But you were suspicious of Iso for giving "compelling and reasonable arguments". That is what you posted about Iso. If you truly believe that Iso was posting "compelling and reasonable arguments", then there is no reason for you to believe Iso to be Scum. If anything, that would make you believe that Iso is Town. But, as we know, that is not the case here.
This is pretty much unrecognizable compared to what I've actually been saying. I was not suspicious of Iso for providing compelling and reasonable arguments—those arguments were what changed my read into a town one. My exact words were, "The reason I said I was mistaken was because Iso provided compelling and reasonable arguments for a scum read on Wheat, as opposed to Wheat's scummy-looking arguments." In other words, those arguments were the reason I said I was apparently mistaken in thinking he's scum.
Why twist my argument into the opposite of what I actually said?
If Teia was Scum reading Iso and then thought Wheaties was Scum, then why would Teia’s read on Iso change? As far as we knew at the time, both Iso and Wheaties could have been Scumbuddies.
Already said I found that possibility unlikely. I deemed the most likely possibility to be that Iso was in fact town and had caught scum.
If anything, it should have been the start of Day 2 when you began to read Wheaties as Town since we all would have the information in front of us.
That's when I started, yes.
But, on Day 1, all Wheaties did was claim and you began to believe him to be Town.
I don't believe hans' claim anyway, but Wheat's volunteered, and I have a scum read on him, so I figure he can do it.
-
I think that of Void and KK, Void is the stronger lynch candidate, but I'm down to lynch either one of them. That said, there's no great hurry, so let's make sure we get as much information as we can before the lynch.
Void, you seem to be losing your composure if your last post's anything to go by (though there are shades of it in your past few posts). What do you think of the assessment that it makes you look increasingly like cornered scum?
@Wheat: Please explain why the following things are scummy: 1) Defending another player from a bad wagon (as you don't say I did it in a scummy way, just that I did it). 2) Calling someone out on ignoring legitimate points to a case.
Plus an answer to the question about 446: Because one is something that I can actively help solve the game with, the other is a bunch of opinions I'm extremely unlikely to change.
@rian: Why do you disagree with my logic in that post? Also, why did you /barn your way onto void's wagon, use other people's inactivity as an excuse to active lurk on the topic of me/Teia and then vote me after Void claimed while giving as little reason as possible for the move?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'll bet you wish you had a non-unglued/unhinged card that shared your first name.
@Wheat: Please explain why the following things are scummy: 1) Defending another player from a bad wagon (as you don't say I did it in a scummy way, just that I did it). 2) Calling someone out on ignoring legitimate points to a case.
1. It's not, normally. But what you did was scummy because you didn't actually prove it to be a bad case; you took out the chainsaw, shoved the business end in GM's face, and then shifted focus to people who thought Jay was scum.
2. It's not, normally. But what you did was scummy because you had *just* ignored the points levied against you.
Plus an answer to the question about 446: Because one is something that I can actively help solve the game with, the other is a bunch of opinions I'm extremely unlikely to change.
OK.
But if you feel that way, then why did you call out Teia for not responding to your case?
@rian: Why do you disagree with my logic in that post? Also, why did you /barn your way onto void's wagon, use other people's inactivity as an excuse to active lurk on the topic of me/Teia and then vote me after Void claimed while giving as little reason as possible for the move?[/QUOTE]
In both cases, he hints at trying to start a wagon on BV, who some (including me) listed as a scummy candidate on Day 1.
Where did I accuse you of trying to "avoid scrutiny?"
Well, I finally got you to correct this doublespeak, but the rest of your recent posting has me re-evaluating my read on you. But I'll take whatever minor victory I can squeeze out of the thread at this point :jam:.
Explain how your feelings on BV have gone on Day 2 then, KK. I can see that you wanted to push him, but I'm very confused as to why you were distracted from that push to agree with Void's case on Teia. As I said, nobody was pegging BV as town by the end of Day 1. It seems like you wanted to push him but decided you couldn't because of what Void was doing for some reason. Town make their own decisions and push who they want.
In my barn post of Void, I say I need to decide which one I'd rather case. I say a little later that I'm planning on collecting the evidence against BV, but I'm in no hurry because he's v/la and can't defend himself. Which is when you ask about Teia, and I decide its fine to suspend the BV case because he's v/la regardless. You asked me what my case on Teia was, with details. So I made it and found out that case was much stronger than I'd thought it would be. You can see how the aggressive lynch-Teia thought processes took over from there.
EWP: @Wheat: 1. How is "I think this fits into Void's town meta. Go see for yourself." a chainsaw?
Quote from Wheat »
2. It's not, normally. But what you did was scummy because you had *just* ignored the points levied against you.
Examples? I was confident calling Teia on this for a reason you know.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'll bet you wish you had a non-unglued/unhinged card that shared your first name.
What the ****. I have dumped a ton of time into this game toDay, I don't know where you get off calling my participation active lurking just because I'm not vomiting my notes into the thread for the non-participating kids to crib. Your WIFOM explanation of players A B & C boils down to 'it's not scummy unless it fits this shoe I've made for Teia specially'.
As for only voting when it's safe, you better back that up with some evidence Moms. I've been trying to get into KK's head this whole Day, & meeting with consistent bulldogging & WIFOM nonsense. I hadn't even seen Wheat's post when I voted.
I'm more than willing to lynch Void toDay, and I'm just as willing to lynch KK instead. They are almost certainly both scum together; their actions don't make sense if they aren't.
