I take moral highground and tend to avoid the RVS, but at this point I do see someone who deserves my vote.
It was my first post, I like to make good first impressions. And you are voting for me on the grounds that I was too friendly? I find that kind of pathetic, honestly.In post 65, mozamis wrote:Well then Shane, you probably won't like this either:
VOTE SKELDA.
His post was way too "blendy", friendly and cheerful. Certainly, when you compare him and Peacebringer, its much more likely that he is scum than Peace. Peace annoyed me by being unhelpful, but it takes gutsy scum to play like that. Scum far more likely to play "nicey nice" like Skelda.
Yes, I have moved my vote around a bit, but I dont see that as a bad thing. It gets reactions going, conversations, and its better thn sitting on the fence.
But out of all my votes, most confident about Skelda being scum.
I checked, it is.In post 61, mnemonicdevice wrote:Yes. Peace is playing like peace normally plays.
Then don't. By the same token, I can't give any defense or explain myself without talking about on-going games as well, so just avoid it.In post 78, JKLM wrote:I can't talk about ongoing games.
Not for me. But I am pretty obvious as scum. And this is a random goat. I used to be into showgoat stuff, but this one is just from Google.In post 56, HönigBear wrote:I don't know the statistics on flips on people who choose to play like dicks like Peace here but regardless I'd like to go for the slightly more subtler scummy players and mozamis is currently leading in that category IMO.
Still if peace is the consensus lynch of the day I have no problem hammering him/voting him if other wagons clearly won't work and if he continues to play like posts 51 and 52.
Skelda out of interest, did that argument work when you were scum i.e. was it effective? Also what breed of goat is that?
It isn't as though we have a great amount of experience together. I don't see how you are that certain.In post 95, JKLM wrote:I know I can't.
Trust me. I know I'm asking for a lot but Skelda is scum. I know that sounds like a scummy excuse but this is scum skelda i know it.
And you got that from two posts? How?In post 100, JKLM wrote:Here's the simplest way I can put his sum play:
Very careful.
Not a risk taker.
Conformist.
But all you did was list traits that I typically have on this site in general, especially in the first few posts.In post 103, JKLM wrote:Your very first post is exactly all of that
Call it a bet I'm willing to take
I was wondering this too. His vote was for projectmatt, I thought. None of those meta-accusations on me had much to do with that at all.In post 108, Broken Aquarium wrote:what's interesting mneumonic?
Oh, forgot about that.In post 115, Broken Aquarium wrote:we areIn post 113, Skelda wrote:I want to hear his explanation first, since I don't see his recent Unvote as particularly scummy. Why aren't you voting if you are convinced? Your vote does no good rotting in your hands.
http://forum.mafiascum.net/viewtopic.ph ... 1#p5339321
I feel like his complacency isn't really that scummy. And him defending people surely isn't. But I really want to see his reaction to your accusations before I take a stance.In post 118, Broken Aquarium wrote:skelda, what do you think about his posts i linked...
post 30, where he says he would vote for JKLM, but he knows that's his posting style
as well as post 59, when he defends peace... when others were kind of getting their backs up at peace.
and post 61 http://forum.mafiascum.net/viewtopic.ph ... 3#p5341743
i know this is not a good argument... but i do that very thing as scum. whiteknight the people that town suspect.
I didn't know this. UNVOTE:In post 144, Garmr wrote:@Skelda Shanes vla your vote on him won't add any pressure and he won't be able to respond back.
Sheez. VOTE: ShaneIn post 146, Garmr wrote:Actually scratch that he should be back tomorrow or today depending on the time zone.
It isn't pointless, though. I just don't like my vote on people who aren't around. All votes are basically for pressure at this point, so I don't see why this vote is that different from any other.In post 149, JKLM wrote:You realize that since you've admitted the fact that you admitted your vote was pointless he won't really feel pressure from your vote?
I know. I wanted you to react, but sort of pointless now.In post 163, Shane wrote:By admitting you're only voting to pressure someone and therefore is not a serious lynching vote, it really does reduce the pressure. But anyway, was there something you wanted me around for?In post 150, Skelda wrote:It isn't pointless, though. I just don't like my vote on people who aren't around. All votes are basically for pressure at this point, so I don't see why this vote is that different from any other.In post 149, JKLM wrote:You realize that since you've admitted the fact that you admitted your vote was pointless he won't really feel pressure from your vote?
@mozarmis: where did your obv town reads come from and when did you change your mind about JKLM
That isn't exactly true.In post 220, mozamis wrote:Still waiting Skelda.
