Mini-Normal 1713: Mystery Mansion Mafia (GAME OVER)

[Akarin]

Everyone has their own way of talking, be it serious be it playful, doesn't matter. Use of words, grammar, sentence construction; that's all unique to anyone. I recognized yours. Maybe style would have been more accurate than tone.
Your reactiontest was serious, right? That means you were serious with your opening post even though you weren't being serious about being conftown by making that opening post.

So you town or scum-read people based on grammar, sentence structure, and style???

Slandaar is not asking "Can you recognize my writing." You made an alignment read off it looking like previous games. Nitpicking the definition of tone isn't responding to his point.

[Performer]

reply to 211 : Other than Mario/Accountant/absta101 seeming town, I'm leaning more null on Slandaar now but I want to FOS Slandaar AND Davsto. Something's just off about them from their posts. I'm curious to see what Davsto does once I unvote Slandaar, as his posts cause me to think he's more null now - for instance, his post 105. But personally I'm suspicious of

anyone

who claims scum or town at the entrance of a game. I also am leaning a bit town on SilverWolf, and you'll see why on an explanation further below.
UNVOTE:

@Akarin

but acting like Accountant and Slandaar were clearly town (rather than not particularly scummy) doesn't read like actually trying to figure out alignment.

How does SilverWolf saying "prob not scum" translate to her thinking they are clearly town?
--

@Performer

Since more time has passed and they happened to post more, it seems to be they're both town

( I could be wrong, they could be third party or mafia)

I don't like the bolded. It goes without saying that you could be wrong, anyone can be wrong. You feeling the need to state it seems like you want to have an excuse for when you feel like changing reads.

Do you still have no scum reads?

I generally wouldn't commit to a vote on day 1 and would rather use the available time until the deadline. So I'm taking my time, as well as analyzing what others posts. I do have a few town reads stated above though. I noted that you keep thinking I'm fishy since I didn't milk a cow at a county fair and SilverWolf thinks I'm fishy, since I didn't say I'm asexual.

Bottom line Akarin is your read is crap. It's based on misinterpreting my posts in a way that looks like you are deliberately trying to paint something scummy that isn't.

Akarin, Accountant, Expedience.

Calling it now. Game solved. Thanks for playing everyone. Hope to see you in a future game soon.

Are you some kind of...Daytime Omniscient Detective?.....

I actually really like Wolfie's case on Expy in post 213.

Her responses to me also fit with the "overreact-as-town" tendency she mentions, and reading them through slowly now, rather than quickly after I post, they feel like genuine emotion to me. And the later posts do show more townish thinking than I was seeing in that first post.

I'll sheep this: VOTE: Expedience

But seriously, Wolfie, follow through with your own advice to yourself and step away from the computer when you start to feel that way. It was really hostile and off-putting. I explicitly wasn't reading your ISO, I was slowly reading through the game and commenting on things.

I'm no longer scumreading Wolfie.

I don’t see how SilverWolf was being hostile (the person closest to being hostile was Jake from State Farm imo). The tone to me from SilverWolf, was that she was very adamant about coming across as town.

Of course I made that vote to appease them! Is there anything wrong with this? By voting, I showed that I wasn't afraid of voting for Mario like Accountant and Wanderer implied that I was. There was nothing to be gained from being stubborn and telling them to fuck off, and I imagine you'd call that scummy if I did this anyway.

And what if Accountant and Wanderer were scum trying to get you to vote a mislynch?

This appeasy nature of your vote is extremely scummy. You don't have to tell them to fuck off but being stubborn about your vote there would of looked more town to me than immediately placing the vote when they point out it's weird that you didn't. I mean, why say you don't want to vote and then do it right away because a couple people didn't like that you didn't vote? Appeasement is very scummy. Town doesn't appease. Town doesn't give a shit what they look like for the most part. Scum do.

Also, I've noticed that grayfoxxxx, All Alone, and Performer all have about 6 or 7 posts and none of them say much of anything. It would not surprise me at all, if there were scum in this group. Making yourself unreadable is also scummy.

Hold on here. I have to disagree on appeasement being scummy. It's odd you say that despite Expedience having his reason(s) for voting at that moment.

