Feysal wrote:Hey, Furcolow... Remember these?
Furcolow #121 wrote:You know, instead of voting me, you guys could ask me things
Furcolow #222 wrote:I am here, ready to answer any question.
I don't see how I am dodging anything important.
If you feel smargaret is important, I guess we aren't on the same page, as I don't cater to scum.
When you were being wagoned, you wanted to be asked questions. However, when questions were asked, you kept dodging them and often called whoever questioned you scum, like smargaret in that above quote.
Furcolow #487 wrote:I was going to have to use the "you're just mad because I beat you as scum, so you are improperly riding my ass and viewing me in a different light than you were going to be" defense. Thanks for the defense, I don't even feel a need to post a detailed defense now.
Considering I'm in multiple games, and really split up my time terribly, having just read a Feysal-wall that wasn't meant to break the game but was really derived from a policy-lynch is completely different than I have seen out of him as town. I feel like it was scummy and ill-motivated. What do you think, bvoigt?
So, instead of the excuse you used to get out of answering smargaret, you're trying to use another.
And
you claim to suspect me in response. Exactly like I said in my case you've been doing.
Don't think I would not notice your use of rhetoric to try and discredit my case, by calling it "improperly riding your ass" and "derived from a policy-lynch". Your play in this game has been intensely scummy, and having seen your scum play, I strongly believe this is it. Your attempt to wriggle out of answering for your play is both pathetic and obvious.
Your accusation that I would be scum for not devoting my time and energy into breaking the game is ridiculous. I tried that in Mafia Holographica, but that was a heavily themed game with special mechanics that could be gamed. This game is much closer to normal mafia games, and trying to break this setup would be a colossal waste of time. Here I will hunt scum, and you are, by a wide margin, the scummiest person in the entire game.
Questions:
1. What caused the flip-flop in your attitude toward claiming? You started by vaguely role fishing, then spoke against claiming, then suggested claiming yourself.
2. Why did you lie about your meta? I've seen two cases where you used self-meta to try to appear town, when I have seen you behave exactly the same as scum. In fact, I have seen you behave that way only as scum.
3. Why do you believe smargaret is scum?
4. Why did you not give reasons for suspecting ThAdmiral, jmj3000 and gonnano when you voted them? Did you think it was reasonable to vote jmj3000 for not delivering, only two hours after his promise of content?
5. Why did you want DavidParker lynched? Why did you lie about saying that all game? If you wanted him lynched, why did you not vote him? How could you want him lynched when, according to your own words, you did not have a read on him?
I have no idea why other players have allowed you to get away with your play this long. I won't let the matter rest. I require answers, and I require them today. I won't be satisfied with you stalling for time, waiting for night so you can consult with fellow scum.
You said you were ready to answer any questions. I'm asking questions now, and I want your answers.
bvoigt #483 wrote:He could have just pointed out that scum did have daytalk, so it seems that he actually didn't know they had daytalk for 24 hours. I know you mentioned that Magna and HackerHuck faked something similar in a previous game, but MOI and HH are both experienced, outstanding players... I really don't see Furc gambitting like that.
I'm not really sold by this. What MoI and HH did was not much of a gambit, they just claimed not to know scum had daytalk. All Furcolow would have to do here is claim ignorance, and truth be told, Furcolow being ignorant would be completely natural. Even he would've understood that claiming knowledge that the scum had no daytalk would've looked bad in his position.
My suspicions and vote will stay. I still want to hear answers from Furcolow.
First off, thanks for the ad hominem. Still resentful that I bested you as scum? I thought so.
Anyways, on to your puny case. Smargaret is scum, if someone who is town wants to ask me questions (like I believe you are), I will answer them. I made the rest of my post, just to come back to this one. I knew this would take the most time, and I wanted to answer fully and not strawman.
The reason there is a difference between you and smargaret in terms of me responding is because I wasn't really sure about your slot. I am still not really sure about your alignment. The size of your posting screams town, but the wrathful-vengefulness of wanting to lynch someone for a prior finished game just doesn't suit you, Feysal.
If you really, really believe that I'm scum trying to twist your words into something they're not, and out-rhetoric you linguistically or through my superior dialect, I guess you're not familiar with my scum play as much as you believe you are. That is the only explanation I can find other than you pursuing something you needed to do a game ago... not in this one.
1)I am for nameclaiming, not countryclaiming. If we are going to claim, I want it to be fully. I do not like lukewarmth.
It is not a flip-flop to me, regardless of how others see this.
2) I did not feel I was lying about my meta. I guess YOU know MY meta more than ME? Is that what you're implying? Because I'm not buying it. In fact, I'm not buying
anything
you're selling. Your questions feel weighted, forced, and a day late and a dollar short.
3) I have explained that it is just a suspicion. Why do you care? NachoMamma/ScottBrosius/myself/I'm sure other people are just gut-style suspicious of her. I don't feel like she is adequately scumhunting, and I feel she is fishing for good easy bandwagons and is trying to drive a mislynch by stroking the fire. Her comments scream caps lawkz, and her tone is faked and doesn't feel town to me. I don't know how else to explain it. I'll admit it is weak, and it might just be personal bias.
