Mini 855: Colorless Rainbow Town (Halted for list mod error)

[MonkeyMan576]

Vote: Zeenon

Anyone with a name that begins with Z is suspicious.

Also, the OP says that all scum get the goon PM. No scum power roles? Hmmmm...

[MonkeyMan576]

Hmm, ok, just confused by the part that said:

If you are Mafia,

you will have received this:

Quote:
Welcome to Rainbow Town Mafia! You are a Mafia Goon. You are allied with ____________. You are anti-town, and win when the Mafia controls the Vote. At night, you may communicate with members of your faction and collectively attempt to kill another player. Please confirm by PM.

BFE

[MonkeyMan576]

Why does it matter Monkey what roles are out there?

Knowing what the mafia can or cannot do definately helps town. Especially if they have no power roles, they are limited in what they can do. No roleblocking, no protecting, no cops? That would be a town advantage.

[MonkeyMan576]

Unvote:
Vote: Mancar

Only scum would be concerned about town knowing their role makeup. Not saying we do, but certainly suspicious.

[MonkeyMan576]

If Nikanor is afraid of you, than so am I.

And so you should be. For I am the spy that saps your puny SG.

Aside from all that, I find the MM/Manz conversation interesting. Immediately after the Rule had the listed quote, it further said...

Other players may have received role PMs describing other normal mafia roles, including but not limited to cop, doctor, vigilante, serial killer, mason,

role-blocker

,

traitor

,

poisoner

, survivor, miller, and

godfather

.

Emphasis mine. These are clearly proScum PRs.

It says that players may have received those roles, not that they did. The prior rule says that every scum will get the goon pm. The first rule seems more definative than the second one. I'm not saying that was the mod's intention but I thought it was worth bringing up.

[MonkeyMan576]

No was wondering why you were so concerned with the roles. Seemed a little like rolefishing to me.

Town rolefishing is scummy, Scum rolefishing is not. Anyone should be able to see that.

[MonkeyMan576]

Only scum would be concerned about town knowing their role makeup. Not saying we do, but certainly suspicious.

Jumpy monkey is jumpy. You are voting him for what is likely the same reason as why he was questioning you. You don't see that? Whats the difference between your suspicion of him based on role fishing, and his suspicion of you for questioning about roles?

I'm not questioning him for rolefishing, I'm questioning him for being concerned about scum rolefishing. I would think that scum would be concerned about the town knowing their roles, not town.

[MonkeyMan576]

I would think that scum would be concerned about the town knowing their roles, not town.

I agree on the Scum part, but why would the Town not be equally concerned of the Scum knowing their roles?

They would be, if someone was looking for town roles. I'm not aware of any mod rule that explicitly states what role townies have.

[MonkeyMan576]

thus why it felt like rolefishing.

There were no set rules stating what roles townies or scum have. So in my mind rolefishing is rolefishing. It's just a small step from fishing roles on townies or scum.

That's where my opinion differs from your opinion. There is a BIG difference. Knowing scum roles helps town. Knowing town roles helps scum.

[MonkeyMan576]

No i agree knowing scum roles helps town knowing town roles helps scum. Fishing for roles could actually bring out town roles you didn't mean to bring out so therefor fishing for roles is anti town.

We differ in that I feel fishing for roles is bad for town.

I think you're trying to disguise your scummy concern for the town knowing mafia roles. It's easy to discern town rolefishing and scum rolefishing.

[MonkeyMan576]

And I think you are hiding your town scummy rolefishing by acting like you are concerned with what roles the scum have in hopes that a power role will drop some sort of breadcrumb.

That's ridiculous. I'm not takling about town roles at all. Talk about misrepresenting my intentions.

[MonkeyMan576]

I believe I said I think which means it is my theory meaning that I am not saying that is what you are doing but what I feel about it. It is not misreping you by stating what I feel or believe or think.

So what did you intend?

My intentions were to find out if scum are indeed all goons. If they are, that would be a huge town advantage, and we could use it against scum for sure.

[MonkeyMan576]

So who was going to tell you this information?

Probably not the mod, but I felt it was at least worthy of bringing up, and it ended up giving us some interesting info about your possible motives as well. So it was certainly productive to me.

If scum were all goons, why would Mod list mafia roles in the list of possible roles?

Well, like I said, what threw me off was that the goon role pm rule sounded definitive, wheras the other possible roles rule did not sound definitive. I may be off track(about the rule, I'm fairly confident about Mancar), but it's just something about the wording that I noted as odd.

[MonkeyMan576]

So what is your evidence against me. ohhh yeah I questioned your motives for rolefishing. Okay its OMGUS.

No, raising a valid point is not OMGUS. OMGUS is a retaliation vote without valid reasoning.

[MonkeyMan576]

I'm going to butt in here and ask a few questions at Monkey. I don't fully understand his claims at the moment, and would like to get a better feel for him.

Why does it matter Monkey what roles are out there?

This was the question that sparked you two off each other. Right off the bat he generalized what you are calling 'scum rolefishing' and turned it into rolefishing in general. What do you feel about this generalization?

If he is townie, do you think he would be likely to generalize like that? Or do you think its more of a scum trait?

I think you said that townies should be concerned with general rolefishing, and that your rolefishing was different because it was localized on the scum. You really can't see a townie getting concerned when they see any sort of rolefishing going on? You think that your question didn't deserve any kind of attention?

I think it was fairly obvious that my rolefishing was directed at scum. I can percieve where a townie would be concerned with rolefishing in general, but to me it is more likely that he is scum worried about the town knowing their role makeup. Being concerned about scum rolefishing is scummy, being concerned about rolefishing in general without noting the difference between looking for scum info and looking for town info is suspicious at least. He continues to defend his position without recognizing my point.

[MonkeyMan576]

@Monkey
Ok, that's fair, and I kind of see where you are coming from. However, right from the get go, he threw your rolefishing in the box with general rolefishing. You can tell by the way he worded his first question to you.

I could see a cautious townie generalizing to be safe. I could also see a scum doing what you are suggesting, by deliberately generalizing your actions in order to base an attack off of. Could you tell me what makes you think the scum condition is more likely? Do you believe that the townie condition is not possible?

Sure, it's possible he's town. I just think it's more likely he's scum, because of the way he immediately attacked me, rather than try to understand my reasoning. It's the kind of antagonistic mindset that scum would be likely to have.

[MonkeyMan576]

I can percieve where a townie would be concerned with rolefishing in general

being concerned about rolefishing in general without noting the difference between looking for scum info and looking for town info is suspicious at least

I understand that you made a distinction about looking for scum/town info, but it seems like you offer up two different stances on general rolefishing within two sentences.

One can be suspicious without being true scum. His actions at least cause concern, and there could be possible scum motive.

[MonkeyMan576]

Attacked? Do you think that the single question he asked you before you voted him counts as an attack?

Do the questions I am asking you now count as an attack?

I think his intentions were clearly to incriminate me. I don't think you're attacking, because you're merely trying to gain information. The difference is, his actions are suspicious, if not incriminating, my actions and you're actions aren't.

[MonkeyMan576]

Why does it matter Monkey what roles are out there?

That's an attack or an attempt to incriminate you?

I can see where MM is coming from on the

potential

implication of this question. I do not read any sort of attack here, though. I likewise don't see any direct attempt to incriminate.

I didn't mean it was a direct attack. I meant that he was being over-antagonistic towards a player trying to get information that would be useful to the town.

[MonkeyMan576]

I don't even think it was antagonistic.

My point is I don't think a pro-town player would have asked the question, or implied my position was anti-town.

[MonkeyMan576]

Wait. I just went back and reread this interaction and it went as follows...

p8 MM- 'No Scum Power Roles.'
p11 Manz- 'Why does it matter?'
p14 MM- 'This is why I think it matters.'
p15 MM- 'Vote Manz b/c you're concerned about the Town knowing the Scum make-up.'

*disclaimer- These are paraphrases

That doesn't look right to me. You just said that you Voted because he was being 'over-antagonistic towards a player'. To me it reads as a player asking for clarification. You Voted

before

he made his supposedly scummy comments. Can you give me a bit more information about the initial Vote?

No, I don't think you get it.

Scum

would be worried about the

town

knowing about scum roles, which is what Manz expressed concern over. Town would be in favor of gaining scum-related information.

[MonkeyMan576]

I understand and agree. When I said 'you' in my paraphrase of p15, I was speaking in the first person as you. Notice I said 'I' in the same manner in p14. To put it another way, I was saying that you Voted Manz because he seemed concerned about the Town finding out about the Scum roles.

Regardless, my point stands. You claim that he was being over-antagonistic towards you while you were trying to find out potentially beneficial information for the Town. I'm saying that him asking 'why' in the context and timing of the discussion doesn't seem antagonistic to me.

Above you said that you don't think a proTown player would ask 'the question'. The question was 'why'. I am looking for clarification regarding your Vote against him.

I think the question shows his anti-town position regarding the issue.

[MonkeyMan576]

So to clarify, you Voted him because you felt that his asking...

Why does it matter Monkey what roles are out there?

...was anti-Town?

Yes, since it implies that he is against the town getting that sort of info.

[MonkeyMan576]

Seems like I have a lot of choices. Hmm.....
Well I would

Vote: Hero764

for being the last to confirm.....
Or I could

Unvote. Vote: Sweep

for confirming at the same time as me.....
Perhaps I will even

Unvote. Vote: d3x

for that awesome play on Fuzzywuzzy.....

But wait! I am definitely voting MonkeyMan576 after he mispelled my name.
It's ZEEnon, get the capitalation correct or else you are referring to someone else.

Vote: MonkeyMan576.

You do know that we're not in the RVS anymore, right?

[MonkeyMan576]

My point is I don't think a pro-town player would have asked the question, or implied my position was anti-town.

So you are very confident that Manzcar is scum, correct?

I'm leaning that way, I wouldn't say I was "very confident". His position is scummy, but town can have scummy positions.

[MonkeyMan576]

I thought you said you didn't think that a town-aligned player would have asked that. Am I wrong?

That's my position, yes. However, I usually like to have a read on more than one issue or action before I have an absolute position on someone's alignment. That is, I feel confident enough to vote him at this point, but I wouldn't advocate hammering him this early or only on one issue. I'd like to see some discussion on other players so we have options on who to hammer, it is far too early in the day to call for a lynch.

[MonkeyMan576]

I wasn't trying to attack nor incriminate only find out whether the intent was town leaning or scum leaning in rolefishing.

So you think that mafia would ask about their own roles for the purpose of rolefishing?

To rolefish and bring out possible town roles I think scum would do anything. To assume that they wouldn't is naive. It is WIFOM to say that scum wouldn't rolefish their own roles. it isn't like scum is going to drop breadcrumbs on their roles. If something doesn't make sense to me or seems off to me I will ask questions.

What I find funny is that Monkey keeps saying that I am attacking him and trying to incriminate him but all I did was ask a question. That is when he voted me. I am still not sure whether or not he is scum but I also feel that others need to get involved and more discussion needs to happen.

I still would like to see an actual case that isn't WIFOM on me. To say that I asked a question about someone rolefishing scum roles means I am scum makes no sense to me. There is no logic in it and it is based solely on WIFOM. I would like Zee or Monkey to explain why it is scummy rather than say a town player wouldn't question someone rolefishing scum roles because that is WIFOM. Because as far as I can tell that is all that there is to this argument.

