VOTE: Sergtacos
Hi
And ...?In post 13, Wossi wrote:Skitter made a wagon
Like, are you going somewhere with this, or are you just making inane observations?
What happened to HEM? (And Serg too I suppose)?In post 24, wavemode wrote:At least 1 scum between Dany/Wicked
Are you serious about this?In post 25, Sephiroth wrote:I don't see it. Flubber is a better wagon.
I guess what I'm getting at is why do you want to wagon Flubber?In post 29, Sephiroth wrote:Sorry, meant this:
That I would rather wagon flubber? Yes. Not sure why we're wagoning HEM tbh.In post 27, skitter30 wrote:Are you serious about this?In post 25, Sephiroth wrote:I don't see it. Flubber is a better wagon.
In post 34, Wossi wrote:Maybe because there's not really any town reason to claim scum?
In post 27, skitter30 wrote:Like, are you going somewhere with this, or are you just making inane observations?
I'm not being defensive. I'm trying to figure outIn post 35, Wossi wrote:why so defensive?
Also if you have such a problem with that post, and such strong feelings about it, why the delayed reaction? Why didn't you push it immediately after he said it, instead of waiting for someone else to push it and hopping onto that push?In post 37, Wossi wrote:So why? Why would someone claim scum? Even in RVS, what might someone be thinking when they claim that?In post 36, TwoInAMillion wrote:It's possible I misunderstood, but even so, this is a game of mafia, and to beleive what someone says at face value during the RVS is a little ludicrous.
Town should never lie
VOTE: Flubbernugget
Scum claiming scum is scum and should be lynched
Town claiming scum is lying and should be lynched
At some point, a wagon will have to have been started . . . that's kinda the point if we're trying to lynch someone. Why is that something to be embarassed about? Like unless you were making some deeper observation that I still don't understand, I don't get why you're commenting on the fact that I started a wagon. You were giving a general summary about something relatively inconsequential without explaining why it's important or why I should care. You weren't adding anything by making that post, which is why I'm saying it make it look like you were trying to look busy.In post 39, Wossi wrote:Um, it's page two? I'm pretty sure nobody looks busy...
Don't be embarrassed that you were the first one to sheep a vote.
Wait are you now claiming that you thought I was scum in 13? What on earth were you basing that conclusion on? And if you think I'm scum, why aren't you voting me?In post 41, Wossi wrote:also I was still excited by the fact that I just happened to random vote for scum
OK, he posted, and you've since posted, so can you answer this?In post 41, Wossi wrote:shhh wait until he posts againIn post 40, skitter30 wrote:
Also if you have such a problem with that post, and such strong feelings about it, why the delayed reaction? Why didn't you push it immediately after he said it, instead of waiting for someone else to push it and hopping onto that push?
also I was still excited by the fact that I just happened to random vote for scum
I think it was clearly a joke because I see absolutely no scum motivation in scum seriously claiming in their first post. I don't think the activity thing is per se relevant. It had been like eight hours on a Sunday. From what I know about him, I can see him doing that as a reaction test as town to see who would jump on it.In post 60, Sephiroth wrote:I mean, was it clearly a joke? Maybe. But we're less than 24 hours into Day 1 and if you've noticed Flub hasn't shown up to say anything since. I'm taking it seriously in that its a good enough reason to start a D1 wagon that actually generates discussion. Whether I'm taking it seriously enough to say that I think Flub is scum, obviously not yet. That may change depending on the their next post though. That's kind of the point of an early D1 wagon...see something worth attacking, wagon, see what happens. I think claiming non-town is worth probing, don't you?In post 38, skitter30 wrote:In post 34, Wossi wrote:Maybe because there's not really any town reason to claim scum?
There isn't really any scum reason to claim scum?
Why are you and Sephiroth taking that post seriously when it was clearly a joke?
Firstly, I appreciate the irony of this question.