[Davsto]

Yo guys, I'm just gonna start reading through again now, sorry for neglecting this game again. Expect postwalls.

[SilverWolf]

SilverWolf thinks I'm fishy, since I didn't say I'm asexual.

[Davsto]

VOTE: Davsto
For being a douche.

I don't like this reaction. Probably just because it's an insult. Be nice.

I think that you shouldn't be townreading based on meta. Meta is flexible, easily changed and can be used to justify almost anything. I'm sure I could find three examples of scum claiming town as well.

Keeping this in mind in case Accountant uses meta reads later in the game.

Anyway, a few things I don't like with this post;
1. Trying to appear newb by saying she hasn't completed a game on this site.
2. Her story about ToS seems like trying to make excuses for wrong reads.
VOTE: Accountant

I don't like this. Using a justification about someone possibly using something as an excuse for reads as an excuse to vote them

before they've actually used it as an excuse?

Ridiculous.

Uh, sorry, I appear to have misplaced my vote, it wasn't silverwolf who voted someone (seemingly seriously) based on the stuff.
UNVOTE: It was Performer.
VOTE: performer

However, SilverWolf, townreading them by that exchange is also silly. I just find reaching to vote on a single person more scummy than oddly townreading two people from it.
Excuse me while I facepalm for being silly enough to mix that up.

Let me guess; you mixed it up because you wanted to follow Akarin onto a town wagon.

post 79, Davsto"]Yeh, sorry, I saw Akarin's comment and vote on you and assumed you were one of the ones voting Slandaar, without checking.[/quote]
See my earlier point.
Willing to vote on Davsto.[/quote]Gonna be honest, in general Mario's posts look like he's trying to find an excuse to scumread literally everything everyone says, even if it requires serious reaching. Disliking.

However, one think I'd like to ask is; why did the vote go onto Performer rather than Expedience?
Is it because Expi's scum and therefore the other was chosen to be wagoned?

Leading questions are the worst kind of questions.

Why does Performer trying to find something scummy and get out of it seem scummy to you?

Performer was trying to find something scummy out of a joke, by reaching in an unreasonable manner. I find that behaviour scummy.

Davsto 's post 159 – you think it's pathetic but it was RVS, it’s early on day 1, so me putting a bit of pressure wouldn’t do harm if he really is town, or if he really is joking.

I think we're past RVS now, so why is your vote still sitting on him?

I don't see the difference between having no vote or having him on vote at this point so I'm just leaving my vote there. Personally can't decipher who's really town or mafia right now.

An excuse to keep a vote parked on someone without having to give justification. When town keeps a vote on someone, usually there's a reason.
post 166, MarioManiac4"]All of this would actually be irrelevant if Accountant said that she's not a bad town player and wouldn't point to it after pushing a town lynch.[/quote]I almost feel like this is coaching, telling Accountant to say this thing, rather than waiting for her to say it on her own.

No.

I mixed it up because I agreed with the points, but didn't realise that Akarin had placed her vote on someone that hadn't actually done that.

So Akarin placed her vote on the 'wrong person' so to say, that's not something you'd want to get into?

What I meant is, I had already found it suspicious when people had non-jokingly voted Slandaar for that blatant joke at the beginning, and I thought that's what Akarin had done too. In fact, she had voted for someone for townreading that, which is a more minor thing but still meh.
Anyway, it's got past the point where reading stuff based purely on that exchange makes sense, so
UNVOTE: Performer

Anyway, while I haven't commented on later stuff since it isn't really causing me that much reads either way (I may have to read through again tomorrow when I'm slightly less tired and maybe that'll give me a different view on it idk) but as you can probably tell I dislike Mario's posts, at least early on. I know the behaviour has changed but scum know how to adapt to become more townie in the eyes of the players, so early posts (at least on D1) can sometimes be more telling.
VOTE: MarioManiac4

[absta101]

@Expedition

Of course I made that vote to appease them! Is there anything wrong with this?

By voting, I showed that I wasn't afraid of voting for Mario

like Accountant and Wanderer implied that I was.

The point is, you were afraid of how it would look like if you jumped onto the wagon and so you wanted to wait and see how people react to your support (from a distance) of it. After Wanderer and Accountant told you it was suspicious of you not to vote him considering you think he is scummy, you conceded and voted for him. This is incredibly scummy.

