|
I can do this!
|
#
¿
May 28, 2015 13:52
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 26, 2024 01:20 |
|
|
Pinterest Mom posted:apply this argument I don't see how Keane's vote is any worse than merk's vote. If anything, I like Keane's post better because it is clearly not intended to be taken seriously and because he seems to dismiss TT for judging merk over the issue (1). Do you find merk suspicious for doing the same thing, PM? Just want to clarify.
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2015 22:47
|
|
|
merk posted:Don't kill me I have a family HHHHhmmmmmmmm?
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2015 23:04
|
|
|
I am not able to do the smack talk as I am neither funny nor do I dislike anyone here.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 1, 2015 02:11
|
|
|
Met posted:This vote rubs me the wrong way. In what way?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 1, 2015 04:00
|
|
|
Assuming Ecco is telling the truth about his/her flip: - LUTR looks very good. A scum player wouldn't be that combative with their ally on D1 (1), (2); - Also liking Gridlocked a wee bit more, as there would be no reason to shoot down a defense of your partner (3); - Liking merk quite a bit less due to Ecco's dismissal of the case against him as "a dumb thing" (4); - Kill all players trying to perpetuate the joke phase.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 1, 2015 20:20
|
|
|
Wonderful. ##vote: merk The Ninth Layer posted:Wow what happened to the Votefinder printout? It's looking a little long in the tooth. Wow, yeah. Votefinder looks gross.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 1, 2015 20:21
|
|
|
merk posted:Shoot this person and his surface analysis. Naaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhh. merk posted:##vote QPQ Glad you are starting to play the game. Can you explain what is up with this vote? merk posted:##vote Gulag
|
|
#
¿
Jun 1, 2015 20:25
|
|
|
im glad that we are perpetuating the joke phase for another few hours. its a good thing we can afford that luxury with all the cool and in-depth posts that have been made with the deadline approaching
|
|
#
¿
Jun 1, 2015 20:31
|
|
|
The Ninth Layer posted:This post assumes that in a game where town have to rely 100% on day play to catch the Mafia, the Mafia themselves would play the game absolutely straight, only throw shade on townies and only defend their scumbuddies. I'm of the unpopular opinion that scum, regardless of set-up, want to avoid drawing attention to themselves and their brethren at all costs because it makes the game much more difficult to win. I don't see any reason to believe that Ecco was trying any gambit here.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 1, 2015 20:34
|
|
|
The Ninth Layer posted:All these in-depth posts like "Ecco said LUTR was sucmmy so she's town, but Ecco said the case on merk was bad so he's scum." look man, i couldnt do another twelve hours of joke posting and thought the town needed an injection of the bleeding obvious to move it forward which seems to be working, so yay my posts might not have been exceptional, but i prefer weak casing to shitposting
|
|
#
¿
Jun 1, 2015 20:36
|
|
|
The Ninth Layer posted:What "gambit" would you even need to call your scumbuddy scummy? Or for that matter to call a case against a townie bad? These are pretty easy things to do if you are scum, arguably easier than casing townies and defending your buddies. I just don't see any reason why Ecco would have suddenly turned on her teammates less than twenty-four hours into a game. I can understand calling out a case against a townie to gain some cred, but I really, truly doubt that he and LUTR would have gone at it with one another if they were both scum.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 1, 2015 20:41
|
|
|
cool.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 1, 2015 20:42
|
|
|
The Ninth Layer posted:I wish I could vote you a second time for this post. Why would scum put shade on their scumbuddies??? So that people would make posts like the one you made. I shouldn't have to explain that to you. im dum
|
|
#
¿
Jun 1, 2015 20:45
|
|
|