You could claim discussion on any scummy behavior is WIFOM. Would scum hammer on L-1 without talking about it first? Wait, that's WIFOM!

[MonkeyMan576]

You could claim discussion on any scummy behavior is WIFOM. Would scum hammer on L-1 without talking about it first? Wait, that's WIFOM!

So then you believe that any claim of scum behavior made should be taken as valid whether or not there any real foundation for the claim?


Okay then. I say you are scum because you reacted very defensive to a simple question.

You have attacked me for no other reason than you don't like being pressured which is scummy behavior.

That's obviously not why I am attacking you. You are ignoring my argument.

You make leaps of reality to mean what you want in order to color someone as scummy.

It's not a leap of reality. You are scummy.

You also are twisting what I said to mean something it wasn't. The question was asking me if scum would do something. The answer is that it is WIFOM. WHY are you twisting reality to make it something it is not?

I'm saying that you calling it WIFOM doesn't make my argument any less valid. You haven't actually addressed the points of my argument.

VOTE MONKEY

Since you haven't actually raised a valid point against me, that is an obvious OMGUS.

[MonkeyMan576]

Sorry for the formatting errors there, my statements are the sentences that begin with "That's obviously", "It's not", "I'm saying" and "Since you".

[MonkeyMan576]

So where is your case against me. I have asked for it but you still can not provide a case other than to say I am scummy.

/facepalm...try reading the thread...

[MonkeyMan576]

Well, maybe Raivann should be the one to lay out the argument for Manz instead of me, then. I think I've already explained it enough, and there is some reasonable concern as to Raivann's understanding of it.

[MonkeyMan576]

[quote="Scien"]

I would still like you to briefly list out you case. I think both you and Manz are misrepresenting each other, and this has got me curious as to if this is intentional or not.

[quote="Manz"]

I don't believe I'm misrepping him. I've acknowladged that he could be town acting scummy, but he's not helping himself by not recognizing my point as valid and continuing to use silly counterarguments.

[MonkeyMan576]

Which argument was silly. I have recognized your points in many places. Which points am I not recognizing?

The point that looking for scum roles is pro-town.

[MonkeyMan576]

Which argument was silly.

Saying that I attacked you for "no reason"

Saying my case is WIFOM and without merit.

Saying my case is "leap of reality".

Saying I am twisting your words.

Saying my attitude is defensive, when it's not.

Saying my accusations are "wild".

Saying I am misrepping you.

Basically you are doing everything you can to discredit me without taking on the actual argument.

[MonkeyMan576]

I said knowing what scum roles were out there is good for town and protown several times.

Well that is totally opposite of your attempts to discredit me, and you showing concern for town learning that info in your opening post, but I appreciate your acknoladgement of my position. We have little to argue about at this point.

[MonkeyMan576]

Are you kidding me. Are you telling me that you continued to argue with me because you have missed the several time that I have said that knowing scum roles benefits the town?

Yeah, I must have missed it in between your superlatives, and it is still backtracking on your original post.

[MonkeyMan576]

Okay now

UNVOTE

by the way my original post was to find out if you were rolefishing and to find out why? My unvote is due to the fact that I now believe Monkey to be a paranoid townie, which is what I was trying to figure out.

Me being "paranoid" is contingent on you being town, which is hardly a given at this point. But it's always better to understand each other than engage in pointless arguments.

[MonkeyMan576]

For now I'll

Unvote

We can always lynch Manzcar if he is our best suspect at the end of the day, but it would be better to pursue other cases at this point...

Raivann, can you summarize the case against Manczar, and who do you believe is suspicious or scummy at this point?

[MonkeyMan576]

My point is I don't think a pro-town player would have asked the question, or implied my position was anti-town.

So you are very confident that Manzcar is scum, correct?

So you are very confident that Manzcar is scum, correct?

Scien's questioning can both be seen a pro-town and scummy, in my opinion. I have a null tell on him/her.

Why did you post this?

For now I'll

Unvote

We can always lynch Manzcar if he is our best suspect at the end of the day, but it would be better to pursue other cases at this point...

Raivann, can you summarize the case against Manczar, and who do you believe is suspicious or scummy at this point?

To which Manzcar case do you refer?

At this point I'm not sure on anyone, but I'm leaning scum on d3x, and I'm leaning town on Fuzzyman.

Why did you unvote again?Why can't you concentrate on other players with your vote still on Manz? Or did you have a change of heart?

Casebuilding is more effective if you have a vote to use. Right now I'm through building my case on Manzcar. There's only one major case. Do you understand the case or not?

[MonkeyMan576]

Yes, believe it or not MM & d3x, I can read and process information.

Okay, this is dodging at it's finest...

FOS: Raivann

[MonkeyMan576]

As you can tell from my fairly late reply, I cannot be on as frequently as I would like to. Therefore, I don't know what could happen from the time I sign out to the next time I sign in. For all I know, it's been a hectic weekend, and I was unable to sign on. Therefore, a lynch could be realized even before I could see it progress. I think that even without voting him, voicing my suspicions of him gives the same results as me actually voting him. Hell, I said I would be voting him. Therefore, I think it gives the same result.

I would go so far to say that 5 votes over a weekend is highly unreasonable to expect.

Are you suggesting that people shouldn't vote for who they find suspicious? What's wrong with 5 votes when it takes 7 to lynch? Moreover, two of the "votes" were FOS's, why are you exaggerating his condition?

[MonkeyMan576]

It sounds like he is saying a 5 person bandwagon is too much, but it's not really 5 people.

[MonkeyMan576]

As you can tell from my fairly late reply, I cannot be on as frequently as I would like to. Therefore, I don't know what could happen from the time I sign out to the next time I sign in. For all I know, it's been a hectic weekend, and I was unable to sign on. Therefore, a lynch could be realized even before I could see it progress. I think that even without voting him, voicing my suspicions of him gives the same results as me actually voting him. Hell, I said I would be voting him. Therefore, I think it gives the same result.

I would go so far to say that 5 votes over a weekend is highly unreasonable to expect.

Are you suggesting that people shouldn't vote for who they find suspicious? What's wrong with 5 votes when it takes 7 to lynch?

Monkey, as there are currently 2 votes on Raivann, I believe Fuzzy was saying that it is unlikely for 5 more Raivann votes to occur this weekend. Maybe you knew that and just have no problem with a quicklynch. Either way, I don't like how you cast suspicion on Fuzzy for merely saying that a quicklynch was unlikely. He was neither advocating for it or against it. To assume otherwise is plain scummy.

Quit twisting my words. Major, obvious word twisting. 5 votes does NOT mean quicklynch, and I specifically said that he was only on 2 or 3 votes.

[MonkeyMan576]

Quit twisting my words. Major, obvious word twisting. 5 votes does NOT mean quicklynch, and I specifically said that he was only on 2 or 3 votes.

I'm not quite understanding. By more count, 5 more votes over the weekend would be a quicklynch.

I didn't read it as 5 MORE votes, I read it as 5 votes. So my bad on that, but I am not in favor of a quicklynch, for the record.

[MonkeyMan576]

@MM- Now that we're all on the same page, what do you think of the original quote in that pyramid? ZEE is saying that he doesn't want to Vote because of the possibility of a quicklynch over the weekend. How viable do you think that is?

Quicklynches rarely happen unless there is a late scum bandwagon or there is strong public opinion against someone. Since we have both manczar and Raivaan as possible suspects at this point, I don't think a quicklynch is likely, or if it were to happen, the obvscum at the end of the lynch would give the town an advantage as far as info is concerned.

[MonkeyMan576]

With that interpretation of how it would go down, do you think ZEE withholding his Vote is questionable?

I'd say his reasoning is suspicious.

[MonkeyMan576]

I don't want to be the level 1 vote, and since I already FOS'd him(for avoiding questions, and for calling someone pro-town after only 2 posts, if anything the lack of posting is lurking, and anti-town), I'll

Vote: Raivann

[MonkeyMan576]

Sorry, alt.

[MonkeyMan576]

cruelty- Aside from telling us about things that annoy you {and have little game relevence}, how's about answering p168? Or commenting on the speed with which the Raivann wagon has built to L-2? Or stating an opinion of MM's reluctance to go L-1, but has no problem with L-2?

MM- Dizzle makes a great point. You went L-2 without batting an eye. There are more than one Scum in this setup, I'd assume. How does your play act as a deterent from an early Scum Hammer? It seems like you want to participate on a lynch without taking the responsibility of your actions. Also, if you just Voted him to L-2, why are you heavily entertaining the notion that Scum will Hammer? Doesn't that mean you think Raivann has at least a better than average chance of being Town aligned?

I wouldn't say I didn't bat an eye. I thought about it carefully. I have no problem taking accountability for my actions, I just don't want to give the scum opportunity to lynch without discussing it, and I've already voiced my suspiciouns of Raivann, so I figure I might as well be on the wagon. I am leaning scum on Raivann, although I still think Manczar is very scummy. Not sure which is more scummy though.

[MonkeyMan576]

I wouldn't say I didn't bat an eye. I thought about it carefully.

Touche. We can only see what you write and the brevity with which it's delivered. I was just saying that it's odd that you'd be willing to go L-2 but would actually voice a negative opinion about L-1 in the same post. That's all.

I don't think it's odd, it was more of a warning to anyone who votes next to consider that the next vote will be L-1. If they want to do that fine, but there is a big difference between L-2 vote and a L-1 vote, and I don't think we are ready for L-1 yet. I would still like there to be more discussion, but it is important for Raivann to understand the severety of our suspicions.

I am leaning scum on Raivann

Do you think that if Raivann is Scum, his partners would Hammer him early to stifle discussion and in essence silence him?[/quote]

It's possible, but it is also possible Raivann is town, and I'd prefer not to give scum the opportunity to hammer quite yet.

[MonkeyMan576]

MM-You say that you want more discussion and that you want Raivann to understand the gravity of the situation. You also say that you wouldn't rule out a Town flip on him. These are understandable points. Do you not have any questions for him so as to make a more secure decision on the player you just L-2 Voted? I

also

find that odd.

Well, he's been dodging the questions I've already asked him so I figured others might have more success than me. Probably more frustration than anything. But I have some questions below.

Re: Avoiding an early scum hammer, I'd rather have a L-2 be made by someone that knows what they're doing and warns of L-1 rather than someone that does it accidentally or who is scum doing it on purpose.

For Raivann:

1. Has your opinion on d3x changed since you fingered him earlier?

2. Why are you so hesitant to summarize the manczar case? D3x correctly stated that it was supicious that you voted without any real explanation of understanding the case against him.

3. Do you think it is more likely that scum would hammer you at L-1 or that an overzealous town would(if you are town).


5. Who are your top 3 scum suspects at this point. And who do you think are the top 3 towniest players?

6. If you were to be lynched, and flipped town, who do you think would be the most suspicious?

[MonkeyMan576]

Sorry about skipping 4... number dislexia I guess.

[MonkeyMan576]

I can see what MM is saying. If there are two (or more) scum, and Raivann isn't one of them (or he is and they've decided he's a liability) then they can hardly 1-2 hammer without some serious heat being fired their way. L1 is a different proposition, one guy with a convincing reason for his vote could hammer and slip away quite easily.

