it true that there are other people who vote data...but these two are the ones that attract my attention more.Col.Cathart wrote:Cool.
unvote
Vote: Tjoe Min Ja
Because of his last post. It seems like he's trying to take two random people from the bandwagon and make them look as guilty as possible.
I intended the wagon to go like it did. If he claimed miller/digger I would of called for his lynch due to improbability of me randomly picking a investigation manipulator. Also people always tend to listen to me, its a gift in this game.X_~ wrote:I do not know if this is what Llamafluff intended to happen or not. I am 50/50 on you, Llama. I don't understand why people are listening to everything you say.
Not a bad lynch. For the two he talked about, CC bugs me a little, dont have a decent read on raiv at this point. I still want to look at drench and jordan first before I vote/make a case.Llama, what do you think of Tjoe? Do the people he called out stand out for you as well?
For the record: Tjoe called out Raivann and Muffin. He never spoke about me, but since it looked bullshit to me, I reacted.LlamaFluff wrote:Not a bad lynch. For the two he talked about, CC bugs me a little, dont have a decent read on raiv at this point. I still want to look at drench and jordan first before I vote/make a case.
Why?TMJ wrote:t true that there are other people who vote data...but these two are the ones that attract my attention more.
this post is scummy post? It hardly makes any sense ("doesnt sure"?)Tjoe Min Ja wrote:Raivann wrote:Vote:DatadanneI like wagons. Llama seems pretty confident in this being a good wagon so what the hell.what are you two thinking? wanna get data lynched quick?Muffin wrote:All right Llama, I'll bite. My vote was random anyways.
unvote
vote: Datadanne
doesn't sure that Data can be lynched quick enough?Raivann wrote:Maybe if Llama gets Data lynched day 1 he wins or something.
unvote
This interests me, as it holds no valid defense and instead performs a very stagnant attempt to change the subject. He again speaks out to a bandwagoner though he is the one in the hot seat.Tjoe Min Ja wrote:it true that there are other people who vote data...but these two are the ones that attract my attention more.Col.Cathart wrote:Cool.
unvote
Vote: Tjoe Min Ja
Because of his last post. It seems like he's trying to take two random people from the bandwagon and make them look as guilty as possible.
@col -120 : that's right
@ravinn : do you really think I'm scummy or you just OMGUSing and follow col cathart?
I'm sorry, but why exactly are you saying that? When you vote someone, you are voting for their lynch. You need to be sure. This, on the other hand, just sounds like scum trying to look innocent and when the person flips town/neutral. But, assuming Jordanscum, she seems pretty sure Tjoe is town. She's also playing the newbie card juuust a tiny bit here, which I don't like.~Jordan` wrote:unvote, vote Tjoe Min Ja
Mind you, I haven't gotten a single lynch right on mafiascum yet, and am quite embarrassed by this. I havent participated in many lynches, but nonetheless...
Conceded.Fishythefish wrote:Drench's posts so far:
- Voting the mod, unhelpful.
Data has never answered the question I posed. Asked or not, it needed to be answered, whether you disagree with it or not. It was indeed answered in his latest post, which is good. I concede Jordan's. Meh, failread, I guess.Fishythefish wrote:- Asking questions to Data and Jordan which had already been asked repeatedly
...Fishythefish wrote:- Asking Llama questions with obvious and uninformative answers, the second of which is rolefishing
I don't like not-serious games. It distracts me from the game, and that, along with wall-o-texts is what contributes most to me flaking, which I don't want. Sorry for trying to play!Fishythefish wrote:- Telling Muffin to stop posting fluff
Covered thisFishythefish wrote:All in all, he has done no scumhunting at all, and a bit of rolefishing.
Covered this.Fishythefish wrote:His questions to Llama look like an attempt to distract from the Data wagon, which is a good source of information at this point.
So, you're completely sure? FromFishythefish wrote:If I know anything for sure, it is that Drench is scum.
This was horribly misphrased by me, and I withdraw it completely. All I meant was "Drench is my strongest read, and it's a reasonably strong read". I certainly didn't mean to imply certainty.Drench wrote:So, you're completely sure? FromFishythefish wrote:If I know anything for sure, it is that Drench is scum.4 flipping pages? WELL DONE! I'll make sure to bring this up if you unvote! Because if anything's sure to you, it's that I am scum!
@Jordan : it's just like what Drench said...you can't join voting just because you haven't lynch someoneDrench wrote:Before I go see what I missed, just something I noticed.
I'm sorry, but why exactly are you saying that? When you vote someone, you are voting for their lynch. You need to be sure. This, on the other hand, just sounds like scum trying to look innocent and when the person flips town/neutral. But, assuming Jordanscum, she seems pretty sure Tjoe is town. She's also playing the newbie card juuust a tiny bit here, which I don't like.~Jordan` wrote:unvote, vote Tjoe Min Ja
Mind you, I haven't gotten a single lynch right on mafiascum yet, and am quite embarrassed by this. I havent participated in many lynches, but nonetheless...
Okay, I understand.Fishythefish wrote:This was horribly misphrased by me, and I withdraw it completely. All I meant was "Drench is my strongest read, and it's a reasonably strong read". I certainly didn't mean to imply certainty.Drench wrote:So, you're completely sure? FromFishythefish wrote:If I know anything for sure, it is that Drench is scum.4 flipping pages? WELL DONE! I'll make sure to bring this up if you unvote! Because if anything's sure to you, it's that I am scum!
