In post 325, Something_Smart wrote:Of course I COULD. But going after Sonia as scum would be like climbing Everest after being told to take a walk.
Not really. You had reasons that you would SR her as town, so there's no reason for you to not push against town!her for those reasons if what she did is scummy.
Assuming I can fake scumhunting perfectly, but given my scum record I clearly can't.
No, what I'm saying is, if you were scum and saw something that a town player did that you thought was scummy, you'd want to point it out to people because as scum you want townie lynches and it's better to use actually scummy things people did than to push complete bullcrap on people.
You're still assuming that I can determine perfectly as scum what I would find scummy as town. Assuming I'm scum and she's town, I'd know that nothing she said was ACTUALLY scum motivated and so I'd have to fake it.
There can be things that, even though you
know
someone is town, you
would
scumread them for it if you hadn't known they were town.
For example, in this game where I was scum, I already knew who was town and who was scum, but there were town players who I knew I would've scumread if I were town.
In post 175, Gamma Emerald wrote:What the hell? If that wasn't obviously not an alt I would start trying to find who it was and lynch the sorry sap who scumslipped.
There are just multiple ways that this seems like a forced way to try to look like you're sided with the town. VOTE: Gamma Emerald for now.
I dont understand this? Do you think Gamma is the one who posted that?
Was it a newb posting in the wrong game or was it someones alt?
If it was an alt slip mod would have gave a warning?
If its not game relevant can't mod just delete it and it gets disregarded?
This questioning seems towny, since it shows deep consideration of the situation.
Just because somebody's considering a situation a lot doesn't mean they're town.
In post 277, WhemePlay wrote:When NM claimed miller my first thought was "wow someone got caught in a counter claim all ready."
Thats why i asked if it was possible to have 2 people role the same numbers.
I'd think WP would vote as soon as a cc happened if he were scum.
Why? If you don't know if there can be more than one person in the setup then it makes sense to ask first rather than just vote one of them.
In post 325, Something_Smart wrote:Of course I COULD. But going after Sonia as scum would be like climbing Everest after being told to take a walk.
Not really. You had reasons that you would SR her as town, so there's no reason for you to not push against town!her for those reasons if what she did is scummy.
Assuming I can fake scumhunting perfectly, but given my scum record I clearly can't.
No, what I'm saying is, if you were scum and saw something that a town player did that you thought was scummy, you'd want to point it out to people because as scum you want townie lynches and it's better to use actually scummy things people did than to push complete bullcrap on people.
This means that something is wrong with your scumhunting process.
It means that you're looking through people's posts for scum motivation and not for town motivation
That's because it's easier to find scum thought process(which is more important than town thought process imo). There are some exceptions, but I usually don't get townreads for reasons much other than PoE until later in the game.
If you think everyone is scum how do you decide whom to lynch D1? If everyone is scumy you would be ok to lynch anyone?
Lowest hanging fruit? How so?
The argument not to lynch someone because they are lynchable is dumb. The only exception I could see that in is a newbie player.
Lowest hanging fruit? How so?
The argument not to lynch someone because they are lynchable is dumb. The only exception I could see that in is a newbie player.
He hasn't posted much and the few posts he has made gave either been fluff or unexplained. So it's easy to just park a vote on him and call it a day. I'm not saying not to lynch him. I was just saying that the votes on him look lazy to me
In post 385, BlackStar wrote:I was just saying that the votes on him look lazy to me
Under what circumstances would a vote on Not_Mafia not look lazy to you? (i.e. is it the way the votes were made that seem lazy, or is it the fact that they exist at all?)
In post 385, BlackStar wrote:I was just saying that the votes on him look lazy to me
Under what circumstances would a vote on Not_Mafia not look lazy to you? (i.e. is it the way the votes were made that seem lazy, or is it the fact that they exist at all?)
It's the way they were made. I don't get the impression that anyone actually believes he's scum. Nobody has really pushed a case on him or anything. What do you think about the votes on him?
In post 385, BlackStar wrote:I was just saying that the votes on him look lazy to me
Under what circumstances would a vote on Not_Mafia not look lazy to you? (i.e. is it the way the votes were made that seem lazy, or is it the fact that they exist at all?)
It's the way they were made. I don't get the impression that anyone actually believes he's scum. Nobody has really pushed a case on him or anything. What do you think about the votes on him?
I think they're perfectly justified. How would you expect someone to generate a case on a player with as little content as him?
In post 385, BlackStar wrote:I was just saying that the votes on him look lazy to me
Under what circumstances would a vote on Not_Mafia not look lazy to you? (i.e. is it the way the votes were made that seem lazy, or is it the fact that they exist at all?)
It's the way they were made. I don't get the impression that anyone actually believes he's scum. Nobody has really pushed a case on him or anything. What do you think about the votes on him?
I think they're perfectly justified. How would you expect someone to generate a case on a player with as little content as him?
Why would you park a vote on a player with little content?
There's nothing dumb about. Voting helps you sort people out. But the people who voted for not mafia just dropped a vote on him and then didn't question him or try to understand him at all. They dropped a vote a ran. That's the very definition of lazy.
In post 391, BlackStar wrote:Why would you park a vote on a player with little content?
This is a really dumb question.
Keep the insults to yourself
I'm not trying to be insulting (and my comment was certainly not directed at you personally). But think about it... if there was never a reason to vote lurkers, then scum would just always lurk.
And in case it wasn't clear, I'm not voting Not_Mafia to sort him. I want him dead.
In post 391, BlackStar wrote:Why would you park a vote on a player with little content?
This is a really dumb question.
Keep the insults to yourself
I'm not trying to be insulting (and my comment was certainly not directed at you personally). But think about it... if there was never a reason to vote lurkers, then scum would just always lurk.
And in case it wasn't clear, I'm not voting Not_Mafia to sort him. I want him dead.
Given that I'd policy lynch NM for him being NM not really but I'd much rather lynch the shade posting non game solving Tesx although I do want to see S_S's answer on why he wants NM dead
The longer you stare at something the more out of focus it becomes
