I'm thinking the following are scum: CoolDog, Looker, Prana
Lets lynch one of them. My favorite is CoolDog.
When I have some time I'll do an ISO and show the posts I dislike in particular, but there are quite a good number of them.
I have to agree with the sentiment in this post. I still think we lynch CoolDog first. If he flips scum though, there is a really great target for the vig.DemonHybrid wrote:Unvote, Vote: a2rudeboy
This may go into complete mafia game theory territory, but I have never once
once
once
seen someone Vote/HoS two people in the same post and not be scum.
If Cooldog is scum, lynch a2. If a2 is scum, lynch Cooldog.
Hate to sound scummy!? I bet you do. That statement is so bad. First off, what about those questions make you sound scummy? Second, why do you hate to sound scummy? If you recognize that saying it is scummy, then why say it? Is there a town reason to say it? If so, then why is it scummy? DOES NOT COMPUTE! Also, the question to Jack can be read as role fishing. Why do you want to know what Jack's concern is with post restrictions?CooLDog wrote:@Espeonage: Hate to sound scummy, but what erges you to say that Jack is town. Isn't it a bit early to defend someone? And wouldn't a bandwagon help the town? You are however, correct in saying that not all power roles have post-restrictions and visa versa.
@Jack why do you want to know about post restrictions? It seems like it wouldn't effect you this early on.
This reads like a bus to me. How would it help the town if it went far but not necessarily to a lynch? If you think he is scum, why wouldn't you want it to end in a lynch? If you think he is town, why vote him at all?CooLDog wrote:@esp, I feel a good bandwagon coming on. It would help the town if this could go far (not necessarily to a lynch though. However, if you continue to play like you do it might just do so).vote esp
You had been pushing esp as scum the whole of D1 (which is interesting all by itself given the flip) so what exactly was your problem with Vezo agreeing with you? I don't understand why you would push so hard for someones lynch and then start questioning people when they agree with you and start voting.CooLDog wrote:Why is ESP scummy now? I personally think he is for reasons that I/town have already said earlier.
And Isn't being lurky scummy?
CooLDog wrote:Are you implying that you and Vez are buddies? fos: Looker. How could he get you killed?
I hate to keep opening up an old wound but Jack is active lurking, but I Don't think he is now worth a lynch over Looker or Esp.
You called Looker scum. Why do you then question zwet's scum read of Looker?CooLDog wrote:@zwet, why is looker scum?
You spent pretty much all of D1 calling esp scum, but then at the last minute you help derail that wagon and go after Nero. Explain please. This makes no sense.CooLDog wrote:I am going to look really bad for this, but I woke up really late this morning so I can't give my full reasons, but this above post sums most of my reasons up in his own words. The above is sooo scumy it begs me to vote for him. I'm concerned with how fast this wagon built up so fast though. if he flips town, then look at who is on this wagon, there WILL BE SCUM. for now though he's a good day-1 lynch unvote, vote nero chain (NC) Sorry I can't post any more but I did wake up really late...
This post just creeps me out.CooLDog wrote:I might not be able to post much as of late but, I will be happy to answer all of your questions.
@a2, Well I don't have much time to post yet the prod date is set a 24-hours. If the prod date was a little less strict it would be fine. Having to post content back0to0back days is challenging for my schedule. I also have a lot of trouble keeping up with large games as opposed to small ones. I think this will be the last large game I'll play (unless I play one over the summer...).
I will answer all of your questions to the best of my ability, I am town thus I have nothing to fear.
Yes you would. It would only look worse if you bussed him so long and then let it drop without ever brining it up. Once you committed to it you couldn't just give it up. Also, if you were always for an espy lynch, then why derail his wagon at the last minute and vote NC?CooLDog wrote:Simple, I would like a horror dude lynch, But I would like a Jack lynch over a horror, for his buddy up with esp.
And because no one has yet to put out a case. The only argument for my lynch this day is that I have a tight schedule. I would also like to note that I was always for a esp lynch. If I was scum I wouldn't have bused him so early in the game, and held onto it for so long.
This statement is contradictory to what you said. You said you wanted the wagon to go far, but not necessarily to a lynch. But you say that you felt he was scum. If you felt he was scum, why would you not want his wagon to go to lynch. You didn't answer this question at all.CoolDog wrote:If you think he is scum, why wouldn't you want it to end in a lynch?
Exactly! I did wantt it to end in a lynch, but the wagon stoped, and if you looked back nothing would have kept it moving, thus I saw horror who still looks slightly scummy. So I hoped on his wagon. That in turn got no place, and thus I settled for Nero as a day-1 lynch.
So you felt rolefishing Jack was an apporpriate response to Jack's rolefishing? Explain.CoolDog wrote:Why do you want to know what Jack's concern is with post restrictions?
Because he's role fishing? I wanted an answer to that.
CoolDog wrote:Is there a town reason to say it?
Yes, I think I have answered that above.
CoolDog wrote:If so, then why is it scummy?
Ok, I have answered this many times above...
CoolDog wrote:I don't understand why you would push so hard for someones lynch and then start questioning people when they agree with you and start voting.
read above
CoolDog wrote:You called Looker scum. Why do you then question zwet's scum read of Looker?
really the same as above.
CoolDog wrote:You spent pretty much all of D1 calling esp scum, but then at the last minute you help derail that wagon and go after Nero.
complete repeat question. I will answer it again.
CoolDog wrote:Explain please. This makes no sense.
done, done, and done
Why do you repeat yourself over and over and over, and then try to sound annoyed that you have to do it? You could have just answered my whole paragraphs with a couple of sentences of your own. Instead you answer each of my sentences on its own, which of course leads you to repeat some of my points, and then sound annoyed that you have to repeat yourself. It looks like you are trying to pad your response to make yourself look better.CoolDog wrote:that pretty much combined with the other things I have said answers this
My skin is crawling after this post.PranaDevil wrote:Okay, thanks to the latest interaction... CD, your response there was scummy as hell, and I wont bother repeating the same points as LMP has done, however I think I will need to go have a further look at your posts. If there was an up to date vote count I might vote you at this stage. Hopefully we'll get one by the time I've done my ISO, which will come as soon as I have enough free time in one sitting to do so.
This is absolutely hysterical. Yesterday CKD answered your question multiple times yet you hounded him demanding that he answer it again. Today CKD asks you a question and this is your response. The height of hypocrisy.CooLDoG wrote:I thought I already answered your question at least twice CKD, try reading the game. I'm going throught the mass of vollk's posts right now so, I can't respond more then that.
The questions in here still haven't been answered.LynchMePls wrote:This statement is contradictory to what you said. You said you wanted the wagon to go far, but not necessarily to a lynch. But you say that you felt he was scum. If you felt he was scum, why would you not want his wagon to go to lynch. You didn't answer this question at all.CoolDog wrote:If you think he is scum, why wouldn't you want it to end in a lynch?
Exactly! I did wantt it to end in a lynch, but the wagon stoped, and if you looked back nothing would have kept it moving, thus I saw horror who still looks slightly scummy. So I hoped on his wagon. That in turn got no place, and thus I settled for Nero as a day-1 lynch.
So you felt rolefishing Jack was an apporpriate response to Jack's rolefishing? Explain.CoolDog wrote:Why do you want to know what Jack's concern is with post restrictions?
Because he's role fishing? I wanted an answer to that.
There are multiple situations where you feel the need to attack others for their votes. Calling all of those situations "lack of reasons" is ridiculous. Suppose this situation:
Person A: I think you should buy these widgets. They are really great widgets.
Person B: I'll take two of those widgets there.
Person A: Why are you buying those widgets!? You never said you liked those widgets!
Person B: Uh...