Could we FOR THE LOVE OF GOD get some votes on this scumbutt. He has no reason to post otherwise.
I thought I already had. Guess I forgot.In post 225, smargaret wrote:Skelda, you've got all these reads - wanna lay down a vote?
also, she, not he.
Well, what Gramr said, and also, if he doesn't vote, not only is he hindering the town's scumhunting abilities, but hiding where his own loyalties lie and making himself hard to read.In post 229, mozamis wrote:Why is MD refusing to vote "evidence" against him?In post 224, Skelda wrote:Mnemonicdevice- His Unvote in 106 was strange. And the fact that he is refusing to vote seems to be the biggest evidence against him. I also really dislike his 141 where he says that he is always vague day 1, since scum need to actively think about how they always are and act like it. I think he's scum.
Well, it is certainly anti-town, anyway. And I suppose it is making him difficult to read at least in theory. Anyway, I guess it is working because some are hesitant to vote for him.In post 241, mozamis wrote:But not that hard to read since you're voting for him? By him not voting, he has put the spotlight on himself. I completely agree that people should vote. And that it's annoying when they don't. But I still don't see why it's scummy.In post 239, Skelda wrote:making himself hard to read.
Your reasons seem really weak.
You like me as a vote I presume?In post 251, mnemonicdevice wrote:I am sorry for not posting.
life got in the way.
will post more. I don't understand what the case is on me?
I like Skelda
VOTE: Skelda
Well, the "honestly" and "this is good" things are seriously just the way I talk. That you're going to have to deal with. And I realized that I was a big advocate for Peace as I was typing that, that is why I threw "I suppose most of us did" in there. Hermy is null because I just haven't seen enough of her, plus I have experience with her and she often seems to do things like that early on. My points on you contradicting each other is not something I even see, please explain that. And I just went down the ISO list, but I thought I got everyone important. So, any reads I missed that you wanted would probably be null, which is why they wouldn't take much time and be thrown together.In post 256, mnemonicdevice wrote:Alright. The numbers i added for everyone else's benifit. THEY ARE NOT SKELDA'SIn post 224, Skelda wrote:Okay let's do this...
1. Gramr- I wasn't crazy about the way he jumped around to Peace early on, but I suppose most of us did.
2. mozamis- He is being really fluffy right now. Getting on my nerves, honestly. His 218 is especially bad with his "I'd forgotten he was scum", since I can't imagine his read was ever that serious to begin with if he forgot about it. 155 is also bad, since "forgetting to put someone on your reads list" is, in my mind, not a legitimate reason to suspect them. It is like forging evidence or something. Not good.
3.Matt- I don't like how he voted Moz and then unvoted the instant he was pressed. That isn't good.
4.Hermy- Well, I don't like how quick she was to call me out for lurking in 214, since she hasn't exactly been helpful herself, and I try to post whenever I can. But Null...
5.Mnemonicdevice- His Unvote in 106 was strange. And the fact that he is refusing to vote seems to be the biggest evidence against him. I also really dislike his 141 where he says that he is always vague day 1, since scum need to actively think about how they always are and act like it.
6.If I missed anyone let me know and I'll throw something together.
Also, I only quoted part of his post.
1. Skelda also complained about Peace. He was being as much as an advocate for his lynch as Gramr was.
2. From my experience, scum seems to use lots of words like honestly.
3. Skelda likes to use lots of This is good, and This isn't good. Which seems like scum trying to convince town of who to vote for. It could also just be her trying to get her point across.
4.Why is she null, when all the points you make of her reflect as bad?
5. I am always vague, how is that not acting like I always am? And your two points there contradict eachother.
6. Skelda seems over-enthusiastic to make another case against someone. If town missed someone, then they almost certainly wouldn't have a strong read on them. However, scum faking reads can easily forget someone. Throw something together seems like he wants to make a case against someone. Just how I read it
This post was made possible by people making me give away all my reads immediately. However, I guess if I am going to die today, you might as well make the best use of them tomorrow.
So you want to advocate a policy lynch?
You said "it's not good", so you are obviously scum!In post 262, JKLM wrote:In post 257, Garmr wrote:@Mnemonic
You have shocked me a little that was a good post why didn't you do a post like that from the start through? Through I think it would of been better to leave the whole post and bolded the relevant bits than to leave out little bits in this case since you used most of it anyway.vote gamr
He made a case about Skelda being scum because how he likes to use positive adverbs
That's not good, that's like saying a persons manipulative if they use fancy language,
It's not good
So please, buddy harder.
