Mini 754 - Frogs Mafia Game, Set and Match.

[Citizen Karne]

FoS: Gorrad

Consider that my 'random vote'.

[Citizen Karne]

Hi I'm here!

Hi say something with a point!

seems kind of hypocritical since you haven't really said anything contentful as well

Agreed.

After having actually read,

FoS: Gorrad

for real now.

[Citizen Karne]

FoS: Gorrad

Consider that my 'random vote'.

Is there a reason why you FoS instead of vote for someone?

I don't usually vote unless to hammer someone. I've random voted in the past, but all-in-all, I feel uncomfortable voting for someone before a hammer unless for a VERY good reason.

[Citizen Karne]

I don't usually vote unless to hammer someone. I've random voted in the past, but all-in-all, I feel uncomfortable voting for someone before a hammer unless for a VERY good reason.

I guess that's part of your meta and all, but do you really feel like that's a pro-town way to play?

FoS: Gorrad

Consider that my 'random vote'.

Is there a reason why you FoS instead of vote for someone?

I don't usually vote unless to hammer someone. I've random voted in the past, but all-in-all, I feel uncomfortable voting for someone before a hammer unless for a VERY good reason.

Can you list for me three ways in which that action is anti town and three ways in which it is pro town?

Do random votes really count towards anything anyway? How is a random FoS any different? I suppose it prevents speedlynching a little. I really can't see any difference. If you want to make a big deal about me not voting, well that's silly. This is how I play. Deal with it. If you want to call me scum because of it, go ahead. I'd love to see your argument on how it makes me scum in this game as opposed to other games where I have been town. I do not think it is at all anti-town, either. It certainly does not inhibit my ability to discuss intelligently.

My FoSes are, for all intents and purposes, votes.

Speaking of FoSes that are, for all intents and purposes, votes, I dislike Gorrad's play so far. His second post seems to me like he is trying to stay out of the focus. His retraction of his analysis of TSQ seems as though he is backing out of a possible confrontation for the sole purpose of not getting into an argument with a player rather than simply mixing up people in his head. (I don't feel as though I am expressing myself accurately, but hopefully you understand me.) With whom did you confuse TSQ in your head, Gorrad?

Also, his posts in response to Haterade strike me as overly hypocritical cheap shots to try and gain town points by advocating for discussion.

[Citizen Karne]

Do random votes really count towards anything anyway? How is a random FoS any different? I suppose it prevents speedlynching a little. I really can't see any difference. If you want to make a big deal about me not voting, well that's silly. This is how I play. Deal with it. If you want to call me scum because of it, go ahead. I'd love to see your argument on how it makes me scum in this game as opposed to other games where I have been town. I do not think it is at all anti-town, either. It certainly does not inhibit my ability to discuss intelligently.

My FoSes are, for all intents and purposes, votes.

My point was that by not voting, you're hindering a town's ability to read you. (Vote analysis works for many players.) By saying that your FoSes are basically your votes, we can treat them as such and that analysis is back on the table. So, yeah, I'm fine with that.

Sounds good to me.

[Citizen Karne]

Guys, crywolf is pretty clearly town.

I wouldn't go that far, but focusing on the way she is random voting as much as you are, Gorrad and ckd, is foolish. If her meta is consistent, it's just a playstyle choice. If her meta is inconsistent, then we might have something to talk about. Even then, though, I really look at that as a null-tell. I've heard a few passable arguments about why it is detrimental to the town or possibly a way for scum to avoid some sort of Freudian slip in random voting that could hurt them later on, but even if you subscribe to those theories it is such a small thing that I hardly think it warrants this much discussion.

[Citizen Karne]

Guys, crywolf is pretty clearly town.

I wouldn't go that far, but focusing on the way she is random voting as much as you are, Gorrad and ckd, is foolish. If her meta is consistent, it's just a playstyle choice. If her meta is inconsistent, then we might have something to talk about. Even then, though, I really look at that as a null-tell. I've heard a few passable arguments about why it is detrimental to the town or possibly a way for scum to avoid some sort of Freudian slip in random voting that could hurt them later on, but even if you subscribe to those theories it is such a small thing that I hardly think it warrants this much discussion.

Pretty sure I asked questions and then was satisfied with the answers. I would hardly call that "focusing on it." Are you even reading the thread?

What? I was directing the majority of this post at Gorrad and ckd. Only the first sentence is for you.

[Citizen Karne]

Ah, I see now. I apologize for the confusing syntax.

[Citizen Karne]

The more I read it, the more to me it looks like haterade was just looking for a random thing to attack, and not actually reading the thread with an eye towards scum hunting. His logic here is SERIOUSLY wonky.

Vote: Haterade

I would like to stress that this is not based on his vote for me, but rather on how he appears to be approaching the thread.

I endorse this product and/or service.

FoS: Haterade

.

[Citizen Karne]

At first I thought that Haterade was thinking that because you said were a good scumhunter when you were scum that you were trying to convince us that you were pro-town in a game where you were not, and this misunderstanding - as a player can indeed scumhunt successfully and be anti-town at the same time and

is expected to do so if they are scum in a game with multiple anti-town groups

- would be cleared up fairly easily (if not a bit aggressively) by TSQ. However, Haterade then refused to listen to logic and evidence and attacked Kmd for no apparent reason after he tried to help explain.

Sounds like a classical case of an overly defensive beginner. I am not 100% sold that he is scum yet (more like 70%), as beginner players seem to all act alike when they are cornered unfortunately. More analysis pending.

[Citizen Karne]

Sounds like a classical case of an overly defensive beginner.

No such thing as overdefensive. Defending yourself is not a scum tell.

Yes there is. However, it is not a scumtell.

I am not 100% sold that he is scum yet (more like 70%), as beginner players seem to all act alike when they are cornered unfortunately. More analysis pending.

Seriously? You are 70% sure that Haterade is scum this early in the game?

Look at the way he has stuck with his case. Noobtown would have retreated by now in my opinion.

[Citizen Karne]

Sounds like a classical case of an overly defensive beginner.

No such thing as overdefensive. Defending yourself is not a scum tell.

Yes there is. However, it is not a scumtell.

Then why bring it up? You sure as hell made it look like a scumtell by saying that then saying you were 70% sure he was scum.

That was more a precursor the 30% of me wanting to say he is town than the 70% wanting to say he is scum.

I am not 100% sold that he is scum yet (more like 70%), as beginner players seem to all act alike when they are cornered unfortunately. More analysis pending.

Seriously? You are 70% sure that Haterade is scum this early in the game?

Look at the way he has stuck with his case. Noobtown would have retreated by now in my opinion.