Sure, I guess, but if you're worried about scum being able to hammer at L-1, why even bring the vote count 1 step closer by making it L-2? Why not just give the warning about not lynching or getting to L-1 too quickly? Raivann knows he's amassed a good deal of suspicion so there's really no need for Monkey's vote at all. Raivann is back to L-3 now anyway, I think, but I still don't like Monkey's vote/explanation.

I've already explained I want my vote to be on the record, I'm guessing scum on Raivann at this point and to not vote would be anti-town. I think there's a good chance Raivann could eventually be lynched and I'd rather vote now than give scum the opportunity to vote at L-1. If people have a problem with my vote, I'll unvote if they are worried about a scum lynch.

[MonkeyMan576]

I'm not worried about a scum lynch, especially at L-3. I am worried that you want your vote to be on the record.

Why would I not want my vote to be on the record if I think he's scum?

[MonkeyMan576]

Yes, a good townie wants to vote out scum but he ultimately shouldn't care whether he is the one doing the voting. All that matters is that scum are lynched. On the other hand, scum who want to give the appearance of being good townies will vote each other out to gain townie points.

I really don't see what the point in withholding my vote would be if I believe there is a strong case against him. Are you suggesting I don't vote for him so I don't look like I'm trying to build town cred?

[MonkeyMan576]

[At Raivann] Who are your top 3 scum suspects at this point. And who do you think are the top 3 towniest players?

Why ask about the townies? Who do you think it serves more to tell the town about your townie feelings?

I think any info is good for the town. Why do you think info is bad for the town?

[MonkeyMan576]

I've already explained I want my vote to be on the record, I'm guessing scum on Raivann at this point and to not vote would be anti-town. I think there's a good chance Raivann could eventually be lynched and I'd rather vote now than give scum the opportunity to vote at L-1. If people have a problem with my vote, I'll unvote if they are worried about a scum lynch.

So does that mean if a scum gets lynched and there are 3 people on on the wagon, are those 3 people your next top suspects since them not being on the wagon is "anti-town"? Also, I don't like that you are worried about what other people think of your vote. It's not the vote people were attacking...it's you basically holding up a big neon sign saying "Hey guys, for the record, I voted for scum!!" That's what is bothering people including myself. The fact that you want to "make others happy" by removing your vote if they say to do so also bothers me. If you think he's scum, who cares what others think about your vote? It's supposed to be your opinion. If it bites you in the ass later, well, it bites you in the ass. Only scum truely care about how they look in others eyes. Town care about finding and lynching scum. So yeah, the above questions to be answered please.

I think you're misinterpreting what I'm saying. I'm not voting because I'm worried about what people think about my vote. I'm voting because I believe he's scum.

[MonkeyMan576]

I singled your vote because your vote came immediately after Zeenon 'passed' on answering the question Raivann asked about why Zeenon thought you were 'null' if your behavior was striking him as both town AND scum. The implications seem pretty obvious to me.

You also tried to 'pass' discussing this at all. This is bad for You, because if someone was saying "This person is both townish and scummy, I'm not going to talk abou tthem", and then passed on further qualifying, *I* would personally be worried that that person might be a scum trying to lay the rails down for a "one-two" mafia lynch later on. IE - YOU should be getting on Zeenon as well, NOT targetting Raivann. My post was to Completely bring out into hte open, something that I see as now TWO (maybe more) players trying to sweep under the carpet. Sinec both players in that partnership, Zeenon, AND scien, have both now tried to avoid that situation by focusin on *everything* else, my suspicions are much more concrete.

Are you playing this game? I don't see you on the roster.

[MonkeyMan576]

Ah, ok.

[MonkeyMan576]

Jason, I hope you get better, but I've stated the Manzcar case many times and I don't appreciate you saying I'm dodging it.

[MonkeyMan576]

How can you have had a town read on Fuzzy when he made two posts? Answered already.

Eh, I'll give you that you answered. It still seems strange after your answer however, and it didn't clear my concerns. Sorry for not pulling it out of the list of my current questions to you.

[1] I didn't look when Manz voted. I know MM voted Manz early then Manz voted MM, then they both unvoted each other. But to tell truth the whole argument was kinda boring to me, I might have posted without really knowing who was saying what. I knew MM made his post about poss. scum roles then d3x and Manz argued with him about it.
[2] Didn't you agree with MM that I should summarize a case on Manz?

[1] Manz voted MM much later in that whole discussion, and I'll give you that it was boring. I mean dang, it was boring to me too. That's why I was looking elsewhere at that time. I guess my question was designed to point out that it didn't seem like you were following the game. If you were truly bored, that could be a reason why you were not doing so. Could you tell me why you think that discussion bored you?

[2] Yes. I believe a more accurate representation of what I said however was, if you are going to come in and toss suspicion towards both party's you should say way you are doing so. Here I'll quote it for everyone:

[To Monkey] Well he can [post his case on Manz] if he wishes. If he does I would like him to back up his griefs on you as well since he said he suspected you in almost the same breath as he said he suspected Manz. People shouldn't just go around tossing out suspicion without talking about it.

What was dx3's first scummy post in your eyes? I screwed up here, I went back and read d3x and that was only scummy post i could find, hence my unvote. I was thinking there was somethin in the posts where he was questioning MM, but yeah there wasn't.

This is a completely valid answer. I give you town points for admitting a mistake, and admitting that you actively went back to check for backing. You didn't try to build a weak scum case or anything.

Why do you think the play of dx3 is scummy vs Fuzzy's play before post 125?
d3x was for his case against me, but I have changed my views on d3x.

Hmm. That's almost fair too. Why did your views change?

---

Actually your answering so far helps a bunch. I would like answers for my d3x question as as well as why you were bored at game start. I am willing to unvote if you cooperate here.

Would you support a Zeenon lynch, Scien?

Hmm. I have questions to him, and he has been lurking recently. I think he is my next target for scrutiny if you answer my last two concerns above. So I have to say yes. In fact let me

FoS: Zeenon

not answering my questions, and lurking.

[still catching up with posts after 259 my thoughts on those later]

I appreciate Scien giving Raivann a chance, but he's agreeing with some stuff that is clearly scummy. Saying that the Manzcar discussion was "boring", possibly trying to derail the Wagon with a Zeenon wagon, giving Raivann "town points" for defending himself better, when he is clearly still behind on town points overall. It's like saying someone is a good baseball player for batting .240, because he was batting .180 before. I'm questioning the logic here, and the possibility of a Raivann/Scien scum team.

[MonkeyMan576]

Saying that the Manzcar discussion was "boring".

It was boring. Manz generalized what you were saying, and I believe it was due to townish concerns. You stretched his meaning, I believe for townie concerns. The only think I got out of that is that you both are willing to fight for your concerns. But the actual points you were raising on each other I think were pretty much 'meh'.

Hence boring. Other's people's reactions with the situation at that time however were more interesting.

possibly trying to derail the Wagon with a Zeenon wagon

There is no wagon yet. I just want my questions answered. Where is Zeenon anyway?

giving Raivann "town points" for defending himself better, when he is clearly still behind on town points overall.

I gave him points for admiting a mistake. It would have been just as easy to come up with something of d3x's and called it scummy to justify his 'another scummy post' claim. Instead he owns up. Seems ok to me, and removes one of my criticisms of him. Townie points awarded. Or scum points removed... however you want to phrase it.

It's like saying someone is a good baseball player for batting .240, because he was batting .180 before.

Heh. I never said he was looking town now. More that he was looking more neutral these days.

Let's use your analogy. If our team is mostly batting .300, he was batting .100. He answered some questions, and removed a couple of my concerns. That raises him to batting .200. My votes not off him, because I want him to answer my new questions. When he does, that will most likely bump him up to .250 (the fuzzy townie read is still kinda negative in my mind). At that point there are people under .250 I want to look at and he is not worth my vote anymore.

Well, I'm still suspicious of the buddying, although I agree Raivann might be bad town rather than scum. It's hard to tell at this point.

[MonkeyMan576]

I appreciate Scien giving Raivann a chance, but he's agreeing with some stuff that is clearly scummy. Saying that the Manzcar discussion was "boring", possibly trying to derail the Wagon with a Zeenon wagon, giving Raivann "town points" for defending himself better, when he is clearly still behind on town points overall. It's like saying someone is a good baseball player for batting .240, because he was batting .180 before. I'm questioning the logic here, and the possibility of a Raivann/Scien scum team.

His VERY NEXT post

Well, I'm still suspicious of the buddying, although I agree Raivann might be bad town rather than scum. It's hard to tell at this point.

Talk about your flip-flop! That sounds like scum trying to cover their mislynching azz. Or am I just crazy? Hell, the only post in between those two post was from Scien.

Monkey wrote:
Saying that the Manzcar discussion was "boring".

It was boring. Manz generalized what you were saying, and I believe it was due to townish concerns. You stretched his meaning, I believe for townie concerns. The only think I got out of that is that you both are willing to fight for your concerns. But the actual points you were raising on each other I think were pretty much 'meh'.

Hence boring. Other's people's reactions with the situation at that time however were more interesting.

Monkey wrote:
possibly trying to derail the Wagon with a Zeenon wagon

There is no wagon yet. I just want my questions answered. Where is Zeenon anyway?

Monkey wrote:
giving Raivann "town points" for defending himself better, when he is clearly still behind on town points overall.

I gave him points for admiting a mistake. It would have been just as easy to come up with something of d3x's and called it scummy to justify his 'another scummy post' claim. Instead he owns up. Seems ok to me, and removes one of my criticisms of him. Townie points awarded. Or scum points removed... however you want to phrase it.

Monkey wrote:
It's like saying someone is a good baseball player for batting .240, because he was batting .180 before.

Heh. I never said he was looking town now. More that he was looking more neutral these days.

Let's use your analogy. If our team is mostly batting .300, he was batting .100. He answered some questions, and removed a couple of my concerns. That raises him to batting .200. My votes not off him, because I want him to answer my new questions. When he does, that will most likely bump him up to .250 (the fuzzy townie read is still kinda negative in my mind). At that point there are people under .250 I want to look at and he is not worth my vote anymore.

I don't like this play from MM at all. First off, I'm getting a town read from Scien at this point. Secondly, his is the only post in between the first quoted post from MM and the second. This is pretty much a scumslip in my eyes. Going to go back now and take a nice long look at MM. Before you go saying, "what, are we not aloud to change our minds" or some other similar post, note that I already explained why this wouldn't be ok (it's too quick in case you missed my above points). The other reason this wouldn't be ok, is because you didn't explain at all why you had such the sudden change of heart. Going from full throttle lynch someone to maybe they are town so quick just reeks of scum.

Also note: You say there is a possible scien/raivann team in one post then take Scien's explanation at face value the next? I don't even need to go back on you in order to

VOTE: MonkeyMan

....I am still going to though.

I'm not against the Raivann lynch, I'm keeping options open for discussion. Scien raises some good points. You would have me stay on one person the whole time?

[MonkeyMan576]

I would like you to explain how you can say "I'm questioning the logic here, and the possibility of a Raivann/Scien scum team. " then suddenly Scien (someone you just got done calling scum-mate with Raivann) makes some "good points" and all a sudden....

I think it's scummy. Hence my post. And I already told you that a simple post like the one you just posted was not gonna be a good enough explanation for me. Seriously...read the end of my post...I'll even re-post it for you.

