VOTE: Elsa Jay
Hi, all!
Haha no, it's fun doing this.In post 16, Elsa Jay wrote:Clearly in his country, fluff is offensive, but fluffly, I don't understand why the fluff is fluff such a fluffling fluffed up word. It makes zero fluffing sense, ya fluff with me?
ofrhz wrote: What didn't you like about the quoted text
Fluff around with me and I'll fluff around with ya.Elsa Jay wrote:urge to Smurf around with people,enemy or ally
Unfair. I posted around 21 hours ago, and much after that was a "Trebor" wagon I had no comment on, and an Overwatch discussion I also had no comment on. The rest of the posts started to appear from ~6 hours ago. I slept for a while and here I am now.In post 53, tictac wrote: Otherwise he's borderline-posting, like avoiding total nullposts, but not giving content either.
But your answer would be slightly different if you were scum, and this information becomes useful to judge later - whether really made by town on what little information they had, or scum subtly followed an agenda.In post 79, Clemency wrote:whatever answer i could give you would be disingenuous because i don't believe it possible to tell the intentions of people off of this little informationIn post 77, Elsa Jay wrote:Well from your "observation", who's the 3 most likely scum ATM?
I really don't understand why people seem hate RVS humor. I think makes the game a bit more enjoyable at the stage. "Forced" is something really difficult to judge. Unless very obviously chummy, humor is gonna be NAI at worst for me.In post 65, DVa wrote:I'm less interested in the associative, more thinking about his scum equity in and of itself.
Basically just thinking of BBmolla's argument from our newbie game that "chummy = scummy"
Not that Sashaddin shouldn't have a sense of humor, just that I feel like he'stryingto be funny in RVS. Kinda reminds me of how alien was before you replaced him in that last game
Probably not enough for right now. Anyone pinging you atm?
In post 102, DVa wrote:Aren't solid reads, obviously there's not much to go on here, and I need rain to post to get any read. If Not_Mafia is just going to lolcat through this entire dayphase I'm A-ok with him getting strung up. I see no reason to think he will get easier to sort over time.
In post 107, DVa wrote:In terms of overall enjoyment of the game, does anyone actually want to be dealing with this on day 2?
So if N_M is scum and town fails to lynch him because it's just the way he plays, we're more likely to self-destruct and carry a ML.In post 108, Elsa Jay wrote:Remember that NotMaf has a history of quickhammering as town AND scum so watch your votes, because he could kill you instantly and fuck over town.
Regardless of Almost50's alignment, his assertion that Not_Mafia isn't a good lynch option can hold independently.In post 171, DVa wrote:Yeah except there's no reason to think that
A) you aren't scum with him or that
b) you aren't scum white knighting him
Please don't. I really think these arguments needn't be too aggressive. Almost50 making claims and assertions doesn't mean town will eat them up and blindly follow. You've dissented with his claim on town!Not_Mafia's reads and his ability to read Not_Mafia, and that's useful.In post 176, DVa wrote:I don't want to say more and am probably going to just replaceout because I don't want to out my main
Lol, can't this theory be applied to anyone? I mean if others are *less* skilled at manipulating their behaviour and vote patterns, it's even *more* useful to keep them alive for one more day.In post 173, Almost50 wrote:Hell, if I was confirmed scum I still wouldn't be lynched on D1 by this player list. They will prefer to keep me alive for one more day to try and deduce who may partners are via my behavior, voting pattern and the choice of the NK.
Hence the "if you can, help".In post 212, tictac wrote:What part of "policy" don't ya get?In post 209, Auro wrote:scum motivation behind A50's arguments.
I thought you might ITH him, and hence was quick to unvote.In post 215, Almost50 wrote:N_M is already on the wagon = No quick hammers. You should've left him @L-1 for me to state intent and demand a claim. tictac has just finished a game with me and he knows well this is my playstyle. For better or worse he should've deduced this is NAI at worst.
Would still like an answer to this.In post 209, Auro wrote:@A50: What was your motivation in trying to lead DVa into a 1v1? To make you two the leading wagons? Did you want to prove some point, like your claim that town would never lynch you D1
How? The attack at DVa, or his tictac vote? O.oIn post 237, ofrhz wrote:I feel like this is slightly towny for N_M tbh
Nevermind, I guess he replaced into it and got lynched very soon after so it doesn't count.Auro wrote:@ofrhz, I see you've modded a recent game where scum!NotMafia and town!A50 were lynched and killed in D1, N1.
I'm reading the game right now, but any thoughts you've to offer on the argument?
Does he? I just read through his ISO and he says this:In post 251, Almost50 wrote:he wants not one, but TWO policy lynches
Where did he say he wanted *two* PLs? As far as I can see, he doesn't want both in the game, and hence a D1 PL on one of them.In post 207, tictac wrote:Both of these player in a game means day1 has to be a policy 4 the game to have any meaning.
I did. I tried to quote it into here, but wasn't able to. I didn't doubt that you were lying about policy not-lynching anyway, tho - hence my lack of a scumread on you for it.In post 255, Almost50 wrote:But I hope you did notice I SR the slot (and explicitly said it was scum) while also stating I won't vote N_M, but the town can do it w/o me. Right?
What's odd to me is that he said he would've anyway, except DVa argued against this and that's keeping him. I can see scum motivation in sheeping DVa to an extent of "I would've already gone; if she goes I go" and advocating for a policy lynch while carrying a lack of interest to scumhunt anywhere else. If Not_Mafia is ML'd, we can't really go deep into his justification for voting.In post 260, Almost50 wrote:If he doesn't want TWO players in the game, he can replace out. Isn't that an easier course of action if he really disliked playing with us "both"?
On a side note, I did comment that my aggressive pushes were bad and could work against me, and that I should've refrained from trying to reason my tunneling/pushing too hard esp while being townread that strong.In post 321, DVa wrote:Auro -- know he's pretty competent scum; if anything I would have expected him to start powerscumming more by now if he was scum so his 'huh, how do I figure this out' disposition here seems townie for the moment.
Disappointed? I'll explain this a bit more.In post 336, Almost50 wrote:Oh, one of the points against Auro is the unvote, but maybe it's because I wanted that claim that I feel disappointed in Auro?
Anyway, the problem I have with this is, again, that he's potentially very scum toIn post 342, Almost50 wrote:Didi it ever occur to you that I might be a lie-detector and and explicit claim is exactly what I would have wanted to verify?? Would you call that a scum-motivated thought?
I could come up with dozens of other motives. How about forcing a suspect to commit to a claim early on before they had a chance to gather more info about the setup? Is forcing "potential" scum to commit to a fake claim in a rash a scum-driven motive?
And you sorted him town after? Where's this Clem answer?In post 369, Sashaddin wrote:I had him null until I asked and Clem answered.