First off, haterade is not a noob. And I have seen both scum and town do exactly what Haterade is doing, sticking to a case that has been proven wrong. I've done it as town. And reading Haterade's post, I did not get any scummy vibes. Yes, he was wrong, but I feel Haterade genuinely believes what he is saying.[/quote]

At the beginning of a game, I am 50% sure a person is scum. The extra 20% is not as big of a gain as I think you are making it. The ad hominem on kmd and the way he is sticking with his attack even though it was pointed out to him fairly clearly by TSQ reads more for me as noobscum than noobtown. You have a different read and a valid opinion, which I understand. I think we are just going to have to agree to disagree on this one.

[Citizen Karne]

Macavity, why the vote for Dahill?

I am not 100% sold that he is scum yet (more like 70%), as beginner players seem to all act alike when they are cornered unfortunately. More analysis pending.

Seriously? You are 70% sure that Haterade is scum this early in the game?

Look at the way he has stuck with his case. Noobtown would have retreated by now in my opinion.

First off, haterade is not a noob. And I have seen both scum and town do exactly what Haterade is doing, sticking to a case that has been proven wrong. I've done it as town. And reading Haterade's post, I did not get any scummy vibes. Yes, he was wrong, but I feel Haterade genuinely believes what he is saying.

At the beginning of a game, I am 50% sure a person is scum. The extra 20% is not as big of a gain as I think you are making it. The ad hominem on kmd and the way he is sticking with his attack even though it was pointed out to him fairly clearly by TSQ reads more for me as noobscum than noobtown. You have a different read and a valid opinion, which I understand. I think we are just going to have to agree to disagree on this one.

You just ignored everything I said. You seemingly looked past the fact that I said Haterade is not a noob, and the fact that what Haterade is doing is done by both scum and town. As a matter of fact, I see town stick to a fallacious case rather than scum. I'm not even going to talk about the 50% and how ludicrous that is.

What a minute. Haterade isn't a noob? I'll admit, I misread your post and thought you said he was a noob. He was a townsperson at the start of this game, and is a goon now, which usually points to a noob in my book.

Also, I didn't look past what you said about the fact that what Haterade is doing is done by both scum and town. I specifically addressed that point when I said:

The ad hominem on kmd and the way he is sticking with his attack even though it was pointed out to him fairly clearly by TSQ reads more for me as noobscum than noobtown. You have a different read and a valid opinion, which I understand. I think we are just going to have to agree to disagree on this one.

What part of that did you not understand?

Also, do you assume everyone is completely pro-town at the beginning of a game? I've always started with completely neutral reads on everyone.

[Citizen Karne]

Also, I didn't look past what you said about the fact that what Haterade is doing is done by both scum and town. I specifically addressed that point when I said:

The ad hominem on kmd and the way he is sticking with his attack even though it was pointed out to him fairly clearly by TSQ reads more for me as noobscum than noobtown. You have a different read and a valid opinion, which I understand. I think we are just going to have to agree to disagree on this one.

What part of that did you not understand?

I understood it perfectly. You don't seem to understand that what Haterade has done is not scummy.

In your opinion

. I could easily be saying the exact same thing about you that you are saying about me yet I have accepted people have different opinions about what they think is scummy or not. If there was a definite set of rules about what makes someone scummy and what doesn't, then this game would be a lot shorter. But there isn't. Now, I know that common sense can help separate the scum from the town in certain situations, but I don't think this is one of them.

Also, do you assume everyone is completely pro-town at the beginning of a game? I've always started with completely neutral reads on everyone.

Statistically speaking, people are more likely to be town than scum. I view people as protown at the beginning unless their play looks otherwise. So you saying you already think someone is 50% scum at the beginning of the game is not neutral. You are saying that you are 50% sure someone is scum based off of absolutely nothing.[/quote]

I assume everyone is either scum or town. I don't think anyone is innocent until proven guilty, or guilty until proven innocent. I just let their posts speak for themselves. The 50% thing has nothing to do with the ratio of town to scum in a game. How could I know that unless I was the mod? Maybe if I phrase it like this: On a scale of 1 to 10, where 1 is confirmed town and 10 is confirmed scum, I start off everyone at a 5 (neutral). Some people, based on their posts, will go up on this ranking; others will go down. Does that make more sense? I can see how you may have gotten confused with the percentages.

[Citizen Karne]

3. See Grimmmafia (not to be confused with Grimmafia). If I'm town, I have less of an active interest in the game and won't be very active unless either actively part of a conflict or if I smell a rat (like how I jumped when I thought a question was being answered that wasn't asked). If I'm scum, I've got more at stake trying to throw blame on others, so I'm more active. Give it time. I shouldn't be like this for long.

I don't like this post very much at all. Self-metas are okay in some situations trying to prove some points, but this is not one of them.

[Citizen Karne]

24 hours with no posts? Odd.

[Citizen Karne]

24 hours with no posts? Odd.

funny you mention no posts...but you dont reply to my email...why is that?

Email?

I'm as confused as you are Gorrad…

Also, if I've missed some questions, ckd, please point them out so I can answer them.

And I would prefer first of all that you wouldn't self-meta in the first place and second of all that if you do it would be for a certain thing like "I always roll dice to random vote" or "I rarely vote except to hammer;" to prove something factual. An opinion about yourself really doesn't help us much. The fact that you are aware of it means you could be using it as scum to trick us. I would actually be more likely to believe you are scum trying to trick someone with a self-meta like that than town trying to prove your innocence. The fact that it is this early hurts you even more. I would think someone would resort to something as flimsy as that later on possibly as a last result, but when it is your first defense it looks like you've been waiting to use it, you know what I mean?

[Citizen Karne]

Ah, I didn't see the last page.

I still don't see the post you are talking about ckd. I'm sorry, would you please direct me to it?

[Citizen Karne]

CK

from the bottom of page 6, bolded questions

I am not a big scot fan. Nothing personal, just don’t like his game play. I cant remember his alignment in those past games I have played with him (I think I have seen him as town and scum)..I think this is the first game I have seen him on the attack with reasoning I agree with. he makes really good points in post 105. 1st, there is no fucking thing as overly defense…and I would like to go a step further,

CK, if you think Hate is “classicly” “over defensive”…my question is to you…So?

2nd, being “70%” sure of someone being scum in this game after 4-5 pages seems silly. I do think Hate is new…I do think Hate appears to be eager.

Sounds like a classical case of an overly defensive beginner.

No such thing as overdefensive. Defending yourself is not a scum tell.

Yes there is. However, it is not a scumtell.

OK, so why bring it up?

(which scot asks right after)

I don’t like CK’s math in post 130. Initially, I didn’t have an issue with “70%”. I took it as he thought hate was scum or had a vibe that he might be scum. I thought it was sort of silly, but not scummy…NOW, that Scot calls him out on this, he is back tracking a tad stating

At the beginning of a game, I am 50% sure a person is scum. The extra 20% is not as big of a gain as I think you are making it.

and again, why mention it? How were we suppose to know you start at 50%?

Your posts so far seem fluffy. I need a point of reference to know what 70% means from you.

Right now, you have left yourself room to maneuver around if you have to. What is my % and why? TSQ’s? Scot’s? Cry’s…and why? How does lurking affect your %s?

