"Scum syntax" arguments are heresy.
VOTE: Bell
From my long experience of playing with Norweegian (1 game!), he screams town when he's town. My ears are open for the scream.
"Scum syntax" arguments are heresy.
Are we really reading into the reasons for which people read other games when they were bored? That looks like a prototype of NAI thing to me.In post 34, Bell wrote:Was thinking if your alignment in this game motivated you to read that game.
It seems like you tried to grasp their characteristics.
This all depends on the circumstances... if a high activity slot is scummy, you should create a massive discussion around it and potentially lynch it. You will get a relatively likely scum flip + a ton of info to work with. If noone really strikes anyone as super scummy, then lynching among the lurkers is a good idea.In post 48, superbowl9 wrote:True, you said elimming higher activity slots gives more info which is 1 not necessarily true and 2 implies elimming high-content slots is not that bad which is harmfulIn post 47, Town looter wrote:That's really not what I said though, was it...In post 45, superbowl9 wrote:Disagree low activity players are better for scum to have around.In post 43, Town looter wrote:Unless there is good evidence of lurking, no. Mis-elimming an active slot will generally tell us more than a mis-elim on an inactive slot. This obviously only applies to early game, activity will be a useful source of information later in the game because of how easy it is to fly below the radar.Elimming a high activity slot just for info is not a good idea
Light townread on Pickaxe Pete because he actually tries to generate AI discussion and ignores the NAI stuffIn post 42, Pickaxe Pete wrote:I see people.
Thank youIn post 54, SJReaver wrote:I'm here for you, bro.In post 51, Marshmallow Marshall wrote: And now, can we start calling eachother scum so that we can have meaningful discussion, please? This debate about lynching and shooting basing on activity isn't alignment indicative, and we've basically killed RVS' significance here.
VOTE: Mashmallow
Reason:Claims previous discussion is NAI and has killed RVS onpage 2when the majority of people haven't voted. Claims calling others scum is more useful but then doesn't do it themselves.
Because it was the best thing to do at the time xD. You advocated for the scum syntax theory.In post 100, Bell wrote:In post 49, Marshmallow Marshall wrote:"Scum syntax" arguments are heresy.
VOTE: Bell
From my long experience of playing with Norweegian (1 game!), he screams town when he's town. My ears are open for the scream.
You seem a little townie, why are you voting me?
You're probably not going to like it, but it was real . It doesn't mean I'm locking him as town, but it means I like him. Objections?In post 105, Bell wrote:I thought this was sarcasm.In post 52, Marshmallow Marshall wrote:Light townread on Pickaxe Pete because he actually tries to generate AI discussion and ignores the NAI stuffIn post 42, Pickaxe Pete wrote:I see people.
It's not that I don't want to read it, I love game theory. I just don't love when it takes over the thread and that people begin to read eachother based on theory agreements or disagreements, because in my experience, that always leads to town getting lynched or scum getting a lot of easy town points.In post 64, superbowl9 wrote:This is the correct takeIn post 51, Marshmallow Marshall wrote:This all depends on the circumstances... if a high activity slot is scummy, you should create a massive discussion around it and potentially lynch it. You will get a relatively likely scum flip + a ton of info to work with. If noone really strikes anyone as super scummy, then lynching among the lurkers is a good idea.This isn't. Never understood why people can't just scroll past things theory if they don't want to read it?In post 51, Marshmallow Marshall wrote:And now, can we start calling eachother scum so that we can have meaningful discussion, please? This debate about lynching and shooting basing on activity isn't alignment indicative, and we've basically killed RVS' significance here.
Voting with a line meant to be replied to, and not taking part to the discussion about theory that took over the thread for some posts. Not saying his posts are legendary, but they are still better than Superbowl's, for example.In post 65, Cat Scratch Fever wrote:What about his posts looked like trying to generate AI discussion to you?In post 52, Marshmallow Marshall wrote:Light townread on Pickaxe Pete because he actually tries to generate AI discussion and ignores the NAI stuffIn post 42, Pickaxe Pete wrote:I see people.
VOTE: Marshmallow
Fair.In post 109, SJReaver wrote:The continued inability of others to read my mind.In post 104, Marshmallow Marshall wrote:
Why do you feel the need to put "reason" next to every vote you make?
