In post 7, Cheery Dog wrote:This is now a prod-dodge post.
Except I have to go vote the non-confirmer
VOTE: Spencer22
thats vague!!
VOTE: Cherry Dog
In post 7, Cheery Dog wrote:This is now a prod-dodge post.
Except I have to go vote the non-confirmer
VOTE: Spencer22
In post 12, Cheery Dog wrote:Neither did me assuming you were scum because of it in tit for tat. (open 455)
Doesn't stop me from making assumptions based on the same thing.
In post 16, Klick wrote:Doyouknow how my scum play is?
By the way, Jacob, if you don't remember, I'm _Sherlock_.
In post 19, Klick wrote:Cool. I'm completely terrible as scum and get lynched by Page 3 every time. I'm totally confirmed town because I haven't scumslipped.
In post 25, JacobSavage wrote:In post 20, ArcAngel9 wrote:In post 19, Klick wrote:Cool. I'm completely terrible as scum and get lynched by Page 3 every time. I'm totally confirmed town because I haven't scumslipped.
Its too soon for you too do any slips but if if you're scum..am sure there will be one to find.
so Is there anyone who played with Jacob when he was scum?
No one in existence unfortunately.
Well unless you count Serial Killer as scum (note: I don't) then your better off looking here, but that was like 2 years ago so...
In post 42, KX wrote:Just a quick note, when I said "not that it means anything, being the norm and all" I mean that this is mafia and so everybody should be distrusted. Personally, having seen HD's play style and knowing him, I trust him the most out of everybody since I have something to go off of. Though I will confess upon re-reading it, I found it scummy myself. Not sure what you mean by contrasting tones, I found it such due to the "Or at least apparently I seem that way" in combination with the aforementioned in parentheses parts, which make it seem to much like I'm trying to cover for further actions.
Though I'm not really helping my case, though I will be helping my point, I tend to just post without thinking unless specifically making a lengthy analysis of another player. As such, sometimes I'll post things which don't exactly look the best, or which contradict things I've already said or the facts. The only upside to this is that it means I'm pretty truthful. Or I could not be, and instead be scummy as hell. My only defense towards that is I'm not stupid, so if I'm scum, I'd probably be covering my tracks a little better. Uh, yeah, rather then debate myself, since it's the only thing I see to do, I'll let you people.
In post 94, Human Destroyer wrote:In post 85, JacobSavage wrote:In post 82, Klick wrote:(also, I'll say that I'm very easily readable - whatever you feel first, I'm the opposite alignment. )
But I feel your town....
VOTE: Klick
Then what do you think of this?
In post 101, KX wrote:For clarification once again: When I say I trust HD the most our of everybody, that do not means I trust him. All that I mean is I trust him more then the rest of you, since I know him and so could judge him better. Also, I don't really get the problem with what I said: I'm enlightening the rest of the game on how I tend to play. No matter what, I can't prove myself as village, and being an impossible goal, was not my intention. Should this not be my normal play style, and so I'm lying about meta, HD could easily object, unless people mean to imply that we're both lying, the only possible reason for being we're both scum. At this early phase, since once again, neither of us are stupid, we wouldn't try such an event which could out us so early.
Anyway, pretty much what I mean to say from all of this is that I'm only explaining my play style, it being impossible to clean myself so early, and that if I'm lying, you would know via HD. Now, just because the way I play is what some consider scummy, just my pointing it out doesn't make me clean. Thing is, it also shouldn't make me suspicious. Either way, it doesn't provide any information towards my alignment which can't be second-guessed, and so the only outcome one should get from it is information about my play.
Let me put it like this: I have two possible ways to play, both with advantages as scum and village:
I can either check my posts, and make them all careful and calculated, trying to subtly accomplish goals, avoid slipping up, etc. As village, it could establish me as a strong leader, give my opinions more voice, which if I have confidence in their correctness would be a good thing, and over all hopefully have a positive effect on the game. It would also prevent people from suspecting me as much and so not waste people's time. Downsides are that if I slip up about anything, it would be hard to explain.
As scum, playing in such a style would be useful as it would allow me to use the information I possessed to attempt to control and manipulate the game, shifting attention from my partners in an attempt to cause mislynches. I would be unlikely to be lynched myself, which for a mafioso is a great thing, and would give me voice. Overall, all helpful things. Some might question me, but as long as I stayed calm, which I could definitely do, hopefully there would be no harm. Worst case scenario, I get lynched, in which case I can put traps on misinformation into my posts.
