Mafia 1013 - Prozacs Basic Theme - Game has ENDED

[Flameaxe]

Hi.

[Flameaxe]

Blackberry: Depends on how random Prozac was during role distribution.

Vote: Strangercoug

[Flameaxe]

StrangerCoug

- If you were mafia, who would your partners be in this game?

I want to be scum with Flameaxe and probably xvart.

And

vote: Flameaxe

for sucking.

I leave for a few months and people still know I suck. That's reassuring.

[Flameaxe]

Unvote!

I'm not totally sold on buddying just yet, personally. I will however point out my current suspicion of fishy (not necessarily sold on raivann yet). You agree with such logic as "he had lots of smilieys in his post, therefore = sucking up to the town"? Seriously? Maybe it's just because I've known Blackberry for so long and have had many conversations with him over AIM that it seems absurd, but honestly, it just seems like a huge stretch to me. If anything, I see Berry's "random questions" to be a town-tell itself. He sparked discussion on page one of a game. While most was short-lived, its still much more discussion than one would get with randomly voting during the day. As far as it see it, this whole ordeal is being blown way out of proportion. Not by raivann who originally made the point, but by fishy. Going from a random vote to berry is likely scum in roughly a page of posts is a bit ridiculous.

PS: I would normally vote after this, but I'll wait for a votecount first.

[Flameaxe]

1) People who use smilies to excess are more likely to be trying to be liked by the town.

I've heard some pretty absurd arguments in my time on this website, but this one is really creeping to the number one spot. Do you honestly believe that using a lot of smilies would be a scum tactic? Calling this a stretch is quite an understatement.

When I said BB was "likely scum", I meant that he was more likely scum than average. Obviously, it's too early in the game to be very sure.

Not buying it. Likely scum and more likely scum than average are completely different. Given the overall tone of said post, I did not (and still cannot) feel "more likely than average". The speed at which you changed gears can be summed up by one word: Fishy. (rimshot?)

Vote: Fishy

---

Yo, Jack. Where you at, brah?

[Flameaxe]

-The "I've been at work and not mafiascum" catchup post-

Note: All comments are made as if that post was the current post. I didn't talk about anything after said post, or reference future activities.

First on the list: Fishy 64 - Fair enough. But that doesn't change the fact that your original post (34 for reference) seemed to have a completely different intention on the "likely scum" that can be best described by the phrase "book 'em, chief". If that makes any sense. I still don't agree with the argument, for the record, nor do I like your outright agreement with Raivann regarding Berry's "attitude". At that point of discussion, only the smiles we're essentially discussed, and you already know my opinion on that. The "wagon" that popped up after the smiley issue seemed a bit opportunistic (not all from you, mostly not you) and you haven't really moved up or down my list after this point (although others may have, more to come!).

Budja 67 - Jumping on a vote for a popular target at the time without adding any useful information. You can probably figure out my distaste for this type of post from that.

Mallow 70 - Yeah...no he didn't.

Budja 71 - More expanding if we could. Not gut if we could. Thanks.

Jack 75 - Cool. What others? Why do you like hopping your vote around without adding a lot of information?

Mitsuru 77 - I like scummy reads as much as the next guy, but can I see something more than a seemingly simple bandwagon jump?

Jack 79 - This post irks me. If we're going to have a day one where a main talking point is how someone wants others to see them, this seems like a good post to point out.

Mallow 80 - Whenever you want to talk about the comment in question, you are free to do so. Seems like a possible case of defensiveness.

Jack 83 - Why do most of your posts seem to catch my eye? What makes Scoug's post/vote any more of a talking point than Mitsuru? "This gives me a scummy read" vs. "You blatantly lied, and then used it as a reason to vote against me". One of these posts/votes outweighs the other, in my opinion.

Berry 84 - I'm not sure if I'm really keen on this whole, secret tell business. Your last comment doesn't hold too much weight either.

Jack 90 - Welcome back again. Dodging a question with a question about a smiley? Come on, buddy. Secret scumtells? See Berry 84.

Budja 91 - I'm glad you could tell us you don't like it. Please tell us why. (Or what post for that matter. Scoug has posted plenty in this game).

Jack 94 - What part of saying scoug said something that he completely didn't isn't a blatant fabrication?

End of page 4 comment - The day started with Jack jumping on the mallow train, and ended in Jack (somewhat) defending mallow's comment. The very same comment Jack sited with his vote. That doesn't make sense. What gives, brah?

Llama 100 - Not actually a reply to this post, but it logically fits here. While I do not completely agree with Llama, I guess I generally do. Obviously my opinion has changed for certain parties after a few days, but I still cannot see Blackberry's post 20 as anything that can be seen from a game strategy view. I don't see it as trying to look town from any faction, and as many times as I read it, I cannot get any closer to seeing it as such.

Scoug 102 - Bingo.

Mallow 104 - Prozac is the mod, Porochaz. Once upon a time it was discovered that Porochaz can be re-arranged to spell out the phrase "Oh Prozac", and that's just what I call him now. (and prozac is an antidepressant if that was what you were referring to). Secondly, I have to also comment on your apparent vanishing once your name became a talking point. I would like to see more of a defending your comment approach from you. It bothers me that I haven't seen it.

Budja 105 - See most of my comments regarding your posts. You haven't been adding very much to a conversation at all, and you ask someone else for information. I want to know your thoughts in more detail.

Raivann 111 - I don't really buy any of your reasons for a Budja leaning town read.
-He knows you get lynched early and often: What does this have to do with any kind of read?
-He wouldn't agree with you: Says who? What's to say he's scum and agreeing with you to throw you off? This is a very weak reason.
-Genuineness: A very wishy-washy answer. He's barely posted enough to sound genuine, let alone nothing to be too sure of as is.
So, you've been relatively quiet lately, and this sort of content doesn't allow me to get a good raivann fix. I don't really care who you've played with before, and I don't plan on taking many comments regarding other games. Lets hear you talk about this game. The one I am currently posting in. Then you can comment on other games, but you have five pages worth of posts to pick out content from. Start there. (Further along the post) You know they we're jokes, but seem to bring them up anyway. I don't understand their place in the post.

Anon 114 - I'm glad you're here and posting and everything, but I personally was expecting bit more from you. The two posts you have quoted do not make me lean either way about Llama, nor do they seem to have much in common. So as far as it concerns my opinion of this game, your post includes two useless quotes and a vote. If you want to convey more information to the town, please do so. I'm sure we would all appreciate it.

Anon 116- Piss off Mr. "I want". You lurk for four pages and come back with a less than stellar post with a vote, seeming to think you're on to something, while the rest of us know nothing of what you're on about. I'm glad we can see your opinions on everyone, but I know coming from myself (someone who seems to disagree with most of your scumdar), I want to hear a detailed explanation of what you think of

everyone

. Do that, and maybe I'll do what command the town to do. Pull your weight.

Llama 119 - I have no qualms with this post outside of the obvious emotion vote on Jack. I do somewhat agree with the vote itself (not the reasoning, but the vote on Jack).

Prozac 121 - Top votecount man. Top. (But you have two not voting with only Jack in the column). I should owe you a beer for all these votecounts.

[Flameaxe]

Oh yeah. I was planning an

Unvote

during that wall of words.

[Flameaxe]

I most certainly hope you are basing your read on more than that. If you are, your entire attack is just a lame attempt to look pro town by hopping on a popular wagon. GG.

No, my read is based on just that. Your defense of BB is unfounded and its ilogical coming from a townie entity that early in the game. You even decide to attack another player based on his accusations against BB. Yet some posts later you agree that the attacks can make sense. Flifflop FTL.

Anon 114 - I'm glad you're here and posting and everything, but I personally was expecting bit more from you. The two posts you have quoted do not make me lean either way about Llama, nor do they seem to have much in common.

Try again? I cant be the only one seeing this.

Anon 116- Piss off Mr. "I want". You lurk for four pages and come back with a less than stellar post with a vote, seeming to think you're on to something, while the rest of us know nothing of what you're on about. I'm glad we can see your opinions on everyone, but I know coming from myself (someone who seems to disagree with most of your scumdar), I want to hear a detailed explanation of what you think of everyone.

The majority of my reads are based on gut, meta, and town/scum tells. Llama is scum for lame attempt to look town by chainsawing BB and then accepting that his accusations were unfounded. My town reads are pretty much gut/ active playstyle, what Id expect from the players if they were town. Mallowgano is an special case, he screams easy target all over his head.

Whats up with this dramatic change of playstyle, smarty pants?

I don't believe my playstyle has changed at all (this game at least, and this is my first game in a year or two) let alone dramatically. Unless it changed from the random vote stage that I have no reason to believe that you've read yet.

