Mini 1161 - Neruzian Era Mafia (Over!)

[Empking]

Vote: Sloth

- He looks like scum pretending to be useful.

[Empking]

I think I should point out that despite the (artificially) large size of that last post it said absolutely nothing relevant to the game save the absurdity (which is almost certainally not true) of we should have three legitimate wagons before killing anyone.

* And you look like scum. VOTE: Empking

Care to explain?

[Empking]

If his feeling is just gut, I understand that, but calling me out for asking questions just seems odd.

I'm calling you out for pointless (in context) questions.

[Empking]

Unvote

Vote: Vi

- Gut

Faraday: What were your actions so far is this game meant to achieve?
Vi: Those sheep comments. What was the point of them?

[Empking]

I'd be surprised if charter was scum.

Why?

Charter: Who is more suspicious: Vi or Looker?

[Empking]

@Quilford: Hiplop aside I have yet to hear much of you in other reads. Do you still Suspect Scott? Any other noteworthy opinions on players?
@Scott, Pappums and Hiplop: What are the 3 scummiest things you've seen so far?

Still early in the game, attempting to come up with three things would be reaching and probably forcing myself to see scummy things that didn't really exist. Don't really like the question.

Agree that people are overreacting to Quilford wagon, seems like he hasn't been close to a lynch, even though people are claiming he was at L-1. Quilford seems to suspect only the people on the wagon too which only adds confidence to my vote.

FOS: Scott

- This post didn't really say much.

[Empking]

Yeah looking again at the post Sloth guoted it does look rather absurdof Quilford.

Unvote

Vote: Qilford

[Empking]

...

When I flip town, lunch Empking, please.

I'd be much more willing to buy that if you had moved your vote to me.

[Empking]

@Sloth - I was waiting to get answers to my questions from other players first.

I don't like the Quilford wagon as I thought the flip comment was quite townie,

Are you taking into account that it was evidently insincere?

[Empking]

@Emp: why the FoS and not a vote of Scott?

I was at a period in the game where I wanted to rationally weigh up my options to decide which of the three I was most suspicious of (Scottl, Vi or Quilford (well before the FOS it was just out of the last two)) and I think that changing my vote at that point would derail that process.

[Empking]

also, just in case anyone hammers, I should probably claim, no?

Why are you asking permission?

[Empking]

also, just in case anyone hammers, I should probably claim, no?

Why are you asking permission?

Faraday: Why the FOS?

[Empking]

also, just in case anyone hammers, I should probably claim, no?

Why are you asking permission?

[Empking]

...

When I flip town, lunch Empking, please.

Charter: Enough to lynch (mainly for the quoted post).

[Empking]

is quilford at l-1? i don't want to hammer but im sort of suspecting him now

This is scum making preparatory excuses for their hammer.

UNVOTE: Scott Brosius
VOTE: hiplop

This seems like scum trying to get a wagon off him, especially with having such a respected player's vote already on his side.

I'm sorry, whether someone's respected or not

does not make an ounce of a difference

in this game.

UNVOTE: hiplop
VOTE: Sloth

This is horrible and looks liker an excuse to get off the Hiplop wagon.

[Empking]

why would I want to get off the Hiplop wagon

You evidently did (becay=use you got off the hiplop wagon). Personally I'd say that you felt from Sloth you would have feeerange to move your vote off him (to put on your favourite wagon) in a way that wasn't so concrete with Hiplop. Or maybe Hiplop is your buddy and you felt bored of bussing him? I don't know.

empking, you're going to flip maf so hard it will make chuck norris cry

Yet still no vote.

[Empking]

Also hiplop putting me at L-1 with the shitty excuse of "pressure"

VOTE: Hiplop

Is that why hiplop will flip harder?

[Empking]

You were at L-1 so we can try and figure out your alignment.

And would you say my alignment has been deduced?

I'm not sure, I can see reasons for you being scum and town. I do want to look over Empking, because his reasons he's been giving recently seem suspect at first glance.

How so?

[Empking]

All of this indicates to me that he wanted a wagon to form on Empking. However, then he unvoted on page 3 in order to pressure Looker. Doing this seems to be contrary to his view of wagon, and also to the goals of his Empking vote.

Page three is past page one.

At the time his vote was on Vi because of gut.

So?

Soon after, he placed Quilford at L-2, and that vote seems pretty opportunistic to me.

Why?

[Empking]

Unvote
Vote Empking

Zero scumhunting

Define "scumhunting". Also: Why do you think I did zero scumhunting?

, way too much defending of himself with no real pressure

at all

(like half to 3/4 of his posts are this),

Excluding this post where have I defended myself?

[Empking]

Vi: Why the vote?

[Empking]

So "Empking - only posts to push Quilford toward getting lynched."?

1. So you disagree with Andrew's claim that I'm being overdefensive?
2. What time period are you talking out? What are the posts that exemplify that?

[Empking]

No comment on Faraday's post.

---

...who's Andrew?

Sorry. I meant Pappum.

I don't disagree that you're posting to maintain the status quo on bad wagons and asking why people want to chop your fishy head off.