He was making a joke. Not a good one, but it's Bell. You have to make allowances.In post 106, Marshmallow Marshall wrote: Because it was the best thing to do at the time xD. You advocated for the scum syntax theory.
Sorry for what? I feel dumb for being clueless in front of this two-word post lolIn post 70, Cat Scratch Fever wrote:lol sorryIn post 69, ofrhz wrote:Was this a serious vote?In post 49, Marshmallow Marshall wrote:"Scum syntax" arguments are heresy.
VOTE: Bell
From my long experience of playing with Norweegian (1 game!), he screams town when he's town. My ears are open for the scream.
We shall see. I never said this read was anything strong. I just like the intent I see behind his simple posts. I could be wrong, of course. But I could also be right. Also note that "findingIn post 112, Bell wrote:You’re looking into the void and letting your brain come up with explanations with no evidence behind them.
He voted somebody who hasn't Replied to their role pm yet.
I've been playing FM consistently since 2017, so I'd say "a lot", although I'm not one of those veterans who have been playing the game for 10 years.In post 116, Bell wrote:How much experience do you have in mafia Marshall?
In post 118, NorwegianboyEE wrote:In post 49, Marshmallow Marshall wrote:From my long experience of playing with Norweegian (1 game!), he screams town when he's town.I’M TOWN!
"One balloon for you" is usually the kind of thing you say when you want to engage RVS-style conversation with a player. Also, "contrived read"... it isn't because I give the weak reads I have to start discussion that I'm giving "contrived" reads. This is going to read as more haughty than it should, but I sadly don't see a better way to word it, sorry in advance: you should be thanking me for starting meaningful discussion on people's behavior (in this very case, mine) instead of blaming me for giving a weak read in the first hours of D1 and calling it "contrived".In post 120, Cat Scratch Fever wrote:I don't follow. Which line by Pickaxe Pete warranted a response...? Like aside from you who quoted his posts to give him a townlean, no one even bothered to respond to Pete's posts.In post 110, Marshmallow Marshall wrote:In post 65, Cat Scratch Fever wrote:What about his posts looked like trying to generate AI discussion to you?In post 52, Marshmallow Marshall wrote:Light townread on Pickaxe Pete because he actually tries to generate AI discussion and ignores the NAI stuffIn post 42, Pickaxe Pete wrote:I see people.
VOTE: MarshmallowVoting with a line meant to be replied to, and not taking part to the discussion about theory that took over the thread for some posts. Not saying his posts are legendary, but they are still better than Superbowl's, for example.
This feels like a contrived read. More votes on Marshmallow plz n ty.
I went down this path too, but as much as youIn post 121, NorwegianboyEE wrote:This reads like busywork to me. Fake attempt at looking like town doing things useful for town. Bell is my first scumread so far.In post 50, Marshmallow Marshall wrote:Are we really reading into the reasons for which people read other games when they were bored? That looks like a prototype of NAI thing to me.
So basically, I'm scum because I'm weird (i.e. come from another site with another meta)? That's GOOFY.In post 129, Bell wrote:At first I thought, no way is this goofy guy scum.
But then I read his first game here as mafia and he was super goofy.
But like, what if he’s just an easy miselimination, I should read another one<this is where i’m At.
Mehhhhh
Double mehhhhhhhIn post 140, Town looter wrote:VOTE: Marshall
I'd rather vote Fwesnid, but both are in my low info scum pool.
Mhmm, what happened there is actually useful to analyze.In post 142, superbowl9 wrote:Thank god we’ve generated some AI discussion out of the 4 theory posts that took over the game thread huh MM
VOTE: Marshall
That's a very good question! xDIn post 143, NorwegianboyEE wrote:Why are we wagoning MM?
Not sure what this post meansIn post 144, Town looter wrote:For me it's because I threw a tiny amount of shade at superbowl as a bit of a reaction test and got two small nibbles.
In post 146, NorwegianboyEE wrote:I’m not really seeing why MM is scummy.
And they seem a bit too easy to wagon this early in the game.
