Open 305 - Faith + 1 [D6] [LYLO]

zMuffinMan · Post Post #18 (isolation #0) » Tue May 10, 2011 12:31 pm

VOTE: andrew

zMuffinMan · Post Post #22 (isolation #1) » Tue May 10, 2011 5:05 pm

andrew wrote:he knows why

Because you're scum and want me lynched?

I'm thinking C-Worl scum and andrew scum.

Also, policy lynching andrew is win/win even if he isn't scum.

zMuffinMan · Post Post #25 (isolation #2) » Tue May 10, 2011 6:05 pm

I... don't think I said you did anything to me...

zMuffinMan · Post Post #29 (isolation #3) » Tue May 10, 2011 10:29 pm

Yeah, but Quilford's face isn't scum, you are.

zMuffinMan · Post Post #32 (isolation #4) » Wed May 11, 2011 12:53 am

I'm voting for scum

zMuffinMan · Post Post #51 (isolation #5) » Wed May 11, 2011 12:07 pm

@Ghostlin,

Overtly hostile are we? Why is P-lynching Andrew win/win? A VI that is still town is still Town, isn't it?

I don't think you've ever played with andrew before...

Also, scumpairs on Page 1. There'd be no concrete way you'd know that unless you were scum.

What does the amount of pages have to do with anything? And where did I say my reads were "concrete"?

Further, are you implying that I'm scum and andrew/C-Worl are my partners, or are you implying that I'm scum and I had something to gain by saying I think they're both scum this early?

@edmund,

zMuffinMan saying he knows who the scum are already is pretty absurd.

Assuming I did say I know who the scum are already, explain how it would be "pretty absurd".

also FoS: sanchocolates for making a RQS even though it was not needed. At that point accusations had already started flying.

I'm also going to need an explanation as to why this was scummy. Although, I was apparently beaten to the punch here by Scumhunter... and Ghostlin, too.

zMuffinMan · Post Post #53 (isolation #6) » Wed May 11, 2011 1:51 pm

So you think I'm scum and andrew and C-Worl are town, and I'm trying to set up chain mislynches?

zMuffinMan · Post Post #55 (isolation #7) » Wed May 11, 2011 2:09 pm

Probably. You could also be bussing one of them and not the other. Any possible conjecture of what you might be doing and who you are establishing links to is somewhat fraught with WIFOM.

Any answer you give may be "fraught with WIFOM", but since you're making the assumption that I stood to gain something as scum from saying I think andrew and C-Worl are scum, you should at least be able to explain how this makes sense.

What scum motivation was there behind this?

I'm all ears (or eyes) for any wild theories you want to put out there to explain why you think I did what I did (as scum).

Frankly, I dislike the talk point blank of "let's kill him anyway, he's a VI".

It's... andrew...

zMuffinMan · Post Post #57 (isolation #8) » Wed May 11, 2011 2:34 pm

You called out two people as scum with absolutely no proof that either of them are scum.

Just to be clear, are you expecting proof that someone is scum before we lynch today?

Are you going to decide who we should lynch today based on proof you find or based on your feelings about the people in this game and what they say?

On page 1 of the game.

For future reference, what page am I allowed to call people scum on? 2? 3? 5?

I'm still new to this site, and this is one of those things I haven't learnt yet, but I'll be sure not to call someone scummy before I'm allowed to next time. I'll even ask permission.

There's no town reason to call people scum at this point of the game w/o some proof or suspicion.

I can think of quite a few reasons, actually, but if there's no reason for me to do it, then why do you think it was a scummy tactic?

So either you're blowing smoke out of your butt during an RVS to see if you can get people to follow you, or you have access to information we don't. We being the townies.

The need to clarify the subject "we" is noted.

It's more that you shouldn't have a reason to be lynch happy at this stage and shouldn't be calling a scum pair with nothing to substantiate such a claim.

What makes you think I'm "lynch happy"? At what stage am I allowed to be "lynch happy"? What substance do I need to call out a scum pair?

zMuffinMan · Post Post #58 (isolation #9) » Wed May 11, 2011 2:35 pm

EBWOP:

I can think of quite a few reasons, actually, but if there's no reason for me to do it, then why do you think it was a scummy tactic?

To clarify, I'm asking you what scum reason I have to do it.

zMuffinMan · Post Post #61 (isolation #10) » Wed May 11, 2011 3:07 pm

You accused them without well, even as much as a compunctory reason except you find one of them to be acceptable as a policy lynch.

Is them being scum not a good enough reason to accuse them?

That's scummy because really, you flipped out at what seems to be an RVS reason for voting. On the first vote.
You snapped at the first sign of someone voting you
, and now you're cross-examining me for voting you for that self same reason. You don't find that scummy? Even a little?

Do elaborate on this, because I can't quite figure out what you're referring to with me "flipping out". Are you saying that I knew andrew was going to vote for me, and I flipped out in advance by voting for him first and saying he's a good policy lynch?

Or are you saying I snapped when edmund put a vote on me? His was the first vote on me.

Do you have reason to suspect I'm cross-examining you purely because you're voting for me?

1) OMGUS. Null, but damn suspicious because you ratted out C-Worl without any reason at all.

Right, I OMGUSed andrew. That makes perfect sense..................................... Except, no.

2) You really hate andrew. Still null, and makes you not useful to town if your dislike of a single player is going to make you unreasonable for the rest of the game. It also gives scum something to play off of if neither of you are scum in the later stages of the game.

I don't hate andrew. If I hated him, I wouldn't have signed this game. Whether or not it gives scum "something to play off" at any stage of the game is irrelevant. I would very much enjoy scum trying to accuse me like you're accusing me, it makes this game enjoyable.

3) You're trying to bus C-Worl/Andrew or some combination of the two. Scummy, because it alleviates suspicion off of you.

Right, and you think I did this in the most blatant possible way. There are so many things wrong with this that I don't know where to begin.

4) You are setting up lynches. Scummy for obvious reasons.

See (3)

You certainly want to lynch what is in your eyes a VI without actually caring about whether he's town or not. That makes you lynch happy in my book.

What's your definition of lynch happy and what sort of indication of my alignment is it?

zMuffinMan · Post Post #63 (isolation #11) » Wed May 11, 2011 3:57 pm

Nah-uh, u r

zMuffinMan · Post Post #65 (isolation #12) » Wed May 11, 2011 4:02 pm

Well, crap, you've convinced me. OK, you're town but andrew is still scum unless he can prove he's the offspring of Adonis sodomising a tiger.

zMuffinMan · Post Post #76 (isolation #13) » Wed May 11, 2011 9:43 pm

What's my wagon now?

andrew, edmund, Ghostlin, Quilford, dvdkid?

There is no way that is a 5-townie wagon. rofl

zMuffinMan · Post Post #79 (isolation #14) » Wed May 11, 2011 11:23 pm

Translation: Even andrew knows my vote on him was a joke vote. I would have retracted my vote earlier, but gauging the reactions has been fun. andrew is probtown (VT fo sho, he never has a PR), C-Worl is prob-town. And

@Amrun,

Zmuffin coming out worse in this exchange, but still not convinced.

Elaborate on this. What "exchange" did I come out "worse" from and why do you think that?

Quilford, why unvote but not vote your top scumspect?

Unvote; Vote Quilford

Do you really think this is a good reason to put a vote on someone? What were you hoping to achieve with this vote?

@Quilford,

Why am I your top FoS?

Also, I'd still like someone to explain how my actions make sense from a scum perspective, though. Don't really care who, any of the people voting can take a stab at this. I'm interested in any answer you can come up with.

Unvote

VOTE: edmund

zMuffinMan · Post Post #82 (isolation #15) » Thu May 12, 2011 5:46 am

I'm asking you why me looking "worse" in some "exchange" is reason to think I'm scum. How do I look worse? How does that make me scum? Why aren't you voting for me? If you think I'm scum, then vote for me. What does my wagon's growth have to do with anything?

