Sounds to me like Mu has read my slightly aggravated stance on shalako and is now trying to get a pass by acting all frustrated townie.
Still doesn't change the fact that you were, in the midst of things, capitalizing on my crusade against AZWOLGING to first label both Shal and I as scumbuddies then when that failed labelled Shal and PF as scumbuddies, neither of which stuck.
Both of which are quite clearly attempts to sling mud to see what sticks. A typical way mafioso's add fuel to the fire without actually committing to anything.
also
HEY DON'T LEAVE THIS THREAD WUFFLES YOU'RE THE ONE WHO DECIDED TO COME IN HERE AND AGREE WITH AE NOW RESPOND TO ME OR FOREVER HOLD YOUR LYNCH! YOU DO -NOT- GET TO CALL ME SCUM, WATCH ME BLOW UP ON YOU, AND THEN LEAVE! YOU EITHER DEFEND YOUR POSITION RIGHT NOW SO I CAN RIP YOU THREE MORE HOLES OR APOLOGIZE AND UNVOTE ME!
But really, at this point, I'm just being silly.
(But but really really, unvote me or defend your position.)
I just don't get it. At least two of you must be scum or something, I refuse to believe such a terrible wagon has come from four town. Either that or you all lack reading skills, both of words and people.
The root of AE's case is based on a link between Shalako and Sir Mu, and then attacks Mu's responses to attacks. Wuffles vote makes no sense since Wuffles says Shalako is likely to be town - meaning the alleged link makes no sense. So to AE and Inifinis (who agrees with AE), how does Mu being linked to Shalako mean anything if Shalako can kill during the day multiple times?
Infinis looked really bad in the end because he buddies up to everyone a few times before placing an opportunistic vote that pushes the first L-2. pinkfloyd is on his heels.
The root of AE's case is based on a link between Shalako and Sir Mu, and then attacks Mu's responses to attacks. Wuffles vote makes no sense since Wuffles says Shalako is likely to be town - meaning the alleged link makes no sense. So to AE and Inifinis (who agrees with AE), how does Mu being linked to Shalako mean anything if Shalako can kill during the day multiple times?
Infinis looked really bad in the end because he buddies up to everyone a few times before placing an opportunistic vote that pushes the first L-2. pinkfloyd is on his heels.
I had to read the above post three times before I actually understood what you were saying, EP.
Why does my vote make no sense? I'm not saying there is much sense in the way Mu tried to link shalako and I but what I AM saying is that by trying to do so, behaviorally, he was fanning the flames to see if they would ignite without actually doing the work himself.
That, time and time again, is what opportunistic scum do, and I am willing to lynch Mu over it.
A claim like that does absolutely nothing for me.
"I'm a power role now go away, booga booga booga"
Not convinced at all. It's a complete null as either town or scum would say it.
AE linked Mu to Shalako, and based a case around it; but I guess your saying his reaction is the scummy part and not AE's case being good so fair enough.
Having had time to re-evaluate the situation, my conclusions:
- Shalako and PF cannot be scum together. The mod confirmed that the daykill fired and did not kill; presuming that they were scum would mean that two scum decided to waste a daykill and an invulnerability for no discernible reason other than perhaps distancing - and that they did this thirty posts into the game, when they had vast options open.
- Multidaykill is highly implausible on scum in any circumstance, and particularly in a 12-player game. The only time I've seen anything close required significant setup before firing. I think Shalako has poor judgement here but is town.
- Bulletproof, one-shot or otherwise, is plausible on both scum and town. PF's alignment remains unknown. I'm not getting strong behavior reads either.
- Wuffles' reactions read very town to me; I disagree with his ideas on mafia theory but I think his emotions come from a town mindset.
- Sir Mu comes out of this looking very scummy, because of the first point in this list. His Shalako+PF scumteam is self-evidently improbable. And his refusal to claim is inappropriate to a town mindset; if you're town, not claiming and subsequently getting lynched is a pointless waste compared to claiming and potentially avoiding the lynch. Further, I think this is the first game where I've seen Sir Mu refuse to claim, and the justification he provides - not wanting scum to get information - would, if true, apply to every game, so I would have expected to see that perspective from him in other games.
@Archonoid - I asked two questions in the post you cited. You deftly avoided answering either with an attack.
Oh, you mean the two "do we consider discussing X scummy" questions? I didn't think the questions themselves were particularly useful. But no, I don't think speculating about the mafia setup is scummy.