We're seven pages in, give more specifics for each person. You shouldn't need to rely on gut to give you a town read at this point. I'm sorry to burst your bubble, but your two quotes really don't convey what you seem to have claimed in this post at all. The first quote was commented on more than just llama (myself included) as it is a completely ridiculous argument to make. The second quote has to do with llama making a point that townies worry about appearances as well as town, and fishy added what llama "somewhat agreed" with. I don't see any unfounded accusation whatsoever. Your case is not as strong and flawless as you think it is.

I still want a detailed explanation of your list.

[Flameaxe]

^ replace "lazy." with "scum."

What a brilliant, worthwhile post.

[Flameaxe]

Opinions:

Anon - Very content light so far. His only content has been tunneled on Llama for rather weak reasoning. Leaning scum until you can show up and show me otherwise.
Blackberry - Was leaning town until this whole "easy target" business. Moved a bit back up my list at the moment.
Budja - Also content light in my opinion. Can't say I really know where you're at with this game as of right now. You have seemed to jump on board with voting popular discussion player (as posted in my long post on 5). Leaning scum.
Fishythefish - Moving back down my list. More on the neutral side. Not going to beat a dead horse about the smiley discussion, you know how it goes.
Jack - Sure, I'll give ya irritating. An anti-town town player best case scenario. Not really anything to give a good read beside the annoyance.
llamaeatataco - Can go either way right now. My opinion has gotten a bit weird over these last few pages with the seemingly emotional vote. Not a strong read.
mallowgeno - Baffles me as to why you are completely oblivious to any comment regarding your vote of strangercoug. I doubt I speak for only myself when I urge you to actually say something about the matter. Your content has gotten a bit flimsy since that whole ordeal began, which makes me lean scum.
Mitsuru Kirijo - Very weak leaning scum read. Lots of short, one line posts that don't add a ton of conversation. But as I said, very weak read.
Raivann - You opened the smiley can of worms early, and sort of slipped out of the open for a bit (in my opinion, obviously). I already let you know my opinion of bringing in meta games of people, so lets not bring it back up. Look back at the other post if you need to. Leaning scum.
StrangerCoug - Nothing here jumps out at me as scum. Leaning town.
xvart - Not going to lie, you have sort of slipped through my tracks. That could be good, or bad I guess. It's probably because you have 5 posts. No read. Talk a bit more and I might get one.

[Flameaxe]

I don't really provide long posts. I say what needs to be said. You'll see long posts if and most likely when I see the need for them.

I don't have an issue with this as I don't like a lot of long posts myself, as they usually end in long replies of quotes to your long posts. That just gets out of hand after a while. This is why I have it as very weak.

[Flameaxe]

Why do you think Jack is scum ?

Is this directed at me? I'd hope not considering I didn't state that I thought he was.

[Flameaxe]

ebwop

FA, are you implying having a gut/meta read is not a valid reason to think someone is town?

Not exactly. I'm fine with a gut feeling, as long as you can show me something to reinforce that feeling. I (and anyone else in this game) has very little reason to trust your gut. Do I use my gut when playing? Yes. Do I hold it to much weight? No.

Now, meta reasons are a whole different story. I believe meta reasons are rarely a strong form of a read. I know from experience that I've tried to play differently in different games, and I can only assume I'm not the only one. Who's to say someone isn't playing different from their meta to throw the town off? It's just too shaky in terms of reasoning to me.

[Flameaxe]

Why do you think Jack is scum ?

Is this directed at me? I'd hope not considering I didn't state that I thought he was.

No, it was directed at Llama, your scumbuddy. In regards to his flailing.

Oh wow, what a brash statement here. I think someone is holding back his opinions of this game.

[Flameaxe]

Reads on current players:
Blackberry-Town
Budja-Undecided
Fishythefish-Leaning Scum
Flameaxe-Calls me oblivious but I still think town
Jack-Scum!
llamaeatataco-Leaning Town
mallowgeno-Town
Mitsuru Kirijo-Leaning Scum
Raivann-Neutral
StrangerCoug-Leaning Scum
xvart-Neutral

I called you oblivious to anything regarding 70, and you still seem to be holding that up just fine. *cough*

[Flameaxe]

The reason I think Jack is scum is because of the way he keeps posting. He keeps changing his vote and he's not really giving any reasons for his changes. Also he claimed a cop that got a guilty on me, which shouldn't be possible.

"Shouldn't"?

[Flameaxe]

I am leaving my vote on Jack until he answers my question or he is replaced. Him being uncooperative is not going to help us at all and it's hard to get a read on him. It's really pissing me off.

POROCHAZ:

Is it possible to get Jack replaced on the fact he isn't being cooperative, and being uncooperative works against one's win condition either way, thus, he is not playing by the rules and working towards his win condition.

Could this be bussing/distancing ?

I got a crazy theory...

Blackberry votes Jack and pretends to be mad at him and hopes llama wagon loses steam.
And once Llama got 4 votes he makes a distancing vote on Jack.
I feel there is something off with llama's vote and Blackberry's replacement request in regards to Jack.
So to wrap up my crazy theory, the scumteam is- Llamaeatataco, Blackberry, Jack.

I'm gonna reread thread with this POV...

Seriously? Why jump straight to bussing in this situation? As far as I can see everything Berry said was completely true. He's barely being helpful in this game. Nothing he does in my mind that seems show that he is trying to help the town at all. If someone is uncooperative in this game, it is up to members of the game to get something out of him. How does a vote not accomplish this?

Of course Prozac most likely won't do anything about it, but at least someone here is trying to cut his act short. I don't see anything wrong with at least asking, let alone grasping at a fairly flimsy straw.

And then we get a self-described crazy theory. Of course, by crazy theory I refer to even more grasping at straws, flimsier straws at that.
- First off, your order of events isn't even correct. Llama voted Jack before Berry did.
- Berry's original vote was for the reason of (as of page 6):

Jack still has not answered my question, and I want that question answered.

and remains as of page 8:

I am leaving my vote on Jack until he answers my question or he is replaced.

That still screams pressure vote in my opinion. Jack's attitude in this game certainly hasn't helped this cause either. I agree, very scummy to try and get information out of unresponsive and unhelpful players.
- Hypotheticals don't really help out in this situation, nor does it help your case.
- I can't help but notice that this entire post really doesn't give anything concrete against anyone. It's a bunch of stated opinions with absolutely nothing to back them up.

Your posts in this game can be summed up by:
-Stupid smiley argument.
-Giving us useless meta's that essentially help no one.
-Jumping on a wagon and calling people flailing.
-Calling me scum for no reason, and never mentioning it again.
-Bringing crazy hypothetical theories to the table, that seem to forget that person you called scum only a few pages prior.

Not to mention some nice lurking between the smiley argument and the meta's. You spark a discussion, don't commit to the statements you made with a vote, and drift out of the spotlight while fishy took any heat from llama, and to a lesser extent myself. Once the wagon got pushed in Llama's direction, you made your mediocre return to hop with the cool kids on that wagon. But that wasn't enough! You continued to also claim a theory that described Llama's scumbuddies, and the little distancing triangle they apparently have. Your last post seemed to have zero merit whatsoever in my mind, and it has pushed my opinion far enough for me to say...

I found a place to vote!

Vote: Raivann

Dear Jack, it almost seems to me like you aren't really taking this game very seriously. Maybe you are, maybe you aren't, but it isn't showing if you do care about it at all. If that changed, that would be great.

[Flameaxe]

Edit: Last post being the theory post.

[Flameaxe]

Also, fucked up my quotes. Deal.

[Flameaxe]

Sorry. More rage at myself for not hitting preview. >_<

[Flameaxe]

A question to everyone in this thread: Do you believe Jack's claim?

The daycop claim?

[Flameaxe]

I was first on llama with my case and my vote!

Ok reread is done.
I really, really like Llama and Blackberry as scumbuddies. I'll buy dinner if I'm wrong.
But not so much Jack as 3rd scum, that is Flameaxe.

Blackberrys implosion and Flameaxes misreads and recent vote seal it.

Let's do this. I'll go get a rope.

Llama you're up first.

I would be lying if I wasn't completely expecting this exact post. Way to be wishywashy bucko. I love my vote now.

[Flameaxe]

Not to mention some nice lurking between the smiley argument and the meta's. You spark a discussion, don't commit to the statements you made with a vote, and drift out of the spotlight...

It's called THE WEEKEND!

Its called MY POINT IS STILL VALID.

[Flameaxe]

Flamaxe is looking scummy.

Helpful as always.

[Flameaxe]

Of course not. What cop doesn't vote with an investigation?

[Flameaxe]

I was first on llama with my case and my vote!

Ok reread is done.
I really, really like Llama and Blackberry as scumbuddies. I'll buy dinner if I'm wrong.
But not so much Jack as 3rd scum, that is Flameaxe.

Blackberrys implosion and Flameaxes misreads and recent vote seal it.

Let's do this. I'll go get a rope.

Llama you're up first.

