I fail to realize? No.Drippereth wrote: You've just described our playstyle.
What you fail to realize is that there is a lot of thought going into the flippant comments; we play a lot of games; the certainties are shorthand and qualifiers are assumed, so they don't need spelling out.
Your rant is, in fact, quite scummy. It's an underhanded criticism of us, without the balls of naming us, and just a big ole IIoA.
I think you're making a mountain out of a molehill. All I had at that point was gut, and that wasn't enough for me, not knowing how Kleedrac plays. Sorry if that's a problem for you, but it's certainly not acting like I'm a newbie.danakillsu has played in about 25+ games on mafiascum.net, has a gut read of scum on someone, but says he's not voting that person because he has no experience with said player instead of something definitive like "this wagon is better" or "I don't see the case on him." I have no experience with danakillsu but I can easily go find a couple of his 20-something games and get experience with him because I'm not lazy in my scum hunting. Also, it was a lame way to acknowledge the wagon without boarding it or resisting it. Laundering is my new favorite word these days.
I have a huge problem with this post. If you aren't defending him why are you trying to undermine other players attacks on him? Furthermore, why are youSuper Smash Bros. Fan, 353 wrote:Just want to make this clear to everyone. I am not defending Benmage, I am just trying to find faults with I doubt it's case on Benmage.
Are people who are scummy but not as scummy as your top read not lynchworthy?Kleedrac, 360 wrote:No it's not a town read it's a not-as-scummy-as-CMAR-readDrippereth wrote:Is that not a town read? "Not lynchworthy?"
danakillsu, 366 wrote:This only says "If he flips scum" (which btw, is pretty much impossible) "you're scum"
And how are you so certain that it isdanakillsu, 383 wrote:No, I mean who he turned out to be. There's no way he's lying when he claimed whom he claimed without a C-C. Do you doubt his claim?Do you mean "look who he claimed to be"? Why do you assume he's telling the truth?
Excellent question.LynchMePls, 409 wrote:Then why aren't you voting him?danakillsu wrote:QFTQFTQFT!danakillsu wrote: Kleedrac needs to be lynched folks. We aren't getting any younger, and for some of us that's a real problem.
Yes, it may not be how newbie's play but it is acting like scum. Pretty much all of your votes have been either exceptionally weak, bandwagoning a likely lynch (with a nice little ramp up FoS shortly beforehand), or only when called out on scummy behavior.danakillsu wrote:I think you're making a mountain out of a molehill. All I had at that point was gut, and that wasn't enough for me, not knowing how Kleedrac plays. Sorry if that's a problem for you, but it's certainly not acting like I'm a newbie.
1. I said I am new here, not new to mafia, this point is wrong.Super Smash Bros. Fan wrote:1. You use the newbie card.Kleedrac wrote:Wow, you guys play a hard game. For my first large game I'm having a lot of issues following some of your logic. Maybe it's the fact I'm too new around here but no one listens to me and you all seem to just point out my most minor logic flaws and then HOLY F*CK BANDWAGON CASE NOW NOW NOW. Fine, if that's what you want. My dying wish (as whatever I write doesn't seem to change things around here) is that when I flip town you'll lynch the dumb hydra whats-his-name and his scumbuddies
2. You add in the "It's not fair!" card.
3. Shows more unecessary hate toward Drippereth.
4. To top it off, this is loaded with AtE.
Conclusion: Your play has been incredibly scummy. You have done very little in the game aside from being super defensive and call Drippereth names. I'm not sure if a claim can even save you at this point.
Note that from here on out I will only post to answer directed questions and won't be contributing more ammo onto your trains, thanks. And on an irrelevant note, I meant to give a shout out to the Ace Ventura reference.LynchMePls, 337 wrote:Because Finkle is Einhorn, and Einhorn is Finkle.
I can't begin to explain how annoying I think animorph is. Ani - replace out if this game is so unimpressionable. Also, if I can grab your attention long enough, why did you quote yourself to the mod in your ISO1?animorpherv1 wrote:Woah. I'm still in this game? Shows how impessionable this game is on me.
Is this just your anti-prod post? Care to join in or replace out?animorpherv1 wrote:Woah. I'm still in this game? Shows how impessionable this game is on me.
I did think it was bad; but since all I was basing my fos off of was one post, why vote someone based off of it? I usually wait until I have more reasoning beyond "I don't like this one possibly insignificant thing." before I vote someone. I'm also more laid back with my vote considering we have plenty of time to reach a decision; plenty of time to post and for scum to slip up in.MacavityLock wrote:
Unreasonable
Paranoia - His intro and only post talks only about Raising and reactions to it. He just FoSes me and Magna, doesn't vote. If you think my post was bad, why wasn't it worthy of a vote?