Unless we're unsure of having Shalako hit a scummy player and we want to confirm he has multiple shots it makes sense to shoot at PF again as he's bulletproof. We don't have a fear of losing a townie and we can pretty much confirm Shalako town. PF to a lesser extent. Bulletproof scum in a mini? You tell me, I'll listen. It's wifom and mod gaming yeah.
Vote: PinkFloyd. Seriously.
Cmon toastboy don't start pulling the town in another direction. How can you not be convinced. He has now started flailing all over. Refusing to claim. Plus the point he was in favor of a softclaim. Being a power role I wouldn't think one would want his role narrowed down. Doesn't add up.
Sir Mu has been scummy from the first or second post. He should be the lynch for the day.
AE linked Mu to Shalako, and based a case around it; but I guess your saying his reaction is the scummy part and not AE's case being good so fair enough.
No, don't push for the town to dismiss the case by stating it was link between Shal and Mu as a fact.
I questioned if there was a link. The main point revolved around Mu saying vig. Looking back seeing the subtle fishing, the push for a soft claim and now refusing to claim all adds up to scum.
Unless we're unsure of having Shalako hit a scummy player and we want to confirm he has multiple shots it makes sense to shoot at PF again as he's bulletproof. We don't have a fear of losing a townie and we can pretty much confirm Shalako town. PF to a lesser extent. Bulletproof scum in a mini? You tell me, I'll listen. It's wifom and mod gaming yeah.
That's a really poor justification for having Shalako shoot PF again. We confirm Shalako's multiple kills by having him shoot a scummy player tomorrow. Unless PF is also scummy enough at that point that we would lynch him, there's no point in potentially wasting the vig shot just for confirmation.
Further, I think this is the first game where I've seen Sir Mu refuse to claim, and the justification he provides - not wanting scum to get information - would, if true, apply to every game, so I would have expected to see that perspective from him in other games.
Oh Em Gee
This is the second time you go against the events of Hetalia in your reasoning. Sir Mu refused to claim in that game too!
In fact, that would explain why Sir Mu was attempting to link players to floyd - if they are both scum, this would explain his failed link attempts pretty well.
Hmm. A thing to consider when Sir Mu flips scum. I would advocate vigging PF if Mu turns up scum buuut we know how that would turn out. Will think on this a bit more.
EWP: Oh. I know what you're talking about. Sir Mu refused to claim in the mass claim, not when at L-2 in that game; and he explicitly was willing to claim if a majority requested that he do so. I was talking about refusal to claim as a lynch suspect, not in the context of mass claims.
This is the second time you go against the events of Hetalia in your reasoning. Sir Mu refused to claim in that game too!
That doesn't make it any less of a terrible play here.
Unvote
to give time for Sir Mu to save himself by claiming because he is currently at L-1 if I am correct, and while it probably won't help, there is always a chance that it might.
Mu, if you are town, at least put all the information on the table to give us a chance to be fully informed before we decide your fate - it makes no sense at this point, when you're at lynch-1 to keep it from us.
Did you intentionally ignore the difference between "refuse to claim in a massclaim" and "refuse to claim at L-2"?
Are you intentionally ignoring a fairly long history of people not claiming for one reason or another? You're acting like no townie has never not claimed, and if I was Sir Mu I probably wouldn't claim then either.
I mean, you ran in and put him to L-1 only to say no townie would refuse to claim and you never saw Sir Mu not claim despite Sir Mu not claiming. Does "I've never seen Sir Mu not claim at L-2 hold water to you? It shouldn't.
Are you intentionally ignoring a fairly long history of people not claiming for one reason or another? You're acting like no townie has never not claimed, and if I was Sir Mu I probably wouldn't claim then either.
Hyperbole much? I didn't say "no townie has ever not claimed". I said a townie not claiming when under the lynch gun is a pointless waste. You seem to be trying for an all-or-nothing defense - that just because some townies have done X, X can't be scummy. But that's silly; this is not a game of 100% probabilities.
I refuse to full claim. I maintain my soft claim of town power role. I maintain that my reason for not full claiming is to deny scum information. I maintain that AE's case is terrible. I refuse my previous statement that AE may or may not be town, and put in its place the statement he is likely, though not surely, town, for reasons I will not yet reveal. I question, however, his statement that the majority of his case revolved around my using of the word vig. To my knowledge, until this point, I had not used that word, but even if I had, I fail to understand why that is viewed as scummy and, furthermore, I do not remember a single point in AE's case where this was put forth as a reason he thinks I am scum, primary or otherwise.
The worst of it is I do not know if he had read my response and does not want to reply, or if had logged off before I made my reply, as MTGS maintains a person to be online a bit after - I am unsure on the exact time - the log off.
