Coz there's no transcendence with lethargy?
VOTE: Lethargy
VOTE: KeyenIn post 172, Transcend wrote:In post 168, alban wrote:Top scum read Keyen.
Active lurking and laundering.
Suspicious early posts by Aubrey. Not of late though.
IGMEOY.
Why no vote?
http://wiki.mafiascum.net/index.php?title=LaunderingIn post 171, ssbm_Kyouko wrote:
Alban, was just thinking the same (SR) about keyen on the reread. Not sure what you mean by laundering but the posts do look fluffy. I don't think I saw any accusation of his yet either. He's letting others make pushes and is picking ones that look supported to back. I don't like 119 either. I was clearly being serious about my Aubrey read at the time.
VOTE: Keyen
In post 26, keyenpeydee wrote:Is Lethargy a hydra acc?
In post 41, keyenpeydee wrote:We still aren't sure what's aubrey's alignment is. hmmm
In post 48, keyenpeydee wrote:Oh yeah we don't have any PRs here so I think this game would last long.
In post 54, keyenpeydee wrote:I hope you're not scum, Toto.
Anyone played with Keyen before?In post 119, keyenpeydee wrote:tbh i don't find any scummy atm. mostly i read as not serious.
How opinions differ. 157 is exactly why I found Aubrey scummy.In post 198, LicketyQuickety wrote:This is actually not a bad post and I say that as the person being attacked. I agree that my slot hasn't been the pinnacle of good play, but I replaced this slot because I read it as Town and it is. I especially like the last paragraph.In post 157, Aubrey wrote::/ your version of quickening the game is not progressive though for the town. You're just mindlessly voting someone "Just because." Your basis is just, lets just lynch someone for little to no reason in order to move onto day 2. Tell me good sir, what do you hope to gain or learn by that? Your play is nothing more than lethargic day one play that is either coming from a lazy townie, a townie who doesn't know how to work from nothing, or scum.
Your not really trying to catch scum. Your not really trying to find likely townies. Your just a blah member right now doing a lot of nothing but complaining about day one, or trying to seem like a progressive townie as scum.
So far I'm not a fan of you or SSBM. I actually have a slight town lean for Dave right now. I like the fact he went after Transcend, and for the reasons provided even if I did not aggree with his suspicions against Transcend.
Dont know how to put it without offending you. But you asked.In post 209, keyenpeydee wrote:So you're suspecting me because of lack of voting?In post 197, alban wrote:http://wiki.mafiascum.net/index.php?title=LaunderingIn post 171, ssbm_Kyouko wrote:
Alban, was just thinking the same (SR) about keyen on the reread. Not sure what you mean by laundering but the posts do look fluffy. I don't think I saw any accusation of his yet either. He's letting others make pushes and is picking ones that look supported to back. I don't like 119 either. I was clearly being serious about my Aubrey read at the time.
VOTE: Keyen
159 laundering
All other posts active lurking
Giving generous town passes to a lot of players. Buddying?
Your case against Eric was thin. Which is why I wrote 134.In post 253, Aubrey wrote:I've basically skimmed the last 3-4 pages. On a skim, I'm much happier with the slot. As I said, my major issue with him was his contraditive attitude. "In post 249, chilledtea wrote:Initially the timing felt as if you were trying to derail the wagon on dave. It could also have been a vote, while not for derailing, for distancing.
Sometimes scum try to stay away from the topic at hand. Even if they don't want to directly influence the said topic.
Do you still find eric's slot scummy?Hey guys lets narrow down some lynch options right out the gate and get a move on, while I go sit in the corner and do nothing but complain!" When BTD said he asked for a replacement, I basically nulled the spot of its ever so light scum lean since it is so early in the game.
Regarding Dave, I just found his early posts playful shitty early day 1 activities. Eh. The argument that town would never vote themselves is farfetched, and a lie. Yea. Not a very interesting wagon in my eyes right out the gate.
--
Holy shit this game is on fire this morning.
Since so many of you were in the other game, is it possible that scum!Dave is deliberately bringing in the style used by you in the previous game for you to starting him based on a feeling that he is doing something you usually do.In post 261, Aubrey wrote:Oh wait. 658 ended this morning. I can talk about it now. Dave literally pushed Transcend for the exact same reasoning I pushed him in said game. We were both townies in said game as well. While I understand this doesn't mean Dave is town 100% I think it looks good on his part, and it makes me think he is actively trying to place him which seems townie to me. It is a slight town lean mind you. Hence my Deja vu comment.