When you make a good case on someone, and others agree and vote with you, why do they have to type out a "case". You've already made the case. The whole purpose of a case is to persuade others that you are right. If you then question everyone who agrees with your case just because they didn't come up with it themselves, you look paranoid/scummy. And what if they'd just typed out a bunch of sentences that was just parroting what you'd already said. Wouldn't that be scummy? Isn't it understood when they place their vote without an explanation that they are being convinced by others to do so? Can't we infer from the above situation, that B is buying the widgets because he agrees with A that they are good widgets? Why does B have to say "Well, you are right. These widgets are awesome, for the following reasons... so I will buy some." That is ridiculous. People don't talk/act this way.
Lastly, I don't like the tone of your response at all. Why do you feel the need to write a sentence that responds to every one of my sentences? If you've already answered one of my points then why do you feel the need to say:
CoolDog wrote:Is there a town reason to say it?
Yes, I think I have answered that above.CoolDog wrote:If so, then why is it scummy?
Ok, I have answered this many times above...CoolDog wrote:I don't understand why you would push so hard for someones lynch and then start questioning people when they agree with you and start voting.
read aboveCoolDog wrote:You called Looker scum. Why do you then question zwet's scum read of Looker?
really the same as above.CoolDog wrote:You spent pretty much all of D1 calling esp scum, but then at the last minute you help derail that wagon and go after Nero.
complete repeat question. I will answer it again.CoolDog wrote:Explain please. This makes no sense.
done, done, and doneWhy do you repeat yourself over and over and over, and then try to sound annoyed that you have to do it? You could have just answered my whole paragraphs with a couple of sentences of your own. Instead you answer each of my sentences on its own, which of course leads you to repeat some of my points, and then sound annoyed that you have to repeat yourself. It looks like you are trying to pad your response to make yourself look better.CoolDog wrote:that pretty much combined with the other things I have said answers this
The questions alluded to here that went unanswered are still unanswered.LynchMePls wrote:The questions in here still haven't been answered.LynchMePls wrote:This statement is contradictory to what you said. You said you wanted the wagon to go far, but not necessarily to a lynch. But you say that you felt he was scum. If you felt he was scum, why would you not want his wagon to go to lynch. You didn't answer this question at all.CoolDog wrote:If you think he is scum, why wouldn't you want it to end in a lynch?
Exactly! I did wantt it to end in a lynch, but the wagon stoped, and if you looked back nothing would have kept it moving, thus I saw horror who still looks slightly scummy. So I hoped on his wagon. That in turn got no place, and thus I settled for Nero as a day-1 lynch.
So you felt rolefishing Jack was an apporpriate response to Jack's rolefishing? Explain.CoolDog wrote:Why do you want to know what Jack's concern is with post restrictions?
Because he's role fishing? I wanted an answer to that.
There are multiple situations where you feel the need to attack others for their votes. Calling all of those situations "lack of reasons" is ridiculous. Suppose this situation:
Person A: I think you should buy these widgets. They are really great widgets.
Person B: I'll take two of those widgets there.
Person A: Why are you buying those widgets!? You never said you liked those widgets!
Person B: Uh...
When you make a good case on someone, and others agree and vote with you, why do they have to type out a "case". You've already made the case. The whole purpose of a case is to persuade others that you are right. If you then question everyone who agrees with your case just because they didn't come up with it themselves, you look paranoid/scummy. And what if they'd just typed out a bunch of sentences that was just parroting what you'd already said. Wouldn't that be scummy? Isn't it understood when they place their vote without an explanation that they are being convinced by others to do so? Can't we infer from the above situation, that B is buying the widgets because he agrees with A that they are good widgets? Why does B have to say "Well, you are right. These widgets are awesome, for the following reasons... so I will buy some." That is ridiculous. People don't talk/act this way.
Lastly, I don't like the tone of your response at all. Why do you feel the need to write a sentence that responds to every one of my sentences? If you've already answered one of my points then why do you feel the need to say:
CoolDog wrote:Is there a town reason to say it?
Yes, I think I have answered that above.CoolDog wrote:If so, then why is it scummy?
Ok, I have answered this many times above...CoolDog wrote:I don't understand why you would push so hard for someones lynch and then start questioning people when they agree with you and start voting.
read aboveCoolDog wrote:You called Looker scum. Why do you then question zwet's scum read of Looker?
really the same as above.CoolDog wrote:You spent pretty much all of D1 calling esp scum, but then at the last minute you help derail that wagon and go after Nero.
complete repeat question. I will answer it again.CoolDog wrote:Explain please. This makes no sense.
done, done, and doneWhy do you repeat yourself over and over and over, and then try to sound annoyed that you have to do it? You could have just answered my whole paragraphs with a couple of sentences of your own. Instead you answer each of my sentences on its own, which of course leads you to repeat some of my points, and then sound annoyed that you have to repeat yourself. It looks like you are trying to pad your response to make yourself look better.CoolDog wrote:that pretty much combined with the other things I have said answers this
I'm calling CD/a2rudeboy/Looker scum team now.a2rudeboy wrote:@ CoolDog- Reading comprehension. I didn't vote you, you got a hand of shame, true I expressed desire to vote, but I still see you as a lesser lynch candidate than Jack. Pay closer attention to details = more town.
@Horrordude (from a while ago)- Case based on lurking= flimsy. Case based on active lurking = stronger.
@CKD- Care to elaborate a little on your vote for looker (#659) ? SInce the vote, his responses have surely upped my scumdar, but I was just wondering what it was before then that made you vote him. It appeared out of nowhere to me.
@Jack- I'd still like the answers to my questions. Also, eagerly awaiting that bandwagon analysis.
Let's not hammer until we get the replacements in and get their views on the game
Answer my questions I've now asked you to 3 times and I'll answer yours.CooLDoG wrote:@a2, at least you posted reasons. I consider you to be town. Once I flip town you will be all but confirmed.
@lmp, lets say I flip town, who will the scum teams be?
@all voteing me but vollk, post reasons, thanks for your shameless votes with no reason.
More rope.CooLDoG wrote:ebwop, should read,
@lmp, lets say I flip town who will the other scum team(s) be composed of.
left out the ()..., call it a scum slip if you like, but how could a vanilla townie know that?
I haven't been in the game very long and I've made my arguments against CD very plain. I wasn't the one who brought that post up, I simply agreed with the player who did. I made a huge post listing point by point my case on him. Go read it again.a2rudeboy wrote:LMP- Is your case still based on the "he voted and HoS in the same post" theory?
Ya, its based on your interactions with CD plus your play from yesterday.a2rudeboy wrote:I was referring to your case on me.LynchMePls wrote:I haven't been in the game very long and I've made my arguments against CD very plain. I wasn't the one who brought that post up, I simply agreed with the player who did. I made a huge post listing point by point my case on him. Go read it again.a2rudeboy wrote:LMP- Is your case still based on the "he voted and HoS in the same post" theory?
You scum buddies are really funny.
This had better be good.evilpacman18 wrote:Hello. Just got home and I'm gonna get settled in and do some reading.
Until then, VOTE: vollkan
I will explain.
Only one problem, watchers see who TARGETS the person they watch, not who the person they watch targets.SnakePlissken wrote:Vote Curiouskarmadog
Why you ask? Well I watched him last night and he visited Demon who is now dead. Something says to me that he's up to no good. wouldn't you?
Well, he'd already obv breadcrumbed it here:Jack wrote:no...he claimed because of incorrect result from mod. Don't see scum doing that.
(My bold his caps)SnakePlissken wrote:unvoteCame in late and didn't realise that RV had pretty much finished. I shouleWatchout more I guess.
@a2rude: Please explain this to me. Because it reads to me like you knew CD would flip town, thus hoping my case on you would vanish.a2rudeboy wrote:LMP- Is your case still based on the "he voted and HoS in the same post" theory?