People actually seeing that my wagon sucks. Pointing it out for context for the next post, which is pretty important:In post 147, stan1ey wrote:Ya this Marshall wagon sucks
So, basically, they would have to sheep your thoughts and not voice disagreement? I get that I'm slightly biased due to being the wagoned player here, but I'm pretty sure that town looks for truth and correct lynches, which implies that town welcomes meaningful discussion, and not for sheep votes. And I'm pretty sure town doesn't purely and simply discredit the players who oppose their views without even really questioning or attacking those views. Because of this:In post 148, superbowl9 wrote:Haha this wagon sucks! Instead let me build a case on someone else with 5 pages of RVS!
Yall sound very eager to throw shade while you are both doing nothing sitting on RVS votes
In post 150, superbowl9 wrote:Your vote was RVS initially no? For a 21 player game seems very convenient that your RVS vote just happened to morph into your biggest scumread
In post 152, superbowl9 wrote:Do you have anything else on Bell besides that he's lamisting? Convince me i'm wrong
In post 154, superbowl9 wrote:Not angry, just trying to create interactions. Which you should know with your level of experience
Completely off the track of my wagon and the reasoning behind it, and deflecting the question of "why is this wagon a thing?".In post 155, superbowl9 wrote:But can you answer my question tho 0.0
In post 162, superbowl9 wrote:I mean if you don't see what I (and presumably others) see you don't need to join the wagon lol. But to shade it just because you don't understand it and then ask us to remove all impact from the wagon by explaining it does not seem very positive of a play here.
What's your experience with mafia lol? No offense, but those two posts are, ummmmm.... showing a... special take on the way Mafia should be played. Explaining your pushes is like mafia 101 for those who seek the truth, i.e. for town.In post 167, superbowl9 wrote:I mean if you don't understand it I don't think I can really help you fam
It's kind of like telling you why explaining a joke no longer makes it funny, if you don't get it you just don't get it
Ah yes, the scum distancing on pg 5 of a large game strat. I can argue with you if that will make you feel better
IIn post 168, NorwegianboyEE wrote:Ahaha, yes. Indeed.In post 167, superbowl9 wrote:It's kind of like telling you why explaining a joke no longer makes it funny, if you don't get it you just don't get it
Explaining why you find someone scummy is so overrated. Let’s just all wagon one player, and only when the player is eliminated shall i reveal how i found him out as scum. Very good strategy, definiteky the best way to find TR’s. I’m sure a lot of town would love to join this wagon UNTIL, i reveal my secrets. When i do that they will all stop wagoning the person in question and it’s all ruined!
By curiosity, do you think it's necessarily indicative of being scum, or that it could also just be indicative of Superbowl being wrong, independently from his alignment? I'd like some deeper thoughts on the matter.In post 172, stan1ey wrote:In post 165, stan1ey wrote:How does explaining your reasoning for voting remove impact ?Absolute nonsense lmao VOTE: superbowl9In post 167, superbowl9 wrote: It's kind of like telling you why explaining a joke no longer makes it funny, if you don't get it you just don't get it
Votes without explainations hold very little pressure because they're void lolIn post 174, superbowl9 wrote:Wagons =/= elims
"But superbowl does that mean you're just hopping on a wagon to add pressure and get the game moving, even if you don't have a strong SR because you know wagons produce interactions?"
^ And now you've removed all pressure that my vote holds
I agree with this post btw. Stanley may have been surfing on the existing contestation against my wagon to take a stance for the sake of it here.In post 177, Nero Cain wrote:ok, but why do you feel that way? And I'm fairly certain that several ppl were already talking about how it was so easy to wagon him so your "MM wagon suxs!" isn't exactly original content.
In post 185, superbowl9 wrote:Yeah thats my pointIn post 183, stan1ey wrote:Where did I say it was forced SvS ? Dont remember saying thatIn post 176, superbowl9 wrote:If you didn't think it was forced SvS why did you bring it up? Do you just not understand the concept of keeping information to yourself so you can greater benefit lol?
Also agree with those posts. I feel like none of this Norwee/Superbowl vs Stan is SvS, though, and Superbowl is scummier than Stanley for the reasons I explained before, so Stanley gets the benefit of the doubt for now. I have my eye on him, though.In post 184, NorwegianboyEE wrote:Then what did you mean? Because if you say an argument is "forced" you to elaborate in what sense it was "forced.