The case against me is that I provided a series of observations about Ecco's lynch that appeared both shallow and obvious. The implication from merk (1) was that I was trying to exploit this death by making content that only seemed meaningful. Scum obviously aren't committed to scumhunting so shallow casing is a good tool to seem townie without providing anything that actually helps the town. As for myself, I don't have much of a defense except that I was frustrated with the joke phase seemingly stretching out infinitely and wanted to post anything that would get the game moving. I was struggling getting serious reads on any of the last five pages taken together, so the next logical step was to look weed Ecco's posts for any weak content that might be relevant. I still stand by the idea that Ecco probably didn't attack her teammates less than twenty-four hours into the game. Yes, busing occurs, but it usually only does so for a reason and I don't see any reason why Ecco would resort to such a tactic that quickly. This is the last I will say to defend myself. Please refer to this post for future reference. Taking a look at Met, his kill is dumb but it doesn't look like it is outright scummy. There seems to be a logical escalation from his original vote (2) to hardening his position (3) to aggressively pursuing merk based on previous meta (3), (4). Nothing about his reads ping as "untrue" to me. I also have a ~~gut~~ sense that scum would be a little more careful about using their vigs instead of blowing it D1 on someone whose death would immediately put suspicion on them. It seems far from ideal play (not to say that people are ideal players, but that they usually do things rationally). I would like met to clarify his thinking in deciding to kill merk and why he decided to kill him on D1.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 2, 2015 02:23
|
|
|
MEDS CURE SCHIZOS posted:Ninth, let's put aside our differences and waste this motherfucker in the name of better play. Merk, it's no longer Day 1, you cool. MEDS CURE SCHIZOS posted:##vote QuoProQuid Also not liking these posts. The first is a transparent bandwagon and buddying. The second is really odd in its lack of reaction to the vig. MCS is the only player to post after the flip that doesn't react to merk dying. Even if you don't think Met is necessarily suspicious, I would at least expect it to give a town player pause. Instead, MCS is unfazed. It's odd behavior. ##vote: MCS
|
|
#
¿
Jun 2, 2015 02:32
|
|
|
Met posted:Yes, it turned out to be. From my point of view, I need to go out for the day and someone is on my rear end when I have a dayvig in my pocket. I don't feel like coming back lynched and a wasted vig. Why? His posts seem almost identical to his content in the Coins of Kerm where he was newbie town.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 2, 2015 02:35
|
|
|
Look Under The Rock posted:Are you always this stiff and unnatural-sounding? Yes. I am a literal alien and my unnatural tone gets mentioned a lot.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 2, 2015 02:46
|
|
|
Somber, what do you think of dscruffy1?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 2, 2015 20:14
|
|
|
Largely agreed. He's a new player (1) and I am very much getting a newbie scum vibe from his content. His latest post (2) rings as very off to me, like someone excusing themselves for not contributing. His post history is lacking in substance and awkward. You've mentioned your suspicions of Gridlocked a few times (3). Along with him, who else would you consider a lynch candidate? For myself, I see MCS and dscruffy1 as suspicious and potentially lynch-worthy. I don't really have scum reads on anyone else.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 2, 2015 20:31
|
|
|
Does one of the Met voters want to explain what scum has to gain in wasting a vigkill D1 and drawing a massive amount of attention to himself? Genuine question. I'm not sold on the vote against him because I don't see much to gain unless: 1.) he knew that merk needed to be killed at any cost, or; 2.) he really wasn't thinking. The latter is hardly a scumtell and the former doesn't seem to fit his interactions with merk.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 2, 2015 20:39
|
|
|
Opopanax posted:Merk fear I covered that possibility, Opop! QuoProQuid posted:I'm not sold on the vote against him because I don't see much to gain unless: 1.) he knew that merk needed to be killed at any cost I just don't see Met shivering in his boots so that explanation doesn't seem to make sense.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 2, 2015 20:43
|
|
|
Met posted:addendum: and consider Opopanax. why
|
|
#
¿
Jun 2, 2015 20:47
|
|
|
MEDS CURE SCHIZOS posted:I love that QuoProQuid's case on me boils down to "He voted for me and I don't like it". Look Under The Rock posted:I'd be on board with this as MCS changes his win condition to "break or otherwise ruin the game" when he gets bored He is currently active in three games, so he has very little experience. Giving him four or five days pass is a little much when the standard is usually only D1.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 2, 2015 20:54
