Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Locked thread
Quidthulhu
Dec 17, 2003

Stand down, men! It's only smooching!



I will actually play this, promise!

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Quidthulhu
Dec 17, 2003

Stand down, men! It's only smooching!



We can't get one more person? Mafia dead

Quidthulhu
Dec 17, 2003

Stand down, men! It's only smooching!



I am not the badman!

Quidthulhu
Dec 17, 2003

Stand down, men! It's only smooching!



ecco "joke" very fake, ##vote ecco

omgus

Quidthulhu
Dec 17, 2003

Stand down, men! It's only smooching!



i'm torn because i don't believe ecco is actually going down this path (reads as major tongue in cheek meta joking about who she is to me) but sara is believing her hook-line-and-sinker and that is dangerous so it makes me wonder if maybe this is an EccoGambit


ecco is this an EccoGambit???

Quidthulhu
Dec 17, 2003

Stand down, men! It's only smooching!



maybe you should not be sitting on a joke vote on me then :v:

Quidthulhu
Dec 17, 2003

Stand down, men! It's only smooching!



PMush Perfect posted:

##vote Ecco

My vote for you is not intended to be a legitimate vote against you, except insofar as you're bad at mafia and it might be good to keep pressure on you early on.

:iceburn:

Quidthulhu
Dec 17, 2003

Stand down, men! It's only smooching!



So far we have:

Ecco: quarterbacking, driving the narrative
ayc: confused, meek
pera: standard pera
BK: absent, snipey
AA: excusing himself, good play tho
PMush: absent, snipey
Quid: handsome, charming

Quidthulhu
Dec 17, 2003

Stand down, men! It's only smooching!



I think pera is most definitely town, everyone else I'm meh on. Probs not ayc.

Quidthulhu
Dec 17, 2003

Stand down, men! It's only smooching!



peramene posted:

This is Ecco. The snark is both typical and astonishingly brilliant. Fantastic liar, though.

my god get a room you two

Quidthulhu
Dec 17, 2003

Stand down, men! It's only smooching!



Do scum have the ability to talk to each other this game? Is it a normal mafia game except for no flips? Is there a night phase? I'm assuming not?

These are questions I should have asked pre d1

Quidthulhu
Dec 17, 2003

Stand down, men! It's only smooching!



EccoRaven posted:

why wouldn't there be a night phase.

It's a weird fast 7 person game I could see it having no night phase.

Quidthulhu
Dec 17, 2003

Stand down, men! It's only smooching!



CONTENT GAME

if you were magically given an item to bestow a 1shot cop ability on someone based on their posting thus far, who would it be and why??

Quidthulhu
Dec 17, 2003

Stand down, men! It's only smooching!



You obviously can't bestow it upon yourself, I guess I should have made it clear from the get go but choosing that as an option is also not helpful. Obviously you trust your own alignment.

I dunno why we've got too people in pera and AA both cheating the content game, HURM.

Quidthulhu
Dec 17, 2003

Stand down, men! It's only smooching!



Ecco, you have come really hard out the gate saying we need to participate and do some major scumhunting. Like I said, you've done a really solid job initially of attempting to control the narrative. I haven't really seen you do any scumhunting yet, which, combined with your hard-nosed attitude, is giving me more pause than if you were simply being smug alone.

Do you have any opinions beyond your read on Pmush? It's pretty susp to shout "we're going to do some major scum hunting to win, folks!" and then to leave a vote on someone who essentially has said "nothing to read yet."

Quidthulhu
Dec 17, 2003

Stand down, men! It's only smooching!



Anomalous Amalgam posted:

I don't like Quids summary post. Seems like quickly written notes jotted down from a skim to seem involved.

I never presented it as anything else? There was almost nothing that had happened at that point except for Ecco making a jokevote on me, so my reads were understandably light and based on almost nothing. The way the list is presented should have made that obvious?

This is a weird point to pick at me on.

Quidthulhu
Dec 17, 2003

Stand down, men! It's only smooching!



I always comment on myself first, I am self-centered.

But you don't REALLY say anything much of substance in there, just a bunch of half feels. Kinda like my shotgun post of random thoughts, which was a lot shorter than yours....



HURMM.

Quidthulhu
Dec 17, 2003

Stand down, men! It's only smooching!



