NY 114: Mafia vs. Werewolves (Game Over)
-
-
Leafsnail Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 753
- Joined: December 31, 2009
-
-
Leafsnail Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 753
- Joined: December 31, 2009
Sorry, haven't been following this... didn't think we'd start pregame .
Anyway -
Super Smash Bros. Fan's list is null... I don't really agree with it, but I don't see what makes it so scummy. It seems more like something easy to bandwagon onto. With that in mind,FomS: Parama and Chronopie. Parama seems far more eager to lynch over that alone, but chronopie seems to be following him, which is odd.-
-
Leafsnail Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 753
- Joined: December 31, 2009
Here, I think it's only 3. Elsewhere... I dunno, quite a lot.Vi wrote:*How many games have you finished, here or elsewhere? (I don't particularly need to know details here)
Fairly.*Do you consider yourself an experienced player?
We get there when we get there.*Are we there yet?
Sure, why not.*How about now?-
-
Leafsnail Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 753
- Joined: December 31, 2009
This is... pretty much a list of everyone who's posted content so far?Timeater wrote:Does anyone know any men named Michel? I don't. I wish I did though.
Hey everyone, look, SSBF is the center of attention! Everyone talk about him! Everyone debate over his silly gimmick!Quick! DO IT GODDAMIT!!
I was considering doing a gimmick for this game until I was preempted byyou know who. I wasn't going to use any pictures, just a codebox, a list, and scumpoints. Every time I see something scummy, that person gets a scumpoint. Whoever has the most scumpoints dictates who I vote for, who I want lynched, and shows my general thoughts towards other players. Its like his list without the silly arrows. Just an example:
Code: Select all
foilist13:2 Leafsnail:1 Lowell:9 Midnight's Sorrow:3 LynchMePls:6 SSBF:4 Vi:7
And I'd just add people to the list over time when I see scummy things. Simple, really.
Except Parama and Chronopie. Interesting.
@105 - Give me examples, Parama. And refer to where you said this before.
Also, please tell me what you think of Timeater's list, which is fundamentally the same idea.-
-
Leafsnail Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 753
- Joined: December 31, 2009
-
-
Leafsnail Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 753
- Joined: December 31, 2009
Oh, I thought by "example" you meant "For example, this is what I think now".Timeater wrote:leaf wrote:This is... pretty much a list of everyone who's posted content so far?
Except Parama and Chronopie. Interesting.
@105 - Give me examples, Parama. And refer to where you said this before.
Also, please tell me what you think of Timeater's list, which is fundamentally the same idea.
I was just putting names down at random, they have no consequence. I said it was just an example, do you not understand?
Are you actually being predatory or just silly?
unvote
Lets move out of RVS quick.
Nevermind.-
-
Leafsnail Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 753
- Joined: December 31, 2009
...How do either of those links show "obvious nervousness and caution" (your words, not mine)? Similarly, the only time you mentioned nervousness before was in response to... pretty much nothing. Your ISO actually looks like a joke.Parama wrote:First off,vote: SSBF
Presents that Leafsnail asked for!
This and the series of posts following it.
Dammit, I screwed up!
And a lot of his posts are pointless info about himself that nobody cares about.-
-
Leafsnail Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 753
- Joined: December 31, 2009
If it's so obvious, it should be easy to explain. It should also be easy to explain why you didn't bring up these points before.Parama wrote:Oh God Leaf you're really going to make me explain something so obvious?
:/Why are you so concerned with it anyways? For all you know I'm RVSing (I'm not but still <_<)
...What the hell are you talking about?-
-
Leafsnail Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 753
- Joined: December 31, 2009
-
-
Leafsnail Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 753
- Joined: December 31, 2009
STOP WITH THE CLAIMS STOP WITH THE CLAIMS STOP WITH THE CLAIMS
Yes, he is reaching. Going through all of someone's posts and attacking every tiny thing (most of which don't seem to be there at all) is reaching regardless of when you do it in the game. Especially if you've already declared you want them lynched.SerialClergyman wrote:Ugh, Serial's pet hate scummy comment. Parama is reaching on page 9 before there's any real concrete information? Seriously? Maybe he should just chilll in the background and make comments like 'blah is reaching'.
Sure, attacking over small things is standard day one play, but if you're trying to apply pressure to get reads, do you do it to the weakest player who is most likely to get lynched?
Rolefishing. Very bad rolefishing.daniel94581 wrote:vezopiraka wrote:I have somewhat of an inside source and I can tell you that lynchmepls is in the mafia but he's not werewolf. And no I don't know this cause I'm scum.
unvote:vi
Vote:LynchmeplsSome sort of cop?
Didn't have much time to write it... in retrospect, I realise it doesn't really make sense.Vi wrote:I don't agree with SerialClergyman's reasons for voting leafsnail, but the line about daniel is bad enough that I don't mind the vote.
Basically, he questioned why someone thought he had found scum followed by claiming he knew what another person was saying better than askbob did.
In his next post, he then demands that The Goat immediately remove his vote on vezo, the same person he defended in his previous post. In fact, now I read his ISO, post 2 also defends vezo. Sure, he claims vezo is CT to him, but surely then he wouldn't feel the need to rolefish this guy?-
-
Leafsnail Goon
-
-
Leafsnail Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 753
- Joined: December 31, 2009
Oh god this game
It seems that several people have attacked me for voting a claimed mason... even though I haven't posted since the masons claimed.Unvote, since him being a mason explains the things I voted him for.
I was just so pissed off at daniel I thought he needed a vote.chronopie wrote:@LS: I was asleep, so no I couldn't give a reply between 'waiting for chrono' and 'chrono can wait'.
Well, firstly, the mason hadn't claimed when I placed the vote, and I hadn't even read the claim at that point. Vi isn't voting for me, and I'm not sure why you're trying to claim support from... him?SerialClergyman wrote:Vi and I disagree on reasons to vote leafsnail but we're both doing it anyway, I actually think that's a good sign. He is voting a mason, as well, if anyone's taking note.
Uh... I can't tell if you're calling me town or scum for attacking Parama. Can you clarify, please?Unsight wrote:Leafsnail is an easier read. He hit Parama like a truck, put it in reverse, and did it again. I'd like to think he didn't try the same to me because I'm voting you for non-stupid reasons but I think Parama was just an easier target all-around. You flip scum and it very much looks like chainsawing. Also, not liking the daniel vote at all. If the mason group is telling the truth then we'll know pretty fast. I somehow doubt a mafia team and a werewolf team would let them all live to end game (that would be cool though). I really can't think of a pro-town reason for voting any member of this self-proclaimed mason team.
@278 - I think I have a theory as to why Vezo is doing this. I'd rather not say what it is though.
@288 - I'm guessing this is like the open Monks & Masons setup, where a werewolf mason is possible but not guarenteed.
@292 - Didn't you vote them earlier, askbob?
@300 - Are you seriously suggesting that Seraphim, Daniel and Vezo are a scumteam? No. This is doomed to fail, as it'll attract a nightkill from the opposing scumgroup. Once one of them flips werewolf/ mafia, it's curtains for the other two as well. I'm quite surprised you didn't consider this.
