Mini Normal 1950 [Engame: Mafia Victory!]
- Vanderscamp
-
Vanderscamp
- Vanderscamp
-
Vanderscamp Mafia Scum
- Vanderscamp
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2065
- Joined: December 10, 2012
I'm fine with thisIn post 7, ChaosOmega wrote:VOTE: CheekyTeeky
What are everyone's thoughts on hypo-vanilla cop claiming?
Spoiler: For those not knowing what hypo-cop is- Vanderscamp
-
Vanderscamp Mafia Scum
- Vanderscamp
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2065
- Joined: December 10, 2012
WreckedIn post 37, Chip Butty wrote:In post 33, UC Voyager wrote:is he new??????
you dont make reads unless you have something to back it up with.....
and you have townie below your name......probably should have started with a newbie game
His join date is right there - August 5. No need to infer anything from title. And yours is September 21, even newer. If this isan example of your detective skills, it's going to be a long game...In post 34, UC Voyager wrote:those dont mean anything, but townie is one of the first. it is recommended you play a newbie game first.........do you have past mafia experience on other sites?- Vanderscamp
-
Vanderscamp Mafia Scum
- Vanderscamp
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2065
- Joined: December 10, 2012
A good way to assess alignments is to hear the reasoning behind people's reads, which isn't possible if they don't get explained. How experienced someone is is also definitely not arbitrary because it will help us know how much credit we should be giving people.In post 38, necro wrote:I think we could just move on from how good or bad people are based on these arbitrary numbers, and move onto assessing what alignment people are in this game instead (:- Vanderscamp
-
Vanderscamp Mafia Scum
- Vanderscamp
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2065
- Joined: December 10, 2012
- Vanderscamp
-
Vanderscamp
- Vanderscamp
-
Vanderscamp Mafia Scum
- Vanderscamp
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2065
- Joined: December 10, 2012
I don't think it's impossible for him to do it but I gave him a mild +In post 55, Rhah wrote:
You consider withholding a read to be indicative? Because that's an easy move for mafia to make, as well. And it is not uncommon.In post 50, Vanderscamp wrote:I'd also like to head necro's reasoning for his UC read but ATM he's my only townread for his refusal to share it.- Vanderscamp
-
Vanderscamp Mafia Scum
- Vanderscamp
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2065
- Joined: December 10, 2012
It's unlikely to be indicative imoIn post 69, necro wrote:
Chaos is probably town.In post 56, Rhah wrote:Oh yeah. Found it interesting how Chaos opens up with just talking about peeks.- Vanderscamp
-
Vanderscamp Mafia Scum
- Vanderscamp
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2065
- Joined: December 10, 2012
I think you're more likely to be town now because I would have expected scumYou to take the easy and expected route and call necro scum.In post 73, UC Voyager wrote:ima be honest. here is what im feeling
town
me (duh.)
Necro
CheekyTeeky
Zulph
Morality
Wave Mode
mafia
Rhah
??????'
????? (possibly. idk. might be 3)
???????? (probably not 4 lol)- Vanderscamp
-
Vanderscamp Mafia Scum
- Vanderscamp
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2065
- Joined: December 10, 2012
- Vanderscamp
-
Vanderscamp
- Vanderscamp
-
Vanderscamp Mafia Scum
- Vanderscamp
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2065
- Joined: December 10, 2012
After isoing UC, he was going after necro less than I remembered so that might be a bad read.In post 86, Luca Blight wrote:
I disagree with this; if UC is scum, what would he have to gain from calling someone who openly townreads him 'scum' this early in the game?In post 83, Vanderscamp wrote:
I think you're more likely to be town now because I would have expected scumYou to take the easy and expected route and call necro scum.In post 73, UC Voyager wrote:ima be honest. here is what im feeling
town
me (duh.)
Necro
CheekyTeeky
Zulph
Morality
Wave Mode
mafia
Rhah
??????'
????? (possibly. idk. might be 3)
???????? (probably not 4 lol)
Talk about unnecessary conflict.
Would scum-UC play the trick of pretending not to know how many scum there are?In post 84, Vanderscamp wrote:I'm also in lines to believe the dumbtell about not knowing the number of scum.
Judging from his posts so far I'd give that a resounding 'yes.'
As for the last part, I have no idea.- Vanderscamp
-
Vanderscamp Mafia Scum
- Vanderscamp
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2065
- Joined: December 10, 2012
I buy it.In post 89, UC Voyager wrote:
lol. dumbtell????would i really dumbtell. well mabye....i mostly did that, so people wouldn't be like (how do you know it is two or something)In post 86, Luca Blight wrote:
I disagree with this; if UC is scum, what would he have to gain from calling someone who openly townreads him 'scum' this early in the game?In post 83, Vanderscamp wrote:
I think you're more likely to be town now because I would have expected scumYou to take the easy and expected route and call necro scum.In post 73, UC Voyager wrote:ima be honest. here is what im feeling
town
me (duh.)