I can see where scum KK ties himself to terrible town Void for post-lynch points, but I also haven't seen a valid defense of Void except "meta", which isn't what I remember from Town Void in CCMVI or what I saw in the partial re-read of the middle of that game that I did yesterday.
What the ****. I have dumped a ton of time into this game toDay, I don't know where you get off calling my participation active lurking just because I'm not vomiting my notes into the thread for the non-participating kids to crib.
I said on the topic of me/Teia. You've been on the thread, but saying as little as possible on the subject except when you think you have something you can snipe me with. When I asked for your opinion you said you wanted to wait until more people had weighed in, but now you've voted me while never touching the case.
BV
Please explain how calling yourself Town is scummy. Use examples of players stating so or proving that is scummy.
Everyone
To whomever said I was pushing a bad scum tell (or evidence or whatever was said about it) on GM for the “I’m Town" thing. I even stated I wasn’t sure how accurate it is. It’s the first time I AM testing too see if it may or may not be a good scum tell. I am not using this as supportive evidence or any kind of evidence against GM.
I hope this illustrates why that behaviour is scummy (& if anyone has more examples gimme gimme I collect them all).
Why are you answering for GM? Do you believe GM is not capable of answering the question? Also, you didn't even asnwer the question in the way I asked. Using cartoon stuff (where you can SEE THE OTHER PERSON?THING) is NOT a good comparison to use.
Whatever guy. It's been discussed umpteen times here & on GGery & Misetings. It is a known mafia meme in the circles I travel, if only because I post one of these images when it comes up.
I will dig up prior times it has come up when naptime rolls around.
I just noticed I get told off for answering for Moms. To me it looks like I was actually answering a question directed at BV.
What "actions" did Teia or I take that appear scummy to you?
I already posted about it, but you and Teia were my only non-town reads. Were being the key words there.
I cleared Kaburi Here, although I'm still slightly suspicious of Ria. However Void's recent claim has rocketed him up to my number one suspect.
Everyone: Is it normal for a Jack of All Trades to exist in a game where everyone already has two abilities (our move and our ability)?
@Void: Why didn't you use any abilities last night?
It seems extremely unlikely that you just happen to be a Jack of All Trades with three abilities that haven't been revealed yet in others (Although Hans could arguably have been a variant on 'tracker'). It seems like a strategy to get one of those roles to counterclaim so scummies can target that person at night.
Eh, setup speculation. I can't say I've seen a game like this. Maybe Islander Mafia, I'd have to dig it up. There are a lot of games in this sub I haven't read, though.
Void, do you have an ability in addition to your moves?
I said on the topic of me/Teia. You've been on the thread, but saying as little as possible on the subject except when you think you have something you can snipe me with. When I asked for your opinion you said you wanted to wait until more people had weighed in, but now you've voted me while never touching the case.
I am responding to this in a separate post because Epic.
Consider the conflict of interest in *you* putting this forward – 'player A (you) would almost never begin a bus wagon on player C (Void or Wheat)'. Somehow this self-serving rubbish is supposed to convince me Teia's behaviour is scummy.
But you were suspicious of Iso for giving "compelling and reasonable arguments". That is what you posted about Iso. If you truly believe that Iso was posting "compelling and reasonable arguments", then there is no reason for you to believe Iso to be Scum. If anything, that would make you believe that Iso is Town. But, as we know, that is not the case here.
This is pretty much unrecognizable compared to what I've actually been saying. I was not suspicious of Iso for providing compelling and reasonable arguments—those arguments were what changed my read into a town one. My exact words were, "The reason I said I was mistaken was because Iso provided compelling and reasonable arguments for a scum read on Wheat, as opposed to Wheat's scummy-looking arguments." In other words, those arguments were the reason I said I was apparently mistaken in thinking he's scum.
Why twist my argument into the opposite of what I actually said?
I'm not twisting anything. I'm taking what you have said and I am trying to get everyone to see what I am seeing.
If Teia was Scum reading Iso and then thought Wheaties was Scum, then why would Teia’s read on Iso change? As far as we knew at the time, both Iso and Wheaties could have been Scumbuddies.
Already said I found that possibility unlikely. I deemed the most likely possibility to be that Iso was in fact town and had caught scum.
Wheat claimed without being in claim range, and he's claiming to be a vig with Pressure.
Then Iso claims to have Thick Fat as an ability. I'm not going to speculate on what he meant or anything, but I'm just noting because it's another unprompted claim. That said, the accusation of Wheat being a roleblocker is oddly specific. Why roleblocker, specifically?
We get hans' claim, and it's a two-shot commuter that's also a bomb. I don't know how Mafia setups normally go, so I can't gauge the plausibility of a commuter bomb, but it seems anti-synergistic enough that I don't believe it.
So yeah, hans needs to get lynched. I don't know what to make of Wheat's claim at the moment, although I'll be interested to see what, if anything, comes of it.
I will admit that you don't call Wheaties Scum in this post, but you do say that hansanator needs to be lynched, but yet don't vote him. It's not like hansanator was in danger of being lynched. If you were unsure of Wheaties claim, then why stay on his wagon when calling for another lynch?
I think that of Void and KK, Void is the stronger lynch candidate, but I'm down to lynch either one of them. That said, there's no great hurry, so let's make sure we get as much information as we can before the lynch.
Void, you seem to be losing your composure if your last post's anything to go by (though there are shades of it in your past few posts). What do you think of the assessment that it makes you look increasingly like cornered scum?