DONT FUCK IT UP DAVE! xoxoxo with love,
Aubrey.
ps.Dont fuck it up.
Your first para: Similar to what I asked you about Dave. You and Keyen were the most active at that time. Is it possible, even marginally, for him to agree with you without obviously sheeping you.In post 272, Aubrey wrote:I glanced through Keyen's ISO. I can see where people may consider his posts fluffy, but I'm not exactly seeing this as super scum. I'm also a bit biased since we seem to have similar ideas here and there. He understood my shit posting early on where as others failed to. We have similar thoughts on Dave. We both understand that Transcend is a bit of a wild card at times (well I assume so based on that one game). We clearly had issues with Eric's play for obvious reasons. I don't exactly consider him lurking when we have players like Deer and that hydra account that haven't said much as of recently. The argument of him considering everyone town and working from there doesn't seem all that scummy to me either. I can't say I understand why you would do that, but whatever. I work from null to X, but to each their own.
If I were to bring an argument forward against him, I'd say a good amount of his posts could easily come from either alignment. He however is bringing forward reads with some reasoning which is nice. I do find it interesting that people are shitting on him for some of his fluffy comments, but gamma never got mentioned. A number of his posts are also fluffy. There maybe other players with fluffy posts, but Gamma is the one other person who I distinctly recall having some fluff to his stuff.
--
Pre-edit. I am not an Alt account and I have never played with Dave. Unless Dave is an alt account.
I agree with this. I had forgotten about the positioning of your unvote.In post 276, Aubrey wrote:I also un-voted the MOMENT Eric requested a replacement, not after he was replaced and LQ displayed immense activity. So scratch this crap of me backtracking cause"I realized LQ is more active and persistent than Eric."
Exactly what I wanted to say but couldn't put it in words. Thank you for vocalising it in a comprehensible manner.In post 281, chilledtea wrote:The comparison of arguments. It is meaningless unless you know for certain that one set of argument has to be correct.Spoiler:
Meaning, say alban's arguments are correct/consistent because he is town.
You comparing your set of arguments to his, either to solidify your set of arguments in his eyes (silly since he could be scum) or to weaken his set of arguments (not possible since that would mean you are scum). There is not much point to be made with that comparison in my eyes.
In post 288, keyenpeydee wrote:Alban, can you expand more about the 'active-lurking' thingy your saying on me? Because, I swear, I'm lurking, yes, but I'm also posting things. Why is that scummy?
I am sorry, I should have explained.In post 289, keyenpeydee wrote:If lurking + posting means active lurking, then why is that scummy?
Your words against my reads. Any guesses, which one will I trust more?In post 297, keyenpeydee wrote:Lol. I am not Active Lurking.
Not laundering. I have already put forth my suspicion and vote on you.In post 287, keyenpeydee wrote:Tbh I don't find Eric that scummy. As I stated in Post 159, I am convincing him to form a case or reads because he simply wants the game to quicken. If he wants that, then why don't he form a case rather than complaining such things. That's what I'm trying to point out. I also stated that I can see him as newbtown but also stated that he has a high percent chance of being scum. Of course, I didn't vote because I still consider the newbtown thing.
Alban, is that your laundering case on me?
And I also find Aubrey as my first real town read.
So you trust a player's words about their experience vis-a-vis their documented meta? Meta could a shit, but a scum's statement about their experience could be simply false.In post 301, LicketyQuickety wrote:Honestly, I think meta reads are mostly shit. The reason I want to ask about thingsIn post 298, alban wrote:LQ, why are you so engrossed in people's mafia playing experiences? Explain please.
You should be more interested in their expertise. And there's no correlation between the two. The q you should be asking is if anyone has played a game before with the player you are suspecting, and if there's anything different about them.such as(!)experience is because it gives me a glimpse into how they play. A player like keyen is going to play differently than someone who has played very little short forum mafia games. The difficult part is trying to understand how these differences affect play and how you can read a player knowing their experience they have going forward in the game.
I'll give you an example that should be easy to understand.
keyen plays games that are likely very fast paced. This means that reads also need to be made at a faster pace than places like this one where days are spread out over weeks instead of hours. This is why I am a little weary of keyen, because he has really only given us a single substantial read (to my knowledge). It seems at least uncharacteristic for keyen to sit back and formulate reads at a slow pace when he is used to making reads at a much faster pace.
