Equi, if I call you a he, I'm apologizing in advance.
Confirm, ya bastard!
P-EDIT: Oh, that's nice. Stick it right to me -_-.
In post 21, Cogito Ergo Sum wrote:In post 20, Minimum wrote:Then why aren't you voting for Tierce?
That was me.
In post 26, Rainbowdash wrote:I would be moving my vote here but its already in the right spot.
In post 27, Voidedmafia wrote:In post 26, Rainbowdash wrote:I would be moving my vote here but its already in the right spot.
Oh?
In post 34, Rainbowdash wrote:You arent paying attention so far.
In post 34, Rainbowdash wrote: really bad RVS vote
In post 34, Rainbowdash wrote: and possibly worse reaction to my vote.
In post 34, Rainbowdash wrote: Why still voting CES anyways?
In post 37, Rainbowdash wrote:You arent paying attention because Riss hasnt answered the last question from CES that directly, only the jokey one. Her other response seems to just avoid taking a straightforward answer.
Why wait for me to call you on not moving a vote for you to move it? I could guess reasoning to the move but timing is way off.
Some RVS votes are bad. In a game thats strong going out of your way to declare it RVS and taking the 'hasnt confirmed' path I dont like much.
Your reaction to mine was just really unexpected and just bugs me. Its hard to really describe but when I saw that response it was that wince type response.
Between Riss posting last and me asking why you are voting CES you posted. Why did you not move your post at that point? You sidestepped my question.
Oddly enough, yes I dislike the reason and actually think that not confirming if possibly an alignment tell wouldnt be a scumtell because mafia also have daytalk. No need to prolong confirmation stage for anypony.
Plus the whole post reads as heavyhanded. Comment to Robo, comment to Equinox, comment to Riss, vote on CES, immediate comment to me after that. Its one of those things that just doesnt feel right.
It still bugs me. Its like that comment that when you are having a conversation with someone it just one of those things that maks you go "wait... what?".
In post 41, Cogito Ergo Sum wrote:In post 40, Voidedmafia wrote:But...it's still RVS?
The idea is that the reason you gave was a "safe" one.
In post 53, Rainbowdash wrote:Some of these votes need to be clarified as serious or not. By some that means basically all.
In post 68, Robocopter87 wrote:
You wanted to lynch me because I was being useless. Thats a pretty decent reason imo, I don't see any reason to fret over that.
In post 69, Tierce wrote:Robocopter--so you see two people voting you, claim that one of them at least has a decent reason to be voting you, and don't adjust your behavior to be useful to town?
The votes aren't going to go away because "[you're]not one to care". You're still being useless, while Equinox is voting a scumspect--she's not "just sitting there", as you're trying to paint her.
In post 73, Robocopter87 wrote:It says you are more willing to policy lynch than to scumhunt for a proper lynch.
In post 84, Cogito Ergo Sum wrote:Whom should I have voted then?
In post 38, Voidedmafia wrote:In post 37, Rainbowdash wrote:You arent paying attention because Riss hasnt answered the last question from CES that directly, only the jokey one. Her other response seems to just avoid taking a straightforward answer.
So she answered the question. Whether or not her answer is a good one is irrelevant to that point, so don't try to make a point out of thin air. (on the topic on how good or bad her answer is, I agree that it's bad and she should've been more straightforward in her answer)
In post 92, Rainbowdash wrote:You are still voting Robo. You should stop that.
In post 67, Equinox wrote:Actually, this one-liner exchange is boring, so I'll just lay out the cards here.
You've said nothing of import.
You deftly dodge the RVS bandwagons by voting the moderator, and you stay there. Fair enough; some people do that because it's funny. When the vote switches start happening, though, you don't really react. Even though you thought my vote on you was for a policy lynch, you didn't react to it. From your point of view, I am pushing for an easy lynch while avoiding commentary on Voidedmafia; that should have raised red flags.
You're just sitting there wondering why my vote's on you.
In post 69, Tierce wrote:Robocopter--so you see two people voting you, claim that one of them at least has a decent reason to be voting you, and don't adjust your behavior to be useful to town?
The votes aren't going to go away because "[you're]not one to care". You're still being useless, while Equinox is voting a scumspect--she's not "just sitting there", as you're trying to paint her.
I would also lynch CES.
In post 76, Tierce wrote:One cryptic player is probably enough.
