Fringe Mafia (Game Over, role PMs posted)

[Empking]

/confirm

[Empking]

Vote: Hop

- its day 1.

[Empking]

Unvote

Vote: Fur

Using WIFOM to give himself town points.

[Empking]

am i still voting for no lynch?
did i expect no lynch to pass?
do you read?

i expect 3 answers

ok, and you completely dodged the real question

Simply awful.

Also though I'm glad you gave me the two games is there anything specific you want me to look at?

EDIT: I don't like Hop's "scum can't daytalk" it doesn't look real to me.

[Empking]

Truth looks fake?

Ever mafia I have been, no day talk allowed, even on other sites.

Read the rules.

[Empking]

Yeah, TM is completely right that fur's desperation to claim reeks of scum.

[Empking]

Give us the link to the wiki.

[Empking]

Why are half the players no voting? (I'd like an answer from the non-voting players)

[Empking]

Hop's play especially with the change of mind about the claim and the lack of vote look like poor distancing to me. I'd be happy with either lynch at this point.

[Empking]

Hop: Do you have a positive read on anyone? Because it looks very like that you're keeping your options open?

[Empking]

I voted Fur for defending himself using WIFOM.

[Empking]

Right, I'm back. Give me a minute to catch up. I'll have my first epic to semi-epic post tomorrow.

Focus on reads of every player along with thoughts on the Furc and Hop wagons.

[Empking]

Unvote

Vote: Hop

The two of them have been the scummiest to me for a long time but since they're balanced I feel that Noc's reasoning pushed Hop ahead of Furc.

[Empking]

I'll do you 50 times better and quote it.

Vote: Furcolow

Why no lynch?

I like your reaction, but I don't like RVS bandwagonning necessarily
I dislike HOMJ's OMG ANTI-TOWN.
If I was scum, you really believe I would do that, or let me rephrase this:

Do you think my partners would let me vote no lynch? Don't you believe I would be trying to ask their advice?

unvote

FoS: HOMJ
Town would be sort of neutral on this, even if they voted me. Sort of like what Lord Chronos did. He asked why. You just simply declared something is anti-town. DID YOU EXPECT ME TO EXPECT NO LYNCH TO PASS? LOL.
I didn't.

Anyways, doing this is pro-town in another way. It helps to end the RVS. I fucking love the RVS, but it is anti-town as shit.

(bold mine) - That's what I saw as WIFOM anyway.

[Empking]

Unvote

Vote: Fur

Simply awful.

[Empking]

I still say Furc is the most likely scum but a post restriction where you can't come out with it but can "Beep" to say it seems very unlikely.

[Empking]

I can't help thinking that waiting for a claim might put us into a rut that we won't be able to escape from. This might be controversial but hammer?

[Empking]

Vote: Hop

- Same as yesterday plus set up speculation.

[Empking]

Smarg: I've been scumhunting being the first person to vote Hop today and oner of the main proponents behind Furc. I might have been wrong about Furc and you might disagree with me on Hop but that doesn't mean I'm not scumhunting. Along with Hop, there's GW for possible scum


Hop: Taking quotes out of context to try and make a player look scummy is scummy itself. (The quote he quoted was in response to Hop having null and scum reads on everyone as we would expect from scum that doesn't want to get boxxed in but still feels the need to post their reads on everyone) Also if you actually want an increase in activity stop posting as much as you do.

[Empking]

1. I am, the post you quotyted out of context is an example of such.
2. It proves I'm not just bandwagonning players.
3. You were implying that I was being hypocritical. In context that was clearly not the case. So yes it is scummy.
4. That's clearly not the truth.
5. Its counter intuitive, true, but that doesn't change the fact that its true.

[Empking]

1. I am, the post you quotyted out of context is an example of such.
2. It proves I'm not just bandwagonning players.
3. You were implying that I was being hypocritical. In context that was clearly not the case. So yes it is scummy.
4. That's clearly not the truth.
5. Its counter intuitive, true, but that doesn't change the fact that its true.

1. That post I quoted proves nothing, the way I read it, ghost implied he had a pressure vote 1. A. You have no examples from day 1 and an incredibility weak example day 2.
2. So you bandwagon yesterday and figure if you vote me first today you will not be accused of bandwagoning, noted scum
3. "I'm not hypocritical cause I say I'm not" lol
4. What's not true? Bandwagon hopping? Look at your vote history and explain how it's not.
5. What is counter intuitive?

1. I was referring to where I pointed out you were keeping your options open with regards to scum reads.
2. Seriously? What was I doing, staying up late at night press f5 to make sure I got there first.
3. Anybody is free to look at it in context. I've no wish to convince you just to stop you convincing anyone else.
4. I've voted two people seriously. I'm pretty sure that my first vote on each of them was before they had a bandwagon.
5. Not what you'd intiutively expect (I may have got the term wrong.)

[Empking]

Hop: Stop strawmanning. (I don't want to distract the town so this my last post you.)

[Empking]

EBWOP:
Strawman: "I don't remeber seeing a rule that says if you vote first you are automatically town"

[Empking]

Z

[Empking]

Zang: What's the difference between something that is "scummy" and something that is a "scum tell".

[Empking]

EBWOP:
Strawman: "I don't remeber seeing a rule that says if you vote first you are automatically town"

YOU said you were scum hunting by voting first

YOU implied that by voting before they had a wagon to make it seem like you are not scum

I don't have to twist it cause you posted it in black and white

Provide quotes. I said that my voting before their was a wagon meant that I wasn't bandwagonning. Not that it was infallable evidence for me being town.

(Nowe I really am not going to talk about it any more.)

[Empking]

DB: Are you really such an awful player that you think back and forths between two players are a good thing as opposed to an activity killer?

Do you have anything specific that I haven't answered?

Hop: Again stop purposely misintepreting me. I never said people should follow me.

[Empking]

1. Stop misintepreting my comments. I clearly didn't think "OMG you are the best scum hunter this game has ever seen, town please follow emp because he is scum hunting yo " was serious but I also presumed it didn't come out of nowhere. Its clearly implying something.