Also I'd still be down for a peace lynch but I think I may have found scum here
See, I was tired, I knew I was forgetting someone. Anyway...In post 288, alienBRO wrote:The fact that we're not in this list concerns me, as does the fact that nobody has pointed this out. Gonna need to yell at pa for not catching this while I was gone...In post 224, Skelda wrote:Okay let's do this...
BA- He gives a lot of town reads. I usually don't like that, since hunting town doesn't really help us all that much. And I don't mind his read on mneumonic, he seems like he had a gut feeling supported by evidence and stuck to it and that is always good. Although sometimes his evidence can be a little weak, like in 114, I'm classifying him as a solid leaning town read.
Gramr- I wasn't crazy about the way he jumped around to Peace early on, but I suppose most of us did. That seemed a little caught up in the moment, but maybe scummy. But overall, I find him very town. I especially like his case against mnemonic in 124 and 203. He actually changed the way I thought about mnemonic, and I think that's a good thing since I'm not exactly renowned for my Day 1 scumhunting abilities.
Honig- Well, he seems to be invested in this game in a way that I don't often see scum invested. His 211 seems very genuine, and in general I find myself agreeing with most of what he says. At the same time, his posts are very wall-of-texty, and that sometimes makes them a bit difficult to get through, but his dislike of rolling the dice with peace seems very town to me.
mozamis- He is being really fluffy right now. Getting on my nerves, honestly. His 218 is especially bad with his "I'd forgotten he was scum", since I can't imagine his read was ever that serious to begin with if he forgot about it. 155 is also bad, since "forgetting to put someone on your reads list" is, in my mind, not a legitimate reason to suspect them. It is like forging evidence or something. Not good.
Shane- His 75 was basically jumping on moz's reads, and pretty much useless. And other than that, he is just a lack of information for the town. His one comment came from 163, when the best he could come up with was a tip about pressuring directed at me. Kind of ridiculous, he has given us nothing.
Matt- I don't like how he voted Moz and then unvoted the instant he was pressed. That isn't good. I also didn't like that all of his reads were town ones in 180. Leaning scum.
JKLM- Looking back, I'm not entirely liking how he put me in a box early on saying "this is your scummy", "this isn't your scummy". That never appeals to me. But, he does seem to genuinely be trying to get reactions and participating, so that is good. Null/town.
Hermy- Well, I don't like how quick she was to call me out for lurking in 214, since she hasn't exactly been helpful herself, and I try to post whenever I can. But Null...
Mnemonicdevice- His Unvote in 106 was strange. And the fact that he is refusing to vote seems to be the biggest evidence against him. I also really dislike his 141 where he says that he is always vague day 1, since scum need to actively think about how they always are and act like it. I think he's scum.
smargaret- I think he's very town. His 193 was interesting for me. I don't view Honig as scum, but it does seem like his suspicions are valid, if that makes any sense.
I think that's everyone. If I missed anyone let me know and I'll throw something together.
-Bro
I actually agree with this. I'm inclined to think they are both town, and I'm not jumping on a policy lynch for Peace either...In post 375, mozamis wrote:Well, read thorugh. Peace vs Garmr looks town v town. In fact he has upped his input so
Hmm, well nice obscure character there. Not really helpful at all, since if you were going to fakeclaim, a Rumblebuffin giant would be a pretty good choice.In post 446, mnemonicdevice wrote:This game is getting interesting... I don't understand the whole reason why I was supposed to name claim initially but:
Alright, I am a Rumblebuffin giant.
Not sure who he is, haven't seen Narnia in quite a while.
Also, I like to say interesting. If you knew me in real life, I would say interesting a lot.
S
Really? That IS interesting. I don't remember Rumblebiffin.In post 450, killerjester wrote:The character is not "a Rumblebiffin giant." His name is Rumblebiffin. He is a giant. IF he had a town role PM, it might appear as, and the flavor pertaining to him being a giant would be below, in the flavor text. And if this were the case, MD would supply us with the name "Rumblebiffin" when asked for his character's name. The answer we received, "a Rumblebiffin giant," might be indicative of a scum who googled his fakeclaim to see if he could add any flavor that might help sell his fakeclaim."Rumblebiffin" - Vanilla Townie
I won't be moving my vote.
Alright. It's been a while since I've read this book or watched the movie. I'm a little rusty on characters. Did he play a big enough role that he would feasibly be included in the setup? It is sort of a random character.In post 452, Garmr wrote:His the giant who kicked down the door in the ice witch's layer or smashed it with his club depending on the version. Rumblebuffin is a noble giant basically of the most respected family.