1. Would you agree that saying one thing while thinking another is a scum tell? Would you agree that its teasonable for me to think that Quilford was doing that (calling me scum while not voting me (this was before the hiplop vote, I think) or voting Sloth(?) based on a theory disagreement (whether people would sheep you)?
2. Is trying to understand the perspective from people of those of unknown alignment a scum tell?

[Empking]

His suspicion of Scott seems genuine so I'd say a pretty strong town read.

[Empking]

@Empking -
Not necessarily

Presuming no role information can you give an example?

Not really; multiple people can look scummy at once

His last wish was to see me lynched. He was the only vote on Sloth. Why wouldn't he (as town) join Looker on my wagon?

Parentheses don't match; I can't tell if there's a second part to this

No second part.

When it's you asking people to provide a precise case against you, quite possibly.

When did I do that?

[Empking]

1) Gambits are the first one that comes to mind, though that probably wasn't the case here.

2) If he was actually getting lynched, what would that have done?

Makes the Vote Count more represantive of what is actually the case. What harm would it do?

The point is that it's not the silver bullet you're making it out to be.

Why do you think Quilford didn't vote me?

4) Post 284 is one example.

You were making an absolute stament about "all" my posts. Surely its a null tell to want to unambigiously disprove that?

[Empking]

Why do you think Quilford didn't vote me?

I think Quilford can answer that.

Quilford can read your mind?

You were making an absolute stament about "all" my posts. Surely its a null tell to want to unambigiously disprove that?

I refuse to believe you are this pedantic.

Of course not. That's why I asked you to clarify the period time your "all" refered to.

[Empking]

Why do you think Quilford didn't vote me?

I think Quilford can answer that.

Quilford can read your mind?

I doubt it.~
I know what my answer is, but I'd like to see what Qwilfish says.

Yet you make no attempt to get Quilfish to say something?

[Empking]

Empking isn't avoiding this thread its just that nothing has caught my eye in the last day.

Why am I the one who's avoiding the thread? (compared to someone like Paprum)?

[Empking]

That was quick.

*I have a Town read on pap-rat

So you're voting me because I'm avoiding the thread. And the reason you are of the opinion that I'm avoiding the thread is because you find me scummy. I'm pretty sure there's a flaw in your logic somewhere.

*He isn't trying to ask why he's getting picked on (let alone only saying that)

So the reason you said I'm avoiding the thread is because after saying that I asked why I was getting picked on?

*He would read my post enough to know he's not the only one getting called out

Yes but you most definitely weren't calling out PR for some reason.

Yeah after seeing your response I'm pretty sure that whole comment "While Scott B.'s post physically hurt to read, I can't disagree with the accusation on Quilford. Three days gone (but not from the site) and comes back to show us what active lurking really looks like.

I thought about switching my vote but Empking is avoiding this thread as much as Quilford." was just distancing from your budddy.

Although whatever you have cake for, happy

that

.

Its my scumday!

[Empking]

It says "I find X scummy but will not contribute to X's lynch". That's textbook distancing.

[Empking]

Who were you planning on changing your vote to?

[Empking]

pr: What do you mean by "all"?


hiplop is pretty obviously town. His reads look honest. DY's recent question on hiplop looks like reaching.

[Empking]

pr: What do you mean by "all"?

Lol. This is a good wagon right here folks, I want more pressure.

So you refuse to answer the question? Why?

[Empking]

And I have not answered most of your questions because they are pointless.

What questions did I direct at you? Apart from the three which you've just answered?

[Empking]

but the vast majority of your posts have been self-defense.

I don't agree at all and I think a lookthrough myiso would quickly disprove that.

[Empking]

With 5 days before the deadline and it being pretty clear that there isn't any interest in lynching Scott today

I was interested...

Same. (though Quilford is quite a bit better).

[Empking]

Let me rephrase. It sounds like the fact that he was the only other wagon was way more important to you, ergo, you were interested more in self-preservation, which to me says you are probscum.

BTW, I don't think that's reaching at all, Emp.

To me that seems different from what you originally said (the "way more important" bit mostly.)

[Empking]

If Chareter says Quilford isn't getting lynched then I believe him.

Unvote

Vote: Scott

- His active (and not so active) lurking.

[Empking]

VOTE: Empking
This vote above makes me think Empking is trying to start a counterwagon to avoid being lynched, knowing he'll probably have Twisted's support.

...

...

And I didn't vote Hiplop because...

[Empking]

Lol

Unvote, vote Empking

Why?

because you were attacking me for voting her/him

When.

[Empking]

Also hiplop putting me at L-1 with the shitty excuse of "pressure"

VOTE: Hiplop

Is that why hiplop will flip harder?

Not an example of me attacking you for voting hiplop (aside for the fact that hiplop is an example of someone who's not-me.

Also jumping on the hiplop wagon so late would've looked crazy suss.

Why?

[Empking]

Lol I shouldn't have allowed myself to be so easily deceived.

Why?

Also: VT

Unvote

Vote: Quilford

- Because, even in the best case scenario, three claims is stupid.