In post 125, Lalendra wrote:Well, it seems like this game is going to be progressing at a good clip. Hi all, back from Thanksgiving shenanigans and ready to dive in.
In post 45, Aster wrote:Curious is how quickly you backtrack on asking for a roleclaim. Northside
hadn't even said a word
and you already felt like you needed to defend yourself with "no, I totally wasn't asking for roleclaims!". It gives the impression that
you knew
that you just committed a scum action.
There is one more curious thing about asking for roles: suppose Tex would claim her role. We, as townies, wouldn't have a clue whether her role was town or not. The mafia, however, would know—and if Tex is town (like you
somehow
silently assumed in post
#35), then its all the more power to them. Roleclaiming seems kinda more beneficial to mafia than to town.
I would vote you, but my vote is already on you from the RVS, so I shall do the following:
UNVOTE: mutantdevle
VOTE: mutantdevle4reals
I agree with Aster's reasoning here, I really really don't like the rolefishing Mutant is doing. It's wayyyy too early in the game for that and is not at all beneficial to town. Even less beneficial is the way in which Mutant pointed out who should be the first NK, like are you kidding me?
In post 47, mutantdevle wrote:Luckily for me, my placement in the list allowed me to choose my role more comfortably. Whether or not I received said role or what role I was after I am unwilling to disclose at this time.
So you acknowledge that you are unwilling to disclose your role; why would you feel that Tex may have been willing to do so?
In post 54, mutantdevle wrote:I hadn't previously considered the possibility of scum taking roles to prevent town having them. Possibly because I'm someone who prefers to boost one's own team rather than subtracting from the other.
Look at this. I mean REALLY LOOK AT IT. He draws a parallel between the two and basically says "As scum, I prefer to boost my own team rather than try to subtract from town by taking their PR's away."
In post 38, northsidegal wrote:wow, finally getting this started - it feels like it's been over a month since i signed up.
In post 24, mutantdevle wrote: In post 18, Creature wrote:Leaving here that I detected so far one post that looks very forced and one post that looks very genuine.
Free towncred if you can find each.
12 & 16?
Also I get the feeling this question is to just test for people who want to appear townie.
why did you answer it, then?
I would like an answer to this as well.
I don't like this. His join date is a month ago but he already said earlier in the thread that he has plenty of experience playing mafia, and in case that wasn't clear, he even refutes your noob claim later:
In post 96, mutantdevle wrote: In post 88, Creature wrote:What I'm worried about mutantdevle is that he has no idea of how mafia works here. So I'm thinking his rolefishing is town motivated even if it's pretty bad.
I’m familiarising myself with how things work on this site. I’m yet to complete a game here but I am currently in 3 of them. On the EE forums however I have played at least 6 games and even hosted one. The mafia culture there is a lot different though. So basically I’m not completely inexperienced and I wouldn’t want anyone to discard me as that.
I almost think that Creature is a scumbuddy who is trying to help out Mutant, and Mutant is just too prideful to take the bait.
In post 102, wilky wrote:
I told you that scum participated in the draft... Surely that's better than saying look at the setup
Firstly, you played a "I don't know how this setup works" trick to look more town, then you took the conversation off topic and tried to keep it off topic, seems scummy to me.
VOTE: Chip butty
I don't like how Wilky is willfully ignoring the rolefishing issue which has generated so much discussion otherwise.
In post 108, Chip Butty wrote:If i had to pick 3 right now:
Wilky for being squirmy and casting a defensive vote.
Mutant for blatant and ill-advised role fishing.
Aster for too much setup spec.
In no particular order yet...
I don't know how I feel about this, he acknowledges the issue with Mutant but it seems obligatory, like he just has to acknowledge what's going on.
In post 118, Creature wrote: In post 12, Aster wrote:VOTE: mutantdevie for bandwagoning.
(This is totally unrelated from my fear of mutant zombies.)
Seemed forced.
In post 16, CommKnight wrote:VOTE: Pisskop - One scum in the group of 1's for sure.
Also holy shit, look at that. I managed to pick the one number that wouldn't screw me and someone else over.
Seemed genuine.
Can you explain this a bit more? These are both RVS votes, surely your reads have to have developed a little more since then. Also, why are you just now answering this question, which was already pointed out by Mutant as seemingly obvious fishing for towncred?
