Doesn't mean you can push a BW on someone who clearly made 2 RVS posts. Calling his posts dumb isn't a great move, either, as they were RVS posts. The fact you needed reasons for a vote in RVS is also suspect, but forgiveable for now.Internet Stranger wrote:I hate RVS.
ShadoWolf wrote:That vote was RVS. The CrazyAnswers thing was just a pun, nothing more.Substrike22 wrote:p-edit: Shadow, why are you calling Crazy out when there are clear flaws in IS' post, which Crazy is actually pointing out?
You think Grey is Mafia. I disagree. Not a quote, but there we are. Your version also fits though.Empking wrote:Pleae quote where Grey disagreed with me. Please quote where you disagreed with me!Empking wrote:ShadoWolf wrote:Read this as:Empking wrote:Sub, Grey and SW calling it now.Empking wrote:EVERYONE WHO DISAGREES WITH ME IS MAFIA!!!
A better quote would be.Empking wrote: GREY AND EVERYONE WHO TRIES TO DEFEND GREY IS MAFIA!!!
I'd like everybody to note that Empking thinks he has called the entire scumteam, based on about 10 posts in total.Empking wrote:I would like everybody to note that SW is calling Grey non-mafia when Grey has only made two posts (and those posts being 1st and 2nd along with being random.).ShadoWolf wrote:You think Grey is Mafia. I disagree. Not a quote, but there we are. Your version also fits though.
How is that any different to what you did to me?Empking wrote:Awful awful desperation to try and discredit me.ShadoWolf wrote:I'd like everybody to note that Empking thinks he has called the entire scumteam, based on about 10 posts in total.Empking wrote:I would like everybody to note that SW is calling Grey non-mafia when Grey has only made two posts (and those posts being 1st and 2nd along with being random.).ShadoWolf wrote:You think Grey is Mafia. I disagree. Not a quote, but there we are. Your version also fits though.
It's difficult to contribute something of substance amongst all the bullshit daddy issues in this thread. However, just as a special favour to you, I'll try to up my content-o-meter. My sincerest apologies.Internet Stranger wrote:Doh. I just realized that I didnt mean Midnight. He hasnt done anything yet except for some random vote.
The scum is Shadow. He is here, but not really here. Like he is making his appearance known but not contributing anything of substance. All I see from him are small one liners criticizing people and not being all that pertinent. That has to be the scummiest type of behavior.
They don't make me uncomfortable, I just think the accusations levelled were brought up too early in the game.GreyICE wrote:What makes you so uncomfortable with accusations, Shado? Scared they have substance in them when they're directed at you?
If you think EMP is the best wagon, why aren't you voting him? What's the benefit of lynching a lurker? I've always found lurking to be a null-tell. Both sides do it equally.GreyICE wrote:If you're asking me what is best wagon, easily EMP by a mile. He's acting quite odd with the "I nailed the entire scumteam" jazz. Sure. The lurkers are still scummy.Erratus Apathos wrote:How can you extol the virtues of reading scum behaviour on wagons when you refuse to form one?GreyICE wrote:Come on people, not forming wagons until I see who is joining us. Call that anti-town if you will, but I've found that scum behavior on wagons is not readable if scum AREN'T POSTING.
I think wagoning a lurked gets us more though. Both the 1 shots are scummy.
You're right, TL, I've been letting some RL stuff get me down, so I'm not putting myself fully into this game. I'm sorry, and I will endeavour to try much harder in this game from now on. My sincerest apologies, everyone.TheLonging wrote:You've done better than this.
This isn't exactly a brilliant reason to push as hard on me as you are. You have literally mentioned me in every one of your posts after this, bar one. You obsessed with me? I'm flattered, but I'm not the guy you're looking for.Internet Stranger wrote:The scum is Shadow. He is here, but not really here. Like he is making his appearance known but not contributing anything of substance. All I see from him are small one liners criticizing people and not being all that pertinent. That has to be the scummiest type of behavior.
A) It'd be nice if it worked that way.Internet Stranger wrote:A) Right, because the scum make an official announcement whenever they are about to do something suspicious. The scum call the press, throw a parade and bring the circus along with them to make an announcement for everyone to see that they are filthy scum.