Parama. Would you mind explaining what seems to be a contradiction here?
Parama - ISO 24 wrote:I think vez is lying tbqh. The claim doesn't seem genuine at all.
Sure, seraphim claimed in the meantime, but how does that make it more convincing? After all, if Vezo was scum falseclaiming mason with 2 random people he'd die immediately when they say "Uh, no I'm not". If you thought Vezo was scum with daniel and seraphim, well, how does seraphim's claim change anything?Parama - ISO 25 wrote:I feel sorry for you, stuck with 2 VIs as masonbuddies.
Although I must say, I totally agree with ISO 26 :/.
Chronopie - I want to ask you a fairly simple question - who do you think is scum? I ask as your last 4 posts don't seem to contain any mention of it. Your last two posts especially look active lurky, discussing how stupid the masons are instead of looking for scum.
Vote: askbob. Do you have any scumreads? As far as I can tell, you've just been swearing at people for bad play and, in your last post, voting a lurker (with what seems to be a bandwagon).-
-
Leafsnail Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 753
- Joined: December 31, 2009
So, having skimmed over the thread:
The wagon on nhammen is dumb. What's more, most of the people on him jumped on him with little to no reason. Personally, I read him as town.
Vote: Chronopie. You need death, and you need it today. The way he joined the nhammen wagon is actually hilarious.
Followed immediately by:Chronopie wrote:I agree with Parama and SC here.
unvote, Vote: Nhammen
--
And LMP said that they had been dropping hints, and wanted someone to ask, so I did. Just because I speculated what form they might take at the same time...
And his last post admits he voted nhammen for lack of content in one of his posts. Oh yeah, great reason for pushing a lynch, Chronopie. And of course you shouldn't be expected to actually think for yourself when voting :/.Chronopie wrote:The fact that I'm online is worrisome? and agree with the points I would have made myself, had I been on earlier.
Vote: Chronopie.
Parama has somewhat redeemed himself in my eyes. I disagree with some of his reads, but his reasoning seems genuine, and somehow... I don't see scum intent behind his recent posting.
Askbob is still scum. He's apparently trying to get a claimed Mason Monk (vouched for by 3 other people) lynched. And even so, he hasn't voted since his totally unnecessary "pressure vote" on robotnik.-
-
Leafsnail Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 753
- Joined: December 31, 2009
...I guess it'd be a "safe move" from a scum perspective, but that's how I read it. I don't really care whether Chrono is a "likely lynch" or not - he's scum.Vi wrote:I actually kind of hate Leafsnail 478. The wagon started, built up, and ended while he wasn't around, so it's perfectly safe to generically attack it as a bad move without really doing anything about it except selectively target the most likely lynch to arise from the wagon's collapse. Also, askbob hasn't posted since vezo claimed.
The part about askbob is true, but his apparent willingness to lynch masons is still odd considering his ISO 16, 20 and 21. The point about him having no real scumreads stands.-
-
Leafsnail Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 753
- Joined: December 31, 2009
-
-
Leafsnail Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 753
- Joined: December 31, 2009
Mason = a role that is not mafia. Daniel and Seraphim have both confirmed this.Super Smash Bros. Fan wrote:
Actually, a Mason/Monk can still be one of the scums as well, just that there's a lower possibility of it, since most Masons are town.Leafsnail wrote:SSBF - uh, so even though he can't be a werewolf or a mafia member (the two scum factions in this game) he could still be scum?
Monk = a role that is not a werewolf. Lynchmeplz has confirmed this.
So Vezo is not a mafia member or a werewolf. HE IS NOT SCUM-
-
Leafsnail Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 753
- Joined: December 31, 2009
-
-
Leafsnail Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 753
- Joined: December 31, 2009
-
-
Leafsnail Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 753
- Joined: December 31, 2009
Steady on, I barely know ya .Vi wrote:he's in the umbrella of people I would shamelessly jump on
And... sometimes I prefer to gather my thoughts before posting. Specifically, when it's 1:30 in the morning.
In other news, you're on the same scumteam as chronopie. Either that or you've suffered a stroke within the last 24 hours. I guess you're hoping your ranknames will allow you to get away with this ridiculous behaviour.
Now, if you think I'm scum for doing this, I'd like you to vote me now and give me your reasons for distrusting me. Y'know, vote someone who you think is scum rather than switching back and forth between an easy newb lynch and your backup vote.-
-
Leafsnail Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 753
- Joined: December 31, 2009
Indeed, it's a lot easier to respond to a post made specifically against you than everything that's happened on the thread.Vi wrote:"Gathering your thoughts" only involves responding when your name is called?
If I'm honest... looking back, I'm having trouble seeing any serious points against nhammen.Vi wrote:I've already mentioned how bad it looks that after missing the nhammen wagon time-wise, you generically tut-tutted it while moving onto the obvious following wagon. You've said (since it became cool to dislike the hamwagon) that you had a newbTown read on nhammen. You don't bother mentioning why you think that or why the arguments are weak, just that the wagon is dumb.
Almost all of the points against him stem from Parama's case, which is entirely based on a chronopie/ nhammen scumteam, and considering how quick chronopie was on the wagon, I just don't see it. It's also odd how many of the people don't seem to have even bothered looking at the original Parama case (ie not looking at the one accused of being a scumpartner Chronopie).
I don't think you're scum for voting nhammen - he's acting stupid. It's more the way you've repeatedly changed between distancing yourself from the wagon and pushing it. I mean... you first go on to nhammen for fluff posting, then you jump to sevis for jumping onto the nhammen wagon in a bad way (as if he were to only one), then go back to nhammen for voting someone who isn't likely to have a wagon formed against them (given your previous vote, this actually looks quite funny), then you go BACK to sevis because apparently you've got "cold feet"... in addition to claiming chronopie town for NO reason and saying you'll attack anyone who voted chronopie.Vi wrote:Now really. On one side we have a number of fairly decent arguments for him being scum, and on the other side... your self-righteous word. Which one do you think I'm more likely to consider accurate?
I don't have a problem with votehopping in general, but doing it again and again and again with little to no reason isn't acceptable.
Hence "switching back and forth between an easy newb lynch and your backup vote". It's the fact that you join AND LEAVE the wagon for no reason.Vi wrote:Never mind that I've left the wagon before and after that discussion because I got an honest-Town read from his posts.
It's a lot easier to respond to a single post than it is to respond to other things going on inthread. My initial complaint was that people were bandwagonning for no reason, but you randomly leaving the wagon, randomly calling chronopie town AND randomly saying you'll attack anyone who votes chronopie is a whole lot worse.Vi wrote:Which nicely leads to the other point in this most recent post of yours. I call you out for posting elsewhere onsite - and you have been posting elsewhere, in multiple places over the course of the last several hours - and you tell me that you're gathering thoughts. But apparently your thoughts only seem to include attacking the person bringing to light that you've been hanging around the site all night. I don't think this is an honest attack at all, especially since your mention of me going back and forth between nhammen and Sevis has already been laid out plainly inthread whereas your initial complaint about the wagon was concerned with people who joined the wagon for no reason at all. Those thoughts you were preparing were not only narrow, they were shallow as well.