Necro
CheekyTeeky
Zulph
Morality
Wave Mode
mafia
Rhah
??????'
????? (possibly. idk. might be 3)
???????? (probably not 4 lol)
Talk about unnecessary conflict.
Would scum-UC play the trick of pretending not to know how many scum there are?In post 84, Vanderscamp wrote:I'm also in lines to believe the dumbtell about not knowing the number of scum.
Judging from his posts so far I'd give that a resounding 'yes.'
where is everyone getting me as scum besides the fact i said that i dont understand why people make reads without reasoning, and then made a joke where i list off my feelings. i did do the dumbtell (which is always scummy), but other than that, there isn't much on me........i dont have any hard reads yet......- Vanderscamp
-
Vanderscamp Mafia Scum
- Vanderscamp
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2065
- Joined: December 10, 2012
- Vanderscamp
-
Vanderscamp Mafia Scum
- Vanderscamp
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2065
- Joined: December 10, 2012
What is Riley cakin'?In post 97, Zulfy wrote:I don´t think Voyager is scum, just out there riley cakin´
Gonna keep my vote on him- Vanderscamp
-
Vanderscamp Mafia Scum
- Vanderscamp
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2065
- Joined: December 10, 2012
- Vanderscamp
-
Vanderscamp Mafia Scum
- Vanderscamp
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2065
- Joined: December 10, 2012
This is a somewhat weird response, but I agree..In post 105, UC Voyager wrote:
Well these are early reads. Which will probably change. I am relatively new to mafia, but from what I know. Ones original reads arnt always the same as their final readsIn post 104, Vanderscamp wrote:Well, I'm explaining why I believe scum are less likely to say certain things than town.- Vanderscamp
-
Vanderscamp Mafia Scum
- Vanderscamp
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2065
- Joined: December 10, 2012
In response to the thing about me, I don't actually like my read anymore, although I still think I believe that UC didn't actually know how many scum there are, but I don't like Luca's reasoning for discounting my (probably bad) read either, because what he's arguing is blatantly untrue in general.In post 112, Rhah wrote:If you didn't read the Open Setup displayed in the OP, what did you read exactly?
Well... both of your assumptions are sort of surface level in a way. The mafia can't be afraid of conflict anyway, given that their nature is to drive mislynches. This post gives me scum vibes on Luca. I would say I'm getting that vibe from his tone, as well. To be determined.In post 86, Luca Blight wrote:
I disagree with this; if UC is scum, what would he have to gain from calling someone who openly townreads him 'scum' this early in the game?In post 83, Vanderscamp wrote:
I think you're more likely to be town now because I would have expected scumYou to take the easy and expected route and call necro scum.In post 73, UC Voyager wrote:ima be honest. here is what im feeling
town
me (duh.)
Necro
CheekyTeeky
Zulph
Morality
Wave Mode
mafia
Rhah
??????'
????? (possibly. idk. might be 3)
???????? (probably not 4 lol)
Talk about unnecessary conflict.
I would like for you to tell me to tell me what is not true. Your first post is a naked vote and then you proceed to... talk about peeks. In what way is my observation dishonest? Also, this being the second thing you decide to post in the game thread strikes me a certain way. It's not a good feeling. Nevermind that you actually accompany your post with a vote on me.In post 102, ChaosOmega wrote:
Well that's not true at all. I voted them and suggested a claiming strategy unrelated to Cheeky.In post 56, Rhah wrote:Oh yeah. Found it interesting how Chaos opens up with just talking about peeks.
VOTE: Rhah
-----
Not a fan of Luca right now either; going to keep that close to the vest for now.
Well. For me it goes, ----> identify scummy behavior ----> call it out. By definition, that constitutes attacking. You got me, buddy. I'm still not sure what you're trying to say here but I know it doesn't make sense. The rest of your reads feel rather weak.In post 103, UC Voyager wrote:im getting scum reads on rhah. he has introduced himself to a few people by attacking them. even in the RVS he was.- Vanderscamp
-
Vanderscamp Mafia Scum
- Vanderscamp
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2065
- Joined: December 10, 2012
If you lynch people because you don't like they're style you're probably going to lose a lot of games.In post 115, Zulfy wrote:
Riley Cake was an Accountant alt. Basically just esoterically trolling with their over the top posting style. Due to not having any scumreads I´m okay with having my vote parked on him because I´m okay with him not in the game.In post 99, Vanderscamp wrote:
What is Riley cakin'?In post 97, Zulfy wrote:I don´t think Voyager is scum, just out there riley cakin´
Gonna keep my vote on him- Vanderscamp
-
Vanderscamp Mafia Scum
- Vanderscamp
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2065
- Joined: December 10, 2012
In post 115, Zulfy wrote:
Riley Cake was an Accountant alt. Basically just esoterically trolling with their over the top posting style. Due to not having any scumreads I´m okay with having my vote parked on him because I´m okay with him not in the game.In post 99, Vanderscamp wrote:
What is Riley cakin'?In post 97, Zulfy wrote:I don´t think Voyager is scum, just out there riley cakin´
Gonna keep my vote on him
Can you justify your "one between" comment at all?In post 117, UnaBombaH wrote:Oh man, I pretty much missed the RVS..