What does this mean? Why would scum get towncred if they can get through the initial wave of suspicion? And if people actually get towncred from doing this, why would town not do that to also get towncred? From this explanation, I don't get why what he did is AI or why you're voting him.In post 84, Chip Butty wrote:Flubber: I don't mind people poking there. I think town tend to avoid jokes like that because there's no upside and they don't need the aggravation. Scum, otoh, see an upside in getting pseudo towncred if they can get through the initial wave of suspicion.
In fact, let's increase the heat a little:
VOTE: Flubber
In post 20, Sergtacos wrote:Vote HEM pleaseIn post 19, Sephiroth wrote:VOTE: flubbernuggetFlubbernugget wrote:Not me
Seems like a pretty open and shut case to me.
What changed about HEM that you went from trying to get votes on him to sheeping him?
What's your opinion on HEM atm?In post 84, Chip Butty wrote:First HEM. RVS vote but unvoted when his wagon took off for no reason.
What does this mean and what are you referring to? I feel like this question is too general to have any meaningful answers.In post 87, humaneatingmonkey wrote:Guys, how do you classify bullshit vote reasons? Scum or town?
I don't think he's done anything L-1 worthy, nor do I like the fact that you're implying we should put him there.In post 104, humaneatingmonkey wrote:Will Flubber get to L-1? That is the question.
He usually seems super scummy as town, and tends to place votes for really bizarre, nonsensical reasons that just look super scummy. I don't think anything you've said here is AI for him.In post 105, Sephiroth wrote:I also REALLY don't like Post 68 from twoinamillion. The reasoning seems manufactured and they had JUST finished trying to shut down any discussion involving Flub's claim. Seems a little sketchy to interpret Flub's post that way and turn it into a vote.
I'm pretty sure he was doing a reaction test to see who is going to use that as a fairly thin excuse to opportunistically push him, kinda like how you, HEM, Chip, and Serg are doing. You still failed to explain why I'm scummy, or how you figured that out by post 13. You've also neglected to explain why you had a strong, delayed reaction to Flubber. I don't get why you waited until someone else pushed him if you feel so strongly on the subject.In post 117, Wossi wrote:please explain how claiming scum is a gambit.
to anyone asking why I'm voting flubber and not skitter: there's power in wagons and there's more then one scum.
You're characterizing my vote as weak but are also neglecting to consider the context that came before that (specifically 38, 40, and 42).In post 119, TwoInAMillion wrote:Nothing with my reasoning. Both of these votes have weak reasoning.
In post 41, Wossi wrote:also I was still excited by the fact that I just happened to random vote for scum
* he exhibits strong feelings about 'claiming scum' = 'scum' (a position that I think is unfounded), and hops on Flubber,In post 146, wavemode wrote:...Where? And what is an "unusual amount of confidence" anyway? Pointing out something suspicious and placing a vote?In post 145, Wickedestjr wrote:Wossi demonstrated an unusual amount of confidence in his skitter scum read on page two
According to Wossi, claiming scum means that Flubber is scum. I think if he actually believed this, he would have mentioned it and pushed it during the first possible oppurtunity. Instead, he waited until other people, like Sephiroth, made the push. It kinda looks like he waited for the push to become legitimized by other people and hopped on when it seemed like no one was objecting. His actions ('hopping on to the Flubber wagon only once other people made it a thing') don't match his stated beliefs ('claiming scum means that Flubber is scum'). His Flubber vote reeks of opportunism, which is scummy to me.In post 152, wavemode wrote:Maybe I'm just slow but I see literally nothing AI here
Also, wasn't this over the course of, what, a few hours? It'd be one thing if he called Flubber scummy in October and voted him in December, but your definition of delayed reaction is a bit too stringent for real life. Not everything happens all at once in forum mafia
This case is the actual definition of reachy, btw. But it's the early game, most cases are bound to be reachy. Reachiness alone does not a scum make, as I explain farther down ⬇ You're focusing too much on the reachiness aspect and ignoring when I said he's parking his vote on an already forming wagon
I didn't say he didn't have any explanations for why he thinks I'm scum. I'm saying that his stated reasons are bad in that they don't actually explain a scumlean. I wasn't defensive and he failed to show where he thought I was being defensive. I don't think that starting a wagon in RVS is AI. He gave reasons why he didn't like me, but they weren't credible because he hasn't actually backed them up (defensive), or weren't AI (starting a wagon). In fact, the 'defensive' thing just looks like he's throwing a accusation at me instead of actually talking with me or answering the question.In post 152, wavemode wrote:This is false btw. If you don't believe his reasons (he thought you were defensive and didn't like you starting a wagon) is one thing but to say he has no explanation is untrue
What makes Wicked's vote worse than Taco's? Tacos also said nothing to or about Flubber before his L-2 on the Flubber wagon, beyond asking Sephiroth to switch his vote from Flubber to HEM.In post 152, wavemode wrote:Now WickedJr, who said absolutely nothing to or about Wossi in the very early game, then was suddenly Mr. "hey i think this Wossi guy is horrible and I believe these other four people who coincidentally are already voting him are astute mafia players whom I agree with wholeheartedly. Let me draw up some reasons Wossi is a scumlord and slap my vote there too" is the worst among them in my view. (aka Mr. I'm going to do nothing for a long time then vote Wossi 90 minutes after Nexus posts a VC showing him to be at L-3. Was the vote based on Wossi's play? Or opportunism?)