All in all... it feels far more like you're lining up mislynches than trying to find scum. You're calling a lot of people probably scum, and then leaving them alone, without any real pressure, as if to return to them later so you can strike them down more easily.
Heh, another noncommital reason to unvote, another noncommital vote. In spite of all the "probscum" and "obvscum" you've mentioned throught the thread, you vote someone you're not sure of. Brilliant.Vi wrote:Since Sevis-scum doesn't seem very popular today I'll go ahead and give you what you asked for.
'Not sure if you as scum would go out of your way to stir up trouble like this, but Ididsay earlier that you were on the hatelist, so~
(L-12)Unvote: Sevis
Vote: Leafsnail
That said, I'm not sure if it's worth lynching you... the enemy scumgroup will probably take you out fairly quickly.
---
Is Chronopie attempting to pretend to look town yet? No? In which case, he still needs to die. The only content he's posted recently seems to be "LYNCH ALL ROLEBLOCKERS"... applied to a wagon started on the premise that he was scumbuddies with nhammen.
---
Parama's case on foilist is solid. Foilist actualy says "I was blatant rolefishing" so... yeah. As far as I can tell, Foilist was trying so hard to paint parama scum that he actually began attacking himself. It's reaching to the point of hilarity. Also, he seems confused as to whether he's trying to call nhammen scum or town.-
-
Leafsnail Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 753
- Joined: December 31, 2009
But he doesn't even seem like the worst... and why go back to him twice?Vi wrote:First bolded: I have but one vote.
Vi wrote:Second bolded: Kind of a flimsy caricature of my reason but it's not like you're reading.
This is the only reason I can find for your second voting of nhammen. I assumed any previous reasons were invalid as you declared him town in your previous unvoting of him.Vi wrote:About what nhammen has said since SerialClergyman posted - He's still not going anywhere. Of all the people he could have voted for more information, he chose pman, who is least likely to gain a wagon (or directly give information). Lots of attempts at reads, none of which are particularly committal. It's scumhunting at its most ineffective.
Third is fair enough... I guess I got a similar read on him.
You did SAY it, but it seems like a bizarre coincidence that almost everyone you find scummy is on one player you've just declared town :/.Vi wrote:Fourth bolded: Intuition is a reason, albeit not a convincing one for others. I DO know that I said I was using Chronopie's wagon as a catch-all basin for the people I found scummy because they all happened to be there, rather than because they were on Chronopie.
Hmm... pretty fair response, actually. Even if your scumlist seems to be moving far too fast for anyone to keep up with :/. Also, are you going to be trying to start a wagon on one of your scumspects at some point?Vi wrote:*I only have one vote. It's hard to put "real pressure" on five people simultaneously. However, I have made attacks on the suspicious players' posts as they've made them, so there's no ambiguity.
*It's Day 1 in a 24-player game; 13 people have to agree to lynch (more specifically, 12 people have to agree with me).
*Not everyone agrees with me, and given the scumhunting techniques going on ITT not everyone is GOING to agree with me. Given that it IS Day 1 and not everyone I believe is scum will turn out to be scum, this is not necessarily a bad thing. (see: Mafia Dodgeball)
*History shows that more often than not a VI (of any alignment) gets lynched D1 in Large Games because it's the kind of player people can agree to lynch. (see: New Age Mafia, Mafia 87, Caught in the Crossfire) And that's fine; it's D1. However, I can press on the wagons that I believe are more likely to hit scum.
*All of the people I think are scum have zero votes on them, so any one of them I pick is the largest bandwagon to push. Similarly, I don't agree with the foilist accusations and I'm presently in wait-and-see mode for Chronopie, so I'm not on those wagons.
Competing scumgroups, experienced player.Vi wrote:Why would I be taken out at night fairly quickly?
---
@621 - yes, this is full, stupid overdefence mode from foilist. Parama's point in valid - foilist is calling Parama scum but mystery refusing to vote and deflecting to chronopie. I love his reason.
Even with all the accusations of misrepping and reaching, this is apparently a good reason to hold off him :/.Foilist wrote:@Parama: You have certainly made my scum list, but I'm not going to vote you at this time. At least your trying to get people lynched.
---
Chronopie is still scum, although probably not aligned with Foilist.-
-
Leafsnail Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 753
- Joined: December 31, 2009
637 makes me feel better about Vi... actions seem to make sense now. Phew.
-.-foilist wrote:Parama has been tunneling rather hard on nhammen with a poor case. This could be a scum move or a VI move, I'm not really sure. He doesn't respond logically to posts, he just uses emotion.
I don't like this post. It looks sortof like it's trying to undermine Parama without getting directly involved. In fact, over the last couple of pages, Midnight looks like he's attempting to kill discussion.Midnight's Sorrow wrote:...sometimes logic doesn't need evidence to disprove it. Confused Ever hear of common sense? Do you really need a 1,2,3 A,B,C explanation on what common sense means, and how it pertains to your...'logic'?
Foilist is still being seriously scummy, and refusing to give a read on Parama. And he's just OMGUSing madly.
@675 - why do people keep analysing the actions of a basically confirmed townie... it's getting annoying, and is fluff.
679 is retarded stuff from Sevis. It looks like scum ass-covering.
680 sees foilist basically admitting to OMGUSing all those voting him by describing his "cases against them".
Chronopie is still so fecking useless. STATE A SUSPICION NOW FFS
In short:
FoS: Foilist
FoS: Mightnight
FoS: Sevis.
Strangle: Chronopie-
-
Leafsnail Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 753
- Joined: December 31, 2009
Actually, you're wrong.foilist13 wrote:
This town has too many VIs.leafsnail wrote:Foilist is still being seriously scummy, and refusing to give a read on Parama. And he's just OMGUSing madly.
@675 - why do people keep analysing the actions of a basically confirmed townie... it's getting annoying, and is fluff.
679 is retarded stuff from Sevis. It looks like scum ass-covering.
680 sees foilist basically admitting to OMGUSing all those voting him by describing his "cases against them".
1) OMGUS by definition needs to happen after someone has already voted you. Everyone voting me did so AFTER I made any attack on them. So try and explain to me exactly how what I did was OMGUS through any possible stretch of logic.
You called Parama a VI, and he called you scum. You then... started calling him scum afterwards? I dunno, it's kinda difficult to tell. In any case, you randomly dismantled his case and only accused him after he accused you.-
-
Leafsnail Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 753
- Joined: December 31, 2009
I like the way you're OMGUSing right now. Clearly you have a good sense of irony. If it's not a joke, though, you're obvscum who deserves to die immediately. I strongly suggest you clarify your position.