I'm not connered Scum. I'm Town being ignored with a good case. If Iso was still in here he would show how I am using Behavioral analysis correctly and would be a supporter of the your lynch, Teia.
inb4 I don't know Iso: You're wrong if you think this. Iso and I have quite the exstensive past in Mafia. We have played over 10+ games together. In a few of the games Iso had managed peg my alignment on my first post of the game. Two times being Scum, one time being Neutral and two times being Town. (We were an opposite teams for all of the games. Wheaties is aware of this as well). That being said, Iso knew that I am Town this game based on the meta he knows a little too well. It's kind of scary to be honest.
Uh, well you probably shouldn't share that you have another ability. As we can see from Arcadic and Iso, not everyone has both an ability and a move.
I don't believe Void's claim, but I think Wheat is trying to make some point about people claiming JoaT, which is why he asked about people claiming it in other games Void has been in. I'm not sure what the point is though. In either case, it doesn't sound like anyone else puts too much stock in Void's claim so far, so there is no need to counterclaim. As scum, he's trying to claim both investigative and protective roles to draw out a counterclaim so his buddies can kill the PRs.
ria, yes you have been on the KK train, but I didn't see the timestamps so it looked to me like you were straight up aping Wheat's vote. It's certainly possible that he posted while you were typing, but we only have your word for that. Too bad MTGS doesn't prompt you about other posts in the meantime like some other sites do.
This is your only reason for voting me? To see my claim?
You do realize that it helps the scum a lot more than town to get multiple claims in a day, right?
...
...
...Void's "claim" is just a scum decoy designed to bait counterclaims. So that doesn't even enter into this discussion.
I don't vote without thinking through exactly what I'm doing. And in this case, I'm ratcheting the pressure on you to see how you respond. Getting a claim out of you is just a bonus piece of information.
I don't vote without thinking through exactly what I'm doing. And in this case, I'm ratcheting the pressure on you to see how you respond. Getting a claim out of you is just a bonus piece of information.
Trying to help reveal as many roles to the scum team as possible doesn't help the town. A smart town makes their decisions based on behavior analysis.
Meaning, if you want to lynch Void (which you shouldn't) the pro-town move is to lynch him, not give the scum team help narrowing down our remaining PRs. Understand?
Examples? I was confident calling Teia on this for a reason you know.
441 (Teia): "And you have no opinion on the counterarguments? "
442 (KK): "I haven't gotten the mental focus to slog through them yet"
444 (KK): No response to counterarguments.
446 (KK): Case on Teia rather than counterarguments.
So, if you didn't respond to the counterarguments there, where DID you respond to them?
First of all, since when is it my responsibility to defend Void from those bad arguments. Secondly, handwaving a case on yourself is so much more telling than handwaving a case on someone else. Third, how are those not responses? Just because meta isn't a convincing argument, it suddenly isn't one at all? How does that make any sense? And finally, I posted 446 at GM's request, not to interrupt Teia. You'll notice that I continue to talk about the case on Void and his meta for many posts after.
@rian: What was the point of bringing up a town-Void game where you felt he didn't fit into my meta read of him?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'll bet you wish you had a non-unglued/unhinged card that shared your first name.
I said on the topic of me/Teia. You've been on the thread, but saying as little as possible on the subject except when you think you have something you can snipe me with. When I asked for your opinion you said you wanted to wait until more people had weighed in, but now you've voted me while never touching the case.
[402] You like Void's post about Teia's read flip flop while undermining Wheat. You only thumbs up the post, there is no way in context to tell that you agree with only part of the post. You also put forward BV as a scumspect, saying you can't decide who to vote. . . so you vote neither. I can't see why you wouldn't want to put pressure on Teia here (BV had V/LA'd, & Void had just voted Teia).
[413] You ignore Void & Teia's posts in favour of picking at kaburi's THIS IS NOT ME CALLING YOU SCUM VOID post & giving lukewarm lip service to collecting more evidence on BV, giving yourself until he comes back to do it. This reads like you've presupposed the conclusion; 'this guy is scum, I'll figure out why later'. kaburi specifically points out that he does not think Teia is maligning Wheat in [387]. You do not comment.
[439] Accused by Moms of the same maligning-without-committing Void accused Teia of (that you barned), you say your question was fair & not trying to push without commenting, but neglect to support this statement. You also say you "more liked it that [Void] found some evidence" – this neatly sidesteps Moms' question of "If you liked his Teia case so much, why didn't you vote her?". This would be a reasonable place for you to say you felt Void's point about Teia/Iso was weak, but you do not.
[442] Teia has asked your opinion of the counterarguments & you dismiss them as wordy & beyond your ability to "slog through" (note that you say you re-read my post repeatedly to no avail). You suggest that's ok because "Void has never been known for strong cases or perfect logic". You also state that you "find little reason" to analyze Void because he's chasing your scum reads.
[444] Teia has recapped her argument in five points, which you dismiss as just being bad at arguing, even though she says while that is a possibility, she sees scummy motive behind Void's behaviour.
[446] Teia has asked you to address Void's motive, but you do not.
[448] Laughing & accusing Teia of ignoring large swaths of your case, when you yourself have just ignored the heart of Teia's push on Void. Teia has again asked you to address Void's motive but you again focus on the bad argument rather than the motivation behind it.
[450] After Teia breaks it down for you – "it's the same thing Void's doing: You're so absolutely convinced of your conclusion that you won't entertain thoughts to the contrary. That's not townie behaviour, because Mafia's ultimately a game about the informed minority (scum) versus the uninformed majority (town)" – you say "You haven't given me anything to think about on the contrary since I laid the case on you." Teia asked you to examine Void's /motivation/ prior to you casing her.