You say that you wasn't afraid of voting but you said this when you voted him.

Yes, I see what you mean.

I was more afraid of breaching some kind of different voting etiquette because there are more scum with capacity to quickhammer

. But on day 1 and with this few votes on Mario that wasn't particularly thoughtful of me.

You're asking us to believe that you were genuinely afraid that scum would quick-hammer and frankly, that's not believable.

Also, if you are scum reading him, why would his scum buddies quick-hammer anyway?

[Davsto]

Anyway, while I haven't commented on later stuff since it isn't really causing me that much reads either way (I may have to read through again tomorrow when I'm slightly less tired and maybe that'll give me a different view on it idk)

What I mean to say here is, well, I was quite tiredly reading through this and, as a result, probably stopped paying as much attention by the last few pages (I noticed I got noticeably fewer - i.e. no - clear ideas from them and that's a bad sign), so I'l read through sometime I'm more awake so that I can actually pay attention. It seems like a lot has happened but I just didn't really pick up on it.

[absta101]

You need to proof read post 254 Davsto. Some quotes aren't working.

[Wanderer-nl]

Everyone has their own way of talking, be it serious be it playful, doesn't matter. Use of words, grammar, sentence construction; that's all unique to anyone. I recognized yours. Maybe style would have been more accurate than tone.
Your reactiontest was serious, right? That means you were serious with your opening post even though you weren't being serious about being conftown by making that opening post.

So you town or scum-read people based on grammar, sentence structure, and style???

Slandaar is not asking "Can you recognize my writing." You made an alignment read off it looking like previous games. Nitpicking the definition of tone isn't responding to his point.

If you want to interpret it that way, fine, there's not much I can do about it. I never said I had a townread, or any read for that matter, on Slandaar, just that I didn't take his conftown-shit seriously or as a reason for scumreading him.

[Wanderer-nl]

Also, if you are scum reading him, why would his scum buddies quick-hammer anyway?

This^

Can we have a vc please?

[Davsto]

You need to proof read post 254 Davsto. Some quotes aren't working.

Oh jesus. I really need to preview this shit. brb with a fixed version. Sorry.

[Wanderer-nl]

Anyway, while I haven't commented on later stuff since it isn't really causing me that much reads either way (I may have to read through again tomorrow when I'm slightly less tired and maybe that'll give me a different view on it idk)

What I mean to say here is, well, I was quite tiredly reading through this and, as a result, probably stopped paying as much attention by the last few pages (I noticed I got noticeably fewer - i.e. no - clear ideas from them and that's a bad sign), so I'l read through sometime I'm more awake so that I can actually pay attention. It seems like a lot has happened but I just didn't really pick up on it.

Why did you need to clarify?

[Davsto]

Anyway, while I haven't commented on later stuff since it isn't really causing me that much reads either way (I may have to read through again tomorrow when I'm slightly less tired and maybe that'll give me a different view on it idk)

What I mean to say here is, well, I was quite tiredly reading through this and, as a result, probably stopped paying as much attention by the last few pages (I noticed I got noticeably fewer - i.e. no - clear ideas from them and that's a bad sign), so I'l read through sometime I'm more awake so that I can actually pay attention. It seems like a lot has happened but I just didn't really pick up on it.

Why did you need to clarify?

I felt I worded it in a mediocre way. Thought I'd make it clearer.

[Davsto]

VOTE: Davsto
For being a douche.

I don't like this reaction. Probably just because it's an insult. Be nice.

I think that you shouldn't be townreading based on meta. Meta is flexible, easily changed and can be used to justify almost anything. I'm sure I could find three examples of scum claiming town as well.

Keeping this in mind in case Accountant uses meta reads later in the game.

Anyway, a few things I don't like with this post;
1. Trying to appear newb by saying she hasn't completed a game on this site.
2. Her story about ToS seems like trying to make excuses for wrong reads.
VOTE: Accountant

I don't like this. Using a justification about someone possibly using something as an excuse for reads as an excuse to vote them

before they've actually used it as an excuse?

Ridiculous.