And you never threw out the possibility of Parama being scum before he accused you. All you said was
NOTHING ABOUT HIM BEING SCUM.foilist wrote:You didn't make a good case, and you're a VI by mine.-
-
Leafsnail Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 753
- Joined: December 31, 2009
Actually, I don't particularly care if scum puts me on their fail-list.Foilist wrote:4) Leafsnail - Unfounded accusation/misrepresentation. (I'm sure this won't sit well with you, but I'll explain when I'm done here)
Sorry, I will turn my mindreading capacities on when reading your posts in future. Because it is completely far to accuse someone of misrepping something you were secretly thinking. And of course, town has no reason to say what they thing of things.Foilist wrote:@Leafsnail: Your accusation against me comes down to nothing. You have yet to point out anywhere where I've OMGUSed. Now you've resorted to saying I am what? Making false claims about my previous stances? You have no idea what my stances are unless I tell you. I found Parama scummy. Did I say that? No.
"I have given up trying to make proper arguments, and am instead bringing in a definition"Foilist wrote:Oh My God yoU Suck "for voting me." The phrase means that you are voting someone for voting you. That does not mean that voting the person who just attacked you is OMGUS.
Let me explain.
You have provided reasons with each vote, I'll agree.
But I am saying that the motivation behind your attack on me is pure OMGUS. Nothing more, nothing less. "Someone is attacking me, I'll weaken him by attacking him back!".
I love the way your biggest defence is not presenting any stances.-
-
Leafsnail Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 753
- Joined: December 31, 2009
You can claim it as a coincidence all you want... but you don't seem to be prepared to accuse anyone of being scum firmly until they're on you.foilist wrote:Then we will have to agree to disagree. You'll notice that I attacked you through analyzing your posts and pointing out what I found scummy. Granted, you attacking me is what brought my attention to you in the first place, but it did not drive my attack against you.
The first part is WIFOM... I never said you OMGUS'd everyone attacking you. Indeed, part of the problem was that you were using nhammen's case against you to try and undermine Parama (on the aspect of rolefishing, mainly).foilist wrote:If I were a scummy OMGUS player I would have gone straight after nhammen when he attacked me. I did not find him scummy however, I simply thought he was misreading or particularly dense. I did not jump on his wagon, I told him he had nothing to add to the game.
Now, I'd like everyone to look at foilist's style of defence. Instead of trying to prove he's town, he's trying to show he isn't OMGUSing. Why? he wants to undermine my case, and add someone to his bizarre scumlist that barely seems to accuse people of being scum.
Incidentally
Names. Reasons. Now.foilist wrote:There are other people I'm not fond of. They simply haven't made my top 4.
Completely fair point, I explained poorly.The Goat wrote:Wait...what? That's not what happened. You didn't ask him to respond to everything that's happened in the thread. You just called out Leafsnail for posting in other threads, but not this one. He responded shortly thereafter, saying that he sometimes prefers to gather his thoughts before posting...but then states it's easier to respond when someone posts about him.
@Leafsnail...if it's easier, then why did you need to gather your thoughts? Also...if it's easier to respond when you're being directly accused...were you being directly accused in the other threads you were posting in when Vi called you out in the first place? Finally...why did you selectively quote Vi's initial accusation? It's not as though it was huge.
The thought gathering was looking over the thread in general. I tend to have at least one post a day where I respond to and comment on posts that interest me. I generally make these at some time in the evening. I was gathering my thoughts for the next one of these posts.
However, I prefer to make a more immediate response if someone addresses me directly. Hence me responding to Vi.
I believe the other threads I was posting in were actually non game, and it's a lot easier to copy/ paste a role pm from an old game than it is to respond to a thread.
I selectively quoted because... I dunno, I do that sometimes. Would you regard it as scummy?
Also, with regards to your next paragraph, do you really regard me as "lurking"?
@721 - Ok, I think I'll have to make up a new term for these purposes. To be unoriginal, let's call it "Oh My God! You're Useless!". As far as I can tell, this is a clear OMGYU.
I don't see any reason for you to declare SC as useless other than the fact that he's accusing you. Indeed, he agrees with 2 out of 3 of your reads.-
-
Leafsnail Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 753
- Joined: December 31, 2009
Uh, for some reason I forgot about the last two pages in my previous post.
Are you gonna do ANYTHING other than undermine what other people say?Midnight's Sorrow wrote:@Unsight: Someone who doesn't listen to what others are saying. Kinda do there own thing, screw everyone else. ....I think -shrugs-
So you're gonna randomly throw together a case on people you don't seem think are scum because Vi told you to?Sevis wrote:Vi, I have no idea what I could possibly say to convince you I'm not scum. You seem to be implying I should tunnel one of the more experienced players. I'll try to get a case together on either you or leafsnail, I think.
:/
Question - who do you think is scum?
Question 2 - why does what Vi said suddenly bring your attention over to different players?
GIVE SOME MOTHERFUCKING SCUMREADSChronopie wrote:It's called having a town read. That and seeing where Parama's points are coming from, in a 'I could see those points being made as town' perspective, and agreeing with them.
NOWNOWNOWNOWNOWNOWNOWNOWNOWNOWNOW
---
I'd be down for a wagon on Sevis if he doesn't answer my questions well. Chronopie too, but apparently his active lurking is working on everyone else.-
-
Leafsnail Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 753
- Joined: December 31, 2009
-
-
Leafsnail Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 753
- Joined: December 31, 2009
No selfhammering if you're town. Seeing who is prepared to hammer and who isn't prepared to hammer is useful information.
Although, since you're scum, you're probably just telling your buddies it's time for one of them to hammer you for town cred.
Well, you did.Vi wrote:
While I'm grateful one person listened, I don't think I was referring to you per seLeafsnail 808 wrote:Complying with Vi's request to STFU a bit.
Which is a fair point. Hence the quieting down.Vi wrote:But I'm seeing a lot of you/Parama/Leafsnail/whoever pushing cases I honestly think are wrongsighted and much back-and-forth catfighting about it while the people I mentioned previously scoot by. It is helping me gain a read on YOU, but I already have a read on you and don't particularly need another one.
Midnight's Sorrow's posts are still looking insanely passive. As in, he only ever comments on arguments, not people. It's starting to get wearing.-
-
Leafsnail Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 753
- Joined: December 31, 2009
-
-
Leafsnail Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 753
- Joined: December 31, 2009
Man, people are suddenly prepared to say a lot more when the noose is around their neck. I think we may be able to apply this principle to politics.
Chonopie's analysis makes no sense... he writes a lot on me, and I don't see why he doesn't FoS me considering how much he's disliked my attacks on him throughout the day. In fact, he seems to rag at everyone on his wagon and then FoS/ vote 5 random people from it.
He also calls Foilist's vote on him "reasoned", which I feel requires further examination tomorrow.-
-
Leafsnail Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 753
- Joined: December 31, 2009
Mod - if two kills are performed on the same target, would the kill flavour change?
I seem to remember reading somewhere that the more dramatic kill method tends to be the one shown (ie if someone's ripped to pieces you don't notice a bullet wound in them). It's quite possible both factions went for him.