Some small town points for noticing that the discussion was sidetracking on game theory disagreement and that this disagreement was being used as an argument against Stanley, and especially for steering the discussion out of it to a more healthy one.In post 187, Nero Cain wrote:I strongly disagree but its game theory so no point in arguing about it and cluttering up the thread. Lets lynch stan or at least talk about him. What is even that fuzzy alien avatar?
In post 189, Nero Cain wrote:naw, creature doesn't post. this guy actully posts.
Why is Creature so famous? Everywhere I go, people talk about him in games lol
Indeed, which is why I'm asking them for their level of experience with the game. Also, I'd like to hearIn post 413, NorwegianboyEE wrote:Superbowl could just be a freak town with differing logic than the rest of us tho MM.
The temptation is too strong.In post 210, NorwegianboyEE wrote:Hear hear brother.In post 209, superbowl9 wrote:Anime pfps are rising in strength. Soon we will take over the universe
The time for revolution is neigh. Throw off the chains of the bourgeoisie anti-anime oppressors.
Right. Good start from offsuit here.In post 215, 72offsuit wrote:Nothing wrong with that post. Why wouldn't !townMM try to halt discussion that they think is filler and bloating the thread?In post 64, superbowl9 wrote:This is the correct takeIn post 51, Marshmallow Marshall wrote:This all depends on the circumstances... if a high activity slot is scummy, you should create a massive discussion around it and potentially lynch it. You will get a relatively likely scum flip + a ton of info to work with. If noone really strikes anyone as super scummy, then lynching among the lurkers is a good idea.This isn't. Never understood why people can't just scroll past things theory if they don't want to read it?In post 51, Marshmallow Marshall wrote:And now, can we start calling eachother scum so that we can have meaningful discussion, please? This debate about lynching and shooting basing on activity isn't alignment indicative, and we've basically killed RVS' significance here.
Not exactly original, but pretty understandable and acceptable.In post 217, 72offsuit wrote:Good enough for me.In post 121, NorwegianboyEE wrote:This reads like busywork to me. Fake attempt at looking like town doing things useful for town. Bell is my first scumread so far.In post 50, Marshmallow Marshall wrote:Are we really reading into the reasons for which people read other games when they were bored? That looks like a prototype of NAI thing to me.
VOTE: Bell Choo choo!
In post 218, 72offsuit wrote:LOL, voted for the wrong player.In post 121, NorwegianboyEE wrote:This reads like busywork to me. Fake attempt at looking like town doing things useful for town. Bell is my first scumread so far.In post 50, Marshmallow Marshall wrote:Are we really reading into the reasons for which people read other games when they were bored? That looks like a prototype of NAI thing to me.
VOTE: MM Choo choo!
This confusion leads me to question what exactly Offsuit thought he was sheeping, and what his intent was when he did it. When you genuinely sheep a reasoning you find good, it's because you thought about it and really liked it... so uh, what is this? Not sure I like it.In post 219, 72offsuit wrote:I think I'm losing my marbles.
I did mean to vote for Bell.
VOTE: Bell
Choo choo
Uuuuuuuuuuuh... no? What is it even based on? I more or less didn't notice its existence... Can you explain further on this, please?In post 239, NoPowerOverMe wrote:town looter is a good wagon.
Oh ok, thanksIn post 421, NorwegianboyEE wrote:You only put the last part in the youtube tag MM.
So (Youtube) l_GBfiKjJZ8(Youtube) would be correct.
In post 255, NoPowerOverMe wrote:I don't like the stanley push. Seems like mislynch bait.
In post 257, NoPowerOverMe wrote:You seem to think everyone overreacts if they don't agree with your pushes.
That's a lot of absolute statements without any quoted basis in the thread, and those statements would really require quotes to back themselves up.In post 261, NoPowerOverMe wrote:You seem overly invested in how players are perceiving other players.
And that's the issue with the lack of quotes: it leads to inaccurate statements, and that can be proved by the people who bring the quotes up. The question here is whether NoPower was doing this maliciously or inadvertently... and I do not have the answer yet. Definetly something to dig into, though.In post 263, NoPowerOverMe wrote:I'm talking in generalities. I didn't say it applies to every situation.In post 260, Nero Cain wrote:????In post 257, NoPowerOverMe wrote:You seem to think everyone overreacts if they don't agree with your pushes.
Who did I claim was overreacting for not liking my Stan push? (let's just say that I'm pushing norway) who did I claim was overreacting for not liking my push on him?