While I have time, I would like to point out that any evidence of this (most likely non-existent) re-read is no where to be found. So once again, Raivann makes baseless claims as if he's a prophet. Implosion? Nothing blackberry has done warrants a description of implosion. Absolutely nothing. Not like we can expect any explanation from you as to why he has imploded. Calling my misreads on you and a recent vote sealing the deal? Do you know what normal people call that? OMGUS. Blatant at that.

You act as if you are the leading voice of this town at the end of the post, when really you've added nothing useful to this game to gain that type of celebrity. All you are giving us includes baseless hypothetical and mediocre cases. Take post 49 for example. You state that you "think" llama is lying, yet give no insight as to why you believe they he is lying. You take the same two quotes that Anon did later in the game (another wonderful point, not against you this time) and give the same insight on the two posts: Nothing. Absolutely nothing. You then, in the same post, you claim llama is scum, because he is lying. So from thinking to seemingly knowing in the same post. You then make it a point to reaffirm to the town that you did in fact not vote BB with your idiotic smiley argument. I don't like this.

Now, to this page!

We went from baseless, and self proclaimed crazy theories to going back on it completely and changing your mind with a brand new level of certainty. This happened in only a few posts. What happened between these few posts? Apparently, you reread, but until I can see any evidence otherwise, I will call a pile of bullshit. Prove it. Then, Flameaxe came along and voted you, pointed out a few inconsistencies in your theory, pointed out a couple of other nuances that you can go back and read yourself. You then continue to claim that this person is scum for a reason that can quite simply be summed up as "he thinks I'm scum, so he must be scum".

You can claim that llama is so-called flailing, but really, I think you are the one performing this apparent evil.

---

Fishy: No, Mallow has not. Despite everyone trying to get it from him, he seems to have forgotten it's existence.

[Flameaxe]

Not exactly. I'm fine with a gut feeling, as long as you can show me something to reinforce that feeling. I (and anyone else in this game) has very little reason to trust your gut. Do I use my gut when playing? Yes. Do I hold it to much weight? No.

Check my other games to see how accurate my gut is. The problem, I think, is that we have different definitions of gut. Gut for me is as an extension of subjective logic that goes online when trying to decide subjective nulltells, as active posting, long posting, vote hopping, easy targetness, etc. Ill try to explain my gut in a playerlist Ill compile in my followng post.

Now, meta reasons are a whole different story. I believe meta reasons are rarely a strong form of a read. I know from experience that I've tried to play differently in different games, and I can only assume I'm not the only one. Who's to say someone isn't playing different from their meta to throw the town off? It's just too shaky in terms of reasoning to me.

This is just stupid. Meta is a very very useful in my experience. Its cool you have tried to play different in different games but your assumption about everyone is wrong. The essence of a player is very difficult to fake and thats what meta aims to.

Just curious, can you show me some of your games and explain the different playstyle you've tried?

First off, you quoted with the name of yourself. I'm not going to be checking your meta, and I doubt the validity of you calling it accurate. It goes against the whole idea behind a gut feeling. Gut only has one meaning: A hunch. A generally baseless hunch. There is no other way to describe a gut feeling. It's clearly defined.

Then you continue to call my views on the game of mafia stupid. How mature of you. What I posted is simply my observations through my years here, I'm sorry if you find that stupid, but what I posted is exactly what I've seen, and I do not plan on that changing any time soon.

Are you honestly asking me to meta myself? Fuck off and do you own damn work. Speaking of which, I don't see this wonderful post explaining why I'm scum. That is what you posted

a few days ago

(and thats all you've posted). Quit lurking and work.

[Flameaxe]

Anon: If you want to look through 50+ games, be my guest. I don't plan on it.

I'll consider it as soon as you give me this wondrous case of yours. Prove yourself before asking others.

Jack: More baseless claims are baseless.

[Flameaxe]

Jack: More baseless claims are baseless.

aka "yup i'm scum but you don't have any evidence on me, neener neener"

I could only wish I had your skills of playing this game. Lazy fucking twat.

[Flameaxe]

Playstyle change? It amounts to nothing more than I quit for almost two years and came back to play one game at a time. Comparing how I played in 2008 to how I play in this single game only proves my previous point. One of the things I told myself when I started this game that I wasn't going to play mafia the way I used to. Why? Because the way I used to play mafia was fucking terrible. Read into my meta a bit more and you will realize that most people knew that, including myself. I was a chronic lurker, I got angry and played aggressive (generally through insults and foul language), and I was generally lazy in almost every game that I played. The fact that I set out to change that has nothing at all to do with my alignment in this game, as the way I used to play didn't vary with my alignment before. I joined this game so that I could hopefully play a better game of mafia by only focusing on one game at a time, and hopefully set myself now apart from my former player.

I would also like to point out a major flaw in Anon's post. Did anyone else notice that his only two examples are town examples? Your case doesn't really work unless you play both sides of the coin, my "friend". My point here is, I believe this Anon fellow needs to broaden his research a bit more before he makes claims that I am scum

based on my opinion of mafia theory

. I've never done player analysis? Please. You need to look harder, I did it in quite a few games. The fact that you are saying that i am scummy because I am using a more pro-town style of posting is a bit ridiculous.

To continue my incredibly unorganized post (sorry!), the fact that he is pointing out that I used to go off of gut feelings is completely true. I did. And as I said in my original argument, I was quite often wrong, therefore, I have decided to take a different approach in order to play better. That is (nearly) word for word what I claimed in the first post, and I don't see what you see as scummy there. Probably because you are grasping at air at this point.

In short (and slightly out of order)!

-Anon is attacking me based on a question he posed to me that involved my opinions of mafia theory. My opinions of mafia theory are not in any way showing of my alignment, in any given universe, at any given time. You argue against that and I'll call you an idiot.
-He backs his statement up with a one-sided line of reasoning. Why not show how I used to play as scum? Will it not prove your little point?
-He calls "a more calculating-vocal-USES REASONS-meta" suckass? Is there anything else to comment on? Really?
-Well, he in a way helped me prove one of my original points. My gut sucked, so now I'm not using it. (For reasoning see PROPHECY MAFIA, I was a vig, and did not kill anyone but town until the final post-lylo night phase where I killed a survivor. I want to say 4-5 town-kills)
-Obviously has a narrow perspective on his meta research. I may have played in somewhere around 50 games on this site, a few more than two examples that happen to fit your needs would suffice. Hell, an example that didnt fit your needs would probably make it more believable.
-Anon is comparing my playstyle in 2008 to my playstyle in 2010. Things change, take it into account before you post.

---

Jacks post doesn't sit well with me, and not the "unvote vote flameaxe" part. The "I just happened to be in a similar situation that anon is calling you out on, and I did it in the same way he is claiming you are" part.

---

Fishy: We may have played before. Can't remember if I quit before your join date or not. (Or are you secretly an alt too? *plot thickens*)

[Flameaxe]

that's fair enough, my playstyle changed after coming back from an absence too.

unvote, vote:coug

My head, meet desk.

[Flameaxe]

Anon's case may be flawed but that doesn't make him scummy.

That's not the reason of my :headdesk:.

[Flameaxe]

@Flameaxe: I was thinking of something more recent than 2008, so I'm guessing it's just me remembering wrong.

I wouldn't put it past me to be remembering wrong either.

[Flameaxe]

unvote, Vote: Flameaxe

This is a good lynch too.

Every time you post, I feel better and better about my vote. Keep it up.

[Flameaxe]

ah. KK. lurklurklurk. I'm way too tired from work to do a post now, but I might do one tomorrow.

This goes for me as well. Fucking weddings man. Fucking weddings. I'll try to comment on Raivann's question real quick first.

[Flameaxe]

unvote, Vote: Flameaxe

This is a good lynch too.

Every time you post, I feel better and better about my vote. Keep it up.

What do you thimk of xvart's case against BB ?

Given that the majority of his case is referring to the secret tell and the trap, I've already touched on both of them in previous posts. Ultimately it's not enough to make me move Berry anywhere near the top of my list.

[Flameaxe]

That still screams pressure vote in my opinion. Jack's attitude in this game certainly hasn't helped this cause either.

I agree, very scummy to try and get information out of unresponsive and unhelpful players.

Italicized emphasis mine. Flameaxe - what do you mean it is scummy to try and get information out of nonresponsive and unhelpful people? How is that scum motivated?

Sorry, that was sarcasm. It's a tough habit to break when taking a sarcastic approach to life to text on a forum... I'll make sure to be more obvious next time.

Given that the majority of his case is referring to the secret tell and the trap, I've already touched on both of them in previous posts.

You have? I saw a passing comment about the secret scum tell and nothing about the trap.

Again, sorry. Half assed that post last night. Thought I did comment on it, guess I didn't. The same opinion does however apply for both of them.

