Needs to loosen up.
Is just a little too serious.
In post 12, Mehdi2277 wrote:
Nextly Pro I'm not sure how moving quickly out of rvs is a bad thing. That's what I saw from post 8.
In post 16, Shamrock wrote:
Why would you rather judge people based on random votes than based on substantive discussion? There's no reason not to move out of RVS as quickly as possible.
I see this is your second game on the site; do you have any other experience playing mafia? (Serious question, I don't mean to be insulting or anything.)
In post 19, Kmd4390 wrote:Prohawk, reactions to real votes are more valuable than "vote so and so for having a blue avatar". Also, laying serious votes early has kinda been my style for about three years. I rarely random vote anymore. And I fully realize that usually shifts attention towards me. I don't mind because it gets my opinions discussed.
In post 23, shos wrote:AAAAAAAaaaand back on computer.
I'm gonna lol at him calling kmd inexperienced xD
look guys, this is page 1, I never expected to find so much content, but I'm getting the feeling that Mehdi is newbtown. clearly isn't so experienced, page one of Day one and already trying to think. slight scumread on prohawk for actually getting a read on kmd from that sole vote. you said that he was 'quick to lay blame'? he posted just one post, which has obviously been a part of RVS no matter what he claims, and for IT you think he's scummy? *that* is quick to lay blame. what YOU did, not what HE did.
UNVOTE: Shamrock
VOTE: ProHawk
In post 35, Shamrock wrote:In post 24, ProHawk wrote:By your incorrect unvote, I have yet to decide if you just forgot who you voted for, or if you are just trying to obfuscate the fact that you had a vote for kmd whom you are now trying to defend.
This is really bad both tonally and substantively.
The idea that shos is trying to "obfuscate" his kmd vote is laughable.
The fact that you're giving yourself wiggle room to attack him on this if other people agree or to back off it if they disagree,instead of actually attacking him and seeing what his response is in order to read him, is bad.
The fact that you're waving your arms menacingly going "ooh back off mister or Imma develop a scumread on you too" is terrible.
VOTE: ProHawk
In post 43, Shamrock wrote:
If you think he's scum then you should be pushing/questioning him, not making vague implied threats and sounding out support without actually voting.
In post 43, Shamrock wrote:What was the purpose of asking this question?
In post 46, absta101 wrote:VOTE: ShamrockIn post 44, Shamrock wrote:absta, thoughts on prohawk?
Haven't looked at him yet.
Pro, you should vote Shamrock.
In post 55, Mehdi2277 wrote:
@Pro, logic is lovely, but you really over complicating some things. You're making a mountain out of a molehill from a small comment. Beyond that in your first paragraph in 53 your pretty saying the vote at first was to generate discussion which makes you sound hypocritical when you attacked kmd for what at the time looked to also be a way to make discussion.
In post 54, Shamrock wrote:Alright. Has your read on shos grown stronger/weaker/the same as a result of the discussion your post provoked? What about your read on kmd?
I said "I don't care" because I don't see anything useful emerging from examining the things you mentioned.
In post 59, Mehdi2277 wrote:
I said at the time. You said "My comment about his mistake was to generate discussion" towards voting shos for I'm assuming what was a minor read if it's main purpose was to get discussion. At the same time before that the way you reacted to kmd's early posts that pushed on me and shos was he was scummy for being "quick to lay blame" when it did a similar thing (kmd's quick allegations made discussion and moved rvs out quickly). It's fine for you to vote someone for something minor for discussion purposes, but it isn't fine for kmd to do that (while he might believe the reads now I still don't think it's a good assumption to say that his first fos was a major scum read when it based on three or so posts).
In post 62, Shamrock wrote:@ProHawk: I've ignored your question about town vs. scum effort, and I'm also ignoring your question about what I consider the strongest scumtells, because I'm not interested in being dragged into a theory discussion in the midst of a game. (We have a Mafia Discussion forum for that.)
In post 66, Shamrock wrote:PH, you don't see the difference between not answering a theory question and not answering a question about your scumreads?
In post 91, Robocopter87 wrote:Pfft fine
So tell me where in here he is town. Because all I see is scum.
Satisfied?
In post 97, Robocopter87 wrote:It is bad when it is sole reasoning to disregard present evidence. It is alright when it is mildly used to get an earlygame view on another player.
