VOTE: Kitty
Is your stupid reason for your vote that he didn't provide a stupid reason for his?
That's stupid!
VOTE: Kitty
Modkill or Policy Lynch?In post 11, camn wrote:Oh hey-wait, an actual RVS scumtell
UNVOTE:
VOTE: deathrowkitty
I actually modkill for not having an avatar now.
The worse my eyes get, the more annoying it is.
Do you know something we don't?In post 12, Almost50 wrote:VOTE: SS
Wagoning purposes.
Also FoS on RC. You kept the thread locked long enough for scum to get acquainted to eachother in their QT.
Cool.In post 15, camn wrote:I have outgrown policy lynches.
But an avatar is in my new mod ruleset.
Here? DRK has been here long enough to understand the subtle slipping under the radar that you get out of not having an avatar. You get a little more ignored. Your posts a little blurred with the player above you.
She knows.
They never go out if style!In post 18, camn wrote:Yep. Not, like, super 100%...but good enough for page 1.
And for clarity... I haven't outgrown LURKERlynches. I will always love that
Oh.In post 30, Almost50 wrote:In post 16, Aristophanes wrote:Do you know something we don't?
I might. Like, if you haven't read the rules.. the mafia QT is open during the day, so.. yeah.. they probably got to talk in private while we were still locked out bc RC forgot to unlock this thread.
It's earlygame. What kind of posts would you like me to be making?In post 29, Thurhame wrote:@camn: To be fair, I have never before heard the point you make about avatars. I understand and agree, but it's not something obvious that you can expect someone to know just by being a veteran.
VOTE: Aristophanes
His participation is mostly responding to others with short questions or meaningless comments, which is more characteristic of scum (it's what I do as scum when I lack energy or motivation). Even when he calls out Almost50 for potentially having "scumknowlege", he doesn't move his vote to match.
Aw thanks! <3In post 33, Killthestory wrote:In post 29, Thurhame wrote:@camn: To be fair, I have never before heard the point you make about avatars. I understand and agree, but it's not something obvious that you can expect someone to know just by being a veteran.
VOTE: Aristophanes
His participation is mostly responding to others with short questions or meaningless comments, which is more characteristic of scum (it's what I do as scum when I lack energy or motivation). Even when he calls out Almost50 for potentially having "scumknowlege", he doesn't move his vote to match.
VOTE: Thurhame
I had a heart attack when I thought I was playing with Kain again :S
In post 123, camn wrote:God you are scummy.
So you want to leave a claimed miller alive until Lylo? Then have the wine of that claim lead to a mislynch??In post 124, camn wrote:Like, I guess if you just want everyone lynched except you and your partner... Then lynching someone just for claiming Miller, independent of any actual scumminess or anything.. That makes sense. If you just want the whole town dead.
I know how to play Mafia. All I'm saying is I have done 0 sorting yet. I've been away most of this, and on a quick skim, found nothing interesting.In post 128, Thurhame wrote:Right. Because it's a really good idea to lynch someone less than 48 hours into our first Day, instead of using most of the it to gather more information and reads and then lynching.
Speaking of which, I got the reaction I wanted from camn. Aristophanes, on the other hand, is still scummy; he's only added a see-i'm-not-lurking post that's completely useless. A mafia thread is mostly noise, get used to it. If you ever want to be a good mafia player, you need to start searching through the noise for those nuggets of true feels that let you make reads.
UNVOTE: camn
VOTE: Aristophanes
p-edit: Miller claim is meaningless. Treat it just like a non-claim.
I don't think it's necessary. Up to you thoughIn post 139, Thurhame wrote:P.P.S. Can anyone tell me whether I'm supposed to reveal the other members of the neighborhood too, or leave them anonymous?
Lol why am I always included in these lists! HahaIn post 154, camn wrote:Jesus Kats-. You are so right about how many people need to die.
What, of their posts, rubs you the wrong way?In post 168, Killthestory wrote:Mfw do you want me to defend you or not?
Katsuki feels town the more I look at their posts, unfortunately. Really wish they could get lynched, so I wouldn't have to listen to their shit. Same for Camn. Both probably town. Katsuki's association with Ircher is notable, too.