Can we PLEASE lynch him? He's too much of a wildcard to have around and he will give scum the win at lylo, if he isn't scum.

Begging for a lynch? Why are you absolutely certain that Jack will lose the game at LYLO if he is town?

xvart.

Stealing your quote to comment on mallow's post too.

Mallow: That is a terrible, and fairly desperate approach to pushing a lynch. Welcome to jumping up my list a spot or two.

[Flameaxe]

Ps:

PROZAC:

I'm moving in the next couple of weeks to a new apartment near school. While I don't plan on moving up full time until the internet and cable is set up, obviously if issues arise I may not have access beyond my phone, which is sketchy at best. Putting it in thread so you players know too.

PPS: A Budja prod might be in order. It's been a while (Thursday to be exact for his last post).

[Flameaxe]

FA and everyone: I think its very evident how using a more friendly playstyle benefits scumbags more than townies, specially when the player we are talking about has a meta of being an ass, REGARDLESS of alignment. Just that change of playstyle that benefits him more in the scum side of the spectrum is enough to maintain my suspicions on Flameaxe.

And Im not even talking about him leaving his gut out of this game, who is a common denominator in his town games.

I agree that leaving scum games out of my analysis is an apparent flaw but my point was not to use his scum meta and compare it to this one. My point was to prove that he has specifically changed his playstyle for this game (already proven in his own response) and that this benefits him more if he is scum.

Llama, stop being a VI. If you disagree with my posts, explain clearly why instead of using stupid phrases to prove your point. You are not even my top suspect.

Ill be back with a full response after my VLA.

Mod, VLA until Wednesday.

All I see here is that your case boils down to my playstyle change benefiting me more if I was scum, but nowhere in this entire case does it say WHY it makes me scum. Sure, lets say it does benefit more as scum (which really, it doesn't benefit me more either way), what part of that means that I am scum? It doesn't. As far as I can tell, a change of playstyle of this nature benefits me as town as well, as my original playstyle didn't help me either alignment. Believe it or not, being an ass in this game obviously didn't get me very far when I did play, from either side of the coin.

The only reason used only my town meta was in the form of saying my town meta was different than I am playing now.

Not only the town meta I remember from him has changed dramatically, it has changed from a caustic-one liners-USES GUT-fuck you meta towards a more calculating-vocal-USES REASONS-suckass meta, hinting a more calculating scum agenda in this game. I never saw a Flameaxe doing analysis of players similar to what he did some pages ago which is the first thing that made me thought Flameaxe could be scum here. Check for yourself.

This quote, in my honest opinion, uses the logic that my TOWN META has changed, hinting that I am scum in this game. While the logic here makes zero sense as is, I don't believe you are trying to say what you are referring to in your most recent post. Your original argument against me did not have the tone or apparent message you have now, not like your current message makes any more sense as a case.

If anything, this post only shows more flaws in your reasoning, and that you are making a huge assumption that is (as documented in thread) based on nothing. You even said that my former meta was present...

REGARDLESS of alignment.

yet you still see no reason to give any references beyond my town references.

In short (again!):
-Your case is now revealed as "I believe his playstyle change would benefit him more as scum, therefore he must be scum" which is a logic jump I find to be unacceptable in a game such as mafia.
-You agree that not bringing up scum references is a flaw in your argument, and then continue to point out that my meta of being an ass was in effect regardless of alignment. Making a case based on change of playstyle, only to use town references to reinforce your case, despite admitting that my being an ass meta was always turned on, seems extremely scummy to me. Not enough for number one though.
-Assumptions based on nothing in this thread, still. You have fourteen pages of content from me to go through, but your only "evidence" against me is from a game starting in late 2007 and my apparent meta from said game.

Schlep up.

PS: Because obviously Anon has no interest in showing any games of mine as scum, look up Doctor Who Mafia 2 (by Battle Mage). I'll dig up a link if I have time, but it was bad enough that I still remember it after all this time, so it must be pretty bad.

[Flameaxe]

Flameaxe, who is your top suspect?

Anon, who am I voting?

[Flameaxe]

I seriously dont want to turn this into a battle of quotes TM. I seriously dont.

I don't either, it's just easier to reply to a comment someone made by first quoting that comment. That's just me, feel free to not quote me back. I won't let it get too over-quotey though, that's just excessive.

- You have accepted that you have changed playstyle. Ok Nulltell. My point is that this change of playstyle benefits you more in the scum agenda. Being an ass gathers you negative attention. Not being an ass gives you a free pass. This is not tell only applied to you. I dont even remember who your top suspects are.

I accepted this a while ago when you first made your case. You have a nulltell that you are seeing as a scumtell. What doesn't make sense in this sentence? "Benefiting me more" also infers that it would also benefit me as town, but then again, you don't seem to talk about this side of the coin, only that it benefits me MORE. Please, enlighten me as to the pros and cons of my playstyle change from BOTH town and scum. The more you go down this road, the more shaky I believe this case of yours becomes.

Believe it or not, being an ass wasn't my only playstyle back then, how about those other playstyles of mine? The lurking for example. Is me not lurking nearly as much in this game a scumtell? Oh sorry, is it a nulltell that would benefit me more as scum? That seems to be a better road of logic in this universe...

If this is not the only tell applied to me, then you should be letting everyone know, otherwise I'll just call bullshit. If you come back with secret tell nonsense, I will also call bullshit. Be warned.

- Flameaxe has acepted that he has used gut before. Obv as scum he would not use gut, so this tell only applies when he is town. He is not using gut in this game. Jumping to the conclusion that this change of approach makes him more likely scum than average is not illogical at all.

I have not used gut in more games than just this. If something doesn't work you fix it, yes? If gut doesn't work, you try a different approach. What approach would you say I am taking from a neutral opinion?

My case is there. Take it or leave it.

I take it, and again point out that there is nothing from this game specifically that you use to reinforce any of your points.

[Flameaxe]

Doctor Who 2

Hard to find anything without brute force with the archives, but there it is.

[Flameaxe]

Alrighty; the time has come. I'm having reconstructive surgery on my shoulder tomorrow morning. I will more than likely not be able to post at all tomorrow, and depending on the pain meds and how the surgery goes I might not be able to make a quality post for a couple days after.

V/LA: August 10 - August 13

I'll try and get a final post in tonight but I wanted to get this done now just in case.

xvart.

Hopefully everything goes alright!

[Flameaxe]

Anon is prob town.
My reads haven't changed. I think the best case made so far is xvarts on BB.

The best case in the game according to you arises, and yet you still hang on to a silly OMGUS vote.

[Flameaxe]

Anon is prob town.
My reads haven't changed. I think the best case made so far is xvarts on BB.

The best case in the game according to you arises, and yet you still hang on to a silly OMGUS vote.

I don't like your reads this game. Maybe you should start using your gut, you are off on me for example

Sure, I'll bite...

unvote, Vote: Blackberry

Well shit everyone. Raivann says my read is off, so I clearly MUST be wrong. You don't like my reads so much that you can't give me a straight reason to vote me. That's nice.

[Flameaxe]

Ok, I like your response. Seems truthful enough.

Does this mean that you agree with Anon's case on Flameaxe?

Yeah.

Do you and Flame really think I'm the best lynch option today?
Or does my scumhunting frighten you?

Scumhunting? Where? The one post you've made on this page is as close as you've gotten to scumhunting, and that's 15 pages in.

This post has brought me to the point of bringing back my favorite post, the single player post-by-post analysis. I'll have that ready soon enough.

[Flameaxe]

Not to mention he turned into an aggro potty mouth when he got some votes.

Let's see some quotes of the, after the votes. I can think of a few comments to anon before any votes and a comment to jack before any votes. Try again.

[Flameaxe]

Ps, my internet was turned off when I left for work this morning. I expect it to be on when I'm home, but I'm phoning it up as of now (from work!).

[Flameaxe]

That was a quick vote Fishy. You didn't even wait for me to answer your setup questions.
Hmmm...maybe my reads are off.

You posted and didn't answer, that's your own damn fault.

[Flameaxe]

The promised post-by-post of Raivann. Sorry for a bit of wall-o-text.

Note: All post numbers are in reference to the post numbers listed for Raivann in isolation. If a post requires context from another player's post, that post number will be provided not in isolation.

Post 0: Pre-confirmation post. Nothing to comment on.
Post 1: Random vote. Only one thing caught my eye that didn't before.

There are things I consider scummy and things I consider townie, but I would rather not say what those are. Scum could just use it to play me.

While we're on the subject of "secret tells", this short little comment seemed to slip through, and it seems to me like it's going down that line of thought.
Post 2: The famed smiley post. Still don't plan on beating this already dead horse. We know it's absurd, the end.
Post 3: Question to Berry, nothing of interest.
Post 4:

As for sucking up i mean to the town in general like saying "hey don't worry about me I'm all loveable smiles" whilst you slit our throats in the night.