What has Quilford done to make you suspect he's scum? The fact he FoSed me but didn't vote means he's scum? Your vote on Quilford is pathetic - you're not even doing anything with your "suspicion" of Quilford. Why aren't you pushing him to explain whatever "scummy" things Quilford has done? Why are you being so passive?

Here's what I think: You're scum, you didn't want to associate yourself with my wagon, and you're voting Quilford to make it look like you're scum hunting, even though your vote on Quilford is doing absolutely nothing. It's a fluff vote.

What's your opinion of the people on my wagon, Amrun?

zMuffinMan · Post Post #85 (isolation #16) » Thu May 12, 2011 6:28 am

Amrun wrote:The answers revealed a lot of internal conflictions

Such as...?

Amrun wrote:and had an overall tone that I think is more likely to be scum than town.

A gut feeling or can you explain specifically what gave you this impression?

Amrun wrote:Your talk of me being "passive" in this matter is pure bullshit, as I have actually gone after Quilford quite aggressively given his content level and the gamestate.

No, you really haven't...

See, Quilford, I'm just not buying it. You don't FoS someone and then say you thought you voted them. It just doesn't work that way.

This is not being quite aggressive at all. This is being passive. You're not putting any pressure on him, you're just saying you "don't buy" that he forgot to vote for me and up until now you haven't given any other reason that you think Quilford is suspicious. Even now, all I can see is you "not liking" his posts and the reasoning in his vote for C-Worl. Out of interest, if you had a problem with Quilford (and specifically his vote on C-Worl), why did you not mention it until now?

Amrun wrote:I am less inclined to vote you after seeing someone scummy slide onto your wagon like that.

I thought the reason you weren't voting me was because my wagon was growing quickly... When did it suddenly become about the reasons people were on my wagon or how scummy they are? Or are you retracting this statement: "I will be happy to vote you, but your wagon is growing quickly"?

zMuffinMan · Post Post #88 (isolation #17) » Thu May 12, 2011 7:14 am

Amrun wrote:It seemed to me like you couldn't quite make up your mind.

That's very perceptive of you. Unfortunately, it's a moot point, unless you think I'm scum and I'm lying about the whole thing being a joke based on playing with andrew on another site.

Amrun wrote:You couldn't come up with a satisfactory answer as to why C-Worl and andrew were scumbuddies on page one after two posts from C-Worl and one from andrew

There could be a very simple reason for this. Or maybe there was some elaborate ploy here because I'm scum and, as Ghostlin is suggesting, I was unnecessarily setting up lynches for no valid reason.

Amrun wrote:The main reason is that I wasn't around at the time when that exchange happened

But you did post shortly after and made no mention of it, and you also made no mention of it when commenting on the exchange I was coming off worse in... Only after he FoSed me without voting for me did you mention it.

Amrun wrote:The other reason is that I wanted to attack him myself and see how he reacted. I waited until he did something else scummy and voted him.

So your scum hunting strategy is to sit back and wait for people to act "scummy" then pressure them? Is this a strategy you often employ as town?

zMuffinMan · Post Post #112 (isolation #18) » Thu May 12, 2011 2:36 pm

@Amrun,

Funny you should mention that... That is a possibility I've put forward. I also think it could be just you as scvum who couldn't fecide which angle to attack andrew from.

So what reason would I have for doing this? Why would I do this page 1? Why wouldn't I employ your masterful approach and wait for them to "act scummy" before attacking them?

Show me what made you think cworl and andrew are scum and scum together at that point in the game. That's the "simple answer" I'm looking for.

You're persistent, I'll give you that.

Yes; what I wanted to comment on was you at the moment and I was short on time. And yes, sometimes the best scumhunting strategy is "wait and see." One scummy comment isn't enough to convince me, but two scummy incidents is enoigh for me to take it seriously. I wanted to see how several scummy and/or lurky characters, including and especially Quilford, reacted when your wagon started gaining more support. Would they join in? With what reasoning? However, I wasn't sure of you myself and didn't want to give the wagon more vote momentum at that particular time.

So your game plan is literally to sit back and wait for people to "act scummy" and then call them out for it and vote for them, even if what they did isnt... actually... scummy...

Can you explain why Quilford's reaction to the game so far is necessarily an act of scum?

Sometimes the best strategy is to lay traps and wait. Sometimes, it's not.

It was a good trap. I don't think anyone saw it coming... ... ...

I'm sorry, what trap did you lay?

if there is scum on your wagon, zmuffin, who are they? Saying "this isn't an all-town wagon" is unspecific, unhelpful, and not scumhunting. It's attempting to throw aspersions onto your wagon without substance.

You tell me, they're your partner/s.

The only people on the wagon I'm not particularly suspicious of are andrew and dvdkid. andrew is just andrew, meh. dvdkid actually seemed genuine to me, but even if he is scum, that can wait til later.

On the other hand, we have edmund,

Ghostlin telling me he thinks my plan coming into this game (as scum) was to call out two "scum" on page 1 and set up lynches....

And Quilford, who has yet to provide any substance to his claim that I'm his top FoS. But I don't find him particularly scummy for that, I'm just interested in his reasoning.

@Ghostlin,

Is this question serious, and if so, do you expect the person you asked to answer the question honestly?

No, that would be me being sardonic. Her "plan" was terrible, and it's nothing more than a cover-up. She's scum.

Although her explanation was interesting to read.

What do you think of Amrun, Ghostlin?

@ C-Worl

Based on what?

zMuffinMan · Post Post #113 (isolation #19) » Thu May 12, 2011 2:38 pm

EBWOP:

edmund... Who thinks I'm newbscum that thought town would sheep my vote for no god reason...

zMuffinMan · Post Post #120 (isolation #20) » Thu May 12, 2011 3:52 pm

eh, I don't mind being hammered if people actually present sound reasoning as to why they think I'm scum (because, quite frankly, suggesting I had some sort of plan on page 1 trying to set up lynches is just plain stupid, and if everyone sheeping this theory is actually town, then I would rather not be in this game - the fact I'm even at L-1 for this poor a reason should be sending signals to anyone who's actually town). Also, what they plan to do when I flip town.

Interested in why C-Worl is pushing hard for the hammer.

Amrun is scum. I would not be surprised at all if there's 2 scum already on my wagon, as well. Although it's really hard to tell the difference between a VI thinking they've caught scum and scum trying to push a mislynch. I'd suggest looking closely at edmund and Ghostlin if I get hammered. edmund's game so far is lackluster and anti-town at best; he's taken no initiative to actually progress the game along or hunt scum in any way. Ghostlin just doesn't have a good reason to even be on my wagon, unless he honestly thinks I'm scum with some master plan to call out scum on p1 and somehow get town to sheep my vote for no reason. Also wouldn't hurt to look at who hammers and for what reason.

@Amrun,

I've ALREADY SAID. I am so tired of repeating myself to you. I think you guys could have set it up pre-game as a distancing tactic. Or, you could be acting independently and WIFOMing town on purpose. Or, you could be misguided town, though I'm doubting it more and more.

I'm not asking you for "possibilities" - I want you to explain logically why you think I am scum because of my early actions. You could look at possibilities behind any action, but if you don't have a reason to suspect I'm scum, then it's a moot point.

Surely you have a better case than simply it's possible my actions were that of scum...

I said SOMETIMES it is a good idea to wait things out and see where they go.

No, it never is. It's a pathetic, passive strategy that does town absolutely no good, and you're only using this as a defense because you are scum and can't properly explain why you didn't put any pressure on Quilford even though you found his actions scummy. For that matter, you didn't put any pressure on me, either, which seems rather odd if you really had a problem with my early play. You took the time to answer the RQS questions, but didn't have the time to comment on anything else, especially when you had an issue with 2 players at that point? How was this pro-town play?

Only now that you're being questioned do you come out of the woodworks.

You still have not explained what made Andrew and C-Worl stand out as scumbuddies on page 1. At this point, the only reasonable explanation of this is because you CAN'T because explaining it would show your scum motivation.

I would have thought it's rather obvious that I have already explained why I did what I did. andrew's vote was a joke vote and everything I said about policy lynching him being win/win were direct quotes from another game and he'd understand the reference since he was lynched D1 that game by the real zMuffinMan. I just chucked C-Worl in there to see what reactions I'd get.