Pedit: Lynch now, lynch later, whats the difference?
In post 112, Shamrock wrote:I agree, but the main thing stopping me going "SCUM SCUM SCUM SCUM SCUM" is that he's already shown a proclivity to discuss theory and this sort of fits with that.
He is still my strongest (only) scumread for now though.
In post 107, Robocopter87 wrote:In post 101, ProHawk wrote:@Robo
These are two quotes from you that I do not quite understand. The fact is you are taking a very anti-town behavior and seem to be playing alone. Why are you trying tosatisfythe people who are asking you to explain you line of thought? If you are indeed town, you should bewanting to helpus, not satisfy us.
Lynch now... or lynch later. If we lynch now we lose eight days of establishing a baseline on the player base, we lose discussion time. I am not sure how much useful information will be put in the updates, but from my experience on here my guess would be little. So which would be more helpful to the town, lynch now or later? Why are you playing against us?
Lynching later is key.
Just found the scumbuddy
In post 122, Robocopter87 wrote:Yeah except you are blatantly misrepping me.
I said you are scum.
I said its possible that you are town. But I didn't say you were town. The point I was conveying was that you are less scummy than shos. Which is why i want shos dead and not you.
Lynching sooner and lynching later, in a game like this it makes no difference. People who say, "Oh we still need some discussion, deadline is far away we should wait it out" are just trying to gain towncred. Town doesn't need to gain towncred. Town needs to find scum. How do we find scum? by gathering information. Best way to gather information? Kill things and watch them flip. Saying we should wait is just a load of BS. It just stalls games.
In post 123, Shamrock wrote:Please don't put words in my mouth. I never said I was certain you are scum; in fact, in the post you just quoted, I was expressing uncertainty in my read! If I was 100% convinced you were scum, I would be focusing on convincing other people to vote you rather than on asking you questions.
Which of these do you think is the case?
I'm also less than crazy about your focus on prosecuting "anti-town behavior" rather than scummy behavior.
In post 121, Mehdi2277 wrote:Pro context is great. He suspects you a lot. He suspects someone else more. He's saying you could be town to focus on the bigger scum read. Tell me the problem?
In post 130, Robocopter87 wrote:Just so we are clear, because you lack the ability to read between the lines.
In post 154, Shamrock wrote:
Concerning ProHawk: Shitty attack on shos. Wishy-washiness in reads, casting around for support before committing to an attack. Focus on pointing out anti-town behavior instead of scummy behavior. A few "look at me I'm town" posts. A few phrasings that seemed off to me.
In post 143, Robocopter87 wrote:
You are a smart guy, you should be able to figure it out.
I can go uber blunt with you, but I'll guarantee that you'll get mad at me for treating you like a child.
In post 161, Robocopter87 wrote:I'll admit the more I talk to him the less scum and more misdirected town I think he is.
Come one pro, get your head out of the sand and look at the last post that shos made.
Tell me where you see town.
In post 166, Mehdi2277 wrote:First paragraph, well scummy players should die. And it's not a poor player thing since shos has played fine in other games.
Second paragraph, innocent til guilty is both the legal system and it actually makes things such as PoE and relations a lot easier to look at when you're willing to have town reads.
Three, your going to need to debate something that isn't semantics or a stretched case to possibly convince me (and likely anyone else).
In post 170, Mehdi2277 wrote:A pro/robo team is one of the least likely teams there is (I doubt they'd fake this argument this well).
Pro yes scummy town can die (although all reads are from different perspectives). Until they die I won't know whether they're town or scum so this argument if they're town that I lead on is just dumb,
And I explained gnr already. It's PoE since I think most of the active people are town this game.
In post 172, Mehdi2277 wrote:I explained that too. Slight town vibes from mala based on her first post and resemblance it had to her play in a game I recently finished with her.
Reading my posts again might help you.
In post 174, Mehdi2277 wrote:Hey you're using sarcasm. You must be scum. You are hiding something you evil person you.
Now can you see why the whole robo used sarcasm argument is really dumb (and then a lot of pointless semantics). My reads may not be long cases, but they explain the main point generally.
In post 188, Guy_Named_Riggs wrote:Sorry for not posting at all
Will catch up when I get around to this game. I have a lot of other stuff to get done
In post 209, Malakittens wrote:I didn't really defend him. I just pointed out his meta is basically the same as scum/town.