In post 265, Nero Cain wrote:So basically you are just responding with vague wording. Got it.In post 263, NoPowerOverMe wrote:I'm talking in generalities. I didn't say it applies to every situation.
In post 266, NoPowerOverMe wrote:There you go again.
More of the previously mentioned behaviorIn post 268, NoPowerOverMe wrote:I mean you seem more interested in townpainting or scumpainting(mostly scumpainting) players rather than actually finding scum.
So that's their meta? If so, then it's more understandable, and can be seen as towny aggressive pressuring playstyle.In post 269, NorwegianboyEE wrote:I'm liking NPOM's content so far. Seems similar to their townplay i'm familiar with.
I don't agree with this (not caring about dying early isn't AtE, it's a mentality), but I see the kind of player NoPower is now. And I don't think it's true only siths deal in absolutes in Mafia; NoPower is going pretty hard at Norwee for rather weak reasons here. Leaning town on him, and leaning TvT on Norwee - NoPower.In post 340, NoPowerOverMe wrote:The "I don't care if I die early" is blatant ate that's the main reason Norway needs to go.
Um, that's it? Rather lazy. I'm disappointed. You are officially stripped of your early town points.
True, but the benefits of faking it as scum aren't so great, and it's not rare to see it simply come from town, so I'm very reluctant to scumread anyone on that basis.In post 428, Nero Cain wrote:the "I don't care if I die" is (imo) mostly bad town mentality thatsEASILYfakeable from scum.
YESIn post 431, NorwegianboyEE wrote:I'm changing your name to Marshal Zhukov after watching that video.
'Twas probably made by capitalist scumbags anyway.In post 447, NorwegianboyEE wrote:How did you mess up your post on my mobile browser so badly.
In post 450, superbowl9 wrote:Had a feeling the MM omgus was coming if I waited long enough
In post 453, superbowl9 wrote:I think MM's spew is kinda IIoAy
Discrediting 2 pages of my content without any quotes and labelling them as IIoA and OMGUS? NiceIn post 454, superbowl9 wrote:Not in the traditional way but more in the just put out a bunch of basic level argumentation thats really low hanging fruit type of way if you get me - not saying it's AI yet
To be fair, Looter seems aware that his case is weak (at least that's what the first line suggests). But he gives it anyway. And honestly, I tend to townread the move because it is likely to come from town wanting to give their opinion, as weak as it could be (a bit like how I gave my early opinion of Pickaxe, and y'all hated that). So if anything, this gives some small town points to Looter. It isn't really a great case though lol, I'm only commenting on the intent I see behind the post here.In post 455, superbowl9 wrote:Why do you think stanley is good for scum me to latch onto over town me? What has stanley done to give you a townread?In post 438, Town looter wrote:Bleh, just as I was starting to get a gut scum feeling about Superbowl (SB), MM throws a proper case together and is going to make it look like I am sheeping (for the 2nd or 3rd time in this game ).
My read started after re-reading the Stanley interaction. I think Scum!SB genuinely thinks it's a good case that he can latch onto and look like he is scumhunting. And it kind of is, except for the fact that there absolutely could be a SvT interaction that "feels" forced (I take Stanley's response as a throw-away gut feeling after reading - I have made similar statements): Scum could be doing the forcing, which gives the conversation a forced feel overall. Given I have a mild town read on Stan, I am willing to trust his gut in this.
Then there is the reluctance to respond openly, which could be scum motivated as the information may not exist.
And then the response to mis-quoting in 308; later you say you were going to respond, but your initial response doesn't really add up. I think a more natural town response would be to respond to 235, probably in a slightly flustered way given you mis-posted.
All very minor things, but they all add up.
I also am getting town vibes from Nero (and NoPowerOverMe, which will matter in a second). Trusting these vibes puts a question mark over Glitch. And where are you in Glitch's reads? Right where a scum partner would be. I know it is absurd looking for associations prior to a single flip. But like I say, the little things are adding up.
Spoiler:
VOTE: Superbowl
It sounds to me like your case is "well scum superbowlcouldhave done all of these things!" I hope I don't have to tell you that's a bad case.