Did you actually think chronopie was scum when you hammered him? If so, roughly how sure were you of this?Dr. Robotnik wrote:Chrono hasn't put up a good defense, and he's digging a deeper hole, trying to claim that more than half his wagon is scummy. Vannilia town? Maybe. We'll see.
Vote:Chronopie
Vote: Midnight's Sorrow. Your ISO made my head hurt... almost EVERYTHING you posted is irrelevant fluff, and none of your posts seem to be even vaguely connected to each other. You also jump on the chrono wagon for no reason at all.
You are pretty much the most active-lurkery player I have ever seen.-
-
Leafsnail Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 753
- Joined: December 31, 2009
I wouldn't say you've posted the least content, but I would say you've posted the most posts with none, and the most posts masquerading as content. Heck, even this defence is pretty fluffy. Anyone who doubts this should simply read your ISO, and say what percentage of your posts contain tangible content.Midnight's Sorrow wrote:
Out of all the people this could apply to...you choose me?? Why?Leafsnail wrote:
Vote: Midnight's Sorrow. Your ISO made my head hurt... almost EVERYTHING you posted is irrelevant fluff, and none of your posts seem to be even vaguely connected to each other. You also jump on the chrono wagon for no reason at all.
You are pretty much the most active-lurkery player I have ever seen.
And I do believe I gave a reason for that vote. It seems it just hasn't meet your qualifications.
My bad! I'll do better next time! /dripping sarcasm~
As for posting reasons for that vote:
Your deflection ("Why me?") is also noted.Midnight's Sorrow wrote:I am happy with one as well.~
Unvote
Vote:CronoPie
So what is the question?Midnight's Sorrow wrote:That is what I am trying to do, and why I voted Sevis. The one person Vi was adamant about being scum.Whether or not I believed Vi then, is not the question, seeing as we all know now that he was town.Whether or not Vi was killed because of that very reason to make Sevis look bad is not the question either. Vi was the only one to die last phase, and sanzing any protection role, we can assume that he was killed by the Werewolves.
No, your attacking the attacker defence will NOT work against a confirmed townie. The last sentence strikes me as especially irrelevant.Midnight's Sorrow wrote:WIFOM. You are aware that my wagon started pretty fast(and you not giving a reason for one), over something that could equate to about half of the players on here. Are you also aware that if it wasn't for the fact that you were pretty much confirmed town thanks to being both a monk and mason, that you probably would have been lynched?
Your terribad deflection is, once again, noted.-
-
Leafsnail Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 753
- Joined: December 31, 2009
-.-Midnight's Sorrow wrote:Leaf:
Your terribad jumping on the smallest things and obvioustryingto make it into something bigger then it is, when that very small thing could be very easily applied to other people, when ther are probably more BIGGER issues that may or may not be trying to be covered up in this...VERY obvious ploy, isverydully noted.~
Is it possible for you to defend in a way that isn't just undermining your attacker?
You don't even bother to answer a direct question, for Christ's sake. And you deflect randomly. What is the small thing, and who else is guilty of it?-
-
Leafsnail Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 753
- Joined: December 31, 2009
Actually, I have been making accusations and TRYING TO FIND SCUM.Midnight's Sorrow wrote:Leaf:
Is the only thing you can do is vote people onKettle calls Pot Blackreasoning's?? You haven't been so hot either in the department that your accusing me of. Maybe you should ISO yourself before you start flying accusations off at a whim.
You, on the other hand, have been attacking arguments and occasionally joining a bandwagon. Heck, even now you aren't seriously accusing me, are you? You're just trying to get me to go away.
This is exactly the kindof thing I'm talking about.Midnight's Sorrow wrote:I think I've said this before on this thread, (to you even! )but if I'm able to undermineanything, then the thing I'm undermining is faulty at best, and bs at the worst of times. Can't undermine something that has weight and credibility Both of which you have lacked in your 'attacks'
[quote="Midnight's Sorrow]I didn't avoid any direct question that I could see. -scratches head- Oh are you talking about that question that asked what was the question? [/quote]
-.-
[quote="Midnight's Sorrow]To answer, I think the question should be, why someone is able to vote someone for shotty reasons, and expect anything that comes from such shoty reasons o make into a 'solid deal' I've said before in this thread too.B.S only begets more B.S.[/quote]
We better lynch you before it spreads, then.
Dear god, this post makes me want to bash my head on a table. Being CONFIRMED AS TOWN is not deflecting.Midnight's Sorrow wrote:
If the shoe fits dear. Your deflection from your votes in D1 was being claimed as a mason by your mason buddy and later on to be a monk as well by your monk buddy.
Kettle calls Pot Blackin it's purest form here.
Post 925, on the other hand, is pretty funny. He yells not to make big deals out of little things while telling us to start analysing nightkills. I mean, Jesus.
It's funny - you posted more content in the last 14 hours than you did in the entirety of day one. Sure, it's all BS deflecting content, but content nonetheless.
I wonder... if a bandwagon forms on you, will you continue to attack everyone voting you?
Incidentally, Midnight's Sorrow, who's scum and why?-
-
Leafsnail Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 753
- Joined: December 31, 2009
-
-
Leafsnail Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 753
- Joined: December 31, 2009
Quoted for motherfucking truth.The guy who's posted 85 useless posts wrote: We should probably look hard at those that seem to be trying hard as well as those that arn't posting much.~
Firstly, stop blindly following Vi.Midnight's Sorrow wrote:Vi also said some great things about you as well too yo~ Razz In fact two of his vote changes went to you~ I can bring those posts up if you want~
Secondly, he later said he wasn't sure about me. So you'll have to make up your own mind, yes?
The way you attack everyone on your wagon implies it.Midnight's Sorrow wrote:Because if I said Ves and Mr Verbose(SSBF) were the ones I thought was town...wouldn't common sense say that I had a scum or neutral read on the others??
-.-Midnight's Sorrow wrote:If you agree with me about Sevis...then why are you not voting him??
No. Your wagon started because of your constant active lurking and bandwagon jumping. Your deflection and undermining of all attackers helped it continue.Midnight's Sorrow wrote:I'm seriously getting the gut feeling my wagon started because I voted Sevis, being the first one to notice Vi's adamant attacks on Sevis in D-1 and bringing it up. Reasons that seem like the grasping of straws, and very convenient~
I'm sorry that you received a scum aligned role pm.Midnight's Sorrow wrote:Im so sorry that I rarely make big wall posts like you do. Im sorry that I sometimes feel that only a few lines, and maybe a few paragraphs are all that's needed sometimes. I'm sorry I don't scum hunt the same way you do. I can't believe what I was thinking trying to be an individual in here and make my own way in this low some world. I'm sorry that have to defend my self from the great onslaught of stupid that is my wagon, I'm so lost a to what to do, your post made me smile~ Im sorry that my contribution is not good enough for you. I bow to you good sir Sad
Now die.-
-
Leafsnail Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 753
- Joined: December 31, 2009
Half of the battle is scumhunting.Midnight's Sorrow wrote:And pray tell me now Leaf. How is what your doing now scumhunting? Your tunneling pure and simple. You don't even seem all that bothered with trying to find scum else where. As long as you get rid of your annoyance right?