You fos:CD and vote someone else. We all point out how scummy that looks, and that if CD is scum, you probably are too. When we're nearly at a lynch on CD, you come in and ask if that is all the case is on you. Looks like you knew his flip would show town, and you hoped the case on you would go away, because clearly your fos:CD/vote other doesn't look scummy when the person you fos isn't scum.a2rudeboy wrote:@LMP- How does it read in that way?
I was asking if your case on me was still based mainly on the post in which i voted/fos'd at the same time (a case which i found weak) or if you had picked up new information from other posts which have strengthened your case.
I make posts, come back 12+ hours later and there is like 1 new post. It's frustrating. Is that hard to understand?curiouskarmadog wrote:explainLynchMePls wrote:This game's activity is excruciating.
@Prana: Why were you saying you didn't want to vote because you didn't want to "add to any kind of a quick lynch"? When was the last time you saw a quick lynch in a Large game? Why is this something to be afraid of? Also, why would a quick lynch of someone who you "would be happy with" be a bad thing? I recognize that you sort of answered this here, but I don't find your answer satisfactory, and I wasn't in the game to press you on the issue.PranaDevil wrote:Okay... what the smeg?
Esp, I have no clue where you're going with your stuff, but it's unnerving me hugely. I'm not voting you now for two reasons:
1 - to make sure that my vote doesn't add to any kind of quick lynch, but let it be known I would be happy with Esp's lynch.
2 - I still feel Jack is somewhat scummy too, and now not just because he seems to be fishing for a post restriction of some kind. But also because it feels like Jack and Esp are backing each other up rather strangely considering nobody else can see the reason from either.
Don't worry, you will. (And what do you mean my games weren't proper games? Smeg head!)SnakePlissken wrote:I don't want to come over as a total dumbass in my first proper game.
Posts like this make me think Esp-Jack isn't a likely scum team. Why would scum buddy to each other so closely D1, especially when one of them is under a fair amount of suspicion? I'd only expect this from very good scum players who are going for a gambit (ie. "but why would I buddy my partner so obviously") and espy doesn't strike me as good enough to try that gambit. At first, since Esp's flip had a scum team name in it, I thought this doesn't mean Jack isn't scum. However, I'm starting to come to the conclusion that there might just be a single mafia in this game (more on this below). Still something to keep in mind.Espeonage wrote:Because for some reason we are the only smart people in the town at the moment.
Town hunting. Great thing to do in a large game as confirmed towns are really powerful when you are looking at interactions later on that revolve around people that are still alive. (i.e. When you have no flip info on the person.)
Up until I get reason to believe he isn't town.
He isn't. But every rvs wagon needs a random counter wagon.
Because the RVS is about placing votes to get reactions. If you play catious from the start the game can get stagnant quickly.
Only buddying if one of us is scum.
Not quite sure. I would say there is one on my wagon and the rest are still random or no votes and are just riding this out for now. I have already said that scum don't like taking risks early, at least they usually don't.
More heavy with sarcasm than when a teenager talks with their parents.
I understand that this could open a Pandora's box of WIFOM, but I think Espeonage's reaction to the CKD and Zwet claims is interesting. He is either hinting that the scum are in fact part of the neighborhoods, or he is just sowing suspicion. I'm betting on the latter.Espeonage wrote:okay...zwetschenwasser wrote:How interesting. I have CKD's role as well, but with Pomegranate.
I'm tempted to believe both of these sets of claims so far. But. I would also hazard a guess that one side of each is mafia else it is looking like massclaim would break the game. I (think I) know seraphim better than that.
You say that if there are two vig groups there would be 3 kills a night. How would you know there aren't two mafia groups? Are 1 mafia group Large games normal? I haven't seen one yet.PranaDevil wrote:Regarding the claims, I'm not entirely sure I believe we have two pairs of joint vigs out there. That would be three kills a night, meaning in the span of two days we could be 8 town down and that's it, pretty much game over. If it turns out they ARE both pro-town, then you've basically told the scum where to begin their targetting (the second claim was even stupider because you could have flown well under the radar with that one).
@Jack: This is what I was talking about early this game day. This was on D1 and HD pointed this post out, and then there was a bunch of discussion between HD/Prana/Looker/Vollkan/(others I may be forgetting) on what pointing out the breadcrumb said about alignments. So "Snake-Watcher" was clearly established D1, and he is still breathing. Seems really strange to me.
This is the second time on D1 (that I was counting anyway) where you express a negative view of Esp, but then let it fall away. To make it worse you unvote without voting. I'm not a fan of that, especially in a post where you admit to having suspects. "Esp I'm less happy about". Furthermore, towards the end of D1 you took a pretty clear stance for an Esp lynch once the NC lynch was taking off. I'd like you to elaborate more on all of this please.PranaDevil wrote:Okay... thinking things over now I've read what's been said, and here's how I stand:
I accept Jack's been making a play, it's a crappy play by all rights, but checking over it, I will agree it doesn't make him scummy by that alone (that's not to say he isn't scum, but now Vollkan has pointed out it's a gambit I can see where it is coming from, as I do like strange gambits in the early play as well). So I'll buy Jack as town for the time being.
Esp I'm less happy about, it's possible he's pulling another gambit, but it sort of feels like he may have tried tagging onto Jack's gambit to gain points from him, but I'll leave him for now.
The 4 vig-likes... there's a chance one is scum, but if the role name does state how many shots they have or whatever, then holding off announcing it is worthwhile (and I'd advise any docs randomly pick one of them to protect just to be safe), though I would hope people realize where I was coming from with wanting to find out the role name (namely if the role name states there is two of them, rather then one, the claim wasn't needed anyway).
I still don't like that there was a claim, but unlike Vezo I can see that announcing 4 scum as joint vigs would be a terrible play as it only needs two of them to get offed to prove that the rest have to be scum (and if we lynched one today then it wouldn't take long for all 4 to go down). So at best one of those 4 is scum. (I actually think them all being town would be overpowered for the town too, so I feel it's more inclined to be one as scum, or even the second group tagging onto the original claim, as I still stand by that 3 kills a night could destroy the town before the town actually get a chance to truly scum hunt).
Anyway, at the moment Vezo has been bugging me but I can't quite put my finger on it just yet. Need to look over him closer in the next day or two.
For the moment though.
unvote
Will have a quick look over later if I have chance to see if anything stands out.
@HD: Same question to you that I put to Prana. This as D1 of a large game. How did you come to the conclusoin there is just one team?horrordude0215 wrote:So we have Esp, Looker, and SS for scum so far. One or two more and I'd say we have the entire team
This needs more explaining too. Explain how Looker was "pushing people" because that was not the read I was getting, and explain how pointing out Snake's Watcher claim was good.PranaDevil wrote:Looker is obv. town, he's pushing people, and pointing out things that need pointing out.
QFTLynchMePls wrote:My skin is crawling after this post.PranaDevil wrote:Okay, thanks to the latest interaction... CD, your response there was scummy as hell, and I wont bother repeating the same points as LMP has done, however I think I will need to go have a further look at your posts. If there was an up to date vote count I might vote you at this stage. Hopefully we'll get one by the time I've done my ISO, which will come as soon as I have enough free time in one sitting to do so.
This is interesting, considering that on D1 you said "scum team" when there is no way you should have known that there weren't 2 teams, but here you imply that it is scummy for him to say "scum teams" because he shouldn't know that it isn't "team". And, based on the number of kills per night, I'm actually coming to the conclusion that it is a single scum team. Which is the way you put it back on D1.PranaDevil wrote:Hold on... you say how could a vanilla townie know there are scum "teams" instead of a scum team?
