Im aware but I'm not going to pursue a player which is already being pursued. Which is why I asked Connor about who he thinks is town.In post 247, Superhans wrote:@ Lovesick,
TheDominator also voted for me with 0 explanation in the post. (e.g. jumping on the Superhans wagon for no apparent reason).
Newbie 1765 | URW | Endgame
-
-
Lovesick Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 125
- Joined: December 7, 2016
-
-
Lovesick Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 125
- Joined: December 7, 2016
Forced? I'm waiting on him to provide any reasoning behind his vote before concluding on anything, i like letting players speak their mind before I come to a conclusion on their action and possible alignmentIn post 249, LicketyQuickety wrote:
I'm not liking this, this seems (yes I'm going to say it) forced!In post 248, Lovesick wrote:
Believe it or not, i wasn't talking about myself but denominator in those instances as the only reason that discussion has spiked up was because of the immediate 'accidental' wagon on him.In post 246, Superhans wrote:@ConnorJC, I'm struggling to keep up with Lovesicks constant barrage of waffle about how innocent she is.
Lovesick, no one cares about you being a lurker.
No one cares that you think it was a bad strategy to gang up on a random lurker (btw I think the strategy was kinda harmless).
Please can your next post have some original insight on who you suspect could be town/mafia.
What do you think about Rautherdir and the LQ vote?
In post 233, Rautherdir wrote:For a variety of reasons, I would like to VOTE: LicketyQuickety
I'll have to leave for a bit, give me questions and I'll answer them in an hour or two.
^ You're such a tease Rautherdir
Pumped up for whatever logic (or whacky logic) you have for us.
i have no opinion on the vote as he provided no reasoning behind it?-
-
ConnorJC Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 754
- Joined: November 15, 2016
- Location: US East Coast
Hmm, town reads
LicketyQuickety(Leaning Town)
While his lack of clarity is annoying, I'm pretty sure that's just part of his playstyle. His effort appears genuine.
LoveSick(Town)
I've flipped here. I now agree with LQ that the whole Lovesick v Me thing was TvT.
I'm not as sure about these reads as I was of my previous scum reads.
pedit: I was so unsure here that there's a ton of posts that just popped up. This doesn't take those into account.-
-
Plotinus Kitten Caboodle
- Kitten Caboodle
- Kitten Caboodle
- Posts: 7611
- Joined: March 13, 2015
- Location: UTC+1
The failure mode of clever is asshole.
Modding checklists | Sequencer is in Game 5 | Space II is in Day 4-
-
LicketyQuickety Survivor
- Survivor
- Survivor
- Posts: 12785
- Joined: May 14, 2015
- Location: Where the moon and the sea meet.
Correct me if I am mistaken, but it seems you think Town has the ability to multitask their Scum reads as a whole better than you know how to do yourself. So how does that work exactly?In post 251, Lovesick wrote:
Forced? I'm waiting on him to provide any reasoning behind his vote before concluding on anything, i like letting players speak their mind before I come to a conclusion on their action and possible alignmentIn post 249, LicketyQuickety wrote:
I'm not liking this, this seems (yes I'm going to say it) forced!In post 248, Lovesick wrote:
Believe it or not, i wasn't talking about myself but denominator in those instances as the only reason that discussion has spiked up was because of the immediate 'accidental' wagon on him.In post 246, Superhans wrote:@ConnorJC, I'm struggling to keep up with Lovesicks constant barrage of waffle about how innocent she is.
Lovesick, no one cares about you being a lurker.
No one cares that you think it was a bad strategy to gang up on a random lurker (btw I think the strategy was kinda harmless).
Please can your next post have some original insight on who you suspect could be town/mafia.
What do you think about Rautherdir and the LQ vote?
In post 233, Rautherdir wrote:For a variety of reasons, I would like to VOTE: LicketyQuickety
I'll have to leave for a bit, give me questions and I'll answer them in an hour or two.
^ You're such a tease Rautherdir
Pumped up for whatever logic (or whacky logic) you have for us.
i have no opinion on the vote as he provided no reasoning behind it?I was anything worse than you! Anything worse than you was I!
You was doided teh aposit_tisopa het dedoid saw em.-
-
LicketyQuickety Survivor
- Survivor
- Survivor
- Posts: 12785
- Joined: May 14, 2015
- Location: Where the moon and the sea meet.
This is dangerous territory mate.In post 252, ConnorJC wrote:LoveSick(Town)
I've flipped here. I now agree with LQ that the whole Lovesick v Me thing was TvT.I was anything worse than you! Anything worse than you was I!