Ah I did indeed miss this. However, scot has asked me basically all of these. Did you miss my responses to his?

[Citizen Karne]

For reference:

Sounds like a classical case of an overly defensive beginner.

No such thing as overdefensive. Defending yourself is not a scum tell.

Yes there is. However, it is not a scumtell.

I am not 100% sold that he is scum yet (more like 70%), as beginner players seem to all act alike when they are cornered unfortunately. More analysis pending.

Seriously? You are 70% sure that Haterade is scum this early in the game?

Look at the way he has stuck with his case. Noobtown would have retreated by now in my opinion.

Also, I didn't look past what you said about the fact that what Haterade is doing is done by both scum and town. I specifically addressed that point when I said:

The ad hominem on kmd and the way he is sticking with his attack even though it was pointed out to him fairly clearly by TSQ reads more for me as noobscum than noobtown. You have a different read and a valid opinion, which I understand. I think we are just going to have to agree to disagree on this one.

What part of that did you not understand?

I understood it perfectly. You don't seem to understand that what Haterade has done is not scummy.

In your opinion

. I could easily be saying the exact same thing about you that you are saying about me yet I have accepted people have different opinions about what they think is scummy or not. If there was a definite set of rules about what makes someone scummy and what doesn't, then this game would be a lot shorter. But there isn't. Now, I know that common sense can help separate the scum from the town in certain situations, but I don't think this is one of them.

Also, do you assume everyone is completely pro-town at the beginning of a game? I've always started with completely neutral reads on everyone.

Statistically speaking, people are more likely to be town than scum. I view people as protown at the beginning unless their play looks otherwise. So you saying you already think someone is 50% scum at the beginning of the game is not neutral. You are saying that you are 50% sure someone is scum based off of absolutely nothing.

I assume everyone is either scum or town. I don't think anyone is innocent until proven guilty, or guilty until proven innocent. I just let their posts speak for themselves. The 50% thing has nothing to do with the ratio of town to scum in a game. How could I know that unless I was the mod? Maybe if I phrase it like this: On a scale of 1 to 10, where 1 is confirmed town and 10 is confirmed scum, I start off everyone at a 5 (neutral). Some people, based on their posts, will go up on this ranking; others will go down. Does that make more sense? I can see how you may have gotten confused with the percentages.

If there is anything you are still unclear on, please tell me.

[Citizen Karne]

I'll just do everyone, ckd.

dahill1-40%
I agree with most of what he's said, and what I don't agree with has been stated reasonably. His argument with MacavityLock really strikes me as town.

kloud1516-40%
I personally have no qualms with what he has said regarding "textbook scumtells" and think his analysis so far is pro-town.

Thestatusquo-40%
I like how he handled the situation with Haterade and the SK meta.

curiouskarmadog-45%
Your play is consistent with what I have seen in the past. Knowing you, your stance on my "over-defense" comment gives you a slight town edge.

Raging Rabbit-45%
Nothing substantial, but I feel I'm getting more of a town read from him. I agree with most of what he's said.

mikeburnfire-55%
His posts are too vapid for my liking. I would like more commentary from him.

MacavityLock-55%
I think his argument against dahill1 is weak. For what he calls out dahill1, others have been worse offenders.

scotmany12-60%
The fact he stopped responding to my posts rubs me the wrong way. I also think he was unreasonably hostile to RR and kloud.

crywolf20084-65%
I'm alright with using dice if you always use them, but apparently she doesn't. She also explicitly stated she wanted to "avoid angering" anyone. I didn't join in the discussion earlier because I was under the impression she always used them, but when it was pointed out that she doesn't, the whole thing was shown under a new light for me. She's also actively lurking to a degree.

Haterade-70%
I've stated this enough, I think.

Gorrad-75%
Active lurking, hypocritical comment to Haterade (which, surprisingly, Haterade didn't respond to), and the whole avoiding-confrontation-with-TSQ thing at the beginning has given me scummy vibes from the start.

As for lurking: it skews it towards neutral. For example, I almost always have around a 50% on killa seven. I think of lurking as a null-tell usually unless a player only starts it when under pressure. Active lurking adds to your percentage.

I hope this helps, ckd, and, even though you do not subscribe to this particular way of thinking, I hope you can at least understand me better now.

[Citizen Karne]

scotmany12-60%
The fact he stopped responding to my posts rubs me the wrong way. I also think he was unreasonably hostile to RR and kloud.

I wasn't going to change your opinion on haterade, and I didn't really have anything else to comment on. We could have gone on with both of us saying that we are right and the other is wrong, and it would get nowhere. You explained your percentages, so I had no reason to respond to that. I don't see how me responding to things that were directed at me counts as me being hostile.

Fair enough on the first part, although personally I would have posted that earlier. As for the second part, I don't see how it matters at whom the things are being directed. It's the way you responded.

[Citizen Karne]

I too am LA due to the fact I work tonight, tomorrow, Friday, and Saturday...along with two art projects that desperately need working on because its due on Monday. I may need replacing...I dunno how much I can catch up with...I will try.

9 pages is not that much...you seem to be active everywhere else..why?

If she truly is active elsewhere, then this lurking is very disturbing to me.

FoS: crywolf20084

[Citizen Karne]

sorry for not posting, marathon day and such

and again, why mention it? How were we suppose to know you start at 50%? Your posts so far seem fluffy. I need a point of reference to know what 70% means from you. Right now, you have left yourself room to maneuver around if you have to. What is my % and why? TSQ’s? Scot’s? Cry’s…and why? How does lurking affect your %s?

do you really think that he's scummy due to his grading (of scumminess) system? how is this any different from other players do? vollkan's a good example of this type of system.

also, i'm comfortable with a

vote Gorrad

right now for a few reasons.
one because of the clear hypocrisy he made in his calling out of Haterade.
next, i don't like how he dismisses the TSQ/Haterade as "WIFOM", which i don't really see how it is. it felt like he was commenting on it for the sake of commenting on it. finally, from what i remember of playing with him, he tends to be much more active and aggressive as town and i'm not seeing that in this game.

1. In which post did I call out Hatorade?
2. I didn't call the TSQ/Haterade argument WIFOM, I said my take on it was. In other words, if I stated my take on it, it would result in too much WIFOM that would muddle things up.
3. See Grimmmafia (not to be confused with Grimmafia). If I'm town, I have less of an active interest in the game and won't be very active unless either actively part of a conflict or if I smell a rat (like how I jumped when I thought a question was being answered that wasn't asked). If I'm scum, I've got more at stake trying to throw blame on others, so I'm more active. Give it time. I shouldn't be like this for long.

Back. Can someone please answer question #1 here? The 'clear hypocracy'? Where is that?

Hi I'm here!

Hi say something with a point!

[Citizen Karne]

Wait...that's it? That's the big calling-out post? Gods above and below, I looked right over that. Are you saying I was wrong to ask him to say something with a point? I was at least /talking/, as opposed to such a worthless post when conversation was occuring.