What scum motivation were you looking for here?

zMuffinMan · Post Post #126 (isolation #21) » Thu May 12, 2011 4:07 pm

@Amrun,

ONCE AGAIN, just because you disagree with me on a theory point does not make me scummy.

That's not why I think you're scummy. It's a gut feeling as to why you started attacking Quilford at the time you started attacking him, even though you supposedly thought I'm scum and you hadn't contributed anything to the game until prodded into doing so by me.

It's not about the level of contribution, it's about when and why you chose to start contributing, and what you are contributing (which is essentially you saying you found aspects of both my play and Quilford's play scummy at D2 but neglected to mention them up until I badgered you).

Nobody else has done anything similar to you, so I'm not selectively applying supposed scum tells.

You are OMGUSing sooo bad.

Yes, because analysing intentions is OMGUS.

By the way, what you supposedly did with C-Worl and andrew is a trap. But they're passive and nonsense, right?

I don't understand what you're asking here.

zMuffinMan · Post Post #127 (isolation #22) » Thu May 12, 2011 4:08 pm

EBWOP: D2 = P2

zMuffinMan · Post Post #129 (isolation #23) » Thu May 12, 2011 4:15 pm

Wait, never mind, just re-read your question.

I don't have a problem with "traps" if someone is actually setting up a trap in a good way. The two issues I have here are:

1) I was not actually setting up a "trap" - I wasn't serious, and at least Scumhunter picked that up, but I wasn't doing it to intentionally trap anyone. It just so happens that people found my play "suspicious".
2) You claim you were setting a trap, but you haven't actually done anything that suggests you really did set a trap... Unless you consider doing absolutely nothing a trap... ... ... This is why I was asking what trap you were supposedly laying.

First of all, you haven't analyzed anyone's intentions that wasn't attacking you.

That would pretty clearly be because there has been very little content that didn't revolve around me, and as special as that makes me feel, it also means that the only real intentions I have to analyse are the intentions of the people commenting on me.

zMuffinMan · Post Post #130 (isolation #24) » Thu May 12, 2011 4:17 pm

EBWOP: the first time I read your question, I took it as you implying that I thought andrew and C-Worl themselves were "passive and nonsense". Which is why I was confused.

zMuffinMan · Post Post #133 (isolation #25) » Thu May 12, 2011 4:27 pm

I explained the entire "trap" to you. Was it perhaps the most effective one? No. But I was busy and rushing. It happens.

You didn't set any trap, though. You just did nothing. And hoped someone would "act scummy". This isn't a trap, it's just bad play.

This is one of the least fruitful lines of discussion EVER.

Not really. You can't explain how your actions were pro-town at all, and I think they're scummy. You didn't lay any traps, but you claim you did. You bring up "scummy behaviour" way after the fact and claim you didn't bring it up earlier because you were waiting for more scummy behaviour (which still doesn't explain why your only comment regarding myself was that I came off worse in some exchange). You really don't have a good reason for going after Quilford, and I think you're afraid to hammer me because you don't want the cop to investigate you when I flip town. That, and this is some poor attempt at distancing yourself from buddies on the wagon.

I'm logically explaining why I think you're scum, and how your actions make sense as scum. You're just mud slinging, trying to discredit my arguments without properly explaining what is wrong with them. Claiming I'm OMGUSing or that I'm VI or that something isn't fruitful doesn't make it true.

zMuffinMan · Post Post #139 (isolation #26) » Thu May 12, 2011 4:41 pm

It is mudslinging if you're just claiming I'm doing something that I'm actually not doing.

Are you implying that I haven't been hunting scum? And this is coming from someone that posts nothing of substance and calls it trapping?

zMuffinMan · Post Post #148 (isolation #27) » Thu May 12, 2011 5:18 pm

@C-Worl,

Came in, whipped his dick out and declared two people scum.

Continued to senselessly defend those unexplained "scumreads"

Then blamed it on reaction fishing when heat started burning him.

Right, and where was my motivation as scum here? Or how does this make sense for me-as-scum in any way?

@Amrun,

I think you may be trying to scumhunt me, but it's not very productive. Scumhunt me if you want, but do it better. No more theory arguing and baseless accusations. I am so bored with this line of discussion.

How is it not very productive to try to get a read on you? Even if you were town, it would still be productive for me to question your motives and form a proper read on you.

I'm not arguing theory. I'm not making baseless accusations.

Fact:

You posted nothing of substance and called it trapping, but you have yet to explain how this was actually trapping.

Fact:

You said you found early posts by Quilford and I suspicious, but neglected to elaborate on why until I badgered you about it. In fact, you neglected to bring it up at all until you were badgered.

The rest of my reasons for suspecting you're scum are, of course, based on my intuition, but they really aren't "baseless" accusations at all. Your actions simply don't give me a town feeling.

zMuffinMan · Post Post #153 (isolation #28) » Thu May 12, 2011 5:39 pm

It sounds like a splendid way to setup mislynches.

... But... How...?

How could I have possibly set up any mislynch unless I was definitely wrong and 6 people blindly sheeped me for no good reason?

zMuffinMan · Post Post #156 (isolation #29) » Thu May 12, 2011 5:57 pm

@Amrun,

I saw a scummy post by Quilford, but it wasn't a lot by itself. I expressed support of your wagon but didn't vote to see what kind of reactions it would draw, particularly from Quilford. I wanted to gauge his reaction and felt that addressing his previously scummy post first would alter his reaction.

I'm not saying you didn't explain your actions at all. I'm saying you didn't explain how it was really trapping. You called it a trap, but it was just you not posting any real content. You've explicitly said that your intention was to wait for Quilford to do something scummy. You didn't prod him into doing anything, you didn't trap him into doing anything. You

weren't

trapping.

I explained then because it was clear that Quilford wasn't going to respond any time soon.

I don't see how it was clear he wasn't going to respond, and I don't see why you needed him to respond to make a case against him. It seems like you already had your mind made up, and it seems like you already had a case on him. Why did you think it was a good idea not to bring it up?

How can I have neglected to bring it up? That doesn't even make sense.

Because you had multiple opportunities to bring it up before you were asked to, and you didn't. Therefore you neglected to bring it up. Neglecting to bring something up isn't necessarily scummy, but I don't think you had a good reason to not bring it up.

@C-Worl,

Start early hope reasons pop up as you go. Which is what you were doin.

It's obviously what you're suggesting I did, but I don't really see where you explain how it makes sense in any way if I'm scum.

zMuffinMan · Post Post #159 (isolation #30) » Thu May 12, 2011 6:27 pm

I must be, because I still can't see how anything you're saying makes sense if this was a plan I formulated as scum.

How exactly could I have set up mislynches unless 6 players blindly sheeped me? And what would I stand to gain from making it that blatant, as opposed to, say, pulling an Amrun and "trapping" you by not posting until you did something I could call scummy? In any case, both you and andrew would have to be mislynches for this to be true, and while you're free to tell us that you're a mislynch, you shouldn't know whether or not andrew is a mislynch as well. FYI, you're the only person who has explicitly stated you think I'm setting up two mislynches. Even Ghostlin has admitted the possibility that I could be scum bussing, although he hasn't explained how this really makes sense.

I never took a serious stance to begin with. At best, the backtracking I did was the same as anyone unvoting their RVS vote, except that I played around with mine a bit because people were reacting to it.

zMuffinMan · Post Post #160 (isolation #31) » Thu May 12, 2011 6:33 pm

@Amrun,

If you had time to post, you had time to give your thoughts on the game. Unless you had some reason you couldn't give your honest thoughts and since you obviously read the posts and thought there was something wrong with them, I don't see how you being busy (but still able to post) is a good reason for not contributing.

How was your "trap" meant to trap people, exactly? What kind of reactions to that would you find scummy?

zMuffinMan · Post Post #165 (isolation #32) » Thu May 12, 2011 6:53 pm

RE-READ THE 27 TIMES I ALREADY ANSWERED THOSE QUESTIONS

Well, you haven't actually answered the questions I just asked.