EccoRaven posted:

Right now I'm feeling pmush is the scummiest based on play. BK had a family thing last night but he's been a non-entity even before then. I'm liking AA's gumption. And I don't like AYC.

If the scum are outside of pmush, BK, and AYC then they're doing an okay job and should feel okay with themselves.

I disagree with almost all of this!

Quidthulhu
Dec 17, 2003

Stand down, men! It's only smooching!



EccoRaven posted:

for reference to anyone not paying attention, this is pmush's case, to which AYC has said "I agree."


this case is nonsense, it lacks sense. The implication is that PMush doesn't think what I'm posting is bad or wrong (in fact the implication is that they are good and right!), but that I am only posting them to appear like I'm posting good and right things, not because I really mean it.

It's patently ridiculous. It's the second laziest case in the world, and does nothing but advance the scum win condition.

I bring it up because if AYC votes me for this (terrible) case I'll be at -1, which is even more absurd.

I think she means more "ecco is posting in a manner that seems like she's putting in a ton of effort but is in fact saying nothing?" Where do you get "I agree with Ecco's points but know she is FAKING THEM" from her statement?

Quidthulhu
Dec 17, 2003

Stand down, men! It's only smooching!



PMush Perfect posted:

This post is Weird. The vote at the end would feel pretty natural as a joke-vote, but as far as I can tell, you're being entirely serious. Not to mention it was right after BK put an actual joke-vote down on him.

This, however, I don't like. Why are you going back to a vote that Ecco and everyone else has already said "yeah that was a joke vote" with to prove your case? There's far more bad ecco content than this, why start here?

Quidthulhu
Dec 17, 2003

Stand down, men! It's only smooching!



##unvote

Quidthulhu
Dec 17, 2003

Stand down, men! It's only smooching!



What we have to worry about is voting TOMORROW, nobody put down a stupid early vote cause that could cost the game.

Quidthulhu
Dec 17, 2003

Stand down, men! It's only smooching!



It does need to be said, people like BK could be paying attention to jack poo poo and come in and drop a vote, and with 2 scum potentially still up that would be game over immediately.

Quidthulhu
Dec 17, 2003

Stand down, men! It's only smooching!



Why am I scum, ecco? :allears:

Quidthulhu
Dec 17, 2003

Stand down, men! It's only smooching!



It was in relation to the posts about putting people at -2, which you directly contributed to with a comment not 5 posts above mine :confused:

Quidthulhu
Dec 17, 2003

Stand down, men! It's only smooching!



I did it to appear helpful because people are dumb when it comes to things that should be obvious in mafia, and I wanted to make sure it was said D1 rather than not having time to shout NOBODY VOTE on D2.

Quidthulhu
Dec 17, 2003

Stand down, men! It's only smooching!



Which statement would that be?

Quidthulhu
Dec 17, 2003

Stand down, men! It's only smooching!



See and the reason I think you're scum on a gut level is because of how unhelpful and dismissive you are being. You come in guns blazing "I'm gonna make sure we all follow the rules & make this mafia game good!" and then when people start talking about ways to not gently caress this game up you go "whoa whoa whoa slow your roll mister, why you trying to boss people, that's FAKE" which directly contradicts what you did yourself, initially.

i think you're standing behind a lot of words without saying very much. if you really want me to go ahead and break down your posts on a point by point level to explain that i guess i can, but your response will probably just be "nah you're misreading me there" so why bother?

Quidthulhu
Dec 17, 2003

Stand down, men! It's only smooching!



I have returned from an eventful afternoon as well, now to crack the case wide open!!

Quidthulhu
Dec 17, 2003

Stand down, men! It's only smooching!



I am going to work backwards from Ecco's case on me, because, again, I am a self-centered person.

EccoRaven posted:

here's a case on quidnose.

1) at the start of the day I make a jokevote on Quidnose. Quid has bad feelings about pera's treatment of my vote, but he blames me for it rather than pera. He blurred the line of causation to position himself against me, which was weird.

This isn't what I did at all?

