Albert B. Rampage wrote:Vote farsidebecause she votes me at the beginning of games..
For beating me to voting on him first
I never had a bw on me at the start of day 1, but I don't see bw votes during the start of an rvs stage as a scum tell.Seraphim wrote:Well Mr. Rampage, have we played since War in Heaven 2? It seems hard to believe we haven't played in so long...
Also, Zito has proven himself scum with his last post. A wagon must be formed on him at once.
This lawyer talk is going to make my head hurt.Seraphim wrote:It's not that I don't approve of the farside wagon, it's that you are obviously scum. In fact, the fact that you are trying to call me out for not approving the farside wagon, a clear misnomer because I never stated such sentiments, is in fact incredibly suspicious in itself.Papa Zito wrote:Seraphim doesn't approve of the farside wagon. Why's that, Seraphim?
Considering post people are just voting based on an anteater pic or bw me. Tunneling is fine.curiouskarmadog wrote:vote richard
have I done this yet?
is it too early to say I am tunneling?
Who do you see being vagueling non random with convo?Sando wrote:Anyone doing this is pretty retarded.bv310 wrote:Seraphim, I've seen people playing like that before. They don't usually try to group policy lynch, they usually just tunnel hardcore and find scumtells where there aren't any. It's actually rather annoying when it happens.
Why are people in this game seemingly obsessed with staying in the RVS, every time we start getting vagueling non-random conversation we apparently need more ant-eaters.
Farside, lol @ thinking ABR will answer questions, that's a good one
Excuse me but I am the one with 5 people who bandwagonned me on page 1 and I just look at it "Oh goody lets see who is scum that tries to lynch me quickly". So I do see the # of votes on you as relevant.RichardGHP wrote:@farside: Forsrs? You're using elusive panic as your excuse to vote me? That's really pretty scum-like you know. Even if I was panicked, it wouldn't make me scum. Nobody wants to be lynched. The fact that I only had one vote on me is irrelevant. I addressed it in a manner I felt appropriate. Lastly, you have a rather interesting and extreme definition of 'obsessed'...
.
yes it's on your profile options. I never changed it myself but that is what I heard.curiouskarmadog wrote:interesting....richard, why do you think it is protown to lynch you? (yes it is sort of trick question)
also, all this talk of sig's...I cant see sigs anymore, is there and option to allow them?
I love you right about now. ♥♥♥♥Porochaz wrote:We are on page 6, we have just started the beginning of our conversations. There is one thing I love doing on this site more than anything (more than annoying people with anteaters and whatever else I can think of) and that is ripping up the poor 'ickle player that is feeling sorry for himself and gets all huffy the first bit of pressure is put upon him... I can some my feelings up in one word. Testicles. I recommend growing some.
You are being attacked on the basis of your reaction to ckd's vote, you explain, we move on, or we don't, its how the game is played. Your continued "Boo hoo, I can't take it any more, you are all so me-he-he-ean" is whats making me continue to vote for you. What the hell is the point in throwing a tantrum the first sign of pressure? It's what the game is about, there is no guarantee we will move off you, but it's better to learn how to play better and give your reasoning rather than be the whiney pathetic newbie your being now. Play the game, become more experienced, learn how to deal with it. Don't go "uh... lynch me then" then immediately sign up for another game where the same thing happens because you can't be fucked learning.
My thoughts can be accurately summed up in this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KOBIq0R4iQY
This is just more bs. I have papa zito trying to push my buttons so many times I lost count. It's meant to get a reaction and if all your going to do is piss and moan and act like a baby because you can't handle pressure, questions or answer things in a reasonable way I don't see changing my vote.RichardGHP wrote:EBWOP:
Well part of my "tantrum" is reaction testing, and part of it is a little frustration. C'mon, you really can't empathise with being panicked and frustrated when 1 person votes you three times?
I thought faraday was scum in both pyp games. Wouldn't you know one game he was scum.curiouskarmadog wrote: also, why does faraday always seem like scum to me....am i an avatar racist?
You think he's town based on 7 pages of whining?bv310 wrote:I think Richard is town, but very whiny town. And not by a big slot either. He seems to grasp the game quite well, but his little tantrum and subsequent backpedaling to say he was reaction-fishing just seems really forced. He seems to be playing the newbie-scum stereotype quite fully.