Ircher rubs me the wrong way. He's probably scum. VOTE: Ircher
Trying to get into the game still mayhap?In post 174, Killthestory wrote:No definitive stances, on scumreads, very passive, not contributing at all.
Because...?
Not entirely, no.In post 333, iraonavp wrote:You disagree with my vote?
How can you disagree with something that is nonexistent (my vote atm)?In post 336, iraonavp wrote:On a related note, I disagree with your vote, namely that it is not on Katsuki.
Indeed it does matter!In post 339, iraonavp wrote:In post 337, Aristophanes wrote:We did have an awful lot of time left...
But I don't think a quickhammer necessarily means scum.
Does it mean scum in this case?
Furthermore, does it even matter?
Caused KTS to die indirectly?
Either this is theory time or you're just saying whatever you can to win my vote.
I thought it was a vig shot but as I was typing this it occured to me that it was probably an SK. But still, if Katsuki never quickhammered Ircher then someone different may have been nightkilled, sorta like the Butterfly Effect.
I'll concede the first point, in that my vote exists even without having been placed. This is despite the urge to philosophy at you.In post 340, iraonavp wrote:In post 338, Aristophanes wrote:How can you disagree with something that is nonexistent (my vote atm)?In post 336, iraonavp wrote:On a related note, I disagree with your vote, namely that it is not on Katsuki.
It does exist! Just look on the vote count, it's right there next to "Not Voting".
Also, does this mean everyone should vote him in their first posts?
Mhm.
Cute!In post 364, GuyFawkes wrote:GalFawkes has me buys with Easter stuff. Will try to get on later.
I can get in agreement here. You're down as town atm anyway.In post 363, camn wrote:There is totally relevance.
Scum love pushing a righteous mislynch.
It is something I strive to find as scum... A good reason to Lynch a townie and avoid any heat for it.
On the other hand, as town I strive to parse out my own feelings in issues like this- is the behaviour itself scummy... Or is hindsight 20/20? That's how we actually find scum.
All that said...I am distracted and on my phone and will try and actually find the scum after the weekend
I don't think so...In post 367, camn wrote:Are you buddying me?
Merely commantary.In post 372, iraonavp wrote:In post 362, Aristophanes wrote:That's an impressive nonanswer to a question which has little relevance to the game past theory talk.
So... you think he's scum-aligned? That would be a first.
rereading again once I gather home. Then I shall do this.In post 400, camn wrote:This placea wasteland full of crickets.is
EVERYONE-
Next post: top scum suspect.
me: Almost50
In post 394, Almost50 wrote:Show me someone who IS doing something in this game, including yourself. EVERYONE is waiting for someone else to make their move, and I can't get a single scum read thus far. Nobody stands out as scum and nobody is making an argument I could comment on. Lynch me for all I care.
This eeally sucks.In post 397, Almost50 wrote:Defense? I'm not going to defend myself. I AM lurking, for lack of any better options. If I do anything in this game status I'd look like I'm trying too hard. Damned if you do; damned it you don't. I'm just taking the easy route of being damned for NOT trying.
But why?In post 399, GuyFawkes wrote:In post 398, camn wrote:Then you need rope.
not as much as snarky does
I kinda agree, as I had mentioned previously. However, if the scum get pregame chatter, their pt would be open already and require no mod action to have that occur.In post 405, Thurhame wrote:Katsuki is still my best scumread - and not just for the quicklynch; I was scumreading (and voting) him before that as well. But since it looks like half the town disagrees with that, I'm willing to settle for Almost50.
There are two reasons Almost50 seems scummy to me. One is the way he hopped on the end of my wagon specifically to "get a claim," and hopped off the moment I did claim. The other is this slip:In post 12, Almost50 wrote:Also FoS on RC. You kept the thread locked long enough for scum to get acquainted to eachother in their QT.In post 30, Almost50 wrote:The mafia QT is open during the day, so.. yeah.. they probably got to talk in private while we were still locked out bc RC forgot to unlock this thread.
