Seemingly Normal Mafia (Over)

[farside22]

vote ElectricBadger

For being a lazy player in the mason and monk game.

[farside22]

I'm a roleblock/ninja assasign who vig's people that make fake claims

[farside22]

Looking at the Magnus/EB exchange

Magnus ask EB for her views on what primate is doing. When EB answers he says this:

yep, electric badger is scum.

And for the record, I don't think primate is doing this entirely randomly

Implies more that there is something here:

First things first. If I'm right, primate should know what I'm thinking already, so, primate, am I right?

The reason that you're scum is that you suspected flareonage while not having a theory as to what was behind primate's actions. I'm not going to press this heavily though, since it isn't logical so much as gut.

The reason I say that its not random, but I don't say what it is, well, I have a good reason for it, even if I don't say my reason.

Suspect flare! umm not sure about that at all. And EB stated a theory on primates actions so where do you get that he didn't have a theory on it from?
The second part of this is you want EB to answer but either refuse to answer or don't have an answer

And... uh.... you won't hear much more about it... don't expect me to fully elaborate... This is something you'll just have to take my word for. It doesn't make that big a difference anyway

It doesn't make a difference, he doesn't want to talk about it and he votes EB for stating an opinion on it. Or for Flare comment.
ummmmm
What?

You seem mostly interested in defending yourself against my accusations. So, do you have any suspects yet? Why aren't you interrogating them?

Just on page three and saying he isn't looking for scum. Cool story bro did you notice most of the joke comments, and RVS votes or did I completely miss out on something there?

Why would I push a case against primate? I don't even suspect him. I asked you why you thought he did what he did. But you decided flareonage was scummy even though all flareonage ever did was ask if people were serious. Then you began trying to corner me when I called you scum for it.

Again I don't see EB saying flareonage was scummy for anything of this nature.

magnus is making absolutely no sense with his attack on EB. He's calling EB scum for either post 40 which I took as a joke or because of the primate theory which he's seems to think it's something more.

vote: Magnus

[farside22]

I forgot I needed to unvote first

unvote:
Vote: magnus_orion

[farside22]

This is Seemingly Normal Mafia. That means there is something abnormal that we don't know about.

If you have the ability to edit posts, please DON'T.

Thought this was an odd rule.

I can edit post as a list mod. I didn't really think it odd from my point of view but I could be wrong

First things first. If I'm right, primate should know what I'm thinking already, so, primate, am I right?

Well, I think so, Brain, but I can't memorize a whole opera in Yiddish.

No pinky we are going to try and take over the world!!!!!

@Magnus: No.

I assume this means you have no clue what Magnus is even talking about here?

[farside22]

I say lynch all liars and OMGUS is so scummy it makes my teeth hurt.

Proof farside asked questions:

Suspect flare! umm not sure about that at all. And EB stated a theory on primates actions so where do you get that he didn't have a theory on it from?
The second part of this is you want EB to answer but either refuse to answer or don't have an answer

It doesn't make a difference, he doesn't want to talk about it and he votes EB for stating an opinion on it. Or for Flare comment.
ummmmm
What?

Just on page three and saying he isn't looking for scum. Cool story bro did you notice most of the joke comments, and RVS votes or did I completely miss out on something there?

Are you doing to say none of this is questions to you at all? Are you really going to say that OMGUS vote with no case whatsoever isn't scummy?
Oh wait I see I asked questions that are retorical so you don't have to answer them. RRrrrrriiiiiiigggght.

Tell me what part of my post is invalid?

[farside22]

OMGUS is similarly ridiculous. I gave a reason that was independent of you voting me. If I hadn't then, yes, it is a scum-tell, however, if that is not the case, then the OMGUS accusation shouldn't give you a shield from ever being attacked by someone you are voting.

Oh really lets see that reason again

Farside's post doesn't show an attempt to continue a conversation with me in order to gain evidence to further gauge my alignment. Instead, its written with a purpose to convince other people to follow his ideas.

Town should be trying to ask me questions at this point, or at least trying to get me to talk more, scum will be trying to push town skepticism toward suspicion by making drawn out explanations, but not asking questions. (well, he does ask questions, but they serve rhetorical purpose, not inquisitive)

Yest Jack says this:

Vote:magnus_orion

Your job to convince me I'm wrong.

Read post 68 for primate

looks for questions and finds none or anything engaging. But you picked me who shows good cause on a vote and reasoning and it's not OMGUS.
Please your excuses are terrible.

[farside22]

Sorry for the double post but forgot to add onto this

I gave a reason that was independent of you voting me

Your vote was saying I wasn't asking question which I proved I did ask questions nor was I looking to engage with you. None which is true so yes your "case" is clearly OMGUS.

[farside22]

I so disagree with your logic to the nth degree. I can't begin to tell you the number of scum I found who just vote to blend in and make no ways then actually try and make a case because it's easier.
The rest of your point is no one but scum build cases which is udder BS.

[farside22]

On primate, his post was similarly constructed without the intent to convince others.

Add backtracking with no reason on a point to the scum list against magnus.

or
DIE SCUM DIE.

[farside22]

Jack did not make an attempt to try and convince others of his opinion, so there's no real scum motivation behind it, just not fulfilling the town motivation. ...he's not trying to push other people to accept his positions, so I'm not going to accuse him of being scum.
...
On primate, his post was similarly constructed without the intent to convince others.

Could you explain what you mean by "convince others of his opinion"? How does that differ from giving a reasoned vote with evidence? If farside called explicitly for more votes I missed it; Richard on the other hand did exactly that without eliciting any comment.

PFFT it's garbage. I presented a case he can't defend so he is attacking me for that case. This way he doesn't have to respond to the case and sweep it under like it's nothing at all.
His attacks against EB senseless drivel.
Attacks against farside OMGUS, backtracking nonsense.

[farside22]

Keep hitting that strawman. I didn't say nobody except scum make cases. That's like saying nobody except scum will lie. However, I think that scum would be more likely make cases this early in the game that do not have systems for attempting to continue conversation to gather more evidence. Its simply too early, there is simply too little information, for you not to want to try to gain more and make sure your right.