Before you go saying, "what, are we not aloud to change our minds"

or some other similar post

, note that I already explained why this wouldn't be ok (it's too quick in case you missed my above points).

It's not adding up. I don't see how you say there's a possible team then take one of the persons on that team's post and say it had good points. If you thought there was a possible team, why would you even consider one of those people on that team that their post would be good advise or points? Shouldn't you take it with a large grain of salt? You would if you were town.

It's called being on the fence. Not everything is always black and white. On the scum side of things, they could be a possible team, but if Raivann starts behaving more townish, then Scien's points could be valid.

[MonkeyMan576]

It is funny that I seem to ripped a new one no matter what I post though.

Take now for instance, if I talk with Scien I'm suspicious.
If I ask questions like would you support Zeenon lynch, I'm suspicious.
Which is a good question, BTW.

Huh. It's like you're pulling for some sympathy here. Sucks. Rather than feeling sorry for yourself (after all this is a game and I don't think anyone is deliberately picking on you or anything) how about changing your gameplay to more aggressively scumhunting? Withdrawing into your shell with woe is me posts just reinforces my confidence in my vote placement. If I'm wrong, prove me wrong.




I also tend to agree with Chinaman that MM is alarmingly easily swayed - I don't really understand how you can think two people are possibly a scum team, and then let one of them convince you that perhaps the other isn't scum at all. Changing tack like that is so horrifically dangerous to town..

All I said is that I want to hear more from him. A lot of time's there can be a rush to judgement, especially on day 1, and players that don't present themselves well aren't scum, just players that don't present themselves well.

[MonkeyMan576]

Unvote:
Vote: Zee

Would definately like to hear more from him.

What's your opinion on the Manzcar case?

[MonkeyMan576]

Wow, I can honestly say I wasn't expecting a Modkill. I can also honestly say that I am buying into a town being swayed by a post and maybe just coming on too strong at the beginning...thing. Right now, since Raivann flipped scum, I will

UNVOTE

due to my main suspicion being surrounded around Raivann/MM connections. It originally seemed like an MM going after largest wagon then backtracking once wagon died down a bit.

Look forward to your post on why Scien is scum. I have a stronger town read on him than scum right now.

How can you say I was backtracking when my vote was still on Raivann when he was modkilled?

[MonkeyMan576]

I'm waiting for Zeenon's case on Scien.

[MonkeyMan576]

do I detect a whiff that you are happy about [Raivann being modkilled]?

Was this directed at Fuzzy or myself?

Right now, since Raivann flipped scum, I will UNVOTE due to my main suspicion being surrounded around Raivann/MM connections. It originally seemed like an MM going after largest wagon then backtracking once wagon died down a bit.

My argument on you died with Raivann.

I'm not sure I agree with this line of thinking. Go ahead and re-evaluate things, of course, but it's just as likely that scum (MonkeyMan) saw the hole Raivann had dug himself and wanted to get his antiscum vote "on the record." It's also a little early this time to qualify as bandwagon jumping, but it's become a pattern of behavior for Monkey add his vote to cases that are picking up steam. He saw the 2 votes on Zee and immediately made himself the 3rd vote. Given Monkey's behavior during the Manzcar episode, his explanation for his Raivann vote and his latest mostly unexplained vote for Zee, I think it's time for my first vote of the game.

Vote: MonkeyMan576

I'm not sure what kind of defence you expect me to put up to that. It seems like pretty petty reasons for a vote when there are people a lot more strongly linked to defending Raivann than me.

[MonkeyMan576]

I'm not sure what kind of defence you expect me to put up to that. It seems like pretty petty reasons for a vote when there are people a lot more strongly linked to defending Raivann than me.

Other than sensing a mounting of suspicion of Zee and increasing pressure for him to unveil his synopsis, why did you vote for Zee?

That's pretty much it. I recognized him as lurking, and bringing out lurkers is pro-town.

[MonkeyMan576]

I recognized him as lurking, and bringing out lurkers is pro-town.

I kinda think that this statement is a bit misleading.

In my opinion,

lurking is anti-town.

Bringing out lurkers is a null tell.

If scum realises someone is lurking, it's in their best interest to draw attention to this as well - it takes the heat off them.


I think Zeenon's return to the game will shed some light on exactly what's going on here. For now though;

FoS: MonkeyMan

So according to you I should ignore someone who's lurking. That really makes sense.

[MonkeyMan576]

That's not what I said. Don't twist my words.


Claiming that you're pro-town because you noticed a lurker is, in my eyes, a null tell. That doesn't mean ignore them, it's just that it's to everyone's benefit to put heat on lurkers.


You're rapidly changing your mind, you're claiming pro-town activities when they're not anything of the sort, and you're twisting my words. It's all rather scummy. I'm not going to vote because of the Zeenon factor, but you're on notice.

I'd say withholding your vote is scummier than anything you've attacked me on. Seems that you don't want to take sides so you can leap on whatever the prevailing wagon is.

[MonkeyMan576]

Well that's just clutching at straws.

I would happily vote for you if it wasn't for the fact that I'm waiting on Zeenon to get back into the game. If you look at post 308, I have a question for Zeenon waiting to be answered - of course I'm not going to rashly vote for you. That would be premature and foolish.

Then it stands to reason your argument against me is premature and foolish.

[MonkeyMan576]

Again, nope.

But explain that. How does waiting for

Zeenon

make my argument against

you

premature and foolish?


(If anyone else wants to weigh in, feel free).

Again, nope.

But explain that. How does waiting for

Zeenon

make my argument against

you

premature and foolish?


(If anyone else wants to weigh in, feel free).

It just looks like you're trying to play both sides without having to take a stance, so that whichever side benefits you more later on you can take advantage of, rather than having an actual argument.

[MonkeyMan576]

And as promised, you'd all know when I was caught up.

Ok, first things first.

Mod- You're prodding everyone, so I don't have to request that, however, are we replacing Hero? He hasn't posted since... well, since before the 1st Mod said he was going to let you handle replacing him.

Second-

Vote:MM

The short version is I don't like the tendency you've shown for doing something and then saying that it's proTown. Let the Town decide what is and isn't proTown. I'm almost at a Null Tell on this because it'd be ridiculous to be that obvious, but that dips a bit too much into WIFOM for my taste. The long version will have to wait for the moment, I'd rather get some discussion going first.

Third- It's great that we got this extension, but we need to make the most out of it. We're still only 5 days away from deadline. Let's kick the tires and light the fires, ladies!

I don't think there is anything wrong with pointing out something as being pro-town if someone is attacking you. It is suspicious if you are just doing it out of thin air.

[MonkeyMan576]

I don't think there is anything wrong with pointing out something as being pro-town if someone is attacking you. It is suspicious if you are just doing it out of thin air.

Well, I agree with you there. I guess the difference in opinion is that I feel like you

are

doing it out of thin air. It's not like someone is listing your moves as Scum Tells and you're arguing that they're clearly proTown. Take the most recent instance. Dizzle asked why you Voted ZEE. Your response was...

I recognized him as lurking, and bringing out lurkers is pro-town.

I wouldn't have a problem if you had said you were suspicious because he was an obvLurker. That's not what you said, though. You said, 'He's an obvLurker and me pointing it out is obvTown'. {<- obvSummary }

Ultimately, it reads to me like you're trying

awfully

hard to seem proTown.

Well, you're entitled to your opinion. Seems an awful lot like WIFOM to me. I think it's natural to want to seem pro-town when someone is attacking you. It would be one thing if I was just going after lurkers, but I was also attacking Raivann, who was not exactly lurking.

[MonkeyMan576]

Also, answer this.

the quality of most of the players left in this game has gone down considerably, you'd think they'd still be just as susceptible to naders

And also tell me exactly how your original response to this (quoted here)

It just looks like you're trying to play both sides without having to take a stance, so that whichever side benefits you more later on you can take advantage of, rather than having an actual argument.

isn't
a) avoiding my question.
b) OMGUS.

I think it's natural to want to seem pro-town when someone is attacking you.

You're artificially trying to create a pro-town persona for yourself. Pointing out lurkers isnt pro-town in and of itself, pointing out that you're doing so and are therefore pro-town is just scummy.

Because it's a valid point. OMGUS is thrown around an awful lot and people don't understand what OMGUS really is, which is voting someone after they vote you and not providing a reason.

[MonkeyMan576]

I think it's natural to want to seem pro-town when someone is attacking you.

Again, I don't believe you were being attacked on that point. In the above example, Dizzle was just asking you why you Voted ZEE. Aside from that, wanting to seem proTown and blatantly calling your own play proTown are 2 very different things.

As to you 'attacking' Raivann, you clearly said that you wanted your Vote on Raivann to be 'on record'. It's never really sat well with me, but it got dropped for want of jucier conversation after a few posts. Your p200 reads exactly like the 'bringing out lurkers is proTown' comment. It doesn't help the fact that you end p200 by saying you'd be ok taking your Vote off if the Town didn't want it there.

It feels like you're trying to appease us and tell us why you're proTown instead of showing us. Oh, and you did say...

I already FOS'd him(for avoiding questions, and for calling someone pro-town after only 2 posts, if anything the lack of posting is

lurking

, and anti-town)

{emphasis mine} This wasn't

that

long ago, so I'd be careful saying that he wasn't exactly lurking when it was clearly a reason for you to start in on him.

It was one of the reasons, then he started posting again, so he wasn't lurking anymore. But I very clearly had reasons for voting Raivann besides lurking.

I can see your suspicions, and there is some validity to them, but I am just frustrated at every vote I make being questioned, where others are getting free passes on their lurkiness. I think people are wanting to see things as scummy that really aren't.

[MonkeyMan576]

I didn't even realize I had been ninja'd there!

cruelty- Where did your quote {"the quality of most of the players..." } come from? I just combed over your Iso and didn't find it.

-------------

@MM- I take note that you didn't respond to my entire post. In fact, you spent more time on my afterthought than the main thrust. As this can be written off to a mere difference of opinions, I'll let it slide. As this isn't the first time you've done it with me {see p194 for full details}, I'm still bringing it up.

Your point on lurkers is a valid one, however scummy behaviour trumps lurkers in my book every day. I have not come after you for "every Vote", so please do me the courtesy of not lumping me in with a generic 'they/them'. It also comes across as a tad bit AtE-ey. Just sayin'.

You're even saying some of my suspicions are valid, so I'm not seeing how you can say that I'm seeing scummy things that really aren't scummy. If that's not what you're saying, I retract that last sentence.

On to the lurkers, who specifically do you think needs more attention? How would you suggest we get lurking players to not get 'free passes'? Are you suggesting a policy lynch of LynchAllLurkers?

My point is that if I was trying too hard to seem town, I would be suspicious of the same thing, but that's not what's happening here. I think what's happening is you're trying to isolate things that sound scummy and not looking at the overall picture.

I'm not necessarily in favor of LAL, if there is someone that is a better lynch target, but in the abscence of a good lynch target, it's certainly a valid strategy.

[MonkeyMan576]

Also, OMGUS = counter attack based solely on the fact that someone attacked you. Which is what you're trying to do here:

I'd say withholding your vote is scummier than anything you've attacked me on. Seems that you don't want to take sides so you can leap on whatever the prevailing wagon is.

here:

Then it stands to reason your argument against me is premature and foolish.

here:

It just looks like you're trying to play both sides without having to take a stance, so that whichever side benefits you more later on you can take advantage of, rather than having an actual argument.