I inferred that if he was already saying 'this is entertaining', then he must already have put together some ideas and/or conclusions. I wanted to hear these ideas/conclusions, which would have obviously brought more to the table and given us more info to work with.Fishythefish wrote:So, your questions to Llama ask him what he found entertaining, suspecting it was the number of people on the wagon. Now, it was pretty clear that this was the case, and I really can't see any scumhunting value in your questions. What were you hoping to gain?
I see what you mean. Sorry for making you think I was criticizing you: please rest assured, as it may be, that I wasn't.Fishythefish wrote:I don't mean to criticise your mod-voting, question-repetition or fluff-criticism per se - but when there is no real attempt at scumhunting in any of your posts, and you are accusing another player of posting fluff, that looks bad to me.
Calling out about use of the English language a case does not make.~Jordan` wrote:this post is scummy post? It hardly makes any sense ("doesnt sure"?)
Asking other people whether a post is scummy? Feels like you're looking for a safe way to join a wagon. Made worse by the fact that the post in question is not scummy, and certainly not scummy for the reason you give. Indeed, it hardly seems like an accusation made in good faith to call a post scummy for its use of English.~Jordan` wrote:this post is scummy post? It hardly makes any sense ("doesnt sure"?)
What is wrong with accusing a bandwagoner of OMGUS and following? Raivann didn't explain his vote beyond "that post was as scummy as it gets". As for a defense, it is true that he doesn't provide one. But did you read the attack? I think the meaning of "attracted my attention" is very clear here, although I'll let TMJ answer this.Jordan wrote:This interests me, as it holds no valid defense and instead performs a very stagnant attempt to change the subject. He again speaks out to a bandwagoner though he is the one in the hot seat.Tjoe Min Ja wrote:it true that there are other people who vote data...but these two are the ones that attract my attention more.Col.Cathart wrote:Cool.
unvote
Vote: Tjoe Min Ja
Because of his last post. It seems like he's trying to take two random people from the bandwagon and make them look as guilty as possible.
@col -120 : that's right
@ravinn : do you really think I'm scummy or you just OMGUSing and follow col cathart?
unvote, vote Tjoe Min Ja
Distancing yourself from your vote, by establishing a meta which lets you mislynch with impunity.Jordan wrote:Mind you, I haven't gotten a single lynch right on mafiascum yet, and am quite embarrassed by this. I havent participated in many lynches, but nonetheless...
Hmmm. My reading of "This is entertaining" was rather different from yours, more as a throwaway comment about how llama was enjoying his wagon. But I can see where you are coming from.Drench wrote:I inferred that if he was already saying 'this is entertaining', then he must already have put together some ideas and/or conclusions. I wanted to hear these ideas/conclusions, which would have obviously brought more to the table and given us more info to work with.
My first game as scum I tried to cast suspicion on players by accusing them of wanting a quicklynch.Drench wrote: Tjoe-wagon: Meh, I personally am not getting much scumfeeling from him, and I don't believe his post was that bad. Added that to Jordan's little embellishment down the bottom of his post, I don't believe it's worthy of a vote.
sigh. I hate it when people just assume things.Fishythefish wrote:Urgh. Jordan's recent posts are scumtastic.
Asking other people whether a post is scummy? Feels like you're looking for a safe way to join a wagon. Made worse by the fact that the post in question is not scummy, and certainly not scummy for the reason you give. Indeed, it hardly seems like an accusation made in good faith to call a post scummy for its use of English.~Jordan` wrote:this post is scummy post? It hardly makes any sense ("doesnt sure"?)
What is wrong with accusing a bandwagoner of OMGUS and following? Raivann didn't explain his vote beyond "that post was as scummy as it gets". As for a defense, it is true that he doesn't provide one. But did you read the attack? I think the meaning of "attracted my attention" is very clear here, although I'll let TMJ answer this.Jordan wrote:This interests me, as it holds no valid defense and instead performs a very stagnant attempt to change the subject. He again speaks out to a bandwagoner though he is the one in the hot seat.Tjoe Min Ja wrote:it true that there are other people who vote data...but these two are the ones that attract my attention more.Col.Cathart wrote:Cool.
unvote
Vote: Tjoe Min Ja
Because of his last post. It seems like he's trying to take two random people from the bandwagon and make them look as guilty as possible.
@col -120 : that's right
@ravinn : do you really think I'm scummy or you just OMGUSing and follow col cathart?
unvote, vote Tjoe Min Ja
Distancing yourself from your vote, by establishing a meta which lets you mislynch with impunity.Jordan wrote:Mind you, I haven't gotten a single lynch right on mafiascum yet, and am quite embarrassed by this. I havent participated in many lynches, but nonetheless...
unvote, vote: Jordan
No, I don't mean that you deliberately mislynch in other games. I mean that you brought that up here - and the natural reason for that is to excuse mislynches here.~Jordan` wrote:First off, you say in so many words that I deliberately mislynch in other mafias just to have an effect on my meta. That is stupid. I'm not that stupid.
Yes, but it looks like you're trying to start a bandwagon without actually believing in it.~Jordan` wrote:Well actually i was trying to imply that my vote somehow always ends in bad luck/always wrong. But I see what you mean.
I made my vote b/c Tjoe is a player I find suspicious. Its only the third vote in such a bandwagon, so I did it mostly to increase pressure (isn't that what we're supposed to do?)