I honestly give no procreations about whether Shalako's decision to shoot was good or bad, but rather I care about who he decided to shoot; why Pinkfloyd of all people? I believe that this situation has been scripted and that both Shalako and Pinkfloyd are scum, having communicated with one another pre-game to play out this little display, so that if one may fall the other looks good. Wuffles may or may not be part of this; I certainly believed him to be in cahoots with Shalako before it was revealed that Pinkfloyd was bullet proof, but now I think he is likely town who caught the wrong end of a rather interesting display of scumminship.
This is telling. He now weighs in after the fact. Questions why PF. Something that could have been asked alot earlier. The interesting thing here is the unvote of Wuffles now that a couple people have jumped on the wagon. He now is linking a daykiller and a bulletproof as scum. Something the scum would like to have help getting rid of. Also that duo, role wise, does not makes sense as scum.
See, I agree with you that Shalako is "paranoid, stubborn, and always thinks he's right", however I do not believe this is his town play, I believe it's his always play. There is rather a different aspect to him that creates a divide between his town and scum self, and I'm not seeing the town side here.
You didn't see this earlier. I love how Sir Mu waits till after the fact to present these thoughts. He's hagning in the background waiting for all the info his team can get.
...
Okay toss the link between Shalako and Mu, toss a majority of the post, how about these two points?
I'm amused that [Shalako], of all people, are talking about terrible reasoning. "Hey, PF's RVS daykill must be serious, therefore I should shoot him to prove that I have a daykill!"
I think we should test Shalakos shot by using it on PF. Or use it as the first lynch of the day tomorrow. But Shalako should not be allowed to come into tomorrow using his own discretion.
We should use it as a lynch, the way it should have been used today.
Yes, it is quite ironic that I, a townie, would correctly guess that Shalako had a daykill, especially in light of my accusatory statements of an inside job between Shalako and Pinkfloyd.
I, a townie? -That phrasing is so needlessly awkward.
AE's case, if he is town, is nothing but him trying to justify his opinion to himself, taking my posts and framing them as if they come from an alternative universe where I'm scum.
You accuse AE of "framing [your posts]," and say this is the "if he is town" scenario? -If you think he is smearing you so badly, why aren't you pushing back?
I still like my vote on Mu. AE's case has some strong points regarding his opportunism, his response was a meltdown, and this refusal to claim looks like a bad attempt to scare off the wagon without risking counter-claim. -If he is town, he should to claim; but if he doesn't, I'm fine moving forward without it here.
Also, TB is scum, but we can get to that after Mu.
I, a townie, am the towniest town to ever town a town.
Ah, how you think I am using framing and how I am using framing are different. What I mean by framing is, he is approaching my posts from a frame of mind that has already decided I am scum, and his opinions of my post reflect this.
Stop it with the "ooh, he went offline, he doesn't want to answer my question" bollocks please Mu.
I post from work. I by necessity of working at a courthouse must limit my foruming time based on the availability of time to post.
Plus, your points are not even points at all. Except maybe for this one.\
What makes a person scum?
I do not mean to ask you why you think I am scum, but a more generalized question, what things do you look towards to determine if someone is scum?
That is like asking what makes a person a person. It is a combination of responses, behavior, and general lack of helpfulness in your case that, while we can never be 100% sure in forum mafia, makes you far more likely scum than not.
I mean, look at it this way.
By not claiming, if you are town, and you think you are going to be lynched, why would you not fullclaim. That's just bad play, you're not helping the town at all. Sure, if you're town, you'd be getting mislynched, but if the town wins, you still win.
Therefore, it makes no sense for you not to claim unless you're not town or unless your role is completely useless if claimed.
And at this stage, when it's HIGHLY likely you're getting lynched anyways, I can't think of a role that this would be the case for.
Hell, if you're town, you should do everything you can to avoid being lynched.
But you're not doing that, and that is why you are scum.
Wuffles, please tell me what you look for when looking for scum.
And I suppose my gambit has failed, so I'd rather not be lynched. I was hoping I would be able to get away with a softclaim while, at the same time not drawing scum night actions through fear.
I am the Cop. My other choices were watcher and tracker, though watcher was oddly worded, as instead of the normal "select a person, see who targets them that night" it was "select a person, see if they use an ability or not that night". Tanarin insisted it was on purpose and what not, so I suppose there's a reason it looks strictly worse than Tracker.
I think we should test Shalakos shot by using it on PF. Or use it as the first lynch of the day tomorrow. But Shalako should not be allowed to come into tomorrow using his own discretion.