[460] I try to establish what is confusing you about my post re: Void & your reply is "Oh, for some reason I never read the posts you quoted with the rest of your post. I don't know how I made such a stupid mistake but the post makes sense now." KK confirmed for not reading?
At this point in the thread my notes have you obfuscating, antagonizing, strawmanning & tunnelling, & that isn't even going into our subsequent interactions or what I see from Day 1 that continues on into toDay. . . & it's 3am (yay x_x).
I need to re-read to be sure but in CCMVI, I remember Void's townie play being lurky & distracting – basically what you just described as his scum meta.
This is me looking into Void's meta & seeing it null out what you are saying.
Exactly what
@KK: I wasn't confident in my reads after rereading the game. hansanator flipping Town was shocking.
You didn't need to yell at me and BOLD your lettering to get my attnetion. I have been responding to everything this game in a timely fanshion. I'm still looking up the JoaT thing for you.
Come on, Teia. That question is as useful as me trying to take a nap after having a double espresso.
I wanted a reaction, and I got a reaction.
I'm not twisting anything. I'm taking what you have said and I am trying to get everyone to see what I am seeing.
What you're seeing is pretty well divorced from the facts, then. We'll see something even more removed from reality later on in this post.
Explain what gave you this read, please.
My experience with Iso suggested that him acting in a way that generates as many reactions as possible then following it up with solid analysis is town behaviour from him. In addition, Wheat looked increasingly scummy at the time. So my read was that town!Iso had caught scum.
I will admit that you don't call Wheaties Scum in this post, but you do say that hansanator needs to be lynched, but yet don't vote him.
My vote was already on hansanator.
I'm not connered Scum. I'm Town being ignored with a good case. If Iso was still in here he would show how I am using Behavioral analysis correctly and would be a supporter of the your lynch, Teia.
This is about the response I expected. Bare denial alongside a "no u" and an appeal to a dead townie. It doesn't make you look any less cornered, because there's no real meat to this. It's just thrown out there as if it's persuasive. The thing about persuasion is that you need strong support for your arguments. In the face of how apparent it is that your case is not good (you're getting extremely basic facts wrong, like who my vote was on at a given time), and how you have no other evidence for your assertion that you're using behavioural analysis correctly, it does indeed look like you're cornered and are simply grasping at straws for any way out of the spotlight.
In a few of the games Iso had managed peg my alignment on my first post of the game. Two times being Scum, one time being Neutral and two times being Town. (We were an opposite teams for all of the games. Wheaties is aware of this as well).
If you were town and he was on the opposite team as you, then how is it anything special for scum to know which players are town?
Trying to help reveal as many roles to the scum team as possible doesn't help the town. A smart town makes their decisions based on behavior analysis.
Nevertheless, one claims when they're at L-2, no matter how stupid they think the wagon is. I got run up to L-2 almost immediately in MM6 over a null tell, and I didn't have any issue with claiming.
@KK: I wasn't confident in my reads after rereading the game. hansanator flipping Town was shocking.
You didn't need to yell at me and BOLD your lettering to get my attnetion. I have been responding to everything this game in a timely fanshion. I'm still looking up the JoaT thing for you.
Thank you, I apologize for yelling but I thought you weren't answering.
Meaning, if you want to lynch Void (which you shouldn't) the pro-town move is to lynch him, not give the scum team help narrowing down our remaining PRs. Understand?
Is that a PR claim?
To be honest, I don't care if you claim or not. Like I said, I wanted a reaction from you against something besides the Teia wagon, and voting you up to L-2 seemed like the best way to get some pressure on you. And I got a reaction.
Does anyone think that town Void was just making a terrible case and scum KK barned it? Or is there any other reason we should lynch KK over Void today?
I'm willing to lynch either of them, but I do think that we should make up our minds which lynch we want to do and follow through. Day 1 Wheat was the #2 scum suspect and he pretty much cleared himself through night actions. Just based on the dead and claimed abilities so far, it seems like there is a lot going on in terms of roles. The only value I see in pushing a KK claim is if we force a fake claim that he can't hold himself to, but I don't think that's very different than lynching Void now and putting the votes on KK tomorrow if he still looks suspicious then. From what I've heard, we have the votes to lynch either of them at any point, people just want to use the full time until deadline.
Does anyone think that town Void was just making a terrible case and scum KK barned it? Or is there any other reason we should lynch KK over Void today?
Descending order of likelihood in my mind:
1) Both scum, and are misplaying horribly.
2) Scum!Void, and town!KK is overzealously barning.
3) Scum!KK barning a bad case made by town!Void.
4) Both town, and are misplaying horribly. But if this is the case, we're right ****ed anyway.
This is why I want us to take our time on this lynch: I want us to be as sure as we can get as to who the stronger lynch is. At the moment, I believe Void to be the better lynch candidate, but I could see KK pulling ahead in that department as well.
Either way, KK needs to claim so we can weigh our options more evenly.
What are you saying happened in CCMVII, BV? I don't see any Nights where two people died in the OP.
Also, Wheat said he used "toNight" in the context of "mafia," which I read as "the game," not "when I am scum." Why would someone capitalize N when they are scum and not when they are town?
Otherwise, re: Teia's and BV's posts, my personal preference is just to lynch Void and deal with KK tomorrow. It's not like we should lynch Void or KK based on what their claims are, we already have enough of a case to lynch either, but I feel the case on Void is stronger.
In it you state that you're used to saying toNight as scum, and have been saying it this game. I'm probably just reading too much into it, but it seems like a scum slip.[/QUOTE]
Mafia as in the game of mafia, not mafia as in the alignment.
