with the "Maybe you'll do more with pressure"? Can you just claim scum for us?

[Aj The Epic]

At this point, it's right in line with my general play.

[Aj The Epic]

At this point, it's right in line with my general play.

True. But he said his reasoning was in his last post. Ignoring that is...questionable.

I read his reasoning. It's also obvious because that's where he called SC's vote weak. But then he's making assertions that SC is waiting for a wagon of 5 (of 10) to blow over. And of course "trying to find scum on it". You know my opinion on that.


P-edit lol keep reaching

[Aj The Epic]

I read his reasoning. It's also obvious because that's where he called SC's vote weak. But then he's making assertions that SC is waiting for a wagon of 5 (of 10) to blow over. And of course "trying to find scum on it". You know my opinion on that.

Tell me, did you find Marquis' case against me compelling? Like I said, I don't see how SC can get a solid enough scum read from Marquis' admittedly weak case on me to vote, but makes no attempt to analyze anything on his own wagon and basically ignores at least half the people on it. Would you ignore a wagon on you if you were/are town?

It's a page 5 case, I don't expect much from those. He also didn't say marquis' case is good or bad, he didn't like your response. Tell me honestly, did you misread that or are you misrepresenting him?

However, I don't like you saying his case was 'admittedly weak' because marquis' ISO never shows him saying his case on you was anything of that sort. In 135 he says in your iso, post 60 is a scum lean but removed totally post 60 is town leanish. So what are you referring to here?

For ignoring wagons on you (or, in this case, him)? Independent of player. I don't mess with early wagons on me much because I don't play well in RVS.

[Aj The Epic]

I then proceeded to direct him to a post I made literally eight minutes after the one he was so offended by that actually did respond to Marquis case on me. His whole point in voting for me was that I brushed off Marquis' case which IS NOT TRUE.

Sure but that's not what you said. What was your initial statement:

Like I said, I don't see how SC can get a solid enough scum read from Marquis' admittedly weak case on me to vote,

Based on?

[Aj The Epic]

Are we reading the same line of text? I didn't even quote the second half of that sentence for this exact reason. You claimed that SC was using Marquis' case as basis for the vote. However, SC didn't like your reaction to it. You directed him to a post and whatnot but WHY did you say it was marquis' case and not your reaction initially? There was no basis for the former.

[Aj The Epic]

What's so close between SC and CKD?

[Aj The Epic]

I would like to

hear AJ's response to the cases presented against SC

because he seems to have disappeared ever since the wagon picked up steam.

What? That's not my responsibility. My interest is you and your inconsistency, not SC.

[Aj The Epic]

Like goddamn, that's actually terrible. You're just trying to tie me to someone you're already daedset on lynching. Really, where are you getting these statements?

[Aj The Epic]

Spiffeh, you're mad that I'm not answering against the cases on SC. The fact that you are consistently trying to tie me to him is not concerning at this point, it's blatantly scum.

P-edit: You've addressed nothing at all. You keep changing the topic until I get bored of restating it. Look here:

I then proceeded to direct him to a post I made literally eight minutes after the one he was so offended by that actually did respond to Marquis case on me. His whole point in voting for me was that I brushed off Marquis' case which IS NOT TRUE.

Sure but that's not what you said. What was your initial statement:

Like I said, I don't see how SC can get a solid enough scum read from Marquis' admittedly weak case on me to vote,

Based on?

I'm asking you specifically WHY you think SC was using Marquis' case as an excuse to vote for you when he stated he didn't like your response. But instead of answering this, you just go:

Based on how he couldn't make anything of his wagon or any other player in the game when I asked him to.

You're completely ignoring the fact that I'm asking you why you aren't stating why SC actually voted for you multiple times and instead explaining everything I didn't need. NOTHING HERE answers my question. So let me lay it out to you:

Why did you lie about what SC's original vote on you was based off of?

[Aj The Epic]

That response is subpar for me. You're making an objectively wrong assumption. Especially considering:

Wow you vote for me instead of my answering my question to you I am insulted.

This is your defense to Marquis? Seriously? If you don't think it's a great case, explain how it's not a great case. I can't gauge what you think of him here.

VOTE: Spiffeh

I don't see any wiggle room for what you "assume".