For the misquote thing I was on mobile and hit the quote button to respond, then changed my mind because I assessed it as not too big of a deal to respond to, you're saying I should have been flustered by it and responded immediately? Maybe I just don't get flustered because I'm built different
More discrediting? -_-In post 456, superbowl9 wrote:Oh the ironyIn post 446, Marshmallow Marshall wrote:There are two possibilities: either Offsuit is a pretty OMGUSsy townie, or they're scum throwing shade at me.
Ehhh, perhaps, but Norway said NoPower was playing in their town meta, and I see NoPower's playstyle as very different from others. They keep making absolute statements where they don't belong, and I think that's a playstyle difference and not an alignment difference. Now of course, they could be scum anyway, but I wouldn't put too much money on it.In post 457, SJReaver wrote:I gave you the benefit of the doubt but this is bullshit.In post 335, NoPowerOverMe wrote:Norway is scum. I'm not moving my vote for the rest of the day.
You didn't test Norway for reactivity, you targeted a poster you already knew tended to react to things and are now spinning that reaction into proof of being mafia. I mentioned at the beginning of the game that Norway was a good scum player, and I think you're trying to capitalize on townie paranoia of being tricked by good scum players.
Even if you did think Norway might be scum, there's no way you'd be 100% sure this early and planting your vote here means less pressure on real mafia. It's a safe way to look like you're scumhunting while contributing little.
VOTE: NoPowerOverMe
Oh okIn post 499, Bell wrote:@marshall, you either misunderstood or strawmanned my opinion on you. I was saying that you’re goofy as both alignments. Also you’ve been in enough games here to adjust to the meta here, so that excuse doesn’t work at all.
In post 501, Bell wrote:People have absolutely said what i’m About to say better. But he’s thinking laterally, but it’s all town perspective.
Huh ok, I actually like your view now lol, it joins up with what I just said and shows that you're looking at me through well-thought-about lens.In post 504, Bell wrote:“the solving of problems by an indirect and creative approach, typically through viewing the problem in a new and unusual light.“-google.
Just read him again.
I agree with you that it's anti-town, but I certainly do not agree that it's scummy to be angry at someone because of a past game. It's not scummy to be human lolIn post 555, NoPowerOverMe wrote:It's pretty self-centered and anti Town though. Any reasonable townie should know that one game is not an adequate sample size. Also being a eplacement is not easy and somewhat thankless.In post 552, SJReaver wrote:If town was made up of robots instead of human beings, sure.In post 535, NoPowerOverMe wrote:I think town would try and incorporate other players into the game rather than try to convince others to ignore other players they had a bad one game experience with.
Someone who will exclude others due to one bad game is going to do so whether they're green or red.
In post 557, ralph217 wrote:howdy
*looks at ISO to make sure I didn't miss posts from the guy*In post 558, ralph217 wrote:hmmmmm
Why is your list made of zero posters AND of active posters (looking at Norwee here) AND of medium-low activity people (like Glitch)? Your post looks like a question asked for the sake of being asked, and I do not like it.In post 591, Nero Cain wrote:how many scum is in
LicketyQuickety
popopopopopopo
ralph217
Ganelon
NorwegianboyEE
Glitch
Lapsa
?
Pretty bold for the strenght of the read on Glitch.In post 602, Nero Cain wrote:lets make this Glitch wagon a thing. to me Bell and you 2 TOSers!
There is no real reason to have that much fear about a Norwee lynch today for scum!Glitch+Norwee, as Norwee isn't really being pushed that much. Not enough for Glitch to try this kind of play, at least. As for the chain lynch theory, if Glitch was trying to do that, he'd be much more present in the thread. As things stand right now, he's only making a few wallposts that probably not everyone reads and that don't have enormous weight in the thread, which isn't exactly the vision I have of "setting up a chain lynch".In post 623, Nero Cain wrote:he doesn't seem to hold this opinion He's accusing me of potentially bussing you. So either he's scum that knows you'll flip scum and is pre emptively setting up an argument for later on or knows that this is TvT and is setting up a chain lynch.In post 619, NorwegianboyEE wrote:It’s acknowledging 2 worlds. 1 where i’m scum and town!Neros push was kinda awkward
In post 653, superbowl9 wrote:Yeah your 2 pages are just basic information and not really things that are pushy/pushable, hence why it's IIoA.In post 627, Marshmallow Marshall wrote:In post 450, superbowl9 wrote:Had a feeling the MM omgus was coming if I waited long enoughIn post 453, superbowl9 wrote:I think MM's spew is kinda IIoAyDiscrediting 2 pages of my content without any quotes and labelling them as IIoA and OMGUS? NiceIn post 454, superbowl9 wrote:Not in the traditional way but more in the just put out a bunch of basic level argumentation thats really low hanging fruit type of way if you get me - not saying it's AI yetI know you want me to go point by point through so you can undermine my position, but that literally makes no sense because I'm saying you've been cluttering the thread with basic info. Why would I respond to/elaborate upon that basic info lol?