This post is odd, but more in the way of the fact that it doesn't seem 100% serious, which is discerning as it sparked a 100% serious vote from fishy, etc on Berry.
Post 5: Again, this post seems to have come up quite a bit. I still do not see any connection between these two posts, nor do I see why they point out Llama's lying. You then reassure the game that you did in fact not vote for Blackberry, which seems off in my book.

I do however think you're lying, I'm sure you've heard more stupid things than that post of mine.

scum=liars=llama.

Voting because you're sure Llama has heard more stupid things then your post is one of the weakest bases for a "liar-therefore-scum" argument, which I find weak as is. Still not sold on this so called scumhunting that apparently comes from this post. A weak flimsy base for a vote is not scumhunting in my book.
Post 6: Very eager to get a vote out of Mitsuru. Not entirely sure what I think about this, but I don't see any reason for someone to rush a vote.
Post 7: Asking others for reads. Not scumhunting. Leaning town on Budja, no explanation why. Unhelpful post overall.
Post 8: The first useless Raivann hypothetical reasoning post. Budja knows you get lynched early and often. No meaning whatsoever. If he's scum he wouldn't agree with you on anything. Again, no meaning. Ring of genuineness, while I don't exactly agree, you provide no reasoning or examples to go along with it. You didn't like someone's random vote stage votes, what does this have to do with scum? Nothing. You know they were jokes and completely sabotage your own statement. Voting for someone for being a mod, you already said you knew they were jokes. This whole post can be summed up with "why is this relevant", which is unhelpful to all. No scumhunting. Town reads, but no scumhunting.
Post 9: You ask a few questions regarding his post, and make a weak attempt at scumhunting. Not buying it though.
Post 10: Completely useless, and almost childish post.

^ replace "lazy." with "scum."

Again, why is this relevant? Not scumhunting.
Post 11: Claims Llama is flailing scum, yet provides no proof of it. Not scumhunting. Maybe a bit tunneled, but not scumhunting.
Post 12: Useless banter. Not scumhunting.
Post 13: Question to ?. Asking someone why they thing Jack is scum. No content of his own.
Post 14: Again claims Llama is flailing, again provides no back to that. Outright claims I'm scum after saying only a few words directed at me beforehand, those words being useless banter. Unhelpful, useless, not scumhunting.
Post 15: The only way I can make sense of your post is if you are misreading Llama and pushing it against him. He states that he believes that two of Jack's qualities of the time were scummy qualities (and I would agree, why would town be evasive?). Llama wanting to make it clear he didn't like jack's actions hardly feels like an excuse. Most votes can be described as this. Take my vote, I feel your play in this game is scummy, so I voted to make it clear that I believed that. If no one voted, it wouldn't be mafia. Bringing up the flailing comment again. I have never seen the term used in any game before this one, and you continue to pound it through all your posts, I don't like that. Attempted scumhunting, poor scumhunting, weak scumhunting.
Post 16: The second useless Raivann hypothetical reasoning post! Asking for someone to be replaced hardly feels like bussing. You yourself call this theory crazy, which doesn't help your case. I've already torn apart this post, go look for my post to figure any other opinions out. Extra comments that were not commented previously: You go ahead and re-read the thread with the POV of your crazy theory? How would that be useful? It's crazy after all. Hypothetical that grasps at straws, useless, baseless, not scumhunting.
Post 17: Useless. Nothing worth commenting on.
Post 18: Again, already replied. Worth noting that you apparently re-read with your crazy theory in mind, only to find that you think that one person voting you is scum. That doesn't seem logical at all. You do not give any reason of why I am scum other that "my misread of you", or in other words "you think im scum, so you must be scum". OMGUS? OMGUS. Baseless accusations, weak scumhunting. Also a bit of a strawman (I hate using this card) Picking out one part of my post and pushing against it, ignoring the rest. No likey.
Post 19: It's called THE WEEKEND, but really, the week starts on Sunday, part of THE WEEKEND. This is a clever way of saying "useless not worth commenting".
Post 20: Answers a question about someone else, not scumhunting.
Post 21: WE ARE LYNCHING LLAMA TODAY, says self-appointed king of the town. Says the guy with the weakest case on llama. Says the guy leading the town. Not scumhunting, leading the town, bad.
Post 22:

unvote, Vote: Flameaxe This is a good lynch too.

Wait, didn't you just say we were lynching llama today o' self appointed king of the town? Very smooth with the abandoning of the dying wagon on to the next wagon. Very smooth. Useless post. No scumhunting. Wagon swapping! Still no reason for me being scum!
Post 23: Telling us again that you are okay with lynching those people you said were scum. We know. Useless, no scumhunting.
Post 24: Asking me a question about someone elses case, while you still sit on a wagon with no case provided by yourself. No scumhunting.
Post 25: Someone is town, but you give zero reason why you believe that. Someone else's case is the best case so far, yet you still sit on someone without a case of your own. Telling us that your scum list has not changed, AGAIN. You really love pounding the same shit through over and over don't you? Not scumhunting.
Post 26: Barely any new information regarding anyone's case on Blackberry. I've been over the whole replacing thing and why that's weak. Jumping after mitsuru, finally something that I can almost see as scumhunting. Half scumhunting, still not the strongest of scumhuntings, but the best yet.
Post 27: Damnit. You make a half decent point against Mitsuru and just drop it after a fairly weak response.

I need time to reread before voting again. To find approriate quotes if they exist. I couldn't find anyone more scummy than mallow. And his recent posts have only convinced me of that. It's just playstyle.

I know that I personally would not be willing to take this as a reply. The fact that you took it so quickly and strongly bothers me greatly. "I need to reread" is one of the weakest replies in the book. Until Mitsuru does reread, there is nothing to drop about your points on Mitsuru.
Post 28:

I don't like your reads this game.

This is not scumhunting. It only reinforces my point that your case against me is purely omgus. You think I'm scum because my reads say that you're scum. The fact that you even bother to reassure that my read on you is off bothers me. You'd think it would be implied that you believe that from your recent posts, but you still go out on a limb to tell everyone that I'm wrong and you're town. Not scumhunting. In the post where you claim to be scumhunting. Ironic? Yes.
Post 29: What person responds to a vote with:

pffhhtt.

Not completely sure what to make of it beyond: useless.
Post 30: Scummy wagon move, we might be getting somewhere. Scummy because he's the third person to hop on. "Getting somewhere" out the window. You can have a better reason than someone's wagon position. In your own words, you might be flailing.
Post 31: Holy shit, a reason for voting me. Not very strong at that. Makes a claim that my reads are off intentionally, gives (shocker!) no basis for said claim. Points out for an nth time that his vote options have not changed. We know nothing has changed. We expect nothing to change, get over it.
Post 32: Still waiting for my aggro potty mouth proof. Here you add a post to "reinforce" your "case" while ignoring fishy's questions, which I don't know if you've answered yet.
Post 33: You obviously had no (and have no) plans on answering them in the first place. You admit your reads are off as soon as you get voted by someone...when have I seen this before....

I really, really like Llama and Blackberry as scumbuddies. I'll buy dinner if I'm wrong.
But not so much Jack as 3rd scum, that is Flameaxe.

Blackberrys implosion and Flameaxes misreads and recent vote seal it.

Oh yeah, your omgus vote on me! Could we see an omgus vote on fishy?
Post 34:

unvote, Vote: Fishythefish

Yes we can![/obama] Sorry if you can't hear the surprise in my voice[/sarcasm]
Post 35: Doesn't reply to my post, only makes a useless post in response to my post. Helpful? Not really.
Post 36: You didn't call him scum, yet you still called him scummy. Given the context of fishy's post, his point still applies. A bit of a strawman (I hate having to pull this card), where you pick out that specific part of his post and ignore the rest of it. I've seen this before...

I was first on llama with my case and my vote!

Ok reread is done.
I really, really like Llama and Blackberry as scumbuddies. I'll buy dinner if I'm wrong.
But not so much Jack as 3rd scum, that is Flameaxe.

Funny. It only took a quick reread to find all these similarities in your cases/votes...One could even say you did this for the llama case, to an extent, but that is for another post.
Defers to xvarts post about blackberry. Another unsupported Raivann hypothetical quickly follows. Things...are repeating...
Post 37: You missed a few steps. You called me llama's scumbuddy, you called the scumteam Llama/Jack/Berry, I called you out on not having me in that scum party, made a case against you, you ignored the majority of the case and voted me because I was voting you. Now, given the full story of events, how am I the OMGUS vote? In your own words, you're flailing.
Post 38: If you call someone scum, as you did, you are not going to get out of it without some explanation or basis. I "decided to go after you" as you say, because you made a claim, and you didn't back it up, and you for the most part have not backed it up.

He decides he is gonna make an example of this brash noob. How dare I call him and llama scumbuddies!