"have my thoughts" and "respond to" are two incredibly different things. To me, SC's wagon is Mollie doing the legwork and everyone else following. Marquiz even admits it in 251 as well as NS in 257. Bins certainly doesn't have one. Your case in 223 isn't good at all. 223 is nothing but a history lesson that you've still gotten all wrong.

The most I care about the SC wagon is that it probably will prevent you from getting lynched. What's with forcing this SC stuff down my throat when I just think you're scum? Is it that hard to comprehend?

[Aj The Epic]

AJ I don't really understand what that quoted post has to do with anything. Could you elaborate?

The issue I'm having with you is that you seemed to approach the situation with your mind already made up. You point out my inconsistencies (that I later clarified) and pay no attention to SC's inconsistencies that he refused to explain after I had asked him to multiple times. (And now we'll never know!) It's fine if you don't buy my explanation but you don't get to give SC a free pass for doing worse shit and making no attempt to justify it.

"have my thoughts" and "respond to" are two incredibly different things. To me, SC's wagon is Mollie doing the legwork and everyone else following. Marquiz even admits it in 251 as well as NS in 257. Bins certainly doesn't have one. Your case in 223 isn't good at all. 223 is nothing but a history lesson that you've still gotten all wrong.

SO WHY DIDN'T YOU SAY THIS? Where were these opinions when SC was being wagoned? Why did it have to be forced out of you? If you truly thought I was scum and saw me pushing SC, you should at the very least not have to have your arm twisted when you're asked about a wagon your largest scum read is supporting wholeheartedly.

Can we please wagon this too?

How am I supposed to explain that you cannot 'assume' something when it's explicitly stated otherwise?

And why didn't I say it? A.) Haven't been here and B.) you didn't ask that. You wanted me to respond to his cases, which is you tying me to SC. You're twisting my arm in an attempt to cuff me to SC and that doesn't fly well.

[Aj The Epic]

@AJ You don't have a response to my second paragraph?

My problem isn't your activity, it was your refusal to comment on the SC cases.

You seem really concerned with being tied to SC. Apparently your own well being is more important than sharing your thoughts.

Why should I respond to a pot/kettle statement? I NEVER refused to comment on the SC case, you just were trying to make me respond in his steed. You're packaging the two of us because I scum read you. Hello? Who the fuck is scummy for this? You for saying I should respond to his cases and thinking it's scum that I'm not or me for pointing out this fallacious garbage you're spewing?

Call me concerned, I guess. You're trying so hard force this, and then not explaining why you lied about SC's case on you.

[Aj The Epic]

How is spiffeh town when he hasn't stopped to explain his 'assumption' or why he wants me to answer for SC? That latter is his entire case on me and now he's framing me to say I only care about myself? This doesn't make sense either because my vote on him certainly wasn't for self-defense.

[Aj The Epic]

AJ do you have any thoughts that don't involve me?

Or are you gonna throw a fit because I asked you to contribute?

Is that necessary?

I don't have good reads right now because I don't have a good grasp of mafia in general right now. I've been respecting Marquis' posts as town as well as Reckoner. I've played with Mollie and this is what I remember about her other than some lylo games. You're my only scum read right now because you just consistently refuse to answer the questions I ask regardless of how I phrase them.

[Aj The Epic]

@AJ last I heard you weren't satisfied responses. I have answered everything you asked. Now you're trying to say literally anything to cast me in a negative light regardless of whether it's true or not. Keep it up.

No you haven't. I'm going to lay it out here for you to answer.

I would like to hear AJ's response to the cases presented against SC because he seems to have disappeared ever since the wagon picked up steam.

First, why do you want me to respond to the cases against SC? I am NOT SC and all I get from this is you trying to time to him.

I pointed out a post that immediately disproved his initial reason for voting for me and since he kept his vote so I assumed that he agreed with Marquis' case. I mean he never further justified his vote so what am I supposed to think?

Why did you ASSUME SC's vote was based only on Marquis' case when SC explicitly said this:

Wow you vote for me instead of my answering my question to you I am insulted.

This is your defense to Marquis? Seriously? If you don't think it's a great case, explain how it's not a great case. I can't gauge what you think of him here.

VOTE: Spiffeh

Again and again I've gotten no answer to this question. You have not told me why you stated what you did when you were very clearly wrong. This, coupled with how you tried to tie me to SC (who you were actively attempting to string up) makes me think you're in the business of framing.