Otherwise, re: Teia's and BV's posts, my personal preference is just to lynch Void and deal with KK tomorrow. It's not like we should lynch Void or KK based on what their claims are, we already have enough of a case to lynch either, but I feel the case on Void is stronger.
I'd rather Void than KK. I'm not too keen on either, but I feel stronger about Void due to his claim. Has KK claimed yet?
This game is a complete trainwreck. Last time I checked an UnCC'd claim meant that player is likely Town, but yet it seems everyone still wants to lynch me. Whatever, get lynch me so I can join another game.
Also, I still don't understand what point BV was trying to make. I believe Wheat's claim because two people died and one of them was the one he said he was going to vig. You're saying CCMVII didn't have a vig, so maybe Wheat is lying?
As for toNight - generally (in lieu of having a PR), toNight just isn't something that a towny has as much reason to say. I have a feeling I'm reading more into this than I should be though, so I'm actually going to concede that I've probably found a red herring here.
This game is a complete trainwreck. Last time I checked an UnCC'd claim meant that player is likely Town, but yet it seems everyone still wants to lynch me. Whatever, get lynch me so I can join another game.
This game is a complete trainwreck. Last time I checked an UnCC'd claim meant that player is likely Town, but yet it seems everyone still wants to lynch me. Whatever, get lynch me so I can join another game.
This game is a complete trainwreck. Last time I checked an UnCC'd claim meant that player is likely Town, but yet it seems everyone still wants to lynch me. Whatever, get lynch me so I can join another game.
I'm just waiting on KK's claim right now, but if everyone else is in agreement that Void is today's lynch I'll go ahead and move my vote and hand him the knife. That way he can suicide himself like a good little scum and go play in a game that's more up to his standards.
This game is a complete trainwreck. Last time I checked an UnCC'd claim meant that player is likely Town, but yet it seems everyone still wants to lynch me. Whatever, get lynch me so I can join another game.
I'm just waiting on KK's claim right now, but if everyone else is in agreement that Void is today's lynch I'll go ahead and move my vote and hand him the knife. That way he can suicide himself like a good little scum and go play in a game that's more up to his standards.
Keep the ad hom out of this. You may be a Mod, but I will not be disrespected like this.
Yes, you've made it quite clear you're going to be useless this game, starting with shooting a player no one agreed with your read on before even getting his claim and continuing on through toDay where you join bad wagons and want a confirmable PR lynched, yet also want someone else to claim.
Do me a favor and actually look at my reads once my alignment is confirmed. I don't want a repeat of MM7 where I caught parinoid, whom Teia protected in a scummy way, I got mislynched, Teia got copped and lynched, and parinoid got to ride out an easy win because no one bothered to reread the game.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'll bet you wish you had a non-unglued/unhinged card that shared your first name.
I wouldn't take offense at being told I have high standards
I meant it to be offensive, so mission accomplished?
It was over the line, though, and for that I'm sorry. As with pretty much everything IRL and on MTGS today, I'm letting my emotions get the better of my judgment. Like I said, I'll reserve further comment on this subject for postgame.
I stand by my offer to move my vote, though. I'm prepared to lynch Void.
Yes, you've made it quite clear you're going to be useless this game, starting with shooting a player no one agreed with your read on before even getting his claim and continuing on through toDay where you join bad wagons and want a confirmable PR lynched, yet also want someone else to claim.
Speaking of over-the-line emotional... Dude, take a step back for a minute. Yes, assuming everything is as it appears, wheat mis-vigged Iso. But saying he's going to useless for the entire game? That's harsh.
Were you too busy performing the nightkill?
This is pretty much unrecognizable compared to what I've actually been saying. I was not suspicious of Iso for providing compelling and reasonable arguments—those arguments were what changed my read into a town one. My exact words were, "The reason I said I was mistaken was because Iso provided compelling and reasonable arguments for a scum read on Wheat, as opposed to Wheat's scummy-looking arguments." In other words, those arguments were the reason I said I was apparently mistaken in thinking he's scum.
Why twist my argument into the opposite of what I actually said?
Already said I found that possibility unlikely. I deemed the most likely possibility to be that Iso was in fact town and had caught scum.
That's when I started, yes.
-
I think that of Void and KK, Void is the stronger lynch candidate, but I'm down to lynch either one of them. That said, there's no great hurry, so let's make sure we get as much information as we can before the lynch.
Void, you seem to be losing your composure if your last post's anything to go by (though there are shades of it in your past few posts). What do you think of the assessment that it makes you look increasingly like cornered scum?
@Wheat: Please explain why the following things are scummy: 1) Defending another player from a bad wagon (as you don't say I did it in a scummy way, just that I did it). 2) Calling someone out on ignoring legitimate points to a case.
Plus an answer to the question about 446: Because one is something that I can actively help solve the game with, the other is a bunch of opinions I'm extremely unlikely to change.
@rian: Why do you disagree with my logic in that post? Also, why did you /barn your way onto void's wagon, use other people's inactivity as an excuse to active lurk on the topic of me/Teia and then vote me after Void claimed while giving as little reason as possible for the move?
1. It's not, normally. But what you did was scummy because you didn't actually prove it to be a bad case; you took out the chainsaw, shoved the business end in GM's face, and then shifted focus to people who thought Jay was scum.
2. It's not, normally. But what you did was scummy because you had *just* ignored the points levied against you.
OK.
But if you feel that way, then why did you call out Teia for not responding to your case?