B) All you're doing is calling for the Brilliant Defense. You expect the evidence to be like CSI level. Unless I come in with DNA, fingerprints, video, eyewitnesses and a signed confession, then any and all suspicious are worthless.
C) It does work that way here. You do scummy actions to draw attention to yourself. In your case its all your scummy inactions. How many more excuses can you come up with to actively not participate Shado? Its kinda hard to slink away and try to hide with me constantly shining that bright light of attention your way isnt it? Your defenders (like Crazy) take on the job of distracting everyone away from you, but that doesnt work with me does it?
D) I'm pretty certain that I caught me a scum here. Your actions are doing nothing to dissuade me from my opinion. Therefore, Shado is filthy scum.
So apparently I have to declare a V/LA when I'm not home for one night? I'm sorry, your majesty. <_<Internet Stranger wrote:You all realize that if Shado doesnt decide to come back, this whole circle jerk exercise is pretty much useless. I still believe that he is trying to lay low while someone else draws all the attention [ie: Crazy]
Obviously Shado doesnt give a crap as long as youre here cockblocking the rest of us from catching us a scum.
1. I have no problem with this criticism. I don't like that you called it parroting, but it's understandable that you see it that way.CrazyQuestions wrote:By popular petition, I start with Shadow. I continue later.
SHADOW
1. Parrots my words attacking IS in his first post. I read his vote on me as a joke, but mixes a serious criticisms with a fun joke.
2. He moves into clarifications with me and empty discussions with Empking, including ridiculous extreme arguments like depicting Empking as someone who already found scum in 10 posts. Shadow can perfectly be interested in slow play, but in that case and thinking as I do, where is he trying to get hints or reads? Which players is he targeting or studying?
3. When pressured to participate after lurking, he mixes a "defence" of lurking as null-tell with an attack to the player who favours wagoning lurkers (Grey) at the same time that Grey has disfavoured the player with whom Shadow is discussing (Empking). In his last post, he parrots me again as I pointed out in my summary how IS' case is just one observation (that is not even his).
Apologies to IS for telling him to fuck off, but I was feeling a little stressed at the time, and I forgot the main rule of Mafia (Have fun). It won't happen again. However, as you said, I wasn't responding to the cases against me, so I'm doing that now.Erratus Apathos wrote:You know why you see me as not scumhunting? Because both Shado and IS are flat out not responding to the cases on them. Shado isn't explaining why he's not scum hunting, and IS isn't answering shit. I'm scum hunting; they're refusing to be hunted.
Now Shado is just resorting to ad hominem.
This is a dangerous statement to make, because while alignment flips are useful for making connections between players after someone flips, some people could use this the other way, and clear certain people as town based on a flip of a town player.Empking wrote:Your being scum is condition on Shado being scum.
RE: GreyICE: I see that point as GreyICE possibly trying to get closer to his attackers so they don't attack him as much.CrazyQuestions wrote:GREYICE
2. His attacks tend to focus on those players who "favoured" him (calls longing buddier, Shadow lurker), and takes the side of Empking. He does not expose any theory on what he was expecting to happen from his funny thing, which sounds bad. And quickly he moves into lurkers (saporo).
IS is attacking without any coherence and does not let even answer (and Erratus is suspecting of IS)
Sounds like a town gambit to me, now you've explained it.GreyICE wrote:Expected, Crazy? I expected to be on L-2 with a wagon formed and waiting for me with pointed questions. Would have been interesting, I get soooo much information out of wagons. I'll tip my hand at this point, that was my goal. It's hard to do, because you want to do something that's insane, but not specifically scum (you get much less information out of wagons that are formed because the victim has just been mimicking total scum).
I have no idea why anyone would defend me rather than wait for me to defend myself, my actions can at best be described as 'eccentric.' Which, well... they were
I'd also like an answer to this. Your posts are sometimes quite confusing to read. No offence intended.Crazy: English isn't your first language is it?
I'm attempting to improve my play now, as I say, I'm trying to put my RL stuff aside for now, and play this game properly.El simo wrote:SWs most recent post makes me want to move my vote from Grey to him, I believe town would reacted to IS by improving their play so IS wouldn't have a point, SW is just complaining about real life and saying IS is wrong.