This is obviously operating under the assumption that Wossi is town, which currently I am for a wide variety of reasons - some gut, some logical, some meta, and not the least of which is the speed of the growth of his wagon.
Bolded never happened. He didn't say that anywhere.In post 152, wavemode wrote:"hey i think this Wossi guy is horrible and I believethese other four people who coincidentally are already voting him are astute mafia players whom I agree with wholeheartedly. Let me draw up some reasons Wossi is a scumlord and slap my vote there too"
This is true. If we simulated a game and votes were placed at random on various players, a resulting wagon is more likely to be on town, since there are more town players.In post 171, wavemode wrote:Any given wagon is more likely to be on Town than Scum, just given random chance.
I thought I wasn't going to be able to talk about this because of ongoing games, but 1954 ended yesterday.In post 21, Wickedestjr wrote:Unvote. Vote: TwoInAMillion
for already misreading. Pretty sure he wasn't criticizing wavemode.
This vote is like really, really bad. Naked voting for L-1 (well now L-2 since dany unvoted after)? Um, no.
I like this, and I think it is a reasonable explanation for your vote on Flubber at that time; probably one of the better reasoned votes on the wagon.In post 181, Chip Butty wrote:It was mostly just early game pressure. Having said that, I don't think I've ever made that kind of joke as either alignment but i could maybe imagine doing it as scum. The thought being that maybe people would think along the lines that it might create the inpression of being town by virtue of being relaxed enough to make a joke like that. Hence 'pseudo cred', cred not based on anything real. As town i wouldn't want the aggro from the initial wave of suspicion because it would just distract from scumhunting.
In contrast, I dislike this, since it seems like you're opportunistically looking for a popular wagon to join.In post 181, Chip Butty wrote:I'll catch up reading and see if i want to change my vote. I see wossi is the fashionable wagon now.
a) I still don't think I was defensiveIn post 190, Wossi wrote:I was mostly just red flagged by her defensiveness to early day one poking/prodding/meaningless accusations. There wasn't much else to go on. I wanted to see if I could gauge some more reactions from her, hence the ambiguity. But I'm liking her more recent postings.
I think he just naturally looks incredibly scummy, and that's really, really hard to diffrentiate between bad/scummy town play and actual scum play from him.In post 193, Wickedestjr wrote:His play here looks similar to that game. The only difference that I can see is that he seems to be misreading quite a bit in this game; his reasons for voting monkey/Seph seem wrong and he also accidentally voted the wrong person before voting Seph. I'm not sure if this is because he's genuinely missing things or if he's scum that just doesn't care about understanding what's happening in the game. It's difficult to say because he has no scum games to look at. Right now he's a neutral for me, very slight town lean if anything.In post 188, skitter30 wrote:I thought I wasn't going to be able to talk about this because of ongoing games, but 1954 ended yesterday.In post 21, Wickedestjr wrote:Unvote. Vote: TwoInAMillion
for already misreading. Pretty sure he wasn't criticizing wavemode.