At best, this is your explanation for your trap:

I expressed support of your wagon but didn't vote to see what kind of reactions it would draw, particularly from Quilford. I wanted to gauge his reaction and felt that addressing his previously scummy post first would alter his reaction.

Now I'm asking you:

How was this meant to trap someone? What reactions would you find scummy?

I've also asked you why you think addressing his "scumminess" would alter his reaction, but you haven't explained that either. Unless you honestly believe that he's scum and would just post randomly without considering that his posts would be analysed.

zMuffinMan · Post Post #169 (isolation #33) » Thu May 12, 2011 7:25 pm

People sliding onto the wagon in shifty, scummy ways

Right, I can see scum motivation here, because it would mean you were just waiting for someone to vote for me and call it scummy for some reason. Maybe look like a white knight rescuing poor, defenseless me.

I can't see town motivation here, unless you think everyone who had already posted had good reason to have their vote on me, and you previously indicated that both andrew and edmund had "shaky reasons". In the first place, you still haven't explained how Quilford slid onto my wagon in a shifty, scummy way - you've just called him scum for FoSing me but not voting me. Whether or not he is scum, you weren't looking at the reason he voted me. Which leads back to me seeing scum motivation for this supposed "trap" you laid.

You say to someone, "X action is scummy and I suspect you," tips them off that they are being scrutinized and they will alter their behavior.

Unless he was just posting randomly without being aware that his posts were being scrutinised, this makes zero sense. Do you really think people in the game are posting without knowing their actions are subject to scrutiny? Also not seeing how someone altering their behaviour is a bad thing. If they're town and they're acting scummy, wouldn't it be best to stop them doing this so you can form a proper read on them? Even if they're scum, it's not really a bad thing if they change their behaviour. For example, you might find inconsistencies in their explanation for their behaviour. You essentially have no good reason not to explain yourself.

And AGAIN about the post, answering RQS does not require thought, but posting real content does.

So you didn't think about your answers to the RQS questions? And it would require extra thought to write down what you were thinking of the game at that point?

zMuffinMan · Post Post #171 (isolation #34) » Thu May 12, 2011 8:01 pm

Quilford's slide on is scummy precisely because he HAS no reasoning.

No, he didn't give a reason for me being his top FoS, but that doesn't necessarily mean he had no reason.

Coming from someone that claims they don't explain themselves to trap people, it's ironic that you're grilling Quilford for not explaining himself.

Again, I see the scum motivation here because it's easy to attack Quilford for doing this, but I'm not seeing the town motivation here, because you're calling him scum without asking him to explain himself. You literally just told him you're not buying that he forgot to vote... Good work scum hunting there, Amrun.

You tell someone that his reaction to pressure was scummy for x reason, and the next time they are pressured in th game, they won't do that again. It makes the reaction more forced, less genuine, and less useful in ascertaining alignment.

er...

Telling someone what they're doing is scummy is never a bad thing. It forces them to explain why they did what they did and if they don't do it again, that's not necessarily a bad thing. And if the following behaviour from them is forced, then it lets you analyse their new behaviour or inconsistencies or scum tells. Also, you haven't actually explained how Quilford's action really are scummy.

If the reaction is forced and not genuine, then I'd assume it would be more useful in discerning alignment.

If you think skimming the game and answering RQS takes just as much effort as reading carefully and formulating thoughts, it's not surprising that I think you should read more carefully.

When I read something, I automatically formulate thoughts on them. It takes little effort to write these thoughts down.

Is it different for you? Is formulating thoughts something you find difficult?

zMuffinMan · Post Post #173 (isolation #35) » Thu May 12, 2011 8:13 pm

I AM asking him to explain himself. He damn well better do so -- and soon.

Yes, but the issue is you

didn't previously

ask him to explain himself before I was on your case.

In neither of these posts: #72 or #75 did you indicate you wanted him to explain his vote. Your issue with him is that he didn't vote his top suspect, not that he didn't explain his vote. If you wanted him to explain his vote, you could have just asked "why are you FoSing zMuffinMan?" and that would have both got your desired result and not clued him in that you think he's scummy.

You didn't do this. There is absolutely no town motivation not to do this.

Sometimes, it is good to force a change of behavior for analysis. Most of the time, even. Once again, this is theory discussion. It's pointless. Stop.

You're backpedaling here. Before you said it makes their reactions more forced, less genuine and less useful in ascertaining alignment. Now you're saying that most of the time it's a good thing.

I formulate thoughts when I read things, but I usually try to read several times before posting -- but at the time, I was literally IN THE CAR posting from my phone while navigating for my mother. I had neither the time nor the inclination to type out an organized, readable post right then, and the main point of that post was to notify people of that.

Yes, and I'm saying I think this is just an excuse, because it would have been very simple to say something as simple as "I'm getting scummy vibes from Quilford and zMuffinMan, but I'm busy and can't go into detail..." or something along those lines. Why you thought it was more important that you respond to useless RQS questions, I have no idea.

zMuffinMan · Post Post #179 (isolation #36) » Thu May 12, 2011 9:09 pm

My phrasing wasn't the best, but it is implied.

I'm sorry, what? Where was this implied?

I am saying that different tactics should be employed in different situations ... which is the same thing I have been saying all along.

There is never a good reason not to explain why you think someone is scummy. Even if there were situations when it is useful, this wasn't one of them. You're making stuff up after the fact.

And now they're sheeping each other. Oh, joy. They really might be scum together.

Implying I'm sheeping andrew... Right. Baseless accusation noted.

If you can't outargue me, you can at least try to discredit me in any way possible, even if it simply isn't true. Maybe you should tell me I'm OMGUSing a bit more. That might work.

zMuffinMan · Post Post #181 (isolation #37) » Thu May 12, 2011 9:26 pm

In everything I said to Quilford it was implied.

It really wasn't. All you asked him is why he wasn't voting his top suspect.

I didn't say I was never going to explain why I found Quilford scummy -- and indeed I have! I just delayed it by like 1 real life day. Not even that much, I think.

Read: you delayed it until I badgered you about it.

zMuffinMan · Post Post #182 (isolation #38) » Thu May 12, 2011 9:28 pm

Oh, and considering your argument comes down to "I think you're scum because you might have planned your early actions and Quilford is scummy because he didn't explain his vote", I'd say I'm successfully outarguing you.

zMuffinMan · Post Post #185 (isolation #39) » Thu May 12, 2011 9:38 pm

Neither of those are my arguments. Please read more carefully if you're going to drag things out like this.

Well, that is pretty much your entire argument.

You think Quilford is scummy because of his vote on C-Worl (which is kind of funny) and the fact he didn't explain his vote (which is, at best, null, unless you're admitting your own actions are scummy).

And you think I'm scummy because it's possible I'm scum. Yeah. You got me.

zMuffinMan · Post Post #230 (isolation #40) » Fri May 13, 2011 8:32 pm

OK, a bit to catch up on since yesterday.

Ghostlin wrote:Muffin: are you still thinking andrew is a good policy lynch?

No

Ghostlin wrote:I acutally like the andrew/Muffin wagons still: If you read andrew, it sounds like he's waffling on someone who declared him scum in ISO 2. Read it, it's acutally rather illuminating. The dissonance there is 'I don't think your scum but you say I am so you're inconsistent, but I'm not really sure you're scum due to a guy I once know that shared a login(ish) with you.' (Later says he feels Muffin was joking.) Then he unvotes and votes Amrun--which seems to be chainsaw defending to me.

But Amrun isn't voting for me, she's voting for Quilford. How could andrew have been chainsaw defending? At best he was sheeping me, but I don't think that was the case either.

Also, not quite sure what you're on about re: andrew's ISO

Ghostlin wrote:Muffin's been defending himself against most of town, but still hasn't rode or continued his case on andrew/C-Worl much besides a preemptive vote. He's also accused Amrun of scummy motives, but has yet to vote (or really FoS) her, and he's spent more time on why her motives are scummy than andrew's.