" posts are trying to justify lurking and basically being Non contributive overall; the fact you've been omgusing Drip for awhile while providing NOTHING besides blatantly untrue claims just keeps making you look worse. The fact you built a case and then blithely ignored it in favor of someone you haven't even had the decency to build a case on just makes it feel like you're grasping. 
Ok, this feels off. If you're going to say this, call people out, explain why you hate it or why it's scummy. It feels like you just are uncomfortable and dislike a playstyle. Why does it matter?Axelrod wrote:There's just way too much "certainty" floating around in this thread. I absolutely hate it when people just start calling other people "scum" and act like they have it all figured out and it's case-closed when the truth is they knownothing. They have ahunch. Anopinion.
I recognize this is a "style" thing for a lot of people, and they'll flip from calling someone obv.scum to deciding they are clearly town at the drop of a hat, and then immediately press on with their next "obviously scum" target, conveniently ignoring how horribly wrong they were the last time they called someone "obv.scum" and it drives menuts. Please STFU or use some damn qualifiers. When you do this you are either being dishonest or you are just being a moron.
/rant
I don't know why I bothered to type this out. Maybe I'm having a bad day or something.
Even though it annoys you, is it scummy? if not, deal with it. This feels just like a way to ignore a player.Axelrod wrote:I fail to realize? No.Drippereth wrote: You've just described our playstyle.
What you fail to realize is that there is a lot of thought going into the flippant comments; we play a lot of games; the certainties are shorthand and qualifiers are assumed, so they don't need spelling out.
Your rant is, in fact, quite scummy. It's an underhanded criticism of us, without the balls of naming us, and just a big ole IIoA.
It is a style that annoys me greatly. Defend it and all the great results you get using it all you want, this won't change.
I also don't even know what IIoA means.
I thought it best to make my case against the person I was most suspicious of rather than try to address every individual instance of suspicion I'd have come across in my 17 page read. I figured my most relevant thoughts would be the important ones to share.xvart wrote:@Mikujin (419)- In those 15 or so pages you found nothing but scummy behavior on Vezo?
Yes my friend, learn to recognize that the post is in the format of "FOS: buddy, vote: townie"LynchMePls wrote:Eww 436. Vote Kleedrac and in the same post unvote, vote Dana?
If we can't have a majority of votes for raising someone, does that not mean we raise no one?LynchMePls wrote:I'm not even wild about the Mina raise, although I don't think its terrible. With the exception of that 436 is one giant scumdar alert for me.
Drippereth wrote:If we can't have a majority of votes for raising someone, does that not mean we raise no one?
If someone hits 14 raises, they will be raised. If no one hits 14, then the highest raise recipient at the end of the day will be hand. Per mod's response to my iso 13, if there is a tie no one will be raised.Mod wrote:A Hand of the King will be raised when there is a simple majority (i.e. 14 votes). Alternatively, whoever has the most ‘raise’ votes at the time of the Day 1 lynch, will be raised.
Whichever method is used, the Hand of the King will become a double voter from the beginning of Day 2. The Hand may split the two votes. Both votes will be public.
The Hand may not be stripped of his title in any way. A new Hand will not be chosen on the Hand’s death.
Mina accused me of copying reasons from vezopiraka. I do not see where I parroted vezopiraka. Therefore, I'm wanting evidence from Mina to prove that I was parroting vezopiraka.xvart wrote:Why would you want Mina to explain why you did something?
1. I was attacking the case that I doubt it made on Benmage, not defending Benmage in general.xvart wrote:I have a huge problem with this post. If you aren't defending him why are you trying to undermine other players attacks on him? Furthermore, why are youseekingfaults in a particular players arguments? Especially I doubt It, whom you are only slightly suspicious of?
Right, but benmage is a big boy and can take care of himself, plus now we cant see how he would react. Answering questions for others is also something of a scumtell. You can say you werent defending him, but the result of your action was indeed defending him2. I was explaining to I doubt it that his case on Benmage was very poor. I asked for evidence and he gave me a quote from one of his posts. I then searched Benmage's ISO and found that I doubt it's case on Benmage was mostly flawed and thus I went after I doubt it. Not because I thought Benmage was pro-town (I do, but that wasn't the reason why I attacked I dobut it's case on him), but because I didn't like I doubt it's case on Benmage.