Right because people are mindless zombies that doent' know how to read a thread and make there own assement on a player. (sarcasm in case you missed it)
Lets see you makes a comment and fought with EB, it's page 4 where most players are doing RVS or jokes and then we have the players who vote without commenting that look like gliding under the radar types that are something to be aware of. We also have player player not confirmed so far.
Mostly it's you who has made multiple sins of scumminess.
So yes in four pages you are the best looking person as scum so far.
Counter point?

As to your other point, its not really relevant, because just because my point is scum like to try to convince town doesn't mean that scum don't also try to avoid making claims. Some scum behave differently than others. It would be silly to layout a single criteria and say that every scum you run into will behave exactly like this.

But its' that exactly you point against me so far an your so called "case" hypocrite much?

Do you find so far a point you made that was valid against me and why?
You pointed to EB saying gut with reasoning and now this time me with nothing more then hey scum act like this and just now you comment I quoted is completely hypocritical in leu of it all.
So again what is your case?

[farside22]

I take issue with 2.
Since when does unusual imply scummy? Such a necessary premise in your argument is completely unfounded. There is no incentive for scum to behave in an unusual manner. In fact, one could argue that the entire motivation is for scum to attempt to act as normal as possible.

Your going to need quotes for me to understand which one is 1, 2 or 3.
I didn't number it so I dont' know which point you consider illogical or unusual actions.

[farside22]

The following players have not posted in this game:

DocPotter
Kairyuu - v/la till friday
Anon - C
DeeJayCee
Nul


My search looking a players profiles seems to be on the fritz but I notice kairyuu in another game saying he was on v/la.

Jack did you notice any other player who has been online or around since the game started?

[farside22]

Here is a point about some players that just vote and add nothing to the convo to slide under the radar. In regards to magnus comment here:

However, I think that scum would be more likely make cases this early in the game that do not have systems for attempting to continue conversation to gather more evidence

flare as scum


kyle as scum


zwet as scum

These are the worst of the worst (no offense to flare) K7 personal as a mod has me have a post or die rule along with no crap clause because how much he lurked and played so far under the radar it was rediculous.


Also I don't see how I'm calling people to lynch you or vote for you based on my orginal case so how about some proof on that.

[farside22]

Mod-Edit Votecount 1-4

magnus_orion - 5

(Kairyuu, danakillsu, farside22, Primate, RichardGHP)

Farside22 - 2

(bv310, magnus_orion)

Jack - 1

(Haschel Cedricson)

Haschel Cedricson - 1

(Flareonage)

Flareonage - 1

(Kyle99)

Primate - 1

(ElectricBadger)

DocPotter - 1

(Jack)

Not Voting - 7

(Kise, DocPotter, Anon, Toonfighter, DeeJayCee, Nul, Seacore)

With 20 alive, it takes 11 to lynch.

Still to confirm:
Anon

V/LA:
TheLonging (exams)

---

I'm confused. Farside, do you believe that every single scum behaves the same exact way? In other words, do you believe that there is no scum tell that can apply to some behaviors of scum, and not others?

Depends on the player. I do question more people who vote for no reason and glide along more often then not in a game as it goes later on as it's more suspicious to me.

To get from (1) to (3) you need an implicit premise (2) which allows for the argument to work.
You never actually said (2). You threw up a bunch of stuff I did, and declared it to be scummy.
You never gave a reason why the actions I committed were scummy.

What? I showed quotes I commented in regards to those quotes. You saying your own words and the post your arguing in regards to EB isn't scummy?
You saying that you are not throwing crap up to see what sticks?
Which is exactly what I see you doing here. Everything is either well you did this. Then when I prove it wrong you come up with some new crap that wasn't part of your case. But please keep digging your own grave. Would you like to claim you scum buddies while we share all our thoughts?

The bottom quote is the short version of my thoughts. People tell me I put too many walls of text and just want the short version. You want the long version?

[farside22]

I'd like to see your rationale for why my actions are scummy (you've only stated what actions you think are scummy). Especially given that what I've been doing, in your view, is just an extension of the RVS (now, I don't think that that's true, but it's interesting that you think the RVS [or at least, the thought behind it] is scummy)

So far I'm seeing magnus say people need to use rationale or not showing enough to him or explaining enough.
I don't see him showing why he thinks this.

magnus original vote and reason:

Farside's post doesn't show an attempt to continue a conversation with me in order to gain evidence to further gauge my alignment. Instead, its written with a purpose to convince other people to follow his ideas.
Town should be trying to ask me questions at this point, or at least trying to get me to talk more, scum will be trying to push town skepticism toward suspicion by making drawn out explanations, but not asking questions. (well, he does ask questions, but they serve rhetorical purpose, not inquisitive)

farside shows proof of asking question
mag's next attempt to throw a crap case

I gave a reason that was independent of you voting me. If I hadn't then, yes, it is a scum-tell, however, if that is not the case, then the OMGUS accusation shouldn't give you a shield from ever being attacked by someone you are voting.

farside shows others who didn't ask question or push conversation
magnus rebutle comment:

However, that's still irrelevant, since Jack did not make an attempt to try and convince others of his opinion

Still seems to think I'm convincing others of their opinion but doesn't show how or why at all.

However, I think that scum would be more likely make cases this early in the game that do not have systems for attempting to continue conversation to gather more evidence. Its simply too early, there is simply too little information, for you not to want to try to gain more and make sure your right.

Shows no evidence of this theory. Continues in the didn't engage comments but clearly we are engaging each other at this point.

Richard isn't trying to convince people, he's just calling for more people...

Again uses this as his reason but doesn't explain how again

I'm questioning the premise that if you can prove "magnus is making no sense" then it follows "magnus is scum"

hypocritical stuff.


Basically magnas has lied. Backtrack his thoughts as far as what is scummy about me. Refusing to show any evidence of his reasons that my post is so called "convincing people". Then says my case isn't showing any evidence by throwing a bunch of stuff together and calling it scummy but his case is based on absolutely nothing because Godforbid his own words should be damning enough.
I'm sure he will say I'm convincing people with this post because I haven't seen him present one shred of evidence to contradict my points.
So far anything I have seen anyone present against mangus hasn't been good enough. He down plays the argument made against him as seen in the first quote and has swept the argument to a who can post more at this point.