On the other hand, I got to read some more when starting, and I have currently no trouble going for a VOTE: UC Voyager.
We do not need this in late game anyway, based on the things I have seen so far.
One ofUC Voyager, Zulfy, Rhahis scum to me, interested in seeing their respective progressions.
I'm not familiar with hypo-claimings (know a few scenarios, haven't been a part of one yet), but how would we do it in this game, and what good could it possibly do?
Not sure if I misunderstood something about it.
By hypo-claimings do you mean claiming peeks? The advantage is that it allows vanilla cop to leave their views for us in case they die without claiming, the disadvantages are that it eliminates some people as being vanilla cop or not, and potentially has the ability to out two roles with a bad NK. I think vanilla cop is more useful when the checks aren't known to everyone beforehand so i think im changing my mind about the validity of it- Vanderscamp
-
Vanderscamp Mafia Scum
- Vanderscamp
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2065
- Joined: December 10, 2012
In post 115, Zulfy wrote:
Riley Cake was an Accountant alt. Basically just esoterically trolling with their over the top posting style. Due to not having any scumreads I´m okay with having my vote parked on him because I´m okay with him not in the game.In post 99, Vanderscamp wrote:
What is Riley cakin'?In post 97, Zulfy wrote:I don´t think Voyager is scum, just out there riley cakin´
Gonna keep my vote on himIn post 117, UnaBombaH wrote:Oh man, I pretty much missed the RVS..
On the other hand, I got to read some more when starting, and I have currently no trouble going for a VOTE: UC Voyager.
We do not need this in late game anyway, based on the things I have seen so far.
One ofUC Voyager, Zulfy, Rhahis scum to me, interested in seeing their respective progressions.
I'm not familiar with hypo-claimings (know a few scenarios, haven't been a part of one yet), but how would we do it in this game, and what good could it possibly do?
Not sure if I misunderstood something about it.
Even if he's scum and doesn't know that it's an open setup he would probably know how many scum there are.In post 122, wavemode wrote:
Since I myself failed to read the setup I'm biased to believe this is genuineIn post 73, UC Voyager wrote:ima be honest. here is what im feeling
town
me (duh.)
Necro
CheekyTeeky
Zulph
Morality
Wave Mode
mafia
Rhah
??????'
????? (possibly. idk. might be 3)
???????? (probably not 4 lol)
Genuine, but NAI
Could be a genuine coming from town
Could also be genuine coming from scum who simply didn't realize it was an open setup- Vanderscamp
-
Vanderscamp Mafia Scum
- Vanderscamp
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2065
- Joined: December 10, 2012
If it's not indicative of his alignment why did you say it was interesting? Because I agree that it's probably NAI but I disagree that it's remotely interesting.In post 140, Rhah wrote:
You're going with the assumption I called him out as in scummy. When I said as much that it wasn't that indicative in way of his alignment. You seem to view all type of pressure as an attack, or that's what you're framing my push as.In post 132, UC Voyager wrote: well the issue is. you kind of had only "peeking" as a reason to try and call out choas. you know you could have said (hey peeking isn't always the best idea).- Vanderscamp
-
Vanderscamp Mafia Scum
- Vanderscamp
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2065
- Joined: December 10, 2012
I understand why people are calling you scum but I think they're wrong.
- Vanderscamp
-
Vanderscamp Mafia Scum
- Vanderscamp
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2065
- Joined: December 10, 2012
Your initial reasoning against Cheeky is quite weak, other people having similar reads is not a good reason to not give your own reads.In post 167, Rhah wrote:
Literally, the post where you go "UCV is scum.. .maybe too scum." I'm pretty sure that atmosphere was at least floating around already given that he was being wagoned, so I really didn't see why you had to add that as your input when it could have been... maybe.. other sorts of content considering your two prior posts in the slot are just naked votes. This is the notion that's condemned me, apparently.In post 159, CheekyTeeky wrote:
So what gave you the weak scum read on me BEFORE our dance? You know, the weak scum read I mentioned to prove my UCV is anti-town and PL is not completely out of line, therefore Una is probs town point?
I actually, from our engagement don't feel that any answers I provide to you will be "correct". I think I'll just sit here and play off my wagon.CheekyTeeky wrote: The way you've twisted my descriptive comment of your post, out of context, to now say I've used it to discredit you as scum has proved to me your intentions are not objectively town.
I think I'm allowed to be interested in things. If you wanna fry me for it then go ahead.Vanderscamp wrote: If it's not indicative of his alignment why did you say it was interesting? Because I agree that it's probably NAI but I disagree that it's remotely interesting.