I don't think you are getting my point.In post 307, keyenpeydee wrote:Didn't I tell everybody that I town read everyone by default? And yes, Aubrey is my first real town read. The rest are just null town.
What's nulltown and nullscum according to you?In post 308, keyenpeydee wrote:Except ssbm and you. You two are null scum
Though I agree with you to a certain extent, it's all too vague.In post 309, LicketyQuickety wrote:Spoiler:
Its not usually something people lie about because most people don't even factor in experience as a metric to read people by! My whole philosophy on reading people is based on thepersonbehind the action. You cannot always play by the book because some people do not play that way. If everyone played by the book then the game would be about who plays by the book the best. This game is just as much about psychology as it is about optimal play. To ignore the facets that make up the personality of the player is a grave mistake! Playing optimally only works when there is psychological factors that are accounted for. You cannot play the game on mathematics alone! The game the players and the stances people would make could literally never get started without some catalyst for understanding the motive of the player behind the action.
Notice how Transcend and LQ have voted for her, and Chilled has already expressed suspicion.In post 460, PsychoticDave wrote:Exactly.In post 458, Transcend wrote:What the hell is the point of defending Cracker
I see no reason to defend someone against votes that really aren't even happening yet.
Seems like scum trying to get votes away from a buddy, but a really bad attempt.
Is my uppitiness bothering yours?In post 466, LicketyQuickety wrote:You seem really uppity for 2 measly votes.In post 465, alban wrote:I guess your townlean on me disappeared, eh LQ?
Devaaaa...grant this moron some sense of humourIn post 468, LicketyQuickety wrote:Games over well done, alban just solved the game for us on day 1. I am impressed.In post 467, alban wrote:Am at L-4 with votes from Keyen, Transcend and LQ.
Dave and Toto will join for sure.
Gamma maybe.
That will put me at L-1.
All the scums in there?
Nope.In post 485, Transcend wrote:Question:In post 482, alban wrote:LQ: My posts around the one Transcend vote started as a joke, but you made sure that it snowballed.
Do you think my vote was actually a joke?
1. There are three scums in the game. You being scummy is independent of others.In post 486, keyenpeydee wrote:Alban, if you feel like my posts are fluffy or whatever fake things or being so nonsense,as I know, they haven't contributed much either. Let me know your answer.Do you also consider posts like Lethargy, Gamma and Dave?
As if I am gonna believe or do anything you say from here on, you stealthy machiavellian opportunist.In post 487, LicketyQuickety wrote:BTW alban, you're free to ask Transcend if he thinks I am actually capable of "snowballing" anything.
Yes.In post 504, Gamma Emerald wrote:Are you scumreading keyen for this?In post 476, alban wrote:btw, Keyen one genuine question for you. I wanted to ask this to you long before. But I forgot. Your resurfacing reminded me of this.
Spoiler:
Why would you keep calling yourself as a VI?
I know newbies or ineffective players really find that term offensive. You can call a bad player anything - literally anything - and they are fine with it, except when you call them the VI. Then they flip. They scream, shout, the works.
It's weird, how you are quick to call yourself a VI before anyone even entertaining that possibility. Not once but thrice. Why would you harp on something thrice?
I am a VI.
I am a VI.
I am a VI.....
Is that coz you would rather be considered a VI for your posts and not be considered a scum for your posts lacking content? I think your posts lack content coz you are scum but not a good one at that and are not able to hide your alignment by coming up with convincingly deeper content oriented posts.
So please answer my q. Why did you think of yourself as a VI?
What exactly did you want? And what did you get?
That's what happens when you play 3 back to back games with someone.In post 503, Gamma Emerald wrote:You know me a bit too well, IIn post 467, alban wrote:Am at L-4 with votes from Keyen, Transcend and LQ.
Dave and Toto will join for sure.
Gamma maybe.
That will put me at L-1.
All the scums in there?amwilling to vote you.
And thereby implying that Keyen's behaviour is not scummy?In post 510, Gamma Emerald wrote:After my pattern review, I find your answer to my question to be indicative of scum. Last time someone pushed someone on that "town would make comments about themselves like that" basis they were scum.
VOTE: alban