|
|
|
Also:Somberbrero posted:It's not just insubstantial, setup speculation in lieu of real thought is scummy. I'm completely fine lynching Scruffy.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 2, 2015 20:55
|
|
|
chill out chica
|
|
#
¿
Jun 2, 2015 20:59
|
|
|
MEDS CURE SCHIZOS posted:You're a loving moron. Eventually you will need to stop repeating the same insults over and over again and start contributing to the game. Cool down.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 2, 2015 21:04
|
|
|
MEDS CURE SCHIZOS posted:I am happy and calm. No, what you are doing is not really "throwing yourself out in the open." All that is happening is that you are being childish and unpleasant, so I stand by my recommendation that you need to chill out. All I intended was that when it comes to content, it is generally not the goal of scum to stick out. There are exceptions to this, especially if hiding amongst the crowd has been ruled out as a viable option, but I usually find it safe to assume that scum will go with the flow instead of fighting against the current. I never demanded that you follow this line of thought, only that it is what I tend to use in Mafia, especially early on. My case against you is that you jump on a case that seems like its gaining momentum and leave plenty of room to distance yourself if it turns belly up ("Oh, I just voted for better play") (1). You then completely ignore the weird as hell vig against merk in an attempt to revive a bandwagon that you are barely attached to (2). I really don't like you trying to misconstrue this as a simple retaliatory measure (3) because it feels dishonest. Going to ignore literally every other comment between that and the one I am quoting. dscruffy1 posted:This must be what it's like to have people talking over your head Somber has already mentioned that part of the issue is set-up speculation replacing actual scumhunting (4) but for me a large part of your problem is that you seem to be aware that you aren't contributing anything (5). It would be one thing for a player to get distracted trying to figure out the game logically, but you seem consciously rejecting the idea that any kind of contribution can be made (5), which is both unhelpful and scummy. Tremendous Taste posted:a better reason to argue met killed merk is that merk was heavily implying he held a vig Okay, I still don't buy the Met case but this is at least the better explanation I was looking for. dscruffy1 posted:Content of the game as a whole. Okay. Hypocritical, I know, but this is almost entirely a brief summary of the bleeding obvious. Scruffy, you mention that Gridlocked seems to be pushing to lynch Met. Why talk about Gridlocked in particular when, as you say, "a lot of people are pushing hard for met?" Do you find anything suspicious about his behavior or his vote in particular? If so, what? Can you provide some explanations as to why you think people are engaging in these behaviors? Just listing off what has happened over the last ten pages isn't immensely helpful. Met posted:Who suicided? You're purposefully misrepresenting what I actually said. What confuses me is how you are framing the kill. You don't initially explain your attack on merk as a result of your suspicions, but because "someone was on [your] rear end" (6). That kind of motivation doesn't entirely make sense for a town player, who should be motivated by finding scum above personal survival. It reads like you are just retaliating against someone who appears to be a threat against you, which is 3P behavior at best.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 3, 2015 04:01
|
|
|
Ixtlilton posted:Okay, so I didn't read a single QPQ post or that long one by MCS but otherwise I'm caught up. Seems like we should kill the guy with d1 in his name. Really though, both Gulag and Opop were on him early D1 for some weird gut or joke stuff, that's a strong D1 case. Rude! Met posted:How do you plan to rationalize it when I flip town? Every time you say this I get increasingly uneasy. I've never seen a town player try to shame players into unvoting them. It's almost always a scum strategy.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 4, 2015 01:40
|
|
|
Who is actually here right now?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 4, 2015 03:24
|
|
|
Met, do you have any last minute claims/reads/whatever that you want to throw out before the timer runs out?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 4, 2015 03:32