That is pretty bad.In post 485, mnemonicdevice wrote:Ugh.... I misread my pm. I haven't seen narnia in a while, so I thought that there was a group of people called "rumblebuffin giants" and that I was one of them. I am a vanilla townie though.
Yeah, I buy that. Guess that's fair. What do you make of the wagin on him in general?In post 489, RachMarie wrote:I am not saying anything about other reasons peeps are voting for him I am just saying based on the claim I dont buy into KJs adamant avowal that it is clearly a scum fake claim because see how he messed it up. My esperience has been scum are less likely to fumble than town. As in the example I posted.
Sorry, just noticed this again (I was in a rush when I first saw it and didn't have time to post, and then forgot). So, he had some bad logic involving my use of the word honestly even though he later claimed that him saying interesting wasn't a scumtell when there was no difference, and that is pretty hypocritical and scummy. He refused and continues to refuse to explain his BA read and how he originally came to the conclusion that BA was the Ice Queen. His read on me changed without explanation, or he forgot about it, even though I was busy with life and just not posting, which shouldn't make him any less suspicious of me if it was genuine suspicion. And then he had that whole Named Townie claim, which came out poorly, so yes. That is why I'm voting for him still.In post 476, mozamis wrote:Skelda, give me YOUR case on MD.
And how is that a scumtell? And how is that any worse than me saying honestly?In post 495, Broken Aquarium wrote:when he says it without really meaning anything... it's weird.In post 441, Skelda wrote:How on earth is saying interesting a scumtell? I agree, I want MD to nameclaim and he deserves votes until he does, but is saying interesting really a great case against him? Does that seem like something scum would be more likely to say?
remember here: http://forum.mafiascum.net/viewtopic.ph ... 4#p5346524 (unvote for no reason)... what is interesting?
and http://forum.mafiascum.net/viewtopic.ph ... 8#p5344378
Mozamis, these were my reasons for him being scum. I'm not trying to give him an unfair trial, people are just focusing on the not great evidence.In post 492, Skelda wrote:Sorry, just noticed this again (I was in a rush when I first saw it and didn't have time to post, and then forgot). So, he had some bad logic involving my use of the word honestly even though he later claimed that him saying interesting wasn't a scumtell when there was no difference, and that is pretty hypocritical and scummy. He refused and continues to refuse to explain his BA read and how he originally came to the conclusion that BA was the Ice Queen. His read on me changed without explanation, or he forgot about it, even though I was busy with life and just not posting, which shouldn't make him any less suspicious of me if it was genuine suspicion. And then he had that whole Named Townie claim, which came out poorly, so yes. That is why I'm voting for him still.In post 476, mozamis wrote:Skelda, give me YOUR case on MD.
Mozamis, these were my reasons for him being scum. I'm not trying to give him an unfair trial, people are just focusing on the not great evidence.In post 492, Skelda wrote:Sorry, just noticed this again (I was in a rush when I first saw it and didn't have time to post, and then forgot). So, he had some bad logic involving my use of the word honestly even though he later claimed that him saying interesting wasn't a scumtell when there was no difference, and that is pretty hypocritical and scummy. He refused and continues to refuse to explain his BA read and how he originally came to the conclusion that BA was the Ice Queen. His read on me changed without explanation, or he forgot about it, even though I was busy with life and just not posting, which shouldn't make him any less suspicious of me if it was genuine suspicion. And then he had that whole Named Townie claim, which came out poorly, so yes. That is why I'm voting for him still.In post 476, mozamis wrote:Skelda, give me YOUR case on MD.
Well, true, but better evidence than a muddled claim and use of the word interesting does exist.In post 520, PeaceBringer wrote:It is day 1, "great evidence" does not exist on anyone. Period.In post 518, Skelda wrote:Mozamis, these were my reasons for him being scum. I'm not trying to give him an unfair trial, people are just focusing on the not great evidence.In post 492, Skelda wrote:Sorry, just noticed this again (I was in a rush when I first saw it and didn't have time to post, and then forgot). So, he had some bad logic involving my use of the word honestly even though he later claimed that him saying interesting wasn't a scumtell when there was no difference, and that is pretty hypocritical and scummy. He refused and continues to refuse to explain his BA read and how he originally came to the conclusion that BA was the Ice Queen. His read on me changed without explanation, or he forgot about it, even though I was busy with life and just not posting, which shouldn't make him any less suspicious of me if it was genuine suspicion. And then he had that whole Named Townie claim, which came out poorly, so yes. That is why I'm voting for him still.In post 476, mozamis wrote:Skelda, give me YOUR case on MD.