You've basically said the same thing twice and thrown in a ridiculous retort for colour. You're not advancing your game at all, you're not bringing up any valid points... this is you trying to make me look like the bad guy for questioning you.

I've advanced the game plenty. I was a part of the attack on Raivann that eventually led to him saying "I'm not having fun" in frustration and thus getting modkilled. I've called for Zeenan to speak up. I'm not sure what you think you're doing that I'm not.

[MonkeyMan576]

So... you were a part of the Raivann bandwagon, and you were also amongst the numerous people who commented on Zeenon being inactive. Kudos.


You still haven't answered my question in 351.

I already said I wasn't OMGUSing you, and you were taking a very liberal approach at the definition. I'm not dodging anything, but it is possible I'm not aware of the question.

[MonkeyMan576]

I'm not dodging anything, but it is possible I'm not aware of the question.

...

vote: MonkeyMan576

Okay, now you're full of it. You're clearly more interested in pointing fingers and not being an object of interest than actually having a discussion.

[MonkeyMan576]

Oh, ok.

You're not discussing anything. If I ask a question, you ignore it (although oddly you address the fact that I'm asking about you not responding to my question), if I hint that you're scum you call me scummy for holding my vote.


Now we find out that if I vote for you, I'm now "pointing fingers". Additionally, I'm probably the most active right now, I don't think I'm exactly hiding in the shadows here, and I think that my posts are pretty clear. So I don't think your accusation of me attempting to "not [be] an object of interest" is a viable one.

I never said you were lurking, I said you chose to mindlessly vote for me rather than address my responce, which was that you may have asked a question and I didn't notice it.

[MonkeyMan576]

mod: manczar was replaced.

MOD NOTE: Skruffs has replaced Manzcar.

Vote count in a few minutes.

Anyway, I'm a little concerned Zeenon is deliberately active lurking. I'm not against a Zeenon lynch if he doesn't post within the next day or two.


(That's not to say I'm not suspicious of you MM).

If you're so convinced I'm scum wouldn't you be against the lynch I am for?

[MonkeyMan576]

If Zeenon is active lurking that supersedes any suspicion I have of MM.

That's rather convenient that you can say that you are suspicious of Zeenon's lurking and me. They seem to be rather mutually exclusive at this point, as by saying you are suspicious of Zeenon, you are supporting the wagon I am on.

[MonkeyMan576]

Unvote

Appreciate Zeenon trying to contribute, hopefully it will be on a more steady basis.

Re: Cruelty, he says the same thing over and over and there really isn't any substance to it.

FOS: Scien

Zeenan brings up some good points and I'm starting to reconsider the Raivann/Scien sumpair theory. The lynch on Raivann was running pretty smoothly and Scien seemed intent on slowing it down.

[MonkeyMan576]

Scien seemed intent on slowing it down.

Can you specifically point to where?

Pretty much starting @267.

[MonkeyMan576]

MM- Thank you. Now, why are you blatantly refusing to answer questions?

I'm not refusing to answer anything. List the questions I'm not answering and I'll answer them.

[MonkeyMan576]

Sorry, alt.

[MonkeyMan576]

1 - Where in the last few pages have you been proactively scumhunting?

I've been a pretty steady scumhunter throughout the day. The last few pages I've been concentrating defending myself.

You cannot use other people as evidence that you're not guilty. I don't want to keep bringing it up but the setup allows for more than one anti-town group (eg: sk), and that's ignoring the possibility of bussing.

There is a precedent for your alignment being determined by your actions with other people, but they have to be YOUR actions. Citing what other people think of you as quasi-conclusive proof that you're not scum is illogical.

I never said anything was quasi-conclusive. I'm just citing why I think I'm not scummy.

So everytime you post you're pro-town, it's your subconscious hitting the keyboard? What do you actually mean to say here?

I mean there are times when people act more defensive and times when people act less defensive, based on how other players are acting, independant of their alignment.

Being defensive is not a scum tell, in fact players that defend themselves well end up being town more often than not, so it could be seen as a town-tell.

Do you think you're defending yourself well?

I'm trying to, but yes, in a short answer.

[MonkeyMan576]

I am suggesting that you are doing exactly that, trying too hard to seem Town; so much so that you are physically pointing out what

should

gain you Town points.

what's happening is you're trying to isolate things that sound scummy and not looking at the overall pictureWell, they say that the Devil's in the details. Ok, I'll play it your way. What is the overall picture that I should be looking at?

That overall I've been valuable to the town, I was on the Raivann wagon, I was fingered as scum by Raivann, so obviously he was trying to get you to think I was scum.

in the abscence of a good lynch target

Are you suggesting that we don't have a "good lynch candidate"?

Right now I would support a scien lynch. In fact,

Unvote:
Vote: Scien

it's certainly a valid strategy. Here's what concerns me. In my first game {Newbie 782} we did exactly that. The Town decided to lynch a lurker instead and it helped my partner and I to secure a perfect Scum victory. It was glorious.

Well, that's certainly a valid concern. But that's not what's happening here. Lurking is definately a scum tell and deserves to be treated as such and with consequences.

On to the lurkers, who specifically do you think needs more attention? How would you suggest we get lurking players to not get 'free passes'?You answered one question of this batch, so I left it off.

By lynching lurkers if there's not a scummier player to lynch.

Again, I don't believe you were being attacked on that point. In the above example, Dizzle was just asking you why you Voted ZEE. Aside from that, wanting to seem proTown and blatantly calling your own play proTown are 2 very different things.

That's a valid observation, but I only called my play pro-town in the context of being questioned/attacked, which I believe was the case.

As to you 'attacking' Raivann, you clearly said that you wanted your Vote on Raivann to be 'on record'. It's never really sat well with me, but it got dropped for want of jucier conversation after a few posts. Your p200 reads exactly like the 'bringing out lurkers is proTown' comment. It doesn't help the fact that you end p200 by saying you'd be ok taking your Vote off if the Town didn't want it there.

It feels like you're trying to appease us and tell us why you're proTown instead of showing us. This isn't a question, but you didn't respond to it, so I'm listing it. You put something vague down about my suspicions being valid, but 'people' are seeing scummy things where there aren't scummy things. You can't have it both ways, MM. Either my suspicions are valid {you're acting scummy} or people are jumping at shadows {you're not acting scummy}. If the later is true, then you haven't even begun to adress my issues with you.

The "on the record" statement is being over-analyzed. I did not mean that my vote on Raivann was not a real vote. I meant that I thought Raivann was going to be lynched, and since I felt strongly that Raivann was scum, I wanted to be helpful and be on the wagon.

Also, as these aren't hidden, cleverly disguised to trip you up, or make you think they're rhetorical, how are you...

not refusing to answer anything

...? You were...

not aware of the question

...? Bullsh!t. You've already played that card. The point is, you can answer these, but it's about the third time it's happened with me alone.

I'm having multiple questions asked of me by multiple people. I understand your frustration, but not answering questions isn't intentional on my part.

[MonkeyMan576]

Cruelty: Your response with the whole lurker vs. MM is understandable. I will however disagree with you when you said MM hasn't made any scumslips that are obvious and undeniable. I will explain below.

OK, so nobody except MM actually posted about ZEE's ISO on known scum. This is curious to me but doesn't mean anything yet. Cruelty, you obviously read ZEE's second post thus I'm assuming you read his first (the ISO). Why did you choose not to comment on any of the meat and only comment on the fat so to speak (ZEE's second post). I read both and decided that the second post was more of a rant than anything to take into consideration. It's actually something I could see myself posting out of emotion or annoyance. Although I may not be fully behind ZEE's posts, I will say that I see what he was trying to point at most of all. The game was practically dead. Everyone, including myself, seemed as though we would rather wait for a substantial post from ZEE than come up with one on our own. Not pointing any fingers as I was there as well, but truth be told, the game was slow, and now has picked up thus validating his point in his second post imo.

ZEE: I will agree with cruelty however that you (ZEE) did not really address the questions put out to you which is what I think more people were waiting for than your actual ISO and scumhunt. I personally want both and I will say that some of your points in ISO are something to think about.

MM: Cruelty is entirely right in the fact it is not crazy scummy to be suspicious of you and someone you are suspicious of. I hadn't really thought too much about what other roles might be out there, but if he is taking that into consideration, his suspicion of you and someone you are suspicious of makes sense if there are other non-town roles. Would you agree? Also, you unvote and FoS: Scien. I'm assuming this is mainly due to ZEE's ISO post. Then you later Vote him. Here's my problem with this....you unvoted ZEE and then picked up his top suspect on one post from him. He didn't answer any questions you and others had for him, but you unvote him based on his scumhunt? What if you were right and he was scum?! Would anything in his ISO be worth a dump in the toilet? Anything at all? It doesn't sit right with me. It's opportunistic to switch back and forth so freely. Also, the fact that he put you at the top of his town list makes it look a little like buddying to me. He's the only one who's said your actions are towny, and tbh, I can't tell where he's getting it from. Let's look at what has stood out about you as I see it:

1. You constantly say the things you are doing are Pro-town or help town or whatever. This is scummy because you wanting to point out that what you are doing is pro-town makes it seem like you don't really buy into what you are doing. Actions should speak for themselves, even if not everyone thinks the actions are as towny as you may think they are.

2. You are dead set in making sure we know you were suspicious and on the wagon of known scum. We know that already, and pointing it out in multiple posts seems scummy.

3. You are dead set on ZEE as it seems like most people were, he posts and ISO on someone and BAM, all a sudden what ZEE is posting must be true? On top of it all, you then try and use ZEE opinion of you to try and defend yourself. Seriously, cuz ZEE says your town you must be town? Did you really think so much time has passed by that we had forgotten that ZEE was suspect and still is?

4. The whole you and manz at the beginning of the game looks bad on you now. He asks why it mattered what roles were out there and instead of simply telling him why you thought it mattered, you blew up and voted for him? It seems now that I am viewing you as scum, your actions here look more like jumping on the first opportunity you could see to start a mislynch. TBH, even though it was the beginning of the game, reading enough into a question to actually accuse someone of being scum looks bad. Also, I got the feeling that your unvote came from seeing nobody back you up. Had there been more votes on Manz, I wonder if you still would have unvoted.

5.

Well, maybe Raivann should be the one to lay out the argument for Manz instead of me, then. I think I've already explained it enough, and there is some reasonable concern as to Raivann's understanding of it.

This now has meaning where I didn't really understand why you posted it before. I can see this as a cry for help from a scumbuddy. Like "hey, back me up here." Not saying it is or isn't but looking at your posts with scum goggles on, it sure looks that way.

6. Uhg, I did an ISO on you and was going to post here all the times you flip flopped your opinion but to be honest, that would take too much time. It's like you go balls to the wall on someone, then 'oh, well, maybe not, too hard to tell', then back to balls to the wall on someone else, then back up again, then again and again..../sigh. I didn't even get to the modkill of Raivann to know you did it too many times for my liking.

7. Another thing I picked up in the ISO that I had forgotten was when you started on the Raivann/Scien team. You said this long before ZEE's post. With ZEE pointing his finger at Scien as his top suspect, it makes a little more scum-sense as to why you flip-flopped back over to Scien.