I don't FoS - IMO it's a retarded concept, if I find someone suspicious, they'd know it because I'd either be voting for them or pressuring them in some other way. My vote was already on someone else and I didn't particularly feel like relieving pressure until I got a response.

Ghostlin wrote:Do you feel that Amrun is scummy?

She's up there in my suspect list. I won't be voting for her today though, probably. Too many people seem to be getting a town read on her and it's not worth beating a dead horse right now when there are better candidates.

--

edmund wrote:Do you confirm what andrew said that there was once a different zMuffin who always tried to lynch andrew?

Yes. It was actually a joke based on this post specifically. That zMuffinMan is not me. I didn't expect anyone else but andrew to get the joke obviously, but it was not at all serious and it was interesting seeing the reactions to it. There's a lot of disdain for andrew on that site, to say the least.

--

@Amrun,

What's your read on Ghostlin? No dancing around with "I dislike this or that". Especially re: the FoS on C-Worl due to an apparently obvious joke from C-Worl.

--

Unvote

VOTE: Ghostlin

Also snake needs to die at some point.

zMuffinMan · Post Post #232 (isolation #41) » Fri May 13, 2011 8:57 pm

Because it's impossible for andrew to read your posts and form his own opinion... What makes you think he was sheeping me?

zMuffinMan · Post Post #234 (isolation #42) » Fri May 13, 2011 9:32 pm

How can you fault him? It was his 4th post, and I'm awesome, so of course people want to talk about me. I'm the only thing a lot of people have talked about.

Why does it matter whether anyone else expressed any sort of suspicion of you?

zMuffinMan · Post Post #240 (isolation #43) » Sat May 14, 2011 7:19 am

Amrun never really attacked me, it was more me attacking her.

If Muffin is town, what is it about Amrun that makes her scum?

That's a really interesting way to phase a question to me.

Inconsistency and opportunistic attacks that I don't think are good arguments. Also, gut.

zMuffinMan · Post Post #241 (isolation #44) » Sat May 14, 2011 7:20 am

Wait never mind, that was phrased at andrew.

Still, interesting way to phrase a question, since I don't think andrew ever implied that I'm town because Amrun is scum.

zMuffinMan · Post Post #242 (isolation #45) » Sat May 14, 2011 7:22 am

420am, can't read stuff properly, just saw my name and thought I'd comment before sleeping. Looks like I had nothing to comment on.

zMuffinMan · Post Post #267 (isolation #46) » Sat May 14, 2011 10:29 pm

@zMuffin : You haven't really said why you find Ghostlin scummy, you have only answered his questions.
I don't really see the case on Ghostlin, please someone enlighten me.

OMGUS

Spoiler:

Quilford wrote:don' like the 'OH IT WAS ALL A REACTION TEST'

It was never a reaction test. It was a joke. But I ran with it seeing the reactions it got.

--

Also, this hypo-lynching idea is bad and unnecessary and shouldn't even be discussed today. And yes, it's still bad even though there's no roleblocker/godfather/etc.

e.g. for simplicity's sake, say 11 alive tomorrow because we mislynch + a VT dies tonight

A scum
B scum
C scum

D inno on A
E inno on B
F inno on C
G inno on D
H inno on E
I inno on F
J inno on G
K inno on H

Now, we assume the cop must tell the truth and can't randomise his result.

A/B/C scum know D/E/F cannot be cop. The pool of cops is between G/H/I/J/K. Scum are going to want to lynch one of them that day and kill another that night, and town wouldn't know who was lying or telling the truth about their claims, so they wouldn't know who to protect, etc.

It's pointless and the downsides outweigh any benefits

zMuffinMan · Post Post #292 (isolation #47) » Sun May 15, 2011 7:34 pm

Wait, can you explain how tunneling and flaking makes you lean town on Ghostlin?

zMuffinMan · Post Post #310 (isolation #48) » Mon May 16, 2011 2:05 pm

My reads really haven't changed that much.

The pool of lynches I'd be happy with today consists of Ghostlin, Snake, Amrun, C-Worl. Ordered by preference.

zMuffinMan · Post Post #320 (isolation #49) » Tue May 17, 2011 3:29 am

That point would actually fit with her scum meta based on what I've seen of her play (last time I played with her she didn't put a vote out at all - yes, literally no vote all game except near the deadline... this time she's just not moving her vote, which is no more helpful).

zMuffinMan · Post Post #321 (isolation #50) » Tue May 17, 2011 3:31 am

Also the fact she hasn't made a case on Amrun, or pushed her vote in any way, or done anything of any real use except point out random things also point to her being scum. She's actually a null read for me because I mostly just skim her posts without attempting to understand what she's saying. I should probably stop doing that.

zMuffinMan · Post Post #350 (isolation #51) » Tue May 17, 2011 4:39 pm

Ghostlin's play is so scummy. Also #344 is lol considering his case consists of things already mentioned by other players, with the addition of "her case on edmund is bad" (and if the latter is a scum tell, then Ghostlin should be dead). I'm not seeing the fluff in her posts either. She made one fluff post I can recall about cupcakes and muffins, the rest has been observations about the game.

@Scumhunter,

There are really no notable differences between her play here and in 1078. The only real difference is she put her vote on someone (as opposed to not voting at all), and now she's been called out on it, she's actually doing something (and it's entirely possible this could all be chalked up to learning from her previous mistakes). As a side note, if she's scum, I think edmund is confirmed town. I don't think Tragedy busses like that.

What differences do you see in her play here as opposed to her play when she was scum?

--

I could see myself jumping on the Tragedy wagon if Ghostlin's wagon dies, she has been playing to scum meta I have on her. I'd still rather see Ghostlin dead today.

zMuffinMan · Post Post #354 (isolation #52) » Tue May 17, 2011 4:59 pm

Not really. When you consider it from the perspective that he was the top lynch candidate up to a couple pages ago and just found a way out. "Investigate me please" could very well be a gambit.

zMuffinMan · Post Post #356 (isolation #53) » Tue May 17, 2011 5:07 pm

Tragedy wrote:If Ghostlin/Myself (In your thoughts, you wanted one of us to be dead, at least) flipped town, who would be your other priority?

If both of you are town (and I see that as fairly unlikely), then I'd be looking at other suspects I've already mentioned.

Tragedy wrote:So, how's the scum meta on me, Muffinz?

If you're asking me how you're playing to your scum meta, then I've already explained this a couple of times.

zMuffinMan · Post Post #362 (isolation #54) » Tue May 17, 2011 8:03 pm

Amrun wrote:I need to check out the Ltragedy doesn't vote as scum" meta, though I do remember her voting more as town.

Can someone give me a link?

Newbie 1078

Literally the only votes she made this game were the mislynch at the very end of D1 (she put her vote down for deadline reasons and she was the only other candidate for a lynch at the time) and her vote on Albert D2 when it came down to a choice between her and her partner as the only viable lynches D2.

zMuffinMan · Post Post #363 (isolation #55) » Tue May 17, 2011 8:17 pm

dvdkid wrote:Also has anyone noticed that GreyIce is essentially controlling this game without even giving out much content.
First off, he steers everyone away from the muffin wagon and turns us to ghostlin and then more recently has turned us onto tragedy. And he's lurking. Just sayin.

I don't mind GreyIce. He's lurking, but at least he's doing it in a good way. I don't particularly have a problem with the way he's "controlling" the game. Although that could just be me thinking he's town because he steered people away from my wagon.

dvdkid wrote:Also random thought: snake=essentially nothing to go off of. 5 posts with nothing remotely helpful.

This would be one of the reasons I wouldn't mind his lynch today. The other being the timing with which he chose to post some of the things he posted. e.g. His ISO#3 was right in the middle of my arguing with Amrun, right about the time my wagon started dying off and all he had to add to the conversation is that it's possible distancing... The turn of phrase he used there was also interesting, but I'm not going to read too deeply into that.

zMuffinMan · Post Post #368 (isolation #56) » Tue May 17, 2011 10:15 pm

Snake wrote:zMuffinMan so are you complainig that becuase I commented in the middle of your arguing with Amrun I caused your wagon to drop off anf that makes me scum? *Scratches head* that doesn't make any sense whatsoever.