I agree, how "could" a VT know that? Surely that is admitting you're not a VT, and instead admitting you know there's two scum teams by accident? The only way I can see you knowing there is two scum teams come day 2 is if you're scum, and you rolecopped the opposing scum team (This happened in a game I modded elsewhere, as Snake will attest to, in fact both scum rolecops rolecopped the opposing team).
So, you're not a VT, and there's no possible town power role that I can imagine allowing you to know there's more than a single scum team out there, so I can only come to the conclusion that you are, as I feel, a scum rolecop (Or scum have a rolecop and you know the results. I know some mods allow day talk too, so no clue if that's the case here, though I know it's not the norm on this site).
This post comes from noob town or genius scum. Given the evidence, I'm going with town-Snake for now. I still find think a claimed watcher living to D3 is pretty remarkable. Also, since you've lived this long and your claim is outed anyways:SnakePlissken wrote:Right my now correct result is that no one visited you last night. I'm a watcher.curiouskarmadog wrote:Snake, did you get a new result?....did you actually watch me or track me?
if you did track me, the question still stands...why did you bother tracking me what did you hope to find?
Also, why are being so jittery over being tracked? You outed your kill yourself? Why you so worried I watched you? Something to hide? I am watching everyone in turn until I die to try and find scum. That's the idea isn't it?
He was at 4 votes in a large game and you were going to be gone for 24 hours. How on EARTH could you be afraid of a quick lynch? It's preposterous. Your refusal to clarify it from that craptastic response is bad.PranaDevil wrote:Pretty much what I said there, you think I'm going to give a different answer later on? I told you the straight answer there, and that IS the answer you're getting, if you don't like it, I suppose it's tough luck.LynchMePls wrote:@Prana: Why were you saying you didn't want to vote because you didn't want to "add to any kind of a quick lynch"? When was the last time you saw a quick lynch in a Large game? Why is this something to be afraid of? Also, why would a quick lynch of someone who you "would be happy with" be a bad thing? I recognize that you sort of answered this here, but I don't find your answer satisfactory, and I wasn't in the game to press you on the issue.
As far as why it would be a bad thing though... ANY quick lynch is a bad thing. Discussion is paramount, and I'm honestly shocked I would need to point that out on this site. Over on sites where Mafia is a side game? Yeah, I can understand that, but here?
It's looking like you weren't wrong, what I'm challenging is that it was an 'assumption' at all, and not informed minority. You made this comment D1, and I assert there is no way you should have had enough information as a townie to assume 1 scum team.Considering the set up, which was pretty much revealed to us early on thanks to piss poor claiming, it makes less sense for two scum teams. But that becomes mod WIFOM stuff etc. I'm not used to large normals in all honesty, so I've no idea if one scum team or two is normal, but I always felt one scum team WAS the norm regardless outside of themed games. Am I wrong on that assumption?LynchMePls wrote:You say that if there are two vig groups there would be 3 kills a night. How would you know there aren't two mafia groups? Are 1 mafia group Large games normal? I haven't seen one yet.
You let it fall away because you brought up suspicions and then did 0 pushing, questioning, or scumhunting of it at all. You'd bring it up, and then move on to other things. You even specifically used the words "leave him for now". The only time you got "massively pissed off" about it was near deadline, and all the hate was moving towards NC. Very easy for scum to sit around at that point and go "but guys, why aren't we voting this guy" who is your scum buddy. I don't like the way you played towards Esp at all, it reads like distancing scum.How did I "let it fall away"? I was pushing Esp pretty much non-stop all day 1 in fact. Seriously, go check it over, I was massively pissed off when he wasn't the day 1 lynch. How is that me letting it "fall away"? What you're saying doesn't match up with the facts.LynchMePls wrote:This is the second time on D1 (that I was counting anyway) where you express a negative view of Esp, but then let it fall away. To make it worse you unvote without voting. I'm not a fan of that, especially in a post where you admit to having suspects. "Esp I'm less happy about". Furthermore, towards the end of D1 you took a pretty clear stance for an Esp lynch once the NC lynch was taking off. I'd like you to elaborate more on all of this please.
@Prana: If Esp is behaving scummy why "leave him for now".
As for the unvote, you'll also note that I wanted to check through the thread as well. I feel leaving a vote on someone at a point you want to check things over to be bad play. If you're not 100% that the vote is on the right person at that point in time, then you should move it, I moved it off entirely, prior to checking through the thread. How is this scummy? Being "overly cautious" is somehow scummy now?
It's really simple. You said Looker was pointing out things that needed pointing out. At the time you said it, the thing that Looker had pointed out was the watcher claim. If that isn't what you meant by Looker's "pointing things out" then YOU are the one who needs to explain what you meant. "Pointing things out" is vague, so I had to infer what you meant. And since what Looker was pointing out directly at that point of time in the thread was the watcher claim. It's not a misrep if you don't make yourself clear in the first damn place. Nice try though.'scuse me? I am now not going to ask you something, I'm going to demand it. Go and tell me where I said pointing out Snake's watcher claim was good.LynchMePls wrote:This needs more explaining too. Explain how Looker was "pushing people" because that was not the read I was getting, and explain how pointing out Snake's Watcher claim was good.PranaDevil wrote:Looker is obv. town, he's pushing people, and pointing out things that need pointing out.
I repeat, I am demanding you do that, because that's not just a misrep, it's a blatant misrep to a massive degree designed to somehow make me seem worse for it.
As for the rest, please to be paying attention to what I is saying.
Otherwise known as read the next post I made which responded to CKD asking me the same damned thing for crying out loud - http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... 2#p2509612
I thought it was obv. It reads like this in my head "LMP is making a good case, but CD isn't scum cause I know he isn't, but I'm going to say that I'm going to go read his posts further, so that if I need to push CD as a mislynch I can. I'll even add language about doing the ISO when I 'have enough free time' so no one holds me to it. It'll be really nice to have an updated vote count so I know if this is a really viable mislynch or not". What ever came of "have a further look at your posts"? You never commented on it after this post and before CD's mislynch. Did you never 'have enough free time' for it? You did apparently find time to distance from the CD wagon once it was about to happen here:If you wish to ever actually explain that one, please do so.LynchMePls wrote:QFTLynchMePls wrote:My skin is crawling after this post.PranaDevil wrote:Okay, thanks to the latest interaction... CD, your response there was scummy as hell, and I wont bother repeating the same points as LMP has done, however I think I will need to go have a further look at your posts. If there was an up to date vote count I might vote you at this stage. Hopefully we'll get one by the time I've done my ISO, which will come as soon as I have enough free time in one sitting to do so.
Yet somehow, between "I'm going to have to take a further look at CD" and his lynch, we have 7 posts from you and not one mention of that further look into CoolDog. We do have this:PranaDevil wrote:More post =/= more content.
36 of your posts there are no content wastes of space... and I was being GENEROUS to you with some of them by allowing one liners that responded to people to not count in my tally (when really there's no content in them either).
THIRTY SIX!
All you've "proven" there is that you have given next to nothing to this game, and are deliberately delaying on providing any information.
Fuck it.
unvote
vote: Looker
CoolDoG will wind up lynched today, but I refuse to accept Looker is doing anything but stalling deliberately. He's done nothing this day phase except ask for a vote count, and now it's been provided he goes V/LA? Bollocks. Nice and convenient I would say.
Also, it's not a 3-4 day absence is it? It's an "until you can be bothered" absence, wich is detrimental to whichever side you are on anyway, if you can't play the game, get the hell out of it and let someone else get in. if this is part of your strategy, then you're scum and need lynching.
Irony, how delicious.PranaDevil wrote:zwet, why are you only commenting on the CoolDoG wagon after it's too late for anything to change? If you felt he was town why didn't you speak up when he was due to be lynched?