2. What does "and did you really just call DB a bad mafia player, LOL" mean? (Are you budding him or trying to imply that there can only be one bad player in a game (excluding yourself))

[Empking]

and who is straw manning now, twisting my words to imply I am buddying? wow you keep spiraling and flailing

I never said you were buddying, I was asking you whether or not you were buddying. Stop twisting my words. Also, you never answered my question; what did you mean?

When have I unfairly insulted a player?

[Empking]

Maybe you didn't directly insult him but asking him if he is really that bad of a player is a sideways attemp to insult him

Ha. I was actually trying to say that he didn't really think that a long boring back to forth was a good thing.

[Empking]

FoS: Doombunny

Doombunny - Answer my questions with actual answers now (not "nothing that Hop hasn't mentioned".)

bv: Presume "OMG you are the best scum hunter this game has ever seen, town please follow emp because he is scum hunting yo!" isn't sarcasm. Using that supposition does that imply that I'm asking people to follow me. (The answers "no" before Hop- and DB try and twist that into something it isn't.)

Zang: If somebody sarcasticly says "town please follow emp because he is scum hunting yo" is it fair to presume that something prompted that and its not just a random comment.

Hop: Third time now:

I never said you were buddying, I was asking you whether or not you were buddying. Stop twisting my words. Also, you never answered my question; what did you mean?

[Empking]

What's "LOL" about it then?

[Empking]

cause I found it funny that you are flailing so bad

That doesn't seem to fit with the quote to me. Or at least doesn't fit with the attitude you later professed about insults.

[Empking]

if you are pro-town how are you going to earn credibility with the players in the game if you insult them?

if I came in and saw someone insulted another player, no matter who it was I would vote them immediately

if you are trying to defend yourself there is no need for insults.

(bold mine)

That strikes me as a little more than "not pro town" to me.

I'm not sure if you're serious about the last bit (of your last post).

[Empking]

I already said if you are pro-town there is no reason to insult someone, so if I logged into a game and saw someone had been insulted, I would vote the person doing the insulting.

insults are not pro town

not sure why you are confused

I don't know why I keep on getting into these with you. I'm not going comment on this anymore.

[Empking]

Doombunny - Answer my questions with actual answers now (not "nothing that Hop hasn't mentioned".)

Well there is the question I did ask you that you didn't answer (How does thinking two people are almost equally scummy make me a bad player?)

Also:

-How didn't you find what the bolded part in post 327 was supposed to mean
-Why did you suddenly begin to post more when pressure builded on you?

1. I never said it did.
2. I'll answer on quick reply.
3. I post when I have something to say. Defending myself is something extra to say and (I find) that once I say quite a bit then I'll continue to post. (Its actually I problem because unless I force myself to stop I'll monopolise the thread.)

I don't know why I keep on getting into these with you. I'm not going comment on this anymore.

Well that's not scummy at all [/sarcasm]

How does not wanting the game to devolve into a back and forth between me and Hop benefit the scum? (I'm making a presumption here (that actively scummy actions are done by scum to benefit themselves) . If you don't like it then I'll rephrase the question.

[Empking]

2. I did. You and Hop are clearly lying when you say otherwise. People don't randomly sarcastically say people shouldn't follow me. Its prompted by something.

[Empking]

1. Its evidence that I'm being independent and not following other players. It wasn't the only evidence I gave.
2. Actually it wasn't the only reason. So, heh.
3. I'm doing plenty.

[Empking]

Define Scumhunting.

[Empking]

1. I can't post examples for where I tried "to find scum based on their actions, words, and sometimes lack of words." and nor could anybody else. I can post examples of where I tried to get data to analyze or where I posted my results from my analysis.

2. I've given plenty of reasons for voting you (and previously for voting Furc) and I'm sure you know that otherwise you wouldn't be acting as if my only reason for voting you today was ""same as yesterday"" when I gave another reason in my actual vote post.

3. Town have never blindly followed anywhere. I'd have to be insane to think that'd change now.

[Empking]

EDIT: I don't like Hop's "scum can't daytalk" it doesn't look real to me.

Hop's play especially with the change of mind about the claim and the lack of vote look like poor distancing to me. I'd be happy with either lynch at this point.

Hop: Do you have a positive read on anyone? Because it looks very like that you're keeping your options open?

Yeah, no reasons at all.

Doombunny: What do you tyhink of Hop trying to mislead the town about my reasoning for voting Hop?

Hop: You were keeping your options open by not closing any (closing an option = finding a player towny)

[Empking]

1. I never said it did.

You said "

DB: Are you really such an awful player

that you think back and forths between two players are a good thing as opposed to an activity killer?" Stop changing your story kthxbai.

"back and forth" = Conversation. Do you still think I'm changing my story.

2. I did. You and Hop are clearly lying when you say otherwise. People don't randomly sarcastically say people shouldn't follow me. Its prompted by something.

"I clearly didn't think "OMG you are the best scum hunter this game has ever seen, town please follow emp because he is scum hunting yo " was serious but I also presumed it didn't come out of nowhere.

Its clearly implying something.

" The bolded part with the rest of the post mases it seem as if you don't know what the something is.

What is it then.

Doombunny: What do you tyhink of Hop trying to mislead the town about my reasoning for voting Hop?

I've noticed it and while its the only thing I can agree with you on, its not enough to make me want to change votes. It also loses some of its meaning when you call out HOMJ for twisting your words, misleading town, etc. on every other point.

Why should it lose its meaning when you independantly acknowledge it to be true?

[Empking]

Smarg: GW, DB and SV are the people I'm leaning at. WSe'll be able to make a much better idea once we lynch Hop and have confirmation thast he's scum.

[Empking]

Smarg: GW, DB and SV are the people I'm leaning at. WSe'll be able to make a much better idea once we lynch Hop and have confirmation thast he's scum.

And yet you didn't make a case on any of them...

By gosh its almost like I'm voting a different player rather than one of those three!

(I'm leaning towards you because you're acting like Hop's buddy. (Following Hop without seeming to understand what you're following and "I've noticed it and while its the only thing I can agree with you on, its not enough to make me want to change votes. It also loses some of its meaning when you call out HOMJ for twisting your words, misleading town, etc. on every other point." looks like you're trying to distance but want to make sure you're not expected to vote Hop.)