Seeing as you had done nothing with more posts, I would say it was a pretty cheap shot.

[Citizen Karne]

welcome farside, good to be in a game with you again..

question, what do you think of this comment for CK in reference to CW? Been waiting for anyone to comment on this..but no one has yet....

still comfortable with my vote on CW however...for now

I too am LA due to the fact I work tonight, tomorrow, Friday, and Saturday...along with two art projects that desperately need working on because its due on Monday. I may need replacing...I dunno how much I can catch up with...I will try.

9 pages is not that much...you seem to be active everywhere else..why?

If she truly is active elsewhere, then this lurking is very disturbing to me.

FoS: crywolf20084

Looks like a BW vote without the vote. I've noticed that some of CK's votes I get the impression he's not really trying to look for scum and just agreeing with whatever is out there.

Well, I can't push out original content in 100% of my posts. Sometimes what is out there is what I believe, and I say that I agree with it. If all I did was follow, I would be a sheep and it would be scummy. But with

some

being the operative word, I hardly fine that to be a bad thing in any way.

[Citizen Karne]

welcome farside, good to be in a game with you again..

question, what do you think of this comment for CK in reference to CW? Been waiting for anyone to comment on this..but no one has yet....

still comfortable with my vote on CW however...for now

I too am LA due to the fact I work tonight, tomorrow, Friday, and Saturday...along with two art projects that desperately need working on because its due on Monday. I may need replacing...I dunno how much I can catch up with...I will try.

9 pages is not that much...you seem to be active everywhere else..why?

If she truly is active elsewhere, then this lurking is very disturbing to me.

FoS: crywolf20084

Looks like a BW vote without the vote. I've noticed that some of CK's votes I get the impression he's not really trying to look for scum and just agreeing with whatever is out there.

Well, I can't push out original content in 100% of my posts. Sometimes what is out there is what I believe, and I say that I agree with it. If all I did was follow, I would be a sheep and it would be scummy. But with

some

being the operative word, I hardly fine that to be a bad thing in any way.

my problem with this comment wasnt that it wasnt 100% original..it was almost like you were throwing suspicion on CW without committing to it. "it that is true" then it does look scummy....why didnt you go check to see if my statement was true for yourself? this is the problem I am having with you all game (only 10 pages)...comments without the feeling of commitment, or leaving yourself room to manuver later if needed...

I really don't understand why you think my comments have no commitment and where or how I'm purposely posting so as to leave myself room to maneuver later.

Also, the "if" wasn't meant to convey a doubt of veracity. It was meant to set up an "if-then" statement to explain the FoS in a satisfactory manner.

[Citizen Karne]

So i don't even have a day read of him.

before you reveal anything else about your partner (please don't by the way), right now do you think he/she's scum, town, or nulltell?

At them moment it's a null tell.

ok..
then what prompted you to say this?

i don't know what my mason buddy's alignment is... So i mean i guess I could suggest a lynch on him for i hate scum masons. I find them dirty, but that means I've would be reduced to a vanilla townie.

That sounds to me like PM paraphrasing.

Also, ckd, I'm confused by your question.

[Citizen Karne]

You took my word for it without looking it up for yourself..why?

Why FoS him without seeing if I was stretching the truth? It doesnt seem like you are trying to scum hunt and you are taking whatever people say at face value..why?

It seemed such a foolish thing to lie about. cry didn't argue it, either. The intention of my FoS was to see what cry's response would be, and it was one of admittance. Also, one example of taking something at face value hardly constitutes a dearth of scumhunting throughout the game. Now THAT is a statement I'd like you to back up.

[Citizen Karne]

You took my word for it without looking it up for yourself..why?

Why FoS him without seeing if I was stretching the truth? It doesnt seem like you are trying to scum hunt and you are taking whatever people say at face value..why?

It seemed such a foolish thing to lie about. cry didn't argue it, either. The intention of my FoS was to see what cry's response would be, and it was one of admittance. Also, one example of taking something at face value hardly constitutes a dearth of scumhunting throughout the game. Now THAT is a statement I'd like you to back up.

either you are dodging the point or not really getting it, I am not sure. Can you please demostrate a time in this game that you have scumhunted? that would of been a great point (checking my statement for truth) to do it. Maybe cry was just posting in GA and avoiding all of her games? Maybe I was stretching the truth to serve an evil purpose....

the point is

, you didnt feel the need to find out, which says something about your situation in this game. You left yourself room to manuver with the "if"...if later someone did check and found that maybe I was incorrect..you could always fallen back on the "if" if you were pressured as to why you jumped on the wagon (yes your fos is wagon jumping)..."well, when I FoSed Cry, I said "if"".

I have been getting a bad vibe from you, on and off all game....as I believe Cry's claim..

vote CK

One example? Let me see what I can do…

[Citizen Karne]

I don't usually vote unless to hammer someone. I've random voted in the past, but all-in-all, I feel uncomfortable voting for someone before a hammer unless for a VERY good reason.

I guess that's part of your meta and all, but do you really feel like that's a pro-town way to play?

FoS: Gorrad

Consider that my 'random vote'.

Is there a reason why you FoS instead of vote for someone?

I don't usually vote unless to hammer someone. I've random voted in the past, but all-in-all, I feel uncomfortable voting for someone before a hammer unless for a VERY good reason.

Can you list for me three ways in which that action is anti town and three ways in which it is pro town?

Do random votes really count towards anything anyway? How is a random FoS any different? I suppose it prevents speedlynching a little. I really can't see any difference. If you want to make a big deal about me not voting, well that's silly. This is how I play. Deal with it. If you want to call me scum because of it, go ahead. I'd love to see your argument on how it makes me scum in this game as opposed to other games where I have been town. I do not think it is at all anti-town, either. It certainly does not inhibit my ability to discuss intelligently.

My FoSes are, for all intents and purposes, votes.

Speaking of FoSes that are, for all intents and purposes, votes, I dislike Gorrad's play so far. His second post seems to me like he is trying to stay out of the focus. His retraction of his analysis of TSQ seems as though he is backing out of a possible confrontation for the sole purpose of not getting into an argument with a player rather than simply mixing up people in his head. (I don't feel as though I am expressing myself accurately, but hopefully you understand me.) With whom did you confuse TSQ in your head, Gorrad?

Also, his posts in response to Haterade strike me as overly hypocritical cheap shots to try and gain town points by advocating for discussion.

Is this good enough? Here I am asking Gorrad a question about an action I consider scummy and looking for a response to help me form an opinion

Also, why does neither my analysis of the game nor various back-and-forths not count as scumhunting (I'm assuming you couldn't have overlooked those, but if you did by all means tell me)? They prompted discussion and certainly helped me (and I'm sure others too) formulate opinions on people in the game. Maybe we just don't consider the same things scumhunting. If not scumhunting, they certainly helped move along the game and provided solid content, neither of which I think of as anti-town. Why do you think I'm more scummy than, say, Gorrad?