You're informed scum that knew there was only 1 scum team.Point. Make it.LynchMePls wrote:This is interesting, considering that on D1 you said "scum team" when there is no way you should have known that there weren't 2 teams, but here you imply that it is scummy for him to say "scum teams" because he shouldn't know that it isn't "team". And, based on the number of kills per night, I'm actually coming to the conclusion that it is a single scum team. Which is the way you put it back on D1.
Best ending ever. After an entire post I devote to showing scummy behavior, you're going to claim I didn't give a reason? That is absurd. Nice deflection.If you ever want to give a reason for that one, feel free.LynchMePls wrote:Unvote
Vote: PranaDevil
I advise everyone else do the same. He's scum.
Lol, I was working on it. Nice try though.PranaDevil wrote:I notice you've chosen to ignore my response to your post about me. Any chance of you actually, y'know, posting a response? Perhaps even a case on me considering you're voting me and as opposed to others, might actually be somewhat useful for the town?
Seriously, is everyone in this game insistant on not actually playing the game and just doing their damndest to avoid playing Mafia?
No, I'm saying your explanation is nonsense. There should have been 0 worry about a quicklynch if you were going to be gone 24 hours and he only had 4 votes on him.PranaDevil wrote:Are you suggesting scum are more likely to be more cautious than town then?LynchMePls wrote:He was at 4 votes in a large game and you were going to be gone for 24 hours. How on EARTH could you be afraid of a quick lynch? It's preposterous. Your refusal to clarify it from that craptastic response is bad.
Absolutely I assumed it was two teams. I've been in 1 Large Normal and at least 5 Large themes (that I remember off the top of my head) and in all but 1 there were 2 scum teams (the one had a scum team and a super strong SK). So yes, I'd say more than 1 scum team in large games is standard for Large games.So you were of the assumption it was two teams right off the bat were you?LynchMePls wrote:It's looking like you weren't wrong, what I'm challenging is that it was an 'assumption' at all, and not informed minority. You made this comment D1, and I assert there is no way you should have had enough information as a townie to assume 1 scum team.
A few questions, seeing as you chose to ignore the one I had asked there, I'll ask that again too:
Is more than 1 scum team normal in a large normal game on this site? This is the first large normal I've played in, and outside of themed games, all games have only had one scum team that I've played on here thus far.
Would scum normally be told if there are two scum teams? In my experience they are only told of their own team, though admittedly the only games I've played on here with two scum teams have been Kise's Square/Enix themed games.
It looked strange to me when rereading the game, which distorts time a bit. I'll have to go back and look at it. This by itself may not be a sign of scum.Go check my ISO of the time frame, I unvoted and then wound up being away for a while. When I can't guarentee to be able to check through the thread instantly, and I want to check through it, then yes, I will remove my vote so if it takes a few days there's no chance of my vote being on a potential bad lynch.LynchMePls wrote:You let it fall away because you brought up suspicions and then did 0 pushing, questioning, or scumhunting of it at all. You'd bring it up, and then move on to other things. You even specifically used the words "leave him for now". The only time you got "massively pissed off" about it was near deadline, and all the hate was moving towards NC. Very easy for scum to sit around at that point and go "but guys, why aren't we voting this guy" who is your scum buddy. I don't like the way you played towards Esp at all, it reads like distancing scum.
Everytime you check through a thread you unvote first? That would be ridiculous. If you don't do it everytime, then why did you do it this time? This is part of what I meant when I said I wanted you to elaborate on this. It looks suspicious.
Is this somehow scummy then? Because it to me seems like perfectly logical behaviour.
No you haven't. Try again. What specifically was Looker pointing out that you thought was pro-town?Pardon?LynchMePls wrote:It's really simple. You said Looker was pointing out things that needed pointing out. At the time you said it, the thing that Looker had pointed out was the watcher claim. If that isn't what you meant by Looker's "pointing things out" then YOU are the one who needs to explain what you meant. "Pointing things out" is vague, so I had to infer what you meant. And since what Looker was pointing out directly at that point of time in the thread was the watcher claim. It's not a misrep if you don't make yourself clear in the first damn place. Nice try though.
All Looker had pointed out was the watcher claim? Are we telling lies here? I think we are, considering the post I linked you to was me stating that Looker had pointed stuff out in his previous long post, which, as it happens, was before I pointed out Looker was "obv. town".
Which means not only had I explained what I meant already to CKD, I had also pointed it out to you in that post.
Nice try though.
LOL. Very cute. No, I didn't make it all up. That is what your words read like. I ask anyone to go back and look at it.So what you mean is you made it all up? Gotcha.LynchMePls wrote:I thought it was obv. It reads like this in my head "LMP is making a good case, but CD isn't scum cause I know he isn't, but I'm going to say that I'm going to go read his posts further, so that if I need to push CD as a mislynch I can. I'll even add language about doing the ISO when I 'have enough free time' so no one holds me to it. It'll be really nice to have an updated vote count so I know if this is a really viable mislynch or not". What ever came of "have a further look at your posts"? You never commented on it after this post and before CD's mislynch. Did you never 'have enough free time' for it? You did apparently find time to distance from the CD wagon once it was about to happen here:
So you appear to dodge the central issue. You said I was making a good case on CD, and that you'd look into it 'if you had time'. 7 posts later (clearly you have time because you are able to make a Looker-scum argument) you still haven't commented on CD. Did you ever do that reread of CD? If not, why did you say you would?I felt he was scummy, but felt Looker was more scummy by that point, yes earlier he seemed obv town, but that day he needed to actually do something rather than be as useless as Jack has been all game.LynchMePls wrote:Yet somehow, between "I'm going to have to take a further look at CD" and his lynch, we have 7 posts from you and not one mention of that further look into CoolDog. We do have this:
Irony, how delicious.PranaDevil wrote:zwet, why are you only commenting on the CoolDoG wagon after it's too late for anything to change? If you felt he was town why didn't you speak up when he was due to be lynched?
Asked and answered. Your assertion that scum wouldn't know there is more than 1 team is hilarious. It's pretty obvious how scum would know.As I said above, from my knowledge (which is two whole themed games) scum aren't even told whether it's 1 team or more than 1 team. So how would scum even know if there was only 1 scum team?LynchMePls wrote: You're informed scum that knew there was only 1 scum team.
Point. I made it.
Sense, make some.
All of this is just completely ridiculous. How can anyone call that post fluff? Simply absurd.You didn't give a reason, you posted a lot of stuff that was nothing more than fluff that you have failed to explain WHY any of it is scummy. Why would scum be more wary of a quick lynch than town?LynchMePls wrote:Best ending ever. After an entire post I devote to showing scummy behavior, you're going to claim I didn't give a reason? That is absurd. Nice deflection.
Why would scum unvote before checking the thread but town wouldn't?
You have failed miserably to explain WHY the behavious is "scummy" you've just pointed out a ton of stuff that is essentially "why do you play like that? I don't" and sorry, but I'm not going to bow down and follow your playstyle, I'll play how I choose to play, and I tend to play a bit more cautious than most. But how that's scummy I have no effing clue.
And now you're giving up. This is easy people.PranaDevil wrote:But meh, I'm officially giving up on this game, half of the players aren't even attempting to play mafia, while the majority of the rest have done a vanishing act.
I pretty much disagree with everything you're saying in this post. I'd really like it if other players would comment on the case and your defense.PranaDevil wrote:Regardless of whether you believe it to be nonsense (There has been lynches quicker than that elsewhere, hence why I was being safe, ask Snake, he's on the UKFF as well), how is it scummy? If it's not scummy, why is it part of your case?LynchMePls wrote:No, I'm saying your explanation is nonsense. There should have been 0 worry about a quicklynch if you were going to be gone 24 hours and he only had 4 votes on him.PranaDevil wrote:Are you suggesting scum are more likely to be more cautious than town then?LynchMePls wrote:He was at 4 votes in a large game and you were going to be gone for 24 hours. How on EARTH could you be afraid of a quick lynch? It's preposterous. Your refusal to clarify it from that craptastic response is bad.