The second option would be the one I have chosen:
Simply say what I think and feel, attempting honesty at all times. Explain myself and my actions to players, attempting to eliminate criticism that's unfounded and provide opinions. Most likely I won't have much voice, and my opinions won't me as much. Also, due to how it works, generally most suspect me. Plus are though that should I live to late game, most should get a very good read on me, and so at that point it would be highly advantages. Also, as it seems to have done already, it tends to generate much discussion. Also, the reason why I picked it, it's simpler to do, and I'm lazy.
This option would also be good as scum though. As mentioned, if I can get through initial criticism and play well, it could lead to a late-game victory, and the general suspicion and so chance of being a lynch target would be a good reason for why I wasn't getting killed. All actions would seem pro village, and as long as I avoided partnering with my scumbuddies, it would have a high chance of success. Also, especially via explaining this whole set-up, it provides a great fake-out play. Nobody would expect a scum to do this and then ruin the strategy by explaining it all, and too choose the option which, of the two scum options, at first seems the lesser, and then make it out to be the greater.
Point being, there are valid explanations for playing just about any way for any side, and so based off an early game announcement of one's play style, it's extremely hard and really just luck what you get from it, at least in a situation with a player like me who dissects the game. All you can get is an idea how they should play, and then see if it holds up. And don't point out the irony of me choosing this style because it's easier, then making these tl;dr posts. I realize it, and it's since I can just type without thinking, even if it takes a while to type.
In post 109, KX wrote:ArcAngel9, y u no reading comprehension?
What I'm saying is I have no clear idea of how any of you will play, while I have a slight idea how HD will play. That means I can understand the way he posts a little better then for everybody else, and so I trust him more. I still don't trust him, but in comparison to the rest of you, he's the one I think, at this time, I could most accurately judge. So, I trust him to be understandable, not a certain alignment. If he flipped scum, as I've already stated, I'm not the best at getting reads off of feelings, and so I wouldn't be surprised. I won't follow him blindly, and want you to show me were in my posts I say I will. Our relation is that we've played mafia together and talked on a different site.
In post 110, KX wrote:Also, to add on, I am not understanding at all where people are getting my posts being emotional from. Even if it's a single sentence, I would like somebody to show me exactly what makes it seem that way.
In post 131, KX wrote:I see it as working with what I know. I know myself and how I plan to play, so I comment on that. I don't know about anybody else, and don't see anything I can comment on. Otherwise I would be posting just about nothing, which is far from helpful and almost detrimental. I figure that the more information it out there, the better it is for the village. If I'm wrong, then correct me. Should information appear on something which I feel I can comment on, then I will. For now though, I do the best that I can which remains useful.
In response to Nic, I'll admit the multi-paragraph post wasn't the most helpful, and could have been shortened, but it was to prove a point. Other the the TL;DR nature, how is the information not helpful? It's proving something to talk about, it gives people insight into my play style since there's no meta, and if gives something for people to go off of. Also, I tend to be a reckless person. I don't exactly crave attention, but see no problem with sticking out, and won't change my attitude to avoid doing so.
And, rather then talk about myself, many of you will be happy to know that I plan to soon make a semi-constructive post of how I see the game so far based on other people.
In post 170, serrapaladin wrote:Less input than Spencer?
In post 174, JacobSavage wrote:II'm addressing Serra about KX
In post 307, Cheery Dog wrote:
In post 294, ArcAngel9 wrote:
Another person i am concerned about is Good Morning, He agrees with everyone about Josh being scum but actua
lly didn't vote him
You want him to have hammered now, yet you've now gone and taken your vote off him? This just doesn't make sense. My leaning town read on you has now dissolved.
In post 334, serrapaladin wrote:Hmm, goodmorning actually makes a good point there.
ArcAngel: why did you mention Josh's RVS vote on you?
.
In post 390, serrapaladin wrote:In post 167, ArcAngel9 wrote:
Josh is a person i am bit concerned about, He randomly votes me firstand after 3 pages laters he made another posting saying that "every body is arguing over nothing" and later he gives bit lecture to KX , and right after he votex KX. Over all 7 pages he has been nothing but "Null"
I don't know Josh before neither i have ever played with him I am wondering if this is how he play or he is scum and trying to avoid facing the game?
Unvote
VOTE: Josh
ArcAngel, this is the post GM and I were referring to. It's odd that in making a case against Josh you would mention "he RVS votes me" that far into the game. RVS votes are really irrelevant as soon as we've left RVS. Also, it's somewhat inconsistent that you decide he's been mostly null, but then vote him anyways. Your vote on Josh seems a bit fabricated overall.
I'm still leaning town on GM, although I'm interested to see how Jenn's case plays out.