[farside22]

And no magnus that last post had no questions what so ever as I had plenty others you still need to answers.
That post is called a case showing your scumminess.

[farside22]

If this is related to the OMGUS, then why didn't I vote them?

Because you have one vote. Duh


The first question wasn't rhetorical and the last question wasn't rhetorical. The second question just me saying your not making sense and should explain.
Which you haven't

Why should I ask for you to show proof of something? Shouldn't you do that to prove someone is scum. Or is that just not your way?

I apologize for being expedient in my answering your concerns, I see this has offended you, could you please suggest how long I should wait before responding to allegations against my person?

There is responding to an allegation and telling people they are not providing enough proof of your scummies or saying why it's scummy then not doing either yourself.

And no the whole XYZ wagon makes no sense especially looking at my orginal case.

The rest is your opinion and so far I see no one agreeing with it.

[farside22]

Mod can you please prod the following players:

DocPotter - DeeJayCee - Nul

[farside22]

my head offically hurts now.
Jester role perhaphs?
I dont' see people normally do something like Toon does without it being for anti-town reason's or something role related.

[farside22]

What odds would you give on Toon being the jester?

Let me ask a question back. How often have you see scum say OMGUS vote and just vote a person like that?
Or to come back and use AtE with a damn I should have known people would vote me for it.
I of course am assuming that Toon Fighter has played more then one game of mafia here at this site.

[farside22]

Sorry I should answer your question about the likelyhood of jester. I would have to see if Jebus thougth jester is considered a normal role. I know there was a jester game for open so I assume it's considered normal.
But Toon's play reminds me of someone who was a jester in another game I played in.

[farside22]

Just got a hold of a computer and saw the mod note about the game in the queue.

Pre-game info: There are no cults, jesters, or day actions. All deviations from a normal game are role-based, and that the game runs exactly like a normal game (ie, vote during the day, night actions at night).

This pretty much changes my theory completely in regards to Toon.

[farside22]

Jester speculation is normally a scum-tell...

Exactly. Seems like a case of "my newbie partner just said something suspicious so I'll speculate that he's a jester so I don't have to vote him right now". Farside didn't answer the "why do you think he's a jester" question right away either.

"my head hurts" sounds like frustration as well.

And the timing of asking the mod for prods on other players...

It would be very convenient to find out two scum of course. But not unheard of.

I never see a player who is scum do anything that obvious which is why I assumed jester. However rereading the queue I see it's not in the game.
Any player that plays that scummy is just hard to fathom. Now if you have seen someone play scum this badly I would like to hear about it.

[farside22]

whatever

Unvote:
vote: Toon

[farside22]

This is going bad on my side...

I admit it, my vote was somewhat a random vote, and had really not much of a reason behind it. I am still newbie (3rd game), and I hope I don't get lynched because of this -.- that would make 2nd game in a row lynched D1...

unvote

Why would you do an RVS vote at this stage in the game?

[farside22]

(1) Farside didn't answer the "why do you think he's a jester" question right away either.

(2)"my head hurts" sounds like frustration as well.

(3)And the timing of asking the mod for prods on other players...

1) it wasn't the first thing I said but I did answer the question 10 minutes later. I notice you didn't answer my question I asked of you.

2) Or someone who thinks something is so stupid it makes their head hurt. I try to tone done the nasty part and not outright call a player stupid/dumb or anything of that nature by just saying my head hurts.

3) I noticed the game started tuesday and it was friday. I don't want people just to lurk by without responding to the game.

[farside22]

Mod-Edit Votecount 1-6

Toon fighter - 9

(Anon, Electric Badger, Flareonage, Kyle99, Jack, magnus_orion, Nul, farside22, RichardGHP)

magnus_orion - 4

(Kairyuu, danakillsu, Primate, DocPotter)

Farside22 - 1

(bv310)

Jack - 1

(Haschel Cedricson)

Not Voting - 5

(Kise, DeeJayCee, Seacore, Toon Fighter, TheLonging)

With 20 alive, it takes 11 to lynch.

To Be Replaced:
TheLonging

---

@richard: how is my question WIFOM? I asked when do you see someone doing it in a game.
Like ever in any game.

[farside22]

somebody asked about the other game I was lynched D1 as townie:
viewtopic.php?t=13008&postdays=0&postorder=asc&&start=0 (newbie 885. the game hasn't ended yet)

I just went through and read a bit on Toon Fighter in the game he mentions above and am now leaving my vote on Toon.

@magnus_orion: You have yet to explain why you believe someone who BW votes looks town to you especially after I showed a few games in which scum just slide in bw votes with no imput.

[farside22]

Sorry magnus I think it's the way you word things I get impressions about players and such that those who vote without reason gets no notice from you.

Case in point:

Nul wrote:
I'll follow the crowd for now. Need to catch up with the game

A good reason not to vote for Toon.

Actually, that's just a bad reason to vote for Toon, not a good reason not to. It doesn't affect Toon's scumminess in the slightest.
Or at the very least, as far as I can tell, Nul's reasons for voting Toon don't affect whether or not Toon is actually scum.

I'm not sure how someone jumping on a BW with no imput doesn't affect anything. I've said already I seem many times scum slide under the radar and vote without imput and you seem to see this as nothing of interest from what I can tell.

[farside22]

I don't see magnus as "pretending to be protown" I see that he made 2 cases based on blowing something up that wasn't there.
First the EB case saying EB was voting for Flare for scum reason's when it looked to be a joke vote.
Saying I was trying to convince players that I was trying to get him lynched but never saying where in my orginal post I was convincing anyone.
He's also very hypocritical as far as I can see. Talks down to any player making a case but doesn't post a clear case himself.

The only reason I'm staying on TF is as I said rereading this game and his other game his OMGUS vote and backtracking doesnt' make sense.