I still missed it. I always fall for those.In post 540, Garmr wrote:It was more a light hearted joke than a fake hammer. I even wrote MD in the unvotes to be clear.......
I thought it just meant he expected to be lynched. I guess we'll see soon.In post 544, killerjester wrote:Die "next"? Don't you mean die "instead"? This is a scumclaim if I ever heard oneIn post 537, mnemonicdevice wrote:Alright. Here are my thoughts: JK has pushed way too much on this case and he should die next.
Wait, so if he flips town BA is STILL scummy? What would happen if he flipped scum then? Are you saying BA seems like he is bussing MD?In post 553, JKLM wrote:Not really. But even if he does you're still very scummy BA and are at the top of my list.
Or maybe you killed him so you could push him due to his being silenced? We don't even know if Mafia members can be silenced, although I assume they can be. But bringing that up seems horribly scummy, since I think BA being silenced was a failed attempt at making him look suspicious.In post 573, JKLM wrote:So I've come to a conclusion.
There are only a couple of reasons to silence players:
-to shut a player up that's making good points
- to create false suspsicion on player to get town to mislynch
-to let scum silence themselves as an excuse to bot be lynched for the day
It is the third one as a result of process of elimination. Here is why:
It can't be the first because look at his ISO. BA has made no arguments or accusations outside of what other players have said. There is no way he could have caught onto scum because he hasn't made any unique cases that would warrant him as the one to be silenced.
It definitely isn't the second reason, why? BA had a wagon in his own right throught the end of day 1. If scum wanted to stage a mislynch and BA was town, he would have cursed himself into being lynched himself. He only got SCUMMIER by the second and mos people were starting to scum read him.
By POE the third point is the only logical thing that would cause scum to silence BA.
VOTE: BA
And that's that.
Case closed. Good huddle guys. Let's get him.
So you think BA is less suspicious because he has been silenced? I don't really think it affects my suspicion of him, actually.In post 584, JKLM wrote:Skelda, one don't put actions in my mouth. This would be a stupid tactic for scum to do by silencing a person and then calling themselves out on it, you know I'm not only not that ballsy but I'm also not that stupid.
Two, silenced usually make people less suspsiscious anyways, so in order for your logic you'd have to actually beleive my argument that silencing of BA was done for a very specific purpose. If BA was going to be a mislynch target, they wouldn't have silenced him, based on the fact that BA had bough people on his tail and honestly him talking a bit more deal his fate of a lynch. He would have out himself in, so scum silencing BA would have been useless an a waste of a night action.
I'm not against a Hermy lynch, I really just want projectmatt to give a more complete list of reasons before I jump on board. Which he hasn't. Nor has he attempted to. And sorry, I feel as though I've missed something, what game-changing info?In post 660, mozamis wrote:So you were ok with a hermy lynch, but wanted a bit more time and discussion.In post 604, Skelda wrote:nd those Hermy votes came in way too fast. I'm fine with a Hermy lynch, but seriously no one was for lynching Hermy yesterday and the fact that people are just leaping on it today seems strange. I also find it strange that BA unvoted as soon as Gramr did, but once again, a discussion for when BA can talk.
So we haven't much more time or discussion, I'll grant you that, but we have had some game changing info.
My point being: why woud you NOT vote for hermy, when ProjectMatt has confirmed your suspicions?
Oh, did you claim Cop? Sorry, must have skipped that post. I believe you. What is Hermy at? Cause if she's at L-1, I don't want to hammer until we are ready.In post 659, projectmatt wrote:I suspected Hermy yesterday and pushed for her lynch. However, I explained my logic properly back then because it was not confirmed to me that the player was actually mafia and I wanted to have my rationale perfectly known to everybody in the game. Now that I know for certain that Hermy is mafia, it seems counter-productive to provide a rational case on why she is mafia as it should be plain to see. This is why I am resorting to pushing confidently and with rudeness because it is the play required to get Hermy lynched without actually outing what I am but since that fell through things are different.
If they are both town, projectmatt is a liar and deserves to be lynched.In post 678, JKLM wrote:Killer I feel that isn't really safe logic, I always find that scum try to control lynches like how you are. It's possible they could both be scum, they could both be town.
If you were a Miller you'd know you were a Miller.In post 685, Hermy wrote:You guys really believe the claim, just like that?
This may sound panicked and desperate but please believe me. I am not scum. Matt is scum, fakeclaiming cop. Unless...
@Mod - Are there any miller roles in this game?