AA jennifer came. So what happened to the read on her and doesn't the reason you unvoted her die if the slot's active again?
In post 407, Human Destroyer wrote:In post 406, ArcAngel9 wrote:and what is surprising me is that how you don't see GM scummy, He has was doing nothing than just twisting the game. how can you don't see that? and HD?
Is this a question being asked towards me or are you asking it about me?
In post 411, serrapaladin wrote:Arc: Sure, you mentioned other stuff, but mentioning Josh's random vote on you is very odd. Everyone makes random votes without reads in RVS, that's really not something you have any reason to bring up.
In post 412, Human Destroyer wrote:@Arc
In post 387, Human Destroyer wrote:Jennifer's case actually interests me a lot, but I like my vote where it is currently.
Taking Jenn's case into account, I'd say GM's floating somewhere in the null range.
I did answer it though...
In post 417, JacobSavage wrote:Who is GM?
In post 415, Human Destroyer wrote:1) Jacob is scummier.
2) Her main focus of attack is goodmorning, why wouldn't she have two scum reads?
P-Edit: @Docteur
In post 419, ArcAngel9 wrote:In post 417, JacobSavage wrote:Who is GM?
GM means GoodMorning!
And tell me, Why are you being less poster on this game? Considering to your history for not being scum for son long. I am having second thoughts on your read... and ignorance is not your regular fashion... Are you Scum?
In post 421, Human Destroyer wrote:In post 416, ArcAngel9 wrote:In post 412, Human Destroyer wrote:@Arc
In post 387, Human Destroyer wrote:Jennifer's case actually interests me a lot, but I like my vote where it is currently.
Taking Jenn's case into account, I'd say GM's floating somewhere in the null range.
I did answer it though...
well that was it? that was looking more like that you don't want talk about him than considering into facts that i mentioned about him.
Well GM was a slight town read before, and now she's moved to null because the cases on her interest me. There isn't really much more to talk about there. >.>
P-Edit: Her=Jennifer
In post 430, JacobSavage wrote:Also the fact I haven't been scum in so long doesn't actually change my chances of being scum.
In post 451, goodmorning wrote:HAHAHA 4 pages since this morning? Good one, guys. Wait, seriously?
In post 359, goodmorning wrote:
Panzer wrote:Goodmorning for starting a stream of anti-town posts.
Pics or it didn't happenOK, where? You're making a pretty brazen assertion here sans evidence.
Answer this please.
In post 371, Jennifer wrote:
Okay, since you are insisting that your list of reads were in hard rank order, and Nic was indeed your third scummiest read..
...why are you now voting your fourth scummiest read instead of your third scummiest? Or second? (Josh/I was your scummiest read)
Also, please show me the exact posts that were made that led to you deciding to vote AA9 over your scummier reads Nik and Ven.
And another also, what do you think about the fact that two of your scum reads (Nic and Ven) were on the same wagon you were on until just recently?
Past tense is the key there. AA9's random assumptions and apparent lack of attentiveness to actual things going on in the game led me to push her two spots down the list. She is now at the bottom, as replacement-you is in replacement purgatory for a little while. So she is my scummiest read as of now.
The actual posts are the ones I pointed out in the 330s I think. My last posts before you replaced in. And they are no longer scummier reads because of those posts.
I think that scumreads (on D1 especially) are completely independent from each other. If some of my scumreads are voting some of my other scumreads, fine. I'll sort it out D3 or D4 (assuming I live so long) when speculation on teams can really come to the forefront.
In post 381, ArcAngel9 wrote:GM... initially seems nice and all with KX and agreed with everyone that Josh is being odd and stuff, but actually didn't vote him. when I asked him reason for not voting Josh, His response doesn't seem genuine, His responded saying that he want to give benefit of doubt and rather want the day extended, if you feel someone scum it shouldn't basically stop you voting but that is not something that worried me about him right now, what worries me that, He voted Josh after everyone started his odd behavior of not voting Josh, that's a scary attitude.
1. I am a girl. That information is right under the picture of the cat beside all of my posts.
2. WHO WANTS A HAMMER LESS THAN A WEEK INTO D1???
3. I VOTED HIM BECAUSE HE WAS MY TOP SCUMREAD. YOU UNVOTED, AND THEREFORE I COULD VOTE HIM WITHOUT PREMATURELY ENDING THE DAY.
4. IF I WRITE IN CAPITALS WILL YOU ACTUALLY READ WHAT I AM SAYING, OR WILL YOU STILL IGNORE IT AND MAKE IT UP AS YOU GO? I'm willing to make some allowances for language, but this is just ridiculous.