Shalako will you take heed and listen to the town on using your shot?
Lol.
Hey Shalako
You know that person you shot?
Do it again because I want you to waste Town Power.
"select a person, see if they use an ability or not that night". Tanarin insisted it was on purpose and what not, so I suppose there's a reason it looks strictly worse than Tracker.
-It's not strictly worse. Watcher sees any ability, while tracker only picks up abilities that target. Also, I'm fairly certain Mu didn't make up this watcher ability, so the rest of the claim is likely true as well, baring a CC of course.
Unvote -In the future, maybe we should just claim our other choices first? -I'm not sure it would have made much difference here, as it shouldn't have been hard to figure out what you picked based on what you didn't, but I would have cleared you just based on the watcher claim.
Unvote, vote Sir Mu
GO GIANTS!
LOL
Still doesn't change the fact that you were, in the midst of things, capitalizing on my crusade against AZWOLGING to first label both Shal and I as scumbuddies then when that failed labelled Shal and PF as scumbuddies, neither of which stuck.
Both of which are quite clearly attempts to sling mud to see what sticks. A typical way mafioso's add fuel to the fire without actually committing to anything.
also
Flail moar.
They hate us cause they ain't us.
That seems absurd.
Explain.
They hate us cause they ain't us.
L-2
They hate us cause they ain't us.
I am soft claiming town power role. I refuse to full claim, as the scum do not need such information. Now off, you dogs!
Infinis looked really bad in the end because he buddies up to everyone a few times before placing an opportunistic vote that pushes the first L-2. pinkfloyd is on his heels.
Please go deeper into this
LOL
LOL
Why does my vote make no sense? I'm not saying there is much sense in the way Mu tried to link shalako and I but what I AM saying is that by trying to do so, behaviorally, he was fanning the flames to see if they would ignite without actually doing the work himself.
That, time and time again, is what opportunistic scum do, and I am willing to lynch Mu over it.
A claim like that does absolutely nothing for me.
"I'm a power role now go away, booga booga booga"
Not convinced at all. It's a complete null as either town or scum would say it.
- Shalako and PF cannot be scum together. The mod confirmed that the daykill fired and did not kill; presuming that they were scum would mean that two scum decided to waste a daykill and an invulnerability for no discernible reason other than perhaps distancing - and that they did this thirty posts into the game, when they had vast options open.
- Multidaykill is highly implausible on scum in any circumstance, and particularly in a 12-player game. The only time I've seen anything close required significant setup before firing. I think Shalako has poor judgement here but is town.
- Bulletproof, one-shot or otherwise, is plausible on both scum and town. PF's alignment remains unknown. I'm not getting strong behavior reads either.
- Wuffles' reactions read very town to me; I disagree with his ideas on mafia theory but I think his emotions come from a town mindset.
- Sir Mu comes out of this looking very scummy, because of the first point in this list. His Shalako+PF scumteam is self-evidently improbable. And his refusal to claim is inappropriate to a town mindset; if you're town, not claiming and subsequently getting lynched is a pointless waste compared to claiming and potentially avoiding the lynch. Further, I think this is the first game where I've seen Sir Mu refuse to claim, and the justification he provides - not wanting scum to get information - would, if true, apply to every game, so I would have expected to see that perspective from him in other games.
Summary:
vote Sir Mu
Oh, you mean the two "do we consider discussing X scummy" questions? I didn't think the questions themselves were particularly useful. But no, I don't think speculating about the mafia setup is scummy.
Unless we're unsure of having Shalako hit a scummy player and we want to confirm he has multiple shots it makes sense to shoot at PF again as he's bulletproof. We don't have a fear of losing a townie and we can pretty much confirm Shalako town. PF to a lesser extent. Bulletproof scum in a mini? You tell me, I'll listen. It's wifom and mod gaming yeah.
Cmon toastboy don't start pulling the town in another direction. How can you not be convinced. He has now started flailing all over. Refusing to claim. Plus the point he was in favor of a softclaim. Being a power role I wouldn't think one would want his role narrowed down. Doesn't add up.
Sir Mu has been scummy from the first or second post. He should be the lynch for the day.
They hate us cause they ain't us.
No, don't push for the town to dismiss the case by stating it was link between Shal and Mu as a fact.
I questioned if there was a link. The main point revolved around Mu saying vig. Looking back seeing the subtle fishing, the push for a soft claim and now refusing to claim all adds up to scum.
They hate us cause they ain't us.
Cmon Zindabad. This was 3 days ago.
If we go through the day with nothing I'll be pushing Shalako to vig Zindabad tomorrow.