In post 238, Kmd4390 wrote:
My issue, however, was with the way prohawk put that. It doesn't look like a mentality of looking for scum. It looks like just finding the best way to pressure people into posting.
Don't get me wrong. Seeing Guy start posting would be great. I just don't think it's going to happen though and I have a much stronger scum read on shos.
In post 234, Kmd4390 wrote:Prohawk, do you even think guy is scum or are you just trying to make him talk? Id rather lynch scum than pressure a perrenial lurker into not lurking. It's like trying to teach a dog to meow.
In post 295, Kmd4390 wrote:
Prohawk, I know I'm responding to something at the beginning of last page, but on Guy and lynching him day 1 of every game, that just describes a policy lynch. I don't want to policy lynch in a micro. We only have so many lynches to work with. If we lynch Guy, it's going to be because we think he's scum. What I CAN say with confidence, however, is that you (prohawk) and Guy are NOT scum TOGETHER. This is because if you are scum, you are pushing policy in a way no half decent scum would on their buddy.
In post 301, Robocopter87 wrote:Do you honestly think that threatening to lynch someone but also simultaneously saying that you won't lynch the person is going to make that person respond any faster?
Simply asking him to post will suffice.
In post 350, shos wrote:It does not say that I am the only one alive, it says that I am the only one that butler fif not take out so far. I have completely losy my believe in my english knowledge of the meaning of 'take out' by now because of you.
are you saying that you are a member too?
In post 433, Malakittens wrote:Honestly, I wanted to vote ProHawk over CO, but with the two current unexplained votes I decided to hesitate.
In post 433, Malakittens wrote:I'm not voting Absta because I'm willing to bet that either CO/ProHawk have a higher chance at flipping scum than Absta at this point.
I can see a scum-ProHawk killing Mehdi because Mehdi was defending hard against a town-Robo rather than killing due to a possible role.
ProHawk straight up countered Shos flavor, so why was he not killed over Mehdi?
^ The same could be applied to why wasn't I killed over Mehdi either due to my soft-claim. The scum either smelt a trap there which I'll admit I tried planting or they see me as an easy lynch in D2.
In post 444, ChaosOmega wrote:
He was at L-1 when I replaced in with Mehdi's intent to hammer. No reason to cut off discussion right there. And why is it a big deal that I didn't hammer? I made known I wanted him lynched.
K. What type of action would you prefer? I can get my cape, run around the town, make some swooshing noises and fight some crime, would that be good for action?
In post 444, ChaosOmega wrote:
ProHawk wrote:Scum off the town lynch
K. Unless of course they both were, and then that reason's right out.
In post 444, ChaosOmega wrote:
For you to ask if it is ethical implies you think it's cheating. That viewpoint strikes me as more scum than town.
In post 444, ChaosOmega wrote:
Multiple attempts to start a theory discussion. Looks like an attempt to make posts that look pro-town but have no useful information or merit on the game, i.e., active lurking.
In post 444, ChaosOmega wrote:
I'm aware that the time difference is a bit off, but you seem to understand the benefit of prolonging the lynch. When you do it, it's to provide discussion time to help town, but when I do it, I'm fence-sitting and my posts are action-less. Why the double-standard?
In post 444, ChaosOmega wrote:
Something else, you seem to apologize a lot.
This could be more that you're just polite in general than anything, but scum have a tactical reason to apologize to players, town really doesn't.
In post 510, Kmd4390 wrote:
But wait. We have lynching wagons too:
Shos (5-LYNCH): kmd4390,, ProHawk,Robocopter87absta101, Mehdi2277
^I've been on the site for four years and have seen exactly one Day 1 mislynch that didn't contain scum on the wagon and that lynch happened on Page 1. I know myself to be town, so Prohawk is scum here. Almost 100% guaranteed.
absta101 (4-LYNCH): Shamrock, kmd4390, ProHawk, Robocopter87
^Day 2. There's Prohawk again. Although I admit this day leans more towards Chaos as a buddy with Shamrock on the wagon with Prohawk (DGB always says scum won't put all their eggs in one basket) and Chaos with his vote sitting without any danger on Prohawk. However, Prohawk's Day 1 GNR vote looks so much like scum going after town and I find that to be a stronger tell than this one.
Either way, this is the equation I'm seeing:
Prohawk+X=TheScumTeam