[Citizen Karne]

<snip>

At least I've read the thread. I give info when I feel I have something to contribute. If I try to say something when I don't have anything to contribute, I end up either sounding really scummy or idiotic. Usually the latter.

There almost always something to comment on. Do you really have no opinions at all so far in the game? Sounds like you are avoiding discussion to me.

[Citizen Karne]

QFT
2nding ML's questions
my thoughts exactly

[Citizen Karne]

Guys, this whole argument is distracting us from lynching Gorrad. MBF and Dahill should join forces and help bring down the scum gorrad.

I agree. While MBF's response at least seems logical to me, although I'm not sure why he attacked dahill1 as much as he did. I really think Gorrad is the scummier player so far.

[Citizen Karne]

How are MBF's responses at all logical? What is your case on Gorrad? Why is your FoS-vote still on cry? I'm getting more and more aggravated with your refusal to vote by the way.

Well, they aren't technically votes so that I can be suspicious of multiple people at once. I believe I'm up to a HoS on Gorrad though. Just don't rely on the vote count. Is it that hard to read the thread and know who everyone thinks is scummy? And do you think MBF's responses are illogical? Do you think duck wouldn't be a risky claim for scum?

[Citizen Karne]

Also, for why I'm suspicious of Gorrad, read my summary of everyone that I posted earlier.

[Citizen Karne]

Been having a busy time lately. I'll post tomorrow.

[Citizen Karne]

I am very sorry I haven't been more involved as of late but school is very hectic right now. I apologize but I don't have time now for anything comprehensive. I'll have to post tomorrow. Again, I'm sorry about this.

[Citizen Karne]

The game is ongoing. Can't link. Quick scan of my threads should find it, though.

Neighbor isn't just flavor. According to the wiki, neighbor refers to any mason pair which doesn't know allignments. The fact is, I've only seen the phrase neighbor actually used instead of mason when at least one of the two were not town.

Also, how many times have you actually seen neighbor used?

I would like to second this question. Gorrad, your word choice is as though you see the phrase often, yet the only time you can think of it is in an ongoing game? Shady at best. I'm all for letting the claimed mason live another day.

Also, archon, do you have any other motivation than blindly trusting Gorrad (yes I realize asking this question is slightly hypocritical)? Seeing as the definition in the wiki lists the pair as being uncertain of alignment as opposed to Gorrad's claim that neighbors always have an anti-town role in the pair, I personally would not trust Gorrad's claim without a grain of salt, especially when paired with his past behavior.

[Citizen Karne]

There is so much wrong with Gorrad's argument it isn't even funny. You are ready to lynch Izzy based almost entirely on the assumption that both you and the mod share the same definition of neighbor. Do you not see what is wrong with this? If Shanba was going off of the wiki definition instead of your personal definition, then they could both very well be town. I personally am more ready to assume Shanba consulted the wiki before this game than Gorrad.

Archon, do you not see the total WIFOM in your argument? You could very well be town by your actions, but then again you could be scum trying to get Izzy lynched. If Izzy turns up town, then either Archon is scum or Gorrad is wrong and he is town. If we go with this lynch, we are letting Gorrad run the town for two days, costing us what may in fact be a pair of town masons.

There really isn't enough evidence in my mind to support this lynch. Gorrad, on the other hand, I would love to see on the chopping block.

[Citizen Karne]

Cry's mason buddy would have a higher odds of being scum, yes, but the possibility of two scum neighbors from different teams is a possibility too.

Why would I?

Because you had not claimed. However, you have now, so that point's moot. Also, are you also a duck?

DI, you're at L-2. I'd hurry up if I was you.

What do you mean a duck? is this actually a part of the game?

Missed this. Interesting. What animal are you? Seeing as you've already outed yourself, I suppose there is no harm in asking this.

[Citizen Karne]

And what are you, then?

You want me to claim? My flavor's species is frog, though whether I'm a regular frog or some subspecies I won't say. The vanillas are all frogs, as you can see in the first post. This is because it's Frogs Mafia.

Why would you even answer this? Sigh.

[Citizen Karne]

Mod: Vote Count, please?

[Citizen Karne]

I really don't think there is anything more we can get from Archon at this point.

I'm willing to hammer. Anyone else have anything they want answered or they want to say before tomorrow?

[Citizen Karne]

Any reason you need to hammer? It doesn't do anything except save us maybe a few hours, right? I'd prefer to just leave the thread open and let the deadline do its work.

I like hammering.

[Citizen Karne]

One assumes flavour is internally consistent. Which in this case, it is.

I also just realized that the flavor you've claimed is actually

not

consistent with what we know thus far. You've claimed pro-town neighbor who is a duck. Kloud flipped pro-town

vanilla

who is a duck. Yet more evidence that we should not be focusing on flavor yet.

The fact that they are both town is good enough for me.

Also, do you think MBF is a better lynch today than Gorrad? If so, why?

I would like everyone (other than Gorrad, obviously) who thinks that there is a better lynch today than Gorrad to answer that question, substituting MBF for whomever you think we should lynch.

[Citizen Karne]

The fact that they are both town is good enough for me.

Red flag! We do not know Izzy is town. Explain yourself.

You said a pro-town neighbor and a vanilla townie were too different to both be ducks. I said that since they are both town, that is feasible enough for me. I don't feel that flavor like this would necessarily be affected by role and that alignment is the only thing I'm taking into consideration. I never said I knew she was town, I just said that I believe the theoretical situation of a pro-town neighbor and a vanilla townie being the same animal is feasible.

[Citizen Karne]

I still think it's a point in Izzy's favor. The duck flavor clearly is consistant, even if they're not all vanillas, and Izzy could've only known this if she's either a duck or scum told about the duck flavor in advance. While the second is entirely possible, it's still pretty conditional and therefore makes her less likely scum imo.

I disagree. Mafia is a game of motivations. To me, the way both Izzy and the person played that information is far more consistent with how I would expect to see a scum aligned player play the role than a town aligned player, and therefore I do not think it makes her less likely to be scum. Hence, the vote.

We will have to agree to disagree I suppose.

I see the case on MBF, but still like Gorrad's better. Will explain it in full tomorrow if I have more time tomorrow.

[Citizen Karne]

I apologize, I have my internet back, and am rereading.