@rian: Why do you disagree with my logic in that post? Also, why did you /barn your way onto void's wagon, use other people's inactivity as an excuse to active lurk on the topic of me/Teia and then vote me after Void claimed while giving as little reason as possible for the move?[/QUOTE]
gotta answer this now:
In my barn post of Void, I say I need to decide which one I'd rather case. I say a little later that I'm planning on collecting the evidence against BV, but I'm in no hurry because he's v/la and can't defend himself. Which is when you ask about Teia, and I decide its fine to suspend the BV case because he's v/la regardless. You asked me what my case on Teia was, with details. So I made it and found out that case was much stronger than I'd thought it would be. You can see how the aggressive lynch-Teia thought processes took over from there.
EWP: @Wheat: 1. How is "I think this fits into Void's town meta. Go see for yourself." a chainsaw? Examples? I was confident calling Teia on this for a reason you know.
As for only voting when it's safe, you better back that up with some evidence Moms. I've been trying to get into KK's head this whole Day, & meeting with consistent bulldogging & WIFOM nonsense. I hadn't even seen Wheat's post when I voted.
I can see where scum KK ties himself to terrible town Void for post-lynch points, but I also haven't seen a valid defense of Void except "meta", which isn't what I remember from Town Void in CCMVI or what I saw in the partial re-read of the middle of that game that I did yesterday.
So now meta has to appear in every game instead of just most games?
And by my count, KK's at L-3...
Vote: KK
Correction, L-2. Let's see a claim, KK.
@_kaburi_ on Twitter
Special thanks to Serrot_29 for Catbug'mrakul!
I just noticed I get told off for answering for Moms. To me it looks like I was actually answering a question directed at BV.
Did a search for "medium sized"
AI used it just the other day
DoYourHomework used it a couple months ago
Tom asked the Theory thread about it back in April, I explained it.
Zindabad calls DRey out & even name drops me He sums up why it's bad news succinctly, whether it's coming from scum or town.
RobRoy, a MiseTings veteran, references it in February. Gandan doesn't ken, so RobRoy explains where the term comes from & how it applies to these games. Serendipitously, we see Void posting immediately before RR explains the term, then a few minutes afterwards. I'm skimming this game right now & to be fair, Void's posting looks a lot like this game. Megs calls him out for repeatedly doing things like the BV/Moms. Sticking this here for when I run out of things to do.
You do realize that it helps the scum a lot more than town to get multiple claims in a day, right?
Wow... I call shenanigans.
I already posted about it, but you and Teia were my only non-town reads. Were being the key words there.
I cleared Kaburi Here, although I'm still slightly suspicious of Ria. However Void's recent claim has rocketed him up to my number one suspect.
Everyone: Is it normal for a Jack of All Trades to exist in a game where everyone already has two abilities (our move and our ability)?
@Void: Why didn't you use any abilities last night?
It seems extremely unlikely that you just happen to be a Jack of All Trades with three abilities that haven't been revealed yet in others (Although Hans could arguably have been a variant on 'tracker'). It seems like a strategy to get one of those roles to counterclaim so scummies can target that person at night.
TerribleBad at Magic since 1998.A Vorthos Guide to Magic Story | Twitter | Tumblr
[Primer] Krenko | Azor | Kess | Zacama | Kumena | Sram | The Ur-Dragon | Edgar Markov | Daretti | Marath
Void, do you have an ability in addition to your moves?
I am responding to this in a separate post because Epic.
You say to Teia When I respond with incredulity, you reply
Tell me more about what scum will or won't do.
Consider the conflict of interest in *you* putting this forward – 'player A (you) would almost never begin a bus wagon on player C (Void or Wheat)'. Somehow this self-serving rubbish is supposed to convince me Teia's behaviour is scummy.
Not what I said. Forgive me for taking note of what I had just read. I wasn't trying to shatter your meta call with a sample size of 1.
[sarcasm]Yes, I did perform the NK[/sarcasm]
Come on, Teia. That question is as useful as me trying to take a nap after having a double espresso.
@KK: I wasn't confident in my reads after rereading the game. hansanator flipping Town was shocking.
I'm not twisting anything. I'm taking what you have said and I am trying to get everyone to see what I am seeing.
Explain what gave you this read, please.
Oh, so abandoning the Wheaties wagon for hansanator means you still read Wheaties as scum. Got it.
Yeah, I don't buy this for a second. Looking at your post after Wheaties claimed doesn't help your case. Your post:
I will admit that you don't call Wheaties Scum in this post, but you do say that hansanator needs to be lynched, but yet don't vote him. It's not like hansanator was in danger of being lynched. If you were unsure of Wheaties claim, then why stay on his wagon when calling for another lynch?
I'm not connered Scum. I'm Town being ignored with a good case. If Iso was still in here he would show how I am using Behavioral analysis correctly and would be a supporter of the your lynch, Teia.
inb4 I don't know Iso: You're wrong if you think this. Iso and I have quite the exstensive past in Mafia. We have played over 10+ games together. In a few of the games Iso had managed peg my alignment on my first post of the game. Two times being Scum, one time being Neutral and two times being Town. (We were an opposite teams for all of the games. Wheaties is aware of this as well). That being said, Iso knew that I am Town this game based on the meta he knows a little too well. It's kind of scary to be honest.
I don't believe Void's claim, but I think Wheat is trying to make some point about people claiming JoaT, which is why he asked about people claiming it in other games Void has been in. I'm not sure what the point is though. In either case, it doesn't sound like anyone else puts too much stock in Void's claim so far, so there is no need to counterclaim. As scum, he's trying to claim both investigative and protective roles to draw out a counterclaim so his buddies can kill the PRs.
ria, yes you have been on the KK train, but I didn't see the timestamps so it looked to me like you were straight up aping Wheat's vote. It's certainly possible that he posted while you were typing, but we only have your word for that. Too bad MTGS doesn't prompt you about other posts in the meantime like some other sites do.