[farside22]

Mod-Edit Votecount 1-8

Toon fighter - 7

(Anon, Flareonage, Kyle99, Jack, magnus_orion, Nul, farside22)

magnus_orion - 7

(Kairyuu, danakillsu, Primate, DocPotter, Seacore, Toon Fighter, ElectricBadger)

Farside22 - 1

(bv310)

Not Voting - 5

(Kise, DeeJayCee, Konowa, Haschel Cedricson, RichardGHP)

With 20 alive, it takes 11 to lynch.

---

The only reason I'm staying on TF is as I said rereading this game and his other game his OMGUS vote and backtracking doesnt' make sense.

which is the only reason you voted for him in the first place.
@TFvoters
WHY????!!! Why would you stay on a wagon that started with a single OMGUS vote??? THREE people voted for TF based on this, which I just don't understand. Then, TF broke down under pressure. You can't blame a guy for breaking down when three votes immediately pile on because of something like that.

TF hasn't changed anything in my view. At first I was like are you kidding with the OMGUS vote and then explanation. Then he shows a game he was lynched day 1 which is nothing like his play in this game if you looked.

[farside22]

far:
He's also very hypocritical as far as I can see. Talks down to any player making a case but doesn't post a clear case himself.

I realize people have called me a hypocrite for a while now, but I fail to see an actual statement of mine where I condemn an action, and then another quote where I actually commit the action I condemn. Could someone do this for me? Or quote a post where someone does?

Magnus case on EB at whole:

This is why you're scum.
You're immediately taking the situation, and turning it to try to corner me.
The reason that you're scum is that you suspected flareonage while not having a theory as to what was behind primate's actions. I'm not going to press this heavily though, since it isn't logical so much as gut.

The reason I say that its not random, but I don't say what it is, well, I have a good reason for it, even if I don't say my reason.

comment on farside case

Farside's post doesn't show an attempt to continue a conversation with me in order to gain evidence to further gauge my alignment. Instead, its written with a purpose to convince other people to follow his ideas.

hypocrite ^

I still think you're scum. Your post didn't do anything to change my mind. Its your job to convince me I'm wrong now.

Quote:
Vote:magnus_orion

[quote="magnus answer]If your implicitly saying I'm scum, fine, I'll do my best to convince you otherwise.
If you want me to disprove that you voted me... well... you just did, I can't disprove that. [/quote]

If you're just trying to prove a point, that's rather silly, we only have 18 days once jebus says the day has officially started, so I'd rather not fool around with that sort of thing. I'm used to longer day phases.
Your job to convince me I'm wrong.

hypocrite

I'll tell you what I'm interested in. I'm interested in finding scum. Your reactions have been knee jerk, and lack the critical thought of someone really interested in finding scum.

This is just hypocritical on general principal of his game play thus far. He's had knee jerk reactions when interigated, lack of critical thought when discussing his "case" and mostly making accusations that don't make sense based on what he is saying.

[farside22]

Mod: please fix my quotes and prod any player that hasn't posted in the last 3 days.
Thank you!

[farside22]

How am I being a hypocrite in that second one exactly? As I take it, the first condition was the one that happened, namely, where I said I would do my best to convince him he's wrong. Is that not consistent with what I said?

Jack's post may have been after yours I would have to look but it's doesn't come off as hypocritacal telling EB to convince you then telling Jack is actually wishy washy not hypocritical. My mistake.

My "knee jerk reactions" have been explained and elaborated in quite some detail, as I have carefully considered and explained what is wrong with them. Despite the fact that I have ended up voting people who were voting me, its not knee-jerk, but the careful wisdom of EXP that leads me to do what I do. As I have said numerous times, there was a game in which I used a similar tell to catch scum. Since I've reiterated this point a few times now, I shall elaborate on this evidence.

So all your knee jerk reactions is based on one game in which you were aggressively attacked for saying a player that was persauding people that you were the lynch.
Did you ever actually say how my post and orginal comment was persuading players to vote on you.
You have yet to be clear on that little issue.

The first comment and corollation is hypocritical you can pretty up your words and say all the BS in the world but in fact it's hypocritical

I pointed to 3 games in which scum glide by and just BW vote so far you have 1 game in which a player did something of convincing and yes I would like a link provided for said game to see if it's close to the case I made you called out as "convincing others to vote"

[farside22]

[

The first comment and corollation is hypocritical you can pretty up your words and say all the BS in the world but in fact it's hypocritical

Except, they're not. And no matter what words you use, or what you call it, you can't change that my express intent was to provoke reactions, and your intent was not.

I'm sorry where did you get your license as a mind reader exactly?
You can say my intent was to provoke reaction but yours wasn't till your blue but you have yet to say how.

Link: http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=10974
The case doesn't have to be similar, the intent does, but I digress.

Anyone want to tell me where the intent in these two are even close to be the same point?

I've read the thread through a few times, and I've noticed a couple of things:

BB says in one post that he never plays the same way twice, and then later talks about his % method of scumhunting. These are contradictory, but this is minor. I'm more bothered by the "boredom" comment, although I know that's been beaten into the ground somewhat.

This brings me to nocmen, who I think is right to question active lurkers... but criticizing short posts themselves is foolish. Not everyone writes long posts as a regular part of their playstyle, and expecting everyone to post large amounts of content per post is unrealistic, not to mention difficult to read.

My suspicion right now is on magnus_orion, however. He was pushing pretty hard on nocmen there for a bit, and then when questioned himself backed off FAST, complete with apologies and phrases like "from my POV" and "I was hoping," which sound like backpedaling without conviction. Bad mojo, and worth pressing the issue on IMHO.

unvote: PhilyEc

vote: magnus_orion

Looking at the Magnus/EB exchange

Magnus ask EB for her views on what primate is doing. When EB answers he says this:

yep, electric badger is scum.

And for the record, I don't think primate is doing this entirely randomly

Implies more that there is something here:

First things first. If I'm right, primate should know what I'm thinking already, so, primate, am I right?

The reason that you're scum is that you suspected flareonage while not having a theory as to what was behind primate's actions. I'm not going to press this heavily though, since it isn't logical so much as gut.

The reason I say that its not random, but I don't say what it is, well, I have a good reason for it, even if I don't say my reason.