[Citizen Karne]

I actually really like the MBF wagon that is going on. I'm going to refrain my case on Gorrad until later as I would hate to take away any of the steam of the wagon. I will instead analyze MBF:

0: Random votes scotmany12.
1: Jokes around with crywolf.
2: Agrees with TSQ but makes sure to qualify said agreement.
3: Fairly noncommittal post claiming a loose suspicion of crywolf.
4: Apologizes for lurking, giving the post the feel of one made by an active lurker. More noncommittal stuff concerning TSQ vs. Haterade. Claims there is nothing really to comment on.
5: Odd post in which he defends dahill1 and votes kloud for similar reasons to his suspicions of crywolf, saying he needs his vote somewhere. This action is straight out of the active lurker's handbook. Seeing as he just criticized someone's case earlier in the post, one would think MBF's vote would land upon them if needed to be anywhere, not someone random who he had not mention prior to this post.
6: Joke about lack of activity.
7: Asks TSQ who should be lynched. (note: seemingly obvious joke at first, but later he makes comments that makes this possibly a serious post.)
8: "Checking-in" post.
9: 3 days later, notices that there is a wagon on cry. Reminds us of his vague suspicion for her. Won't vote for her (although kloud got voted on basically the same grounds), but would like some flavor.

IMPORTANT

: If crywolf/DizzyIzzy comes up scum, this post could be scum MBF prompting her to dish out the fakeclaim.
10: Unvotes crywolf, as he had been accidentally replaced, trying to be safe, although cry is only at L-2 and he has now said repeatedly that he is vaguely suspicious of her. Seeing as his vote is already on her, it would give a scum-on-townie-wagon a perfect excuse to jump on and still appear somewhat noncommittal. This is definitely odd. Seems like scum trying at all costs to avoid bussing a partner (which makes sense if he wants her to continue undercover with her whole neighbor thing seeing as have a scum neighbor could be very valuable in the future).
11: Questions scotmany's recent actions involving Gorrad and crywolf.
12:

Agrees that crywolf's duck claim does not bother him, even though ducks are not frogs.

This directly contradicts recent statements. Also, his wording makes it sound like he was voting crywolf, when, in fact, he was not.
13: Attacks dahill1 for not looking at flavor. Wants prods. (If he is scum with cry/Izzy it makes sense that he would want more people to see recent vents and change wagons.)
14: Clarifies argument for voting dahill1. Looks very suspect, and he softclaims unnecessarily.
15: Makes logical points on why it would be unwise for a mafiosa to claim duck. Makes sense with the whole prompting-her-to-claim scenario.
16: Clarifies points for dahill1.
17: States that he believes the mafia to be made of frog-predators such as snakes. Has recently reaffirmed believe that mafia is made of frog-predators, but now considers ducks to be predators of frogs,

something he did not, apparently, believe when he made this post.

18: Votes ML for flushing out the other mason. If he wanted to keep cry around solely because of her having a neighbor who could be manipulated, it makes sense that he would not want the other neighbor to come out in the open, let alone come under fire.
19: Good post about mason/neighbor strategy.
20: Same as previous.
21: Reaffirms belief that mason/neighbor should not reveal.
22: Criticizes vote on him for fairly legitimate reasons. Ad hominem instead of defense.
23: Claims sarcasm (looking back, looks valid), agrees we need more activity, argues with ML over whether or not he quoted him out of context (looking back, ML is right and MBF did quote him out of context).
24: Puzzlingly votes No Lynch. Not only claims to trust Gorrad, but implies that earlier post towards TSQ may have been genuine. Very odd, very scummy.
25: Ponders voting Archon, but doesn't (probably still wants to save the other neighbor although now that he is out he is less useful).
26: Does not cite evidence when he should. I would like to see these several games in which the town nolynch day one. Smalltowns and shorter Dethys don't count.
27: Jokes about scummy no lynch vote. Provides no real defense.
28: Votes Gorrad, even though he trusted him earlier and agreed with his comprehensive post.
29: Accepts Gorrad's explanation without much question and votes crywolf (possibly taking a cue from his scumbuddy to begin bussing).
30: Says he doesn't want a second reveal because both neighbors could be town. However, he is voting one of the neighbors. Seems to be trying to keep up appearances in the transition between keeping alive both neighbors and bussing cry.
31: Votes DizzyIzzy.
32: Does not defend himself whatsoever, instead opting for joking.
33: Keeps up buddying routine to TSQ. Contradicts himself by saying ducks are more likely to be scum than frogs and saying Izzy acted as though she knew ducks were safeclaims, something he wrote off yesterday. Seems as though he is trying bus a scumbuddy who has a case against her because she has become a liability (no longer has any worth as a neighbor).
34: Contradicts himself by saying ducks eat frogs, something he could not have believed previously.
35: Makes a shoddy defense of what he said. Promises more stuff.
36: Misconstrues the case on Gorrad, and decides to keep his scumbuddy alive for another day, as he now has an (OMGUS-y) alternative, scotmany12.
37: Realizes how big of a fool he has made of himself with the whole flavor arguments. Retracts all statements instead of trying to rectify them. Scummy.
38: Seems to have knowledge that one of the neighbors is scum, even though this is not necessarily the case. Earlier, in his attack on Gorrad, he claimed that he thought the neighbor argument was "arbitrary."
39: Point one is circular logic, or he is starting with an assumption he can't prove (unless he is mafia). Either way, not a good start. Number two misconstrues the situation a little with cry, although it WAS scummy. Point three makes a somewhat relevant point which nevertheless contradicts his first point, or doesn't (depending on if his logic was circular or just based on unfounded assumptions). After placing an argument on Izzy, he says he is more than willing to lynch scotmany12 OMGUS-ly instead of the person he has been focused on for quite some time. Makes sense if they are partners. He will bus her if he needs to but is grasping for a viable alternative. scotmany's somewhat aggressive posting style seems like a good scapegoat, apparently.
40: Admits to being wishy-washy. Says he is having trouble justifying voting Izzy, which, ironically, I agree with. Goes after scotmany, who he has less evidence on than Izzy. Basically confirms my suspicions.
41: Votes scotmany12.
42: Angry that people think he is taking things out of context. Would probably have been more helpful had he actually tried to prove he did no take said things out of context.
43: Misconstrues case on Gorrad. Gorrad used a self-meta. scot meta'd cry. Those are tow VERY different things. Self-metas are not acceptable, while independent metas are. If you say you cannot see the the difference between these, you are either lying or a bad player. I don't think you are a bad player, so I'm going with you are lying.
44: Asks for a votecount check.
45: Tries to defend his case, but makes no sense whatsoever. Also seems to contradict himself when he says scotmany's case pointed out flaws in Gorrad's argument and made sense. I believe he may be trying to say that because scotmany was not suspicious enough of anyone to say anything earlier, that any case he makes ever is scummy and contradictory because earlier he said he did not want to voice his opinions, even if the case makes sense. Please explain to me how I am wrong.
46: Replies to Dizzy.

Look, it is blatantly obvious that MBF is scum. I'm pretty sure he is in league with DizzyIzzy and Gorrad, but that is more speculative.

Vote: mikeburnfire

even though I'm not hammering. That's how sure I am.

[Citizen Karne]

Anyone care to comment?

[Citizen Karne]

i wouldn't mind a MBF claim

Agreed.

[Citizen Karne]

I find Citizen Karne's case as to why MBF is scum pretty compelling, with the exception of his suspect conclusions as to who his scum partners might or might not be, and I also support his call for a claim.

vote: mikeburnfire

Um…was that the hammer?