[Empking]

1. It still looked fake.
2. Its still something weird (Honestly I don't put much weight on this.)
3. That isn't how you left your options open. Stop misrepresenting me. (If you want evidence for how you left your options open look at today how you voted me and SV forgetting the two players you called scummy yesterday. Esentially, despite giving your reads you could vote anybody without looking like you're backtracking.)

I'm sure you're scum because of DB's play but most the fact that you continue and continue to misrepresent me.

[Empking]

DB: What are your thoughts about Hop claiming that I was claiming that Hop was leaving his options open "by voting for furclow"?

[Empking]

Hop: Do you have a positive read on anyone?

Because

it looks very like that you're keeping your options open?

(bold mine)

I think its pretty clear how you're keeping your options open, plus the fact that I explained it again today.

[Empking]

You're right about Lord being dead I forgoty about that. But HOW THE HELL DID YOU KNOW NOC WAS DEAD?

[Empking]

1. We're not on Epic Mafia. We're on Mafiascum. I know I presumed that Noc would come back to us either at the end of the day or the start of the next.

[Empking]

Well I never played a game with someone missing before so that's my only experience

Yeah. I'm not going to call that a scumtell.

[Empking]

You're right about Lord being dead I forgoty about that. But HOW THE HELL DID YOU KNOW NOC WAS DEAD?

This contradicts what you just said IMO

How?

[Empking]

You're right about Lord being dead I forgoty about that. But HOW THE HELL DID YOU KNOW NOC WAS DEAD?

This contradicts what you just said IMO

How?

An answer that's relevant to the question would be preferred.

[Empking]

I thought it was a scum tell but you explained it to me satisfication.

[Empking]

Posting to avoid the prod. I'm really worried about the activity level. I know I can just right back in once the yanks get over their holiday.

[Empking]

I'm not going to post cases on SV and GW because I want people to vote Hop rather than SV and GW.

[Empking]

I'm not going to post cases on SV and GW because I want people to vote Hop rather than SV and GW.

How is this protown behavior?

How is it not?

[Empking]

1. I am scumhunting and I am reading players. I can tell you why I find them scummy but I'm not going to build a proper case and allow your buddies to use them to get you off from being today's lynch.
2. I'm withholding info from the scum. Town can look at the data just like I've done.
3. I've considered the possibility and have found it lacking.

Edit; How in the good lord's name have I been withholding my reads on players. Everybody is well aware who my four main suspects are. And you've rebutted nothing even DB agreed with that (I think).

[Empking]

As town, there is

one

reason to post a case. In order order to get a player lynched. That's it. And unless Primate or TM disagree with me in regards to that then I'm going to take that to my grave.

(Town doesn't need to be psychic, I know at this point in time I don't have a case on GW I'd have to look at his posts again to make a proper case.)

Smarge: I think bv is clearly town as his actions with regards to Hop certainly look like town actions (it doesn't strike me as bussing nor does it seem careful as we'd expect a scum vote on a townie would be.)

Hop: I'm willing to reevaluate you when new information comes to light.

Everybody: Not that the player who
1. Speaks generally about me saying Hop is misinteprating my posts too much but when given examples agrees that Hop is misinterpreting my posts. Classic scum trying to defend their buddy.
2. Chainsaw defends Hop.
3. Swaps his and Hop's vote (they keep the number of votes the same but allows Hop to move his vote and tries to reduce the connection of them voting me at the same time for a while) on me and just generally acts like Hop's buddy.

Is the one trying to force me into building a case on another player.

[Empking]

Empking, how is that philosophy not tunneling? There is at least one other scum out there.

I've got

four

scum reads on players. That's why I'm not tunelling. I'm just not going to expend my energies to prevent Hop from getting lynched when he's clearly scum.

[Empking]

@emp - you told smarge that you think BV's actions are pro town, do you think somebody replacing into the game should focus on the person with the largest bandwagon or should comment on more than one player?

Preferably the second.

[Empking]

His reaction towards you doesn't look like bussing or like scum voting a townie. Therefore if he's neither bussing nor trying for a mislynch he must be town.

[Empking]

His reaction towards you doesn't look like bussing or like scum voting a townie.

Therefore if he's neither bussing nor trying for a mislynch he must be town.

this part strikes me as odd

ok I buy he doesn't look like scum voting for a townie - so it could be townie voting for a townie

but how do you jump to the conclusion that he is "trying for a mislynch"? the only way to know it would be a mislynch is if somebody KNEW I was town.

you say it doesn't look like he knows I am town so wouldn't you have worded that last part differently?

If he was scum then he would think you're town so if you were town and he was scum then he'd have to be trying for a mislynch. Since he isn't then unless he's bussing (which we've already said is unlikely) he must be town.

[Empking]

but how can you say he is trying for a mislynch when you are convinced I am scum? the only way you can say that is if you know I am not scum.

He isn't trying for a mislynch! He's town!

[Empking]

but how can you say he is trying for a mislynch when you are convinced I am scum? the only way you can say that is if you know I am not scum.

He isn't trying for a mislynch! He's town!

1. they way you worded it, made it see like you knew I was town.

2. I am not trying to twist your words so I will just ask. Did you just declare BV is town?

I am 90%+ sure that bv is town.

[Empking]

Mod: Would you mind updating the first post with Nocmen's flip

[Empking]

TM: What weak arguments?
Look at this in a wider issue. DB and Hop are clearly buddies. Who are my buddies?

You reason it with the fact that you think Hop is scum, and the fact that it wasn't a careful vote. In other words: WIFOM, in other words: it actually does look scummy.

1. I took two possible scenarios. 1 . Hop is scum 2. Hop is town his actions looked town either way.
2. Don't just dismiss an argument as WIFOM. Scum make careful votes. bv didn't therefore bv is town. Where's the WIFOM.

[Empking]

Oh yeah. TM if you doubt that bv and Hop are buddies look at this post taking into account DB's later actions and play.

Gusy, ya'll realize that setup speculation is only really scummy if it distracts the town from scumhunting or people begin to take it like its fact rite?

Also, I want to hear from smar (Soras replacement) about the game.

@Ghost- Is there anything else you want to say? Being gone for a while and then just coming in for a brief talk about speculation isn't cutting it.

@HOMJ- Is this the only reason you have for voting Zang? This is pretty weak XD

HOMJ is my top suspect right now for reasons detailed yesterday. I don't want to put a vote down on him though until I hear more from bv, smar, and Ghost.

