In post 86, Amy Farrah Fowler wrote:
I can see that farside isn't simply pushing her replacement tell (I'll call it that for now). She's also involved in other elements of the game, commenting and asking question, so townpoints to her in that respect, as I've noticed that sometimes scum looking to lynch town tend to spend all their time focusing on their lynch target of choice.
As for her replacement tell, whatever my personal thoughts on it may be, it looks like she genuinely believes in it. Scum using it ONLY to lynch someone would've probably dropped the case much earlier without bothering to do things like bringing up evidence.
She is also analyzing Mr Blonde's reactions, adding to the fact that it's genuine.
So I'd say I can classify farside as Null/Town.
Where have you seen this analysis?
In post 110, SnugglyDuckling wrote: In post 50, Mr_Blonde wrote: In post 47, Amy Farrah Fowler wrote:
Would you like to inform us of what that something is?
Or if it's gut feeling then are there any specific posts that provoked it?
Some examples of why he is town reading you would be sweet too.
Just feelings I got. No hard evidence obviously. Specific post would be 28 though in hindsight it doesn't look as bad as I thought. I guess it was just going off what had been posted so far though now that more things have been posted, that doesn't stick out as much to me any more.
Amy seems town just because I feel like I want to trust her for some reason. Do I
need
a reason? Haha because I don't have one.
Interesting that you both asked questions to me about each other.
Need
is probably a bit stronger of a word than necessary. But you
should
have a reason for why you think she's town. Even if it's just gut or 'tone' (how their posts read) you should be able to give some explanation as to why you feel the way you do regarding other players.
One of the best tools that I've found playing forum Mafia to catch scum is by looking for consistency from others. Are their explanations plausible? Do I agree with the conclusion they come to based on the evidence they use to support it? Basically - do the dots connect? Now this isn't 100% sure-fire going to catch you scum, but it has worked for me a lot in the past. Scum tend to have a hard time faking internal consistency and over a period of time that becomes glaringly obvious.
In post 116, Amy Farrah Fowler wrote: In post 111, SnugglyDuckling wrote: In post 53, Mr_Blonde wrote:Generally players that hand out reads for seemingly arbitrary reasons get the stink eye from me.
Fair enough but I rarely find reasons to suspect people other than arbitrary ones so prepare to give me a lot of stink eyes.
Townpoints for the above post.
While I partially agree with acryon and hope you find some legitimate reasons too, this post jumps out to me as towny, if only because I can't really see scum, especially newbie scum, replying in that way.
I've already declared Duckling as town for his free-flowing posts. Get your own read
In post 127, Amy Farrah Fowler wrote: In post 117, TobyLoby wrote:Chaos' post,
In post 63, chaoslord54 wrote:Also, your case against Mr.Blonde has no real evidence against it and I do not understand why a wagon is building on him so early because of a post where he said "let's dance."
I do find scummy, but in the past I've found it to be a stronger associative tell than a flat out. A scum coming in to defend their buddy sort of way. Two votes on a buddy may look more dire than it is. I can especially see this with a newer player. I suppose it could be a scum Chaos busing a scum farside and overexagerrating a wagon but I find it less likely.
I like this post.
I think the tone of the post reinforces the defensive aspect. It's a slight example of more reductio ad absurdum, whereby chaos is suggesting that the phrase 'let's dance' was the cause of a 'wagon'. Some specific wording in the post like 'no real evidence' for example, also give off a scummy vibe.
@Toby
- Please explain the bolded quote of yours that is nested here. I missed this earlier, but here you appear to be linking me with Chaos by saying that he is coming to my defense - but end the quote by saying that he could just be busing Farside as well. I'm not following here.
You are saying that two other slots could potentially be scumbros with Chaos, which essentially makes Chaos scum in either situation, but you are voting whom? Also - I feel it's very early for such associative tells, even if soft. I find it a bit troubling that you'd associate this sort of defense to automatically mean wolf/wolf instead of potentially Chaos buddying/WKing.
In post 131, Skelda wrote:
I feel like this is a Towntell
. I know I definitely felt this way just before my posts in this game. Would scum be less likely to say that they were confused? I dunno, I feel like Town are more open about how they are feeling.
I couldn't disagree more. I also find it odd that you'd consider this a Townie post.