Robocopter went from calling Equinox's vote on him (and mine, as I gather?) a 'policy lynch' to saying she has decent reasons to be voting him. When called out on the fact that he is still doing nothing, he went back to calling it a 'policy lynch'.
So what is it, Robo? You are showing no evidence of trying to contribute; that could be lazy town, but you are trying to throw mud at the people voting you by saying that they are not interested in lynching scum, when by your own admittance your play does not help town.
Who do you think you should get away with doing nothing?
In post 116, Equinox wrote:In post 115, Voidedmafia wrote:Equi, are you just sheeping Dashie, here?
Sort of. I haven't spotted the tell that Rainbowdash is claiming, but Rainbowdash's hardline defense for Robocopter87 means Robocopter87 is more likely to be town than not, regardless of what Rainbowdash is.
There's a couple of possibilities I've thought of where this might not hold true, but they're both things I believe I can spot at a later point.
My vote switch to you was my own. Your vote switch to Robocopter87 while Tierce and I were attacking him caught my attention. Rainbowdash happened to give me an excuse to switch to you.
In post 119, Robocopter87 wrote:Exactly.
In post 121, Robocopter87 wrote:Um what?
You assume to much.
Seeing as I said this,
And her next post was this,
Tierce wrote:UNVOTE: Robocopter87
VOTE: Cogito Ergo Sum
So yeah. don't know what the heck you are talking about.
In post 126, Robocopter87 wrote:In post 124, Voidedmafia wrote:
You haven't provided a link that clearly shows that Tierce unvoted because there was no reason to lynch Robo. It is a POSSIBILITY, yes, but you haven't shown it to be the definitive reason (nor has Tierce commented on why she's unvoting you).
You are battling with technicalities.
In post 134, Robocopter87 wrote:1. If it more anti town than scum them then it is a policy lynch to lynch me based off this reasoning.
2. See point one. Also you say that it is not a policy lynch but you have failed to give any specific reasoning for lynch me besides being useless.
3. No such reasoning exists? What about the fact that Tierce posted twice without acknowledging me?
Tierce, post 136 wrote:Robocopter: please explain why you think it's acceptable for a town player to not vote, to just complain when others are voting him, to have no visible reads at all, not even about the wagon on you. This is supposedly what you are doing. I don't treat these players as policy lynches, I treat them as scum, because this is scum behavior. Behaving like this as town is pretty unnacceptable on my book. It's more likely to come from scum than town, there is no town motivation for it (if your motivation is getting reactions, you're not going to get anything useful, because town has every right to be riled up that you're effectively not helping your faction), so I vote it.
In post 136, Tierce wrote:
Voided: You're saying that you accept it if Rainbowdash doesn't explain her tell... but then say that if it isn't explained, you're not removing your vote. That amounts to stomping your foot and sticking to a wagon--and at this point, it's pretty clear that that wagon isn't going to go through.
I understand sticking to one's guns, but at this point you're being as useless as Robocopter. Look at it this way: Equinox unvoted. I unvoted. Robocopter is not going to vote himself. You no longer have the sufficient number of players to push this lynch today; accept the fact that the tell will not be explained and look elsewhere.
In post 145, Rainbowdash wrote:@VM - There is a point where towntells can outweigh scumtells. Robo is town for something, I do not want to say what it is because if scum dont see it, telling them is needless giving them of stuff. Besides, your points 1 and 3 are reaching... the way you word 3 really bugs me too.
Now that the two you sheeped have moved, what are your thoughts as to what exactly is going on? I just see you clinging to a dead wagon that the rest of us are basically saying town forreasonsand not wanting to move on.
If you are sure Robo was scum... was he getting bussed?
Was a partner defending him?
Also has your read on Riss changed at all? What do you think of those on your wagon.
In post 152, Equinox wrote:
In post 151, Voidedmafia wrote:I don't know if Tierce or Equi are known for bussing, but I don't feel like Tierce was. The attack was pretty legitimate, so that part feels town to me.
Equi feels more like she could've bussed. I sadly can't explain this beyond that, but that's how I feel.
[...]
Vote: Riss
You feel like I might have been bussing. I basically stated outright in the thread that I'm difficult to lynch even as scum. There's a vote on me. You... vote Riss_? What?
What's your read of Rainbowdash?
In post 155, Equinox wrote:In post 154, Voidedmafia wrote:Dashie can be town.