Suspect flare! umm not sure about that at all. And EB stated a theory on primates actions so where do you get that he didn't have a theory on it from?
The second part of this is you want EB to answer but either refuse to answer or don't have an answer

And... uh.... you won't hear much more about it... don't expect me to fully elaborate... This is something you'll just have to take my word for. It doesn't make that big a difference anyway

It doesn't make a difference, he doesn't want to talk about it and he votes EB for stating an opinion on it. Or for Flare comment.
ummmmm
What?

You seem mostly interested in defending yourself against my accusations. So, do you have any suspects yet? Why aren't you interrogating them?

Just on page three and saying he isn't looking for scum. Cool story bro did you notice most of the joke comments, and RVS votes or did I completely miss out on something there?

Why would I push a case against primate? I don't even suspect him. I asked you why you thought he did what he did. But you decided flareonage was scummy even though all flareonage ever did was ask if people were serious. Then you began trying to corner me when I called you scum for it.

Again I don't see EB saying flareonage was scummy for anything of this nature.

magnus is making absolutely no sense with his attack on EB. He's calling EB scum for either post 40 which I took as a joke or because of the primate theory which he's seems to think it's something more.

vote: Magnus

[farside22]

Knee jerk reactions are more of a townie tell, unless there are specific circumstances that make it suspicious.

Somehow this is one of those games where discussion about who is mafia turns incredibly clunky.

I say we lynch Toon Fighter.

This just in magnus tried to call EB scum for this reaction.

News at 11.

[farside22]

You can say my intent was to provoke reaction but yours wasn't till your blue but you have yet to say how.

It was a rather outrageous accusation with very little substance, thus it would produce reaction.

basically magnus admitting to pushing BS cases as though they were real.

Anyone want to tell me where the intent in these two are even close to be the same point?

Both don't try to draw the conversation out to gather evidence. What I had said originally.

How did I not draw out conversation. You can keep changing the wording from saying I'm trying to convince players to not drawing conversation all you want but you can stop not answering this question

This just in magnus tried to call EB scum for this reaction.

?
Explain how everything from now has to a reaction from that, or for that matter, how I would plan what the reactions were?

? How does this relate to my response to what you said about EB. It's just back to calling you a hypocrite again.

[farside22]

You can say my intent was to provoke reaction but yours wasn't till your blue but you have yet to say how.

It was a rather outrageous accusation with very little substance, thus it would produce reaction.

basically magnus admitting to pushing BS cases as though they were real.

Anyone want to tell me where the intent in these two are even close to be the same point?

Both don't try to draw the conversation out to gather evidence. What I had said originally.

How did I not draw out conversation. You can keep changing the wording from saying I'm trying to convince players to not drawing conversation all you want but you can stop not answering this question

This just in magnus tried to call EB scum for this reaction.

?
Explain how everything from now has to a reaction from that, or for that matter, how I would plan what the reactions were?

? How does this relate to my response to what you said about EB. It's just back to calling you a hypocrite again.

comments in bold as I forgot to seperate quotes

[farside22]

Ah, yes, thanks for reminding me, that too. Sorry, I didn't fully elaborate, that's a slip up on my part.

The entire wording:
"They don't try to draw out the conversation to gather evidence and, instead, they attempt to convince other players of a position."


Dattebayo

How?

[farside22]

by just providing evidence toward a conclusion, and nothing else...

Dattebayo

I provided evidence and commented on the evidence I presented and questioned you on said evidence.
Basically this answer doesn't fly so far as a response and still doesn't explain how me and dour's post is in anyway similar especially as dour didn't provide any evidence of his comment to you.
So how again are you seeing anything similar with Dour and mine post?

[farside22]

We've been over this, well, at least part of this.
I still don't think that you were asking those questions with any intent in mind to actually get answers in your original post.

If you want to separate "comments" from "evidence", that's fine. However, while he doesn't use quote tags, he does use quote marks, and those are quotes. Basically, just because he was more concise than you, it doesn't mean that his intent was any different.

Dattebayo

1) seriously are you a mind reader or you just making this crap up now?
2) not seeing it and I think your now officially just making crap up.

All I see this post is making things up that are not there. There is no similarities you got caught in a lie and you can't get out it's just that simple to me.
Second you keep saying things that are almost like back tracking your position without backtracking.
Well you asked question but I don't see they had intent. That makes no sense.
I point to 2 other people that didn't provoke anything as far as question or engaging you in talks and you pretty much poo, poo it with reason's that are faulty in comparison to your attack on me.
Now your using a past game saying well player X did this and that is what you remind me of and when showing the 2 quotes side by side you just dig further into this "convince players" with no substance.
You have lied twice now and misrepresented your position on a player twice.
Basically your action are just like watching a magician to me trying to pull a rabbit out of thin air. (there is other words I would like to use or analogies but it would be more rude)

unvote:
vote: magnus

[farside22]

Actually, I disagreed with magnus when he first questioned that post (he said something about it only asking rhetorical questions), but I agree with him now.

His basic case is: mafia are less likely to start in on someone and poke and prod and get them to reveal something about themself. They are more likely to look for something to vote on. One is scumhunting, the other is scumvoting.

Now, that's a fairly high standard. Lot's of times as townie I'm not really feeling it, and just vote instead of getting into someone. Lots of townies do that.

But it is a legitimate case and a legitimate comparison, if you are attuned to it your gut can make the judgment call.

Your post was similar to the dougrim guy in that the main thrust of it was "this is why magnus is suspicious".

No my post was in regards to the EB/magnus argument outline magnus faultiness with his case on EB and calling him scum for said argument.
It was based on substance in the game.

[farside22]

dour

dour post the cast page 5 after 4 days into the game
He used " with very few words and not actual quotes that show his case
his suspicion is with no questions at all and 1 paragraph with 4 lines

farside

post the case on page 3 after 2 days into the game
Uses quote
asked questions
the post has 17 sentences with 1 paragraph


now onto the meat of this
How does this question not prove a comment from you?

And EB stated a theory on primates actions so where do you get that he didn't have a theory on it from?

You think dourgrim wasn't voting based on substance in that game?

It was but it certainly wasn't an indepth case. It was a few he did this and it looked the most suspicious.