My first vote on you was primarily a joke vote, but it does point at a real feel I had on you: that your joke vote on me was a pretty poor one, and way too easy. I also wanted to see what you were going to do with it from that point, how you were going to respond to me once I called you out for a jokephase vote, and also where you would then go from there with it once again once the above two things had gone down:


Quidthulhu posted:

ecco "joke" very fake, ##vote ecco

omgus

But then, Sara started to take you seriously for what was clearly a joke vote and commentary on my not being around when I am scum. That's a reasonable meta-read, but when the game was, what, 4 hours old at that point, it was ridiculous for Sara to be taking you with your point there as earnest. Yes, I easily could have jumped on Sara for that, and in retrospect discussing it, maybe I should take a harder look at if she's continued that sort of "following people around" pattern (I don't believe she has where I sit here now), but the issues for me were:

1. you were coming in as self-appointed thread leader & savior
2. people (sara) were accepting you in that role & taking what you said with earnest examination
3. if you were scum, which i had a gut worry you were, that was dangerous and needed to be called out.

Which, I did:

Quidthulhu posted:

i'm torn because i don't believe ecco is actually going down this path (reads as major tongue in cheek meta joking about who she is to me) but sara is believing her hook-line-and-sinker and that is dangerous so it makes me wonder if maybe this is an EccoGambit


ecco is this an EccoGambit???

I even directly asked you to comment on it being a gambit or not (which I inherently meant as 'scum ploy,' and probably should have worded thus.)

So I don't know here if you're misrepresenting me purposefully or if you genuinely thought I did what you said. I can tell you from my perspective, it wasn't, although I can kinda see why you felt that way now that I've reviewed and broken it down.

My response to the next point is getting long, so, post break!

Quidthulhu
Dec 17, 2003

Stand down, men! It's only smooching!



quote:

2) Quid manufactured problems with my posting twice. The first is here; Quid seems to misunderstand a point I made against PMush by assuming words PMush neither said nor implied. He did it again here where he claimed his "on day 2 we can't vote right away!" comment was a helpful post to make 24 hours into day 1 and I was being hypocritical for deriding it.

Both of them are problematic because it shows Quidnose isn't trying to build logically sound cases against me; he feels the need to manufacture problems in my posts and use those problems to cast suspicion on me. This is what scum have to do; scum can't post "sincere" cases, any case a scum player makes is going to necessarily be artificial. A good scum case can hide it, but a bad scum case can't.

You admit the first one is based on a misunderstanding, so that automatically contradicts your "look at him faking cases" point - I could be scum faking a case who got confused or town trying to engage with you who got confused & it wouldn't have changed the fact that I got confused.

But more importantly, I don't even understand how our interaction here (which weirdly you don't link to your response, just my response to you) even connects to your point above about me faking content. Here is the entire exchange in context, with my translation as I see it:

PMush Perfect posted:

I hate to use the big fake-impressive words but they both strike me as a little performative? Like they want to be seen saying the words they're saying, rather than for their meaning.

PMush basically says "just putting down words for the sake of putting down words" - e.g., "faking content." Ecco jumps on the semantic points of this with her argument:

EccoRaven posted:

this case is nonsense, it lacks sense. The implication is that PMush doesn't think what I'm posting is bad or wrong (in fact the implication is that they are good and right!), but that I am only posting them to appear like I'm posting good and right things, not because I really mean it.

It's patently ridiculous. It's the second laziest case in the world, and does nothing but advance the scum win condition.

I bring it up because if AYC votes me for this (terrible) case I'll be at -1, which is even more absurd.

I mean as far as I can tell here Ecco you're just harping on PMush for not saying "She's faking content" and rather saying "she is using fancy words to look better than everyone" or...something. I'm not even sure how you jumped to this conclusion, because to get to where you are ("she is agreeing with what I am saying without saying that and it is therefore ridiculous of her to say 'but it's fake' because if she thought it was fake she would not have agreed with it!") I have to jump through so many logical "well maybe she meant this" hoops a few times for it to even work. Frankly you are wicked smart and this seems like an incredibly dumb point to make & furthermore to doubledown on.

(Also notice Ecco herself brings up "guys be careful of the vote count!" here while harping on anyone for MENTIONING votecounts ever. CURIOUS.)

So, I jump in & say "I actually think PMush just meant 'she's faking content'":

Quidthulhu posted:

I think she means more "ecco is posting in a manner that seems like she's putting in a ton of effort but is in fact saying nothing?" Where do you get "I agree with Ecco's points but know she is FAKING THEM" from her statement?