You was doided teh aposit_tisopa het dedoid saw em.-
-
ConnorJC Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 754
- Joined: November 15, 2016
- Location: US East Coast
-
-
ConnorJC Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 754
- Joined: November 15, 2016
- Location: US East Coast
Could you explain why?In post 255, LicketyQuickety wrote:
This is dangerous territory mate.In post 252, ConnorJC wrote:LoveSick(Town)
I've flipped here. I now agree with LQ that the whole Lovesick v Me thing was TvT.-
-
ConnorJC Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 754
- Joined: November 15, 2016
- Location: US East Coast
Hmm, now looking at the vote count I see this is effectively a delayed OMGUS vote. That's interesting.In post 233, Rautherdir wrote:For a variety of reasons, I would like to VOTE: LicketyQuickety
I'll have to leave for a bit, give me questions and I'll answer them in an hour or two.-
-
LicketyQuickety Survivor
- Survivor
- Survivor
- Posts: 12785
- Joined: May 14, 2015
- Location: Where the moon and the sea meet.
You make it look like you are Totally fine giving yourself a Town read. Its used improperly, it can be misconstrued in horrific ways. It even give me some pause.In post 257, ConnorJC wrote:
Could you explain why?In post 255, LicketyQuickety wrote:
This is dangerous territory mate.In post 252, ConnorJC wrote:LoveSick(Town)
I've flipped here. I now agree with LQ that the whole Lovesick v Me thing was TvT.I was anything worse than you! Anything worse than you was I!
You was doided teh aposit_tisopa het dedoid saw em.-
-
ConnorJC Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 754
- Joined: November 15, 2016
- Location: US East Coast
Oh, I see. Maybe that is better phrased as "I now agree with LQ that Lovesick attacking me was townish".In post 259, LicketyQuickety wrote:
You make it look like you are Totally fine giving yourself a Town read. Its used improperly, it can be misconstrued in horrific ways. It even give me some pause.In post 257, ConnorJC wrote:
Could you explain why?In post 255, LicketyQuickety wrote:
This is dangerous territory mate.In post 252, ConnorJC wrote:LoveSick(Town)
I've flipped here. I now agree with LQ that the whole Lovesick v Me thing was TvT.
Of course, I now don't think that as much (see my recent posts).-
-
Lovesick Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 125
- Joined: December 7, 2016
what do you mean by multitask their scum reads?In post 254, LicketyQuickety wrote:
Correct me if I am mistaken, but it seems you think Town has the ability to multitask their Scum reads as a whole better than you know how to do yourself. So how does that work exactly?In post 251, Lovesick wrote:
Forced? I'm waiting on him to provide any reasoning behind his vote before concluding on anything, i like letting players speak their mind before I come to a conclusion on their action and possible alignmentIn post 249, LicketyQuickety wrote:
I'm not liking this, this seems (yes I'm going to say it) forced!In post 248, Lovesick wrote:
Believe it or not, i wasn't talking about myself but denominator in those instances as the only reason that discussion has spiked up was because of the immediate 'accidental' wagon on him.In post 246, Superhans wrote:@ConnorJC, I'm struggling to keep up with Lovesicks constant barrage of waffle about how innocent she is.
Lovesick, no one cares about you being a lurker.
No one cares that you think it was a bad strategy to gang up on a random lurker (btw I think the strategy was kinda harmless).
Please can your next post have some original insight on who you suspect could be town/mafia.
What do you think about Rautherdir and the LQ vote?
In post 233, Rautherdir wrote:For a variety of reasons, I would like to VOTE: LicketyQuickety
I'll have to leave for a bit, give me questions and I'll answer them in an hour or two.
^ You're such a tease Rautherdir
Pumped up for whatever logic (or whacky logic) you have for us.
i have no opinion on the vote as he provided no reasoning behind it?-
-
LicketyQuickety Survivor
- Survivor
- Survivor
- Posts: 12785
- Joined: May 14, 2015
- Location: Where the moon and the sea meet.
Don't admit to being attacked. Be the attacker, not the attacked. Its a lot harder to defend yourself than attack someone else.In post 260, ConnorJC wrote:
Oh, I see. Maybe that is better phrased as "I now agree with LQ that Lovesick attacking me was townish".In post 259, LicketyQuickety wrote:
You make it look like you are Totally fine giving yourself a Town read. Its used improperly, it can be misconstrued in horrific ways. It even give me some pause.In post 257, ConnorJC wrote:
Could you explain why?In post 255, LicketyQuickety wrote:
This is dangerous territory mate.In post 252, ConnorJC wrote:LoveSick(Town)
I've flipped here. I now agree with LQ that the whole Lovesick v Me thing was TvT.