|
|
|
Quandary, I have a dumb question: Does the game "day" end prematurely if the town reaches a majority on someone before the timer runs out or do we literally just have to wait until 11:00 PM every day? I assume the former, but want to confirm.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 4, 2015 03:35
|
|
|
The Ninth Layer posted:...claims? I forgot there were no power roles here.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 4, 2015 03:37
|
|
|
Look Under The Rock posted:yeah wow ??? Look Under The Rock posted:lol
|
|
#
¿
Jun 4, 2015 03:47
|
|
|
Look Under The Rock posted:Why don't you want to survive, this is what's confusing me. The only way your vote on me makes sense is as a gambit. What kind of gambit do you think Met is trying to play right now? How is he promoting his survival with a vote on you.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 4, 2015 03:50
|
|
|
Reviewing the last hour from yesterday.Look Under The Rock posted:for real This is a profoundly bad post because it says and commits to nothing. If MCS had been lynched, you are absolved of guilt because your vote was to remove a player who does "not play mafia to win... [but] to gently caress the town over." You simultaneously give yourself room to maneuver in the event that you need to flip over to Met. You seem to agree with TNL and leave space to follow up on his call. Look Under The Rock posted:lol As I mentioned before, this is a weirdly defensive post from someone only previous interaction with Met is a vote made to express agreement with merk (1). If LUTR believes Met is scum, why is he so defensive when faced with his accusations? Wouldn't he dismiss them as the raving of a dying mafioso? Tentatively dropping a #vote: LUTR for now. I haven't had the chance to look over his earlier content (and probably won't until this evening) with any depth. However, I remember his contributions being fairly scant.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 4, 2015 18:17
|
|
|
100YrsofAttitude posted:I never liked this post from the get go. Effort for effort's sake. 100YrsofAttitude posted:And what a thin line it is between this and white noise posting. This falls into what I so often call the incredibly frustrating 'damned if you do, damned if you don't' mindset of mafia. Some people will never be happy with anything you do. It's how I'm finding the cat-fight between MCS and QPQ. Just hissy and pointless, I don't think it makes one more scum than the other. That's a pretty substantial shift to make over an evening. What exactly caused that? You quote the exact same post as part of both reads.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 4, 2015 18:20
|
|
|
Having gone through LUTR, his content is just as as unexceptional as I remembered. He has lots of jokevotes (1), (2) but that's not exactly noteworthy in this game. His only major contributions until Met's lynch is his defense of Gridlocked (4) (5) which is only weird because of his previously laid-back demeanor, and his sparing with Ecco (6), (7), (8) which I had initially used in LUTR's benefit. Now, I'm not entirely sure. As TNL says (9), the exchange comes off much less extreme than I remember. The crux of my suspicions still boil down to the last moments of yesterday. I really don't like how defensive he gets when Mets and MEDS cast suspicion on him (10). His explanation for this behavior, and his thoughts on why Met was pulling a gambit seem weak to me (11). Also, I dislike the Shanakin lynch (12). I won't mourn his passing if it happens, but it comes off to me as an exceptionally lazy play. The Ecco Gambit, which seems to be LUTR's reasoning for the lynch (Ibid)works more in theory than in practice, where it can act as smokescreen for scum looking for an easy target. ##vote: LUTR
|
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2015 02:45
|
|
|
Pinterest Mom posted:i found scum with the ecco gambit Obviously the exception that proves the rule!
|
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2015 02:49
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 26, 2024 01:20 |
|
|
With CCKeane's vote resolved, we're at a four-way tie. I'd rather if we put our heads together to get a bit more consensus. I'll reread 100 Yrs and Shanakin to see if there is something exceptional that I missed. As with before, who is here right now and will be around for the deadline? CCKeane posted:Haha okay DFW. I don't know what that acronym means, CCKeane!
|
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2015 02:54
|
|