(Your vote looks like omgus [though I'm not voting you atm] to me, but I suppose you'll make the case that it was motivated by my supposed "lying", despite that already being your position well before voting for me, so I won't bother pursuing that path, unless you want to.)

hypocrite again

OMGUS is similarly ridiculous. I gave a reason that was independent of you voting me. If I hadn't then, yes, it is a scum-tell, however, if that is not the case, then the OMGUS accusation shouldn't give you a shield from ever being attacked by someone you are voting

Okay, okay, let's do it this way, explain why your post is fundamentally of different intent to that of dourgrim's, because I don't see that. I suspect we'll reach an impasse here, though.

Aren't you supposed to prove it does in some way? Because so far your not doing that and I asked to have anyone show me anything that is related in with that post.
Jack said:

Your post was similar to the dougrim guy in that the main thrust of it was "this is why magnus is suspicious".

Which I never used those words like Dour did and I showed reason's I found your logic and case faulty on EB.

Now you go off and show the similarities in the 2 cases and how they same in any way.

[farside22]

Now you go off and show the similarities in the 2 cases and how they same in any way.

This is not a useful way of framing it. Of course the posts have similarities, and of course they aren't the same.

Intent is nebulous, it is perceived by the scumhunter (sometimes mistakenly) and lied about by scum.

You are essentially demanding that he provide quotes to prove a gut call.

There's no point to continued argument here. Others will read and make their decisions.

Gut = intent?

Basically, you have declared that my position doesn't hold, for some unstated reason.

Because it doesn't and you haven't show any way it has.

Farside, it is odd that you thought Toon fighter was scummy enough to speculate that he was the jester, and unvoted magnus to vote him, but now have your vote back on magnus. I don't see anything you've said about him as being near as strong as "is this guy a jester?"

Why are you defending someone you called making crap up orginally?

notice my whatever post when i voted TF. It means it's not worth arguing as there was no jester in the game. TF is also not posting so what you want me to just sit there and not question the other person I find to be scum?

[farside22]

Why are you defending someone you called making crap up orginally?

notice my whatever post when i voted TF. It means it's not worth arguing as there was no jester in the game. TF is also not posting so what you want me to just sit there and not question the other person I find to be scum?

See, farside, everything you are accusing magnus of is stuff that townies do. Knee jerk reactions, hypocrisy, exaggeration, "lying", being wrong about other townies. To say that someone is acting like a jester is to say that they are doing something that

no townie would do

. Whether there is a jester in the game is irrelevant.

TF isn't posting, so it's perfectly suitable to go after magnus. But why is your vote on him rather than TF?

Townies lie while making a case and are hypocrites. Can you tell me who these players are because I have a black list of people I don't ever want to play with and those would be the type I dont' like?
There is no town reason to lie while making a case. If you can tell me how then you are defending scum because scum lie and make shit up all the time.
You want to say why being a hypocrite is town? The do as I say but don't do as I do attitude doesn't fly with kids so why would if fly in mafia?
I noticed this is the second time you didnt' answer my question.

[farside22]

magnus are you a lawyer?

intent defined:

in⋅tent1  /ɪnˈtɛnt/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [in-tent] Show IPA
Use intent in a Sentence
See images of intent
Search intent on the Web
–noun 1. something that is intended; purpose; design; intention: The original intent of the committee was to raise funds.
2. the act or fact of intending, as to do something: criminal intent.
3. Law. the state of a person's mind that directs his or her actions toward a specific object.
4. meaning or significance.

magnus seems to think I intented my case to be look here is scum and doesn't show how or why.
I showed questions that were not rethorical first. Then he saids I'm trying to convince people I was saying he was scum. Again not showing how or why.
Now he is holding this you had intent. Which clearly is an opinion he has and no fact behind it because again he has not show how or why my post had intent to begin with.
My orginal case was talking discussing the argument between EB and magnus which was the main thing going on that was not RVS or joke comment.
I saw Magnus was throwing acusations that did not jive with his case and I showed and said why. The comment for EB on post 40 looked like a joke comment. He says took it sericously from his comment. He votes EB for her answer on primate but again doesn't say why.

Every time I have made a point against magnus orginal case he backed off of his comment a bit and tried rewording something he didn't say before in his case. Then tries from another angle and so forth and exectra.
There are all scum moves in my view. He wants to asked questions and belittle people there is no town movtive except to make a player look small and pretend they have no clue what they are talking about. That to me is scummy.

I could go on but I was told walls of text make people hate you.
so for those who hate long post:

There is nothing I have seen pro-town come from magnus. He goes from hypocritical, wishy/washy, backtracking, lying and trying to change a case slowly but surely that wasn't there to begin with. This is called manipulation in laymen terms.

[farside22]

Long post in coming!!!

magnus orginal claim:

Town should be trying to ask me questions at this point, or at least trying to get me to talk more, scum will be trying to push town skepticism toward suspicion by making drawn out explanations, but not asking questions. (well, he does ask questions, but they serve rhetorical purpose, not inquisitive)

unvote vote: Farside22
I can point to games where this scumtell has been successful, if people want me to.

1) I asked questions and yes one was definately not retheorical. Claiming I'm not trying to get him to talk more.

However, that's still irrelevant, since Jack did not make an attempt to try and convince others of his opinion, so there's no real scum motivation behind it, just not fulfilling the town motivation. I wasn't lying when I said I assume that people are town unless I think I have reason to suspect otherwise.

Now we come more to this is trying to convince people that I'm saying scum lets lynch

However, I think that scum would be more likely make cases this early in the game that do not have systems for attempting to continue conversation to gather more evidence

Goes back to not trying to carry a converstaion even after I showed how my questions.

Tries to down play his own case here;

As to your other point, its not really relevant, because just because my point is scum like to try to convince town doesn't mean that scum don't also try to avoid making claims. Some scum behave differently than others. It would be silly to layout a single criteria and say that every scum you run into will behave exactly like this.

Richard isn't trying to convince people, he's just calling for more people...

Again not showing any evidence of this.