Due to these things, I have to

Vote: MonkeyMan

Please address my points and tell me how these actions are coming from someone town. Put a town spin on them instead of a scum one if you will. Should be easy for you since you're claiming to practically bleed town.

-----------------------

MOD

: sorry I didn't get this post in before your vote count post...

Your post is littered in sarcasm, and fails to take seriously any of MY arguments, yet I am supposed to take you seriously? You are trying to boost your argument with colorful language yet there is little substance to your arguments.

1. You're entitled to your opinion. Again, my point is not to paint myself as town, but to point out that there are far scummier people out there.


2. I'll point it out as often as people point out the same arguments over and over against me, despite that I have answered them.

3. At this point, everyone's a suspect. I don't think anyone has ruled YOU out yet. But, we wouldn't want to accuse you of trying to paint yourself as town or anything...

4. I don't see how my interaction with Mancar looks bad. It's still true that being against scum rolefishing is scummy. You claiming otherwise doesn't look good on you.

5. I was clearly asking Raivann to post the argument because I didn't believe he understood it, and voting for someone without understanding the basis for the argument is scummy.

6. This doesn't make any sense. Zee and I are advocating the Scien/Raivann scumpair theory because Scien was defending Raivann. You defending Scien at this point clearly looks suspicious.

In the future, please try not to exaggerate your arguments with colorful language. Most people will see style over substance. And lose the sarcasm, it doesn't advance your argument at all, and in fact hinders it.

[MonkeyMan576]

Sarcasm is a tool and one I use. Deal with it. Why wouldn't you take someone accusing you of being scum seriously? I happen to believe there is plenty of substance to my arguments and after that last post, I think you have only strengthened them.

If you have to use sarcasm to "strengthen" your argument, then it only shows your argument is weak to begin with.

1. I have to disagree. Who's scummier? Scien? Why? Cuz Zee said so? If ZEE changed his mind and said you were scummy, would you stay on Scien or find a way to get back on ZEE without it looking like OMGUS? (<--rhetorical questions)

Way to ask a question without actually asking a question.

2. Being on a wagon of scum does not make you town. Period. ESPECIALLY since we didn't get to see how it would have panned out due to him being modkilled and not lynched. Who knows, you could have easily flip flopped again.

How many times do I have to say I am not trying to "look town"? I am pointing out there are scummier players.

3. What? I don't even get this. Everyone's suspect, but when you go after someone it's balls to the wall. I would hope nobody would rule me out. That's buddying and scummy. Only scum have info on what side others are on. I don't even get where the second part of that came from......how would you even be able to accuse me of that? Because I go out of my way to say "hey, look at all the town things I'm doing" as I do them?? No wait, that's you.

So now you're reverting to a "I know you are but what am I argument"

4. wow....did I ever once say anything close to being against "scum rolefishing"? First of all, I'm not sure that town can actually tell the difference between standard rolefishing or "scum rolefishing". In fact, I'm at a loss on what the difference is or even how to go about fishing for scum roles. Aside from that, the point you are missing is that Manz never said this either. He asked you a question. YOU are the one calling it "against scum rolefishing". EITHER WAY THOUGH, my point was you being opportunistic about jumping on someone....not for what the argument was about.

You were attacking me for scum rolefishing(saying my interaction with Manczar was scummy). According to you I can only attack you if I have your permission.

5. Obviously it was not as clear as you think since that's not how I saw it.

Well, that was the point, and if you had asked rather than jumping to conclusions(which you are doing a lot of), then you would have realized that.

6. When did I defend Scien? Did I do it in your mind? If you close your eyes really tight and hope it's true, does it then become true? Cuz if when I read my posts and if I read them correctly, I am accusing you, not defending anyone.

There you go, using sarcasm again, thinking it strengthens your argument. You are attacking the Scien wagon, and therefore defending him by proxy.


[Quote="chinaman]In the future, please do not make things up. How do you know my argument is hindered by sarcasm? Is it because I didn't get you to vote for yourself?
------------------------------------
Overall, I think your response to my points to be erratic and emotional. You're only digging a bigger whole when you post like that.

[/quote][/quote][/quote][/quote]

I don't think so, my arguments are much more logical than yours. If anyone is digging themselves a hole it's you.

[MonkeyMan576]

Well, I don't have a whole lot of time, so I'm not going to address the above post about me yet. Haven't actually read it yet. Anyway, I don't know who my 2nd suspect would be here.

I was honestly under the impression that there were 2 scum as that is my experience.

This is my first mini. Anyway, I will have to get back to you on that. Well, that's all I got for now. Look forward to your read of me.

I was under the impression that there are usually 3 scum to 9 town. There are exceptions, but Chinaman "assuming" 2 scum leads me to wonder if he knows the makeup of the mafia. Even if it's his "first mini", scum to town ratio is basic mafia theory.

[MonkeyMan576]

Well, I don't have a whole lot of time, so I'm not going to address the above post about me yet. Haven't actually read it yet. Anyway, I don't know who my 2nd suspect would be here.

I was honestly under the impression that there were 2 scum as that is my experience.

This is my first mini. Anyway, I will have to get back to you on that. Well, that's all I got for now. Look forward to your read of me.

I was under the impression that there are usually 3 scum to 9 town. There are exceptions, but Chinaman "assuming" 2 scum leads me to wonder if he knows the makeup of the mafia. Even if it's his "first mini", scum to town ratio is basic mafia theory.

Haven't got around to reading Amishes long post about me but I will and will respond. I just had to get this out real quickly. MM, are you saying my inexperience or lack of knowledge about "basic mafia theory" is a scum tell for you? I have one completed game if you look at it was a newbie game which had 2 scum. I don't know any mafia theory. I don't care to look it up either since A: it's theory, and B: I don't have the time. I look it up as it comes up in games...things like WIFOM, OMGUS, etc. I would assume most people would think those are basic as well, but when they first came up, I had no clue.

I'm not saying your lack of experience is a scum tell, but to me most newbies would not assume two scum. You assuming two scum, rather than admitting ignorance, lends me to believe you might have inside mafia info.

FOS: Chinaman

[MonkeyMan576]

@Monkey: Do you fully believe that there's only 2 scum total then? And only 1 left?

I do not believe one way or the other. Usually in my experience the number of scum depends on the number of town power roles(which I do not want to speculate on).

[MonkeyMan576]

Obviously. Who is your number one connection with Raiv then since he'd be 1 scum out of a possible 2 scum game?

Right now Scien is still my top suspect.

[MonkeyMan576]

For it to be OMGUS, it has to actually be a good point.

Uh, not really. Attacking someone because they attacked you is OMGUS. The actual quality of the attack is really irrelevant (as long as the attack is legitimate, weak case or not).

Not true. Attacking someone with good logic is not OMGUS, regardless of where they voted. OMGUS is when someone votes someone who is attacking or voting them without good logic or without reason at all.

[MonkeyMan576]

Ok, so, just got done with Amished's (holy crap, don't try and say that out loud, it hurts) p449 (his case on Scien). First let me say that the post from Scien above could not have come at worse time for him. It has been stated numerous times that deadline is in fact tomorrow. No defense or even an understanding that he has seen he is even under fire here. Add in the fact that I had just finished Amish's (much better) post...

Anyway, so Amished, when I started reading your post, I started with a mindset that you may be scum with MM. I had thought about who the 3rd person in the scum-bunch would be (now that it has been brought to my attention as a possibility and even a probability according to you) and had read enough to know that you thought I was scummy and that you thought MM was town. Since MM is/maybe was, my top suspect, I thought you could be his scum buddy coming to his defense. Similar to some of your points about Raivann and Scien actually. So anyway, I started out reading it as though it was scum writing it. I actually couldn't finish it that way. There is logic and the points are solid. There is a little bit of WIFOM in there, but all in all, I can't say that I could fully disagree with any of the points. There is actually many small things that I had overlooked that you brought out. All in all, it is going to make me look back at my case on MM to see if the case on Scien is stronger from my point of view.

-------------------------------------

MM:

You assuming two scum, rather than admitting ignorance,

wft? Here is what I have posted reguarding this subject. Point out where exactly I am not trying to get an honest answer and am somehow using this from a scum point of view. Also, do you realize that I am the one that brought it up in the first place? If it was me with insider info, wouldn't I already effing know?! I don't see why you are trying to make a scumtell out of a question! Anyway, what I said

Also, and this may be something that I just missed as a commonly known rule, but I thought we only had one scum left. It doesn't say on page one how many anti-town roles to town-roles there are, so if there are 2 scum left, how do you know? I'm kinda a newb (one completed game) so if I'm missing something here, let me know please.

No response from players then..

Prolly should have asked this to MOD anyway.
MOD: is the anti-town roles vs. town roles hidden for a reason or is it common knowledge somewhere that if you have 9 player it equals 2 scum, 12 player equals 3 scum, etc?

Then mod answers then you start in on this with

I was under the impression that there are usually 3 scum to 9 town. There are exceptions, but Chinaman "assuming" 2 scum leads me to wonder if he knows the makeup of the mafia. Even if it's his "first mini", scum to town ratio is basic mafia theory.

Totally ignoring many posts in between my answer from the Mod and you posting the above. In fact there were some pretty meaty posts from Zee and Amished in there. I would at least think you would want to comment on them. Why did you skip them to attack something that was already addressed by the Mod and Amished?

--------------------------

Now onto Amish's case on me. Should be fun.

If two people are having an argument I often try to let those two hash it out rather than make things more complicated. Often in a two person argument one or the other ends up being scum, depending on the logic of the arguments, and in late-game scenarios it can be more helpful to look at a two person argument than a three or four person argument.

I didn't see where the mod had said for sure if there was two or three scum, and I in fact doubt he did.

[MonkeyMan576]

@Monkeyman: Is there a reason you're being so antagonistic?

Back to game related issues: In what scenarios (good logic vs. good logic, good vs. bad and bad vs. bad) do you view which role as town? Why?

I'm not being antagonistic, just defending my position.

[MonkeyMan576]

Didn't realize the second part was directed at me.

Good logic tends to be pro-town and bad logic tends to be anti-town. Not definitive as townies can use bad logic but often scum will get caught in situations where they have to defend themselves with bad logic.

[MonkeyMan576]

I'm also not locked on Scien, he's just the top suspect at the moment because of the Raivann connection, mostly. But I am considering the possibility this is a town vs. town argument.

Also I'd like to note I did not lead the Scien wagon, Zee did.

[MonkeyMan576]

1 hour and 30 minutes to deadline?

[MonkeyMan576]

I just didn't realize the deadline was that close...Jason and Skruffs are going up on my scumlists.

[MonkeyMan576]

That was to MM.

Yes, if they don't vote.

[MonkeyMan576]

Jason and Skruffs are going up on my scumlists.

Why? Skruffs has been MIA since last Thursday and jason has been ill with LA for weeks now. What are you getting at?

I'm getting at that I am against a no lynch and they are the main players in the way of a lynch happening.

[MonkeyMan576]

Sorry Monkey, I have been in hospital yet again and only out.. I am in rehab for a few injuries and ended up ripping a muscle in my leg, which ironically was not my bad leg so now I have to walk with pressure on my origionally bad leg.

but lets make the deadline interesting eh?

vote: Monkeyman

I said in my last post I felt he was scum.