Ooo, another hypothetical post from raivann, shock! I never called you a noob, only brash. Which you were.

He goes on to say I think I'm a celebrity or some shit. It's because I was right about him and llama.

While you're out looking for my potty mouth quotes, I would like to see these quotes as well. If you're referring to how you led the town, I've already shown why you were, and I wasn't the only person to call you out on it.

That's the last post! Overall, weak scumhunting at best, way too many baseless hypotheticals, some strawmanning on multiple occasions, and some omgus votes.

Now if you excuse me, I'm going to not type for a while...

[Flameaxe]

Overall, weak scumhunting at best, way too many baseless hypotheticals, some strawmanning on multiple occasions, and some omgus votes.

So basically - " I'll post a whole bunch of stuff that everyone will skim over then I'll vote your for scumhunting, and I'll throw in some mafia lingo like omgus, hypothehicals, and strawmanning, Yeah that should be good."

Or basically proof using posts of your own, my opinions on said posts, and a general list of everything I covered in said post. Not that you read the whole thing.

[Flameaxe]

Xvart:

I'm sorry they don't mean much to you. However, I find them to be incredibly useful, not only for my own understanding of the game, but I find them to be a great way to get a point across and back it up. This is what I did in my post. Sorry if I sound arrogant here, but did you read the entire post? Do you have anything to comment on besides the fact that it is a pbpa? I personally do not feel I can make a pbpa of every person in this game and make it look scummy, and I find it hard to believe the same could be said for you.

[Flameaxe]

OK. I can admit when I'm wrong. I have no real evidence on Llama and thought I'd try and get a lynch because I have a gut scum read on llama. Take it as you like.

As for Raivann, he might have been scummy at first, and I thought so too, but now he's asking questions, responding to accusations and trying to scumhunt. So what if he doesn't post huge walls of text? He was scummy at first, but isn't now. He shouldn't be lynched.

Sorry, I still don't see all this trying to scumhunt business. From my pbpa he has had one worthwhile post in my eyes (406). Nothing else has changed in the way he has played this game from the start.

[Flameaxe]

OK. I can admit when I'm wrong. I have no real evidence on Llama and thought I'd try and get a lynch because I have a gut scum read on llama. Take it as you like.

As for Raivann, he might have been scummy at first, and I thought so too, but now he's asking questions, responding to accusations and trying to scumhunt. So what if he doesn't post huge walls of text? He was scummy at first, but isn't now. He shouldn't be lynched.

Sorry, I still don't see all this trying to scumhunt business. From my pbpa he has had one worthwhile post in my eyes (406). Nothing else has changed in the way he has played this game from the start.

Replace "from" with "since".

[Flameaxe]

I don't think you're arrogant at all. And yes, I did read it. I personally find more consolidated summary posts more effective at conveying scumminess. My problem about pbpa, especially in cases of players already in the spotlight, is that it is a lot of typing when a summary would do just the same. Even adding in that "x number of posts were useless or had nothing to comment on" to convey that the person in question isn't really contributing.

I would agree, but given the case, I found it worthwhile. I was going to have to go through each post and write my own notes down, so why not give them to all to see. I would generally agree about the "players in the spotlight", but I don't know if it applies as I was (self-proclaimed) the one who put out the case that moved the spotlight towards him. I gave a general summary at the end of my post as well to accompany the base from the isolated posts. When I point out a point of non-contributing, I don't see an easier approach than a pbpa. He made a claim that he was scumhunting, I decided to show post by post that he generally wasn't contributing to the effect that he claimed, it just seemed like an efficient way of putting it out there for a pbpa.

In other news, Anon's 444. The "I have to live with it comment" seems off in my book, but the rest of the post is just fine in my book. Can't wait for the second half here.

In other other news, Mallow's V/LA sucks. Discuss.

[Flameaxe]

Though some may not see scumhunting in here, I think Raivann has made a good point. Flameaxe's reply was weird. I don't see how Raivann was keeping his opinions from the rest of us. I thought his reply, though slightly exaggerated, was a town one.

Generally, when one goes out of their way to call someone scum (indirectly, but the point was still there), but didn't say a damn thing regarding said player up until that point, they aren't sharing everything with the class. It's pretty obvious now he had (and still has) nothing to show I'm scum besides the point that I voted him.

[Flameaxe]

Ps:

PROZAC:

I'm moving in the next couple of weeks to a new apartment near school. While I don't plan on moving up full time until the internet and cable is set up, obviously if issues arise I may not have access beyond my phone, which is sketchy at best. Putting it in thread so you players know too.

PPS: A Budja prod might be in order. It's been a while (Thursday to be exact for his last post).

So, I moved in a day early, which puts me out of internet for the evening. Any pressing comments/concerns, write flameaxe in big letters and ill be sure to comment from my phone tonight.

[Flameaxe]

A) My fishy vote wasn't exactly random.
B) My understanding is that an arsonist is a SK, and the firefighter prevents kills from fire.
C) It's possible I guess.

Gonna re-read and put up another player-by-player. Obviously things have changed since that one.
Mallow: You're an idiot.

[Flameaxe]

I don't have the same opinions on all of them anymore. I thought Blackberry was town, but now I'm thinking he is scum because I actually read back on my own with my own opinions. Wouldn't ya know! It's easier for me to play when I actually know what's going on and I'm not waiting for a scum to claim then be lynched!

I'm not sure about you guys, but this part of the post seems fairly disgusting to me. Obviously, he points out that his opinion of Blackberry has changed, but then goes on to add that its because he reread the thread with his own opinions? Sorry, but that isn't going to be an acceptable answer right now. We have 22 pages of content, with a lot going around blackberry. Use it.

Second, this post sure does come across with the idea of you admitting that you didn't do shit day one, and now you're actually trying. That doesn't sit well with me. Why exactly did you wait until now to reread the thread with your own opinions? Who's opinions were you rereading with last time? Or have you even read at all?

Even your reads of everyone else seem off to me.

Budja-I didn't know what to think of him then. I still don't know but I'm leaning town.

Very weak opinion after an entire day. What makes you lean town?

Fishy-I thought he was scum too until I read what he actually posted. I'm neutral about him now.

This one kind of baffles me. You thought he was scum, before you actually played the game and read what he posted? 'The fuck, man. 'the fuck. This is just off.

Jack-How could I not have thought he was scum? He was just a bad player.

Remember what I said about the last one being off? Yeah, this one might top it a bit. Dwelling on your opinions of dead players gets us nowhere, and if anything it looks like you're trying to cover your tracks from yesterday. My own last part is admittedly a stretch, so I won't go any further.

llama-Even though he is wrong about my poor English skills He comes off as town for me. Yes he insults, yes he lies about English, but I still have a gut feeling he's town.

I don't understand why the english idea needs to continue to come up. It's not important, and doesn't further this game at all. Stop. Can you give us some insight as to why your gut might be leaning town?

Mitsuru-Only thought she was scum because of OMGUS.

Again, why do we need to worry about bringing up opinions of dead people. It's not important, and again, it seems like you are covering your tracks (even moreso on this one, so I won't call this a stretch).

Raiv-Never really looked at him.

Generally, it's a good idea to look at popular lynch targets during a day. Again, dead people, why?

Stranger-Still think he's scum. If not, he's the arsonist.

Just like I've bitched at other people before you, lets hear some whys. What makes you believe he is scum? Hopefully I am not the only one that finds it odd that he adds on arsonist at the end, just for good measure.

xvart-I'm now thinking he's town.

I can only assume you know where I'm going next. Why do you believe he is town?

[Flameaxe]

Mallow: There are lots of questions in there. Please answer them. (Note: The question "Dead people, why?" is used rhetorically, and does not require an answer unless you want to.)

[Flameaxe]

I am not sure what to make of Fishy attacking Stranger. This throws me off a bit.

Also - would an arsonist have some sort of Immunity from kills?

They might, they might not. I don't see how it would make a difference either way.

[Flameaxe]

Basically everyone should answer these questions:

1. Did you belive in Jack0s claim-?

2. What exact scum motivation can Mallow have to vote for dead people?

I already answered number one when it was asked day one. (No).

For two: What about it makes him so townie? All I see is someone who is clearly not paying attention, and hasn't been paying attention for most of this game (and is someone I'm not sure is still paying attention

because he still hasn't acknowledged my questions I asked of him. Hint hint to mallow. Does underline get through to you?

). I, through my own experiences, do not find "not paying attention" to be a tell either way.

[Flameaxe]

Why do you think there are TWO killing TEAMS? And why in the same post you come up with theories that contradict this stance?

We had two kills. One kill was given with arson flavor. One dead player was a town firefighter. I think its a safe assumption we have an arsonist. Mafia + arsonist = two.

[Flameaxe]

I think mallow voting Jack is a good indicator that he didn't kill him.

This I can agree with.