Day 2, at least. Or at least a week after we began. Not ~20 hours. Some people have distractions come up that prevent them from putting all their efforts into Mafia.ConfidAnon wrote:And, according to this, when in the game would be an acceptable timeframe for accusations?ShadoWolf, 101 wrote:They don't make me uncomfortable, I just think the accusations levelled were brought up too early in the game.
GreyICE wrote:With two different lurkers and pergolwtf and the general tone of posters you want him at L-1? And you didn't announce this, begging for the ninja hammer?Empking wrote:Crazy is either both very good scum (the large posts of reading people) and rather awful scum (the angering IS and the like) OR he's town. Oh yeah somebody needs to vote Shado.
This is... The scummiest thing I've seen this game.
QFT.GreyICE wrote:And I don't give a shit ever who says I'm scum. Anyone can check my meta to see that. I call trying to cause a ninja quicklynch scummy.
As much as it pains me to say it, he's right. He is pressuring me, probably the most out of anyone here. However, I hope this post proves that I can in fact post something useful. While I do see IS as somewhat town (scum wouldn't push this hard), pressuring for an L-1 vote on me is somewhat scummy.Internet Stranger wrote:Crazy: WTF?!? I'm not pressuring Shado?? Lol wut?!?
I have a vote on him. I'm top of the god damn mountain calling for his lynch. What are YOU doing. You're stalling!
Stop asking for more proof, for more evidence. Shado doesn't post anything useful. Its all one excuse after another and namecalling from him. THAT is my proof, THAT is my evidence. So sod off, I'm doing my job! My vote isn't compromised, its on a very likely scum! You haven't even voted for him, you're making as many whiny excuses as he does. Grow a sack a drop a vote.
Don't use your misdirection tactics as evidence that you're somehow helping. All your observations are meaningless. All you're doing is adding wet garbage to the fire.
While I can appreciate the works of Nietzsche just as much as the next man, this is so irrelevant it pains me to respond to it. Try to keep on topic, CQ.CrazyQuestions wrote:God is dead. God remains dead. And we have killed him. How shall we comfort ourselves, the murderers of all murderers? What was holiest and mightiest of all that the world has yet owned has bled to death under our knives: who will wipe this blood off us? What water is there for us to clean ourselves? What festivals of atonement, what sacred games shall we have to invent? Is not the greatness of this deed too great for us? Must we ourselves not become gods simply to appear worthy of it?. Nietzsche.God IS wrote: ...
Well, I've claimed now, as I feel that a quickhammer would happen if I waited for L-1.TheLonging wrote:L-1's are best times for claims.ShadoWolf wrote:I'm at L-2, right? Sound like a time for a claim?
Yeah, it's weird that I fear ninja-hammers, being as though I like staying alive in this game. From my point of view, I'm the only confirmed townie, so I'm kinda eager to avoid dying, as I can't help town from beyond the grave.Empking wrote:Ok, unless I've accidently walked into a 13 player newbie player game the fact that Shado has QFT'd Grey's fear of Ninja Hammers pretty much cements them being scumbuddies in my mind.
Yeah, it's true that the guy who hammers will be heavily scrutinised, I will concede that, but it doesn't mean it won't happen.Internet Stranger wrote:Why do they think that we wouldnt be all over anyone that decides to ninja hammer? Even if after Shado turns out to be scum, other scum will ninja hammer to silence their dead homey. So ninja hammerers never prosper.
And with a Vanilla townie claim, this might as well be at L-1 now.
The what? Sorry for being a bit dim today.Internet Stranger wrote:I love the hat in hand concession speech Shado made.
And I'm all for letting ShadoTown live. That's just a personal opinion of mine though.Internet Stranger wrote:But we cant let scum live. Im all for stringing ShadoScum up.
Assuming that's true, why the great pressure to put me on L-1? The only difference between L-1 and L-2 is that L-2 prevents a quickhammer, assuming 2 people don't vote quickly in succession.Empking wrote:Yes the fact that it won't happen is why it won't happen.ShadoWolf wrote:Yeah, it's true that the guy who hammers will be heavily scrutinised, I will concede that, but it doesn't mean it won't happen.