Ah, her first post. This is probably her towniest post, and it's what she's been riding off of. She looks like she's scumhunting (she isn't, she doesn't follow up on anything she asks here), she gives some bullshit opinions like how Aster's RVS vote seems forced (lmao what), and she goes after mutantdevle because
everyone
is going after mutantdevle and he's already making himself out to be the easy target for D1.
What's that? Her
towniest
post is this garbage? Yeeepppp.
She then adds on a vote from mutantdevle, which was easy to see coming..
In post 152, Lalendra wrote: In post 148, mutantdevle wrote:I do not accept I was role fishing I was simply asking a fish if they'd be willing to jump out of the water. I had no intention of throwing my hook into the water if she said no.
This just sounds like semantics.
In post 148, mutantdevle wrote:
Texcat had free choice of role. She had the freedom to choose absolutely any role on the list without worry that someone else may take the role. As a result, she could choose whichever role she thought was the strongest.
Hence she potentially has the strongest and most valuable role in the game.
Fake claiming as something either less useful or potentially damaging for the mafia if they were to target her could prevent them from doing so. Personally,
I would consider the act of fake claiming as a little selfish
since there are the dangers of someone CC and it would divert the kill to someone else but I put the option there for if she wanted to take it.
Either way, starting a conversation about her role is anti-town, to me. If she has the strongest and most valuable role in the game, why bring attention to it? You said it might benefit town to know what it was, but it also benefits scum. And then you say fake-claiming would be selfish, but by bringing up the topic of her claim (whether you think it was role-fishing or not is irrelevant), you are leading to one or the other of those eventualities. If she indicates she doesn't want to claim, you have still cast a spotlight on her, turning her into lynchbait if she is town, and thereby potentially losing one of our biggest assets.
In post 199, Lalendra wrote:What I don't understand is that Mutant keeps going back to "I was giving her the option to roleclaim." Everyone has the option to roleclaim at any point in the game, she didn't need your permission to do it. And you misunderstood what I said about her being lynchbait. I didn't say that a fakeclaim would make her lynchbait; I said that whether she fakeclaims or claims or doesn't claim, SHE IS NOW LYNCHBAIT purely because you brought attention to her. Whether or not scum would have drawn that conclusion on their own is irrelevant; you didn't need to point it out to them. At best it's anti-town.
She makes the easy argument everyone had already made, which is "rolefishing is bad kay". These posts aren't absolutely terrible, at least. Just, you know. Easy.
In post 207, Lalendra wrote:
Yeah, I really don't like 171 either but like...that's just SUCH obvious buddying. It's hard to see it as anything else but my god that would be blatant if that's what it was.
No opinion, no rebuttal, no agreement. Just fluff comment. This becomes a heavy theme in Lalendra's posts from here on out, by the way.
In post 208, Lalendra wrote: In post 189, mutantdevle wrote:Not everyone on the wagon is irrational. Like I say, I would probably have been on the wagon myself if a wagon built around someone else asking the same question I did.
Not to be sarcastic, but if this is the case, why did you ask it? Did you only realize how scummy it was after everyone pointed it out?
In post 209, Lalendra wrote: In post 203, mutantdevle wrote:
I don't get why you need to be sarcastic here other than to purposely be aggravating in a non-constructive way?
I didn't understand how what they were saying by describing textcat as lynchbait. So instead of assuming they were in the wrong, I took into consideration that perhaps the fault was on my part for not understanding the term. Over the last few weeks, I have been quickly learning a lot of new terms in mafia so it wouldn't be such a stretch to me if I simply misunderstood the term. Hence my post clarified that in case that was what was happening.
Was your post in which you said "lynchbait is bait to be lynched" not sarcastic? That was how I read it.
And I misspoke when I used that term I think. What I meant to say is that she is more likely to be either lynched or NK'd because of the attention brought to her. I still say that just because you felt it was "obvious" that her role was objectively the best because she had the opportunity to pick first doesn't necessitate you pointing that out. I'm also confused about your motivation for doing it in the sense that you mentioned that you only wanted a yes or no, not an actual claim, but on the other hand you also said that you were giving her an opening to claim comfortably. Which was it? Again, I feel that she could have easily claimed without having someone give her an opening, and that at best, asking her that question exposed her strategy quite early in the game.