Wicked, how would you characterize Two here in relation to that game?
What do you think about him?
Flubber yes, Wossi no. I think several reasons have been given why Wossi is scummy, and they're all pretty good ones at this stage of the game. He also hasn't really rebutted any of them, although tbf, he said he was busy irlIn post 202, Sephiroth wrote:Man is it just me or do both wagons feel exactly like early D1 wagons that stuck around too long? I don't think anyone has given a convincing reason to lynch either wossi or flub.
This is how I feel about them too, and to a certain, but lesser extent, you and Seph as well. You're all pushing the right things imo, and taking reasonable positions. I'm just slightly concerned that I'm biased towards townreading all four of you because you're pushibg things that I agree with.In post 205, implosion wrote:Danny and Wicked both look somewhat generically town but could both easily be me misreading a playstyle.
In post 211, Flubbernugget wrote:Wavemode's misrepresentation of skitter's scum read on wosi as a function of time as opposed to events is extremely dishonest. I expect a wosi scum flip to implicate wave.
I feel like these two quotes don't really match exactly. You vehemently dislike Wave's argument and accuse him of misrepping me to the point where you make assocatives between scum!wossi and wave, but I kinda feel like the strength of this sentiment was walked back in the second quote after people pushed back against the initial quote.In post 219, Flubbernugget wrote:Wave is probably town because I'm only taking issue with one of their pushes. Even if I don't like their pushes, as per their recollection of the game I played with him I'm willing to offer the benefit of the doubt that there's a method to their madness.
I agree that it kinda looks like Wossi is lurking a bit, but he did state that he was busy irl and that he would be here tomorrow. I disagree that he needed to claim during that post, as I don't think anyone was planning on lynching him before he got back.In post 215, Lalendra wrote:I don't like that Wossi has checked in since the wagon really built on him (190) and still hasn't felt the need to claim. If he's town I think he needs to do that, and RL can't be the issue here because it takes less time to claim than it did to write up that post
To be fair, the last time he posted, he was at L-2, and just a cursory skimming of the thread would indicate that a lot of people are finding him sketchy. I find it plausible that he might have time to skim along but not post a reasonable defense.In post 223, Lalendra wrote:Yes, I read the post. When he says "don't lynch me until Friday," that's a pretty clear sign that he is reading the thread and chose not to respond to his accusers yet. Claiming seems prudent in that situation.
I think you were here for the buildup of the wossi wagon. There's a lot of support for it, and he hasn't really posted much of consequence since then; he's said he's busy until tomorrow.In post 243, humaneatingmonkey wrote:Has there any claimings, wagons, I missed? Anyone kind enough to put me back into the game?
I don't think word-count in general is a scumtell. Some people post one-liners. Some people post paragraphs. Like the length of my posts has absolutely nothing to do with my alignment (the number of posts I make on the other hand . . . . )In post 257, humaneatingmonkey wrote:My eyes rolled so far back that I felt my brain touch my iris.
I was kidding. But I'm still on the lookout for well-curated posts because it screams day chat editing. I'm also not wrong.
No one here is ever going to let him lynch anyone based on word-count. It's such a bizarre thing to suggest that it looks like you're trying to throw any old accusation at him to see what might stick so that it looks like you're thinking about the game when you're actually not.In post 274, TwoInAMillion wrote:*sigh* My point was that that is what could happen if he followed through with his line of logic.In post 272, skitter30 wrote:Above, it sounds like you were accusing him of trying to set-up mislynches.
I was scum with Serg in 1946. He's a lot more self-aware than he might appear to be, and was actually pretty cognizant about the reactions his actions might instigate; he'd talk to his partners a lot and run things by us to make sure he didn't look scummy. (ie 'should I lolhammer?'). If anything, I think that town!taco is less worried about how he looks to others. He also, like, tried to look more invested, even as he played up the stoner dude persona. Like he tried to look like he was contributing and scumhunting, but played up being high so that people wouldn't take what he was saying *that* seriously.In post 297, Sephiroth wrote:I think this line of argument winds up being fairly wifom but for the record I don't think serg-scum was too worried about the consequences.
