Mafia 104 - Revenge of the Crimson King - Game!

[MonkeyMan576]

Vote: Socrates

Since philosophers are supposed to be experts at logic, it makes sense(at least to me, to vote for a philosopher in the RVS.

[MonkeyMan576]

1. Having a name Socrates does not make you good at logic.
2. It was a random vote.
3. Clearly an OMGUS vote.

[MonkeyMan576]

I think this is the scummiest post here. It's pretty obvious what Tar is referring to. People are RVSing it up, and usually the person that tries to show themselves as serious and waiting for RVS to be up is very likely to be scum.

I think its silly to ask Tar to clarify, and shows a subtle connection between you and Cyberbob.

Vote: RayFrost

What cyberbob said is true.

Anyways...

It is not obvious what Tar was talking about.

Wanting the RVS to be over in order to get some real discussion and scum hunting going on is pro-town, so that couldn't be a slip.

I didn't see anything that was really... noteworthy about Cyberbob's post, so I asked Tar to clarify.

Also, since when is asking for clarification a scum tell? It's a null tell

at best

, since it requests more information, it doesn't say "I think you are wrong cuz [flimsy reasoning]" or "I think you are wrong cuz [super awesome reasoning]." It just asks "what are you talking about here?"

Nice try, though.

pro tip: don't try to defend your scum buddies so much that you end up reaching for some reason to chainsaw defend (wait... isn't that a tell tar thought of? )

RF's post here seems overly defensive. Often if someone is overexplaining their actions it's because they have a guilty conscience. The RF/CB connection seems plausable.

Unvote:
Vote: RayFrost

[MonkeyMan576]

RF's post here seems overly defensive. Often if someone is overexplaining their actions it's because they have a guilty conscience. The RF/CB connection seems plausable.

Unvote:
Vote: RayFrost

1. I'm overly defensive, get over it.

2. I didn't explain my actions all that much, I was pointing out the flaws I saw in the action of the person voting me.

3. I fail as town, so yeah... I do have a guilty conscience.

4. The reason of the person quoting me for voting me was crappy, but the game is barely beginning, so I consider it valid to respond to any points made against me rather than ignoring it. It does this thing called promoting discussion.

5. you using a highly flimsy reason for voting me is noted.

Good day, monkeyboy~

My reasoning is hardly flimsy. For early in day one, I'd say it's pretty good, at least to make you scummier than anyone else, and your comments seem to confirm my hypothesis.

[MonkeyMan576]

MonkeyMan, how is Ray being

overly

defensive, and how does being defensive make Ray more likely to be scum?

I explained that over-defensiveness indicates guilty conscience.

I just think that the passion of his defence(it didn't really require the five or so sentences that he posted) wasn't equal to the level of attack.

[MonkeyMan576]

MonkeyMan, how is Ray being

overly

defensive, and how does being defensive make Ray more likely to be scum?

I explained that over-defensiveness indicates guilty conscience.

I just think that the passion of his defence(it didn't really require the five or so sentences that he posted) wasn't equal to the level of attack.

ITT monkeyboy tries to convince the town that defending yourself to anything above some arbitrary extent is a scum tell.

Nice strawman.

[MonkeyMan576]

Over defensiveness = defending yourself too much = scum tell

you said five or so sentences is too much

this is an arbitrary number

thus, I don't see a straw man.

The strawman is that it's not an arbitrary number. I didn't set any number, I just said it was my opinion. And not referring to me by my actual name is an appeal to emotion.

[MonkeyMan576]

Really? No more Kise votes? ;( Awww. You disappoint me. ALL OF YOU.

Unvote, Vote: MonkeyMan

I guess I'll have to settle for the one looking for anything he can twist into being scummy. I honestly don't see how it could be seen as overly defensive scum... he seemed to just be responding to the fact that swimmer called his post "silly" and said it showed a scum-connection. If someone tried to call

me

out on that, I'd have a similar response.

Wow, and you're voting me for scum hunting? Okay. I'm not pushing for a RF lynch, just justifying that he's my scummiest player at the moment.

[MonkeyMan576]

MonkeyMan, how is Ray being

overly

defensive, and how does being defensive make Ray more likely to be scum?

I explained that over-defensiveness indicates guilty conscience.

I just think that the passion of his defence(it didn't really require the five or so sentences that he posted) wasn't equal to the level of attack.

