Mafia 96 - Murder in Emerald City (Game Over!)

[Kise]

I'm still on vacay'. Be back home in a few days to catch up.

[Namttam]

Explain to me how this is not a solid case that KK was lying about his claim.

You mean the fact that he claimed Emerald miller and then some players badgered him into asking the mod for more specifics? To the best of my recollection he never said anything along the lines of 'when I die I will flip town'. You are implying in your case that he was saying this by claiming Emerald miller, which isn't really the case. If you can quote where he said definitively that his role PM stated what his flip would be before he was badgered into asking the mod, then I would have to agree with you. Like I said, however, if my memory is right, that did not happen. Do you understand where I'm coming from?

That is not my logic at all. What I am saying is that since KK asked the mod to answer whether he would flip town or scum and the mod resent his role PM, then the information would be in the PM. However, since he already had the PM then there would have no need to ask the question since he had the answer. Whether he claimed he would turn up town or not is irrelevant to the argument. So no I do not understand where you are coming from.

More over, your appeal to other players dislike of mastin's post style is a incredibly suspicious play. You are using it to further your desire to get him lynched because your case is not as strong as you would like. I would vote for you before I vote for Mastin, however I'm leaving my vote on KK because I believe my logic is solid.

I believe my case is plenty solid. Even if you don't agree with every point I've made against him, they are still abundant like the stars in the sky. I mean, I was only analyzing 2 posts out of everything he has said in this game and came up with that much stuff. How much scummy behavior would it really take before you lynch somebody? The post you directed me to only made one point against KK, and I think even that can be logically explained. I realize I'm coming on very strong with this case, but I feel that this is the only way people are going to listen.

Was it you who used the shotgun analogy? Throwing out of bunch of points, some of which are scummy and others which are not at all doesn't make your case stronger. It makes you more suspicious. You avoided the issue I was questioning which was you asking people to vote because Mastin's posts are long.

1)They absolutely do carry over and I don't believe I ever implied that. While VP and Johnny are different people they have the same role.

Actually you did. It's in the post you directed me to:

The JR wagon is useless when there is no JR. I was voting him to get him to talk more but with him gone there is no reason for this.

You say the wagon is "useless" because JR is gone, but in your post above you say that all of the points against him still apply to me. If you really thought they still applied than you should have left your vote there.

I address this to you and Clergy since he quoted it as well. I was voting for JR because he was suspicious and I wanted him to talk more. You showed up and I unvoted you and switched my vote to KK. I removed my vote from you not because I don't suspect you anymore, but because you were talking plenty(having already posted 7 times and giving appearance that you were going to be posting more). I would be able to decide later if you were scum by the information you were providing in those posts. I only had suspicions about JR so there was no reason to keep voting you when I felt KK was a solid case.

If anyone is trying to take advantage of sheep it is VP. Encouraging voting without reasons encourages play which provides little information, and is definitely not a town move.

Yes, I surely am using my powers of hypnosis over other players.

You can't blame me if they don't post reasons

(though I am pretty sure I have thoroughly covered them).

Could the following people please explain whether or not you think Mastin is town based on the above points

(not necessary if you simply vote)

Yes, Yes I think I can blame you.


Last post for today, I'll be back tomorrow night. Probably around this time.

[Mastin]

Right, so my internet had failed on me Thursday, and it only just started working again. Got lots of catching up to do; I'm going to have lots of fun this game.

[Mastin]

MafiaMann
is having a birthday!
Mafia Scum

Happy B-day.

For some reason, I have my doubts.
Anyone else share that opinion?

Mastin, I'm not going to go tit for tat with you for the sanity of everyone in this game.

Then you will inevitably fail to truly counter me. Not responding to everything will leave you looking scummy, because you'll inevitably leave out key parts of my argument.

(Well, you would, except that half of the time, I'm too lazy to check back on my own posts and go by memory.)

So, I will sum it up for you: you're wrong.

1: And, I'll return the favor and sum it up for you:
I'm not wrong.

2: And even if I were, being wrong is not a scum tell.

A lot.

So, what?
Being wrong a lot isn't really an issue, now, is it?