No, the point is that after everything that had happened, the only comment you had was that there was some possible distancing between Amrun and I. Like, that's all you had to add to the game at that point...?

zMuffinMan · Post Post #400 (isolation #57) » Thu May 19, 2011 12:42 am

I assume dvdkid.

Also edmund requested nobody hammer until he had a chance to post.

P-Edit: I actually believe this claim

zMuffinMan · Post Post #408 (isolation #58) » Thu May 19, 2011 1:09 am

Amrun, even if Tragedy was stupid enough to fall for that (and believe me, she'd have to be dumb as a doorknob to not realise the trap you're trying to set up), it's a null tell at best.

Anyway, I think she's truthfully name-claiming, but whether or not she's truthfully role-claiming is the question. There are a couple reasons I believe her claim. First, just based on what I've seen of her scum play, I think she'd more likely claim VT than a PR (although this is really iffy, so I am not giving it too much credence). Second, her name-claim does fit her role-claim (albeit, the whole "look at the front page" thing came off as slightly suspicious and could easily have been planned). And there's a third reason which I'm not going to divulge because I don't want to give scum any clues about what I'm looking for in a claim.

zMuffinMan · Post Post #412 (isolation #59) » Thu May 19, 2011 1:31 am

She was trying to trap Tragedy into saying town-aligned instead of south-park aligned, which is just dumb, because there was a N0 kill on Mr Garrison.

zMuffinMan · Post Post #415 (isolation #60) » Thu May 19, 2011 1:39 am

Because it's not a tell.

zMuffinMan · Post Post #418 (isolation #61) » Thu May 19, 2011 1:55 am

Quilford wrote:It wouldn't have resulted in anything useful

This.

It's not a tell.

zMuffinMan · Post Post #448 (isolation #62) » Thu May 19, 2011 2:47 pm

C-Worl wrote:Right now Amrun (is admittedly NOT SouthParkAligned)

As much as I would love to jump on this and say, "haha Amrun obvscum", this is not an indication that she's scum. It's not an indication that she's town, either.

Ghostlin wrote:Here's my thoughts on the matter. I would recommend no one protects Trad tonight (don't tell us if you're an FH, folks)--if she's telling the truth, odds are quite likely she won't be here Day 2. (Yes, this is WIFOM--but scum usually DO kill protective PRs).

If I were scum in the game and I knew she wasn't fake-claiming, I wouldn't be stupid enough to take a 50/50 risk on killing her instead of going for, say, the cop or the other faith healer. Why risk not getting a kill like that? Not to mention the obvious complications of giving the other Faith Healer a safe route to claim and confirm Tragedy as town. No, Tragedy won't be NKed tonight, and this is regardless of her alignment.

What I'm wondering here is why you think the other faith healer shouldn't protect her if she really is a faith healer, because that would just guarantee she dies. Admittedly, if Tragedy is really a faith healer, scum's chances of killing a PR are 50/50 as opposed to roughly 1/4 (depends on the D1 lynch), but it's still very, very risky. And yes, I could see why you're suggesting this if you don't believe she's a faith healer, but I don't see why you felt the need to suggest this as if a real faith healer is going to look at her claim and not consider all possibilities. Just seems like you were trying (badly) to earn town points here.

PS: Like I've already said, Tragedy is def claiming her real name, the only issue that needs to be discussed is whether she's claiming her real role. And objectively speaking, Cartman is just as likely to be scum as he is to be a faith healer.

Scumhunter wrote:The Eric Cartman claim is way more risky for scum than a faith-healer claim. I believe her close to 100% unless someone cc's Cartman.

Bad Scumhunter, bad.

Tragedy wrote:Fun Fact: I doubt scum gets safe claims in any Open Games.
Seriously?

This is something I disagree with.

For example, I will guarantee, 100%, that no one will claim Scott Tenorman in this game.

You'd have to have balls of steel.

Ghostlin wrote:There's no way to counterclaim a faith healer, unless three people all claim it. Which makes it infinitely safe for scum to claim FH.

There are reasons this is false, but I'll agree with you here as far as D1 goes.

Also considering pushing a Snake lynch at this point. He's the very definition of an active lurker, and still hasn't given his explanation for the Tragedy vote which he said he'd be back shortly to do when he did it.

zMuffinMan · Post Post #489 (isolation #63) » Sat May 21, 2011 4:13 am

Shut up during twilight, K?

No one wants to hear your suspicions.

zMuffinMan · Post Post #491 (isolation #64) » Sat May 21, 2011 6:43 pm

@Mod

Can we get a prod on chkflip?

zMuffinMan · Post Post #499 (isolation #65) » Wed May 25, 2011 7:40 pm

But I thought he looked cute in that hat...

Also two of the people initially on my wagon are DEAD. That leaves andrew and dvdkid and Quilford. Pick one. Scum is there.

I could get behind a Quilford lynch today.

zMuffinMan · Post Post #502 (isolation #66) » Wed May 25, 2011 8:29 pm

What are your reads, Amrun? Just your scum reads will do.

zMuffinMan · Post Post #505 (isolation #67) » Wed May 25, 2011 9:45 pm

Actually andrew and snake do need real content.

zMuffinMan · Post Post #506 (isolation #68) » Wed May 25, 2011 9:52 pm

Actually, GI, Tragedy = scummy for not changing her vote in forever, but andrew is andrew? Yeah, andrew is andrew, but is andrew really andrew enough that he gets a free pass for being andrew?

zMuffinMan · Post Post #507 (isolation #69) » Wed May 25, 2011 9:53 pm

That made sense in my head.

zMuffinMan · Post Post #514 (isolation #70) » Thu May 26, 2011 10:31 am

It's not "smart" play to avoid killing a faith healer.

zMuffinMan · Post Post #517 (isolation #71) » Thu May 26, 2011 10:47 am

Tragedy wrote:It's not "smart" play for scum going straight for the faith healer when you can get the cop... Hmm.
I dunno.

They did a good job with that, too.

@andrew,

real content. now.

zMuffinMan · Post Post #521 (isolation #72) » Thu May 26, 2011 11:13 am

Amrun wrote:9/10 the other faith healer protected Tragedy last night.

Not really...

Amrun wrote:A 50/50 chance of killing a faith healer

That's higher than the chance of hitting a PR by killing someone else (a lot higher), so unless they had a good read on someone else as a PR, and their aim was actually to kill a PR, Tragedy would have been the best kill.

zMuffinMan · Post Post #525 (isolation #73) » Thu May 26, 2011 1:56 pm

You didn't say you weren't from South Park, you said you weren't South Park aligned.

zMuffinMan · Post Post #529 (isolation #74) » Thu May 26, 2011 2:15 pm

Amrun wrote:Which means that I am aligned to another place, meaning I am from another place. I think. I didn't bother to wiki anything.

I had to go back and look at my win condition, and it's vague enough that I could actually believe you are town but not South Park aligned.

But then, what were you looking for in Tragedy's alignment claim?

zMuffinMan · Post Post #533 (isolation #75) » Thu May 26, 2011 3:51 pm

eh, at this point I could do an andrew or a Quilford vote. I still feel uneasy about the wagon that formed on me at the beginning of the game.

zMuffinMan · Post Post #535 (isolation #76) » Thu May 26, 2011 4:10 pm

baaaaaaaaaa

VOTE: andrew

zMuffinMan · Post Post #538 (isolation #77) » Thu May 26, 2011 5:49 pm

I didn't say you formed the wagon on me

zMuffinMan · Post Post #539 (isolation #78) » Thu May 26, 2011 6:34 pm

I think my main issue with you being on the wagon is the fact you had a chance to get off your RVS vote at one point (when you explained a bit about our history) but you chose not to.

Other than that, your play has just been bad. You kept your vote on Amrun for the entire D1 (despite not even knowing why your vote was still on her), you've been active lurking with very little input, and you just generally haven't tried helping town in any way.

