OKAY. TODAY IS WALL DAY, AND CHARLIE MAFIA IS UP FIRST. BETTER BE PRETTY APPRECIATIVE NOW, BECAUSE I'MA PUT THE TEAM ON MY BACK AND LEAD US TO VICTORY.
SO LET'S DO THIS.
Starting at 50, I will review the thread and pinpoint the scum. 50 is game start.
At 54, just to note, if anyone hadn't caught on yet, Huir means to escape. I don't think there's a real Spanish verb dedicated to shun. So, just putting that out there for Kryptinen. The mod.
This also confirms Kryptinen's post restriction because I'm going to go off the probability that Haylen knows Spanish.
Not looking good. So, if anyone, near Endgame calls Kryptinen fake for some reason, don't buy it. Or else.
My ghost comes out. And kills you.
Okay, so here's Part 1 why Rhinox should die. I don't even care if this was random voting, or reaction testing, because I know it's not.
Charlie wrote:I vehemently protest.
You're shunning based on the fact a player has a post restriction. Very anti-town. Also, I feel this is Town post restriction simply because they're the most common. IMHO, kryptinen is cleared D1.
Charlie to the rescue after Rhinox proposes a Kryptinen lynch due to her post restriction.
OH. So because the mafia can fake a post restriction means that the town can't have a post restriction. Hmmzorz.
I will give him a small amount of town points for trying to end RVS that fast as well though.
Oh and now a RC Wall. Good.
Kryptinen wrote:The fact that you're doing this on Day 1, on PAGE THREE makes me extremely suspicious of you because who as town would write somebody off this early.
First off, consider the facts that Page 1=Page 3. I'm aware that makes it worse.
Second, you're going by semantics. I don't think Charlie had the intent to refuse to lynch Kryptinen because of her post restriction. Note that her post did say that Kryptinen was cleared
for D1
. So there goes that reasoning already.
Kryptinen wrote:Also, the "we have our differences, fine" is a classic "ok, let's agree to disagree" that I see from scum who want to pacify a townie when it turns out their stance was unpopular. I almost NEVER see townies make any kind of pacification statements like this.
But this was between 2 posts. If Charlie really wanted to back down after 2 posts and one major disagreement, she could've just said something in the terms of "I'm wrong you're right", not "Agree to disagree."
Btw. how did you find that agreeing to disagree is more scummy than townie? I'm aware that it doesn't provide much more discussion, but it might actually help someone's manner in the game. I can see it being an extremely minor scumtell, but nothing more really.
Kryptinen wrote:Rhinox is probtown due to #61. I can't see scum posting that. Scum would be more likely to hope that part went unnoticed and would want to pigeonhole things and try to create false subconscious leanings within people based on fallacies like "nobody with a PR could be scum".
But um...
RC wrote:So you are completely writing off kryptinen as scum just because he/she has a PR? haaaaa dumb. This kind of pigeonholing is what makes people pay in the end. I wrote off Parama as scum in POWERFUL WIZARD MAFIA because of this post, and I MYSELF voted wrong twice in a 6-1 endgame after correctly nailing the other two scum. I had confirmational bias (town) on Parama and I let it blind me.
Didn't you just use the opposite of that logic? Who says it can't work both ways?
#69 is making me meh on my early suspicions of Charlie scum. Then again, it just seems he's trying to make everyone active at this point which is more scummy than townie in this sense. If you're trouble grasping this, then that's your fault.
Umbrage wrote:1. Whether krypt is town or scum because of his post restriction is a WIFOM argument. Why would anyone would WANT to try and write a player off as town so quickly? It makes no sense from a pro-town perspective.
Damnit Umbrage. You're agreeing. I bring up in D1 argument, and that you're going way too deep in the semantics here.
Umbrage wrote:2. Rhinox's vote doesn't look serious AT ALL. He said he didn't like having to translate everything, reasoning that is on par with OMGUS and pretty common for RVS. Charlie acted like he was proposing a policy lynch, which I don't see.
Looked serious to me. For all we know, Rhinox could've voted Kryp for being female. He voted for something in game. This lynch was not random. Oh, and Charlie didn't look like he was proposing a policy lynch. Let's be real now.
Umbrage wrote:3. The switch from 'enraged at a really bad vote' to 'oh well we all have our own opinions' is really fake. Especially when you remember that NO NEW INFO was posted during the time in between. Charlie said he saw rule #1, so why didn't he apply that logic earlier? It's a staged fit followed by a quick retreat. Scummy.