...
...
...Void's "claim" is just a scum decoy designed to bait counterclaims. So that doesn't even enter into this discussion.
I don't vote without thinking through exactly what I'm doing. And in this case, I'm ratcheting the pressure on you to see how you respond. Getting a claim out of you is just a bonus piece of information.
@_kaburi_ on Twitter
Special thanks to Serrot_29 for Catbug'mrakul!
441 (Teia): "And you have no opinion on the counterarguments? "
442 (KK): "I haven't gotten the mental focus to slog through them yet"
444 (KK): No response to counterarguments.
446 (KK): Case on Teia rather than counterarguments.
So, if you didn't respond to the counterarguments there, where DID you respond to them?
VOID.
WHY DIDN'T YOU TAKE AN ACTION LAST NIGHT.
This forum requires that you wait 30 seconds between posts. Please try again in 4 seconds.
Void (2): Gerrard's Mom, Teia Rabishu
Gerrard's Mom (1): Void
Teia Rabishu (1): KoolKoal
KoolKoal (3): Wheat_Grinder, rianalnn, kaburi
With 9 alive, it's 5 to lynch!
Meaning, if you want to lynch Void (which you shouldn't) the pro-town move is to lynch him, not give the scum team help narrowing down our remaining PRs. Understand?
First of all, since when is it my responsibility to defend Void from those bad arguments. Secondly, handwaving a case on yourself is so much more telling than handwaving a case on someone else. Third, how are those not responses? Just because meta isn't a convincing argument, it suddenly isn't one at all? How does that make any sense? And finally, I posted 446 at GM's request, not to interrupt Teia. You'll notice that I continue to talk about the case on Void and his meta for many posts after.
@rian: What was the point of bringing up a town-Void game where you felt he didn't fit into my meta read of him?
[402] You like Void's post about Teia's read flip flop while undermining Wheat. You only thumbs up the post, there is no way in context to tell that you agree with only part of the post. You also put forward BV as a scumspect, saying you can't decide who to vote. . . so you vote neither. I can't see why you wouldn't want to put pressure on Teia here (BV had V/LA'd, & Void had just voted Teia).
[413] You ignore Void & Teia's posts in favour of picking at kaburi's THIS IS NOT ME CALLING YOU SCUM VOID post & giving lukewarm lip service to collecting more evidence on BV, giving yourself until he comes back to do it. This reads like you've presupposed the conclusion; 'this guy is scum, I'll figure out why later'. kaburi specifically points out that he does not think Teia is maligning Wheat in [387]. You do not comment.
[439] Accused by Moms of the same maligning-without-committing Void accused Teia of (that you barned), you say your question was fair & not trying to push without commenting, but neglect to support this statement. You also say you "more liked it that [Void] found some evidence" – this neatly sidesteps Moms' question of "If you liked his Teia case so much, why didn't you vote her?". This would be a reasonable place for you to say you felt Void's point about Teia/Iso was weak, but you do not.
[442] Teia has asked your opinion of the counterarguments & you dismiss them as wordy & beyond your ability to "slog through" (note that you say you re-read my post repeatedly to no avail). You suggest that's ok because "Void has never been known for strong cases or perfect logic". You also state that you "find little reason" to analyze Void because he's chasing your scum reads.
[444] Teia has recapped her argument in five points, which you dismiss as just being bad at arguing, even though she says while that is a possibility, she sees scummy motive behind Void's behaviour.
[446] Teia has asked you to address Void's motive, but you do not.
[448] Laughing & accusing Teia of ignoring large swaths of your case, when you yourself have just ignored the heart of Teia's push on Void. Teia has again asked you to address Void's motive but you again focus on the bad argument rather than the motivation behind it.
[450] After Teia breaks it down for you – "it's the same thing Void's doing: You're so absolutely convinced of your conclusion that you won't entertain thoughts to the contrary. That's not townie behaviour, because Mafia's ultimately a game about the informed minority (scum) versus the uninformed majority (town)" – you say "You haven't given me anything to think about on the contrary since I laid the case on you." Teia asked you to examine Void's /motivation/ prior to you casing her.
[460] I try to establish what is confusing you about my post re: Void & your reply is "Oh, for some reason I never read the posts you quoted with the rest of your post. I don't know how I made such a stupid mistake but the post makes sense now." KK confirmed for not reading?
At this point in the thread my notes have you obfuscating, antagonizing, strawmanning & tunnelling, & that isn't even going into our subsequent interactions or what I see from Day 1 that continues on into toDay. . . & it's 3am (yay x_x).
Exactly what suggests.
Your initial reply suggests to me that you understood where I was going with that (you are wrong about Void's meta), now you're playing dumb?
aaaaaand goodnight kids
I know that your skimming thread, but please don't be rude about towards me because you over looked the answer. Your answer is here:
You didn't need to yell at me and BOLD your lettering to get my attnetion. I have been responding to everything this game in a timely fanshion. I'm still looking up the JoaT thing for you.
You're at L-2. Claim rather than making excuses.
I wanted a reaction, and I got a reaction.
What you're seeing is pretty well divorced from the facts, then. We'll see something even more removed from reality later on in this post.
My experience with Iso suggested that him acting in a way that generates as many reactions as possible then following it up with solid analysis is town behaviour from him. In addition, Wheat looked increasingly scummy at the time. So my read was that town!Iso had caught scum.