You're allowed to be interested in whatever you want, in the same way that I'm allowed to question it. Why was it interesting to you? Because I also thought you were throwing shade on whoever it was, and ATM it seems like you were just saying it for the sake of saying something.- Vanderscamp
-
Vanderscamp Mafia Scum
- Vanderscamp
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2065
- Joined: December 10, 2012
From his earlier post:In post 170, CheekyTeeky wrote:
Did you misquote here? I can't see the word "interesting" in this.In post 165, Vanderscamp wrote:
If it's not indicative of his alignment why did you say it was interesting? Because I agree that it's probably NAI but I disagree that it's remotely interesting.In post 140, Rhah wrote:
You're going with the assumption I called him out as in scummy. When I said as much that it wasn't that indicative in way of his alignment. You seem to view all type of pressure as an attack, or that's what you're framing my push as.In post 132, UC Voyager wrote: well the issue is. you kind of had only "peeking" as a reason to try and call out choas. you know you could have said (hey peeking isn't always the best idea).In post 56, Rhah wrote:Oh yeah. Found it interesting how Chaos opens up with just talking about peeks.- Vanderscamp
-
Vanderscamp Mafia Scum
- Vanderscamp
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2065
- Joined: December 10, 2012
Don't lynch people for their playstyle over their alignment.In post 172, Zulfy wrote:
Don't be scummy, that's not my argument.In post 161, Vanderscamp wrote:If you lynch people because you don't like they're style you're probably going to lose a lot of games.
Critical thinking skills are lacking. I've been in games where I was obvtown and the other person obvscum and town lost cuz of the third person's colorful personality.- Vanderscamp
-
Vanderscamp
- Vanderscamp
-
Vanderscamp Mafia Scum
- Vanderscamp
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2065
- Joined: December 10, 2012
I am speculating, that's what happens early D1.In post 184, Rhah wrote:It isn't ordered most/least. Everyone on there is who I've perceived as scum in some fashion. I hope to lynch in there and achieve desired results. necro looks like our lucky candidate right now.
Can't say I've seen you make a decent one, friend.necro wrote:Best post you've made all game.
If I wanted to speak for the sake of it and not be scrutinized I don't think I would have had a hard time. Otherwise you're just speculating and I don't see the point in even responding because I feel like I went through this with Chaos himself already.Vanderscamp wrote: You're allowed to be interested in whatever you want, in the same way that I'm allowed to question it. Why was it interesting to you? Because I also thought you were throwing shade on whoever it was, and ATM it seems like you were just saying it for the sake of saying something.
You're framing my push on you, subtly. If anyone's hyperdefensive it'd be you considering the way our progressions started in the first place. Otherwise, there's things that you can be posting right now. As in, you've done more talking about UCV distracting the town from scum hunting than actually scumhunting. And again, inventing avenues for me to be scum.CheekyTeeky wrote: Then Rhah gets all uppity "omg CT is discrediting me bring it on I'll smash you" so like he's either usually hyperdefensive and irrational as town or he's scum; pushing shade on whoever hoping something sticks.
You went through it with him but then you called it probably not alignment indicative and I no longer had any understanding of why any of it meant anything to you or why you would bother to talk about it.
If you don't respond, it's harder for me to re-evaluate if I'm wrong.- Vanderscamp
-
Vanderscamp Mafia Scum
- Vanderscamp
- Vanderscamp
-
Vanderscamp Mafia Scum
- Vanderscamp
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2065
- Joined: December 10, 2012
If he thought you were new or bad, why would he scumread you?In post 213, necro wrote:I don't think what UC reads me as specifically is as important as the motive behind the read he gives. I agree it's unlikely scum UC bothers scumreading me there though, so the townread doesn't make him more town.
What does come across as odd is that he's really surprised by my play or thinks I'm new/bad and then townreads me. You'd think he'd scumread my play if anything if he was town.
UC is probably scum and if he flips scum I'd look at Vanders.- Vanderscamp
-
Vanderscamp Mafia Scum
- Vanderscamp
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2065
- Joined: December 10, 2012
Really?In post 218, CheekyTeeky wrote:
:/ VOTE: necroIn post 217, necro wrote:Yes I plan to wait until 2 hours before the deadline so my buddies and I can secure the lynch with our nefarious plans!!
*cue evil cackling*- Vanderscamp
-
Vanderscamp Mafia Scum
- Vanderscamp
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2065
- Joined: December 10, 2012
I still think UC is pretty town and I think I like Necro.
I still don't like Rhah calling out Chaos's thing as "interesting" and then saying he thinks it's NAI because it just looks like a meaningless thing to point out if he doesn't scumread it. I think his recent posts have been okay.