This is what I want answered. This isn't hard to notice either. And regardless of how you say it, you've never answered this latter question.

[Aj The Epic]

A.

Vote Spiffeh
????
Profit

Zito, I'm trying to get one question out of him and it feels like I'm pulling teeth. But I REALLY want that answer.

[Aj The Epic]

Wouldn't your opinion of him change if he was unable to answer something and simply delayed it over multiple pages?

[Aj The Epic]

To me, 223 does not answer my question. His statement there is he answered it back and thus assumed SC changed his answer. Which doesn't make any sense because nothing SC says coincides with that. Especially when Spiffeh states it in his case against SC. That's why I have an issue with 223 being a defense of it.

I wasn't ignoring it. I was reading and waiting to form an opinion on it before Spiffeh made another statement on it that was completely egregious. I don't have anything productive to add so I stay quiet until I do.

Wouldn't our opinions change when you do essentially the same thing over the same amount of pages?

Difference being, I'm not ignoring questions.

[Aj The Epic]

As I stated, I'm reading the thread. However, I slip away when you start talking meta. I don't have any recent meta on anyone and so I choose to listen when the discussion heads that route.

[Aj The Epic]

I don't understand how you make that assumption when there's nothing to support it.

[Aj The Epic]

Not necessarily. It could be him just developing scum reads that he can jump to. He also could be aware of SC's alignment and hardbussing.

[Aj The Epic]

Why do you refuse to comment on the SC wagon then, cause if he was framing you, then both spiffeh and SC would have to be scum together. You can't really accuse spiffeh of trying to frame you, unless of course you know SC's alignment, but there is only one way for you to know that.

I've commented on the SC wagon.

Spiffeh asked me to respond to the cases on SC. There is no room for interpreting that.

[Aj The Epic]

"have my thoughts" and "respond to" are two incredibly different things. To me, SC's wagon is Mollie doing the legwork and everyone else following. Marquiz even admits it in 251 as well as NS in 257. Bins certainly doesn't have one. Your case in 223 isn't good at all. 223 is nothing but a history lesson that you've still gotten all wrong.

[Aj The Epic]

Okay. AJ. Simple question. Yes or no answer. Do you think spiffeh and SC are scum together?

no

Because you had been ignoring the countless things brought up against SC and were hardcore going after me for such a flimsy reason.

Ignoring and hadn't posted in that period are two completely different things.

Yet you're STILL claiming that I haven't answered your question? Just because I didn't answer it to your liking doesn't mean that it was unanswered. You're just trying to perpetuate this argument so you can seem like you're contributing WHEN YOU'RE DOING JACK SHIT.

To me this is pot/kettle.

[Aj The Epic]

A policeman came to talk to the crowd, "We are currently investigating a murder, please return to your homes and we will be in contact shortly"

Goddamnit Jim Webb.

Posting thoughts in a moment.

[Aj The Epic]

I don't understand what part of this is hard to understand

I have already accepted that the links do not show what I thought they showed

What I am disputing is that you are suggesting that I threw out those links after the fact to justify some meta that I deliberately made up

Which requires the premise that I deliberately made up false meta on you

I want to know why it's more likely that I would do something that pointlessly dumb than that I simply misremembered how our previous encounters of multiple years ago went

jesus christ cdb

I am not saying that you

deliberately

went in with the intention of lying about meta once you started talking I have said this like 3 times and you keep acting like I haven't said it at all. I think you pulled 2 games out of your ass that might have had some vague recollection of friction between us and tried to present that as meta case thinking no1 wld bother to check.

the only thing that I like that you have done that gives me pause is pointing how lame star's vote is in the middle of our spat. its bad. its really bad.

also nexus has not done jack shit after saying he wld this morning what is up with that. (I don't expect you to answer for him, but if you have any insight I wld love to hear it.)

Mollie and CDB, your argument isn't necessarily wrong from either side. You're both agreeing that it was a bad example, and CDB apologized for it more or less in 527, stating that it was just memory from a specific post in 567.

I don't like 585. "What you're saying" posts are a bad way to lead off to anything extensive considering that you're never going to be right in what was actually said. The summary just isn't sufficient.