Because, again, I generally don't see that as being in there.

And your reply, which again, you decided to leave out of your analysis above:

quote:

because if pmush actually had something substantive to say about my posting itself she would have said so. the case was, remember, "ecco just wants to be seen saying the words they're saying rather than for their meaning." (that's literally the entire case.) The implication isn't "ecco said bad things," since if I did that would be a much better case. The implication is in fact "what ecco is saying is good, but they're only saying it to look like they're being helpful."

It's you who's inferring more from the case, not me.

This is a total misreading of PMush's statement, and completely ignores my question. I said: "Where do you get 'I agree with Ecco's points but know she is FAKING THEM' from her statement?" and you basically said "When she said 'I agree with Ecco's points but know she is FAKING THEM'" as a response...


quote:

3) He's had weird posts elsewhere, like claiming pera is "definitely town" an hour into the game here.

I have a gut feeling, and those reads were, you guessed it, entirely gut feelings. As I said a few posts later when we were discusisng it.

quote:

Nothing in his history stands out to me as "this is a post a townie would have made."

Beginning to feel like you clicked the question mark & skimmed my posts for poo poo you could jump on me for, especially since you, you know, left out your part of a point you made against me...



quote:

4) He used the allears emote, which is the second scummiest emote behind rolleyes. (This is semi-sincere, #1 and 2 are obviously the meat.)

That is true, but I also use all ears when I am being a smug rear end town-member, and I am frequently a smug-rear end town member. As I am this game. :allears:


I dunno I feel okay about it! It's where my vote is right now and I'm comfortable keeping it there for the time being.
[/quote]

Quidthulhu
Dec 17, 2003

Stand down, men! It's only smooching!



I'm actually more on the fence about Ecco now because on the one hand she seems to be putting in more earnest effort with this series of exasperation posts rather than her "do my bidding, mafia-children" from before, but she's just coming to the seemingly wrong conclusions about everything and getting there in really shoddy ways.

And in the back of my mind I keep wondering about the lack of flips completely changing the way scum are going to play. Scum can easily double down on town members together without fearing reprisal via connections to a bunch of bad cases if one of them flips. So I could easily see Ecco & friend doubling down on stupid poo poo because it's not gonna get them dunked in the future. Ecco especially probably has enough confidence in her mafia ability to believe she can talk herself out of anything (and she probably can, like, 80% of the time).

I'm hurming all over the place here.

Quidthulhu
Dec 17, 2003

Stand down, men! It's only smooching!



Anomalous Amalgam posted:

Anyhow, I'm going to drain the stress of the day in the tears of internet edgelords that I conquer on digital fields of battle.

Toodles!

what are you playing, i want to play :ohdear:

Quidthulhu
Dec 17, 2003

Stand down, men! It's only smooching!



AA, I disagree with you about PMush. Here's the deal, I know she's been snipe-y and unengaged for a lot of the game, so when you said that and with Ecco going on & on about how she's scum I went "maybe I am missing something and giving her too much of a pass," but reading her delineation of the Ecco case, I believe it:

PMush Perfect posted:

Ecco scum!

AA has been pinging me a bit too. I hate to use the big fake-impressive words but they both strike me as a little performative? Like they want to be seen saying the words they're saying, rather than for their meaning.

I'd rather vote Ecco, though since it's been much more consistent from her.

So her initial vote was a joke vote on Ecco, but here she's feeling a gut read from both of you, which, with lack of other content, she stands by.

She expands on her AA feelings (along with stuff about AYC being cool and BK being absent):

PMush Perfect posted:

AA did not exactly change my opinion by jumping in literally fifteen minutes after I called them suspicious and then immediately making a super-defensive post.

Ecco comes in hard on PMush, and that solidifies it for her:

PMush Perfect posted:

Look at Ecco flying to the defense of her scumbuddy. It's beautiful.

I think you got overinvested in the game because you've got something to prove about it going right, but you rolled scum so you're trying to hide your conflicting feelings behind big showy grandstanding.

I think the latter statement is a good read and totally plausible.

I could go on but ultimately I don't have a problem with the way PMush has come to develop her joke vote into a real vote. What do you see in her post history that you see as her "faking it" or whatever, AA?

Quidthulhu
Dec 17, 2003

Stand down, men! It's only smooching!