In that case, why are you questioning Rainbowdash's read of Robocopter87? If you have Rainbowdash as probably town, shouldn't that mean you trust her and, by proxy, her reads, as she's a known quantity ability-wise?
In post 159, Rainbowdash wrote:@VM - Do you have any strong TOWN reads?
In post 180, Equinox wrote:Actual town read on Robocopter87 happened just now when I read Voidedmafia's post, which means you're probably town for putting a full stop on that wagon.
In post 200, Equinox wrote:In post 198, Rainbowdash wrote:Just trying to get points across. Im against it to the point I am not sure which of Equinox and Robo I would vote if Riss is scum.
If Riss_ is scum, the partner is likely not Robocopter87.
In post 217, Rainbowdash wrote:Vote Tierce
Thats the lynch then no?
Just logically thats the lynch if im trusting my reads.
In post 220, Rainbowdash wrote:
I think if you can trust me and my Robo defense its the vote to make.
In post 224, Robocopter87 wrote:VM is nullish for me. Leaning scummy. But not enough to place my feet in that ground.
In post 235, Cogito Ergo Sum wrote:You surely can't think we should out the masons to help you scumhunt so I don't really get why you're saying all of this? Especially since it'll rule out mason pairs?
In post 246, Robocopter87 wrote:In post 245, Voidedmafia wrote:and I guess I can trust that you've foundsomethingin Robo's ISO to call him town and hard-defend him this much
Pfft my towniness is obvious.
Voidedmafia wrote:
And how much of this is based on me sheeping Equi and Tierce onto you?
(also, null-scummy can still let you make a scumteam, yknow.)
None if it is based on that. Just slight quirks and honestly some PoE. Like I said, not enough to put me in that ground.
(Why? You partners with Riss?)
Voidedmafia wrote:
Where'd you get the idea she wanted to out the mason pairs?
I know you directed this at CES, but I gotta say that attempting to find possible Mason pairs in order to clear town is the same thing as attempting to find mason pairs in order to choose a nightkill.
Like this,In post 75, Voidedmafia wrote:In post 73, Robocopter87 wrote:It says you are more willing to policy lynch than to scumhunt for a proper lynch.
I don't remember "policy lynch" being among my list of reasons for wanting you dead...
You said this but it took a LOT of pressuring and questioning to get you to explain why it wasn't a policy lynch. And even now I still don't feel that it was adequately dealt with.
(Except no because I said that you were null with a hint of scum BEFORE Tierce said anything. I don't know how many times I must explain that you are a null read. But slightly scummy. But that scumminess doesn't mean you are scum with Riss. But you know all about "WELL IT WASN'T SPECIFICALLY STATED SO YOU CAN'T ASSUME THAT EVEN THOUGH ITS OBVIOUS ENOUGH TO MAKE THAT ASSUMPTION." So I shouldn't have to tell you.)
If you are searching for mason pairs, regardless of your intent, you still are forced to reveal the mason pairs. A.K.A, outting the pairs.
You can't masonhunt and not expect to out masons.
In post 248, Equinox wrote: I can lay my reasoning out if you want, but I'm fairly sure that we all can't be wrong about this.
If you read Tierce as town, the only logical pairing here is {Equinox, Riss_}.
If that pairing makes sense to you, you will get more information out of an Equinox vote at this point, as it will make apparent the scum team in play once I flip. Before you do that, though, please take a look again at why you're reading Tierce as town; if, after that, you still agree with your read, vote me and let Robocopter87 choose the hammer.
In post 257, Robocopter87 wrote:You see RBD? Me not voting worked out quite well for me.
Now I have the power to decide a Day One lynch and on top of that I'm being generally called town (Thanks to you)
I could just coast on this through the whole game. But I'll be nice and help out a little.
In post 286, DoomYoshi wrote:Since the scum have day talk, it seems entirely possible that equi and tierce sorted out a bus.ther option would be voided.
In post 294, DoomYoshi wrote:
@VM: The "ther" should be Other. What I mean is that a really obtuse bus is entirely possible since masons have day talk. Ergo, we can't rule out equi bussing tierce.
In post 301, DoomYoshi wrote:
It doesn't, that was 2 seperate lines of thought. I didn't say A, then B. I said A, or B.
In any case, you are scum from PoE. If not you, then Equi.
In post 308, DoomYoshi wrote:Yea. You had no reasons to vote riss on day q. You never voted tierce, instead you voted equinox but now are sheeping Equi on day 2. If tierce had flipped town, who would you be voting today?