[Flameaxe]

Unvote. Vote Blackberry

I can agree with this case, and I'm not buying his cases.

However, I REALLY want Mallow lynched tomorrow.

The reason I was sticking to my guns on Mallow then saying I won't vote BB because it isn't going anywhere is because I really want mallow lynched. Call it tunnelling, but I have a serious gut read on Mallow as scum. Hypocrisy, yes, but I don't think Mallow is good for town this game.

The underlined part is the only bit of speculation and stretchy posting I will make this week. Just sayin', the motive WAS there, even for someone not paying that much attention.

[Flameaxe]

I promise you that my vote on Jack was a big mistake. I didn't read the scene close enough and I thought Flameaxe was killed when I first read it. Still think Blackberry is scum.

Another "off" post. Can you please answer my questions from post 537? That would be just swell. Super swell.

[Flameaxe]

I can sort of see where berry is coming from with this, but it would take a nice assumption on my own part to make it happen. I'm not completely sold on it because of that.

[Flameaxe]

Remember that one time I mentioned a mallow post being "off"? That last one joined the "off" party. Don't really expect either faction to just give up like it almost seems like he's doing.

[Flameaxe]

Honestly, I don't really believe the whole VI thing when he even said he thought I was killed when he first read it. I don't know about all of you, but when I see...

Jack - Steven Goodrem - Vanilla Townie - Shot Night 1

I don't really see any possible way someone can be so dim that they read

Flameaxe - Steven Goodrem - Vanilla Townie - Shot Night 1

They're completely different, and even someone very, very quickly skimming would (in my opinion) not read that incorrectly. He was either expecting another death (which I believe is what blackberry might be on to, in some respect) or completely illiterate. I highly doubt someone like mallow is illiterate, despite being mostly unresponsive to most posts directed at him (see day one). Up until that post, I might be okay with a VI read, but I feel as if the read moved completely beyond that. I just don't see someone misreading Flameaxe for Jack. It's just too much to misread.

[Flameaxe]

I think we can all agree that a hammer before he does read is dumb. Lets not do that, kay?

[Flameaxe]

I'm sorry. What about 209 is so scummy exactly? Raivann posted a completely baseless theory in a point in the game where his scumhunting levels were completely nonexistant. Sure, he said he read, but when you post a theory like he did, that has no concrete proof at all, it doesn't exactly show you reread shit, and that's what I pushed for most of day one. If I follow your logic, I can just say in this post that I'm about to reread, and come back later with a post that simply says: "Hey guys, my reread showed that Scoug is scum. Vote." The game just doesn't work that way. You need to back your claims up, and Raivann simply was not.

I think it goes without saying I still stand by my entire case against Raivann, despite the unfavorable result. For a good 5-7 pages, his entire reason for believing I was scum was that I was "misreading" him. That's what his "reread" showed. Something that happened AFTER his theory post. I still believe his reread was bullshit, and I still know he never showed anything to make me feel otherwise.

I don't plan on being any less abrasive. Deal with it. I used to be quite a bit more abrasive, so this is as good as you're going to get. It's how I play the game.

Budja: I don't see if it's really that obvious that BB has role information. The fact that he quoted the post itself shows to me that he sees something within that post, and something that I touched on in post 599.

Ps: Can we get a votecount/prods, Prozac?

[Flameaxe]

Thank you prozac <3. I'll get you some eggnogfas for the holidays to make up for it.

[Flameaxe]

I don't exactly believe there is anything scummy about proposing a scum-team. If you read 209 closer, you would know that that is only part of my reason for voting him. I voted Raivann because he was consistently putting out these theories that had little to no basis to go along with them. I don't believe his proposing of the scum-team was scummy, it was the part where he backed it up using a pure hypothetical situation. He did this (from my knowledge) three times during the entire day, while posting little to no analysis as to what was actually going on. It wasn't helpful, and it never will be helpful. End of story. Resorting to hypothetical situations instead of actually scumhunting (and no, I do not believe the two are the same in any way) is, in my mind, grasping at straws. I don't see why him not having any votes has anything to do with this fact, because it doesn't. I didn't read the post as townie with a revelation (still don't), I see an idiot, not scumhunting, posting another post, not scumhunting. He did not, in my opinion, read the game to see if it held water, he (as he himself stated) "reread with that point of view", which to me sounds as if he already completely believes it. It turns out after his bullshit reread, that he goes against his crazy theory completely because someone thought he was scum (rephrasing of his own words). Blackberry asking for someone to be replaced, in the manner that he did, was not, and was nowhere near distancing. Calling it that was a stretch as it is, and I called him out on it. Call it blatantly defending blackberry, but I call it calling someone out on a very flimsy "case", if you can even call it that. I've been doing it all game, against many people. Look it up. Saying I misread him, and that is why I am scum, is not "a player who is willing to change their opinion when analyzing a game", because 1) I showed in my pbpa that he really wasn't analyzing shit, and 2) baseless omgus isn't analyzing. It is wishy-washy. It was baseless omgus, it didn't change from that for a majority of the day, and when it did his omgus would have had more weight.

I don't expect giant posts from other players, nor do I find it scummy. I've mentioned this in regards to Mitsuru already. What I do expect is someone to backup a claim they make, something that neither Jack nor Raivann did. As I said before, I could simply say SCOUG IS SCUM, I REREAD I KNOW THIS. That is unhelpful in most ways. If you don't explain yourself, fine. But if you make a claim, back it up. It's not hard. It's pro-town. It's helpful. Jack and Raivann were not helpful in my personal opinion.

[Flameaxe]

Xvart: I don't feel as if I am trying to justify the lynch itself. Obviously, that would be useless. I am however justifying my original case on Raivann. Conf is pushing against me regarding that original case, and it only seems fitting to bring it back up.

Unless I'm not supposed to defend myself anymore.

Berry: I'll reply to that business when I can put something together that at least makes sense in my own head. I honestly cannot think of a way to respond to it other than "no, i r not", which isn't really a productive answer.

[Flameaxe]

Or I can post and not hammer.

Just sayin'.

[Flameaxe]

although I suspect Flameaxe may have an idea

I'll call myself 90% sure at this point...If that 90% chance is right, then I might say don't claim it right now. My idea makes perfect sense in my head, but who's to say my head is right.

I hope I'm right Berry.

EDIT, IM UP TO 99 PERCENT WITH BERRY'S LATEST POST.

[Flameaxe]

I will in my next post. Gathering my thoughts just in case. I'm also half-asleep.

[Flameaxe]

And I did a quick little reread half asleep, and I don't feel any different.

Vote: Mallow

[Flameaxe]

Cross fingers.

[Flameaxe]

Certainly not a "basic" role for a "basic" game.

Now claim your Night Two action.

It's not like its a theme game or something.

/in to mod, this is a basic game, it will have roles that might not necessarily fit into a mini normal but will not be too out there (ie. you have heard of the roles before), it'll be swingy but will be as balanced as I can make it. There will be flavour but it won't be specific. (ie. no theme - like Lost or Batman) and there will be no weird mechanics and the ruleset will be pretty much standard.

Requirements are that you have 1 completed game and that you have a good replacement record, (as in you havent been replaced for no reason recently)

I think its safe to say a bus driver fits into the role of "not necessarily mini normal but not too out there".

And yes, night two action agree.

Edit: Berry beat me to it.

[Flameaxe]

Yeah, because it takes fucking hours to go to the mini theme queue and look at Prozac in ISO. Try harder please. You're just looking desperate now.

If the entire town wants me to claim, I'll claim, but don't expect me to do it just because you tell me to. This is a democracy not a dictatorship.

Your claim had nothing to do with my hammer, nor did I find it brought any useful information to the table in my eyes as I already worked out Blackberry's role. I've had a town read on Blackberry for most of this game, and I trusted his judgement because of it (and his potential role for what its worth).

[Flameaxe]

Certainly not a "basic" role for a "basic" game.

Now claim your Night Two action.

It's not like its a theme game or something.

/in to mod, this is a basic game, it will have roles that might not necessarily fit into a mini normal but will not be too out there (ie. you have heard of the roles before), it'll be swingy but will be as balanced as I can make it. There will be flavour but it won't be specific. (ie. no theme - like Lost or Batman) and there will be no weird mechanics and the ruleset will be pretty much standard.

Requirements are that you have 1 completed game and that you have a good replacement record, (as in you havent been replaced for no reason recently)

Flameaxe, ever since I've called you out as being the arsonist, you've really done nothing for the game. Also, I think this post only supports Confucius' misconception that we are scum together. I think you

WANT

me to get lynched up today. Where are YOUR thoughts and opinions on ANYTHING?

From what I've seen from him so far, I can see Conf pushing this (in my honest opinion) silly point. I'm putting in my two cents to hopefully prevent it from drawing out like the stupid smiley discussion did.