(The bottom bit is more important than the top bit.)

[Empking]

2. Don't just dismiss an argument as WIFOM. Scum make careful votes. bv didn't therefore bv is town. Where's the WIFOM.

The wifom is right there. Look it up if you can't see it. Also, bv can serve fine as possible buddy, seeing as you joined forces in much the same way Hop and DB did.

I think I see where you're coming from but if that's the case then all town tells are subject to WIFOM. There are some actions that scum just won't take or are unable to fake. bv has committed WIFOM.

To respond to your last point; that's just factually wrong.
1. Me and bv both voted Hop. DB and Hop have been very careful in making sure they don't vote the same player (even though it looks unnatural IMO)
2. bv hasn't mentioned myself (I don't think). Unlike Hop and DB.
3. Neither bv nor myself have turned a sudden u-turn on one another despite considering them the scummiest player previously.

(Oh yeah. Reading through your first post again. I'm not going to take the reason I suspect SV and GW to my grave. I'm going to take the fact that a case is a persuasive tool with me till I die.)

[Empking]

I've got four scum reads on players. That's why I'm not tunelling.

Tunneling isn't when you only have one read on a player. It's when you're 100% convinced that someone is scum that you're almost unwilling to look at anything or anyone else. (In this case you are so convinsed on HOMJ being scum hard enough that you're ignoring your other scum reads on other people)

I am willing to look at other players but Hop is both clearly scum and the largest wagon on one of the definite scum (You, SV and Hop). I have absolutely no reason to deal with you or SV (since I'm already convince of your being scum and Hop has the biggest wagon) and I couldn't try and get a better read on GW because he's just been replaced and his replacement isn't really in the game yet.

"I don't have any clear buddies so I must be town!" Come on now... Maybe its only because you've only really been talking about HOMJ this game XD

also, this thread needs moar SV, post restriction or not.

"I'm clearly strawmanning an argument so I must be town" Come on now...Also I'm pretty sure that I've talked about you and bv as much as Hop recently.

[Empking]

1. Just because someone has the largest wagon doesn't mean ignore everyone else

Give me an example of something I should be doing. Why should I do it?

2. No it's not straw man, you totally implied that you are not buddying, and there is no reason to imply that if not trying to imply you are town

1. I didn't imply that I wasn't "buddying" but I think I get what you mean.
2. TM: Note the quick defense of DB.
3. Do you know the definition of "must"? Tts the "must" that's the problem.

3. You quickly gravitated to bv, looks sort of like buddying to me

How did I gravitate to bv?

[Empking]

Hop, you gave me the example now I'm looking for a reason.

2. No it's not straw man

I'm not defending

LAL?

(Also, the fact that Hop ignore the "must" thing that was the majority of my argument with regards to that leads me to believe that he knows he's wrong.)

[Empking]

Must isn't relative because that's clearly what you were trying to imply.

No it wasn't. And to stop this from turning into a yes-no-yes-no thing. SV and GW are my other two suspects, neither of them have an obvious buddy (especially not SV who is the SK (OK, GW does have two obvious partners but that's just because they're obvious scum not in relation to GW.))

Saying the truth is not

necessarily

defending,

FTFY

there was no twisting of words as I already explained. By accusing someone of buddying and saying you aren't, is saying he must be scum and I must not be.

Wrong.

[Empking]

Your rebuttal in the above post is strictly your opinion, sadly opinions in this game don't hold much weight

"I can't argue with the insurmountable logic that Empking clearly thinks scum without buddies exist (and therefore he can't possibly think that a player without any obvious buddies MUST be town). So I'll just pretend its all opinion"

[Empking]

YOU

ask who are your buddies, implying that you have none, which implies that

YOU MUST BE TOWN

OK, one of two things are definitely true now.

1. You've failled to hear about SKs.
2. You're scum.

Which is it?

[Empking]

YOU

ask who are your buddies, implying that you have none, which implies that

YOU MUST BE TOWN

OK, one of two things are definitely true now.

1. You've failled to hear about SKs.
2. You're scum.

Which is it?

1. yes I have heard of SKs but I am not trying to speculate if we have them in this game because we don't have nearly enough information to do so
2. No I am not scum
3. so by that statement if you are not implying you are town, does that mean you are implying you are SK? because that would make town's job that much easier because now you threw it out there, you are either implying one of those 2 things.

I'm implying nothing.

[Empking]

than why bring it up in the first point? why accuse someone of buddying and than ask people who you have buddied?

1. I never accused somebody of "buddying" nor asked who I "buddied" I accused them of having obvious buddies and my having no buddies.
2. Its an important part of scumhunting and I think TM neglected it.

[Empking]

than why bring it up in the first point? why accuse someone of buddying and than ask people who you have buddied?

1. I never accused somebody of "buddying"

nor asked who I "buddied"

I accused them of having obvious buddies and my having no buddies.
2. Its an important part of scumhunting and I think TM neglected it.

TM: What weak arguments?
Look at this in a wider issue. DB and Hop are clearly buddies.

Who are my buddies?

basically yes you did

See, at this point you're just lying in a way that simply can't be beneficial to your win con. This is why people call you a VI.

[Empking]

how did I lie?

also calling someone a VI I have learned on site is more of a scum tactic than a town tactic

asking someone "who are my buddies" is basically the same as asking "who I buddied" just worded differently

Not at all. You don't buddy your buddies (or at least its not buddying when you do it to your buddies).

nobody is buddying you but you tried to buddy to BV by [-b]immediately[/b] calling him pro-town, trying to get him on your side ASAP

(bold mine)
Quotes please.

and I consider being called a VI an insult so I would ask you to not do it again.

That's not the way to get better at this game.

[Empking]

nobody is buddying you but you tried to buddy to BV by

immediately

calling him pro-town, trying to get him on your side ASAP

(bold mine)
Quotes please.

[Empking]

I am willing to look at other players but Hop is both clearly scum and the largest wagon on one of the definite scum (You, SV and Hop). I have absolutely no reason to deal with you or SV (since I'm already convince of your being scum and Hop has the biggest wagon) and I couldn't try and get a better read on GW because he's just been replaced and his replacement isn't really in the game yet.