These two posts aren't terrible, but.. Still, no opinions, no real anything other than disagreeing and back-and-forth with mutantdevle.
In post 244, Lalendra wrote:I find it funny that Creature keeps referring to mutant being newbtown when a) they've played on another site together and b) mutant has made it very clear that he is not new, that he has played before, and that he does not want to be discounted as a new player.
Her last post before her posts become spaced by 48 hour pads. And it's just fluff. Disappointing.
In post 298, Lalendra wrote:Sorry, I've been reading but apparently didn't post recently. Nothing much has changed for me, I want to lynch Mutant but would also be down for a pisskop lynch.
"Just gonna keep flying under the radar here, nothing's changed btw, still wanting to lynch mutantdevle. Oh also down for pisskop since it seems people are starting to sway that way. No opinion given. No reads on anyone else. No specifying if I want to lynch pisskop as a PL or because I scumread him."
In post 337, Lalendra wrote:Aster, I don't think I understand why you were pushing an answer regarding pisskop's lynch, and then suddenly decided to switch from him to Mutant.
That said, I would be willing to lynch either of them, so I guess my vote stays where it is until the end of the day gets closer.
Pretends to be scumhunting, without actually.. asking a question. Asserts that once again she's cool with either lynch and then goes quiet. Again.
In post 363, Lalendra wrote:She probably didn't tell you her theory because you didn't claim so it's still just a theory.
In post 371, Lalendra wrote:Could you share reads without writing walls? I think we have plenty of time in the day, and I for one am curious as to what you think of the current gamestate. I would also, to your point, like to see more/indepth posts from Creature.
T-t-t-triple fluff combo!
In post 396, Lalendra wrote:The wagon on mutant built pretty quickly, what information do you hope to gain from it if he is town?
In post 397, Lalendra wrote:Like if there's days of discussion leading up to a lynch, that's one thing, but he was wagoned really early on and the pace of the game since then has been fairly slow. I guess all lynches offer some information though.
Suddenly seems somewhat opposed to lynching mutantdevle? Doesn't specify why or even clarify that that's the case, just kind of.. implies that it wouldn't give information. Or perhaps doesn't understand how to gain information from lynches.
Similar to the above, doesn't seem to understand how someone's flip can help determine the alignment of people who are on the wagon and help give scrutiny to their arguments. That's NAI though, I guess.
In post 479, Lalendra wrote:I really don't like pisskop's posts or playstyle this game, but I don't know if he'd be trolling so aggressively as scum. I do think he's a liability to town, and I'm willing to put him at L-2.
VOTE: pisskop
Yes, he'd troll this aggressively as scum, by the way. That's pisskop, always.
She mentions that she doesn't think he's scum, and that she wants to lynch him as a policy lynch.
Especially because in D2, policy lynching pisskop while scumreading mutantdevle
is the biggest part of her case on me.
In post 487, Lalendra wrote: In post 486, Creature wrote:
Anyone who somehow got to the conclusion pisskop and mutant are both scum with me as scum defending them and still somehow defends it without ever doubting.
Which is who? I feel like you're making soft pushes without really naming names, and leaving yourself room to change your mind later.
Says Creature is making soft pushes and not really naming names in order to change his mind later... While doing the exact same thing. Remember, she hasn't given a single read this game so far, and we're almost to post 500! She hasn't even MENTIONED anyone else in this game other than mutantdevle, pisskop, Aster, and Creature.
In post 528, Lalendra wrote: In post 489, Chip Butty wrote: In post 479, Lalendra wrote:I really don't like pisskop's posts or playstyle this game, but I don't know if he'd be trolling so aggressively as scum. I do think he's a liability to town, and I'm willing to put him at L-2.
VOTE: pisskop
FoS @ Lalendra. Pisskop is now playing the game and has been for a while. My problem with him right now is he is question dodging and generally not gamesolving.
But I didn't say that he wasn't playing the game....
I LOVE this awkward interaction between Chip Butty and Lalendra. When Lalendra flips scum, I say we look at Chip next.
In post 537, Lalendra wrote:Well we only need one more person to vote pk to get a lynch, since Mutant already said he would hammer. So to those of you who aren't voting pk, why? What would convince you to move your vote?