Of course, I now don't think that as much (see my recent posts).I was anything worse than you! Anything worse than you was I!
You was doided teh aposit_tisopa het dedoid saw em.-
-
ConnorJC Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 754
- Joined: November 15, 2016
- Location: US East Coast
@Lovesick-
-
LicketyQuickety Survivor
- Survivor
- Survivor
- Posts: 12785
- Joined: May 14, 2015
- Location: Where the moon and the sea meet.
I'll give you an example:In post 261, Lovesick wrote:
what do you mean by multitask their scum reads?In post 254, LicketyQuickety wrote:
Correct me if I am mistaken, but it seems you think Town has the ability to multitask their Scum reads as a whole better than you know how to do yourself. So how does that work exactly?In post 251, Lovesick wrote:
Forced? I'm waiting on him to provide any reasoning behind his vote before concluding on anything, i like letting players speak their mind before I come to a conclusion on their action and possible alignmentIn post 249, LicketyQuickety wrote:
I'm not liking this, this seems (yes I'm going to say it) forced!In post 248, Lovesick wrote:
Believe it or not, i wasn't talking about myself but denominator in those instances as the only reason that discussion has spiked up was because of the immediate 'accidental' wagon on him.In post 246, Superhans wrote:@ConnorJC, I'm struggling to keep up with Lovesicks constant barrage of waffle about how innocent she is.
Lovesick, no one cares about you being a lurker.
No one cares that you think it was a bad strategy to gang up on a random lurker (btw I think the strategy was kinda harmless).
Please can your next post have some original insight on who you suspect could be town/mafia.
What do you think about Rautherdir and the LQ vote?
In post 233, Rautherdir wrote:For a variety of reasons, I would like to VOTE: LicketyQuickety
I'll have to leave for a bit, give me questions and I'll answer them in an hour or two.
^ You're such a tease Rautherdir
Pumped up for whatever logic (or whacky logic) you have for us.
i have no opinion on the vote as he provided no reasoning behind it?
In post 129, LicketyQuickety wrote:
1) You said you would unvote them once they posted, so not only is this a non-committal vote, but it defeats the purpose of the vote in the first place.In post 123, Superhans wrote:
Yeah I think that smiley face does seem pretty scummy now that you mention it.In post 114, LicketyQuickety wrote:
Scum post.In post 104, Superhans wrote:VOTE: Lovesick
Lovesick, I'll be super happy to unvote on the condition that you read through all the comments posted so far tell us your opinions on scum/town reads. Cheers
In all seriousness what I did may appear scummy, and perhaps I rushed too quickly onto the lurker Wagon. my reasoning was that if lots of people vote for someone who's lurking, they'll freak out when they log in, and play more aggressively.
In all seriousness, I was voting Lovesick to put pressure on him
2) You are asking something of someone that you haven't done adequately enough yourself ie. reads. You make it sound like the lurker should have definite stances at this point in the game, when you yourself are not doing anything close to that.
3) You make jokes about the smiley being Scummy when I actually didn't list any reasons for why I thought it was a Scummy post. You then go on to interpret why I read the post as Scummy, so you clearly know at least part of the reason for why it is Scummy, which leaves me wondering why you made the post in the first place as Town... Unless you knew it could be interpreted as Scummy when/shortly after you made the post, which is what I am thinking, which is why I think you are Scum.
4) The you give a second reason for your vote. This is over explaining your position. You were Sitting there thinking what you could say to defend yourself and prolly came up with the second bit first then went back and added more of an explanation to you vote which is what we see as the first reason. Either one of these answers wouldn't been too Scummy on their own, but put together, both saying about the same thing (one just more elaborate) and that makes for an over explanation and over explanations (in defence) are Scummy in my book.
Note that these posts were made one directly after the other.In post 130, LicketyQuickety wrote:
I take issue with this... Nacho is a much much better player than myself. I also detailed that I am NOT the IC this game because I didn't/don't want the responsibility.In post 74, Rautherdir wrote:Probably. He's the IC, it was likely a conversation starter.
VOTE: Rautherdir
You are not paying attention.I was anything worse than you! Anything worse than you was I!
You was doided teh aposit_tisopa het dedoid saw em.-
-
Superhans Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1984
- Joined: December 6, 2016
There are four different situations with the upcoming Rautherdir vs LicketyQuickety fight.
1) R is scum, trying to appear town-ish by using potentially broken logic to trick the town into lynching LQ.
2) R is town and LQ is scum and the logic he is working with is valid.