In post 402, NicCage wrote:
Why would you put an inactive player back up to L-1? You didn't want to lynch him before, and you can't add pressure to a nobody.
Has been discussed, but
1. Didn't realize he was inactive at the time.
2. Did want to lynch him, just didn't want the Day to end prematurely.
On a lighter note:
In post 406, ArcAngel9 wrote:and what is surprising me is that how you don't see GM scummy, He has was doing nothing than just twisting the game.
QFLOL.
In post 434, Human Destroyer wrote:Even skimming, goodmorning is mentioned in like every post
It's physically impossible to forget she's in the game if you've read it
Also QFLOL.
In post 453, Cheery Dog wrote:
In post 382, ArcAngel9 wrote:In post 307, Cheery Dog wrote:
In post 294, ArcAngel9 wrote:
Another person i am concerned about is Good Morning, He agrees with everyone about Josh being scum but actua
lly didn't vote him
You want him to have hammered now, yet you've now gone and taken your vote off him? This just doesn't make sense. My leaning town read on you has now dissolved.
What I meant was that, I found Josh scummy but he was prodded and there was a good chance he could replaced, so i changed my vote someone who i think may be scum. If everyone decides to lynch Josh i want to make sure that others know that i am with them on that.
But in your reasoning for the GM vote, you had him as scummy because he hadn't voted Josh and agreed with everyone else.
And it just doesn't make sense when GM wasn't the only person to have agreed with Josh being scummy but not voting him, is it just because of the readlists that you're only worried about one of those people that expressed interest in the Josh lynch but didn't vote?
In post 459, Klick wrote:In post 458, ArcAngel9 wrote:SCUM FOUND, PLEASE LYNCH THIS WOMAN!!!!!!!!!!!
SCUM FOUND, PLEASE LYNCH THIS WOMAN!!!!!!!!!!!
In post 464, Klick wrote:In post 461, ArcAngel9 wrote:In post 459, Klick wrote:In post 458, ArcAngel9 wrote:SCUM FOUND, PLEASE LYNCH THIS WOMAN!!!!!!!!!!!
SCUM FOUND, PLEASE LYNCH THIS WOMAN!!!!!!!!!!!
LOL, And whats your read on GM!!!
I could see gm as scum, and may end up voting her today.
I was just showing that quoting a post and saying "Oh this person is scum" means absolutely nothing.
In post 547, JacobSavage wrote:
Page 1 of Many, Going to sleep and continue this in the morning.
Also Serra, its just a matter of time.
In post 576, KX wrote:The problem is, do those making such opinions think of them as vague and circumstantial? If yes, I want a lynch on that person for doing something I consider damages the game. If no, then I want to lynch them for bad reasoning. Either I find them scummy, or I find them dislikable. Well, when the time comes around, I'll vote whoever I think is the best choice. For now though, I think none of the targets are the best, and see no reason to cast a vote.
In post 590, PJ. wrote:In post 589, KX wrote:So Panzer, since your actions are making me believe you're scum as well, why am I not scum? After all, by objecting to you and calling your claims ludicrous, I'm obviously HD's scum partner panicking about him getting offed. Or am I not scum because unlike HD I've been somewhat inactive and withdrawn instead of getting things done? But wait, that can't be, I've made lists and cases, so forget that, I'm scum just like him!
I'm convinced from your early play that you're a newer player. also aren't you IRL friends or friends from another site with HD?
In post 601, serrapaladin wrote:I'm getting the strong impression one of HD or Panzer is scum. I don't see the wagons on GM or Jenn. Despite his awesome drawings, I still think Jacob is a decent lynch.
In post 604, serrapaladin wrote:Why did you respond to that post?
In post 605, PJ. wrote:You think my post are meaningless because you don't understand when I'm getting at, and I don't know how else you want me to explain it. I seem to be repeating myself a lot this game but people keep asking me how i feel about things I feel I've made quite clear. I've answered every question posed to me. It seems that the base reason of why I'm getting votes is because no one understands what I'm saying. What do you guys need clarifying.
Niccage seems ridiculously scummy.
In post 608, serrapaladin wrote:In post 606, ArcAngel9 wrote:how is it bothering you Serra? In what way?
Why would it bother me? I just found it odd that out of all posts you would reply to some assertions of which wagon's I agree with. Why are you so convinced HD is town?
In post 610, Cheery Dog wrote:In post 603, ArcAngel9 wrote:About Drawings.. Jacob is adorable.. Don't lynch him please..
Does being able to draw actually mean anything about his alignment? This is a game of mafia not a talent quest.
In post 660, borkjerfkin wrote:Answers to both these questions can be found in my ISO