The meat of the argument;

Everything you posted was evidence for (1)
And then you reached the conclusion (3)
To get from (1) to (3) you need an implicit premise (2) which allows for the argument to work.
You never actually said (2). You threw up a bunch of stuff I did, and declared it to be scummy.
You never gave a reason why the actions I committed were scummy.

I note the same wording used when he is cornered by EB as well here:

I'd like to see your rationale for why my actions are scummy (you've only stated what actions you think are scummy). Especially given that what I've been doing, in your view, is just an extension of the RVS (now, I don't think that that's true, but it's interesting that you think the RVS [or at least, the thought behind it] is scummy)

belittle a case again:

I'm questioning the premise that if you can prove "magnus is making no sense" then it follows "magnus is scum"

While even if I agree I was making little to no sense, I contend that that still doesn't make me scum.

Yes, they showed, in essence things that I said, and then you declared each in turn, ridiculous.
Did you, or did you not, explain a motivation for why scum (and not town) would commit those actions that you have pointed out as me doing.

Now I have to show how town or why scum does these things

"Prove" is a very strong word. You've proven very little, if anything, in this game. To prove something is to show that, without any reasonable objection, something is absolutely true.

Being bombastic and disagreeing is not proving something wrong.

being a lawyer now

Affirming that I realized you had asked questions, but they were more statements of ridiculousness, not actual questions you intended to be answered.

back to this even though I showed a question that expected an answer

goes back to the old standby and seems to think he should not have to explain why

However, I think that scum would be more likely make cases this early in the game that do not have systems for attempting to continue conversation to gather more evidence. Its simply too early, there is simply too little information, for you not to want to try to gain more and make sure your right.

Surely I needn't quote you in order to explain why or how? There's my explanation, right there.

Shows no evidence of this theory. Continues in the didn't engage comments but clearly we are engaging each other at this point.

Offered to, in the post from which "magnus original vote and reason: " came from. Nobody asked for me to further back it up. This is just a reiteration of my original point, if you didn't get that the first time you read it.

Why would anyone have to ask for this. I don't know any town reason to hid or fluff a case from thin air

Here is how he is apperently reading the case I made and guessing how players react to the case:

"XYZ is scum, WAGON GO!" I'm not going to have people saying, "That makes perfect sense, I agree completely, 'WAGON GO!' totally convinces me that XYZ is scum, and I should vote for him"
Why? Because "WAGON GO!" offers nothing in the range of logic or reasoning, it is an emotional outburst that does not attempt to assert a defensible position. Does that make sense? If not, be sure to let me know, so I can further elaborate on this.

Oh and apparently he thinks his reasoning is obvious again which means if you don't get it apparently your dumb:

Yes, I would prefer that you ask me to explain or back something up, so that it doesn't leave me explaining things that are "obvious". You may have noticed I have none of that so-called "common sense", so I can't tell what should be obvious and what shouldn't.

Oh look now EB is being accused of the same thing here:

@EB: While I don't really care that you're voting me, I do want to point out something I found rather interesting.
At first I thought you were merely being cautious, but this recent vote calls that into question.
You see, you've been encouraging my lynch for a while now, saying things like "the magnus wagon is a good wagon" etc. etc.

more hypocrisy on OMGUS

You claim your ulterior motive was related to not voting, with the reasoning that you were afraid of "omgus". Well, I think omgus is a ridiculous accusation, said as much, so that fear should have been alleviated.

Tell me again is OMGUS scum or town modivated. Your calling it both leaves you ton's of wiggle room.

Except, they're not. And no matter what words you use, or what you call it, you can't change that my express intent was to provoke reactions, and your intent was not.

But he can say my intent was show he was scum and zomg lets lynch him with no evidence what's so ever.

Hey look here is the intent again

Link: http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=10974
The case doesn't have to be similar, the intent does, but I digress.

It was a rather outrageous accusation with very little substance, thus it would produce reaction.

LOL This is I said next to nothing to provoke a response but that's okay because it produced a reaction. Well guess what buddy my post may have been long but it certain produced a reaction from you.

Both, don't try to draw the conversation out to gather evidence. What I had said originally.

You want to point how my intent interwines with another player in another game I think that gives me a ton of rights to show you throwing crap up again.

They don't try to draw out the conversation to gather evidence and, instead, they attempt to convince other players of a position."

Oh look back to the old standby again I answered that I was drawing out conversation. Showed that I ased questions and so far nothing I can find in my post shows me convincing anyone of anything.

I still don't think that you were asking those questions with any intent in mind to actually get answers in your original post.

Tell me how this isn't scummy now?

Basically, just because he was more concise than you, it doesn't mean that his intent was any different.

Back to the intent of a player.

Which I never used those words like Dour did and I showed reason's I found your logic and case faulty on EB.

Dour showed reasons, he found my backing off a person to be suspicious, as well as parts of my tone, which he indicated. Difference of specific words doesn't count for much when it comes to intent of writing

Again this doesn't seem right. he wants to down play the case I laid out by comparing it to what Dour did saying tone and intent doesnt' change anything.

So basically for the reading impaired:

Cases from mag on far: go from not asking question, not provoking a response to intent to have him lynched and back and forth among the 3 over and over again completely ignoring his own comments he makes about intent.
Ignores questions asked and saying their rhetorical. Saying his intent because of a small post is to push conversation but mine didn't even though my post clearly did do that
Now magnus as held most dear to the intent word like a shield which in fact of the defination and my own knowlegdge of what I was saying and why I said it which god knows do I need to say again why I showed the case in the first place? intent is simply a feeling based on a post that has no evidence (IE gut) and I'm sure I could say till I'm blue in the face that my case is valid it marked with questions, comments and show's someone making a weak case off of a joke comment.

[farside22]

But farside, I agree with magnus about his impression of your post (my disagreement about the time was over the use of the word rhetorical). Does that make me mafia too?

How does my post show intent?

[farside22]

Does that make me mafia? Was my intent to evade your question because I didn't like it? After what you have said about magnus, how could you argue that this was scummy without being hypocritical?

I answered your question. If there is a question you feel I missed please point it out.
And I find you a hypocrite for saying I didnt' answer the question right away even with it 10 minutes later.
So are you going to avoid every question at this point and continue to protect magnus for no reason then I would call you scum together and EB's comment about scum bussing and retracting looking more likely since you have completely backed off of magnus and using condensation as a key to scum hunting.