I think he's done several sketchy things, including his push on Flubber which imo was kinda delayed until after you pushed it since it looks like he specifically waited to see how people would react if it got pushed. His response to me pointing this was was to attribute the delay to being excited for finding scum so early, but I don't think I'd said anything AI by that point. He's also admitted to making 'meaningless accusations', and I don't understand the town motivation in that.In post 299, Sephiroth wrote:With Wossi to me it seems the wagon is built on him holding a position that happens to be unpopular (lynch all liars) with this group of players more than anything particularly scummy that they've done. I dont think there was a significant shift in rhetoric between 34 and 37, since it all falls under the umbrella of lynch all liars which is not a novel belief. Its an older playstyle sir, but it checks out. 41 just seems like he's making a joke about his random vote and its been read into like crazy. This isn't page 2 anymore. I mean I could respond to each specific post thats called out if people want but suffice it to say I just don't see what others seem to see in Wossi.
I think it's insufficient when your major argument for why Wossi might be town is that you meta townread him for a game you can't discuss. You haven't actually pointed to anything in this game for why he's town; at best you've kinda handwaved away some of the arguments against him.In post 309, wavemode wrote:Just to be clear, you think I'm lying? Or you think meta is not a sufficient reason to townread someoneIn post 306, Chip Butty wrote:Just did a complete reread of the game. Scummest so far is wave's 'meta' tr of wossi.
I'm not ignoring the things that have since happened. I don't think I should drop things just because they happened 10 pages ago when the person involved hasn't been active in the thread during that time and can't talk to people about them.In post 313, Sephiroth wrote:And I think that given all that its a lot more sketch that people are willing to drop L-1 votes and demand claims. Its like you're living in RVS and refuse to accept that scummy players and scummy actions are happening RIGHT NOW.
I still don't understand why this was important or relevant to point out. If you expected it to be passed over, why note it at all?In post 314, Wossi wrote:Then Skitter was the first person to put a second vote on somebody, and I pointed it out. I expected my observation would just be passed over, maybe more interesting after town had more information,
But you implied you would answer the question after he posted again, so I don't get why you'd say that if you weren't intending on answering after he posted.In post 316, Wossi wrote:Because I thought either or both of you might be scum and I didn't want to say "Oh, I'm voting to apply pressure and get reactions!" because that kind of defeats the point.
That post isn't remotely AI for me, but whatever. More interestingly, you called me scum in 117, which came after this.In post 323, Wossi wrote:This is the point when I decided Skitter was town
In post 329, Wossi wrote:I don't understand how people seriously thought I was making a serious accusation on page two. No one catches scum on page two.
These two quotes don't match. You were pushing him very seriously at the time. You're now backtracking on how hard you were pushing him. You weren't even suggesting per se that you caught scum; the above post sounds like you're pushing a policy lynch on him regardless of his alignment. I don't understand why we *shouldn't* have taken the above post seriously.In post 37, Wossi wrote: So why? Why would someone claim scum? Even in RVS, what might someone be thinking when they claim that?
Town should never lie
VOTE: Flubbernugget
Scum claiming scum is scum and should be lynched
Town claiming scum is lying and should be lynched
Wossi, how would you characterize the above quote?In post 42, skitter30 wrote:Wait are you now claiming that you thought I was scum in 13? What on earth were you basing that conclusion on? And if you think I'm scum, why aren't you voting me?
This sounds like OMGUS-lite.In post 343, Wossi wrote:i'd come across another post where you were pushing me and my read would drop again to scum very quickly.
If you don't intend on throwing out this accusation . . . why are you mentioning it?In post 343, Wossi wrote:I won't mention how you look like scum who threw all your chips on a mislynch and now need to reach to justify why you're still on my wagon
In post 368, iDanyboy wrote:My 40% winning percentage says otherwise.In post 365, TwoInAMillion wrote:iDannyboy is probably town but I think he could do a better job of getting opinions from others and not just forming conclusions by himself.