What are your reasons for voting C-Worl, again? Is it just that his #447 implied he knew Tragedy is a faith healer?

zMuffinMan · Post Post #541 (isolation #79) » Thu May 26, 2011 9:31 pm

That post was longer than all of your other posts combined, if that was a quick post where are the ones that take you a long time to write?

And surely if you had time to write an odyssey, you had time to consider where your vote was.

Do you have any other reason for voting C-Worl, or that it?

zMuffinMan · Post Post #543 (isolation #80) » Fri May 27, 2011 4:20 am

I have a better idea. Compromise. Split thinks Amrun is scum with andrew coming in second. Amrun thinks andrew is scum. You're fine sheeping split. How about you both vote andrew? GI can even join the party, too. We'll sing and dance and eat cupcakes together. We'll have a marvelous time.

zMuffinMan · Post Post #553 (isolation #81) » Fri May 27, 2011 5:02 pm

@Split,

I really don't think anything can be read into Amrun's alignment issue. A few reasons for this:

- First, if you're town, you should be able to look at your win condition and see that it's vague enough that you don't need to be "South Park aligned" to win this game
- Second, I see no real scum motivation for her to bring it up. Yes, she could have been setting up a fake-claim for a later stage of the game, but I think this is a case of mod wifom. chk more likely changed her alignment for the purposes of making it more difficult for her to claim. Fake-claiming a different alignment doesn't exactly help her in any way...
- This third reason is just an addition to the second reason and also pure guesswork, but I suspect that all mafioso are South Park residents (just based on the flavour so far) and wouldn't actually need to make up a different place of alignment to fake-claim.

As for other issues with her play, I can't say I disagree, but they're not really enough to make her my top suspect right now.

zMuffinMan · Post Post #559 (isolation #82) » Sat May 28, 2011 2:23 am

I... don't even know where to begin with #558. I think it's best we all pretend that post doesn't exist.

zMuffinMan · Post Post #574 (isolation #83) » Sat May 28, 2011 5:51 pm

I actually think #558 makes C-Worl more likely to be town.

It's just so downright stupid that I don't see C-Worl-scum trying to pull off something like that.

@andrew,

Why do you think it's more likely that C-Worl-scum would "slip" and act like he knows Tragedy is faith healer than C-Worl-town genuinely thinking Tragedy is faith healer?

zMuffinMan · Post Post #577 (isolation #84) » Sun May 29, 2011 1:36 am

GI is getting replaced too, isn't he?

zMuffinMan · Post Post #584 (isolation #85) » Sun May 29, 2011 2:41 am

Empking wrote:Muffin: Who are your null reads?

Well, that depends. If you're asking who I'm completely null on, then it'd really just be you, RedColbalt and to a lesser extent dvdkid. My other reads are varying degrees of strength, but I just haven't seen enough content from those slots to really get an idea of their alignment. Why are you interested in my null reads?

zMuffinMan · Post Post #585 (isolation #86) » Sun May 29, 2011 2:47 am

btw what's your opinion on andrew, and is the only reason you think Amrun is scum because she suggested that voting block thing?

zMuffinMan · Post Post #591 (isolation #87) » Sun May 29, 2011 3:15 am

@Empking,

How was she trying to control it? Or where did you see this? Because all I saw was her sheeping GI's votes (which I guess is no better, but I didn't get the impression she was controlling it).

Also, read on on andrew?

zMuffinMan · Post Post #593 (isolation #88) » Sun May 29, 2011 3:23 am

Do you think Amrun-scum = Red-scum? Or do you think there was another reason she was trying to control it there?

Also, read on andrew?

zMuffinMan · Post Post #595 (isolation #89) » Sun May 29, 2011 4:04 am

Scumhunter

Splitfarvle, C-Worl, zMuffinMan, dvdkid13, Quilford,

snake

Empking, RedColbalt

Opinions on the Ghostlin wagon, Empking? Feel free to exclude yourself.

zMuffinMan · Post Post #606 (isolation #90) » Sun May 29, 2011 5:30 am

OK, in light of Ghoslin and edmund being... DEAD... what's your opinion on who's scum?

Well, at least this sort of solidifies you as a town read. I don't think Ranmaru-scum could mistake this for being D1 still.

zMuffinMan · Post Post #608 (isolation #91) » Sun May 29, 2011 5:39 am

No, andrew is the one on C-Worl. I'm on andrew. Who you only seem to have one comment on. Check my earlier posts on D2 for why.

zMuffinMan · Post Post #609 (isolation #92) » Sun May 29, 2011 5:44 am

btw scum is Empking, andrew and probably Red. Opinions on this?

zMuffinMan · Post Post #612 (isolation #93) » Sun May 29, 2011 6:23 am

I think my #539-#541 pretty well explains why I'm voting andrew.

To summarise, when I was at L-2 pretty early in D1, andrew had a chance to unvote but instead said he only had time for a short post but instead wrote something that could be considered a wall essay by his standards and simply neglected to comment on anything in the game or remove his vote from me. Like, I was at L-2. Did he really feel like telling a story with his time was more important than commenting on the game and/or moving his vote elsewhere? This just reeks of scum hoping for a mislynch with the convenient excuse that they weren't around to remove their vote due to being busy.

His next post he moves his vote to Amrun. This, I didn't have a problem with. What I do have a problem with is that he kept his vote on Amrun for the whole D1 despite acknowledging that he didn't even know why his vote was on Amrun. He active lurked his way through the rest of D1, while keeping his vote on Amrun the whole time. This is so scummy it hurts.

Today he's dropped Amrun and gone after C-Worl because of some slip that everyone has pretty much acknowledged was not a slip at all...

Amrun I find less scummy at the moment. I'm trying to make sense of her alignment claim and I can't see it coming from scum. Also just from the fact that I think andrew is scum, Amrun is less scummy. Although it is andrew; if he flips scum, that could have been some terrible attempt at bussing D1.

zMuffinMan · Post Post #614 (isolation #94) » Sun May 29, 2011 6:36 am

zMuffinMan · Post Post #616 (isolation #95) » Sun May 29, 2011 6:43 am

Being right about a town read doesn't make you scum. And buddying doesn't work if the person you're buddying... dies.

zMuffinMan · Post Post #618 (isolation #96) » Sun May 29, 2011 7:06 am

BTW, Amrun is at L-2, I think. Try not to quickhammer guys, ty.

zMuffinMan · Post Post #621 (isolation #97) » Sun May 29, 2011 7:36 am

Tragedy care to weigh in with your reads?

zMuffinMan · Post Post #627 (isolation #98) » Sun May 29, 2011 8:02 am

Requesting consideration is insidiously wresting control?

zMuffinMan · Post Post #641 (isolation #99) » Sun May 29, 2011 2:47 pm

Someone wanna refresh my memory as to what Amrun has done that's actually scummy?

As far as I can tell, Split was making a case on her (though I don't like the alignment part of the case), C-Worl is sheeping split, Empking thinks Amrun is scummy because of the voting bloc, and I can't actually figure out why Ranmaru thinks Amrun is scummy.

zMuffinMan · Post Post #643 (isolation #100) » Sun May 29, 2011 4:17 pm

I have a headache. My palm just hit my head so hard then it's not funny.

Do you seriously not understand why andrew thinks it's a slip?

I'll humour you, since I can't tell if you're trolling or not.

Two possibilities: Tragedy is scum, and lying, or Tragedy is town, and telling the truth. No VT is going to claim Faith Healer, maybe the cop would but that's still unlikely, so if she's town, she is the faith healer. andrew is implying you know she's town, and the only way you could have known that D1 is if you're scum.

It's a horrible argument, but this defense is just as bad.

zMuffinMan · Post Post #646 (isolation #101) » Sun May 29, 2011 4:20 pm

Yeah, no, we've already established it's a horrible argument and there's no real basis. You don't need to continually act like an idiot to "out" that.