I think Luca's reaction to Chaos's scumread on him was somewhat awkward but I don't mind his push on Chaos.- Vanderscamp
-
Vanderscamp Mafia Scum
- Vanderscamp
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2065
- Joined: December 10, 2012
In post 223, CheekyTeeky wrote:
What?In post 221, Vanderscamp wrote:
Really?In post 218, CheekyTeeky wrote:
:/ VOTE: necroIn post 217, necro wrote:Yes I plan to wait until 2 hours before the deadline so my buddies and I can secure the lynch with our nefarious plans!!
*cue evil cackling*
You're voting someone for what is an obvious troll.- Vanderscamp
-
Vanderscamp Mafia Scum
- Vanderscamp
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2065
- Joined: December 10, 2012
Yes, this is my point.In post 226, ChaosOmega wrote:
You're framing this the wrong way. Don't know if this is Vanderscamp's point, but it's mine. The point isn't whether or not it's interesting. If you think it is, great, who cares. If you don't think it's alignment-indicative, why say it at all? Because you thought it was interesting isn't a good reason, because you "have no interest in discussing subjective things". To me, it looks like you were trying to doubt-cast me by jumping on the coattails of Vanderscamp:In post 224, Rhah wrote:
We're talking about something that I decided wasn't alignment indicative, that I said I found interesting. You said it wasn't interesting to you. I have no interest in discussing subjective things or figuring out why you would use that to try to read me. I'd say maybe my recent posts and just about everything else besides the thing you seem to take issue with would be more helpful in discerning my alignment.Vanderscamp wrote: I still don't like Rhah calling out Chaos's thing as "interesting" and then saying he thinks it's NAI because it just looks like a meaningless thing to point out if he doesn't scumread it. I think his recent posts have been okay.
You're arguing semantics. The connotation of this is that you found my opening post suspicious. You could have commented on my opening post before Vanderscamp's vote. It reads like mild support of his vote without taking an actual stance.In post 56, Rhah wrote:Oh yeah. Found it interesting how Chaos opens up with just talking about peeks.
If you have no interest in discussing subjective things, why bring it up in the first place?
Fwiw I agree that your (Rhah) recent posts sound better but you're not giving me any opportunity to try and re-evaluate this point if I'm wrong.- Vanderscamp
-
Vanderscamp Mafia Scum
- Vanderscamp
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2065
- Joined: December 10, 2012
In post 226, ChaosOmega wrote:
You're framing this the wrong way. Don't know if this is Vanderscamp's point, but it's mine. The point isn't whether or not it's interesting. If you think it is, great, who cares. If you don't think it's alignment-indicative, why say it at all? Because you thought it was interesting isn't a good reason, because you "have no interest in discussing subjective things". To me, it looks like you were trying to doubt-cast me by jumping on the coattails of Vanderscamp:In post 224, Rhah wrote:
We're talking about something that I decided wasn't alignment indicative, that I said I found interesting. You said it wasn't interesting to you. I have no interest in discussing subjective things or figuring out why you would use that to try to read me. I'd say maybe my recent posts and just about everything else besides the thing you seem to take issue with would be more helpful in discerning my alignment.Vanderscamp wrote: I still don't like Rhah calling out Chaos's thing as "interesting" and then saying he thinks it's NAI because it just looks like a meaningless thing to point out if he doesn't scumread it. I think his recent posts have been okay.
You're arguing semantics. The connotation of this is that you found my opening post suspicious. You could have commented on my opening post before Vanderscamp's vote. It reads like mild support of his vote without taking an actual stance.In post 56, Rhah wrote:Oh yeah. Found it interesting how Chaos opens up with just talking about peeks.
What intention do you not like?In post 236, CheekyTeeky wrote:
Yes I figured that but would like him to put more than "really" in response. Obviously I know it's sarcasm. I don't like the intention.In post 234, Zulfy wrote:
He thinks you didn't understand that was sarcasm.In post 223, CheekyTeeky wrote:
What?In post 221, Vanderscamp wrote:
Really?In post 218, CheekyTeeky wrote:
:/ VOTE: necroIn post 217, necro wrote:Yes I plan to wait until 2 hours before the deadline so my buddies and I can secure the lynch with our nefarious plans!!
*cue evil cackling*- Vanderscamp
-
Vanderscamp Mafia Scum
- Vanderscamp
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2065
- Joined: December 10, 2012
In post 226, ChaosOmega wrote:
You're framing this the wrong way. Don't know if this is Vanderscamp's point, but it's mine. The point isn't whether or not it's interesting. If you think it is, great, who cares. If you don't think it's alignment-indicative, why say it at all? Because you thought it was interesting isn't a good reason, because you "have no interest in discussing subjective things". To me, it looks like you were trying to doubt-cast me by jumping on the coattails of Vanderscamp:In post 224, Rhah wrote:
We're talking about something that I decided wasn't alignment indicative, that I said I found interesting. You said it wasn't interesting to you. I have no interest in discussing subjective things or figuring out why you would use that to try to read me. I'd say maybe my recent posts and just about everything else besides the thing you seem to take issue with would be more helpful in discerning my alignment.Vanderscamp wrote: I still don't like Rhah calling out Chaos's thing as "interesting" and then saying he thinks it's NAI because it just looks like a meaningless thing to point out if he doesn't scumread it. I think his recent posts have been okay.