This is the only decent point. I didn't notice this until I read this, and it is really true. I'm going to roll it off of a medium scumtell though, just because Charlie shows this after RC's posting. I think it was just that Charlie didn't want to argue though. However, even I'm thinking that I'm totally making excuses at this point.
Damnit Umbrage.
Nobody Special wrote:Charlie, why do you feel so strongly that, in a game where it's specifically stated that we should expect the unexpected, you can write off anything as "usual"?
You could explain this.
Please? Someone later?
Tanstalas wrote:So, perhaps Hiraki didn't get a link to the game either, but he still got a link to the QT, and in there RC was telling him to get his butt in here and post?
That's a new level of speculation.
I'm confused by this argument on why RC and I are probable scum just because he voted me first after Umbrage stated that I was last. Last time I checked everyone had to confirm in thread right? It's not that odd, methinks.
I don't like Doombunny's 76 just because of
Doombunny wrote:How will more people posting change your answers? I agree with RC, if you have something to say, stop avoiding it.
Maybe he's just busy? I don't see why this is so monumental. If RC has a good case, Charlie won't be able to defend against it well in any time.
78 and 79 are nice.
RC wrote:a) What the F*** is the point of a pressure vote if you say "Pressure vote" right afterwards? It entirely defeats the purpose.
Not really.
RC wrote:b) What's with the smiley? Trying to tell everyone (including Charlie, who you're voting) that your vote is not serious at all?
Nit picky.
RC wrote:c) How's it feel having a distraction in place so you don't have to vote anyone else? Good? I hope so. Now make a real vote.
Is this an admission that you're only focusing on Charlie? AKA: You may/probably be/are tunneling.
Oh RC. I'm really not liking this play.
Nice back up by Doom at 81.In 84 NS discusses Eulogy.
Come on NS. Is this a joke? Whether or not he does have a post PR this isn't what we should be discussing.
Btw. Yes I'm aware that's not your entire post.
Nothing interesting until 101.
Hmmzorz.
Y'know, call this appeasement, but I've been thinking of changing of my views on the Alliance for one game.
If this is what I think it is, the Alliance exists in every game, just isn't stated. Per se, there will usually be an agreement between 2-3 players in a game that has more than or equal to 13 players. This is the only time it's been directly been stated.
That being said, a definite alliance between players is a no-no. There should be an indirect alliance rather than the direct alliance that RC is proposing. To add on, there shouldn't be a definite group of people in the alliance because that's biasing. No one likes that.
That's the end of my views on it.
So basically, if you invite me to the alliance, I will reject. However, that doesn't mean we can't have corresponding views. In the end, however, this means we're still in an alliance but not a formal alliance. That is where your direct statement of an alliance fails. There already is an alliance, just you can't see it.
RC wrote:There will always be pro-Alliance people, and there will always be Anti-Alliance people. You just have to decide which side of the fence you're on. The entire point is to have pro-town AND scummy people in the Alliance. If you don't get this, then you're missing the point.
Okay, now I'm missing the point.
RC wrote:(btw, did you even READ the quotes I posted? I spent a good while looking them up because I thought they adequately described stock attitudes of town and scum to the formation and continuation of Alliances. Please read them).
Considering no one knows where the quotes are from and if that's the majority rather than the minority of the games that has worked with a direct alliance, the quotes are useless.
RC wrote:1.We all vote together. That means we all vote the same person, but we have to agree amongst ourselves who that person will be. Once we do that, it forms a blockvote effect that is pretty much unstoppable because nobody else can "control" our votes through manipulation, because we already have a standing agreement.
This is equivalent to having a Town Leader/King sort of role. Hate this.
RC wrote:2. We can vote to invite new people into, or kick people out of the Alliance. This includes me, even though I'm starting it. I mean, as a non-Alliance member, people still CAN vote with the Alliance if they wish, but obv they don't have to. The Unicorns start in the Alliance, but only because I created it and it's a Unicorn game
They are free to leave if they want.
This is where the border between RC proposing something good for the town and RC proposing something that looks good but is actually bad for the town gets a bit washy. First off, couldn't the scum manipulate the alliance to get some/most of their members on it and have leading roles by just bussing one player? Take this game for an example. If there's 3 scum, and Scum A already looks scummy, Scum B and Scum C could hop on the Alliance and get rid of Scum A making them look uber-pro town. One of them would be instated onto the Alliance, or even both.
Would you then make a counter-alliance? That just looks uber scummy, and really not needed.
RC wrote:3. Alliance gets pared down in size as the game does. Should be slightly less than half, if even that large. This ensures the maximum amount of helpfulness, usefulness, and trustability.
But at this point, you're manipulating it even though you realize that you may not be in the Alliance for the entirety of the game.