[Flameaxe]

As for opinions, I'll have more concrete ones once certain people reply to your claim, BB.

If anything, I'll say I find it odd a claimed doctor survived the night. And for more, I find it odd-er that llama was killed, to be honest.

[Flameaxe]

You don't think Llama was a high scum suspect? And that arsonist would want to kill scum?

But llama over a claimed doctor? Please. Llama has been under pressure for a good 90% of the day game.

[Flameaxe]

You don't think Llama was a high scum suspect? And that arsonist would want to kill scum?

But llama over a claimed doctor? Please. Llama has been under pressure for a good 90% of the day game.

Hi. llamaeatataco was killed by the Arsonist, while I have a role that cannot protect against Arsonist kills, making me a Townie from the Arsonist's perspective. We can assume the Arsonist was trying to kill Mafia, or else is an idiot.

Point taken in that respect. It still doesn't account for why the mafia killed someone other than yourself. Unless of course for some odd reason you can protect yourself, which you already claimed you did not.

[Flameaxe]

Fair enough blackberry.

Regarding mafia size, it obviously depends on how many power roles will balance it. With 5 dead, all being powerless against a mafia, two "generally" protective (if you count bus driver as protective), and knowing my own role, I'm leaning 2 right now. The potential two day victory helps my lean as well.

[Flameaxe]

Flameaxe I can 100% confirm isn't

Mafia

.

I don't think Coug is mafia because he was on mallowgeno before he slipped. Not 100%, but a good bet.

--- ---

I don't see a problem with secrecy at this point. If I die at night, you can just look at my role and deduce what happened. If I am alive tomorrow, I can (and probably will) explain then. We only need one more vote to verify if I am right or not. Plus, I'd rather people do less talking and more voting. The quicker we end the day, the less info mafia has to make their decisions tonight.

@Xvart: I had a pretty good idea by this post.

[Flameaxe]

I'll also confirm Scoug's night one result, as soon as I get this answer from Prozac:

Prozac: I don't expect it, but is there any issue with flavor claiming? Just want to make sure.

As for the role, I'm just a lowly vanilla.

[Flameaxe]

Okay.

The flavor of my role says I was a famous barman in the town, and I work at the local bar, thus the alcohol.

[Flameaxe]

I also believe Coug. Thief is a pro-town role and he has crumbed.
By elimination I'm pretty certain scum = Anon, Xvart and arsonist=Flameaxe.
After MC, I'll be voting Flameaxe.

While I don't expect it, there is still a possibility of three scum. It hasn't been ruled out. Given that, why would we go for an arsonist lynch exactly? Unless of course we are mafia and want a win. Even with two scum, I'd even say going for mafia would be more ideal. While it hasn't happened yet, I don't see why a crosskill couldn't happen. Not much to bank on, but It'd sure be nice.

[Flameaxe]

Oh, and another flaw in your logic. Last night can be summed up in two (three if you like speculating) ways: Mafia didn't kill, Anon was protected (and to a lesser extent because this isn't confirmed in any way) the mafia shot the arsonist and the arsonist has kill-immunity.

First option: I'd find unlikely with a possible win for a group of three on the line. With a group of two, I'd still feel it would be unlikely for a no-kill.
Second option: I find the most likely. I'll elaborate more on what this means for my list once everyone else claims. I'd personally prefer an Anon claim next. Personally.
Third option: Blah blah blah, we don't even know if they have kill immunity, so I don't hold this with that much weight.

[Flameaxe]

I have been is a simular situation (as the arsonist actually) and were there one player less, it would be a horrible idea. But since its not LyLo, removing a kill is the best bet.

Anon protected from scum kill => Anon town => I'm scum. So, by logic scum shot a NK-immune arsonist which is hardly farfetched. It all depends on perspective.
Right now, you just don't want to be lynched and lose.

How do we know it's not lylo though? We don't.

I'm not ruling Anon just town yet. I obv know my own role, and I know that it's not the arsonist, so ruling him, or any of you out as the arsonist would be silly.

You're right. As I see it, if I get lynched here the town will most likely lose. It all depends on perspective, and I'm sorry to say that your perspective is wrong.

[Flameaxe]

@Flameaxe, do you believe the PR's?

Yes, to an extent. I know that Scoug is a thief due to his claim about what he got from me/jack. Am I going to rule out a possible anti-town use to that role? No. Am I leaning there? No.

I don't have any reason to disbelieve Confusius, but obviously the same deal as Scoug would apply. I'm less inclined to go with the paranoia on this one, I find it very hard to believe we would get protection from an arsonist with the firefighter, but not from a mafia kill.

I do believe Berry's claim, and while I very highly doubt it, a mafia bus driver wouldn't be something that I would 100% rule out (but I highly, highly doubt this one).

[Flameaxe]

@Flameaxe, do you believe the PR's?

Yes, to an extent. I know that Scoug is a thief due to his claim about what he got from me/jack. Am I going to rule out a possible anti-town use to that role? No. Am I leaning there? No.

I don't have any reason to disbelieve Confusius, but obviously the same deal as Scoug would apply. I'm less inclined to go with the paranoia on this one, I find it very hard to believe we would get protection from an arsonist with the firefighter, but not from a mafia kill.

I do believe Berry's claim, and while I very highly doubt it, a mafia bus driver wouldn't be something that I would 100% rule out (but I highly, highly doubt this one).

Someone didn't read my post.

Someone should probably claim.

[Flameaxe]

Phonepost:

If we have three scum, and lynch the arsonist, we have reached endgame. That is why it matters. Banking on two scum sounds like a terrible idea at this point. How this is "suspect" is beyond me.

[Flameaxe]

I have trouble thinking Coug-scum as thief is a town role (wiki).

The wiki isn't the law of the site, you know that right?

(RHYME. Replying to the rest of the page in a sec now that I'm home)

[Flameaxe]

Im even being a nicer guy and asking for a majority. Also I think you are the arsonist.

Obligatory "Why?" comment here. Show me why, show the rest of the town why for that matter. I can't wait.

[Flameaxe]

Looks like someone is not READING HIS OWN POSTS:

If the entire town wants me to claim, I'll claim, but don't expect me to do it just because you tell me to. This is a democracy not a dictatorship.

Triple post! Sorry in advance.

I fail to see a point in pointing this out. As far as I can tell, the entire town is onboard with a massclaim at this point. I am part of a massclaim. You are part of a massclaim. Stop stalling and claim, por favor.

Hell at this point, I couldn't care less who claims first. Lets just get this massclaim over with so we can get some decent discussion going about it.

[Flameaxe]

Im even being a nicer guy and asking for a majority. Also I think you are the arsonist.

Obligatory "Why?" comment here. Show me why, show the rest of the town why for that matter. I can't wait.

After BB called you the arsonist for the first time you changed dramatically your "townie" playstyle and have regained the playstyle/meta I remember from you (short posts, lurking,). But the most important thing is that you have stopped pretending you are looking for scum since that point. When was the last time you had a supect? Since I trust BB, then you cant be mafia, so yeah, you are the arsonist.

But if I were the arsonist, what motive would I have for not looking for scum at this point? If I were the arsonist, I would be unable to win if the mafia were still around. It's safe to say this reasoning is flawed at best. The last I checked, you were pushing (day one) that the fact that I wasn't playing my original meta was showing of me being scum, and now that I've "gone back to that meta", I'm scum. Good to see some lose/lose tunnelvision. It makes me all tingly inside.

I'll end with another question for you, that ties into my question in the first paragraph. What

exactly

do you make of this claimed playstyle change? (Accompanying questions: What reason do I have to change this playstyle? How do I benefit from this claimed playstyle change? If I were the arsonist, why would I be "pretending" to find scum?) Regarding that last question: it almost seems as if you aren't even sold on me being the arsonist yet. Some of your points just do not make sense from a third-party. Unless of course you think my role is "Arsonist who really doesn't want to win", which is just plain silly. Pretending to find scum? Really? And you think I'm the arsonist. You better get your logic straight, and quick.

As far as I can see, all you're doing at this point is parroting Berry. Use your reply to this post to change that opinion of you, or not. I really don't know with you at this point.

Budja's next post should have flavor. While I'm most inclined to vote for Budja at this point, I will wait until Berry/Conf flavor claim too. Might as well get it all out there at this point.

[Flameaxe]

Bah!

[Flameaxe]

<3 Prozac.

You did right. Town could have still won.

I enjoyed this game immensely. And the group of players were awesome.

Also since its already kinda known, Ill let Flameaxe know that I am a Populartajo alt. (thats how I knew his ancient meta). FTR, I really believed in my arguments when I made it. You should probably go back to your gutsy playstyle rather than the convoluted system.

GG.

I already knew, don't worry. My gutsy playstyle just doesn't work when I'm not playing 10 games at a time and I need to use it. It's more fun actually doing shit.