There are a lot of problems wrong with this. For one, you shouldn't be ignoring me or SV just because we're not the largest wagon. Also, you say your going to look at other players but you don't say anything about them. Also, is HOMJ your largest scumread?

Also, I can understand the replacement screwing up your Ghost case but there's still no excuse to not post one on SV.

SV is pretending to have a Post Restriction. That's it (and its good enough for me)

"I'm clearly strawmanning an argument so I must be town" Come on now...Also I'm pretty sure that I've talked about you and bv as much as Hop recently.

You clearly said "DB and Hop are clearly buddies. Who are my buddies?" implying that we must be scummier than you because we're "buddies" and you're not buddying.

You're ignoring the "must" thing.

Also, I don't really think one real post about me and then a couple "OMG DB is buddying" and a bunch of "bv is town. Period." posts cut it.

1. Don't teach Hop bad habits. You're not buddying with Hop you are buddies with Hop.
2. I'm confident that I've given multiple examples in multiple posts for why its clear that you and Hop are buddies.
3. I've explained in stupid detail why bv is town.

nobody is buddying you but you tried to buddy to BV by immediately calling him pro-town, trying to get him on your side ASAP

(bold mine)
Quotes please.

I think you're focusing on the wrong thing here. If I am not mistaken, HOMJ is calling you out for trying to get bv on your side. You may not have done it immidiately but you definately did. We both know what he meant.

I'm not discussing what he meant (nobody can prove either way; though the fact that my bv read was forced out of me rather than being volunteered IS conclusive evidence for it being true). I'm discussing the fact that he's clearly trying to make things out as worse that they are.

TM: Please note the way DB swooped in to defend Hop.

[Empking]

I'm not discussing what he meant (nobody can prove either way; though the fact that my bv read was forced out of me rather than being volunteered IS conclusive evidence for it being true). I'm discussing the fact that he's clearly trying to make things out as worse that they are.

I for one fail to see this in the aforementioned quote. Yes, HOMJ did say immidiately when you didn't talk about bv immidiately but everyone still knew what he meant.

Give me one town reason for why he would say "immediately". If you're going gto defend him you may as well do it without just going for rhetoric everytime.

Hell, I didn't even pay any mind to it because it was so pointless until you pointed it out.

"I ignored the scummy lie of my partner" - What does that prove?

[Empking]

Hop:

nobody is buddying you but you tried to buddy to BV by

immediately

calling him pro-town, trying to get him on your side ASAP

(bold mine)
Quotes please.

Also,quotes for where I said you and DB were buddying.

[Empking]

Hop:

nobody is buddying you but you tried to buddy to BV by

immediately

calling him pro-town, trying to get him on your side ASAP

(bold mine)
Quotes please.

Also,quotes for where I said you and DB were buddying.

TM: Note the way that DB and Hop are launching a coordinated strike against myself (by continuing to ignore my several posts about how "being buddies" is nothing like "buddying".) in order to make me mad.

[Empking]

TM: Also note how DB has clearly told Hop to leave his defense to the "immediately" point to DB and Hop is being a good follower and ignoring it.

[Empking]

why are you directing everything toward TM? there are other players in this game

And they're welcome to read the points I direct to TM.

and how is me pointing out your lies a coordinated strike?[/quotes]

Quotes please.

seems like you are flailing pretty hard

Evidence please.

[Empking]

Also,

Hop:

nobody is buddying you but you tried to buddy to BV by

immediately

calling him pro-town, trying to get him on your side ASAP

(bold mine)
Quotes please.

Also,quotes for where I said you and DB were buddying.

[Empking]

TM:

besides do you not know how buddying works?

buddying is typically scum buddying to town, you are implying that DB and I are scum together teaming up on you which is not what buddying is.

Is this or is this not conclusive evidence that DB and Hop knew what I meant and were just trying to annoy me in order to bait me.

Hop: You're saying that since pressure has built up on me then I've responded to posts directed to myself quicker. Please provide evidence of that.

[Empking]

Hop: You've ignored my request for proof about you "immediate" argument enough times that I can't even make the post pyramid bigger without the forum preventing me. Please respond to it.

[Empking]

Day 1 - 16 posts
Day 2 - 71 posts

nuff said.

No.

and you decalred bv as pro town that was pretty immediate imo

Are the say 25/11 is immediately after 16/11 (bv's first post) or do have some other date in mind.

DB:Wow, I guess you were wrong about Hop not meaning immediately, weren't you? Whoops.

[Empking]

DB: 1. Do you know the difference between "buddying" and "being buddies"?
2. Does Hop's quote show me saying the former?
3. I said that you were launching a coordinated attack by mixing up "buddying" and "being buddies" in what way is that the same thing as saying "FoSing you and calling you out for things is now a coordinated strike"?
4. In day 2 I've got a very strong scum read on two players. Provide evidence for why that is not the reason for the increased level of posts.

Hop: 1. Ah, so I've reminded you of the fact that you weren't meant to keep up on that "immediate" thing. (TM; Take note)
2. I see no reason to respond to a quote that was clearly designed to troll me by obv scum. What town motivation can you see.
3. I've only recently become under pressure (two scum isn't pressure). Therefore how could my posting level before TM's vote be connected to TM's vote?

TM: 1. Note again that with specifics DB goes "he shouldn't be ignoring this anyway" in order to distance but in general continues to protect Hop.
2. The way Hop suddenly does a u-turn on the immediately front (coincidently around the same time DB could have orderred him to do so in their conversations.)

[Empking]

1. Bull
2. Not a scum tell.
3.

[

VOTE COUNT 1.01

]

"He's a bit unorthodox."
"He's also tripping his brains out. ...You know that, right?"

[

4

]

Furcolow

- HopOnMyJoystick, LordChronos, Empking, Doombunny9

[

2

]

LordChronos

- TonyMontana, Furcolow
[

1

]

TonyMontana

- Zang

Not Voting: sorasgoof, Shattered Viewpoint, foilist13, GhostWriter, Nocmen

---

Day 1 will end on November 25th, 2010 at 2:00 AM EST (Countdown here) or when someone is lynched.

With 12 alive, it takes 7 to lynch.