But why does it indicate "a guilty conscience" and not just a strong passion? I want you to dig deeper. Where do you draw the line between "defensive" and "over-defensive"?

I'm calling bullshit on this attack (and nothing Swimmer's piggybacking) because I've been accused of being "over-defensive" literally

DOZENS

of times, and it

IS

just how I play. When someone attacks me, I respond. And I am always a VERY passionate player. So I used to get "Glork is being over-defensive" a lot. Eventually people realized that my playstyle is to just fire back at any attack until I can debunk it (or, if possible, show that my attacker is scum).

Monkey, I can accept that you think he is "over"-defensive because of the passion with which Ray defended himself, but I disagree with you on what it means. It means that Ray is passionate. Nothing more, nothing less.

I agree that there could be more than one possible interpretation. I just think that given the early nature of the game, the possibility that he could be scum warrants attention. There's no one answer for when someone is overdefensive, but it CAN be a scum tell. Of course, it doesn't mean it ALWAYS is.

[MonkeyMan576]

I'm trying, at least.

[MonkeyMan576]

Overdefensiveness is a lamesauce scum-tell if you ask me. If you are town and someone is suspicious of you, how in any way is it anti-town to respond aggressively to suspicion of someone you know is town?

Also, Monkey, was their any

actual

holes with his defense of himself that you saw?

Speaking of defending oneself, are the people who said that they are suspicious of me actually serious?

The strawman and the appeal to emotion being the biggest holes. I laid out my case exactly as I saw it, I wasn't trying to make more or less of it than it was, wheras he is jumpy towards anyone who attacks him, and overexplains his defence.

Like I said, I am not advocating his lynch, and recognize that he could be jumpy-town. but I like my vote at this point.

[MonkeyMan576]

I don't believe that swimmer has inside info at this point.

Yes, you are definately scum.

Unvote:
Vote: Swimmer4lyfe

[MonkeyMan576]

I have a reason for my vote, and I'm not believing swimmer, clearly. Why are you word twisting?

[MonkeyMan576]

I have a reason for my vote, and I'm not believing swimmer, clearly. Why are you word twisting?

lack of insider info = lack of information = not scum

No word twisting there

I voted because I believe he is lying. Not because I think he's not scum.

Now you're just being silly.

[MonkeyMan576]

I noted you saying you don't think he's scum.

Now you're just misrepresenting me.

Your notation is wrong. I think he could very well be scum.

[MonkeyMan576]

overdefensiveness is a scum tell only when you can tell the difference between it and defending yourself

your "Scum tell" on me is asking Tar for clarification because I didn't understand.

That's why it is a crap case.

I know the difference between overdefensiveness and defending oneself. Yours felt over the top.

My "scum tell" is Cyber's attempt to stay out of the spotlight, which I've already explained. Your subtle defense of him is noted, and I don't believe you when you say you don't understand. I found it to be obvious.

Tar has also stated pretty much exactly what I have said in that regards...why no suspicion on him?

- What is this "personal scumtell", exactly, and how is it applicable to both myself and Ray? I mean inductive logic is terrible at the best of times, but you're taking it one step further here.
- The reasons for your case being bad have already been covered. I don't feel like repeating what other people have said on the very same page.

How am I putting words in your mouth?

I've already explained what the personal scumtell is. Maybe you should read the thread.

This is putting words into my mouth:

You've got a serious self-fulfilling prophecy going on here, my friend. I'd bet a lot of money that if you'd been ignored you'd be going on about "omg scum coverup I'M ONTO SOMETHING HERE" instead

1. tar didn't

2. hardly a subtle defense when something isn't obvious - seems like you are buddying tar by saying what he said was obvious and attacking cyberbob and myself (the latter was a bad idea, though, scummy one)

3. cyberbob is being active now, and I don't see anything wrong with him for the time being

monkeyman:

so you think he's lying

what about?

what makes you think that?

I distrust people who speak in absolutes on day 1.

[MonkeyMan576]

You just did.

Um...no?

[MonkeyMan576]

I distrust people who speak in absolutes on day 1.

Is an asbolute.

I distrust (implied all) people who speak in absolutes on day 1.

Asbolute

You're so clever.

How about this...

Speaking in absolutes is something I tend to distrust in people on day 1...