You're arguing semantics. The connotation of this is that you found my opening post suspicious. You could have commented on my opening post before Vanderscamp's vote. It reads like mild support of his vote without taking an actual stance.In post 56, Rhah wrote:Oh yeah. Found it interesting how Chaos opens up with just talking about peeks.In post 236, CheekyTeeky wrote:
Yes I figured that but would like him to put more than "really" in response. Obviously I know it's sarcasm. I don't like the intention.In post 234, Zulfy wrote:
He thinks you didn't understand that was sarcasm.In post 223, CheekyTeeky wrote:
What?In post 221, Vanderscamp wrote:
Really?In post 218, CheekyTeeky wrote:
:/ VOTE: necroIn post 217, necro wrote:Yes I plan to wait until 2 hours before the deadline so my buddies and I can secure the lynch with our nefarious plans!!
*cue evil cackling*
If you don't like my vote on you then start being interested in discussing subjective things and why people are reading you.In post 239, Rhah wrote:Rhah (4) - UC Voyager, necro, Vanderscamp, Zulfy
Kangaroo court is in session.- Vanderscamp
-
Vanderscamp Mafia Scum
- Vanderscamp
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2065
- Joined: December 10, 2012
- Vanderscamp
-
Vanderscamp Mafia Scum
- Vanderscamp
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2065
- Joined: December 10, 2012
I don't agree.In post 240, CheekyTeeky wrote:VOTE: Rhah
If Rhah flips scum it probs clears the rest of the wagon. I don't think bussing is optimal or makes sense right now.
If he flips town then that further incriminates the wagon right?- Vanderscamp
-
Vanderscamp Mafia Scum
- Vanderscamp
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2065
- Joined: December 10, 2012
Really?In post 282, necro wrote:
Sounds like a bad case of lazy and fake scumhunting.In post 267, Chip Butty wrote:In post 212, necro wrote:I'm inclined to just not explain reads to be annoying at this point.
Closer to deadline I'll be more serious.
Pro-tip: Telling people youre trying to be annoying sucks out all the annoy from what you're doing. Not that find naked votes annoying, just unhelpful re gamesolving. But whatever, you do your naked vote thing, and I'll do my voting for naked voting thing.In post 262, necro wrote:
I am detecting a hint of frustration.In post 256, Chip Butty wrote:Let's all do quote walls, just to be annoying at this point. Closer to deadline, we can stop.
Spicy!
Acidphoenix is town btw.
Because I think acid has been pretty scummy, he seems to be openly not hunting.- Vanderscamp
-
Vanderscamp Mafia Scum
- Vanderscamp
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2065
- Joined: December 10, 2012
Oh, okay, it wasn't clear at all that you initially thought it was indicative.In post 308, Rhah wrote:
I feel given that none of my pushes have been a tangible threat to your slot's life(either on this day or tomorrow, actually) and I'm maybe the only person who has pushed you, you shouldn't feel like you're in a corner. When people present the impression that they're sorting me but don't respond to things I've said before I tend to think their read is already decided on me for *reasons*. As in I've said things before to you that weren't attacks and didn't get anything back.In post 303, CheekyTeeky wrote:UGH -_-
I gave you several. Here it is in a few sentences. When I brought it up in post 56, I thought it was meaningful in sort of an indicative way. Between that time and post 126 I decided that this was not indicative. What happened somewhere after this point is that you two pushed me for "bringing it up in the first place". Again, this ignores the fact that I had a progression where I genuinely evaluated something. This has happened at least three separate times and I'm still being harped on for something that means nothing.Vanderscamp wrote: If you have no interest in discussing subjective things, why bring it up in the first place?
Fwiw I agree that your (Rhah) recent posts sound better but you're not giving me any opportunity to try and re-evaluate this point if I'm wrong.
Maybe I'm wrong but I don't remember you ever mentioning it.- Vanderscamp
-
Vanderscamp Mafia Scum
- Vanderscamp
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2065
- Joined: December 10, 2012
- Vanderscamp
-
Vanderscamp Mafia Scum
- Vanderscamp
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2065
- Joined: December 10, 2012
What's the point of having multiple alts if he's known to be all of them?In post 318, UnaBombaH wrote:
Just a quick pop-in on my break, and this caught my eye.In post 310, Chip Butty wrote:And 'i keep forgetting to log in' pings me a bit too, though maybe the dude is busy irl.
Morality has MULTIPLE alts, this is one of them - I bet that he meant he forgets to log on to this SPECIFIC account..
I'm past the point of scumreading him for his D1s, because he is always very passive early, and usually solves the game D2/D3.