K, why?In post 375, Mulch wrote:Ah, 75% sure that sergetacos is scum. Sorry bud that I replaced.
If you're seriously going to try to scumread me here after 1946 I can't take anything you're saying as credible.In post 383, Mulch wrote:Scumteam is
Serge
One in wicked/steph/wave
One in million/chip/implosion/flubber/Skitter
I don't disagree with the meta, but I think his play here matches the town meta. He actually like tries as scum. Here he made a lolmiller claim, and then disappeared for llike five days.In post 384, Mulch wrote:Basically, he acts more jokes, never gives reasons, and throws his vote around too much as Town. This game he's giving reasons and vote parking. Probably scum
And . . . he hasn't explained anything here?In post 392, Mulch wrote:Interesting, that's true. But I've never seen him explain things as town. NeverIn post 390, skitter30 wrote:I don't disagree with the meta, but I think his play here matches the town meta. He actually like tries as scum. Here he made a lolmiller claim, and then disappeared for llike five days.In post 384, Mulch wrote:Basically, he acts more jokes, never gives reasons, and throws his vote around too much as Town. This game he's giving reasons and vote parking. Probably scum
I don't think it is. I also think in his recent catchup that he backtracked on how hard he pushed his flubber vote to make it seem like it was less of a thing.In post 398, Mulch wrote:Skitter is your case really based on post 13? Really? Cmon man its page 1. Your kind of obvious town here but no offense that case is shit
In post 401, Mulch wrote:The rambling paragraphs could be copy pasted from our scum game
And he literally naked voted someone for the L-1 vote - we know scum have daychat. I can't see scum!serg not asking his partners if this was a good idea or not, and I def can't see them letting him do that???In post 404, Mulch wrote:OK, that's it for today. I'm going to be pretty low effort and low time to this game.
VOTE: sergetacos
I do think his Miller claim is towny tho.
This was L-1.
You unvoted him already? And I don't want to unvote wossi. He's my biggest scumlean right now.In post 413, Mulch wrote:UNVOTE: sergetacos
Idk
Skitter I'll unvote him if you unvote wossi
Any lurkers we can lynch?
I've found that getting rid of those lead to town wins
In post 160, Sergtacos wrote:In my perspective it was an obvious joke.
And lol no.In post 432, Mulch wrote:wossi
Why do I feel like you're scum here?In post 434, Mulch wrote:I mean wave could be scum cause he's trying.In post 431, skitter30 wrote:K, now read page 2.
Wave is my next biggest scumlean and I'd be voting there. But you're going to have explain why I shouldn't be voting wossi beyond 'lolmeta'. You can't say all my reasons are bad ffs when you clearly don't know what you're talking about.
Meta is the best way to read people actually, it's not lolmeta
It's
Meta literally tells you allignments
And
Your read is based on page 1
Cmon. Really Skitter
No.
Yes.In post 439, Mulch wrote:I sort of don't want to add Dany because all 3 scum leans he has are town pretty sure
Skitter if wossi is town, u still be townreading Dany?
Yeah, and you acknowledging it doesn't make it any less scummy.In post 443, Mulch wrote:Your right, that's pretty scummy of me to switch on wave.
No. Until you can explain why he's town *in this game* I'm going to be stubborn.In post 444, Mulch wrote:Skitter my man you have to trust me ans wave on wossi. The man is town
Why do I feel like you're just cycling through names until you find somebody you don't think I'm going to put up a fuss about?In post 445, Mulch wrote:VOTE: chip
Gonna place this vote because i think he's useless as town too
Let's Lynch chip
Yeah, I know. I've never played against you while I was town before, but I've played as scum with you like four times, and I've gotten a certain vibe from your town and scum games.In post 446, Mulch wrote:For example Skitter
I'm scummy as town
Towny as scum
Even if I was being Completely scummy, I'm probably town
That's why meta matters
Like you dropped Serg/Flubber with almost no effort on my part. And both of those, and the push on Chip now, almost feel like policy.In post 454, skitter30 wrote:Why do I feel like you're just cycling through names until you find somebody you don't think I'm going to put up a fuss about?