A normal person who thought RC forgot to unlock the thread would assume he was running late - in which case the scum QT would have still been locked too. But Almost50 knew it was only the main thread that RC "forgot", implying that he has access to some quicktopic. At first I assumed he might be a Neighbor like me but in a different neighborhood (the fact that my neighborhood has a specific name made me think it might not be the only one); however, with three non-neighbor flips a second neighborhood seems unlikely. So he's probably one of the Mafia.
VOTE: Almost50
Ah!In post 412, GuyFawkes wrote:In post 411, Aristophanes wrote:But why?In post 399, GuyFawkes wrote:In post 398, camn wrote:Then you need rope.
not as much as snarky does
(I should iso to see if there's a case from you..)
snarky's ISO is my case
I realize this.In post 415, iraonavp wrote:In post 410, Aristophanes wrote:In post 394, Almost50 wrote:Show me someone who IS doing something in this game, including yourself. EVERYONE is waiting for someone else to make their move, and I can't get a single scum read thus far. Nobody stands out as scum and nobody is making an argument I could comment on. Lynch me for all I care.
This eeally sucks.In post 397, Almost50 wrote:Defense? I'm not going to defend myself. I AM lurking, for lack of any better options. If I do anything in this game status I'd look like I'm trying too hard. Damned if you do; damned it you don't. I'm just taking the easy route of being damned for NOT trying.
I'd love for a bit of scumhunting from you! Giving up is antitown, especially when it is unnecessary!
I beg of you to do something!
Do you think Almost50 is likely to be scum-aligned? You've done absolutely nothing yourself, I remind you.
Have you ever heard that the acknowledgement of one's meta renders that meta null?In post 416, Almost50 wrote:In post 407, iraonavp wrote:So you're saying that since SnarkySnowman is also lurking, he should understand your point?
No. I really didn't want to explain, but ... ok..
Snarky's the only one on the list who has played with me before. Even better, he played with me as both scum & town. When I act like I don't care top get lynched it means I'm a VT. I always think that lynching a VT is better than lynching a PR. I do acknowledge that lynching scum is even better, but let's face it: You guys are moving in circles and don't know what you're doing. There's no one person standing out as obv.scum for the whole town to vote. We are thus likely to lynch one of our own.
When I'm acting more careful though I could either be scum or a PR myself. My play as a PR is very much like my play as scum. As a VT I stand out and -while I'm working on it- I can't help but be more at ease, more sarcastic, more careless.. etc.
So, there. I am a VT, and I would have preferred to eat the rope or get NK'd over losing a PR, but the way you're acting (you as in plural you) it looks like my death will be in vain anyway.
^^In post 419, Almost50 wrote:It's not "meta" as in something you do inadvertently or subconsciously. It is an established way of playing. I DO get myself lynched if it's going to stop the lynch of a PR... intentionally. Of course, it is null NOW bc I did explain it to you all. Before that, only Snarky should've picked up the signal.
iraonavp wrote:In post 420, Aristophanes wrote:^^In post 419, Almost50 wrote:It's not "meta" as in something you do inadvertently or subconsciously. It is an established way of playing. I DO get myself lynched if it's going to stop the lynch of a PR... intentionally. Of course, it is null NOW bc I did explain it to you all. Before that, only Snarky should've picked up the signal.
Pretty much what I was saying.
However, I wanted to see how you reacted to a push on this point.
I think that original post is fairly towny in intent.
Which original post are you referring to here?
In post 416, Almost50 wrote:In post 407, iraonavp wrote:So you're saying that since SnarkySnowman is also lurking, he should understand your point?
No. I really didn't want to explain, but ... ok..
Snarky's the only one on the list who has played with me before. Even better, he played with me as both scum & town. When I act like I don't care top get lynched it means I'm a VT. I always think that lynching a VT is better than lynching a PR. I do acknowledge that lynching scum is even better, but let's face it: You guys are moving in circles and don't know what you're doing. There's no one person standing out as obv.scum for the whole town to vote. We are thus likely to lynch one of our own.