Did you even read my reason's for finding his behavoir scummy based on the actions so far? He was antsy on one f@#ing vote. One person pushing his button's and he couldn't handle it. Do you know that players that are town tend to do that for reaction?Anon wrote:Ok.
Best RVS in a while. God laffs while reading.
Now, srz bsnss, Richard likely town getting angry. Easy target ftw.
Which means that the people pushing the wagon are more likely to be scum than the average.
Letss see, farside smells bad pushing rly hard. Seraphim doesnt want to lynch him but to pressure him so he can be useful. And Faraday votes because anyone that asks to be lynched should be lynched iho, lolwut?
I cant decide which of the voters is the most scummy. All three have some bad flavor attached. The good thing is that if richard is town, as I suspect, its likely one of these guys is likely scum and that a farside-seraph-faraday scumteam discarded from the go just using "all eggs in one basket" theory.
A more deep reread in iso will give me more light about these three. For now, wagon powers activate:
Vote: farside.
Richard what do you think of Anon's vote and reasoning he put?RichardGHP wrote:Oh lawds. Two people from lolstralia.
@Sando: Anon is correct in his assessment of me. I don't know if I'd call myself frustrated, but certainly something along those lines. Also, your vote makes no sense whatsoever. You're voting me based on overreacting to one (followed by a couple more) vote(s)? Now that's just plain stupid. Even though I was nowhere close to being lynched, a vote is still a vote and I have a right to be... anxious about it. If you had even bothered to meta me you'd know that over-reacting is commonplace for me anyway.
+Anon wrote:Players that are TOWN?farside22 wrote:Did you even read my reason's for finding his behavoir scummy based on the actions so far? He was antsy on one f@#ing vote. One person pushing his button's and he couldn't handle it. Do you know that players that are town tend to do that for reaction?
Are you going to answer my question first or keep harping on the town? I'm not saying anyone is town. I'm stating that town tends to push for reaction. Do you disagree with my thought on what town tends to do?Anon wrote:I dont want to misrepresent the question and correct me if Im wrong, but in this post you are saying that players that are town tend to do that (push buttons so target cant handle). I assume you are talking about CKD. How do you know CKD is town?farside22 wrote:+Anon wrote:Players that are TOWN?farside22 wrote:Did you even read my reason's for finding his behavoir scummy based on the actions so far? He was antsy on one f@#ing vote. One person pushing his button's and he couldn't handle it.Do you know that playersthat are town tend to do that for reaction?
And anon misrepresents the question.
I love how anon isn't answering anything asked at all so far. (in case you missed it that is sarcasm)
unvote:
vote: Anon
Oh and your not answering my question your trying to make it more then it is.
Also please point me to questions Ive missed.
anon wrote: Yeah its one vote. But it was not a normal one vote. As I said, CKD voted him three times, in a serious way, with zero ingame argumentation. Of course people is going to be obsessed with someone voting him like that.
So because Rich couldn't answer my questions or points and ask people to vote for him = frustrated town?Anon wrote:It entirely depends on the way people express that reaction.Sando wrote:Anon, if over-reacting and panicking to a vote(s) isn't scummy, what is a scummy reaction to votes?
Ive seen townies, especially newbies, overreact and panick to a vote, which is prob not the case here since its more likely richard is angry with ckd triple vote. Ive seen scumbags play it cool and not slip until the last moment.
All alignments commit scumtells, the point is that you have to analyse first if its a very reliable scumtell, and second if there are other tells to fight or help the read. That is scumhunting.
Obviously this answers the question that Anon didn't read my reason's for voting Richard in the first place which leads me to keep my vote on Anon.farside22 wrote:This is just more bs. I have papa zito trying to push my buttons so many times I lost count. It's meant to get a reaction and if all your going to do is piss and moan and act like a baby because you can't handle pressure, questions or answer things in a reasonable way I don't see changing my vote.RichardGHP wrote:EBWOP:
Well part of my "tantrum" is reaction testing, and part of it is a little frustration. C'mon, you really can't empathise with being panicked and frustrated when 1 person votes you three times?