That wasn't actually just directed at you, sorry it came out that way.Empking wrote:What great pressure to put you at L-1? (Also I should mention that I said NINJA HAMMAHS won't happen not that they'd be unwelcome.)ShadoWolf wrote:Assuming that's true, why the great pressure to put me on L-1? The only difference between L-1 and L-2 is that L-2 prevents a quickhammer, assuming 2 people don't vote quickly in succession.Empking wrote:Yes the fact that it won't happen is why it won't happen.ShadoWolf wrote:Yeah, it's true that the guy who hammers will be heavily scrutinised, I will concede that, but it doesn't mean it won't happen.
1-1. I didn't like that you called it parroting, but I can understand why you feel it might've been parroting. The other issue (my vote) was fairly self-explanatory, as it was a random vote with a little joke tacked on.CrazyQuestions wrote:@Shadow
1. Since you simply deny the parroting without any particular argument and avoid the other issue, I cannot comment.
2.. I already covered that in my analysis. Since you do not analyze it, I cannot comment.ShadoWolf wrote: I am interested in slow play, as it's easier to analyse.
3. Since you simply deny the parroting without any particular argument, I cannot comment.If you find one of my posts confusing, please mention which. I will rewrite it.ShadoWolf wrote:Your posts are sometimes quite confusing to read. No offence intended.1. Why do you feel compelled to comment this post? If you have decided to "scumhunt" or "participate", you better start with the dozens of posts before this, as obviously, isolated posts do not tell much.ShadoWolf wrote: While I can appreciate the works of Nietzsche just as much as the next man, this is so irrelevant it pains me to respond to it. Try to keep on topic, CQ.
2. It is not irrelevant. It is very relevant because I basically considered alpha-IS (god) dead in terms of our particular tennis game.
1-3. Once again, I just feel that you're trying to misrepresent me here, by calling it parroting. Also, you didn't respond to this:You call my argument "Extreme" and "Ridiculous", but Empking did actually say that he thought he had found scum in his post, roughly 10 pages in.
2-1. I will certainly take you up on that next time I see one I don't understand.I didn't try to defend lurkers, I just think that certain players are/were trying to push a lynch on lurkers, which is an easy lynch to push, and rarely finds scum this early in the game.
I felt we were still in RVS at that point, so I made a random vote.CrazyQuestions wrote:Since you simply provide no particular argument about absence of parroting in your contributions, I cannot comment.SW wrote: 1-1. I didn't like that you called it parroting, but I can understand why you feel it might've been parroting. The other issue (my vote) was fairly self-explanatory, as it was a random vote with a little joke tacked on.
Since you do not discuss the fact that you combine a random vote after an accusation in the same post, I cannot comment.
I didn't interpret his reads as hyperbole, I took them totally seriously. There was no reason not to.I interpreted Empking as hyperbolic much before he pointed out. His own words fit with such description. Your argument is therefore extreme as you equate hyperbole to reality and attack him.SW wrote: 1-2. You didn't address my first point of this line of thinking:You call my argument "Extreme" and "Ridiculous", but Empking did actually say that he thought he had found scum in his post, roughly 10 pages in.
Since you simply provide no particular argument about absence of parroting in your contributions, I cannot comment.SW wrote: 1-3. Once again, I just feel that you're trying to misrepresent me here, by calling it parroting. Also, you didn't respond to this:I didn't try to defend lurkers, I just think that certain players are/were trying to push a lynch on lurkers, which is an easy lynch to push, and rarely finds scum this early in the game.
Why do I need to respond to such an argument? I have not said anywhere that you defended lurkers.
Sure looks like you said I defended lurking.CrazyQuestions wrote:3. When pressured to participate after lurking, he mixes a "defence" of lurking as null-tell with an attack to the player who favours wagoning lurkers (Grey) at the same time that Grey has disfavoured the player with whom Shadow is discussing (Empking).
Now you're accusing me of not reading the thread?The post is random only if you do not read the previous ones.SW wrote: 3-1. I commented that post because it seemed so random and crazy that I just had to bring this up.