[MonkeyMan576]

He's def not my buddy. And I gave a reason for the vote.

[MonkeyMan576]

Everyone in the town is my buddy:).

[MonkeyMan576]

Everyone in the town is my buddy:).

obv lying scum.

I'm not his buddy.

Obv you're not town then.

[MonkeyMan576]

You're agreeing to being not-town. You're worse.

[MonkeyMan576]

Unvote, vote: MonkeyMan

Scummiest read so far. His attack seems rather vague, and, he just stroke me as scum.

You claim you're voting me because "I just struck you as scum" yet you accuse me of being vague?

[MonkeyMan576]

You're agreeing to being not-town. You're worse.

You said "in the town"

that includes scum/3rd party/town

null tell.


you spoke in asbolutes again

fail

Well, I know I'm town. You're basically claiming 3rd party or scum, which is it?

[MonkeyMan576]

Monkey took his early case far too serious. It was a weak case, which is fine for getting the game moving. But if he was just trying to get the game moving, he would have known that and not been so utterly convinced of it.

Thank you for recognizing this. I stated several times that my case was being exaggerated. It was never meant to be taken as a "me or him" situation. I was not "utterly convinced". I use my words with conviction and use my votes liberally, even in early game. Putting pressure on people gets reactions, and that was my ultimate goal.

[MonkeyMan576]

What's with the word twisting. I never said I was exaggerating my case...

[MonkeyMan576]

Monkey took his early case far too serious. It was a weak case, which is fine for getting the game moving. But if he was just trying to get the game moving, he would have known that and not been so utterly convinced of it.

Thank you for recognizing this.

I stated several times that my case was being exaggerated.

It was never meant to be taken as a "me or him" situation. I was not "utterly convinced". I use my words with conviction and use my votes liberally, even in early game. Putting pressure on people gets reactions, and that was my ultimate goal.

Pads gave MM an easy out, and he took the bait. Please, MM, show me these "several times" when you said you were exaggerating your case just to put pressure on him.

Agreed. Pads is a likely 3rd scum on the team.

Lies

My point is that I was pushing a slight scum tell, not a major scum tell. Then everyone else is attacking me acting like I am overpushing a psudo-major scum tell, when that was never the case.

[MonkeyMan576]

Thank you for recognizing this. I stated several times that

my case was being exaggerated

. It was never meant to be taken as a "me or him" situation. I was not "utterly convinced". I use my words with conviction and use my votes liberally, even in early game.

Putting pressure on people gets reactions

, and that was my ultimate goal.

Sorry - allow me to rephrase.

Show me where you said your case was being exaggerated (the overdefensive thing?) and also show me where you implied you were just trying to pressure for reactions.

I didn't imply that at the time, of course. Why would I show my hand in the midst of an attack?

[MonkeyMan576]

I think the whole "It was just for pressure!" excuse is too often used as a cop-out.

Again, a misrep.

I believed he was scummy, just not as scummy as everyone attacking me is putting it out to be.

[MonkeyMan576]

Also, I want to make it clear, while we both think you're scum (MMan), neither of us say it's about the vote. It's your other reactions.

I haven't reacted to anyone specifically. I've reacted to the exaggerated casebuilding against me. I've reiterated my RF case, how the cases against me have been overblown, and how my responses have been appropriate, so I don't know what's being expected of me.

[MonkeyMan576]

[quote="RayFrost"]
Exalt is Exalt
/quote]

Now that we know Exalt was a mafia godfather, time to look at who was defending him...

sounds like there could be a connection here...

FOS: RayFrost

[MonkeyMan576]

What bothers me most about Merkabah is that he calls Exalt scum based on his interaction with me during the RANDOM stage of the game, yet they continue to hold it over. It could be that Exalt just

happened

to act scummy to them after they called him scum on Page 2, but it could also be that they're trying to cram suspicion down our throats when they don't actually believe that Exalt is scum. VPB's post 46 is where he first brought it up. Since it was on Page 2, I didn't pay it any mind at the time, assuming that VPB was still thinking in terms of random/joke votes. But Amished went with it, too, and then they kept attacking Exalt.

Here this also looks like he's defending exalt...

FOS: Glork

[MonkeyMan576]

That was Glork, not Merk that said that...

[MonkeyMan576]

Page 8

Can somebody please explain posts 178 - 191. Either MonkeyMan contradicted himself a lot, or I just don't understand any of it. Can somebody summarize that whole argument please?