They hate us cause they ain't us.
However, Pink floyd's play today has left me with a very uncomfortable lump in my stomach. I agree with the pinata about that.
This is the second time you go against the events of Hetalia in your reasoning. Sir Mu refused to claim in that game too!
Hmm. A thing to consider when Sir Mu flips scum. I would advocate vigging PF if Mu turns up scum buuut we know how that would turn out. Will think on this a bit more.
Did he? I don't remember that. Let me take a look.
Unvote
to give time for Sir Mu to save himself by claiming because he is currently at L-1 if I am correct, and while it probably won't help, there is always a chance that it might.
Mu, if you are town, at least put all the information on the table to give us a chance to be fully informed before we decide your fate - it makes no sense at this point, when you're at lynch-1 to keep it from us.
I mean, you ran in and put him to L-1 only to say no townie would refuse to claim and you never saw Sir Mu not claim despite Sir Mu not claiming. Does "I've never seen Sir Mu not claim at L-2 hold water to you? It shouldn't.
What makes a person scum?
I do not mean to ask you why you think I am scum, but a more generalized question, what things do you look towards to determine if someone is scum?
The worst of it is I do not know if he had read my response and does not want to reply, or if had logged off before I made my reply, as MTGS maintains a person to be online a bit after - I am unsure on the exact time - the log off.
did not want to reply*
if he had logged off*
they log off*
Okay toss the link between Shalako and Mu, toss a majority of the post, how about these two points?
12-11? I'm losing track
Absolutely not. I said it was terrible. -But I do understand that reasoning.
We should use it as a lynch, the way it should have been used today.
I, a townie? -That phrasing is so needlessly awkward.
You accuse AE of "framing [your posts]," and say this is the "if he is town" scenario? -If you think he is smearing you so badly, why aren't you pushing back?
I still like my vote on Mu. AE's case has some strong points regarding his opportunism, his response was a meltdown, and this refusal to claim looks like a bad attempt to scare off the wagon without risking counter-claim. -If he is town, he should to claim; but if he doesn't, I'm fine moving forward without it here.
Also, TB is scum, but we can get to that after Mu.
Ah, how you think I am using framing and how I am using framing are different. What I mean by framing is, he is approaching my posts from a frame of mind that has already decided I am scum, and his opinions of my post reflect this.
I maintain my soft claim.
I post from work. I by necessity of working at a courthouse must limit my foruming time based on the availability of time to post.
Plus, your points are not even points at all. Except maybe for this one.\
That is like asking what makes a person a person. It is a combination of responses, behavior, and general lack of helpfulness in your case that, while we can never be 100% sure in forum mafia, makes you far more likely scum than not.
I mean, look at it this way.
By not claiming, if you are town, and you think you are going to be lynched, why would you not fullclaim. That's just bad play, you're not helping the town at all. Sure, if you're town, you'd be getting mislynched, but if the town wins, you still win.
Therefore, it makes no sense for you not to claim unless you're not town or unless your role is completely useless if claimed.
And at this stage, when it's HIGHLY likely you're getting lynched anyways, I can't think of a role that this would be the case for.
Hell, if you're town, you should do everything you can to avoid being lynched.
But you're not doing that, and that is why you are scum.
Vote Sir Mu.
Wuffles, please tell me what you look for when looking for scum.
And I suppose my gambit has failed, so I'd rather not be lynched. I was hoping I would be able to get away with a softclaim while, at the same time not drawing scum night actions through fear.
I am the Cop. My other choices were watcher and tracker, though watcher was oddly worded, as instead of the normal "select a person, see who targets them that night" it was "select a person, see if they use an ability or not that night". Tanarin insisted it was on purpose and what not, so I suppose there's a reason it looks strictly worse than Tracker.
[Mafia Stats] Mafia MVP: 1/3 Basic #29,Co-[CCMV]
[Mafia Stats] Mafia MVP: 1/3 Basic #29,Co-[CCMV]
Lol.
Hey Shalako
You know that person you shot?
Do it again because I want you to waste Town Power.
Love,
A.E.
[Mafia Stats] Mafia MVP: 1/3 Basic #29,Co-[CCMV]
-It's not strictly worse. Watcher sees any ability, while tracker only picks up abilities that target. Also, I'm fairly certain Mu didn't make up this watcher ability, so the rest of the claim is likely true as well, baring a CC of course.
Unvote -In the future, maybe we should just claim our other choices first? -I'm not sure it would have made much difference here, as it shouldn't have been hard to figure out what you picked based on what you didn't, but I would have cleared you just based on the watcher claim.
LOL