Your quote contributed nothing to the thread except beginning this line of questioning, which isn't helpful to anyone.My quote is much more accurate than your words. Thus I used my quote.SW wrote: 3-2. Why did you have to use metaphor in such a confusing way? Why didn't you just say why you "consider him dead"
CrazyQuestions wrote:He basically took his initial observation on Grey to signal Strike, Grey and You. You used big capital letters to transform his observation into a big shouting. He obviously replied with a different version provoking you. It was clearly a hyperbole...ShadoWolf wrote: I didn't interpret his reads as hyperbole, I took them totally seriously. There was no reason not to.
That's his quote. I didn't transform his observation in any way. Stop trying to misrep me.Sub, Grey and SW calling it now.
Who lurks? Lurkers. By that logic, I defend lurking, I defend lurkers. I didn't defend them, I just said that it was a null-tell, and that we shouldn't analyse lurkers yet, as it was too early in the game to do so.How DEFENCE OF LURKING AS NULL-TELL looks like DEFEND LURKERS??SW wrote: Sure looks like you said I defended lurking.
I have been reading the thread, but I can see where you're coming from.You catalogue my post as random. I clarify it is not, and I interpret why you call it random. It is a very reasonable interpretation, especially after you said "You're right, TL, I've been letting some RL stuff get me down, so I'm not putting myself fully into this game. I'm sorry, and I will endeavour to try much harder in this game from now on. My sincerest apologies, everyone." I find you just glanced to the new posts without reading the past ones in detail, and decided to answer a bit the latter ones.SW wrote: Now you're accusing me of not reading the thread?
You started it by using a quote that seemed totally irrelevant. I questioned it, you explained it. I still think the quote was unnecessary though.If the line of questioning does not help anyone, why did you start it?SW wrote:Your quote contributed nothing to the thread except beginning this line of questioning, which isn't helpful to anyone.
Scum would be more cautious to take the bet, already knowing the outcome, and knowing that they'd suffer heavy scrutiny because of it. Town wouldn't know the risks, but would be "certain they've caught scum", and so would take the bet. Yes, it's WIFOM, but it's entirely based in WIFOM territory, there's no argument that can be made that isn't WIFOM here. Caution is a scum-tell, in my eyes.Substrike22 wrote:@ Shadow, I don't think town would've necessarily taken that bet given the context of how it was asked. It sets up EMP for one of those "well if you're scum, say 100% and it flips to be true, then you're scum, or maybe you're scum and going to play dumb by providing a random statistic" type arguments. Therefore I find your reason for voting Emp to be self-preservation. Or do you actually want to explain why you think town would've taken that bet, without using WIFOM.
You misunderstand me. I was quoting what I read from that post, not my scumlists from that post.GreyICE wrote:Substrike22 wrote:Shado, not happy that you think that one side or the other is scum - this could be town on town violence (even though it's not because EMPKing is scum, and CQ is town, so bah on your dumb list Substrike). But, that fits with what I've seen of you and other players, so it doesn't worry me.
Haha, you're so wrong it hurts.Internet Stranger wrote:It still comes down to the fact Shado is our scum. The evidence has been persistent the entire day. It is now that Shado realizes that its too late, he has been caught, and there isnt much he can do other than play sheep and hope we find him cute and walk away.
Crazy has done an entire about face when it comes to Shadow after I called her out for defending him. Im still keeping an eye on her.
You all can continue to argue amongst yourselves all you want. I know that my tally for caught scum is about to go +1.
GreyICE wrote:You so deserve the rope this game.Empking wrote:The rhetoric is empty in this one.GreyICE wrote:Oh goodie, lets all fucking huggles the Emp. Yeah, people are calling me scum, better pretend there's a shot of me getting night killed, NKs are soooo scary for townies... wait until my darth vader powers kick in muahahahaha
This is the post I was poking fun atFugitive wrote:Well, I'll definitely be caught up by the time Day 2 starts.
Also, Shado didn't just claim scum. You guys should check out Bawston Brawl. IP probably rages hard at posts formatted like that now...
I don't know what the fuck you're on about.Empking wrote:Last minute distancing from Grey?ShadoWolf wrote:Ideas for next day: Everyone who insulted me can go fuck themselves with baseball bats.CrazyQuestions wrote:He would also provide ideas for next day.