Also dude you have literally OMGUSed everyone who has slighted you. Idk why you view this as a "discredit" because (at least imo) OMGUS is pretty NAI in most cases but it's just funny to point out when you OMGUS scumread someone then say they're OMGUSing.
Nice, so one of the reasons for which I joined a large instead of a mini just went awayIn post 832, ManateeDude wrote:Titus replaces Ganelon, Almost50 replaces popopo etc
VC incoming thank you guys for your patience
No, but you asked "how many scum in there", and I don't get why you put the players you put in the list there. Usually, people make that kind of list to "sort by activity", like "how many lurkers are scum", which is why I asked. Guess I misunderstood it. What was the intent behind your post, then?In post 638, Nero Cain wrote:In post 636, Marshmallow Marshall wrote:Why is your list made of zero posters AND of active posters (looking at Norwee here) AND of medium-low activity people (like Glitch)?
I don't really understand this. Am I supposed to hunt from only one activity group or something? Also, Norway feels kinda active lurkish compared to early game but I do have town reads of various degrees on most active players.
"Norwee has two votes, but more people could vote him" isn't exactly what I would call a compelling argument. It's far from enough for scummates to think "Hey, we gotta prepare ourselves for the bussing towncred!". As for you "doing your job", well, sure, but I'm doing my job by pointing out that your reasoning is bad lol. Also, I do not exclude a Nero-Superbowl scum team (although I have not specifically looked into it, I think it makes sense both as a team and as individual scums).In post 639, Nero Cain wrote:norway is @ 2 votes.In post 637, Marshmallow Marshall wrote:as Norwee isn't really being pushed that much
all of Nero, Glitch, Bell would vote him...prob. If we all voted him we could make him the top wagon. There are maybe others that have expressed suspicion of him and would vote him. I don't think its that far fetched to think the guy could get lynched. But even if its not today its not like there is some statue of limitations on Glitch's accusations so
Well I have doubts you know what you are talking about. If you think my reasoning on Glitch is weak fine but I'm doing my job and pushing my top scum read and trying to get town to go in the direction I think it should go. The only 2 other wagons are you and superbowl so you are kinda floating the idea that I am pushing Glitch to deflect from you or SB wagon but are being really really wishy-washy about it? (see bold) So I kinda don't get whats making you have doubts and it feels more like this was intended to litly defend Glitch than actully confront me with something that bothered you.In post 637, Marshmallow Marshall wrote:And since your case is weak, I think the first quote up there could very well be a deflection from an annoying wagon.Maybe, maybe not, I don't know... but I have doubts on Nero now.
And how does that make me more likely to be town? If anything, according to your reasoning, it should make me more likely to be scum: if you're right in assuming scum!Glitch, he'd have either defended scum!me indirectly by steering the lynch away from me or deemed that pushing town!me would be a bad idea for reasons unknown. Now obviously, I'm not saying I'm scum, and I don't really see why Glitch would be, either, but I don't get your reasoning.In post 961, Nero Cain wrote:In post 826, superbowl9 wrote:Sorry but can you link me to this post? I don't remember thisIn post 815, Nero Cain wrote:Also I had kinda felt like Glitch's hesitation @ joining the MM wagon made MM somewhat likely to be town. What do you think about that?it was also ??? b/c the wagon was a fairly strong 4 votes so IDK why he's acting like it was gone and dead. And even if it was dead (or thought it was dead) he could have tried to restart itIn post 383, Glitch wrote:I wish I could have been here when your wagon was alive and strong so I could bolster it with my vote as well
So he didn't vote MM b/c ????
FMPOV, a vote on a growing wagon just moves the game along and intentionally not moving the game foreward is scummy to me.