Some things that should be mentioned as to how scummy Mastin is:

Great, I get to shoot down points against me!

Oh, now, this, this is a TRUE mafia game for me.
Opinions are flying.
Vote counts are dieing.
VP is lying,
And the scumbags are frying.

[/end poetry]

(Some lyrics are there for the purpose of the poem only. Keep in mind I'm a writer, and I like poetry.)

More seriously,

Walls are being built,
I have suspicion being placed on me,
I've managed to catch three scum (VP, Kublai Khan, Lowell, scumminess listed in that order),
We're debating,
We're in a heated fight to the death,
They're caught and know it,
I'm town and they're scum,
I get to fight for my opinions,
Pages are stacking up by the dozens,
etc.

This is how a mafia game should be played. A heated battle to the death. It's discussion to its max. This. Is. Fun.
Seriously, in games where I'm not suspected at all/very little, I literally stop playing. What's the point in playing a game where nobody suspects you?
There's no risk. No reward. No thrill of the hunt. Nothing...exciting.
THIS game, however...
There's a risk. If I lose the fight, I'm lynched--a mislynch, sends us into the night, and with my playstyle, people will write off everything I say as meaningless, and will ignore it, letting VP, Khan, and Lowell fly under the radar.
There's a reward. If I win, then VP is lynched, flips scum, and we're far closer to eliminating all scum.
There's the thrill of the hunt--watching the scum try to defend themselves desperately, and fight back with OMGUS-style attacks.
This game is exciting.
It has what truly makes me happy.
Walls, lots of posts, me having caught scum...
Oh, this is just so much FUN!

^^This is called entrapment at best

Entrapment--laying a trap. In this case, for scum.
What's wrong with that?
Nothing.

but I reiterate my feelings that you were rolefishing.

I. Never. Rolefish. Like, ever. Never in my games, have I rolefished, and I take SERIOUS offense at the accusation. Not as scum. Not as town.

Read it at face value: Me wanting to trap scum.
Stating whether it worked or not, however, would be anti-town to do, because it would give the scum information that they otherwise would not have had, allowing them to safeclaim in the future. (I have a theory on the matter. If I decide to reveal whether the trap ensnared scum or Khan passed, I'll also reveal the theory I have about scum PM's vs. town PM's.)

Really? I wouldn't have guessed.

Summaries suck. Simple.
[/alliteration]
Seriously, though. They don't convey the entire message. If you want the case against me, I will be happy to give you a PBPA on your scummy actions which will prove that you are scum.
But I'm not going to make a summary of the accusations.

Not that hard to understand.

Emerald is not a role, nor does it affect role. Learn what flavor is. kthx

Emerald is PART of the role. Let's look at what the PM's state, and what the flips say:

The Setup

:

This is a closed setup. There is at least one Townie in this game, who will have the following role PM:

You are an

Emerald

Townie

.

The only power you have is your vote, so use it wisely.

You win when all threats to the town have been eliminated, and at least one pro-town player survives.

There may or may not be other town roles. Here is an example of another role PM which may or may not appear in this game:

You are an

Emerald

Doctor

.

Each night, you may target another player in order to protect them from any attempts on their life that night.

You win when all threats to the town have been eliminated, and at least one pro-town player survives.

Note the underlined, and the italicized. Emerald is part of the role, not the flavor.

Sotty7,

Emerald

Townie

[/u] - Slaughtered Night Zero
elvis_knits,

Emerald

Jailkeeper

[/u] - Murdered Night Zero
Konowa,

Cerulean

Mafia

Doctor[/u]

- Annihilated Night Zero

Note the emphasis. They are revealed as Emerald *role*. They get a PM of Emerald *Role*.

The mafia have *Faction* Mafia *Role*--and it stands to reason that they don't have a mention of Emerald in their PM, because Emerald is not part of their role. It's part of all pro-town roles. Failure to specify the Emerald part is a HUGE scum-tell. Lynch anyone who doesn't claim Emerald *role* when claiming, please.

This makes no sense.