[farside22]

Regardless of whether you thought it was scummy that I skipped your question, do you see the problem with insisting that magnus has to show intent? Ultimately most cases come down to gut, and the best you can do as explanation is point to what triggered your gut and give an approximate explanation.

I already did the above. But thanks so much for letting me know your are not reading my comments at all now.
But I don't use gut. I used the game and the argument between EB and magnus to provide a case on magnus. Or did you miss that case where I say post 40 is a joke vote and magnus push makes no sense. His constant hammering of a point is mute and not really understanding mostly if he is voting EB for his joke vote or his opinion of primate.

You know what my gut says to something I see like that. mmm that looks like scum pushing a crap case and while making others look bad in their views.

[farside22]

Jack wrote:
Game is too much jack-magnus-farside-EB at this point. I propose we lay off each other for the next 2 pages. Even if you are convinced of the scum to be found in here, you surely don't object to taking the time to look for other scum.

Agreeing with this for now but I will get back to Jack and magnus later and there points once everyone else post

[farside22]

vote: Toon Fighter

[farside22]

Anyone else just get whiplash?

@dana: What is wrong with Jack's vote? Could you also point out some of this poor logic?

Not only that but a very hypocritical comment.

[farside22]

unvote vote:kyle99

I've played a game with this guy as scum. This is how he acts. Opportunistic, lurky, no explanation. And did I mention wishy-washy?

What happened to your Jack vote? What is with the sudden switch here?

[farside22]

danakillsu have you ever played with Jack before?

[farside22]

Mod-Edit Votecount 2-3

danakillsu - 7

(Konowa, Seacore, Fate, Kairyuu, Kyle99, Haschel Cedricson, Anon)

Toon Fighter - 5

(Nul, farside22, bv310, RichardGHP, Jack)

Kyle99 - 2

(ElectricBadger, danakillsu)

Not Voting - 5

(DocPotter, Toon Fighter, Anon, Kise, DeeJayCee)

With 19 alive, it takes 10 to lynch.

Prodding Primate. Since I don't mind allowing lurking as a strategy, you'll need to call out specific names to prod if you want them prodded.

Also, DeeJayCee seems to be missing. I'ma seek out a replacement for him. (He's the only one who's not picked up his D2 notice)

---

Mod: Please prod any player that has not posted for day 2. I noticed Primate hasn't posted not sure who else is missing.

[farside22]

This is the last game I need to do my catch up post in.
I will try and get to it today.

[farside22]

Anyone want to give the the short versision on why TF hasn't been lynched?

[farside22]

What happened to our dana wagon? Gah.

Unvote:dana

Vote: Nul

wWhat the heck kind of vote is this. If you believe dana is scum shouldn't you be pushing for it?

primate asked:
Would you mind qualifying this? What he's saying now is more pessimistic, but the seeds of the behaviour are definitely there in that previous game.

in the newb game he was told what OMGUS is. He actually had view points in the game and commented more then just one liners I see in this game.
He asked questions and digged into reasoning that he has failed in doing this game.




Oh boy fate want to lurker lynch: scum tell 101
Nul has posted... twice. Definitely a better wagon.

Anon: Why is nul a dumb town in your view?

Nul wagon is full of phail.

Basically:

Posting to let everyone know I'm alive.

Unless something happens or toon manages to prove himself innocent, i will not be changing my vote.

An inexperienced scumbag rarely reinforces his vote.

So please dana wagon NAO.

Since when? It's easy to stay on a bw and offer nothing for scum.

Sorry, must have missed the post in your huge ISO where you said "Yeah, I'm all caught up now. Definitely keeping my vote on Toon."

I'll take your word for it and unvote you now.

Pfft
calling fate scum with this post alone


Nul: have you caught up if so what is your view on who is scum and why?

Fate:

Nul has a pretty strong stance, yeah, that just makes him stubborn scum that don't want to back off or find reasons to vote toon.

The quickest turn around in history of posting

unvote:
vote: fate

Still have 3 more pages to catch up but this is scum, scummy, scum.

[farside22]

Seeing as we are reaching Deadline and Nul doesn't show up I change my vote.

unvote, vote: dana

Why are you voting for dana?

[farside22]

Wait, I just isolated Toon and I think this is important.

Hey, I'm still here.

Looking at my own townie role, and magnus turned up townie, and no kill, I would guess that there is no scum and that is what's different. But that's just my speculation on setup.

I have alredy defended myself yesterday, and until new reasons to attack me pop up, I won't post more about them.

What does everyone make of this post?

I think this strongly leans to Toon being town.

I see that I win when all threats (mafia?) are gone. (paraphrasing)
Why would you see this as town?

[farside22]

^^scum with TF

unvote:
vote: Anon

pretty clearly I have a win condition for town. If you dont' have a win condition or dont' know what it is then your not town.

[farside22]

I just realized anon was defending TF's logic instead of pointing out the TF had the town win condition
Anon didn't quote where TF stated his win condition which confused me about his orginal comment.
Back to fate again

unvote:
vote: fate

[farside22]

Fate just earned himself some major town points right there.

Who wants to join him? Space is limited...

I think fate is scum.
Dana missing the claim and still pushing TF is scummy.
Your in dangerous category.

[farside22]

Ok we can oficially kill Fate now.

this ^

[farside22]

HAHA! Where is everyone's "I don't want a no-lynch lulz" BS reason to vote NOW, HUH?

HMMM!?

I'm still voting for you and you havent' responded to my reasoning. So now what.

[farside22]

Isn't it ironic that the only people on my wagon are the people that haven't posted in forever? I think TF's latest switch of his vote shows him for the scum he is.

pretty sure dana is scum. Keeps wanting to push TF. I see this as scum now as TF is the easy lynch target at this point.

[farside22]

I see this as scum now as TF is the easy lynch target at this point.

Why is he the easy lynch target?

VI's make scum happy and give them easy targets to mislead the town on.

[farside22]

DAMN IT!

[farside22]

Sorry farside.

I protected you too. So there you go.