That seems rather OMGUSy...anyone else you think is scummy?

[MonkeyMan576]

Who said anything about a No Lynch? Scien very clearly said that he was going to Hammer himself if it came down to that.

For all following along, they'e both at L-1 now.

Well, I don't believe him...and threatening self-hammer is a scummy tactic if he survives the day.

[MonkeyMan576]

@Fuzzyman, so are you against a Scien lynch "if it must go the other way"?

[MonkeyMan576]

why push a vote away from Scien?

Cuz he didn't want to hammer early?

Have to answer for JasonT?

He doesn't do a whole lot of answering and we're 3 minutes away from Scien self-hammering, so yes.

Looks like unless d3x changes his mind or skruffs shows up that it will be curtains for Scien.

So it's okay to answer for someone if you don't think they'll answer? Sounds an awful lot like coaching to me.

[MonkeyMan576]

to follow up, since I felt Rai and Monkey where scum, and Rai dead and flipped scum, my Monkey vote makes sense does it not?

But you're ignoring Scien's buddying of Raivann.

[MonkeyMan576]

[/quote="MM"]But you're ignoring Scien's buddying of Raivann.

How does that have anything to do with him believing

you

are Scum?[/quote]

I'm just pointing out that he's only looking at things selectively and not looking at the whole picture.

[MonkeyMan576]

in respects to the budding thing, I often find scum tend to distance themselves rather than buddy together, it makes things a little too obvious when one flips scum and they can be linked together with ease then..... kinda like what has happened here. Its easier for scum to buddy with someone who is town alligned so there is possibility of a mislynch based on this when scum flips

WIFOM I guess really, I just see more town alligned players being buddy-ed with someone ho flips scum, than actual scum buddying together.

If that makes sense?

It's a fair position, I guess. But the buddying seems a little convenient for me. So you're guessing scien flips town?

[MonkeyMan576]

While we still have twilight left, and assuming that Scien flips Town, what are your thoughts/reactions, Amished?

If you're assuming Scien flips town, why did you vote for him?

[MonkeyMan576]

I'm trying to get reads on people and I'm getting attacked on it...and thanks for avoiding my question, d3x.

[MonkeyMan576]

If you're assuming Scien flips town, why did you vote for him?

Is that a serious question?

Yes, I think it would be dangerous to assume anything at this point about Scien.

[MonkeyMan576]

@dizzle: You mean how Monkey had plenty of time to answer for himself and I said what I felt his defense said and you didn't even give Jason a chance to answer? Ok.

One last time. Jason has not been a reliable discussion participant and Scien's deadline was fast approaching.

And he couldn't answer, say... tomorrow if he wasn't around ?

Why would it be a problem to ask this question of Amished?

HoS:MM

I'd Vote you if would count for tomorrow tonight.

What question?

Amished, I would also like your thoughts on MM's post lynch twilight play.

Gladly, as soon as he explains his own motivations. I don't want to give him an out that I might see if he doesn't and is scum.

My own motivations for what? Asking questions on how people think Scien will flip gives me an opportunity to gauge them.

[MonkeyMan576]

If you're assuming Scien flips town, why did you vote for him?

Are you freaking kidding me? There are no pretenses about his flip. It will or it won't. I'm saying 'assuming that he will' because in his last post he was coming from a Town perspective. Unless he was f*ing with us {which serves no purpose as we're about to find out anyway} I'm assuming he will flip Town.

Sorry, didn't see this.

So you don't think it's possible he saw he had backed himself into a corner and his gambit didn't work?

[MonkeyMan576]

Why would it be a problem to ask this question of Amished?

HoS:MM

I'd Vote you if would count for tomorrow tonight.

I'm not avoiding asking this of anyone, I'd invite any player to answer this. I was just already in a discussion with a few people.

[MonkeyMan576]

So you don't think it's possible he saw he had backed himself into a corner and his gambit didn't work?

This...Is...Irrelevant. We are about to see his flip, so what does it matter? I want to know a player {who championed a case against a lynched player} what his thoughts would be assumig the guy we just lynched wasn't lying about his flip. He has already been lynched, so I don't see how your position makes any sense. So what if he did paint himself into a corner? He's dead and we're about to find out. I want Amished's opinion before the night falls and we may not

get

an answer.

I don't think it's irrelevant to see what aasumptions people are making. You assuming he flips town is telling, imho.

[MonkeyMan576]

MM- Answer my question.

Repost the question, please.

[MonkeyMan576]

MM-

p609 I questioned Amished.
p610 you reacted negatively and came after me.
p614 I asked you why asking my question was a problem {for you specifically}.

Allow me to rephrase, why did you have a negative kneejerk reaction to my asking Amished about the lynch?

I was just agreeing with you that no player was above being asked the question.

[MonkeyMan576]

Hmmmm, no kills.

I have some night action info, is it too early share it?

[MonkeyMan576]

*sigh*

1) Do you think you're the only one that is able to do anything at night (other than the scum that can kill)?

2) Would you want to wait til you could actually use the info to ... you know.. condemn somebody?

....

I think it is condemning, but not 100% of course.

[MonkeyMan576]

I'd say I'm about 85% sure it's condemning.

[MonkeyMan576]

I could be on later, but I would want a majority decision.

[MonkeyMan576]

And I am for him revealing the information at the timeline laid out above.

I don't have a list of games handy I will have to do some research.

[MonkeyMan576]

@Dizzle: Nobody died. Unless there's a cautious vig out there (doubt it) everybody else should've killed. SK's generally *act* like a vig to set up a late game safeclaim "hey, look, i've been shooting scummy people" so I'm pretty certain that there's only 1 kill out there (scum's NK).

As I doubt the possibility of more than one protective role, and there was no kill; the said claimed protective role (me) is the reason for no-kill. Since said protective role protected himself; himself would've been the target.

It's a pretty obvious target, but you don't really expect a watcher or tracker in a game. With what I'm guessing MMan is and what I figure happened, this way will allow him to come out with his 85% damning evidence as he's not risking pulling out a power role with the information. And why wouldn't I come out after a night like that? A self protecting doc can pretty much live indefinitely.

After MMan claims (if he does) I have a question for him.

Isn't it a bit suspicious to claim self protecting doc? I mean, its a sure way to avoid being targeted at night. Self protecting doc's are pretty rare, in my experience.

[MonkeyMan576]

Like Scien, I am a man of my word.

Vote:MM

As for those posts, I'll list all of the times I've questioned, rephrased, or simply demanded an answer to the exact same question. If you'd like me to break it down for him again, just ask.

p614- I ask the question he has yet to answer.
p623- I accuse him of dodging said question.
p628- I tell him to answer again.
p642- I tell him to answer again.
p6653- I listed the post I had originally asked him in and broke down the relevant posts leading up to it {just in case, as you said, it was too hectic}. I also rephrased the question for him, in case the timing was confusing.
p667- I pointed to p660 asking for an answer.
p675- I taunted him to see if he'd bite and finally answer me.
p682- I gave him an ultimatum that he has since ignored, along with my question for the 7th time {if you include posts he's made without answering said question, it's more}.

Can you dig it? I said,

can you dig it?

~Seriously, no more Dizzle.

That's a pretty poor reason for voting someone. I'm not avoiding your questions. And expecting everything to be done on your timetable is ludicrous. And your abrasive manner is troublesome.

[MonkeyMan576]

MM- I want to understand something. Maybe we're not on the same page here. Before I ask followup questions to p694, why do you think I'm Voting for you?

Because you think I'm not answering your question. Which is totally not the case. I'm not aware of it.

[MonkeyMan576]

MM- Did you read the post you quoted?

yes, and you have a very condescending attitude. Why can't you just ask the question you want answered?

[MonkeyMan576]

Because even in that post I can't tell exactly what the question is.

[MonkeyMan576]

I agreed with you. I wouldn't call it a knee jerk reaction.

[MonkeyMan576]

@d3x - I haven't had time to list my power role games yet, it will take quite a bit of work, so you'll have to give me a chance.

My night action result:

I roleblocked Chinaman last night. I suspect the reason why there were no deaths is that my roleblock prevented him from his kill.

This would also explain why he is so adamant about not believing my night action result.

[MonkeyMan576]

Ok, so I don't know about the rest of you, but if I was scum *with* China; I wouldn't want him to send in the kill. However, I've definitely been on scumteams where they want to kill due to a grudge, so there's a chance that the kill was double blocked.

@MM: Is there a restriction as to who you can roleblock?

No.

[MonkeyMan576]

While I'm not wanting to have the two of you stop the back and forth, I'd like the other players to get in here and be a bit more active as well.

Anyone who hasn't posted yet, please do {disclaimer- I'm well aware the thread's been only open 24 hours}. Topics can revolve around the MM case, the CM case, the Amished claim, the MM claim, or other notable issues that are at hand.

@Fuzzy, I'd especially appreciate to hear from you. I skimmed the games you linked to and you seem very much more involved than in this one. Why? Unfortunately, one was a Scum role and one was a Town role, so it equates to a Null Tell at best. You said earlier that you aren't the biggest fail of this game and I agree. However, I don't think that should be a badge of honor.

@MM- Definitely, I was just making sure that you remembered and it didn't slip under the cracks. Also, why would you assume that your 'RB' stopped the NK? There are many possibilities and yours is only one. Afterall, according to Amished, there was no NK because he Doc saved himself. You did say that you were only 85% sure, but still...

Amished said he was targeted, not that there was a kill attempt against him. He could still have been investigated(which seems likely to me) or protected by someone else, etc.

[MonkeyMan576]

Amished said he was targeted

Interesting. Can you point out exactly where this happened?

Screw it, I want to brag a bit; and I think it might help MMan make up his mind if I'm reading the signs correctly (which I believe I am). I am a doctor who can self protect. Clearly I protected myself last night, and unless there's another way for somebody to block a kill;

I'm certain that I was targeted

. I'm betting that MMan is a watcher or tracker (more likely watcher) who watched me and saw somebody "visit" me last night. Since we have one "correct lynch" (the modkill) and one mislynch; I don't feel like we're anywhere near lylo and can test MMan's claim; which should help everyone feel much better.

He's assuming it was a kill attempt that targeted him, he doesn't know for sure. And since I know I roleblocked someone, I'm pretty sure it wasn't a killer. At least that seems the most likely scenario to me. Feel free to point out other scenarios though.

[MonkeyMan576]

MMan, answer d3x's question already. I pointed out what he was asking so you can look at my recent posts too for said question.

That's a more involved question, and takes more time to answer. I'm getting tired of the pushiness.

[MonkeyMan576]

I suspected I was targeted because I thought that there was no other ability to prevent me being targeted. (Pending MMan saying he's telling the truth) if China targeted somebody else, the same night result would've had it.

735 makes me much less likely to believe MMan's claim. In fact, I'm considering reversing my whole opinion of him and voting for him, though I want to think over the game first.

Why would a roleblocker have restrictions on who they can roleblock?

[MonkeyMan576]

MM- Re:p739, you know that if you are targeted {in almost every instance} you are not told that you are targeted, right? He's not saying that he knows he was targeted, he's saying that he's almost 100% sure that the NK attempt came at him and because he "self-protected", there was no NK. The porblem is,

if

both of you are telling the truth, there is no way to know that CM is Scum or Amished was the target or someone else did something else to stop the NK {including the Scum setting up a false protect claim by submitting a No Kill}. MM, did you receive confirmation that CM tried to do anything last night?