My vote was already on hansanator.
This is about the response I expected. Bare denial alongside a "no u" and an appeal to a dead townie. It doesn't make you look any less cornered, because there's no real meat to this. It's just thrown out there as if it's persuasive. The thing about persuasion is that you need strong support for your arguments. In the face of how apparent it is that your case is not good (you're getting extremely basic facts wrong, like who my vote was on at a given time), and how you have no other evidence for your assertion that you're using behavioural analysis correctly, it does indeed look like you're cornered and are simply grasping at straws for any way out of the spotlight.
If you were town and he was on the opposite team as you, then how is it anything special for scum to know which players are town?
Nevertheless, one claims when they're at L-2, no matter how stupid they think the wagon is. I got run up to L-2 almost immediately in MM6 over a null tell, and I didn't have any issue with claiming.
Thank you, I apologize for yelling but I thought you weren't answering.
We're good, Wheaties.
Hey, thanks for calling me stupid.
^that's implication and stretching, which is what you and Void have been doing with the case on Teia. (Mostly Void.)
Is that a PR claim?
To be honest, I don't care if you claim or not. Like I said, I wanted a reaction from you against something besides the Teia wagon, and voting you up to L-2 seemed like the best way to get some pressure on you. And I got a reaction.
@_kaburi_ on Twitter
Special thanks to Serrot_29 for Catbug'mrakul!
I'm willing to lynch either of them, but I do think that we should make up our minds which lynch we want to do and follow through. Day 1 Wheat was the #2 scum suspect and he pretty much cleared himself through night actions. Just based on the dead and claimed abilities so far, it seems like there is a lot going on in terms of roles. The only value I see in pushing a KK claim is if we force a fake claim that he can't hold himself to, but I don't think that's very different than lynching Void now and putting the votes on KK tomorrow if he still looks suspicious then. From what I've heard, we have the votes to lynch either of them at any point, people just want to use the full time until deadline.
Descending order of likelihood in my mind:
1) Both scum, and are misplaying horribly.
2) Scum!Void, and town!KK is overzealously barning.
3) Scum!KK barning a bad case made by town!Void.
4) Both town, and are misplaying horribly. But if this is the case, we're right ****ed anyway.
This is why I want us to take our time on this lynch: I want us to be as sure as we can get as to who the stronger lynch is. At the moment, I believe Void to be the better lynch candidate, but I could see KK pulling ahead in that department as well.
Either way, KK needs to claim so we can weigh our options more evenly.
Also, Wheat said he used "toNight" in the context of "mafia," which I read as "the game," not "when I am scum." Why would someone capitalize N when they are scum and not when they are town?
In it you state that you're used to saying toNight as scum, and have been saying it this game. I'm probably just reading too much into it, but it seems like a scum slip.[/QUOTE]
Mafia as in the game of mafia, not mafia as in the alignment.
I'd rather Void than KK. I'm not too keen on either, but I feel stronger about Void due to his claim. Has KK claimed yet?
TerribleBad at Magic since 1998.A Vorthos Guide to Magic Story | Twitter | Tumblr
[Primer] Krenko | Azor | Kess | Zacama | Kumena | Sram | The Ur-Dragon | Edgar Markov | Daretti | Marath
So BV is town.
JoaT is essentially unable to be cc'd.
While this may be true it is still bad play.
I'm just waiting on KK's claim right now, but if everyone else is in agreement that Void is today's lynch I'll go ahead and move my vote and hand him the knife. That way he can suicide himself like a good little scum and go play in a game that's more up to his standards.
@_kaburi_ on Twitter
Special thanks to Serrot_29 for Catbug'mrakul!
Keep the ad hom out of this. You may be a Mod, but I will not be disrespected like this.
Calling me terrible because of play is one thing.
Saying that I have high standards because I called the game a trainwreck is another.
I'll let you decide on which is more insulting.
I'm sorry you feel disrespected. I'll reserve further comment for postgame.
@_kaburi_ on Twitter
Special thanks to Serrot_29 for Catbug'mrakul!
I'm sick of newb-town being dragged around by the nose by the scum in modfia games and I'm not cooperating with scum demands.
That's why JoaT is a good scumclaim. Makes the player seem useful while not being easily cc'd.
Actually tends to be a scum role sometimes for that same reason, though not always.
But on the other hand you aren't Void and thus don't know as well as he does what offends him. Just sayin'.
I want to lynch you.
I just also want to lynch Void.
Do me a favor and actually look at my reads once my alignment is confirmed. I don't want a repeat of MM7 where I caught parinoid, whom Teia protected in a scummy way, I got mislynched, Teia got copped and lynched, and parinoid got to ride out an easy win because no one bothered to reread the game.
I meant it to be offensive, so mission accomplished?
It was over the line, though, and for that I'm sorry. As with pretty much everything IRL and on MTGS today, I'm letting my emotions get the better of my judgment. Like I said, I'll reserve further comment on this subject for postgame.
I stand by my offer to move my vote, though. I'm prepared to lynch Void.
...so are you calling me newb-town, or scum? Just looking for clarification here.
Also, I'm fine with lynching you--I never vote someone unless I'm willing to lynch them. I'd just rather lynch Void first.
Speaking of over-the-line emotional... Dude, take a step back for a minute. Yes, assuming everything is as it appears, wheat mis-vigged Iso. But saying he's going to useless for the entire game? That's harsh.
@_kaburi_ on Twitter
Special thanks to Serrot_29 for Catbug'mrakul!
@_kaburi_ on Twitter
Special thanks to Serrot_29 for Catbug'mrakul!