Uh, sorry, I appear to have misplaced my vote, it wasn't silverwolf who voted someone (seemingly seriously) based on the stuff.
UNVOTE: It was Performer.
VOTE: performer

However, SilverWolf, townreading them by that exchange is also silly. I just find reaching to vote on a single person more scummy than oddly townreading two people from it.
Excuse me while I facepalm for being silly enough to mix that up.

Let me guess; you mixed it up because you wanted to follow Akarin onto a town wagon.

Yeh, sorry, I saw Akarin's comment and vote on you and assumed you were one of the ones voting Slandaar, without checking.

See my earlier point.
Willing to vote on Davsto.

Gonna be honest, in general Mario's posts look like he's trying to find an excuse to scumread literally everything everyone says, even if it requires serious reaching. Disliking.

However, one think I'd like to ask is; why did the vote go onto Performer rather than Expedience?
Is it because Expi's scum and therefore the other was chosen to be wagoned?

Leading questions are the worst kind of questions.

Why does Performer trying to find something scummy and get out of it seem scummy to you?

Performer was trying to find something scummy out of a joke, by reaching in an unreasonable manner. I find that behaviour scummy.

Davsto 's post 159 – you think it's pathetic but it was RVS, it’s early on day 1, so me putting a bit of pressure wouldn’t do harm if he really is town, or if he really is joking.

I think we're past RVS now, so why is your vote still sitting on him?

I don't see the difference between having no vote or having him on vote at this point so I'm just leaving my vote there. Personally can't decipher who's really town or mafia right now.

An excuse to keep a vote parked on someone without having to give justification. When town keeps a vote on someone, usually there's a reason.

All of this would actually be irrelevant if Accountant said that she's not a bad town player and wouldn't point to it after pushing a town lynch.

I almost feel like this is coaching, telling Accountant to say this thing, rather than waiting for her to say it on her own.

No.

I mixed it up because I agreed with the points, but didn't realise that Akarin had placed her vote on someone that hadn't actually done that.

So Akarin placed her vote on the 'wrong person' so to say, that's not something you'd want to get into?

What I meant is, I had already found it suspicious when people had non-jokingly voted Slandaar for that blatant joke at the beginning, and I thought that's what Akarin had done too. In fact, she had voted for someone for townreading that, which is a more minor thing but still meh.
Anyway, it's got past the point where reading stuff based purely on that exchange makes sense, so
UNVOTE: Performer

Anyway, while I haven't commented on later stuff since it isn't really causing me that much reads either way (I may have to read through again tomorrow when I'm slightly less tired and maybe that'll give me a different view on it idk) but as you can probably tell I dislike Mario's posts, at least early on. I know the behaviour has changed but scum know how to adapt to become more townie in the eyes of the players, so early posts (at least on D1) can sometimes be more telling.
VOTE: MarioManiac4

[Slandaar]

Everyone has their own way of talking, be it serious be it playful, doesn't matter. Use of words, grammar, sentence construction; that's all unique to anyone. I recognized yours. Maybe style would have been more accurate than tone.
Your reactiontest was serious, right? That means you were serious with your opening post even though you weren't being serious about being conftown by making that opening post.

So, basically, you were saying because I used the same style, grammar and sentence construction then I haven't done anything suspicious?



I think the point, as I said, is you didn't tackle the points others were making with your post. It just doesn't have much relevance especially when your conclusion is; null.

[Wanderer-nl]

Eh yeah that post of mine certainly wasn't great, but I also don't think it's important enough to keep bickering about. What do you think of the rest of my iso, Slandaar?

[Wanderer-nl]

Anyway, while I haven't commented on later stuff since it isn't really causing me that much reads either way (I may have to read through again tomorrow when I'm slightly less tired and maybe that'll give me a different view on it idk)

What I mean to say here is, well, I was quite tiredly reading through this and, as a result, probably stopped paying as much attention by the last few pages (I noticed I got noticeably fewer - i.e. no - clear ideas from them and that's a bad sign), so I'l read through sometime I'm more awake so that I can actually pay attention. It seems like a lot has happened but I just didn't really pick up on it.

Why did you need to clarify?

I felt I worded it in a mediocre way. Thought I'd make it clearer.