4. Even DB admits this is false.
5. How is this a scumtell?
6. Bull.
7. This I don't even.
8. This I don't even.
9. First part: No I didn't. Second Part: Not a scum tell.
10. Quotes please.
11. How is this a scum tell.
12. Quotes please.
13. Bull
14. Firstly, it was 90%. Secondly, where did I ever suggest that I was 100% sure than bv was town.
15. How is this a scum tell?
16. Coincidence
17. Quotes please.
18. Evidence please.

DB: Thoughts on 7.
TM: Thoughts on 7.
Smarge: Thoughts on 7

[Empking]

His reaction towards you doesn't look like bussing or like scum voting a townie. Therefore if he's neither bussing nor trying for a mislynch he must be town.

this is where your "bull" comment was about

That doesn't make it any less bull.

Also, your last post. What does that have to do with 10.

[Empking]

your post 54 - 58 is basically how you won't post your reads on anyone else because you want me lynched

Bull

you saying you are taking your reads to the grave

Quotes please.

[Empking]

you saying you are taking your reads to the grave

Post 57 is about me holding the fact that cases are a persuasive tool to my grave. I already explained that.

Hop is scum for one very simple reason: DB is clearly his buddy. You can almost ignore his repeated lies and nonsense posts. DB is clearly his buddy.

1. DB had Hop as his to suspect but came up with a BS reason not to vote. (post 29)
2. He's now done a complete u-turn on Hop. Defending him at every opportunity.
3. Hop's and DB's coordinated strikes to annoy me.
4. DB always generally agreeing with Hop but when asked about specifics always disagreeing with him.
5. Hop's ignoring a point I made against him in order to leave it to DB to defend him about it.
6. DB defending him on that point.
7. Hop changing his mind on that point quickly as soon as DB was on in order to tell him to pull a u-turn.
8. Until recently, DB and Hop coordinated to keep their votes off the same player today.

[Empking]

BV: 3 and 8 are not the same thing at all. 2 could be split into two points anyway, so you might be right with regards to being similar to 6.
With regards to three I'm pretty sure you just said "I missed that part XD My bad." with regards to you saying the exact same thing beforehand.

Thoughts on Hop's seventh reason?

[Empking]

1. Do you know the difference between "buddying" and "being buddies"?

Yes I do

Give me one good reason then for mixing them up, then.

[Empking]

clames to be oln the wagon early

early

The first vote count is the "early" one.

Hop: Quotes to back up the lies comment, please.

[Empking]

clames to be oln the wagon early

early

The first vote count is the "early" one.

Hop: Quotes to back up the lies comment, please.

fine you were on the wagon early and you got off the wagon, once you are off the wagon you can't claim that you were on it early when the lynch is final

Actually I can.

when the final hammer dropped you were in an opportunistic spot on furc's wagon and final vote count is the one that counts

er, no. The one that counts are all of them.

[Empking]

when the FINAL wagon was developing you were in spot 4, spot 4 on a 7 person bandwagon is one of the worst spots to be on because it forces it to a full fledge bandwagon making more than halfway to a lynch.

you really aren't helping your case by saying "earlier in the day I was on his wagon early" final vote count weighs more than any other vote count of the day.

Again no. The wagon that weighs the most is the one that has the biggest influence on the day. That would be the very first wagon on Furc.

[Empking]

DB: 3 and 8 are not the same thing at all. 2 could be split into two points anyway, so you might be right with regards to being similar to 6.
With regards to three I'm pretty sure you just said "I missed that part XD My bad." with regards to you saying the exact same thing beforehand.

Thoughts on Hop's seventh reason?

Sorry. I made a typo to you I was responding to. Its fixed now.

[Empking]

Getting off the wagon *does* negate any claims of being early.

Of course, this argument would have been much more relevant if fur had been scum.

"Town should ignore information that helps to find scum" - Is this a fair paraphase of your last comment. If not, how not?

TM: Thoughts on 7?

You haven't convinced me that Hop is a better lynch, so in your own interest (and/or town's), you should perhaps present a better case on someone.

TM: Thoughts on 7?

[Empking]

TM:

7. claims to have reads on other scum, claims he actually has 4 scum reads however he won't share them with anyone

Thoughts? Specific thoughts on this specific claim.

[Empking]

TM:

7. claims to have reads on other scum, claims he actually has 4 scum reads however he won't share them with anyone

Thoughts? Specific thoughts on this specific claim.

But make sure you read this before responding, this supports my #7

http://mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.ph ... 2#p2643292

The claim seems to be true? Am i missing the reason you are harping on that point?

TM: Stop tunelling. I think that you

know

who my four scum reads are on. I've mentioned them time and time again. Plus if you wren't tunelling so you'd know that Hop was just quoting random posts rather than proving anything.

DB: Who are the four players I think are scum?

[Empking]

@emp, the issue is not who your scum reads are like I said, the issue is you refuse to make cases on any of them

7. claims to have reads on other scum, claims he actually has 4 scum reads however he won't share them with anyone

i'm not going to discuss this any more. Reading through DB's posts I'm pretty sure I was wrong about GW and TM.

[Empking]

DB: Who are the four players I think are scum?

Me, HOMJ, SV, and Ghost. Why did you feel the need to ask me this?

To make certain that I was clear and that both TM and Hop are lying (rather than being mistaken) when they say that I haven't given them.

[quote"Emp"]i'm not going to discuss this any more. Reading through DB's posts I'm pretty sure I was wrong about GW and TM.

What about my posts made you change your mind?[/quote]

You went from Hop to GW. It seems unlikely that you'd move from bussing Hop to bussing another member of your scum team.

Smarge: DB caee coming in a minute.

[Empking]

Smarge: 1. DB had Hop as his to suspect but came up with a BS reason not to vote. (post 29)
2. He's now done a complete u-turn on Hop. Defending him at every opportunity.
3. Hop's and DB's coordinated strikes to annoy me.
4. DB always generally agreeing with Hop but when asked about specifics always disagreeing with him.
5. Hop's ignoring a point I made against him in order to leave it to DB to defend him about it.
6. DB defending him on that point.
7. Hop changing his mind on that point quickly as soon as DB was on in order to tell him to pull a u-turn.
8. Until recently, DB and Hop coordinated to keep their votes off the same player today.