So he is scum if his content isn't top notch tomorrow..?- Vanderscamp
-
Vanderscamp Mafia Scum
- Vanderscamp
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2065
- Joined: December 10, 2012
Did you get anything from my reaction?In post 347, CheekyTeeky wrote:
I've been pretty clear about why I moved to chip. You've taken my actions out of context to create this cheeky!scum dialogue. I naked voted vander to get a reaction from an early scum lean, I vote necro for being too WIFOMy, I pressured rhah to try and get some straight answers out of him, I vote UCV to get him interacting with the game again, because I didn't like that he feel silent when his wagon disappeared, I had chip as a probs town read but didn't like his last few posts as I explained, I even said his logic is good but I found his tone awful so I'm waiting to see how I feel about him.In post 345, Morality wrote:Cheeky said to Rhah about not setting up another mislynch, but then has changed over to Chip after Chip started doing his Chip thing.
As you can see I'm using my vote to get reactions and I'm giving reads to get more reactions. This is independent of what others are thinking or doing. If they hop on someone I'm trying to get a solid read on then that has nothing to do with me and it's beyond a stretch to say my actions are premeditated to get rid of chip? Seriously.
Also why phrase this as "cheeky wants another mislynch" when I don't know that chip is town. How do you know he's town? And just wtf none of my actions indicate this is true. I hope this is just a misunderstanding and that you're not trying to pocket chip who scum read you. In fact this point is making me feel like chip is probably town if I'm on the right track about you.- Vanderscamp
-
Vanderscamp Mafia Scum
- Vanderscamp
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2065
- Joined: December 10, 2012
You just said you don't think he'd be pushing as hard as he is on you if he's scum?...In post 365, CheekyTeeky wrote:Morality is scum. Doubt = zero.- Vanderscamp
-
Vanderscamp Mafia Scum
- Vanderscamp
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2065
- Joined: December 10, 2012
Have you ever said doubt = 0 as scum?In post 371, CheekyTeeky wrote:
Check out my 100% success rate when I say doubt = zero. Although I've only said it twice. Hopefully this adds to my sample size.In post 368, necro wrote:Morality is a difficult read, I don't see someone could have zero doubt on a scumread. Sounds like you're tunneling or scum.
Would you say it about a town as scum?- Vanderscamp
-
Vanderscamp Mafia Scum
- Vanderscamp
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2065
- Joined: December 10, 2012
- Vanderscamp
-
Vanderscamp Mafia Scum
- Vanderscamp
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2065
- Joined: December 10, 2012
This is scummy but I don't think Necro is with Morality from this.In post 401, necro wrote:Yes it's my first game ever and I have made the mistake of linking myself to my partner being wagoned. Shucks, this game is very hard!!!- Vanderscamp
-
Vanderscamp Mafia Scum
- Vanderscamp
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2065
- Joined: December 10, 2012
Haha, this.In post 431, Rhah wrote:
Only going to quote one of these statements cause the other similar things you say are around the...same level of headache? The fact that you admit to being reckless and a wild card as scum literally means we can expect anything from you, including doing things that youIn post 417, Morality wrote: I at all hesitant when I am scum? If anything, I have a balls to the wall kind of mentality as scum.wouldn't. So it doesn't mean a whole lot. All the self meta stuff is puke.
It's annoying but I feel like it's vaguely towny.
I think CT is probably townier than Morality but I'd guess both are town at this point for no real reason other than that they seem to be genuine. CT calling Morality towny then 100% scum is a pretty weird line to take as scum.- Vanderscamp
-
Vanderscamp Mafia Scum
- Vanderscamp
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2065
- Joined: December 10, 2012
If you want people to listen to you, you probably shouldn't call them ignorant.In post 439, Morality wrote:Oh damn. I haven’t gotten toxic in months. This is going to be fun. Haven’t dealt with the ignorance in players in a while, not to this extent anyways.- Vanderscamp
-
Vanderscamp Mafia Scum
- Vanderscamp
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2065
- Joined: December 10, 2012
You don't actually believe you're contradicting yourself though, right?In post 447, Morality wrote:In post 446, CheekyTeeky wrote:
But unlike you, I assume others are intelligent enough to work out how you're massively contridicting your own arguments. So I don't need to weave a scum dialogue for you like you're trying so hard to make for me. That's what I mean by too easy. You're shooting down your own arguments.In post 437, Morality wrote:
Notice how Cheeky continually states making this too easy yet says nothing, Rhah.In post 434, CheekyTeeky wrote:In post 417, Morality wrote:The fact he called me hesitant should show that I am not scum aligned.
Stop you're making this too easy. And my case isn't eloquent because I'm effing recovering from last night but you had to push me while I'm down so I'm not letting you get away with it.In post 429, Morality wrote:Hesitance implies I stop doing something because I was worried. I’m the guy that had a 2+ year scum streak and has only been lynched once as town in 3+ years. And I can’t even remember the last time I got lynched day 1. When would I ever be “hesitant”?