When I'm acting more careful though I could either be scum or a PR myself. My play as a PR is very much like my play as scum. As a VT I stand out and -while I'm working on it- I can't help but be more at ease, more sarcastic, more careless.. etc.
So, there. I am a VT, and I would have preferred to eat the rope or get NK'd over losing a PR, but the way you're acting (you as in plural you) it looks like my death will be in vain anyway.
^^^In post 440, duppin wrote:In post 416, Almost50 wrote:
So, there. I am a VT, and I would havepreferred to eat the ropeor get NK'd over losing a PR, but the way you're acting (you as in plural you) it looks like my death will be in vain anyway.
What? Soaking a NK is great as a VT but a lynch? How about going for a lynch on scum instead?
Why plz
I mean, you're not necessarily wrong, but I've just been off in Mafia lately.In post 451, iraonavp wrote:The way that you join in on conversations just to make small remarks bothers me, e.g. 366, 411. I think that the tone of some of your posts is unnatural and forced, maybe. It looks to me as if you'd rather not do anything but make endearing posts about things that aren't really relevant to the game, to make yourself appear more relaxed (and, perhaps in some people's eyes, town-aligned).
1. Nope, just recognizing that my style has weakened significantly lately and I am seeming objectively scummier than usual. I don't know why I'm sounding forced, but I am.In post 455, iraonavp wrote:In post 454, Aristophanes wrote:I mean, you're not necessarily wrong, but I've just been off in Mafia lately.In post 451, iraonavp wrote:The way that you join in on conversations just to make small remarks bothers me, e.g. 366, 411. I think that the tone of some of your posts is unnatural and forced, maybe. It looks to me as if you'd rather not do anything but make endearing posts about things that aren't really relevant to the game, to make yourself appear more relaxed (and, perhaps in some people's eyes, town-aligned).
What does this mean, are you pleading guilty to all counts of Being Scum-aligned?
I know, not a defence, but w/e.
I'm not scum. Neither are you. We should band together and snag real scumz!
Such as who?
I do. I just don't feel like I'm we grounded this game.In post 458, duppin wrote:In post 456, Aristophanes wrote:
2. That's kinda what I'm hoping to figure out with you here. I don't have as much time as usual for this, so I'm curious, do you have a suggested starting point?
For what it is worth, this is what bothers me a little. It sounds like you don't want to scumhunt yourself.
In post 463, camn wrote:more Aristophanes votes please.
This game needs some energy.
Clearly we are not talking our way into a scumlynch.. lets instinct our way in.
Even Aristophanes thinks he is scummy.
In post 464, SnarkySnowman wrote:I want to read more but I feel like I could back that. Aristo thinking he's scummy objectively scummier in this game than usual gives me scumvibes.
Feel better RC!!!In post 465, RadiantCowbells wrote:I'm sick atm sorry about infrequency of updates.
Lol what are you, triple voter?
Like,I'm dumb, but come on.
Bring it.In post 484, Katsuki wrote:I should hammer just to be safe...
At least list intent and let me have final words first.In post 488, Katsuki wrote:Maybe when you actually reach L1.
Or better yet, let's lynch scum instead!In post 489, Aristophanes wrote:At least list intent and let me have final words first.In post 488, Katsuki wrote:Maybe when you actually reach L1.
That's all I ask!
Not what I'm saying.In post 492, camn wrote:In post 482, Aristophanes wrote:I'm better at late game, so I apologize for being weak so far.
Let me slide until endgame guys! That's a good strategy!
I am rereading tonight.In post 503, iraonavp wrote:In post 498, duppin wrote:In post 496, The Archmage Ludicrous wrote:What's with all the periods?
I assume it was a prodge.
Aristo, can you share your reads? You must have something.
I tried this before, and apparently he has absolutely nothing other than the unique ability to ask others for their reads, so he can agree with them.
*sigh*In post 504, camn wrote:LETS LYNCH HIM THEN!
Danke!In post 505, Almost50 wrote:We're not lynching Aristo. We're lynching Thur, and that is final. *Said in RC's special tone*
Hahaha I don't know if this is real or not, but I like it!In post 512, Katsuki wrote:Hey all just wanted to say I'm the SK.