The other half is making sure the scum you find dangles from the end of a rope.
Nice AtE. I like the way you say all this while not even voting me.I'm kinda sorry that you seem so sure that I'm scum for such fail reasons that you conveniently made of me. I'm kinda sorry as well that you seem to have been fishing for "better" reasons to be voting me. And I'm kinda sorry that I'm gonna call you out for if I get lynched today. Its not gonna look good for you.~
I don't need to "fish" for reasons - all of your posts are throwing them out by the barrelfull.
You seem to be torn between calling me scum and the realization that I'm not gonna let you wriggle out of the noose this easily.
So give your own reasons for your suspicions. Especially on Sevis.And as for the Vi thing. I'm simply analyzing what he said about people. He was town. So his words should hold useful for something. I mean....I don't think he kicked the bucket for no reason at all.~ And yeah, I can most certainly make my own assumptions. I'm not as dumb as you make me out to be-
-
Leafsnail Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 753
- Joined: December 31, 2009
Fair enough. I believe they are perfectly adequate reasons to vote someone at the start of a day.Midnight's Sorrow wrote:How about we actually, you know, acknowledge the fact that the reasons that my wagon stared were for active lurking and 'bandwaggoning'. Let's all agree here shall we?
Firstly, I'm not inexperienced scum.Midnight's Sorrow wrote:Let's also agree that those two are very convenient reason to vote someone. Reasons most inexperienced scum jump at most of the time.~
Secondly, you keep using "convenient". Well, uh, yes, they are. On the other hand, you have been both active lurking and bandwagonning. You do not deny this. You are scum, no matter how "convenient" that fact may be for anyone.
Sure.Midnight's Sorrow wrote:You made your vote on me for those reasons, lets agree with that hmm?
Add "painfully obvious deflection" to the list.Midnight's Sorrow wrote:Now that we agree with those. Lets move on to the rest of it shall we~ Two people voted for no reason what so ever. Bandwaggoning. You know? Like what I was accused of *cough* TIMEATER *cough* So why are they not getting heat as well? You aware that most of the people arn't even here yet, and have yet to post.
You don't even know what you're accusing me of anymore, do you? "OMG! YOU WANT TO KILL SOMEONE! ONLY SCUM WANT TO KILL PEOPLE!"Midnight's Sorrow wrote:Don't know why you assume so much, Leaf, especially on as little as you have.~ In what instance is it cute nor funny for a townie role to say things like "Your scum! DIE!" with such clarity and vigor Usually the people that scream those those things are scum and/or VI's. Are you a VI Leaf? I hope not
:/
On the other hand, he's been trying to look helpful while not doing anything (scumtell at any level of experience) and has been deflecting, undermining attackers and all sorts of other horrible stuff. In short, scum.Faraday wrote:the midnight sorrow bandwagon is interesting btw. the intiial reasons were b/c he didn't do fuck all? same could be applied to the guy people are currently switching too. so yeah.-
-
Leafsnail Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 753
- Joined: December 31, 2009
-
-
Leafsnail Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 753
- Joined: December 31, 2009
Now. And add "show where Leafsnail has been misrepping you" to the list of things to prepare.foilist13 wrote:@Leafsnail: Nice misrepresenting. I'm looking. You'll get a list when I'm ready to post one.
Maybe. Doesn't change Midnight's Sorrow's alignment though.nhammen wrote:*cough* askbob *cough*
No.nhammen wrote:Ummm? Isn't that the whole point of a defense? I don't understand this. At all.
The whole point of defending is to show that you didn't do the things you are accused of, not to make weak accusations against your attacker to get them to go away. Simply making accusations against anyone who votes you is not a townie thing to do at all.
Deflection is noted. And I don't see why this is a defence - it's not like there's only one scum left.nhammen wrote:And you think SGR hasn't? What about askbob?
It's not the exact same thing, firstly. I felt Parama was reaching for something so early in the game, wheras Midnight's Sorrow's "defence" seems to be built on insulting me/ saying I'm attacking me too hard/ calling me scum/ calling me a VI/ saying that active lurking and bandwagonning aren't scumtells/ deflection (pick a random one from this list).nhammen wrote:undermining attackers isn't scummy. In fact, it can be very pro-Town. As long as you scumhunt as well... But I find undermining attackers by itself to be more of a newbtell than a scumtell. Especially considering that you have done this in the past: especially your ISO 8, where you undermine someone's case by calling it reaching. And yet, when Midnight does the exact same thing you have done, you call it scummy.
He can go ahead and do it if he's seriously accusing me of being scum, but he isn't. As soon as I say I'm not responding to him anymore, he just says "great!" and doesn't bother to say anything else.
Now that you call my attention to it, yes, definately. He's bandwagonning like nobody's business (switching to Midnight's Sorrownhammen wrote:@Leafsnail At one point you stated you were suspicious of askbob. Are you still suspicious of him?veryquickly, and then jumping to SGR even though nhammen's roleblock is far from conclusive). And wait, didn't he think nhammen was scum anyway?
Hey, askbob: Do you still think nhammen is scum? If not, why?
I voted midnight because of the 3 pages of nonsense in his ISO. It looked extremely active-lurky to me, so I put a vote on him, since he's received no attention so far.nhammen wrote:If so, why are you more suspicious of midnight than askbob?
Since then, it's his reaction that's kept me on him, and kept me thinking he's the scummiest player around.
Because he hasn't posted once since I expressed suspicion of him. So yeah, I'm still just as suspicious as I was when I first wrote so.nhammen wrote:At one point you stated you were suspicious of sevis. Are you still suspicious of him?
Same reason as above. But Sevis really does need to come out to play. Now.nhammen wrote:If so, why are you more suspicious of midnight than sevis?
He hasn't really caught my attention before, to be honest. Actually, I'm kinda curious as to why you blocked him, considering the last thing you said about him before the night wasnhammen wrote:What is your opinion of SGR?nhammen wrote:Well nuts. I tried... I still consider you to be slightly scummy...
Yes and no.nhammen wrote:If a player uses OMGUS, is this a scumtell? Why?
Voting someone who votes you for bad reasons isn't necessarily a scummy thing to do. Nor is properly attacking someone who voted you in the past.
On the other hand, persistently focusing only on those who attack you, and then ignoring them after they leave you is very scummy.-
-
Leafsnail Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 753
- Joined: December 31, 2009
-
-
Leafsnail Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 753
- Joined: December 31, 2009
-
-
Leafsnail Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 753
- Joined: December 31, 2009
Elaborate and explain why the other accusations are wrong.animorpherv1 wrote:
becauseLeafsnail wrote:
Would you mind explaining this sweeping assertion?animorpherv1 wrote:So, I find Midnight wagon has no real evidence.one of yourmain points is "your posting fluff" which can be one (just as eaily) by both sides.-
-
Leafsnail Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 753
- Joined: December 31, 2009
So you're using deflection as a defence as well? Great.animorpherv1 wrote:This post (Made by Midnight) expresses my feelings about the wagon.