Wow nice fence sitting you have going on there. I so love it.Anon wrote:Yes, town tends to push for reactions, thats pure scumhunting, but that doesnt mean that all people pushing for reactions are town.farside wrote:Do you disagree with my thought on what town tends to do?
That is the tip of my reasoning. I had more reason's on top of that I expanded on as show above. You neglect those or did you just chose not to read?Anon wrote:Yes I talked about them in a previous post:farside22 wrote:The other question Anon missedfarside22 wrote: Did you even read my reason's for finding his behavoir scummy based on the actions so far?
Anon wrote: To reinforce my position lets analyse the reasons farside used to vote him.
Yeah its one vote. But it was not a normal one vote. As I said, CKD voted him three times, in a serious way, with zero ingame argumentation. Of course people is going to be obsessed with someone voting him like that.Farside wrote:Richard being obsessed with CKD's vote on him is ridiculous. It's one vote. I detect panic in Richards post.
What do you see more often in games as far as players pushing for reaction, scum or town?Anon wrote:Its not fence sitting. Its stating the truth. In a wagon, there are always two type of people: townies scumhunting and scumbags pretending to be townies scumhunting.farside22 wrote:Wow nice fence sitting you have going on there. I so love it.Anon wrote:Yes, town tends to push for reactions, thats pure scumhunting, but that doesnt mean that all people pushing for reactions are town.farside wrote:Do you disagree with my thought on what town tends to do?
At this precise moment, Im trying to find out which one you belong to.
Look above to your answer Anonanon wrote:Look, farside, Im asking questions and pushing you to get reactions from you. Does that mean Im town? Should I think you are town for doing the same thing?
This is really a bad comment coming from ABR. Seriously if you don't like day 1 don't play and become a replacement player then.Albert B. Rampage wrote:Come on, let's just lynch whoever the fuck ever, I don't care about Day 1.
What? Please explain your question in full.Anon wrote:Farside all your 268 can be answered with:
Why do you think taking a stance different to yours makes someone scum?
Sure. I know some game you'll remember called Pick your Poison 4 where you were pushing Yosarian's case in a way that made me think you were town. Unfortunately for me and almost for the game, you were scum and I got lynched for it. But thats where I learnt that pushing cases is very easy to fake and not the 100% towntell you are trying to paint.farside wrote:When you get back Anon I want links to games you saw scum do what your claiming there.
Now that we are talking about that game, you commented that you remembered my play from the other game. Now that Im fully caught up, how different/similar am I playing to that game?
Nvm I read this question a second and a third time and realized the question.Why do you think taking a stance different to yours makes someone scum?
Is it me? This sounds like a bw vote. He votes for bv but not saying why.Espeonage wrote:Unvote, Vote: bv
To many sus things here. I didn't even have a proper case on Anon. So, yeah.
Ah so you read my meta of you and decided to act as such now?Anon wrote:You commented previously that I was acting different from our previous game together. Do you still maintain that comment?
I never said aggression:Anon wrote: Im talking about scum faking aggressiveness towards a player to get reactions/answers. I never talked about the RVS.
I need to work on what I mean with this. Call it taunting of a player, playing with their mind a bit. I also used the words pushing someone's button prior to this.far wrote:I'm stating that town tends to push for reaction
Where are you getting this from?Anon wrote:I'm talking about me. You think I am scum because sic, you dont agree with my reasoning.
I read where you got that from. My full case is here in case you missed it.anon wrote:I'm talking about me. You think I am scum because sic, you dont agree with my reasoning.
Not sure how much mafia you have played but I know scum who play it more safe and talk about people they are suspicious of but don't vote. Then when asked they place a vote on said person.Sando wrote:Seraphim/Farside, the flip-flopping, ok. But the vote under pressure being a scumtell? Why do I get the feeling that if there wasn't a vote that he'd be backing off the wagon and again, be accused of flip-flopping, another scumtell. This latest accusation seems like a catch-22.
Espeonage jumping on the popular wagon strikes me as opportunistic.
Richard seems to have gone from whiny, to angry, to angry with a bit of a plan, to a gambiting master... At least in his own mind.
Sando wrote:So, uh, Anon, you don't think Over-reaction is a tell?