[Empking]

Emp you are looking too much into the poor wording of my sentence, I'm harping on the fact that you refuse to post your cases on the people you find scummy, I'm not talking about your refusal to list the named of them

A player's reaction to poor wording; My bad, I meant X.
A player's reaction to a caught lie that he thinks he can wriggle out of: No look at these quote.
A player's reaction when he knows he can't wriggle out of the lie despite trying to: You such and I mean X (Ignore those five post previously where I made it clear that I meant Y like I said.)

[Empking]

Dude it's obvious i have been on you for refusing to share your READS on people

Stop the straw man

Pssst, Hop. DB told you to pretend you were talking about cases. I think you forgot there.

[Empking]

To make certain that I was clear and that both TM and Hop are lying (rather than being mistaken) when they say that I haven't given them.

It always make me laugh when yuou call other people out for lying by changing their words. We all know who you think is scum. We don't know why.

I thought you weren't a mindreader?

TM and Hop have said several times that I didn't say who my four scum reads were on.

[Empking]

DB: Zang and bv are obv-town. So its a question between TM and Smarge for the fourth scum (If we ignore GW). I think Smarge's post are genuine scumhunting.

[Empking]

Post 46, its along with Hop's posts where the annoyance is seen ""OMG DB is buddying"".

There are probably three scum on your and Hop's team. Reading your post meant that I had to replace GW so TM was no longer clearly town (he was clearly town because he wasn't scum)

[Empking]

true claim is true.

Why do you say that? It seems awfully vanilla for a BM game with roles such as "Patholologist".

[Empking]

There are probably some ludicrously minor roles in this game. Attempting to use flavour to outguess the mod may not go as well as you think...

Oh and I'm telling the truth, there is no way if you are pro-town you can honestly say I have not been scum hunting, if I'm wrong on you emp, I'm sorry but you are the biggest read I have right now

I will say that the 180 smarg has pulled definitely has me paying more attention to her as well

Neither Commuters nor William Bell count as minor roles IMO.

[Empking]

true claim is true.

Why do you say that? It seems awfully vanilla for a BM game with roles such as "Patholologist".

Doesn't seem that vanilla compared to the two vanilla flips, though?

PRs and VTs are completely different.

Also, those roles were Brandon and the cow. <those be minor roles

Unlike William Bell who was a major mysterious figure in S1.

[Empking]

Emp since it's clear you still don't beleive me,

What are your thoughts on smar's 180? Odd or do you beleive his reasons?

His 180 doesn't have a scum motivation unless you're scum. If you're scum then Smarge is probably town for other reasons.

[Empking]

Emp is refusing to do what?

[Empking]

The wiki's wrong. The classic commuter one is one that every other night can become un-NKable.

[Empking]

Search for nocman

Nope, nice try though.

[Empking]

[face_palm] @ smarg's "the wiki"

Disregard the fact that there's only one "the wiki" to be talked of here, any definitions not found in our wiki might as well be made up be oneself.


Do I really need to spell out that I have role-related privvy info that more or less confirms Hop's commuter claim? Nobody can take a hint in this town?

Well since "hints" AKA "things you can later deny" are anti-town, I for one don't trust them in the least

[Empking]

@HOMJ- You are NOT clear. Do NOT act like it. For all we know TM could have been roleblocked, he could be your scumpartner trying to save you etc.

Unless TM is cleared and we find out he was not roleblocked you are clear. But TM isn't clear and a roleblock is always an option. You. Are. Not. Clear.

Or that Hop isn't a scum commuter, scum aescetic (which Zang hinted was more likely given the William Bell claim) or any similar role.

(I'm posting once a day and I have little reason to post more. The players I need to convince (GW and SV) aren't here and the two people voting me aren't giving any arguments just snide little comments.)

[Empking]

I can't believe that Hop decided to quote Zerofang and Mastin to prove his point and then left Glork to the middle.

Hop:
1. Your case was amost completely untruths (That's what I meant by "Bull", "Quotes please" and "Evidence Plerase".
2. You tell me how to prove the (truthful) statement "despite find the same players scummy, early D2 DB and Hop refused to vote for the same player" and then I'll prove my arguments.

[Empking]

3. Emp won't til I answer why DB and I have not voted the same, like I can read DB's mind (cause I have proven I'm not afraid to vote my suspicions) And DB and I ARE voting the same player now so this point is invalid

Bull.

2. You tell me how to prove the (truthful) statement "despite find the same players scummy, early D2 DB and Hop refused to vote for the same player" and then I'll prove my arguments.

[Empking]

One more thing, this game is to catch scum so I vote people I suspect is scum because votes put pressure on people to get them to talk, how is this anti-town behavior?

If that's directed to me then when did I say that?

[Empking]

DB:
1. Which of the following two facts are true: You are scum with Hop OR you don't know what "early day 2" means?
2. Which of the following two facts are true: You are scum with Hop OR you don't know what "how to prove" means?

[Empking]

@ emp, when i flip town, who will be your suspects for scum and why

You're not going to flip town.

[Empking]

You and DB are scumbuddies, therefore you must be scum.

[Empking]

DB:
1. Which of the following two facts are true: You are scum with Hop OR you don't know what "early day 2" means?
2. Which of the following two facts are true: You are scum with Hop OR you don't know what "how to prove" means?

Neither. This doesn't matter though seeing as how you said bull to "Emp won't til I answer why DB and I have not voted the same, like I can read DB's mind (cause I have proven I'm not afraid to vote my suspicions) And DB and I ARE voting the same player now so this point is invalid" none of which is bull (It's a fact that HOMJ isn't a mind reader and its a fact that currently, me and HOMJ are voting you therefore, therefore, it is not bull)

OK, since you're convinced that is isn't "Bull" find me a quote where I said I "won't til I answer why DB and I have not voted the same".

[Empking]

I can't believe that Hop decided to quote Zerofang and Mastin to prove his point and then left Glork to the middle.

Hop:
1. Your case was amost completely untruths (That's what I meant by "Bull", "Quotes please" and "Evidence Plerase".

2. You tell me how to prove the (truthful) statement "despite find the same players scummy, early D2 DB and Hop refused to vote for the same player" and then I'll prove my arguments.

pretty sure this is where you said you would not make a case til it was proven

er no.