Midnight's Sorrow wrote:Leaf:
Your terribad jumping on the smallest things and obvioustryingto make it into something bigger then it is, when that very small thing could be very easily applied to other people, when ther are probably more BIGGER issues that may or may not be trying to be covered up in this...VERY obvious ploy, isverydully noted.~
I don't see how anyone can call posting basically no content throughout the whole of day one a "small thing", but hey, what do I know.-
-
Leafsnail Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 753
- Joined: December 31, 2009
Everyone loves outguessing the mod and rolefishing!Lowell wrote:With 24 players and 1 NK, I'd say there was probably at least TWO kills blocked last night, not just one.
So if nhammen "blocked" someone, I'd say it's a good guess that person has a killing role.
(In case someone needs me to explain, "Hey, SGR, are you a vig?"
Lowell wrote:Sorry, vote sgr. I don't see why we don't test this out.Lowellis scum.
Oh... you mean it in the looser sense of indirectly lowering their position. Ok, fair enough. What I meant was simply attacking the attacker to make their case on you seem weaker.nhammen wrote:What weak accusations to make them go away? Where did this come from? I said that undermining your attacker is the whole point of defense. And your response says, no, it is saying you didn't do what you are accused of. Which... wait for it... undermines the attacker.
It was used against you in a big way... part of why I never joined your bandwagon.nhammen wrote:Not deflection. Not a defense. This is independent of whether midnight is scum. Many players believe that attacking one player for something, but not attacking others for the same thing is scummy. Heck! Parama used that as his case against me. I am trying to find out how sincerely you are pushing this, so that I can tell if it is scummy. Attempt to discredit this evidence is noted.
I wanted my full focus on M S (for reaction reasons) at least briefly, since he had no attention at all day one.nhammen wrote:The reason I asked these questions is because you completely dropped these cases to push the case on midnight. You can attack more than one player at a time. So I was wondering what the reason was for dropping these cases.
See: foilist.nhammen wrote:Well, you like to accuse players of OMGUS, but I haven't seen anybody do the version of OMGUS that you call scummy.
I don't think I've used it as the basis for any serious case other than M_S or foilist.
vezo wrote:One guy from each mafia group should claim their team so we know if there is a mafia werewolf
No, it'd be like being a Mafia Townie. It just doesn't work.
1055 - THANK YOU. And MS responds with an excellent fluff post.
Timeater - firstly, what makes you so sure nhammen is town? Secondly, what makes you so sure he blocked the mafiakill?
Actually, since my read on foilist from yesterday stands, this is a very tempting proposition.Parama wrote:Everyone, stop voting Socrates and lynch foilist.
I want to see what he has to say for himself today.-
-
Leafsnail Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 753
- Joined: December 31, 2009
If he's lying about being town, there's a good chance he lied about blocking SGR, yes? And thus your case would crumble to nothing.Timeater wrote:leaf wrote:Timeater - firstly, what makes you so sure nhammen is town? Secondly, what makes you so sure he blocked the mafiakill?
Did I say he was town?
What makes you so sure he didnt?
I'm not sure he didn't - just in a closed game with 22 players left alive there are plenty of other ways to stop a kill.-
-
Leafsnail Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 753
- Joined: December 31, 2009
I answered both your questions. I did absolutely nothing of the sort.Timeater wrote:Do often put words in other people's mouths, Leaf?
You're right, scum would never try to get a townie lynched! Perish the thought.Timeater wrote:Crackaddict logic.
DoctorTimeater wrote:Like what?
Roleblocker (possible if nhammen is lying)
Jailkeeper
Kill-Immune role
Delayer
No kill to frame SGR
Come to mind most readily.-
-
Leafsnail Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 753
- Joined: December 31, 2009
Foilist's last post makes me completely comfortable with a foilist bandwagon.Vote: Foilist. Look how he never does anything except write long posts about how he's refuted all accusations of being overdefensive. Heck, he completely forgot about me after I unvoted him. And a lovely bit of deflection in the middle there.
I haven't forgotten about you, Midnight's Sorrow.
Lowell is a good alternative lynch. This definately looks like scum trying to force a lynch through... or possibly rolefishing for a vig.Lowell wrote:But we're still left with someone claiming to have roleblocked someone else and in the process leaving us with waaaaay fewer NKs than standard in a game this size. Right? I'm not willing to watch the socrates wagon die down. His is the only lynch that makes sense.
In any case, Socrates is holding up well. I don't see any real reason to lynch him.-
-
Leafsnail Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 753
- Joined: December 31, 2009
Foilist is still obvious for his mad overdefence and the fact he only focuses on his accusers. Post 1126 is hilariously desperate.
Lowell is also probably scum. Nhammen could've done that since he was about to get lynched yesterday... could be indirect defence of foilist?
Timeater is on the same team as foilist. Note the lack of connection with foilist and the vague "attack" on socrates.-
-
Leafsnail Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 753
- Joined: December 31, 2009
I answered your question - nhammen was about to be lynched. If you're about to be lynched, you'll claim anything.
I love the way you accuse me of making unfounded accusations while suddenly switching to me with no other reasons. Really nicely done.
And I don't get accused until I vote you. Would it be possible to get some non-lame, non-OMGUSing scum ITT?-
-
Leafsnail Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 753
- Joined: December 31, 2009
I suppose I could indulge you for now.Timeater wrote:*** Can we play the I continue to fail at chainsaw defence game? ***
Code: Select all
1. Foilist 2. Timeater 3. Midnight's Sorrow
Seriously, why the FUCK did I move to the top of your scumlist just because I said you were scum?-
-
Leafsnail Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 753
- Joined: December 31, 2009
I did post my top 3 suspects... which you'd know if you actually read my posts.Timeater wrote:Actually Leaf, I've considered you scummy since like page 6.
My request is pretty simple, I don't see the harm in posting their top three suspects. Why the resistance? Why so scared? Just do it.
For those who haven't yet, please post your top three suspects.
You said something about me in ISO post 10, but you seemed to accept my answer in ISO post 11 (yeah, it was just a misunderstanding on my behalf). You then say nothing about me until post 35, but this doesn't seem particularly aggressive. Perhaps 36 was, but you don't actually accuse me... then you ignore me apart from one question until post 43, where you vote me. So no, I don't accept that you've considered me scummy since page 6.-
-
Leafsnail Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 753
- Joined: December 31, 2009
-
-
Leafsnail Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 753
- Joined: December 31, 2009
Be mildly dissapointed.Parama wrote:SORRY LEAFSNAIL I COMMENTED ON FOILIST'S LIST WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO ABOUT IT?
As suspected, Timeater didn't flip the fuck out over foilist failing his test in the same way he did when he failed to see the three suspicions I posted.