From SWN II http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... &start=250
andAnon wrote: explain why you dont think he is scummy after:
- Overreacting to 5 votes. Really?
First is post 253, second is 337.Anon wrote:Scumbags are more likely to overreact to a nonexistent pressure because they are paranoid of being supected/lynched. So yeah, its a scumtell.
Had a change of heart on over-reaction as a scumtell I see...
I just read about 8 of his post in isolation. I haven't had more time to read things lately. i would assume that was just day 1.CKD wrote:did you read the whole game, or just the Day 1 wagon?
Paranoid about who I think is scum, yes. Not paranoid about someone voting me three times. That's just dumb. It was obvious that it was to promote reaction.Ojanen wrote:Some stuff I want to know:
@Jahudo, you mentioned Boost mafia; did I understand correctly that this is a sequel? If yes, can you explain the mechanic of that game?
@farside:I kind of went at this. Would you consider yourself a paranoid player in general?farside wrote:CKD: Would you say this is typical reaction from richard? I have a current game I'm thinking of right now and he has flipped town but idk it's like either he's not paying attention to what's going on all over or he's paranoid andI equate paranoid to scum.
Someone's not reading their misrep's here. Or my case I had on them. I wonder what that says about Anon.Anon wrote:I stand by my explanation on my last post.ckd wrote:uhhhhh....please explain or prepare to be voted.
I understand where your confusion is coming from. If you read my second quote in context, Im repeating what farside says in 261, "pushing for reactions" and explaining her that it wasnt the towntell she was thinking of since I was kinda doing the same thing yet she kept (keeps?) thinking I was scum. I didnt plan to get reactions from her but I guess I pressed a button that made her go rage mode against me.
In regards to gauge your reaction, I sincerely think you are looking too much into it. Im still evaluating what does this mean in terms of alignment and the slight town read I have on you for other reasons. Would you say you have an agressive defined meta as a townie?
Anyways I had some question I asked richard he never responded to.What's the difference between what CKD did to rich that Papa Zito was doing to me exactly?
Richard what do you think of Anon's vote and reasoning he put?
Richard what do you think of bv310's action and comments so far?
In case you "missed" again the what papa was doing to me I posted it here: http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... 70#2182870far wrote:
What's the difference between what CKD did to rich that Papa Zito was doing to me exactly?
Sando post 267: I believe anon was voting bv at this time what was the point of this question?far wrote: That is the tip of my reasoning. I had more reason's on top of that I expanded on as show above. You neglect those or did you just chose not to read?
Voting for Pom for a rhetorical question is scummier? Really since when?Albert B. Rampage wrote:Wow, terrible reasons for voting Richard.
I have no intention of "starting a bandwagon", or "drawing up a case", but I think pomegranate outweighs bv310 (what kind of name is that?) and richard in scumminess by bricks.
And this is different that how you have been playing how?Albert B. Rampage wrote:Pom is keeping a low profile, refraining from speaking candidly as scum like to do, her stances are scummy and evasive. Pretty sure she's the scummiest person so far.
I'm not sure what you mean then by downplaying CKD's actions during the day. Could you expand more on this?On Richard:
So I was totally on Richard's side at first. Ckd totally comes on as doing a policy hounding thing. That's more reaction inducing than random bandwagoning because it's directly saying YOU SUCK to someone's face. I thought this
and some similar accusations were kind of ridiculous, exaggerating Richard and downplaying ckd.
I have 2 town games here.dybeck wrote:I don't think I played with him before - but unconventional can be a good thing in a game like this where not much is moving very fast. Too often on this site people get lynched for standing out though. Historically, I used to play like that a lot and I've got a good few premature lynches to show for it (as town and as scum). Have you got a good example of his erratic play that you can point me to (like in other games)?farside22 wrote:@dybeck: I'm not going to even delve into that WIFOM you are so deftly pulling out of your ass on ABR. ABR is one of those players who will do the most unconventional thing whether town or scum. But knowing I have seen him play well as town and crap as town I don't let him fly by without poking him into a repsonse because his scum play is just as erractic.
No as he plays the same as scum looking town.dybeck wrote:@farside: If his play here is consistent with other games in which he's been town, doesn't that back up his town credentials?
@dybeck: why are you so intent on defending a player who isn't really under any pressure when you should be scumhunting?