Also note that if most people agree to this Alliance that if RC dies, that the Alliance goes down with him in terms of helpfulness.
RC wrote:4. Remember, the main object of this entire idea of Alliances is to FORCE SCUMMY PEOPLE TO DO PRO-TOWN THINGS, AND HOLD THEM ACCOUNTABLE IF THEY DON'T.
But wait!
RC wrote:1.We all vote together. That means we all vote the same person, but we have to agree amongst ourselves who that person will be.
It sounds like you want joint-lynches, rather than doing this. Pressure voting from the same person isn't going to help much.
tl;dr: Stop this Alliance bullshit.
Kryptinen's 109 is really sketchy. That's ultimately false and you know it.
Zodiark and Umbrage look meeeeh due to Tans' points. I see where both sides are coming from. Umbrage loses more scum points though for contradicting the obvious.
Umbrage wrote:
Both Zod and I have noted that you aren't responding to him.
Okay, but he has. You haven't given out any questions though, just thrown suspicion that he can't defend.[/quote]
RC is taking Umbrage too seriously in 116.
Eh.
I don't know if RC is faking town right now, but this already looks a bit scummy.
Umbrage town is a bit better though, even in light with his interactions with Zodiark and Tans.
RC has a fair point about 117 with #1. I've had no problems discussing the Alliance, I just really don't want it.
RC wrote:2. Why are you trying to throw a tantrum and such if you don't get your way?
Because you've never done this?
RC wrote:3. Do you realize that if the majority of the Alliance is pro-town, then they are forcing scum to vote for other scum?
Note the If clause that sneaks in quietly.
RC wrote:4. Do you realize that by accepting the "protection" of the Alliance, scum are forced to give up many of their rights to push mislynches?
You've heard of blind people, right?
Umbrage wrote:No to both. But I recently won a scum game by distracting the town through spamming silly THIS PLAN IS GOOD FOR TOWN crap. I see no good reason to form an alliance. I already see how it is distracting everyone from scumhunting.
See? Umbrage is right. Which makes me feel good. Which makes me feel good about the Umbrage-RC town-town argument. WHICH IS MAKING ME COME TO MY SUPER ULTRA-CONCLUSION WHERE I AM FEELING GOOD ABOUT SCUM.
Yeah, 127 makes me feel good about RC town.
Page 7. Probably because I'm getting bored of this. I'm not sure at NS' status at the moment either, so I might do a mini ISO about him on my own.(oh em geee not enough talk about NS. must be scumbuddies with him imo)
Ugh. Tans is right about Umbrage though in 151. Umbrage hasn't stated anything. Which is detracting from Umbrage-town status.
UGH.
Tans wrote:Good to know you are paying such close attention to the game.
Oh. That's a good point. Umbragetown is back!
And then Umbrage responds with Caps.
And no answer.
Which is what he accused Tans for.
FUCK YOU UMBRAGE.
YOU'RE SCUM, RC IS TOWN. FINAL.
Yeah #162 confirms that Umbrage hasn't been reading. He's back at null. Not town. I can't leave an active lurker like that.
Rhinox is still scummy, so it's okay.
He's not scum anymore, but leaning. Probably lying near the border.
I like RC's 170 points on Kyrpiten. That would really help. Also note that I've probably butchered her name numerous times in this wall. Sig.
And I'm back at 173.
Doombunny wrote:If you have the time to write a wall I'd assume you have the time to read one. Not reading posts (Yes, even large walls) is anti-town at best.
Ha.
Hahaha.
Hahahahahaha.
Umbrage jester is possible, but probably not. I think Umbrage has given up/gone insane.
You have to realize that if you lurk in a game, intentionally, for a time and re-read it, your views will probably be off. If they're not, luck is on your side. If they are? Well, um. You should probably try you best to bitch up to everyone.
Because you're probably going to get lynched.
I am the sympathetic god of mafia though. So I give my sympathy to Umbragetown.
Pulindar wrote:Actually, a suggestion. In general, I think the people in this thread need to apologize to each other. This game is supposed to be fun. While we may not get along completely, nor should we agree on anything, Charlie was right when he called for a friendly game. If you guys were a bunch of kids playing near me I would have given you all timeouts for the fighting and made you hug and apologize. (really would have) So, I ask everyone, can we have a restart here and now where we try to come at this game as though we are friends playing at a table together. Sure we should all still attempt to achieve our win conditions, but we can do that and be friendly.
Thanks!
Stefunny wrote:Hiraki, what happened to the motivation RC gave you to make a wall post?
Dunno.
)