I repeat, this is my FIRST Large normal (and my last most likely), you are basically saying that because my only experience of large games is two Kise run themed games that I should somehow assume that there wouldn't be a single scum team.LynchMePls wrote:Absolutely I assumed it was two teams. I've been in 1 Large Normal and at least 5 Large themes (that I remember off the top of my head) and in all but 1 there were 2 scum teams (the one had a scum team and a super strong SK). So yes, I'd say more than 1 scum team in large games is standard for Large games.
The scum aren't told there is more than 1 team, but they can use the size of their team and the strength of their roles to easily tell if there is only 1 scum team. For instance, in star wars, which was a 22 player game, we (the Empire mafia) were only 3 players (although all with PRs), so we knew right away that there must be a second scum team out there.
I'm used to NORMALS having just one scum team. Regardless of whether I'm wrong or right about that, it's NOT scummy by itself. As far as scum/town tells go, it's completely null.
What it IS as a tell, is a "New to large normals" tell if large normals are normally 2 scum teams.
LynchMePls wrote:No you haven't. Try again. What specifically was Looker pointing out that you thought was pro-town?Bolded to show my major points in that post, the first pointing out where Looker had, indeed, been pointing things out that needed pointing out (as everyone was blaming Looker for something Espy had already done by that point), and the last one showing that there was no scum motivation in that post, nor had I actively noticed any from Looker at that point.PranaDevil wrote:CKD, just look at his last long post.
Opens with a solid point on zwet,follows up with pointing out Espy had, indeed, pointed out Snake's claim well before he had(I didn't even put much thought into Looker pointing it out because Espy had already shown it quite clearly by then anyway, why is Looker getting grief for that and not Espy?)
Good first line in response to Vezo as well (I would say that though as it's something I agree with anyway as I said pretty much the same thing earlier), not sure what he means by the next line though.
You also asked leading questions of him (how many scum are in his mafia) that could only ever be answered with what amounts to no more than "How the hell do I know how many scum we have?" Because either he honestly doesn't know, or he would have to pretend he did anyway, it's a pointless question.
All in all, I see zero scum motivation for Looker's actions, he's been showing himself as obv. town so far and I'm not liking the pressure on him.
Do keep up.
No, you made it up, if that's what it "sounded like" to you, then you have issues, you can't say I said one thing, but meant another. What I type is what I type, not some made up crap that you've decided that it must insinuate.LynchMePls wrote:LOL. Very cute. No, I didn't make it all up. That is what your words read like. I ask anyone to go back and look at it.
I didn't have the time. Guess what? Looker was a bigger priority for me to make a case on at that point in my eyes. Are you suggesting that, when I didn't have much time to make a full case, that I should go after one that YOU feel I should make, as opposed to the one that, at that point, I believe to be more useful?LynchMePls wrote:So you appear to dodge the central issue. You said I was making a good case on CD, and that you'd look into it 'if you had time'. 7 posts later (clearly you have time because you are able to make a Looker-scum argument) you still haven't commented on CD. Did you ever do that reread of CD? If not, why did you say you would?
Do you not see how ridiculous your argument is? It's basically: "He had time to make one case, he must have had time to make more as well". Sorry, but the world doesn't work that way. Time is not infinite, and when I have non-mafia stuff to do, I have to say that mafia will normally be done last. Not first. If being busy away from the site is somehow scummy then I'm fucked if I know how.
Except for the whole fact that it's not always guarenteed scum would know, at least not until day 2 or 3 (Unless scum were lynched right off the bat, then the team opposing the lynchee's team would know).LynchMePls wrote: Asked and answered. Your assertion that scum wouldn't know there is more than 1 team is hilarious. It's pretty obvious how scum would know.
Throw in the above, namely that THIS IS MY FIRST LARGE NORMAL and your entire reasoning here is just fucking moronic. "He's never played a large normal, but he has to know what is the usual set up for them anyway otherwise it's scummy". That's what you are saying, and it's just fucking stupid.
It's fluff because NONE OF IT MAKES A CASELynchMePls wrote: All of this is just completely ridiculous. How can anyone call that post fluff? Simply absurd.
Where are you showing that any of it is "more likely to be done by scum than town"? Where are you showing where the scum motivation for anything I've done is?
It isn't there, it's non-existant, it's just a massive fuck ton of bullshit.
Here's your entire case on me:
"He hasn't played in large normals and assumed scum would be a single team, that's scummy"
"I don't like why he unvoted in case of a quick lynch, must be scum"
"He unvoted Espy to check the thread then disappeared for a while through being busy, scummy"
"He felt Looker was pro-town, that's scummy"
"He had chance to check over Looker and not CD? Must be scummy"
THAT'S IT!
There's no more to your case on me, and none of that is scummy behaviour, cautious behaviour? Yes. Lacking in the general knowledge of Large Normals? very much so. Being busy through real life stuff? Hell yeah. But... where is it scummy? Show me WHY it's scummy, nobody has bothered to do that so far.
You've made a poor case on me, and a bunch of people are diving on it as an easy mislynch, yet not a single person who is voting me has given any solid reasons why I am somehow being seen as being scummy, not one. Why are my actions more likely to be scum than town? What scum motivation have I got for any of it? Seriously, I can't see ANY of this being presented.
And then you wonder why I'm getting fucking frustrated and pissed off with this absolute fuck up of a game?
This is mind numbingly frustrating.Jack wrote:I commented already (post 908).LMP wrote:I'd really like it if other players would comment on the case and your defense.
WHAT?SnakePlissken wrote:I didn't say it was conversely though, thinking you can get a quick lynch because there is no defence for it would be cheap lynch move for the scum.LynchMePls wrote:^^That is absurd.
If that is the case, then anytime scum starts to get wagon they just fake giving up and they never get lynched.
Why is giving up a town tell?
I can't believe someone is accusing me of not adding anything after the last 5 or so posts I've made. I simply can't believe it. I'm going to step away from this game right now before I get really pissed off.SnakePlissken wrote:I'm starting to see Pranas point about your responses. What I have written is easily readable and you come back with nothing, it's almost as if you are trying to make your post countnin here look busy without actually adding anything. Your getting a bit Jack on us by doing that.LynchMePls wrote:WHAT?SnakePlissken wrote:I didn't say it was conversely though, thinking you can get a quick lynch because there is no defence for it would be cheap lynch move for the scum.LynchMePls wrote:^^That is absurd.
If that is the case, then anytime scum starts to get wagon they just fake giving up and they never get lynched.
Why is giving up a town tell?
This is an unfair characterization of my case in the following ways:PranaDevil wrote:Only when I get frustrated at things, and this game is less fun and more frustrating. I don't think I've ever replaced out of a game, and I ideally don't want to start now, but I also would rather a game where people actually put forth good cases, rather than cases that are simply "I don't agree with this, therefore it's scummy" which is exactly how LMP's case is. There's no "scum are more likely to do this" reasoning, or "this is scummy because" reasoning, just complete "If you don't agree with how I feel things should be done, then you are scummy". It's just utterly ridiculous reasoning.
No one asked you to "make a full case" on CoolDog. You said you would look at him and comment on it, and then you didn't. It looks like you were trying to blend with the town ("Yeah, you guys are right") without having to join in the building mislynch. It looks like a carefully constructed way to blend with the town without getting involved, and I say it was scummy. If you hadn't ever said the case on CD was good and you'd look into it, and you just pursued Looker instead, it would be completely different (this would be an instance of disagreeing with me but not being scummy), but that isn't what you did. What you did was "you guys are right, I should look into that some more...**twiddles fingers and doesn't look into it more until we're near lynch** oh hey, I'm gonna vote this guy over here with no explanation about my looking into CD". I'm saying I don't think you ever intended to look into CD more, you just said that to blend with town, which was very anti-CD at that point.PranaDevil wrote:So just because I made 5 quick and short posts, I somehow had loads of free time to make a full case on CoolDoG?