600 is about as close to correct on this as we're going to get. CDB misremembered. He got called for it for not remembering correctly. Mollie still thinks he's scum and in some ways is justifying why scum CDB does this. However, I doubt CDB did so with the belief that no one would check. That's an assumption that just doesn't work (especially since we're not only in a game with 18 people but one with Mollie).

Starbucks' 603 was bad on her for calling Mollie for something CDB said in 507. While I don't like Mollie's response, the frustration is genuine. This isn't scum Mollie and I disagree with catboi/reck and star to a lesser extent for being on her right now. I say star is different because I understand her frustration at having to wait for questions and she's probably disenfranchised by the first part of 609.

Flameaxe has nothing in their iso that I like. The only real substantive post is on being okay with davesto votes but preferring coug ones. So I guess I'll return the favor and ask for some opinion on the rest of the game.

VOTE: Flameaxe

I'm not going to do some cheesy quote of a playerlist that you're ignoring, but I've given my thoughts. You can even 'borrow' answers like this is a college final.

Also pedit: Spiffeh is becoming a "how do you feel about Aj" bot.

I might be able to program that for you, spiffeh.

[Aj The Epic]

@AJ: Are you upset I'm not going around mindlessly shouting my townreads around, because a vote isn't going to change that.

I'm a bit frustrated, but not to a level of being upset. I'm just asking to see where you stand.

[Aj The Epic]

@Papa, I'm literally going on gut feelings with a ±50% error right now. Associations tells at this early in the game are useless, I only go for what I feel is right. Saying "I'm not gonna touch this wagon (even though it's on someone I think is super scummy!) because ____ is on it!" is silly.

That's a good answer.


@AJ - What's your opinion of the back-and-forth between me and Bins?

I've attributed bins to be an early NS from the first few games I remember with NS. I always scum-read him and still have never been able to figure him out. Since the people I play with seem to read him like a book it's never been an issue.

The vote on SC is so much like the notscience I remember that I'm surprised they aren't the same person. I'm not convinced it isn't part of the playstyle to be incredibly vague and based on gut instinct. He's adapted a bit and expanded (Somewhat) on the bbm read. The progression to adapt and adhere is good, that's something notscience does a lot of. But you're asking for Christmas coming early if you think you're going to get a lot of solid reasoning.

[Aj The Epic]

Spoiler: UHHHHHH

But really, this isn't going to help us with anything other than cause passive-aggressive (or simply aggressive) posts permeate the thread for weeks to come. I'd prefer if you both just took a quick breath and remembered we're still just playing a forum game like a bunch of nerds with nothing better to do.

[Aj The Epic]

On a reread of his ISO, I could be tempted to vote AJ. His tunnel on spiffeh doesn't really look believable, it looks a bit like scum taking a singular focus in the early game to avoid commenting on anyone else. Vote on Flameaxe was also not good.

There are far better people to lynch (hint: AJ), and also you should not get your feelings hurt over something like that

Lol. "Could be tempted", "Doesn't really", "looks a bit". AND THEN SUDDENLY: Far better.

You have a super non-committal post on why I'm scum and then seem to suddenly become really convinced of it. Why the difference in conviction?

[Aj The Epic]

??? How does the one guy the entire town spent the first 10 or so pages on not stick?

[Aj The Epic]

I literally voted you 3 minutes after the first post I quoted. to not quote it is at best neglect, at worst deliberately deceptive

my confidence grew because the gears in my head turned and I said "you know WHAT" because that's how my mind works with scumhunting and my thoughts evolve over time

Disagree that quoting vote is needed. But putting that as part of your case is certainly 'scratching'. You were completely unsure about it when you vote me and then you become strongly committed to endorsing it. Your confidence might have 'grown', but it isn't reflected in your rhetoric. You're all over the place, because now the best you can do is 'scratch together a case'.

[Aj The Epic]

My enthusiasm isn't indicative of much other than my enthusiasm...

Not going to reply to catboi outside of congratulations on reading the thread. That's a history lesson, not a case.

[Aj The Epic]

@Mod: replace me. Sorry, I just have no motivation for this game.

Sorry It really showed when I looked at catboi's post and just went "they're no way in hell I'm ever reading and responding to that entire thing". Not gonna drag this slot through mud for days.