[Empking]

Yep, it's right there in bold

Prove this and I'll prove that

er no

[Empking]

What I was saying is that I find DB's post right there extremely suspect. Why do you say there's only one other scum?

Yeah, that's just trying to throw dirt on another player. Since I know bv is lying I would like a claim from him.

[Empking]

Oh yeah. Does anybody want to claim Gene's death?

[Empking]

I'm fine with mass claim.

[Empking]

I am the Observer. Alternating tracker - watcher. Tracked DB night 1 got nothing. Watched TM night 2 got nothing.

[Empking]

Oh yeah. SV to claim next.

[Empking]

Who's voting bv? 5

[Empking]

I'm waiting for the end of the mass claim and now I'm also kind of convinced by Zang's insane/paranoid argument.

[Empking]

/pickin up prod
I'll be up to speed tonight.
Where we at with the massclaim? My turn?

Primate's.

[Empking]

If we're done with the MC then I'll have to

Vote: bv

[Empking]

@Primate- So you're still not scumhunting and you're not explaining your sudden vote on HOMJ, kool.

@bv- Same for you. I asked you to do something a few posts back and you're still ignoring it. This is getting old.

Also anyone notice:

3.) All anti-town roles have been equipped with safeclaims.

So why the hell would bv claim something that wasn't a safeclaim?

He didn't have a FC that lent itself to JOAT.

[Empking]

This is different because I'm not dead. Having scum appear as town after the death can change the game, but an alive on would almost completely ruin the towns chances of winning.

My point wasn't about how unfair it would be, it was about how it is possible that we have a mod-confirmed scum and that while you are basically 99% clear, you're not 100% because there's always that chance of the mod including a role such as that in a bastard game (ephasis on bastard). I am willing to say that you're confirmed unless there's other evidence otherwise due to how it would be unfail to the town assuming every member of the town is telling the truth about their roles. This conversation is basically pointless and distracting from the town so I'm willing to drop this.

Also, I like how bv has been posting in other games but not this one...

If scum can be mod confirmed as town in this game then being mod confirmed as town means nothing. If being mod confirmed as town means nothing in this game then there's no point including a role that gets mod confirmed as town. I'd call him 100% cleared.

[Empking]

DB: Primate and you are my other top suspects.

[Empking]

You and Primate have been my two biggest scum reads all game. Primate has still been lurking and not posting in a scummy fashion and his claim doesn't really alter that and your posts haven't stopped being queer just because my working hypothesis turned out to be wrong. I'm not going to continue with this considering.

Who are your top scumreads other than bv

Scumhunting=/=Saying who you're top scumreads are

[Empking]

That isn't my case on you. But:
1. Not null, there's still a BS reason not to vote him.
2. No because you've still done a complete u-turn on a player.
The same is true for most of them (just not 5 and 7)

[Empking]

DB: Do you really consider a player trying to get brownie points by cuddling up to a pro-town player who was the obvious lynch really unlikely?

[Empking]

DB, he doesn't have one on me because he knows my claim is true and he's scum with Smarg

That makes utterly no sense.

[Empking]

DB: Do you really consider a player trying to get brownie points by cuddling up to a pro-town player who was the obvious lynch really unlikely?

Alright, you may have a point here. I still want to see:

a. Your current case on me (since you said the one you provided isn't the current one)
b. Your case on bv
c. A reason why you haven't provided a case on bv so far

That makes utterly no sense.

Then prove him wrong, make a case on him.

That also makes no sense. The ability to make a case on a player is a scum trick. I've got one reason for voting bv, he obviously (from my perspective) scum. Now I could look through his posts with my cognitive bias firmly in place, making everything he's posted a scum tell but truth be told that's not the pro-town thing to do.

People should decide to vote bv or Smarge/Me on the following things.

Are you scum? (Then vote me)

Do you find Smarge scummier than bv? (Then vote me)

An idea: How about we No Lynch then Smarge kills bv, so we get rid of bv scum but we don't risk losing by lynching me or Smarge.

[Empking]

I think its a safe assumption .

[Empking]

No, you won't kill me. You'll make me "disappear", then I'll turn up dead a few days in. You know, your scumkill.

Town bv would not think that would happen. Town bv would think such an action would see both myself and Smarge lynched and would know that scum-Empking or scum-Smarge would not do that. Scum-bv wouldn't think it through since he knows it isn't possible for that to be the case.

[Empking]

An idea: How about we No Lynch then Smarge kills bv, so we get rid of bv scum but we don't risk losing by lynching me or Smarge.

This won't work. For one, we can't be completely sure that smar is insane and if she isn't, we're screwed if we do this. This plan also only works if smar is telling the truth because if smar is lying and is scum then they just kill someone else and leave bv alive and what do you know, we just lost someone without learning anything. Other things can go wrong as well such as a scum roleblocker.

I am excedingly confident that unless we have a SK (exceedingly unlikely) that Smarge is insane. In that case then if (presuming no roleblocker) bv was alive the next day then you'd know myself and Smarge would be scum. Unfortunately, you've got a point about roleblockers.

[Empking]

An idea: How about we No Lynch then Smarge kills bv, so we get rid of bv scum but we don't risk losing by lynching me or Smarge.

I don't see how this is different then lynching BV.

If BV is town and gets lynched then scum wins (if everyone has been honest.) If we no lynched then scum would've made one killl putting us into pretty much the same situation we're in now. DB's right that the truthful scenario could be messed up by a scum roleblocker though.

[Empking]

If BV is town and gets lynched then scum wins (if everyone has been honest.) If we no lynched then scum would've made one killl putting us into pretty much the same situation we're in now. DB's right that the truthful scenario could be messed up by a scum roleblocker though.

Think about it this way:

If we mislynch bv there will be 7 people going into night with a town person dying due to scumkills so we have 3 town 3 scum and we lose.

If we no lynch today we have 3 scum, 5 town with bv dying due to smar and a townie dying due to scum NK, assuming bv is legit, its still 3 town, 3 scum and we lose.

IK think somebody is scum with bv and dfoesn't think his scenarios through. If bv dies because of Smar then bv can't legit because one of them must be scum.

[Empking]

I'm here and I still lack anything new to add.

[Empking]

Vote: bv