Anomalous Amalgam posted:

Heroes of the Storm :smugwizard:

Quidnose#1228, add me friend, I was gonna play some games tonight. I'm not very good though!

Quidthulhu
Dec 17, 2003

Stand down, men! It's only smooching!



EccoRaven posted:

Pmush's case, from the words she used: "Like they want to be seen saying the words they're saying, rather than for their meaning."

The implication is that the words themselves are not problematic but rather how I've presented them. The alternative - that I'm saying the words I'm saying for their meaning - would not be a bad thing (or else PMush would have said "ecco made a bad post"). Indeed, the entire idea behind the post relies on the underlying words being good - because, in PMush's argument, I want to look like I'm saying good words but I don't actually mean them (since PMush's point turns around me trying to look better for having made those posts).

You're extrapolating that PMush said something like "ecco is posting empty nonsense," which can't be supported by the text. And that's my point - you were manufacturing it to position yourself against me. Whether it was intentional or not is the question of whether you're scum or town, but let's not be confused about the underlying facts here.


I believe your "misunderstandings" are because you're more likely scum than town. Reasonable minds can disagree, and obviously I'm not going to convince you you're scum.

Real life example from my life today, sorry for being political if anyone here doesn't want that but it makes my point:

Donald Trump today said some poo poo about something or other, I can't remember, but he said a whole bunch of random crap about how "this is a great thing" and "we're working hard and doing great" and my response was "Man that dude has no idea what the gently caress is in [the bill or whatever] that he is publicly praising."

I could easily say from that: "Donald Trump wants to be seen saying the words he's saying, rather than for the meaning."

Which would mean "Donald Trump is acting like he is saying real things and if you're not paying attention it sounds like he is but in reality he isn't saying anything."

Tell me truthfully, would you interpret my statement as me saying "He's saying good words but that doesn't matter because his intent is bad?"

Like, how would you even get that from what I'm saying?

Again, it's truly bizarre to me that you are doubling down on what ultimately we could handwave away as a semantic point, and one I think you are misinterpreting. But you're not saying "Maybe we can agree to disagree" or "maybe we're reading it differently then" or anything other than "you're objectively wrong here, quid, and that makes you scummy," and like...but you're wrong? I don't even know anymore with this :psyduck:

Quidthulhu
Dec 17, 2003

Stand down, men! It's only smooching!



I am either extremely excited or completely absent. There is rarely an inbetween :allears:

Quidthulhu
Dec 17, 2003

Stand down, men! It's only smooching!



Actual Reads

Totally Town
Quidnose - it's me my role PM says town~

Probs Town
AYC - I think he's earnest and I haven't seen anything in his posting other than "trying to figure the game out". If he's scum he's playing the newbie card very well, but I don't see it right now.
PMush - I think her poo poo has been genuine, and although I'd like to see more from her, I think that combined with three people coming out hard against her makes it more likely she's town at this point (although there are also many people against Ecco, who I think is scum, so that's admittedly a weaker argument).
AA - I like his work

Neutral
BK - Not liking his incorrect case on me right now but I haven't seen enough from him to know anything yet.
pera - So here's the thing, pera was seeming really genuine to me at the beginning of the game but then I remembered she's the Liar Queen and with the few weird things people have pointed out, I dunno. I think it's gonna be hard for me to ever get an actual read on pera in a mafia game. She's acting kinda weird but she always cats kinda weird so :shrug:
Ecco - Everything in me is screaming SCUM SCUM SCUM SCUM SCUM but again, she's...being so WEIRD about it, doubling down on bad cases, coming out hard and aggressive...as PMush said, this seems really atypical, even for Ecco queen of the poopoo-elites....

No flips is gonna make this hard going forward :\

Quidthulhu
Dec 17, 2003

Stand down, men! It's only smooching!



I guess that wasn't super helpful.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Quidthulhu
Dec 17, 2003

Stand down, men! It's only smooching!



BK, calling bullshit. You pulled a post from the beginning of the game jokephase as your hingepin, quoted one other early post, and have said nothing about anything else. I've posted a SHITTON of content since then. Why am I scum for what I've done on the last 3 pages? Source your quotes.

You don't get to roll in & call me scum on that little with barely any comment, that's a load of garbage. It's lazy and frankly scummy as hell.

  • Locked thread