3) R is town and LQ is town (most likely), the argument will hopefully yield good content though.
4) Both R and LQ are mafia trying a really cliche technique of pretending to fight each other to gain town trust.
I personally think number 3 is most likely, and number 4 least likely, but wouldn't be surpised if 1/2 is the case.
We'll have to wait for Rautherdir to return before properly making an evaluations.-
-
LicketyQuickety Survivor
- Survivor
- Survivor
- Posts: 12785
- Joined: May 14, 2015
- Location: Where the moon and the sea meet.
-
-
ConnorJC Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 754
- Joined: November 15, 2016
- Location: US East Coast
I need to see Rautherdir's logic before I can draw a conclusion here.In post 265, Superhans wrote:There are four different situations with the upcoming Rautherdir vs LicketyQuickety fight.
1) R is scum, trying to appear town-ish by using potentially broken logic to trick the town into lynching LQ.
2) R is town and LQ is scum and the logic he is working with is valid.
3) R is town and LQ is town (most likely), the argument will hopefully yield good content though.
4) Both R and LQ are mafia trying a really cliche technique of pretending to fight each other to gain town trust.
I personally think number 3 is most likely, and number 4 least likely, but wouldn't be surpised if 1/2 is the case.
We'll have to wait for Rautherdir to return before properly making an evaluations.-
-
Superhans Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1984
- Joined: December 6, 2016
Million dollar question, is Lovesick a genius mafia, or goofiest townie ever?
^"I never do reads day one" & "We get cozy and make slowly introduce our playstyles".In post 157, Lovesick wrote: Also Connor, by logical i mean with evidence from night phases which we can use to deduce and conclude things with ease other than make assumptions purely made on the first few posts in Day 1. Normally (At least where i played) Day 1 is a warm up, we get cozy and slowly introduce our playstyles to eachother hence my not so contribution to the actual objective. As also as a norm, I never do reads day 1 because it's too early to judge, too early to analyse, deduce, conclude and speak so confidently about my own thoughts when it comes to other players however I do understand why that may not be the case here because of the length of the days which personally i think is ridiculous but also logical in its own ways
I don't rate that comment at all.-
-
Superhans Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1984
- Joined: December 6, 2016
I mean its not that difficult to come up with a case for you Lickety. I may agree with lots of the stuff Rautherdir has to say.In post 266, LicketyQuickety wrote:5) they never come up with a case, which is basically a Scum claim in my book.-
-
Superhans Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 1984
- Joined: December 6, 2016
-
-
Lovesick Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 125
- Joined: December 7, 2016
I particularly don't think anyone is leaning town or mafia as of right now, however there are certain parts of people's playstyles which make me wary/cautious of themIn post 256, ConnorJC wrote:After rereading the posts that just came in, I know don't think that Lovesick is as town. I'd say maybe leaning town.
@Lovesick, please provide some of your own reads.
Superhans - His very switchy behaviour where he hops from one thing to another, almost indecisively and usually dropping down on the people which he pursues after minimal effort ( Almost as if trying to blend town but trying to not get involved too much )
Connor - Continues to request reads from people after providing minimal ones himself, pursuing after players which are already being pursued. In my opinion following after Nacho a bit too much
Rautherdir - Justifying actions of others through Nacho's words and playstyle which I think is never justifiable as it is a preferred playstyle rather than something which should be followed.
These are some observations which I have made which make me cautious of the players.-
-
Lovesick Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 125
- Joined: December 7, 2016
Im still not sure what you mean but I think scum reads can be multitasked to an extent, if you cannot put pressure on two players then let another player deal with one of them? (Im sorry if Im miles off about what i understood from your post but im talking to someone on the phone )In post 264, LicketyQuickety wrote:
I'll give you an example:In post 261, Lovesick wrote:
what do you mean by multitask their scum reads?In post 254, LicketyQuickety wrote:
Correct me if I am mistaken, but it seems you think Town has the ability to multitask their Scum reads as a whole better than you know how to do yourself. So how does that work exactly?In post 251, Lovesick wrote:
Forced? I'm waiting on him to provide any reasoning behind his vote before concluding on anything, i like letting players speak their mind before I come to a conclusion on their action and possible alignmentIn post 249, LicketyQuickety wrote:
I'm not liking this, this seems (yes I'm going to say it) forced!In post 248, Lovesick wrote:
Believe it or not, i wasn't talking about myself but denominator in those instances as the only reason that discussion has spiked up was because of the immediate 'accidental' wagon on him.In post 246, Superhans wrote:@ConnorJC, I'm struggling to keep up with Lovesicks constant barrage of waffle about how innocent she is.