I wouldn't shed a tear if you shot me instead. And I have started asking questions, a pretty large line of questioning towards PD, that has only generated comments from people when I ask for them. But don't let the truth get in your way.curiouskarmadog wrote:yeah you keep saying that, but you are not doing anything about it...also, i hate the saying "perfectly honest"..have you not honest in this game...how about you get something started by asking question instead of bitching about the boring game (not scum hunting). To “be quite honest”, I was debating between killing you and Demon last night..thoughts? I changed to Demon at the last second.
The VT claim D1 for starts. And then pretty much every other bit of it.curiouskarmadog wrote:really?...what about his play said town?LynchMePls wrote: Oh, and the Demon shot was awful, he was obv town.
This one?SnakePlissken wrote:LMP you didn't answer my question either.
Because if so, you can't possibly expect me to answer a rhetorical question. If not, then you need to ask it again, cause I don't see it.SnakePlissken wrote:So should we lynch you then? Because by your logic that's what we should do.
Then you could have said "I haven't had time to do that CD read I said I would, but I have seen something about Looker I'd like to talk about. But you didn't, you did JACK ALL about it. Which to me indicates that you never really intended to reread CD, you were just saying that. Which implies scum.PranaDevil wrote:LMP, I note you've still dropped down to just that part of your "case" now, seemingly dropping everything else in favour of avoiding any of the questions I posed. Why?
Incidentally, regarding CoolDoG, you say I didn't have to make a case, that's as maybe, but I still felt like I needed to go through his posts fully, and as I did not have the time to do so, I didn't.
Sure. Or you could have just admitted you didn't have time and said something to that affect in thread. Instead you just simply dropped it, which looks lazy or scummy. You aren't striking me as lazy, so...Are you now suggesting I should have skimmed his posts to come to a viewpoint on him, rather than taking the time to do a decent job?
I LOL'd.I suppose if that's how you normally look over people, it would explain why your case on me has no solid basis and that you can't actually respond to any of it without deliberately ignoring what I'm saying.
Why? The votecount begs to differ with you. Why would you say you are an easier lynch? Particularly when you assert my case is bad. This quote does not compute with your defense.After all, right now I would say I'm the easier lynch over Jack,
Alright, you have got to be an idiot. "So should we lynch you then?" is the definition of a rhetorical question.SnakePlissken wrote:It wasn't rhetorical, and you are not answering anyones questions.LynchMePls wrote:This one?SnakePlissken wrote:LMP you didn't answer my question either.
Because if so, you can't possibly expect me to answer a rhetorical question. If not, then you need to ask it again, cause I don't see it.SnakePlissken wrote:So should we lynch you then? Because by your logic that's what we should do.
I can't believe I have to explain how it is scummy, but here goes. If you do it in order to look town ("look how pro-town I am, I'm going to unvote so we don't have a quick lynch, aren't I awesomely pro-town guys") then it's scummy. Its a statement that looks designed to appear town. I'd even find just a plain unvote less scummy. But your unvote comes with "reasoning" that is designed to look townie (I want to prevent a mislynch) but is actually terrible logic (there is no way a mislynch would occur in the 24 hours you claimed you'd be gone). If you don't have a reasonable expectation of a quicklynch (which you shouldn't) then there is no reason to point out that you are unvoting to prevent a mislynch, except to create the image that you are pro-town.PranaDevil wrote:Regardless of whether you believe it to be nonsense (There has been lynches quicker than that elsewhere, hence why I was being safe, ask Snake, he's on the UKFF as well), how is it scummy? If it's not scummy, why is it part of your case?LynchMePls wrote:No, I'm saying your explanation is nonsense. There should have been 0 worry about a quicklynch if you were going to be gone 24 hours and he only had 4 votes on him.PranaDevil wrote:Are you suggesting scum are more likely to be more cautious than town then?LynchMePls wrote:He was at 4 votes in a large game and you were going to be gone for 24 hours. How on EARTH could you be afraid of a quick lynch? It's preposterous. Your refusal to clarify it from that craptastic response is bad.
No, it's a scum tell. The scum tell is that you had information the town shouldn't have. Of course you're going to say now that there is a better explanation for why you had that knowledge, but why should we believe you about that? As it stands, you may refute my assertion, but my assertion is simply valid. The fact is, the game looks to be a 1 scum team game, and you were calling it that D1 before we'd had any flips.I repeat, this is my FIRST Large normal (and my last most likely), you are basically saying that because my only experience of large games is two Kise run themed games that I should somehow assume that there wouldn't be a single scum team.LynchMePls wrote:Absolutely I assumed it was two teams. I've been in 1 Large Normal and at least 5 Large themes (that I remember off the top of my head) and in all but 1 there were 2 scum teams (the one had a scum team and a super strong SK). So yes, I'd say more than 1 scum team in large games is standard for Large games.
The scum aren't told there is more than 1 team, but they can use the size of their team and the strength of their roles to easily tell if there is only 1 scum team. For instance, in star wars, which was a 22 player game, we (the Empire mafia) were only 3 players (although all with PRs), so we knew right away that there must be a second scum team out there.
I'm used to NORMALS having just one scum team. Regardless of whether I'm wrong or right about that, it's NOT scummy by itself. As far as scum/town tells go, it's completely null.
What it IS as a tell, is a "New to large normals" tell if large normals are normally 2 scum teams.
As I've already pointed out, you've still failed to explain what I was supposed to know you meant when you said "he is pointing out things that needed pointing out". From the context of when you said that (right around when he was pointing out Snake's watcher crumb) I had to infer that you meant his pointing out the crumb.LynchMePls wrote:No you haven't. Try again. What specifically was Looker pointing out that you thought was pro-town?Bolded to show my major points in that post, the first pointing out where Looker had, indeed, been pointing things out that needed pointing out (as everyone was blaming Looker for something Espy had already done by that point), and the last one showing that there was no scum motivation in that post, nor had I actively noticed any from Looker at that point.PranaDevil wrote:CKD, just look at his last long post.
Opens with a solid point on zwet,follows up with pointing out Espy had, indeed, pointed out Snake's claim well before he had(I didn't even put much thought into Looker pointing it out because Espy had already shown it quite clearly by then anyway, why is Looker getting grief for that and not Espy?)
Good first line in response to Vezo as well (I would say that though as it's something I agree with anyway as I said pretty much the same thing earlier), not sure what he means by the next line though.
You also asked leading questions of him (how many scum are in his mafia) that could only ever be answered with what amounts to no more than "How the hell do I know how many scum we have?" Because either he honestly doesn't know, or he would have to pretend he did anyway, it's a pointless question.
All in all, I see zero scum motivation for Looker's actions, he's been showing himself as obv. town so far and I'm not liking the pressure on him.
Do keep up.
LOL! So now I'm not allowed to interpret other people's posts? Exactly how are we supposed to find scum then? Of course I have to read what people are saying, look at the motivations of those statements, and try and glean alignment from it. The motivation of that post was "let me look town by saying I agree with the CD wagon, but distance from it with a 'I'll look into it more later' statement". If you'd actually delivered on looking into CD, that wouldn't be the case, but given that statement followed up by you NOT looking into it, the only motivation I can see for you even making that post was the blend with the anti-CD vibe that was going on in the town at the time.No, you made it up, if that's what it "sounded like" to you, then you have issues, you can't say I said one thing, but meant another. What I type is what I type, not some made up crap that you've decided that it must insinuate.LynchMePls wrote:LOL. Very cute. No, I didn't make it all up. That is what your words read like. I ask anyone to go back and look at it.