I don't have time to read Exalt's big post right now, so I will later.

Also, MonkeyMan, I'm assuming all my points I used against you were correct, because you haven't responded to any of them.

I saw one point against me, that you didn't like my vote against Swimmer. I stand by my vote, at the time, he was as scummy as anyone.

[MonkeyMan576]

vote monkeyman

He seems like pseudo-protown.

His playstyle is circular, overexaggerating, and basically not really helpful; just seeming helpful.

Sorry for inactivity, especially since its so different from my other mafia.
I keep forgetting to post here after I post there.

So explain how my supposed pseudo-helpfulness is worse than your non-helpfulness?

[MonkeyMan576]

@MMan: He doesn't have to. Any alignment player would say that they're pro-town. From that standpoint, he just has to prove that you're scummy; not that he's less scummy than you because he "knows" his alignment.

Unless you're accusing him of being scum; I fail to see the point of that post.

He hasn't proven I'm scummy though, he's just hopping on the most convenient wagon.

And his argument makes HIM seem MORE scummy. If someone attacks someone for lurking, and the attacker is lurking 10 times worse, it doesn't help their argument.

[MonkeyMan576]

Glork, RF, and Solemn are my top suspects right now...

[MonkeyMan576]

Glork, RF, and Solemn are my top suspects right now...

Glork and RF for buddying with Exalt(and RF was still a little over defensive in the beginning), and Solemn for his bandwagon and poor attacking.

[MonkeyMan576]

Explain how I was "buddying" exalt.

Explain how glork was "buddying" exalt.

Explain how your "attacking" is any better than solemn's "attacking." (hint: posting more != better attacking)

I've already explained my feelings on exalt...try reading.(Post 275)

I've posted multiple opinions on multiple posters, wheras solemn hasn't posted until now and joined the easiest bandwagon with poor reasoning.

[MonkeyMan576]

So...they're bussing??

Huh?

swimmer isn't going after MM.

MM has a (very) weak vote on swimmer while he's proclaiming suspicion elsewhere.

Not seeing the bussing.

Looks like distancing at best if they

are

scum buddies.

My vote on swimmer is weak in the sense that I am prepared to change it after my modkill analysis, I just have more than one suspect and it would be foolish to quickly change votes without analyzing the landscape. But it's not weak in the sincerity of my opinion.

And WIFOM doesn't make me scum, I voted swimmer because I think he's scummy(again, already explained).

[MonkeyMan576]

righto, I won't bother then.

Wrong post number, monkeyboy?

I'm not responding to you again, you're being insulting.

[MonkeyMan576]

I'm a town tracker...

[MonkeyMan576]

Anywho, here are my thoughts starting from the bottom of Page 12/top of Page 13.

- Post 300 kinda looks like Kise trying to slip in a sneaky little "opportunism" attack on me. I'll admit to only being alerted to the post I voted him for by Glork, but prior to today I really truly haven't been paying as much attention to the game as I really needed to be if I wanted to stay focused. Mea culpa, but I won't apologise for it - I did as well as I could given that it was in the middle of my exam period.
- Post 307 is a good post with regards to the "replacements > policy lynch" deal - at least in this situation. I do support policy lynches for certain other things.
- Post 315 from SolemnJ seems like a pretty lazy vote. He's basically taken everything people have been saying about MonkeyMan, condensed it into a few words, offered up nothing of his own, and stuck a vote in at the end.
- To be honest I don't really follow Pads' attack on me in Post 353. Scum don't always buddy up to their partners - in fact I would say they're almost more likely to buddy up to

town

players. He throws in a few iterations of the "oh that's

just

X enough to be inconspicuous - scum?????" attack, which really only strikes me as confirmation bias.
- WTF @ Monkey's roleclaim?
- Re: Wicked's question in Post 369: I was half-kidding. I was (and still am) always going to go into proper detail about my swimmer vote even if Merk didn't recant, I was just looking to get a little snark in.

I'll end this post with the scum reads requested by Socrates:

Right now I'm still liking my Kise vote. I don't think his counterattack is at all genuine; I think he's slipping in a bit of the old OMGUS. Apart from that, I'd say SolemnJ would be second in line and after that probably Raivann for not even being able to recognise the fact that Swimmer got replaced.