Lovesick, no one cares about you being a lurker.
No one cares that you think it was a bad strategy to gang up on a random lurker (btw I think the strategy was kinda harmless).
Please can your next post have some original insight on who you suspect could be town/mafia.
What do you think about Rautherdir and the LQ vote?
In post 233, Rautherdir wrote:For a variety of reasons, I would like to VOTE: LicketyQuickety
I'll have to leave for a bit, give me questions and I'll answer them in an hour or two.
^ You're such a tease Rautherdir
Pumped up for whatever logic (or whacky logic) you have for us.
i have no opinion on the vote as he provided no reasoning behind it?
In post 129, LicketyQuickety wrote:
1) You said you would unvote them once they posted, so not only is this a non-committal vote, but it defeats the purpose of the vote in the first place.In post 123, Superhans wrote:
Yeah I think that smiley face does seem pretty scummy now that you mention it.In post 114, LicketyQuickety wrote:
Scum post.In post 104, Superhans wrote:VOTE: Lovesick
Lovesick, I'll be super happy to unvote on the condition that you read through all the comments posted so far tell us your opinions on scum/town reads. Cheers
In all seriousness what I did may appear scummy, and perhaps I rushed too quickly onto the lurker Wagon. my reasoning was that if lots of people vote for someone who's lurking, they'll freak out when they log in, and play more aggressively.
In all seriousness, I was voting Lovesick to put pressure on him
2) You are asking something of someone that you haven't done adequately enough yourself ie. reads. You make it sound like the lurker should have definite stances at this point in the game, when you yourself are not doing anything close to that.
3) You make jokes about the smiley being Scummy when I actually didn't list any reasons for why I thought it was a Scummy post. You then go on to interpret why I read the post as Scummy, so you clearly know at least part of the reason for why it is Scummy, which leaves me wondering why you made the post in the first place as Town... Unless you knew it could be interpreted as Scummy when/shortly after you made the post, which is what I am thinking, which is why I think you are Scum.
4) The you give a second reason for your vote. This is over explaining your position. You were Sitting there thinking what you could say to defend yourself and prolly came up with the second bit first then went back and added more of an explanation to you vote which is what we see as the first reason. Either one of these answers wouldn't been too Scummy on their own, but put together, both saying about the same thing (one just more elaborate) and that makes for an over explanation and over explanations (in defence) are Scummy in my book.
Note that these posts were made one directly after the other.In post 130, LicketyQuickety wrote:
I take issue with this... Nacho is a much much better player than myself. I also detailed that I am NOT the IC this game because I didn't/don't want the responsibility.In post 74, Rautherdir wrote:Probably. He's the IC, it was likely a conversation starter.
VOTE: Rautherdir
You are not paying attention.-
-
ConnorJC Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 754
- Joined: November 15, 2016
- Location: US East Coast
So cautious doesn't mean leaning scum?In post 271, Lovesick wrote:
I particularly don't think anyone is leaning town or mafia as of right now, however there are certain parts of people's playstyles which make me wary/cautious of themIn post 256, ConnorJC wrote:After rereading the posts that just came in, I know don't think that Lovesick is as town. I'd say maybe leaning town.
@Lovesick, please provide some of your own reads.
Superhans - His very switchy behaviour where he hops from one thing to another, almost indecisively and usually dropping down on the people which he pursues after minimal effort ( Almost as if trying to blend town but trying to not get involved too much )
Connor - Continues to request reads from people after providing minimal ones himself, pursuing after players which are already being pursued. In my opinion following after Nacho a bit too much
Rautherdir - Justifying actions of others through Nacho's words and playstyle which I think is never justifiable as it is a preferred playstyle rather than something which should be followed.
These are some observations which I have made which make me cautious of the players.
You're calling Superhans out on being switching and trying to blend in? That's exactly how I'd defineyourplay so far.
I've provided reads twice. You'd provided reads 0 times before this post.-
-
LicketyQuickety Survivor
- Survivor
- Survivor
- Posts: 12785
- Joined: May 14, 2015
- Location: Where the moon and the sea meet.
That's why it would be a Scum claimIn post 269, Superhans wrote:
I mean its not that difficult to come up with a case for you Lickety. I may agree with lots of the stuff Rautherdir has to say.In post 266, LicketyQuickety wrote:5) they never come up with a case, which is basically a Scum claim in my book.And yes, I have caught Scum for not providing reasons for their Scum read on me before.
I was anything worse than you! Anything worse than you was I!
You was doided teh aposit_tisopa het dedoid saw em.
Copyright © MafiaScum. All rights reserved.