I'm trying to understand what you mean by downplaying CKD.Ojanen wrote:You took it thoroughly out of context by snapping out a quote (from yourself, actually) from the point where I now added in []. The word "this" was referring to the quote in the middle, not ckd.farside22 wrote:I was asking you about your views after reading this OJ.I'm not sure what you mean then by downplaying CKD's actions during the day. Could you expand more on this?On Richard:
So I was totally on Richard's side at first. Ckd totally comes on as doing a policy hounding thing. That's more reaction inducing than random bandwagoning because it's directly saying YOU SUCK to someone's face. I thought this []
and some similar accusations were kind of ridiculous, exaggerating Richard and downplaying ckd.
Richard did all of the more scummy stuff later than this part so I'm not saying people overreacted later (also a part you cut from my quote), but at this point I thought some did. Ckd came on with his dance, Richard said exactly 2 things:Richard wrote:If this is some kind of attemp at a Policy Lynch, please stop.And you representing this as "Richard being obsessed with CKD's vote on him is ridiculous." came on as strange to me.Richard wrote:I've played with him before and he's under the impression that I'm terrible at the game.
Does it look random to you? He voted me 3 times for emphasis.
Not sure your wording here is a bit confusing to me.Ojanen wrote:Ok, we see "obsessed" differently. We read the context differently at minimum I think. I assumed reminiscnece of bitter arguing from another topic (these games take ages, that always seems to me to exaggerate this stuff) and a joking or serious, more or less veiled insult and didn't think it strange R would take note. I assume you read it as early, if emphathized voting by one person, showing a sign of caring is scummy.farside22 wrote:I'm trying to understand what you mean by downplaying CKD.He is being obsessed. He's obviously bothered to note that CKD voted for him 3 times and admitted to tunneling. I took CKD's comments more as a joke but to me it looked like it got to Richard. Why should someone voting for a player 3 times in 4 pages bother anyone?
dybeck wrote:The reasoning behind my question is that it just seems too early for scum to be bussing one of their own. There's an incredibly juicy alternate wagon on Richard that they could be plugging, whilst still flying under the radar. It just doesn't sit right with me that there'd be bussing going on in this specific situation. Does that make sense?
Why would you think that?Seraphim wrote:While bv has not done much to decrease his scumminess, I think he is more likely to be town than I originally thought. I think both the Espeonage and Nick wagons warrant further investigation. ...
Last I checked I believe it was you (will relook later) I thought you said Esp was someone you thought was scummy.Seraphim wrote:Nick's post is bizarre. I don't know if he's scum, but it's definitely bizarre.farside22 wrote:Why would you think that?Seraphim wrote:While bv has not done much to decrease his scumminess, I think he is more likely to be town than I originally thought. I think both the Espeonage and Nick wagons warrant further investigation. ...
I'm looking back at Espeonage too, and he looks like serious scum. I'll be posting some questions for him in a little bit.
I'm not letting bv310 off the hook...I'm just ensuring that I'm not ignoring what else is happening in the game. Also, I've been looking at the bv wagon and a lot of the scummier players in the game are on it. This has caused me to doubt the wagon's validity.
Seraphim wrote:First point: yes. But you said you weren't feeling the bv wagon...do you think it warrants your consideration now?dybeck wrote:A good solid read of the game would be good from bv310.
Seraphim: what's your general impression of the players ON the bv wagon? Generally town? Or some bussers on there?
Second point: bv wagon = Papa Zito, Anon, Seraphim, Espeonage, farside22, curiouskarmadog, RichardGHP
hmmm...if we assume I'm town, I feel the town is the majority here. Richard is VI, I think. That doesn't excuse his play but that's what I'm feeling right now. That's likely to change if he doesn't get off his lazy ass and post. Espeonage is most likely to be bussing scum...I don't get that feeling from Richard.
Sera I am referring to the bold part where you say players as in more then one. Did your views change on some players on the wagon for bv?Seraphim wrote: I'm not letting bv310 off the hook...I'm just ensuring that I'm not ignoring what else is happening in the game.Also, I've been looking at the bv wagon and a lot of the scummier players in the game are on it. This has caused me to doubt the wagon's validity.