It was already pretty clear to me. What's weird to me now is that you reworded that part of your post but needed to be asked to clean up the rest of it. Makes me think your priorities are with looking town, not scumhunting.

[Davsto]

Anyway, while I haven't commented on later stuff since it isn't really causing me that much reads either way (I may have to read through again tomorrow when I'm slightly less tired and maybe that'll give me a different view on it idk)

What I mean to say here is, well, I was quite tiredly reading through this and, as a result, probably stopped paying as much attention by the last few pages (I noticed I got noticeably fewer - i.e. no - clear ideas from them and that's a bad sign), so I'l read through sometime I'm more awake so that I can actually pay attention. It seems like a lot has happened but I just didn't really pick up on it.

Why did you need to clarify?

I felt I worded it in a mediocre way. Thought I'd make it clearer.

It was already pretty clear to me. What's weird to me now is that you reworded that part of your post but needed to be asked to clean up the rest of it. Makes me think your priorities are with looking town, not scumhunting.

Nah, it's because I actively remembered I worded something a bit oddly so I went to fix it, but I didn't actually look at my post until it was pointed out.

[Slandaar]

But personally I'm suspicious of anyone who claims scum or town at the entrance of a game.

Lets ignore experiences on other sites, what is suspicious about someone claiming town? Does the time of it have any relevance?

If you find it suspicious when someone claims scum, then, why did you vote the player claiming TOWN (which everyone should do) and not the player claiming SCUM (which no-one should do)?

Eh yeah that post of mine certainly wasn't great, but I also don't think it's important enough to keep bickering about. What do you think of the rest of my iso, Slandaar?

I don't need to bicker about it but don't expect my mind to change on it.

It's fine I guess. Nothing there which makes me think you are town if that's what you're asking but nothing else I see as suspicious either.

[GrayFoxxxx]

Analysis incoming

[Slandaar]

Hold on here. I have to disagree on appeasement being scummy. It's odd you say that despite Expedience having his reason(s) for voting at that moment.

I agree with you.

Can you explain why you think it isn't scummy?

[Slandaar]

(I agree with the first half not the second)

[Wanderer-nl]

@Slandaar: So basically I'm a nullread with a scummy post?

[Slandaar]

@Slandaar: So basically I'm a nullread with a scummy post?

I think you are scum because you posted what you did. If you remove that then sure we can reevaluate but why are we doing that?

[SilverWolf]

255 Good posting, I agree.

Hold on here. I have to disagree on appeasement being scummy. It's odd you say that despite Expedience having his reason(s) for voting at that moment.

OK, What was his reason for it?

Here's what he said for why he suspected Mario and why he wasn't voting.

I feel that Mario's aggression is excessive, unwarranted, and anti-Town. He looks very hard to find scummy things, and to some degree he's probably seeing things that aren't there. The repeated stabbing of his quote + quip seems like he's trying to appear very pro-Town by filling up pages and raising his post count, while perhaps saving some of his point for later posts and, uh, not nonuple-posting would actually help more. Perhaps I'm reading too much into this in some ways and it's just an aspect of his playstyle when he replaces in, but it nevertheless makes him lean scum for me. I support the wagon against him.

Don't really feel like voting, I haven't played a game on this site with this many players so I'll wait a bit to see how it works out. I'll remove my RVS vote from Accountant though.

OK, Then Wanderer and Accountant give him shit about this and suddenly.

@Wanderer, @Accountant: Yes, I see what you mean. I was more afraid of breaching some kind of different voting etiquette because there are more scum with capacity to quickhammer. But on day 1 and with this few votes on Mario that wasn't particularly thoughtful of me.

VOTE: MarioManiac4

Now, the fact that he voted for Mario based mostly on playstyle is an issue but if he finds those things scummy w/e, it's D1. The problem I have here is he didn't want to vote. Then caved to pressure. And in the follow-up response gave some strange reasoning regarding quickhammers that quite frankly, I'm not even sure how that applies here.

It's appeasy AND has the appearance of trying to look town. Scum are far more worried about their appearance than town are.

Also, if he thinks Mario is scum, why would he be concerned about quickhammers? Is he perhaps showing us that he knows Mario is town?