Vote him already.

zMuffinMan · Post Post #650 (isolation #102) » Sun May 29, 2011 4:35 pm

My andrew wagon has cupcakes and milo.

zMuffinMan · Post Post #651 (isolation #103) » Sun May 29, 2011 4:50 pm

That was a scum test, btw. If you say no to cupcakes and milo, you're scum. Only scum have reason to not want cupcakes and milo.

zMuffinMan · Post Post #653 (isolation #104) » Sun May 29, 2011 5:19 pm

Sure, Mila Kunis is what I meant. Come on over.

zMuffinMan · Post Post #655 (isolation #105) » Mon May 30, 2011 5:04 am

andrew, you ISO#1 isn't even that big a deal to me. I just found it interesting that you were able to type that up "quickly" when it's over double the length of any of the other posts I've seen from you. You still haven't addressed the other problems I have with your D1 play (or D2 play for that matter).

zMuffinMan · Post Post #661 (isolation #106) » Mon May 30, 2011 5:08 pm

andrew is funny. He's already set up a move to Amrun when his C-Worl "suspicion" dies out. He knows nobody is going to support his C-Worl vote because it wasn't really a "slip" and he's recently not-very-subtly suggested Amrun is his second scum pick so he can move the shortly. But duhhhhhhhhh he still hasn't told us why he thinks Amrun is scum. He's also completely ignoring the bigger part of the reason I think he is scum when I've repeatedly mentioned that his ISO#1 is only one of the things that I thought was odd about his D1 play.

--

Tragedy, suspicions?

zMuffinMan · Post Post #662 (isolation #107) » Mon May 30, 2011 6:26 pm

btw Empking, how are you reading andrew as town?

zMuffinMan · Post Post #665 (isolation #108) » Mon May 30, 2011 8:19 pm

You don't even remember why you voted Amrun on D1, though. You said it might have been because she was using AtE or it might have been gut.

Disliking D1 doesn't excuse your play.

zMuffinMan · Post Post #672 (isolation #109) » Tue May 31, 2011 1:22 am

It's andrew

zMuffinMan · Post Post #674 (isolation #110) » Tue May 31, 2011 4:17 am

Dealing with Tragedy can wait. I'm not wholly convinced she's town but she doesn't require immediate attention.

I would like her to actually

do

something, though.

zMuffinMan · Post Post #683 (isolation #111) » Tue May 31, 2011 5:20 pm

So I tried to google "Tragedy translator" but had no luck. #677 is giving me a headache.

@Tragedy,

Do you think andrew is scum? What does the following mean...?

Tragedy wrote:It would be entirely difficult to determine Andrew's wagon...

--

@Split,

Yo, just like... tell me you're considering burying andrew right now. If this andrew wagon collapses, I'll consider the Amrun wagon, but this is andrew-scum without a doubt. I've played like 40 games with andrew, I know his scum meta and I know his town meta. This is not andrew-town.

--

@Ranmaru,

Why are you voting for Amrun again? Do you have anything better than sheeping Empking's "voting bloc" reason?

zMuffinMan · Post Post #685 (isolation #112) » Tue May 31, 2011 5:24 pm

What do you think of Amrun then?

Who are you thinking about voting for?

Do you think you're going to vote any time soon?

zMuffinMan · Post Post #703 (isolation #113) » Wed Jun 01, 2011 9:41 pm

Didn't expect a VT claim from andrew-scum. Need to check some things.

andrew, drop C-Worl for a min. Who do you think is most likely scum and why? If you say Amrun, tell me why.

zMuffinMan · Wed Jun 01, 2011 10:18 pm

Actually no, never mind. Not going to WIFOM myself out of this because of your claim. You're prob-scum. Someone hammer the nail in andrew's coffin.

zMuffinMan · Wed Jun 01, 2011 10:51 pm

What about your name?

And why aren't you trying to be helpful? Who is your top scum read after C-Worl and why? (Don't say "Amrun D1 reasons" because you had no D1 reasons)

zMuffinMan · Wed Jun 01, 2011 10:53 pm

FYI, Kyle is a jew, a ginger and is from new jersey. 3 strikes, andrew, 3 strikes.

zMuffinMan · Wed Jun 01, 2011 10:55 pm

Actually the whole "I have my name" thing leads me to believe you're scum and scum have fake name-claims. As though your name was meant to be a sign you're town or something....

zMuffinMan · Post Post #729 (isolation #118) » Thu Jun 02, 2011 4:06 pm

I'm telling you guys, he's getting worse. The Jersey in Kyle is coming out. I don't see any other choice. We have to kidnap Kyle and lock him in the meat freezer at Sizzler.

He has to be put away and he has to be put away now.

@andrew,

Your blood is tainted with the 3 Js - Jewish, Jersey and Jinjer. Admit it.

--

Good hammer, RC. You're not scum at all... ... ...

zMuffinMan · Post Post #743 (isolation #119) » Mon Jun 06, 2011 2:48 pm

Well

Today, ideally, I want both faith healers to claim.

I had a guilty on andrew yesterday (duh) and I investigated spltifarvle last night and got a guilty again.

So.

Yeah.

Would rather not vote him off until both faith healers claim so we can co-ordinate protects.

Officer Barbrady, etc.

zMuffinMan · Post Post #744 (isolation #120) » Mon Jun 06, 2011 2:48 pm

Well, it's a guilty on jilynne actually.

zMuffinMan · Post Post #747 (isolation #121) » Mon Jun 06, 2011 2:54 pm

Officer Barbrady: South Park Aligned Sane Cop

Yeah.

zMuffinMan · Post Post #755 (isolation #122) » Mon Jun 06, 2011 3:24 pm

Gut, I guess. I submitted both investigations during twilight each day. Split just seemed hesitant to get on the andrew wagon and it looked like a bus when he finally did. Also, generally I just look for scum partners in whoever FOSes scum and votes for someone else.

zMuffinMan · Post Post #758 (isolation #123) » Mon Jun 06, 2011 3:29 pm

I kind of want to wait to see if there's a third faith healer claim, just to be sure. If not, you two can co-ordinate the protects. Remaining scum has a 50/50 chance of successfully killing me tonight, but even if I die, that's 2 confirmed townies left and decent leads on the last one. And you two can protect each other the following night and that's another 50% shot at scum missing their kill.

I would guess CSL is town, I would guess the remaining scum is one of Empking or Quilford. I'm 90% sure Ranmaru is town. C-Worl is prob-town too.

zMuffinMan · Post Post #790 (isolation #124) » Mon Jun 06, 2011 7:53 pm

VOTE: jilynne

Hopefully that was the hammer.

zMuffinMan · Post Post #792 (isolation #125) » Mon Jun 06, 2011 8:18 pm

Well, if Amrun/Tragedy agree that scum is most likely in one of Emp/Quil/CSL, it's an easy win. The only problem here would be if one of Ranmaru/C-Worl is scum, but I don't think it's likely.

Hopefully we win the coinflip tonight.

zMuffinMan · Post Post #793 (isolation #126) » Mon Jun 06, 2011 8:24 pm

I'd suggest having a read through at some point tomorrow if I die tonight. Like I'm pretty sure the remaining scum is one of those three. I'd say Quilford over Emp followed by CSL last. But I could be way off. Quilford pretty much active lurked his way through D2 with promises to analyse andrew at some point but no delivery. Also there were just some D1 interactions with Scumhunter, and generally suspicious play D1.

zMuffinMan · Post Post #794 (isolation #127) » Mon Jun 06, 2011 8:25 pm

C-Worl's interaction with split doesn't look like scum-scum. Ranmaru's replace-in post I'm willing to believe he's town because it

looked

genuine and I don't think scum would mistake it for D1 if they'd read their quicktopic. Which he would have done.

zMuffinMan · Fri Jul 08, 2011 10:36 am

Nope.

zMuffinMan · Fri Jul 08, 2011 10:37 am

Yep. I got 3 scum investigations in a row, and I set you up for a win on D4 if you just listened to what I said during twilight. Was disappointed C-Worl even got lynched, especially when I said neither you or C-Worl should be lynched. Meh.

zMuffinMan · Fri Jul 08, 2011 10:43 am

I'm not really frustrated. I don't think I played badly so it doesn't bother me. Only thing I'm personally frustrated about is that I wasn't more forceful about my suspicion of Quilford D3.