A NL would suck as we wouldn't gain any information at all today so let's not let the day go to waste.
Still doesn't mention anyone other than mutant and pk, still not scumhunting. Just asserting that NLs suck and that someone should get on the PK wagon. Then..
What? We're already here? That's it? If you thought Day One was fluffy and empty, just waiiiit for this shit.
She opens up strong, with..
In post 578, Lalendra wrote: In post 577, Viomi wrote:Hey guys, when I inevitably get mislynched or NK'd and going through my ISO, remember this: Chip Butty is definitely town.
Not that I necessarily disagree, but why are you so sure?
This is my first PYP; is it common for the numbers to play a large role in gamesolving? I figured that it would be more like a traditional game, in terms of post analysis and associatives, but it seems like the draft order and the numbers people picked are factoring into not only setup spec but also NK spec.
Did I say strong? Oops. Makes sure to open up with "Not that I necessarily disagree," STILL refusing to give us any information on her positions, opinions, reads, ANYTHING. Then asks some generic questions about the setup, blah blah.
In post 592, Lalendra wrote:Not a fan really of the way Viomi is interacting. Just really seems like they're not putting a lot of critical thought into the process. I'm not so sure I buy scum!creature just yet, the failure to tell us whether he played a PYP in the past doesn't seem inherently scummy to me. Mutant is also becoming less scummy as time goes on; not necessarily that the rolefishing seems less scummy to me, moreso that nothing since then has pinged me as scummy and I'm no longer convinced that the question in and of itself was scummy. I guess Mutant is null for now. I would definitely like to hear more from Comm and NSG but not sure I'm willing to call them "suspicious" just yet.
VOTE: viomi
I really could just post this, and this would summarize the entirety of everything she's done Day Two. Bullshit reasons for a bullshit vote, since she sees people are starting to scumread me and there's an easy wagon coming up. She makes sure to sit on the fence on Creature and Mutant, while looking like she's giving reads but she really isn't. Then does the same for Comm and NSG. By the way, that's the first time she's mentioned them this game. Also says she'd "like to hear more from" them. LMFAO.
In post 595, Lalendra wrote:Mutant, you're more dedicated to the game of mafia than I am to anything in life.
That said, do you think it's possible that there are games that don't contain "Pick Your Power" in the title which may be throwing off your statistics? Also how do replacements, inactivity due to RL circumstances, etc. factor in? I do believe that statistics and meta are valuable but I feel like there are a variety of other, far less predictable forces at play that make it nigh impossible to always accurately predict how a player will behave in a given scenario.
Blah blah blah, fluff fluff fluff, look like I'm helping but really I'm not..
In post 596, Lalendra wrote:Personally I struggle with meta because while some things are meta tells, calling it out basically either tells the person "okay good, I should keep doing what I'm doing" or "shit, they're on to me, better change it up" so I appreciate your approach of not just laying it all out there right away. I will, however, be interested to see how you use the data to substantiate your claims as the game progresses.
And.. morrre fluff..
In post 644, Lalendra wrote:@Mutant - Stating a reason is fine if you don't feel it requires explanation. It's up to the people who find your statement unclear to ask for additional details. I personally am not going to explain myself ad nauseam unless people have specific questions because why waste my breath if a simple statement would have sufficed? You're criticizing people for not being clear enough but not asking for any clarification.
@Viomi - While that may be true, a time-stamped digital note to yourself doesn't really help US, does it?
pedit - jfc stop long enough for me to post, I've tried three times now and I keep getting blocked by the "you may want to revise in light of new posts" lmao
Disagrees with mutantdevle here, which is ironic because she then uses the reason she's disagreeing with as a reason to vote me in her later case. Then states the obvious about my reaction test, and fluffcomplains about me posting a lot. The first bit is the important one.
In post 711, Lalendra wrote: In post 709, texcat wrote: In post 701, Creature wrote:No sure if I can do anything more today, but Viomi's wagon is over.
No, Viomi is at L-1. That is hardly over. Quit trying to protect your buddy.
Yeah I don't like that post at all. Clearly the wagon is far from over, we're still in the middle of discussing it, what on earth would make you say that unless you're just trying to persuade people to look elsewhere with no real reasoning?