No, all I know is I succesfully roleblocked someone.

[MonkeyMan576]

it was post 684 where he "was certain" he was targeted.

I know. Not to be a d!ck, but I was asking MM for a reason.

I think it will help in the hunt in the long run if we have all the possible scenario's laid out in an organized manner.

As the whole thing is WIFOM, I don't see how it

could

help. There are also almost an infinite amount of permutations that could have happened and what this is doing is serving to distract from actual Scum Hunting. I'm not trying to be mean or sh!t on your parade, but how does this help us to catch Scum? You said that it doesn't hurt, but neither does talking about the Dodgers' chances at the Series. The fact is, it doesn't hurt {possibly}, but it doesn't really help either.

---------------------------

MM- How do you "know" that you successfully "RBed" someone?

The dodgers don't have a chance. Go Angels!

[MonkeyMan576]

it was post 684 where he "was certain" he was targeted.

I know. Not to be a d!ck, but I was asking MM for a reason.

I think it will help in the hunt in the long run if we have all the possible scenario's laid out in an organized manner.

As the whole thing is WIFOM, I don't see how it

could

help. There are also almost an infinite amount of permutations that could have happened and what this is doing is serving to distract from actual Scum Hunting. I'm not trying to be mean or sh!t on your parade, but how does this help us to catch Scum? You said that it doesn't hurt, but neither does talking about the Dodgers' chances at the Series. The fact is, it doesn't hurt {possibly}, but it doesn't really help either.

---------------------------

MM- How do you "know" that you successfully "RBed" someone?

I got a PM back from the mod.

[MonkeyMan576]

I doubt this is true. It's more likely he is a paranoid cop.

Vote: Chinaman

[MonkeyMan576]

Without quoting it directly {as that would result in a modkill}, what did it say? I'm asking you to paraphrase it as closely as possible. An option {to be safe} would be to write a draft, send it via PM to the Mod, and see if the wording is ok to post without getting in trouble.

That I succesfully roleblocked Chinaman.

[MonkeyMan576]

Two scenarios:
JasonT is a sane cop, with a guilty verdict on me.

I am lying about my night action(roleblocking Chinaman)

-------------

I am correct about Chinaman trying to kill Amished, and my rolebock stopping his kill.

Amished was targeted by a non-killer or a 2nd killer.


I tend to believe the first, because of Chinaman's peculiar behavior today, and of course, I know I'm town.

[MonkeyMan576]

You're veering awfully close to a quote. I'd put more para in paraphrase.

Well, if I get modkilled for it, you know Im telling the truth lol

We do? How?

[MonkeyMan576]

I meant I believe the second, obviously.

[MonkeyMan576]

I feel that it would serve as a distraction because there is no possible way to know what scenario happened without outting more PRs which I believe is a bad thing. It's a whole big ugly batch of WIFOM otherwise. Scum Hunting without a scenario for why there was a NK last night is good enough, IMO. We didn't need one to catch onto Raivann, afterall.

Amished is saying roleblockers are rare and this is worth a lynch.

Jason is assuming he is a sane cop, and this is worth a lynch.

This role speculation is highly speculative, and I don't see where the damning evidence is.

[MonkeyMan576]

/facepalm @ 763. If he's modkilled, his role is revealed, but he'd automatically lose. You can claim that somebody is guilty because of a cop investigation. Christ don't be so paranoid about it.

Hmmm, I wouldn't think a mod would post a potential cops sanity after being killed if it verified his NK claim, but that's just me. But one can always hope.

[MonkeyMan576]

Why wouldn't I say that Jason was paranoid if a sane result would lead to my lynch?

A town roleblocker lynch will severely hurt the town.

[MonkeyMan576]

MM- Did you mean to quote me there {p769}? I don't get it.

I was responding to the post that questioned my motivations for questioning Jason. Major WIFOM by the way.

[MonkeyMan576]

This role speculation is highly speculative, and I don't see where the damning evidence is.

A claimed guilty on you is good evidence is it not?

What do I have to gain by lying in my claim? You flip town I am the auto lynch tomorrow. Why risk putting myself out there like that for the sake of one mislynch on someone who has already had suspicion on him.

More WIFOM.

[MonkeyMan576]

Is that all your defense is going to be? claiming WIFOM?

My defence is Chinaman's behavior(claiming that we shouldn't believe my night action without hearing what it was, then not voting for me oncce he hears it, even though it potentially implicates him), the fact that you could be a paranoid cop, and that Amished is willing to lynch someone because he thinks town roleblockers are rare(which is not true).

[MonkeyMan576]

How is that WIFOM any more than your claim?

You claim RB that blocked me.

He claims cop and found you guilty.

Only difference is, if you flip and are telling the truth, he dies. That a one scum for 2 town (assumption) trade. Scum are already down 1. I get you are saying scum could do anything, but there is stuff that puts them in a bad spot. Jason-scum fake claiming is one of them wouldn't you say?

Fine lynch me then. You have a point. When I flip town, you know Chinaman is probably scum, and Jason is probably scum, so you will have the win as long as there is no SK(which is likely with so few deaths).

I want the town to win as much as everyone else. So if it means I get lynched to achieve that goal, I am for it.

[MonkeyMan576]

Fine lynch me then. You have a point. When I flip town, you know Chinaman is probably scum, and Jason is probably scum, so you will have the win as long as there is no SK(which is likely with so few deaths).

I want the town to win as much as everyone else. So if it means I get lynched to achieve that goal, I am for it.

Great appeal to emotion there and lovely WIFOM again.

I'm not appealing anything. I'm advocating my lynch so the town can win.

[MonkeyMan576]

I didn't say we shouldn't believe your night action without hearing what it was. I was saying I was interested in what you had to say but no matter what you claimed I wasn't going to role over and automatically believe you. Please quote me where I said we shouldn't believe you before even hearing it. If you can, I will admit defeat and ask everyone to vote me. Also, had I voted you for potentially implicating me you and many others would have called OMGUS. I'm sure that's what you were planning. Thing is, if you role blocked me, you don't know what you blocked if anything at all! 85% was waaaay too large of certainty that I was scum with just your info. It was also, as jason pointed out, very much WIFOM to say it did.

In your defense though, I looked up on mafia wiki some roles and stuff and RB WAS indeed listed under Basic Roles. Here's the link http://mafiascum.net/wiki/index.php?title=Roles

So rare or not, they are in the basic column according to mafia wiki.

Why would I do that. Lynching me is clearly the best play here.

Unvote:
Vote: Monkeyman

[MonkeyMan576]

And you say there is no appeal to emotion lol

It's not an appeal to emotion. I don't have an alterior motive. I want to be lynched to prove that I am town and Chinaman and Jason are the last scum.

[MonkeyMan576]

And you say there is no appeal to emotion lol

It's not an appeal to emotion. I don't have an alterior motive. I want to be lynched to prove that I am town and Chinaman and Jason are the last scum.

MM: You flipping town doesn't "prove" anything. It's WIFOM. It's possible, but many many other things are just as possible. Do you get that?

It's probable. Jason's refusal to to admit he may not be sane is scummy.

[MonkeyMan576]

Okay, well enjoy life without your roleblocker then, and a roleblocker who has outed a mafia(probably) at that.

[MonkeyMan576]

(This is what I meant with MMan always screws up his claims when he's scum with me that I mentioned early on in the game)

How have I screwed up my claim? There's no evidence of that, and even if I flip scum, it's because of the investigation, not the claim.

[MonkeyMan576]

It's not a scumslip. I said "if I flip scum, it's not because I have a bad roleclaim, it's because I was investigated guilty".

[MonkeyMan576]

Of course, I know I'm not scum, I was just making that statemnt from an objective mindset.

[MonkeyMan576]

I know exactly what you said, MM.

Well, if you know what I said, you'd know it's not a slip, I was just making the point that my roleclaim hasn't been proven wrong yet, but Amished is acting like it was.

In fact I'm going to flip town, and I'll laugh my arse off when the mod does the writeup.

[MonkeyMan576]

So you'll flip scum because you were investigated guilty and not because of your claim. Yes, we know.

There you go again. I didn't say I'd flip scum, I said if I did, my possible lynch wouldn't be because of the roleclaim.

You guys are crazy.

[MonkeyMan576]

/facepalm @ 763. If he's modkilled, his role is revealed, but he'd automatically lose. You can claim that somebody is guilty because of a cop investigation. Christ don't be so paranoid about it.

Hmmm, I wouldn't think a mod would post a potential cops sanity after being killed if it verified his NK claim, but that's just me. But one can always hope.

Wait, are you actually hoping for a mod kill on a claimed cop here?

If I were scum, which I'm not, and I were another townie player, I would hope he was nk'd to verify my guilt if it was posted he was sane.

Since I am town, and I think he is lying in his rc, yes, I hope he is nk'd.

[MonkeyMan576]

/facepalm @ 763. If he's modkilled, his role is revealed, but he'd automatically lose. You can claim that somebody is guilty because of a cop investigation. Christ don't be so paranoid about it.

Hmmm, I wouldn't think a mod would post a potential cops sanity after being killed if it verified his NK claim, but that's just me. But one can always hope.

Wait, are you actually hoping for a mod kill on a claimed cop here?

If I were scum, which I'm not, and I were another townie player, I would hope he was nk'd to verify my guilt if it was posted he was sane.

Since I am town, and I think he is lying in his rc,

yes, I hope he is nk'd.

Again, I will ask... how have I, in your opinion gone from Insane/paranoid cop to lying in my claim and confirmed scum if you flip town.

Why do you keep failing to answer that?

I never said it was confirmed. I said I think you are lying.

[MonkeyMan576]

And if there were never any anti-town roles in the town Beloved Princess' and PGO's wouldn't exist.

[MonkeyMan576]

And there'd never be millers. You realize talking about random roles does not add to the game. I'm about to just ignore you pretty soon.

I refute your point and you accuse me of not adding to the game?

[MonkeyMan576]

@MMan: The reason you "screwed up" your claim was in the fact that you said you could roleblock anybody you wanted as many times as you wanted. Knowing my flavor (could protect in a "rainbow" way) made me suspect that you weren't a pro-town role. 1-shot doc on a cop is balanced (which made me believe him). Then, a cop isn't going to investigate a person more than once really. Since I couldn't protect somebody more than once, that's what gave you away to me.

That's not a logical conclusion. Just because you have a curtailed role, doesn't mean every role is like that. Restricting a vigilante role is normal. Restricting a roleblocker role isn't. I know you'd like to take credit for "outing" me but it just isn't the case.

[MonkeyMan576]

I don't take credit, but even before the cop claim I was ready to lynch you because of what I thought I understood the "flavor" to be. A pro-town protective role (kinda like a roleblocker) that didn't have a similar flavor was suspicious to me. Cops + SKs typically don't need to target the same person more than once so it was a "rainbow" type of town. That's what I thought would happen from the non-scum perspective. Also, another game where a roleblocker is scum only.

Well, you may have been right about the lynch, but your logic was still flawed.

[MonkeyMan576]

MM- Why weren't you answering my questions? I'm still very curious about that.

Your posting style is all over the place, and it's difficult to discern what's a question or not. Plus you were demanding immediate answers for some posts that require more effort and it was a little off-putting.