I've already dealt with this in full.I didn't have the time. Guess what? Looker was a bigger priority for me to make a case on at that point in my eyes. Are you suggesting that, when I didn't have much time to make a full case, that I should go after one that YOU feel I should make, as opposed to the one that, at that point, I believe to be more useful?LynchMePls wrote:So you appear to dodge the central issue. You said I was making a good case on CD, and that you'd look into it 'if you had time'. 7 posts later (clearly you have time because you are able to make a Looker-scum argument) you still haven't commented on CD. Did you ever do that reread of CD? If not, why did you say you would?
Do you not see how ridiculous your argument is? It's basically: "He had time to make one case, he must have had time to make more as well". Sorry, but the world doesn't work that way. Time is not infinite, and when I have non-mafia stuff to do, I have to say that mafia will normally be done last. Not first. If being busy away from the site is somehow scummy then I'm fucked if I know how.
Again, you may not have played Large Normals, but you've played Large Themes, correct? In your Large theme experience, how many scum teams have there been?Except for the whole fact that it's not always guarenteed scum would know, at least not until day 2 or 3 (Unless scum were lynched right off the bat, then the team opposing the lynchee's team would know).LynchMePls wrote: Asked and answered. Your assertion that scum wouldn't know there is more than 1 team is hilarious. It's pretty obvious how scum would know.
Throw in the above, namely that THIS IS MY FIRST LARGE NORMAL and your entire reasoning here is just fucking moronic. "He's never played a large normal, but he has to know what is the usual set up for them anyway otherwise it's scummy". That's what you are saying, and it's just fucking stupid.
Saying that doesn't make it so.It's fluff because NONE OF IT MAKES A CASELynchMePls wrote: All of this is just completely ridiculous. How can anyone call that post fluff? Simply absurd.
Let me get this straight, if I point out multiple instance of scummy behavior, it's not a case unless I also say "which is more likely scum because (insert X)"? Why do I have to hold everyone's hands? If I point out scummy behavior, shouldn't people be able to see on their own why it is more likely to come from scum? This isn't kindergarten, people should be able to connect the dots on their own. Showing multiple instances of scummy behavior should be enough for them to see the big picture (this guy is scum).Where are you showing that any of it is "more likely to be done by scum than town"? Where are you showing where the scum motivation for anything I've done is?
Misrep. My point is "he has information D1 town shouldn't have".It isn't there, it's non-existant, it's just a massive fuck ton of bullshit.
Here's your entire case on me:
"He hasn't played in large normals and assumed scum would be a single team, that's scummy"
Misrep. My point is "town has no reason to be cautious of a 24 hour quick lynch there. Which means this statement is trying to appear pro-town with faulty reasoning"."I don't like why he unvoted in case of a quick lynch, must be scum"
Misrep. The point is "He unvoted Espy and then disappeared." Of course you're going to claim its for being busy, but that doesn't make it so, and it isn't part of my case."He unvoted Espy to check the thread then disappeared for a while through being busy, scummy"
Misrep. Where do I assert that a pro-town read on looker is scummy?"He felt Looker was pro-town, that's scummy"
Misrep. My point is that you said "I agree with you guys about CD, I'll look into him" and then went 7 posts without commenting on him, not even a "I decided not to look into CD" or "I actually think CD might be town" nothing, simply dropped it entirely. And then, when CD was near lynch, you put your vote somewhere else, implying that you did have time to look at people, but you didn't want your vote on CD. THAT IS SCUMMY."He had chance to check over Looker and not CD? Must be scummy"
Again, claiming there is no more to my case after falsly representing my case doesn't make it so. Of course you're getting frustrated, you're caught scum. All of your play D1 towards Espy looks like bussing a scum buddy, and your play D2 towards the CD wagon looks like distancing from a mislynch. On top of that you've made posts with information on D1 that town shouldn't have, and a ridiculous "to prevent a quick lynch" statement.THAT'S IT!
There's no more to your case on me, and none of that is scummy behaviour, cautious behaviour? Yes. Lacking in the general knowledge of Large Normals? very much so. Being busy through real life stuff? Hell yeah. But... where is it scummy? Show me WHY it's scummy, nobody has bothered to do that so far.
You've made a poor case on me, and a bunch of people are diving on it as an easy mislynch, yet not a single person who is voting me has given any solid reasons why I am somehow being seen as being scummy, not one. Why are my actions more likely to be scum than town? What scum motivation have I got for any of it? Seriously, I can't see ANY of this being presented.
And then you wonder why I'm getting fucking frustrated and pissed off with this absolute fuck up of a game?
Seriously, if you think that question wasn't rhetorical, you need to go back to school, smack your teachers and demand they actually teach you something.SnakePlissken wrote:No I asked by your logic, as in you said that Prana should be lynched because he wasn't going to bother with rhe game anymore, you then got called on that possibly being scummy as it could be seen as simple lynch to get the heat off someone else, you then have a hussy fit storm off saying your not going to play because you were getting annoyed or something, so by that logic I asked should we lynch you while you were away then? Not idiotic a simple question and I don't care much for your insults either.
Jack, help a brother out. I know it might take 15 minutes, but how about explaining the POE that got you to this point. I'm not saying I disagree with you, but it'd be really nice to understand what the hell you're thinking.Jack wrote:The scum are somewhere in here:
antihero (horror)
Silver (nicolbolas)
a2rude
evilpac(vezok)
by poe
Wow. Nice call. Add silverbullet, and we have a slot that has literally done nothing to help town the entire game. That is awesome. I especially love Nicolbolas' "I've got several town reads but no scum reads".Jack wrote:go iso nicolbolas.
I replaced into this game jack ass. I wasn't in it to start. And I had to catch up on 20+ pages. Yeah, I'm sure there was some skimming in there.You "inferred" that I meant Snake's watcher crumb so far after I had made that explanation to CKD that you either skimmed the thread (and therefore are taking things out of context, which makes your "case" null and void) or you deliberately avoided acknowledging the post (which again makes your case null and void).
This is the sort of thing I'd expect scum to say. "Why me?"SnakePlissken wrote:What I'm not getting is why your all so sure that I'm a scum watcher and silver isn't a scum tracker? Does make me wonder what your real motivations are here?
There is a massive difference between speculating on the number of scum left on D4 and making posts that plainly state the number of scum teams D1. We have a lot more information now as town to make a somewhat informed decision on how many scum we think are left. On D1 you town had 0 ways of knowing whether there was 1 scum team or 2.I also note he still hasn't jumped on evilpacman for his earlier "assumption" on the scum, the same way he jumped on my assumption that there was just one scum team. Which also means he's inconsistant with his views.
This is awful. I have no idea why you wouldn't shoot. GOOD FREAKING LORD.lewarcher82 wrote:since we lynched mafia, I decided not to shoot, according to what discussed in post 1133 and 1135.
Just like the other neighborhoods, if one of us dies, the other gets the power to themselves. If Vollkan were scum, I don't think I'd still be alive. However, I have wondered about it, given that every night we block someone, the kill goes somewhere else, and its not like the scum haven't had better targets each night. And Vollkan not being targeted for an NK into D5 is pretty surprising if he is town. I can't help but wonder if this wasn't what the mod wanted with the game though, lots of paranoia amongst the neighborhoods. If so, it's worked pretty damn good.curiouskarmadog wrote:also need a claim from rude.
LMP and vollkan...not only does your role stop someone from killing, but it also protects someone from a kill....after 4 nights, you have yet to stop a kill..one would think that you have done something by now...thoughts on suspicion of the other? What happens to your power if the other dies?
also, pac should not be the lynch today, given your claim.
Mod can you update the first page please.
Done