MonkeyMan could be up there too, but he hasn't really posted all that much in the pages included in today's read apart from that awful claim. I'll do some more reading tomorrow morning.

What's so awful about my claim? What am I supposed to say about it? It's a role. It's not a theme game so I don't have any flavor to back it up with.

[MonkeyMan576]

Anywho, here are my thoughts starting from the bottom of Page 12/top of Page 13.

- Post 300 kinda looks like Kise trying to slip in a sneaky little "opportunism" attack on me. I'll admit to only being alerted to the post I voted him for by Glork, but prior to today I really truly haven't been paying as much attention to the game as I really needed to be if I wanted to stay focused. Mea culpa, but I won't apologise for it - I did as well as I could given that it was in the middle of my exam period.
- Post 307 is a good post with regards to the "replacements > policy lynch" deal - at least in this situation. I do support policy lynches for certain other things.
- Post 315 from SolemnJ seems like a pretty lazy vote. He's basically taken everything people have been saying about MonkeyMan, condensed it into a few words, offered up nothing of his own, and stuck a vote in at the end.
- To be honest I don't really follow Pads' attack on me in Post 353. Scum don't always buddy up to their partners - in fact I would say they're almost more likely to buddy up to

town

players. He throws in a few iterations of the "oh that's

just

X enough to be inconspicuous - scum?????" attack, which really only strikes me as confirmation bias.
- WTF @ Monkey's roleclaim?
- Re: Wicked's question in Post 369: I was half-kidding. I was (and still am) always going to go into proper detail about my swimmer vote even if Merk didn't recant, I was just looking to get a little snark in.

I'll end this post with the scum reads requested by Socrates:

Right now I'm still liking my Kise vote. I don't think his counterattack is at all genuine; I think he's slipping in a bit of the old OMGUS. Apart from that, I'd say SolemnJ would be second in line and after that probably Raivann for not even being able to recognise the fact that Swimmer got replaced.

MonkeyMan could be up there too, but he hasn't really posted all that much in the pages included in today's read apart from that awful claim. I'll do some more reading tomorrow morning.

What's so awful about my claim? What am I supposed to say about it? It's a role. It's not a theme game so I don't have any flavor to back it up with.

[MonkeyMan576]

I'm not fading into anything, I've been more active than most players. What info do you think I have that I should be sharing?

[MonkeyMan576]

I'm not lurking, I'm just tired of everything I say being twisted...

[MonkeyMan576]

@People who are voting me: What's exactly so scummy about my posts? I said I had something on Cyber, then Merka posted things about Cyber that rose my suspicions enough to a vote.

Funny thing, MM has gone into lurking. Hmm... Something smells bad... Scummy++.

Cyber is yet to defend himself. And that excuse of town deserving to lose is not good. Scummy++.

xReck voted Vaya for basically lurking, and yet he ignores MM's sudden lurking. He's even hypocrite enough to say that my reasons to vote for Cyber are convenient, when he doesn't have a real reason to vote for Cyber. When he placed his vote, he said he couldn't post the reasons atm, but then he never posted them at all. Next thing he did after voting him was pushing for his lynch. Still no reasons.

I still want a Cyber's lynch, but I'd be happy to lynch xReck any time soon.

I'm not lurking, I'm one of the more active players in the game. Taking a break for a couple of days is not lurking.

The difference between me and Vaya is I've claimed and Vaya hasn't...

Unvote:
Vote: Vaya
FOS: Snow_Bunny

[MonkeyMan576]

Convenient. You decide to "take a break from the game" just after you claim due to lots of pressure on you. Really convenient.

He also chose to take a few days off during Thanksgiving weekend, during which many people were on V/LA. Did that thought ever cross your mind?

No. I don't have Thanksgiving here in my country, and thus that didn't crossed my mind. Also, he took more than the weekend, mind you.

Going away when you are under pressure is not look good in my eyes. Period.

I didn't go away. I'm tired of people that accuse others of lurking that are less than active themselves...

[MonkeyMan576]

Can someone summarize the Cyberbob case?

[MonkeyMan576]

On the other hand... *reads Cyberbob as scum in Commie Mafia more carefully*... while Cyberbob wasn't as emotional there as he is here, dear gods his summary posts there are JUST like his ones here. (Including one very early this game where my first read was a town PBPA. Oops.)