No, I'm voting you for a few reasons and this isn't one on them. You are using the "Norwee was pushed hard enough for scummates to want to save him" argument against Glitch and are pushing his lynch for it, which sucks. There's also my 971 on the same topic. To make it short, my main reason for voting you is that your push on Glitch is bad and that you're clinging to it without being towny by doing other stuff (really, your latest and main activity has been pushing Glitch and more or less insulting Norwee over petty stuff). You also happen to have interesting interactions with Norwee and Stanley, and I believe your flip could help solve those slots.In post 988, Nero Cain wrote:MM are you voting me b/c I disagreed with you that norway had gotten pushed today?
Uh yes you are using that argument Nero lol. As for the info part being a bad reason to vote you, it'd be true if it were my only reason, which it is not.In post 639, Nero Cain wrote:In post 637, Marshmallow Marshall wrote:
as Norwee isn't really being pushed that much
norway is @ 2 votes.
all of Nero, Glitch, Bell would vote him...prob. If we all voted him we could make him the top wagon. There are maybe others that have expressed suspicion of him and would vote him. I don't think its that far fetched to think the guy could get lynched. But even if its not today its not like there is some statue of limitations on Glitch's accusations so
In post 992, Bell wrote:Look Marsh, your vote on nero is like, 95% likely to be town. vote elsewhere.
I've literally never seen scum act like nero is rn.
He's super obv town. And you can quote me and make fun of me forever if I'm wrong.
In post 994, NorwegianboyEE wrote:We can paranoia scumread Nero if he’s alive after like 3-4 days. But i’m not for a D1 lynch on him.
Nero votes are wasted votes because i’ll never support it.
Uh ok, I guess this is a "throw my vote away" situation. I still view Nero as scummy though. UNVOTE: Nero Cain back to this then.In post 996, NorwegianboyEE wrote:Don’t go to the dark side MM. I know it’s tempting. But the side of good is here, begging you to cast aside your sins and prove your towniness.
I'd say Stanley was pushed about as hard as him, which isn't much. Speaking of that, surprisingly the push on Stanley died down because... uh, because he went offline? Or am I missing something?In post 995, Nero Cain wrote:you said norway isn't being pushed that much. He's been one on the days main pushes besides you, Glitch and Superbowl.
I do not like what you think of me. I would never hammer early unless there's a real consensus on it (or unless I'm dumb and accidentally hammer lol).In post 1058, Bell wrote:Lapsa, Dexter, Marshall, or you know, anybody who drunk posts.In post 1048, Almost50 wrote:Who would you expect to quick~hammer?? I am already on the wagon. FL & N_M are not in the game. Who -from this players list- has the balls (or is enough of a troll) to quickhammer and hope to get away with it?
@Kitty, read back at my progression from 1 meta read game to two meta read games to, Idk what he is anymore.
WhyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyIn post 1052, SJReaver wrote:Honestly, my impulse control isn't too good today. I'm going to vote now so I don't give into temptation.
VOTE: glitch
That's L-1.
See, I am not quickhammering today. I am good.
I could also get on board with this btw, but I feel like Superbowl is a better lynch info-wise. Voters and people who commented on Offsuit aren't legion. I also think Superbowl is more likely to flip scum. Good lynches either way.In post 1034, SJReaver wrote:Everyone just ignores my post on scum!72. Feels bad.
Mafia is red,In post 1009, 72offsuit wrote:I thought that it was over.....
I thought you'd understand.....
That Superbowl;s wagon.....
Is the one to get on, band.....
Townies are blue,
This is a bad wagon,
I'm voting for you.
VOTE: 72offsuit
Either this VC is terribly wrong or the people screaming Glitch is at L-1 are terribly bad at math. Or they're hoping for him to be fooled and not to look at the big obvious orange vote count lol.In post 1057, ManateeDude wrote:
What's up with the lynch lining-up lol? Nero is the most guilty here since he started it. I still don't like Nero btw.In post 1174, stan1ey wrote:what about nero today, superbowl tomorrow?
In post 1198, Nero Cain wrote:I think there's an intesting dynamic were Glitch doesn't want to join the MM wagon, Stan calls the MM wagon bad.Are Glitch and Stan just scum thats defending bad town here?