I’m a headache of a player, yes, but a headache that will catch scum, and a headache as town.
Town tell on my part.
I don’t contradict myself as scum.- Vanderscamp
-
Vanderscamp Mafia Scum
- Vanderscamp
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2065
- Joined: December 10, 2012
- Vanderscamp
-
Vanderscamp Mafia Scum
- Vanderscamp
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2065
- Joined: December 10, 2012
I believe this stuff.In post 459, Morality wrote:
I don’t believe I’ve ever failed to do this when I said this.In post 457, Morality wrote:I’ll conf town myself eventually.- Vanderscamp
-
Vanderscamp Mafia Scum
- Vanderscamp
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2065
- Joined: December 10, 2012
It was annoying but I think it was pretty useful, I think morality, CT and rhah all came across as pretty towny.In post 471, acidphoenix wrote:this seems stupid
is anyone getting anything useful out of this
also UNVOTE:- Vanderscamp
-
Vanderscamp Mafia Scum
- Vanderscamp
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2065
- Joined: December 10, 2012
I Think acidphoenix is openly not hunting.In post 483, Rhah wrote:
Can one read acidphoenix's posts in this game and say you're sure ofIn post 411, Morality wrote: Acidphoenix’s read of me, I’m not sure what exactly it is,anything?- Vanderscamp
-
Vanderscamp Mafia Scum
- Vanderscamp
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2065
- Joined: December 10, 2012
I don't think that's likely.In post 543, UC Voyager wrote:UNVOTE: morality
VOTE: cheekyteeky l-3
I just reread a bit of the current day. Is it possibly Morality and CheekyTeeky are going at each Other so whichever one that isn't lynched looks less scummy. I don't think it is the best move, but it could be possible.- Vanderscamp
-
Vanderscamp Mafia Scum
- Vanderscamp
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2065
- Joined: December 10, 2012
Not good reasoningIn post 553, CheekyTeeky wrote:Wave, Luca, Chaos have been notably silent. I'm pretty sure zulfy is town as noone has a legit reason to scumread them that I've seen.- Vanderscamp
-
Vanderscamp Mafia Scum
- Vanderscamp
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2065
- Joined: December 10, 2012
Very pro-town is an extreme stretch...In post 571, UC Voyager wrote:At first. I really didn't like hero's play style, but it has grown on me. Despite my disliking for naked votes, Necro has been making good points, and seems very pro-town.- Vanderscamp
-
Vanderscamp Mafia Scum
- Vanderscamp
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2065
- Joined: December 10, 2012
You're going to have to explain this one..In post 612, UC Voyager wrote:I think Cheeky is scum due to her big attack on morality which also convinced me morality might also be scum. I'm not sure about necro. I think it might just be his playstyle.- Vanderscamp
-
Vanderscamp Mafia Scum
- Vanderscamp
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2065
- Joined: December 10, 2012
If it's not true, why is she scum?In post 614, UC Voyager wrote:
I think you possibly you both as scum buddies tried to put a push on each Other so that which ever one didn't get lynched looked less scummy, but the more I think about it and the game goes on, the less I think that is true. I think you have been more honest than you were earlier in the day.In post 613, CheekyTeeky wrote:
You think I'm scum because I convinced you someone else is scum? Whaaat?In post 612, UC Voyager wrote:I think Cheeky is scum due to her big attack on morality which also convinced me morality might also be scum. I'm not sure about necro. I think it might just be his playstyle.- Vanderscamp
-
Vanderscamp Mafia Scum
- Vanderscamp
- Mafia Scum
- Mafia Scum
- Posts: 2065
- Joined: December 10, 2012
- Vanderscamp
- Vanderscamp
- Vanderscamp
- Vanderscamp
- Vanderscamp
- Vanderscamp
- Vanderscamp
- Vanderscamp
- Vanderscamp
- Vanderscamp
- Vanderscamp
- Vanderscamp
- Vanderscamp
- Vanderscamp
- Vanderscamp
- Vanderscamp
- Vanderscamp
- Vanderscamp
- Vanderscamp
- Vanderscamp
- Vanderscamp
- Vanderscamp
- Vanderscamp
- Vanderscamp
- Vanderscamp
- Vanderscamp
- Vanderscamp
- Vanderscamp
- Vanderscamp
- Vanderscamp
- Vanderscamp
- Vanderscamp
- Vanderscamp
- Vanderscamp
- Vanderscamp
- Vanderscamp
- Vanderscamp
- Vanderscamp
- Vanderscamp
- Vanderscamp
- Vanderscamp
- Vanderscamp
- Vanderscamp
- Vanderscamp
- Vanderscamp
- Vanderscamp
- Vanderscamp
- Vanderscamp
- Vanderscamp
- Vanderscamp
- Vanderscamp
- Vanderscamp
- Vanderscamp
- Vanderscamp
- Vanderscamp