Whoops, guess that means I have a fairly consistent style of writing PBPAs..............

Seriously. Watching you guys run around feeling so happy with your AWESOMELY SWEET READS is actually pretty funny.

So your argument is anyone who has a scum read on you is either not town or playing anti-town?

[MonkeyMan576]

I'm not sold on the Cyberbob case, but I'm against a no lynch.

Unvote:
Vote: Cyberbob

[MonkeyMan576]

Cyberbob never answered my question, so I'm keeping my vote on him.

[MonkeyMan576]

Cyberbob never answered my question, so I'm keeping my vote on him.

This is also a pretty dumb post; basically it's a petulant cry for attention that is being expressed in a mafia-related manner. I'm sorry that I missed answering your question, MonkeyMan; would you like to point it out for me that I can do so now?

I'm pretty sure voting for someone isn't a "cry for attention". Your logic is terrible.

At any rate, the question was...

So your argument is anyone who has a scum read on you is either not town or playing anti-town?

[MonkeyMan576]

I'm pretty sure voting for someone isn't a "cry for attention".

When the vote is justified by "HE DIDNT ANSWER MY QUESTION OMGGG!!!!", yeah. It kinda is.

If you asked a question to someone you wouldn't want them to answer it? And that was hardly the only justification for my vote. Admittadly, the case against you isn't what I'd call strong, but a no lynch is certainly not preferable at this point, and you seem the scummiest to me.

So your argument is anyone who has a scum read on you is either not town or playing anti-town?

Given that I know my alignment to be town, yeah. It is.

I can understand why people would be suspicious of me given my rather sketchy posting towards the beginning, but a) I did provide a reason for this and b) I find it difficult to believe that so many people literally find me the scummiest person in the game right now with so much lurking and obvious shitty bandwagoning going on. Hell, some of you are actually falling for the rather obvious DeAdLINe oMG!!1!!1 rationale.[/quote]

Your over-defensive reactions don't suggest a vanilla townie about to be lynched, they suggest scum about to be lynched. In your own analysis, you don't list bandwagoning bad enough to be scummy, so why would other players vote for a lurker or bandwagoner over someone that they actually find to be acting scummy in their posting?

[MonkeyMan576]

If you asked a question to someone you wouldn't want them to answer it? And that was hardly the only justification for my vote. Admittadly, the case against you isn't what I'd call strong, but a no lynch is certainly not preferable at this point, and you seem the scummiest to me.

Nice false dichotomy. There are lots of players in this game besides me, and there are a number of days yet before the deadline.

Sure, but they aren't as scummy as you, so it's not a false dichotomy.

Your over-defensive reactions don't suggest a vanilla townie about to be lynched, they suggest scum about to be lynched. In your own analysis, you don't list bandwagoning bad enough to be scummy, so why would other players vote for a lurker or bandwagoner over someone that they actually find to be acting scummy in their posting?

Have you considered signing up for some more newbie games? Just saying.

Way to not answer my question. Again.

[MonkeyMan576]

Insulting anyone who thinks you're scum is not pro-town play. Supporting the lynch here.

[MonkeyMan576]

A loss of a town member is a loss of a town member. While a VT might be less valuable than, say, a doctor or cop, I'd still prefer lynching scum over lynching VT.

That's my biggest hangup with the Cyberbob lynch atm - it's not usual for scum to claim VT. If they're going down, they're going to try and draw out a counterclaim for a power role.

I'm not sure that's true early in the game. There could very well be more than one cop in the game, so I'm not sure a theoretical cop claim would perpetuate all other cops to immediately counter claim.

[MonkeyMan576]

I'm beginning to think a Muh wagon might be better at this point. His behavior is very scummy.

FOS: Muh

[MonkeyMan576]

What's your point wicked?

[MonkeyMan576]

EBWOP: MonkeyMan, respond to these questions that I reiterated on page 14 after you requested that I bring them up again.

Okay. I think I understand page 8 now. Also, MonkeyMan didn't respond to this;

Show me where you said your case was being exaggerated (the overdefensive thing?)

And MonkeyMan, these were the things I wanted you to respond to;

My reasoning is hardly flimsy. For early in day one, I'd say it's pretty good,

at least to make you scummier than anyone else

, and your comments seem to confirm my hypothesis.