Bullshit detected: nhammen isn't a lurker. Logically, if "The lurkers" was your third suspicion, then your third suspicion should be the lurker you regard as worst.foilist13 wrote:1) Parama
2) leafsnail
3) nhammen
You've provided "reasons" (I use the word extremely loosely here) in the form of "It will provide more information if he's town". Well... no, it won't. All it will tell us is that there was a roleblock on Socrates. And the way you phrase it doesn't make it seem like you suspect him at all. I smell a chainlynch attempt here.-
-
Leafsnail Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 753
- Joined: December 31, 2009
Timeater wrote:leaf wrote:As suspected, Timeater didn't flip the fuck out over foilist failing his test in the same way he did when he failed to see the three suspicions I posted.
Dear god you are the master of misrep. Have I flipped out at anyone so far concerning listing their top 3 suspects? No. So what basis do you have for this premise? None.
There.Timeater wrote:
Heh. Still not answering questions are we? You would rather make predatory accusations like you have been most of the game coupled garbled misinformation? Oh you would? Ok.Leafsnail wrote:Timeater is on the same team as foilist. Note the lack of connection with foilist and the vague "attack" on socrates.
Vote: Leafsnail
Socrates is obviously fighting for his life. Are you all so keen to politely forget SGR?
Anyways, if you must - go ahead, lynch foilist (I am of the opinion Leaf is a better lynch, obviously).
It wont matter that he'd(foilist) be a victim of a feedback loop of non-information and accusation.His tunnel-vision inquisitors will be put to the blade for their scuminess soon enough.
Also, I love how hard you were defending foilist in this quote.
???Leafsnail wrote:Right, but I was asking again and asking everyone, obviously. (Note that he later lists his top three like everyone else.)
But you went over 30 posts without accusing me in any way... how can you say you were suspicious of me all that time over something you'd accepted and moved on from? If you're so insistent that's the truth, why were you hiding your suspicions away until I accused you of being scum?Leafsnail wrote:If you haven't noticed, I wasn't quite active for a good portion of the game. Graduation and all that jazz. I don't have to scream to the heavens I think you are scummy for it to be so. I know what I know and truth is truth. Do think that I care if you accept what I think or not?
I addressed every point in it, so I'm not sure what you mean by this. In addition, you haven't explained why lurkers are suddenly a-ok rather than the scum of the earth.foilist wrote:@leafsnail: You're a moron. Read the damn post.
Also, gotta love scum that insults everyone who's got their read on him right.
And I was supposed to infer all that from your post? Wow. I'm obviously a moron for not having some kind of ESP.1253 wrote:Waffle waffle waffle
And you still don't say why you think him scum, or why your animosity to lurkers is gone. Great.-
-
Leafsnail Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 753
- Joined: December 31, 2009
Timeater wrote:Doesn't it seem like Leafsnail is perpetually bending the truth to suit his own arguments and accusations?Timeater wrote:2) Your first post. I took it as more than just a mistake on your part. It seemed like an over-eager attempt to discredit me.
You made over 30 posts in this time. Why wouldn't you be able to say anything about me in them even though I was your strongest scumread?Timeater wrote:I didn't want to make a big deal of it at the time because I wasn't around to do so.
Timeater wrote:And ad-hom attacks are not ok.Sample from foilist wrote:@leafsnail: You're a moron.Timeater wrote:1) I honestly dont think foilist has made that many mistakes this game.
Also, look at this gem from foilist earlier.
You two are hilariously obvious scumbuddies.foilist wrote:When read carefully, Timeater actually comes off as a very intelligent player. His sarcasm and humor have led me not to take him very seriously up to this point, coupled with the fact that he tends to lurk and hasn't seriously gone after any players yet, makes him seem terribly scummy off the bat.-
-
Leafsnail Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 753
- Joined: December 31, 2009
I didn't say it did. I just said it makes the two of you ridiculously obvious scumbuddies.foilist13 wrote:What exactly about that quote of me shows a town read of Timeater?
This is only true if there's one mafia and one werewolf, and the people who are already dead have a chance of being antimillers .foilist wrote:to my best approximation, they each have a 1/24 chance of being scum, though that is not taking into account the fact that vezopiraka is confirmed.
And please can we lynch obvscum foilist or Timeater?-
-
Leafsnail Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 753
- Joined: December 31, 2009
I was thinking this in NY 112, but she turned out to be the vig who shot the Mafia Busdriver (and, ultimately, me). It was... a pretty fatal underestimation.Socrates wrote:True story, I have literally never seen Pomegranate caught up in a game. I remember it made her a really easy mislynch target in a game I was scum in a while ago.
I never accused Parama of tunneling - you can look through my ISO and check. And I'm trying to get foilist lynched because he's obviously scum. I'd also be up for a Timeater lynch, incidentally.SSBF wrote:I'm not liking Leafsnail's tunneling. Yes I wasn't a fan of Midnight's Sorrow (Hence my previous Day 2 vote on him), but Leafsnail went on and on and on about Midnight's Sorrow and now foilst13. It's also hypocritical because he called Parama for tunneling, when he's doing the same thing now.
I would say something about this, but since noone else cares about M_S's obviousness I can't really be bothered.Midnight's Sorrow wrote:If you even bother to look at the time stamps you'd know it wasn't immediate >.< I can read pretty fast, but hell to the freaking no can I read that many pages in a *Snap* like that... It was a hour or two.
Stop saying I immediately jumped on it because of my first post being my vote on him.THATis stupid. Sorry~
Nice. So can we lynch you now?Timeater wrote:@leaf
I dont consider getting angry and using ad-hom attacks a scumtell. I consider it getting angry. And yes, we are scum buddies. You caught us. Yep, you got it right. Bah! Better luck next game, I guess.
Go die in a hole, scum.Midnight's Sorrow wrote:
Coward.
You and leaf both.
@1326 (Socrates) - how do you work out if people, say, "Aren't mafia"? With no dead scum, aren't both groups basically interchangable?
I'm not liking the whole business of pushing a cop to one specific player. Cop should be aiming for scum - specifically giving him a target that isn't your strongest read looks like you're aiming him at a godfather or something.Socrates wrote:Eh, he sticks to his principles, but I don't recall him ever doing it to the point of refusing to comment on the game at large, and its not like I am 110% on SC scum. That why I want an investigation on him and not pushing his lynch.
About the whole townie list thing... it's a lot easier to make those after scum has been lynched. For now, focusing on obliterating scum would be a LOT better.
Also, I'd like someone to explain why noone else dislikes Midnight's Sorrow's behaviour :/.-
-
Leafsnail Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 753
- Joined: December 31, 2009
-
-
Leafsnail Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 753
- Joined: December 31, 2009
I did read Midnight's Sorrow in ISO at the start of day 2... I stopped when the urge to bash my own brains out with a brick grew too great. Everything about his posts scream newbscum trying to avoid attention and wanting to look like doing something. His reactions to attacks are also bad - horrible deflections and no actual cases.-
-
Leafsnail Goon
- Goon
- Goon
- Posts: 753
- Joined: December 31, 2009