4) I did provide reasoning for voting gonnano, even if I voted him RVS style at one point. You must not have really read my iso or my posts in context. I unvoted ThAdmiral, and have even been defending him since that point. His response to my pressure-vote was adequate in proving to me he is likely town - he doesn't post like that when I've seen him as scum. I am very familiar with his play. My vote on jmj is because he is actively lurking and promising when he isn't delivering. I'm more than willing to replace my vote on him on d2, or even to tack it on to him if the Amrun wagon dies out... he could easily be scum with all the excuses he has been dishing out.
5) Just because I vote someone, or say I want them lynched, doesn't mean that is even the case. Hence why I've said my admiral vote was a "pressure-vote", my davidparker FoSs were more pressure-FoSs, when I really had a null read on him. I have no idea as to his alignment. Since then, I've been leaning town, but I'm not really positive. He could easily be scum having fooled me.
DavidParker wrote:Furcolow wrote:lowell is effectively trying to quell the momentum of myself voting someone who is probably being replaced as scum because they didn't fit their town meta as scum. It's tough to fake it.
I am viewing Lowell, then, as being Amrum's partner-in-crime, trying to wagon jmj a town-VI.
Town-VI??? That's a huge misrep. Nothing has indicated towards jmj being a VI yet.
I guess I'm confusing him with someone else. Reading him in iso, he is a lot more inactive and intelligent than I remember.
DavidParker wrote:I'm going to go out on a limb and say I'm pretty sure GhostWriter is scum. More sure than almost anyone.
reasoning?
why does this appear like you are defending jmj in your last two posts?
I would be pretty happy lynching him to check yours and GW's alignments based upon who was pushing him and who was defending him. It would probably be worthless, but it's something to think about as a town.
ThAdmiral wrote:@ smargret: I'm on my phone so it's hard for me to quote but I am responding to your post about me a page or so back.
Of all the posts by people voting me for their reasons this makes the most sense.
All I can say is that I'm not trying to excuse myself before the fact for lynching a townie. First off all I genuinely believe gw is scum, second of all if you check my meta you can confirm that I generally don't scumhunt. While there are times I do, for example I always like to make a case on someone if I replace in to a game, I am far more likely to jump on an existing case.
Furthermore it is untrue to suggest because of this that my belief in these cases are any less, or that I would be less culpable if it was indeed on a townie. I choose cases I believe in and expect to be held fully accountable for my choices.
This doesn't feel like TheAdmiral as scum to me. When he is scum he typically lurks by for the win, and is generally uncooperative. This reads as cooperative, even if it doesn't explain much. He is just like that. I don't see him as scum, and I haven't all game. Things might change, but I doubt it. My reads seem to have been a little off lately, though, so we'll see.
bvoigt wrote:@Furc: While I don't agree with his case on you, Feysal seems sincere, and probably town.
The gonnano wagon doesn't seem to be going anywhere. Now that my top suspect has an active replacement, maybe we can get enough support to get her lynched. So far, Amrun's play looks just as bad as PI's.
tl;dr:
Amrun is fencesitting, voting a lurker, inconsistent, and scum.
UNVOTE: gonnano
VOTE: Amrun
I agree that Feysal could be town, and his effort surely shows that, but I am not familiar enough with his scum play for myself to bring him out of the lack of a read category. I have a couple town reads, and am suspicious of a few players (amrun (moreso due to PI and conflicting FoSs), smargaret somewhat, and possibly lowell(maybe just due to playstyle)). I am pretty confident that you are bandwagonning here for the sake of bandwagonning, though,
bvoigt. What is your response to that accusation?
Amrun wrote:Bvoigt: I don't like to form too solid opinions when I replace into a game. I don't experience the posts organically so I feel like my perspective is skewed by everyone else's suspicions. I try to come up with some new arguments, but I think it's better to do so as things unfold around me.
In general, though, I do not tunnel and my town reads are rare. Everyone is scummy until proven innocent, to me, and I keep an open mind about things.
So for the moment, I AM on the fence about several people. I am more certain about others, which I said first. Anyone 100% on their reads of EVERYONE or majority is either delusional or scum.
As for Fuzzman, he is scummy-looking to me but a read based on one post is hardly trustworthy, not to mention a lynch is unlikely at this point.
Amrun, you say everyone is scummy to you until proven innocent, but then you later say you are "sitting on the fence" on people?
Considering that is the reason Bvoigt was voting you, why do you feel confirming his suspicions, while in direct contradiction to something you posted herein, is a good defense?
Let me help you out - it isn't.
I'm happy with my vote.
Scott Brosius wrote:InflatablePie wrote:smargaret wrote:In short, yes, you are tunneling. And for all that you're so convinced I'm scum that you won't vote anyone that I am EVEN THOUGH YOU FIND THEM SCUMMY TOO, you're not voting me. Why not?
I'll say it again (this is the third or fourth time):
I'd rather my vote go somewhere useful.
Your wagon will not build - I actually think I'm the only person here that finds you scummy (unless I missed someone saying such).
Smarg is pinging my scumdar, just with careful style of posting. More of a gut read than anything thus far. I like this post though, we need wagons or else we are not going to get anywhere today.
I completely agree with this, and you can see if you iso me I've been suspicious of her.
It is more gut for me as well, hence why my agreement is complete.
/hate to be agreeing with scott brosius!