[Citizen Karne]

I find Citizen Karne's case as to why MBF is scum pretty compelling, with the exception of his suspect conclusions as to who his scum partners might or might not be, and I also support his call for a claim.

vote: mikeburnfire

Um…was that the hammer?

It's six to a lynch. So no. He is at l-1 now I believe.

Ok. Whew.

Claim please?

[Citizen Karne]

My impression of pbpa is that you are looking for the person you are doing them on to be scum, and that should be taken into account. I was very nitpicky.

MBF, what you said is nice, but I'd still like a claim.

[Citizen Karne]

My impression of pbpa is that you are looking for the person you are doing them on to be scum, and that should be taken into account. I was very nitpicky.

MBF, what you said is nice, but I'd still like a claim.

Wrong.

If you go into a PBPA with a preconceived notion of that persons alignment, then you defeat the purpose of the PBPA, and basically reduce it to the definition of confirmation bias. If you enter a PBPA thinking that a player is scum, than you will be likely to upplay anything that makes them look scummy, and downplay anything that makes them look towny, and vice versa. A PBPA should be a tool to figure out how you feel about a player, not a method of attack.

Again, we will agree to disagree. I've always used them to make cases, not get a feel for the player. If I'm trying to get a feel for someone, sure I'll analyze all their posts, but I won't post anything unless I find something noteworthy. If I think someone to be scum, then I'll provide my thoughts (which believe them to be scum) on every single post they have made. The way I go about doing a pbpa defeats the purpose of what you use them for, but not what

I

use them for.

[Citizen Karne]

Sorry, y'all, I haven't meant to lurk. It just kinda happened.

Here's the skinny: I'm still all in favor of an Izzy lynch, and I still think MBF is pretty protown. The reason I haven't been commenting on those points made against him is because there is, to an extent, some truth to them and I wanted to see his responses.

They're what I'd expect from him as town. Admitting to tunnelvision and playing by gut, for a player of MBF's caliber...frankly, as scum, I'd expect him to play better. For me, at least, disinterest is a town-tell. Scum have a harder job, they have more at stake in the day phase, so they post more. Power-roles have this too to an extent. When I'm a vanilla townie, I'm usually significantly less into a game than when I'm scum, and I tend to apply that to others as well.

This is almost entirely composed of WIFOM.

[Citizen Karne]

My impression of pbpa is that you are looking for the person you are doing them on to be scum, and that should be taken into account. I was very nitpicky.

MBF, what you said is nice, but I'd still like a claim.

Wrong.

If you go into a PBPA with a preconceived notion of that persons alignment, then you defeat the purpose of the PBPA, and basically reduce it to the definition of confirmation bias. If you enter a PBPA thinking that a player is scum, than you will be likely to upplay anything that makes them look scummy, and downplay anything that makes them look towny, and vice versa. A PBPA should be a tool to figure out how you feel about a player, not a method of attack.

Again, we will agree to disagree. I've always used them to make cases, not get a feel for the player. If I'm trying to get a feel for someone, sure I'll analyze all their posts, but I won't post anything unless I find something noteworthy. If I think someone to be scum, then I'll provide my thoughts (which believe them to be scum) on every single post they have made. The way I go about doing a pbpa defeats the purpose of what you use them for, but not what

I

use them for.

So did you miss my arguments for WHY Pbpa's are a bad tool to use cases? You completely strawmanned me. My argument wasn't anything close to as retarded as "lol, you use them for something other than you say you have." My argument was that PBPAs are inherently ineffective and useless for making cases. This is not a "agree to disagree" situation. I made an argument for why your case making method is de facto unreliable, and you essentially said "Meh, whatevs." This is not an argument about what you or I DO use PBPAs for, but an argument about what they OUGHT to be used for. Notice the difference between a prescriptive and a descriptive statement there.

Your case is invalid until you defeat my arguments.

I don't think you fully understand me. I

know

there is a confirmation bias present. When you are arguing against anyone in any form, there is going to be a confirmation bias present, because you think you're right. If one didn't look at people expecting to find scum, one would wind up rarely finding anything. I do look at people neutrally to begin with, but once I gain suspicion of them, I start to look at them as scum, and vice versa. Looking at them as scum helps find more things to support the suspicion. It's exactly like forming a conspiracy theory, and it has to be, because in the game of mafia the whole point is that

there is a conspiracy afoot

. And when I'm making a case against someone, I'm not going to go into their townie points (which everyone invariably has), and I

am

going to play up their scumminess in order to help convince others of my views. A pbpa is one method I use of doing just that. So it

is

a case of agree to disagree, because I would use a pbpa as a form of attack (and therefore experience conformation bias during its usage) while you would use it as purely a form of analysis (and therefore not experience confirmation bias during its usage).

[Citizen Karne]

Listen, because I think you're just not getting this, I'm going to lay it out in easy steps for you.

1) The purpose of making cases is to convince other people, not for your own edification.
2) Because this is true, you want to maximize the accountability of the case, in order for other players to check up on it and fact check it for accuracy.
3) PBPA DE FACTO make it harder to check up on the accuracy of the case, because of the need for players to check up on EVERY SINGLE POST THE PLAYER HAS MADE in order to check for your bias.
4) Comparatively, as opposed to other methods of presenting cases, for instance making points, and then citing examples of those points for other players to fact check, PBPAs are not transparent at all, because they ask us to rely on your own CONFIRMATION BIAS rather than looking at the case objectively and making up our minds.
5) Players are not going to trust you on face, and generally don't even read PBPAs from my experience.
6) Therefor, PBPA are not effective ways of making a case.


I tend to get very suspicious of players making PBPAs because they're very good at looking impressive, without serving a humungous amount of game function. Basically, they're giving the appearance of scumhunting without actually doing so.

Look just because the case may have confirmation bias doesn't mean the

facts

are wrong. It just means I've inserted my opinion into it. You are saying that because I'm being opinionated, you can't trust my case? Come on, TSQ. The case is based almost entirely on fact with the major exception being my speculation as to the possible scumteam of Izzy, Gorrad, and MBF.

Point taken about the inconvenience to other players, however. If you want I can quote it and insert links to his posts.

[Citizen Karne]

Just curious mike, what animal are you?

[Citizen Karne]

Also can you explain your flip-flop on the issue of what being a duck actually means flavor-wise other than "it doesn't matter I retracted my flavor points they don't count" for me? Or at least point out where they are, because if they are there I've missed them.

[Citizen Karne]

Then kloud was killed. He was a pro-town duck. I should have come to the realization that flavor is unreliable at this point, but I still thought it held value. I thought that surely there couldn't be TWO pro-town ducks (or TWO pro-town neighbors, for that matter). At least one of them had to be scum. Eventually reality sunk in and I realized that flavor can't be used to confirm or deny anybody in this game.

