Mafiascum.net

In post 898, cassielle wrote:interesting that schadd_ handles your post

In post 880, cassielle wrote:1 cleared my original concerns, yes. there are new ones,and some old ones, and my concerns arguably should have been addressed better by you originally.

2 did you see 876? it's a very good read. from the time i entered the game this has been a concern and it keeps going that way. you keep dodging scrutiny. may or may not be related, but lets live on the edge and just flatly claim that it is, unsupported by evidence.

3 and you sure are hyperdefensive. vote for you = scum instantly? why? why is scumreading you scummy? and where is your scumhunting behavior? scumhunting is natural to town even if it gets pointed the wrong way once in awhile

4 why is your vote the same exact vote as post #7? why has that not moved? its safe to say the wagon has stalled, in fact, on multiple separate occasions. do you really believe in that vote that much? do you truly have that much conviction in it? where do you get that conviction from a 23 post ISO which is devoid of content?

5 why is this second readslist substantially identical to the first aside from "gbT went inactive" "shade is uh something lets call it nulltown" "i actually have an opinion on cass and its mostly because she voted me and tries to aggressively scumhunt"? why would gbT taking a day or two off (because thats all its been, really) instantly drop them to null? why does it seem like you cant form an actual opinion on shade and so you just throw that slot in nulltown? indeed, from your description, why not just null? why are all your reads weak and without conviction?

6 how the hell are 801 and 838 unanswerable or rhetorical? mbg managed to answer 838, which is the exact opposite of that, and -grey- has pursued and asked followup questions to all of your examples. er, except 801. because, well, you havent even tried to answer it to begin with, just thrown your hands up and said "impossible! must be rhetorical." why dont you want to answer?

In post 899, -Grey- wrote:

In post 894, schadd_ wrote:

In post 879, -Grey- wrote:

In post 878, schadd_ wrote:grey is definitely angry, which i think you get good at feigning if you play F2F, but who knows. pointing things out before reading all the way is kinda towny, but i would think he knows that. there's a lot of rhetorical/unanswerable questions which gives me a yucky impression (see 534, 609, 801, 838). it's kinda hard for me to divorce scum from mean and abrasive, so this is more difficult.

Those questions are neither rhetorical nor unanswerable. They are pointed. They put the recipient on the spot for a reason.

mm. the one that stuck out to me was, perhaps intuitively, the one that you asked me. 801, "schadd_, why does your ISO read like coasting scum?" and obviously, i mean, i don't really see it, because i'm town. me being able to answer this pulls counter to the sentiment of 842 (though this may have been a rhetorical question, heh). so, it feels like you're just fishing for me to not be able to answer your question.

I'm fishing for you to justify your play, which you aren't even trying to do.

Attempting to redirect my question as a reason to scumread me isn't going to make me go away.

In post 880, cassielle wrote:why does it seem like you cant form an actual opinion on shade and so you just throw that slot in nulltown? indeed, from your description, why not just null?

In post 911, RadiantCowbells wrote:TB, if you do not unvote Schadd in the next 24 hours I am going to hammer you.

Schadd is town and obviously so.

In post 913, mattblackguy wrote:

In post 911, RadiantCowbells wrote:TB, if you do not unvote Schadd in the next 24 hours I am going to hammer you.

Schadd is town and obviously so.

TB, doesn't know how to defend himself so he's just trying to push the mislynch on Schadd instead.

In post 832, cassielle wrote:EBWOP oh wait i dont have a vote out wtf

VOTE: schadd_ i hate not having a vote out