This kind of seems like you are purposely trying to make Rayfrost look scummy. Mostly because your reasoning shouldn't make somebody look scummy, their actions should.

I just think that the passion of his defence(it didn't really require the five or so sentences that he posted) wasn't equal to the level of attack.

Which lines would you have removed then? Or how would you have shortened the defense if you were in RayFrost's shoes?

I would have answered more to the point.

MonkeyMan, how is Ray being

overly

defensive, and how does being defensive make Ray more likely to be scum?

I explained that over-defensiveness indicates guilty conscience.

I just think that the passion of his defence(it didn't really require the five or so sentences that he posted) wasn't equal to the level of attack.

ITT monkeyboy tries to convince the town that defending yourself to anything above some arbitrary extent is a scum tell.

Nice strawman.

Nice strawman.
[/Quote]

How is my suggesting his argument is strawman in itself a strawman?

And not referring to me by my actual name is an appeal to emotion.

How?[/quote][/quote]

Because he is trying to get others to view me in negative light without actually having to provide an argument. Plus, it's insulting.

[MonkeyMan576]

Are you purposely ignoring this point:

My reasoning is hardly flimsy. For early in day one, I'd say it's pretty good,

at least to make you scummier than anyone else

, and your comments seem to confirm my hypothesis.

This kind of seems like you are purposely trying to make Rayfrost look scummy. Mostly because your reasoning shouldn't make somebody look scummy, their actions should.

I was focusing on his actions, so I don't see your point.

How is my suggesting his argument is strawman in itself a strawman?

Because RayFrost wasn't strawmanning you.

Well that's a matter of opinion.

Because he is trying to get others to view me in negative light without actually having to provide an argument.

How does calling you Monkeyboy actually make people view you in a negative light?

It's degregating.

Also, how come you never responded to these points? I brought them up on page 14 after you requested that I bring them up again.

I probably didn't see them.

[MonkeyMan576]

I'm beginning to think a Muh wagon might be better at this point. His behavior is very scummy.

FOS: Muh

or its just that I thought of you as suspicious and your trying to lynch me

LOL. You're right the fact that you continually promise to provide content but fail to do so, and then refuse to vote isn't suspicious.

[MonkeyMan576]

Are you purposely ignoring this point:

My reasoning is hardly flimsy. For early in day one, I'd say it's pretty good,

at least to make you scummier than anyone else

, and your comments seem to confirm my hypothesis.

This kind of seems like you are purposely trying to make Rayfrost look scummy. Mostly because your reasoning shouldn't make somebody look scummy, their actions should.

I was focusing on his actions, so I don't see your point.

What does this have to do with the point I brought up against you?

Because your reasoning was that actions should make someone scummy, and I agreed that Reck's actions made him scummy.

How is my suggesting his argument is strawman in itself a strawman?

Because RayFrost wasn't strawmanning you.

Well that's a matter of opinion.

First of all, if it actually is a strawman, then why have you completely forgotten about him?

Secondly, if RayFrost was strawmanning you then what exactly were you trying to convince the town of in that post?

[/Quote]

Which post?

Because he is trying to get others to view me in negative light without actually having to provide an argument.

How does calling you Monkeyboy actually make people view you in a negative light?

It's degregating.

Maybe only slightly, which brings me to my next question; Why do you think RayFrost would have done that so early in the game if it is obvious that it wouldn't have a great effect anyway?

I don't know, but it's WIFOM. Who knows what kind of effect it would have?

Also, how come you never responded to these points? I brought them up on page 14 after you requested that I bring them up again.

I probably didn't see them.

How come you weren't looking out for them?

People make mistakes.

[MonkeyMan576]

EBWOP: Ray, not reck.

[MonkeyMan576]

My guess would be Jupiter mafia, but it's just a guess. Right now I am thinking Snow_Bunny is the most likely partner. Her accusing other people of lurking and then never playing is really bad. You're still on my scum list(for refusing to vote) but I don't know that I'd peg you as Jupiter mafia.

[MonkeyMan576]

Request deadline extention

[MonkeyMan576]

It wasn't for anyone specific, just want to make sure we get the best lynch.

[MonkeyMan576]

I wouldn't be opposed to a SB or Meh lynch, but Cyberbob is the most viable it seems like. A no lynch would be bad.