First, tell my why you thought there couldn't be two pro-town ducks, and then tell me why you instead said that your reason for being suspiscious of Izzy's duckiness was because ducks eat frogs.

[Citizen Karne]

First, tell my why you thought there couldn't be two pro-town ducks, and then tell me why you instead said that your reason for being suspiscious of Izzy's duckiness was because ducks eat frogs.

'Duck' is a suspicious claim. We already had a pro-town duck, which is a weird thing to have in a frog-town because ducks eat frogs in real life. Two of them seemed ridiculous to me.

So are you saying now it

is

a fakeclaim by scum even though you were so adamant before that it couldn't be one?

[Citizen Karne]

This is why I wait until the end to vote.

We seem to have stalled. People not voting MBF, care to weigh in? TSQ and Gorrad (and of course MBF), we already know about you guys; I'm mainly speaking to the others.

[Citizen Karne]

I'm not voting for MBF. He should not be the lynch today. If you all want to move to a more viable lynch candidate, ala Gorrad, then please don't hesitate to do so. Also, finals coming up, so yeah, limited access.

I'm fine with lynching Gorrad. However, I'm also fine with lynching MBF. He is closer. Why do you think MBF is town?

[Citizen Karne]

I'm actually not convinced that you are scum. I have liked very little of what you said, and you've done scummy things. However, my gut tells me to stay away from you, and everything you write seems sincere to me. So I don't know.

Seriously guys, fucking read the game.

So... in summary, you aren't voting for him despite agrreing there's a solid case against him because of your gut and his appeal to emotion?

I'm not voting for him because he's not the best lynch candidate. I'm sure that gorrad is scum, but not sure that mbf is.

Why are you so sure Gorrad is scum?

Do you think that MBF is more liekly to be scum than not be scum?

Would you be willing to hammer MBF if it became apparent that a Gorrad lynch isn't happening today?

The second two are what I'm wondering. I don't see why if someone you think may be scum is on the chopping block but isn't your first choice, why wouldn't you want him to be lynched?

Of course, if your gut is strong enough to outweigh he evidence you've seen, well there's not much anyone can say, is there?

[Citizen Karne]

In other words, TSQ is either too lazy to read my pbpa or too stubborn to treat it as a case. Probably both. :/

[Citizen Karne]

and for shits and giggles..CK can you post 3 reasons (and provide posts) for why you think MBF is scum...when he does that TSQ can you address it?

Absolutely. I've made this request of him like 3 times for this express purpose.

I've somehow missed all of them.

Well, here goes.

1. MBF isolation Posts 12 & 17, which contradict MBF isolation Posts 33 & 34.
These showcase his contradictory stance on flavor.

2. MBF isolation Post 43.
This showcases both his illogical stance on metas (he claims that scotmany's dismissal of Gorrad's self-meta contradicts his acceptance his meta of cry) and his odd stance on Gorrad (he admits that scotmany had a legitimate reason to vote Gorrad, yet recently has sworn that Gorrad is town).

3. MBF isolation Posts 24 & 27.
These showcase MBF's puzzling No-Lynch vote. Instead of making a case on the three people he feels are scum to try and garner some votes for them, he just votes no-lynch. Instead of justifying his vote, he makes a sarcastic remark. Also, notice his attachment to Gorrad, whom he said in post 43 was legitimately votable at that time. I don't know about you, but I would call someone legitimately votable

and

the most trustworthy in a game unless there was something else going on under the surface.

[Citizen Karne]

lynch order preference at the moment:
MBF
Izzy (although it is slightly rising, will explain later)\
Gorrad

Are MBF and I both bussing one partner and not bussing the other, then?

Personally, I think so.

[Citizen Karne]

lynch order preference at the moment:
MBF
Izzy (although it is slightly rising, will explain later)\
Gorrad

Are MBF and I both bussing one partner and not bussing the other, then?

Personally, I think so.

You're REALLY not Rosso.

In posting style, yes.

[Citizen Karne]

Scot is probably scum.

He's spent the entire game flying under the radar,

Really? You really think so?

[Citizen Karne]

MOD only one person is voting scotmany12

.

[Citizen Karne]

Will respond to CK later tonight, but izzy, what the hell is "Potentially scummy behavior?"

You can't just say someone is being "potentially scummy" without saying what it is that makes them "potentially scummy"

I didn't feel the need to repeat what other people have already stated.

Can you cite where others have already said to what you are alluding?

[Citizen Karne]

We have stalled. :/

[Citizen Karne]

Wow. If MBF comes up scum, I can't wait to say I told you so and get started on Izzy.

[Citizen Karne]

Well, I'm a dead townie. Kill TSQ tomorrow. He's followed in line with Gorrad and just ended the day prematurely. That, and all the other reasons I listed earlier indicate scum.

Ended the day pre-maturely? There's a deadline in less than a week, you silly lummox.

Agreed. Also, you followed Gorrad much more than TSQ did. In fact, once you disliked TSQ, you started to follow Gorrad.

[Citizen Karne]

...wait, the only scum revealed so far is also the only frog revealed so far?

Well, it IS called "Frogs Mafia"…

[Citizen Karne]

Anyone know what a Gaoler is?

[Citizen Karne]

Ah, thanks.

I'm going to start off with a hard look at DizzyIzzy.

[Citizen Karne]

Just got over an illness. Sorry for the dearth of posting.

[Citizen Karne]

Does anyone else get the feel that dahill1's traitor comment might have been a slip? Even in the wiki entry, one would get the impression that recruiting the traitor was a separate action from the nightkill.

[Citizen Karne]

I have never played a game with a traitor except on Epic Mafia, and they are portrayed differently. I wasn't familiar with the concept of recruiting at all.

[Citizen Karne]

Didn't finish my reread of Dizzy because of school. When I finish my English homework I'll answer the questions posed to me and finish the reread.

[Citizen Karne]

None here either.

MacavityLock, what other questions have been posed to me?

[Citizen Karne]

Also, I have never been scum.

[Citizen Karne]

OK, term is over, and I'm back.

MacavityLock, what other questions have been posed to me?

The thing I'm most interested in right now is for you to talk about why your broke your meta and chose to vote MBF yesterday.

Well, it put him at L-1 or L-2 I believe, which is, judging by the title of my thread, still within my meta, technically.

Also I was extremely sure he was scum. I was wrong, but extremely sure. The fact I usually wait for the hammer but voted early is something I do in order to draw attention to the case. If I'm voting you before the hammer, I'm extremely sure you are a scum and it is a sign that something is up.

[Citizen Karne]

Sorry my computer crashed. Catching up.

[Citizen Karne]

I have never been scum on this site outside of a marathon day Dethy.

[Citizen Karne]

Also:

CKD might just have made the worst case against someone I've ever seen in Mafia.

Agreed.

[Citizen Karne]

Many things are occurring at once.

I should be active by next week. Sorry, last week of high school is a lot more difficult and time-consuming than I thought it would be.