Joins texcat in misrepping the fuck out of Creature, lmao.
In post 715, Lalendra wrote:It sounds like he's interpreting it as sarcasm, as it was intended, but not buying it.
If it walks like a fluffy duck, and quacks like one too...
In post 734, Lalendra wrote:@Mutant - These posts are the ones I disliked.
271 - Moving vote from Mutant to PK while still saying Mutant was her top SR.
352 - Naked votes Aster, after Aster unvoted PK and voted Mutant - who was still Viomi's top SR.
398 - Says that Mutant's lynch would give us the most info and she's "pretty sure" he's scum - while voting Aster.
517 - 120ish posts later, "Aster is town", votes PK again. Doesn't explain why attitude on Aster shifted.
577 - Says Chip Butty is "definitely town", but doesn't say why.
590 - Naked votes Northside, quoting a post from Aster which says that both Northside and Comm are suspicious. Doesn't explain why she chose North over Comm, or why she is suddenly listening to the reasoning of someone she was previously voting for.
There's a lot of jumping around, very little explanation or clarity, and direct conflict between posts (and sometimes within the same post). I stopped reading the ISO after 590 because frankly I don't feel like dealing with the toxicity.
FINALLY! Some content, right? ...right? Oh, nope. Just bullshit reasons. This is the good part, I promise.
This bit? This one right here?
Yeah, about that Lalendra, I never said mutantdevle was my top scumread. You know who
did
mention that mutantdevle was their top scumread, and then moved their vote to PK? That's right.
In post 479, Lalendra wrote:I really don't like pisskop's posts or playstyle this game, but I don't know if he'd be trolling so aggressively as scum. I do think he's a liability to town, and I'm willing to put him at L-2.
VOTE: pisskop
Oops
The rest of that post is complaining about me not giving much information on my reads when I swap between people, ironically. Hah.
In post 878, Lalendra wrote:Prod received. Won't have time to read/catch up until later today or tomorrow.
This post is three days after the last one, by the way.
At least she catches up the next day, so she can post this:
In post 928, Lalendra wrote: In post 855, CheekyTeeky wrote:Oh and a tip that changed my life on MS: when you highlight part of a post and push quote, it quotes that specific part for you. Yw.
WHAT
WHAT HAVE I BEEN DOING WITH MY LIFE
Yay, fluff.
In post 957, Lalendra wrote: In post 939, Viomi wrote:You're here, care to reply to my response to your "case"? Or are you just going to continue sheeping?
I didn't really feel the need to respond, nothing you said changed my mind. Obviously I read the posts surrounding the ones I quoted, and still found them noteworthy, so I wasn't swayed by your argument since you didn't present any new information.
Translation: She didn't actually read my post, because if she did, she'd know I wasn't presenting new information or even preventing an argument to be swayed by.. Because I spent that post pointing out how blatantly misreppy, hypocritical, ironic, and scummy her "case" was.
In post 1014, Lalendra wrote:Ugh, I would really rather lynch Viomi than Comm. But I will vote Comm if needed to avoid a no-lynch.
What's this? People are starting to move off me to CK? Guess I better casually start the exact same slide over, just how I did from mutantdevle to pisskop. Even the same reasoning too, wanting to avoid a no-lynch.
Cool. Me neither.
In post 1090, Lalendra wrote:Is that just a blatant AtE?
I am really glad I read that spoiler text because all of it was amusing but I literally just cackled at
In post 1085, KidAmn wrote:and then swing the veiny engorged bat of justice at the 2nd half of this shitpile
Calls out Creature's AtE, and then some fluff. Which honestly I'd be fine with if this WASN'T ONE OF HER LAST POSTS. That's right, we're reaching the end, sweetheart.
In post 1091, Lalendra wrote:I don't know how I feel about Aster v. Comm. I think there are much scummier people that we can probably agree to lynch *cough*Creature,Viomi*cough* until we sort out whether this is TvT.
Her last post. "I don't know how I feel about that situation. I'm not going to form an opinion or give information. I still think we should lynch Viomi or Creature, though I'm not going to give the reason why I'm suddenly scumreading Creature. I'm also not going to reply or form opinions on literally
anything
happening in this game."
Oh yeah, and she hasn't posted for 50+ hours since then.