[MonkeyMan576]

I tracked Snow_Bunny, actually, who didn't leave her house. She was first on my list of suspicious people at the end of the day. And no, I didn't kill her.

[MonkeyMan576]

Well, I have a limitation on my role, so maybe SensFan had a limiatation also? And my claim wasn't "out of nowhere".

[MonkeyMan576]

My limitation is that I can only track on odd numbered nights.

[MonkeyMan576]

I never said SensFan had any limitations. Frankly, if I were town and I knew someone tracked someone that was killed and had the same role as another dead townie, I'd probably vote for them too.

All I can say is I'm telling the truth.

Tarhalindu has good reason to suspect Devestation, so a wagon on him(since I know I'm innocent) seems as good an idea as any.

Unvote:
Vote: Devestation

[MonkeyMan576]

Ray Frost is obviously lying. There's not 3 Trackers for sure. I didn't target SensFan, any scum could make up that claim.

Unvote:
Vote: RayFrost

[MonkeyMan576]

If RF is scum, he wouldn't cc me unless he thinks I'm town. Saying he's a tracker that visited me who just happened to visit SF is really, really convenient.

[MonkeyMan576]

Umm...

you were about to get lynched

regardless

of what I did.

I could've easily just voted you without revealing a damned thing as scum and I'd have gotten away with it, too.

Which makes you look even scummier. Town wouldn't give up their power role so easily.

[MonkeyMan576]

@Mer: And my earlier point stands that if RF is scum he wouldn't cc unless I was town.

[MonkeyMan576]

Nah, he'd CC if you were lying too; there's no way he'd know your alignment what with the naming of our outed scumgroup implying a second.

Just because he didn't know doesn't mean he doesn't suspect I'm town if I'm not in his scum group.

[MonkeyMan576]

Mostly because of the fact that he's either a tracker or scum (or both). After your flip, we'll see that you're scum. If you were town, he'd sign his own death warrant by claiming you killed a townie. 1 for 1 with a weak PR that nobody believes is a bad idea. Trying to gain "confirmation"; sure, there's ample scum motivation for that.

Trading town for scum seems dumb to me when you have likely scum in RF.

If he is a mafia goon or some other unimportant role he may figure the gambit is worth it if he can get the town to believe him. He can always say he didn't know I was town, he was just going by his night results.

[MonkeyMan576]

@MMan: the only way we'd believe him is if you flip scum. We're not that stupid.

@Annachie: Hi, why the unvote?

If I flip scum, then there are two trackers. If there are two trackers, my claim is just as believable as RF's claim. My play has been more pro town than RF, my day 1 play backs up my night action play, and I didn't give up my power role claim unnecessarily. RF's claim is all too convinient, and reeks of a scum gambit.

[MonkeyMan576]

Monkey, who are your picks for scum other than RayFrost?

Devestation and Empking for now.

[MonkeyMan576]

Vote: Monkeyman

Odd nights eh? Well that's funny considering Sens didn't have a limitation. It's also funny that you targeted Snow Bunny, who is now dead.

L-1. Speedlynch with caution.

FOS Annachie

for trying to leave MM some hope. Negro please.

Infinis, you're leaking.

Neither of your points says anything about my guilt. It's already been near-confirmed there are two trackers in the game, it's not my tracker claim that's being questioned.

[MonkeyMan576]

I think you're a weaboo, but as far as the game goes, the only thing that would make me think you're far from being anti-town is that ballsy tracker claim. Monkeyman was roachmeat as soon as Sens flipped, so not sure why you felt the need to rush the lynch by claiming. You have done good to question people last I remember. Hopefully you got the results/reads you wanted, because I didn't get much out of them.

Monkey, I don't care if you play this game sweeter than Xyl. When you get caught as obvscum, you die. Simple as. You could have been squeaky clean and had the most pro-town behavior yesterday, but Sens flipping tracker, plus you claiming odd night limits... you really did drop the soap on this one. It's not my fault I can't help but tap that ass.

Like I said, I'm not obvscum. Normally, if there are two trackers, one is guilty, but since RF also claimed tracker, there is obviously two trackers, so the argument that I am guilty because I claimed tracker and was cc'd is null and void. I feel sorry that RF-scum is before you on a silver platter and you are not getting it. Scum obviously killed SB because they knew I was attacking her and that I was a tracker and would likely be targeting her, easily setting me up to make me look like the killer.