Yes, it does. If Khan has a vital role to your faction (be it either Cerulean or the other faction), or you have a small Mafia Faction (this would be ESPECIALLY true if you're Cerulean.), then defending him would be your best shot at winning.

I have no problem defending Khan because HE'S MOST LIKELY A MILLER.

I have no problem attacking either you or Khan because you two are more likely mafia than any other players here.

If I'm wrong

You know you are.

then so be it.

Okay, "so be it"-->Lynch VP. You know that, correct?

You clearly don't know my scum meta if you think I defend my buddies.

1: I'll look into it, but off the top of my head, I don't recall seeing you having attacked them a great deal, either. (Amnesiac, hard to tell, but I don't *think* so. Ongoing game, none come to mind.)

2: And, again, things could be different this game. A smaller mafia faction than one would expect in a game of this size, or Khan being an absolutely vital mafia role (only power role, for example), would make practically any player defend their buddy.

Just a bit?

Of course, only just a bit. She's looked at other suspects as well, you know, and dropped a few fair FoS's every once and a while.

Are you serious?

Yes. I am. I saw a potentially serious slip on your part, and so, I point it out.
VP, really, can you act like caught scum any more?

You need to die for repeatedly accusing people of things that they are clearly not saying.

1: Wants me dead without expressing the opinion of me being scum,

2: I point out what I see--that is what I saw, a potentially huge scumslip.

3: This is not a counter to the point. You're not explaining how it is NOT what you were saying.

Also, why the hell are you responding to points I put to Zazier anyhow?

If I see a slip, and it's not regarding me, do you want me to not point it out?

Really, VP. It doesn't matter who it was directed to. If there's a slip in it, it should be pointed out.

I'm not surprised at all BECAUSE IT'S TRUE.

I'm more of a longsword/revolver-type guy, really. Own two of the former, a few of the latter. Shotguns, not my style.

Everyone, please note that Mastin says that me referring "the town" is a scumtell by referring to "the town".

Well, that's because I'm mirroring your words. I can't word it this way:
"Note how VP is referring to the rest of the town in third person", because that implies that he, himself, is referring to the town as part of it, which contradicts with the accusation that he is not part of it.
While as saying
"Note how VP is referring to the town in third person" is an accusation that he is referring to the town in the third person, not being part of it himself.

Simple logic, really.

I don't know what game this is, but I'm pretty sure I was not in it.

Meant Amnesiac.

I've seen him lurk.

I haven't. :/

It's part of his meta.

I haven't seen him lurk. Links would be appreciated.

Plus you are making this game very boring for everyone else.

Not really. I'm having loads of fun scum hunting. You?

I don't blame him at all.

If I can have links to him having done this before as town, then I wouldn't, either, because he could be excused for it.

Yep, in the 25 pages of epistles you've written, most of the points were about me, a player who has been in the game for two days.

The fact remains, that most of my points have been against you and Khan, who you have been defending, yet you admit "what little scum hunting there is" is good. If the scum hunting is good, yet the points are against you and Khan, then you're essentially admitting to being scum yourself, hence, a scumslip.

You sure got me.

Again, this is not countering my point. You respond to it with sarcasm, yet do not explain how it isn't true, that you made a huge scumslip.

You're not doing a very good job thus far.

Heh. I think I've done a decent job of massacring you and Khan thusfar.

Better try harder.

Alright, I will. You want the case against you, no? A PBPA will do it rather nicely. Against both you and Khan, because you two are linked.

Are you seriously this stupid

Your personal attack against me has been noted.

or are you just trying to be irritating?

Note how he, again, does not counter the point.
I said that because he admitted what scum hunting I have done, when it is mostly against him, to be legit is a huge scumslip. He posts this as an "answer". Try harder, VP. You're making it too easy for me to nail you as scum.

or because they don't exist.

They do. I've even outlined them in some of my games. From memory alone, I can cite every reason there is behind it. But I won't, yet, because it allows you to adjust your style.

Let me show you how to be succinct Mastin. I criticized you for always insinuating how pro-town you are:
VP wrote:

Things you repeatedly bring up again and again to insinuate how pro-town you are:

And I give you a nice little summarized list that is easy to read.
You say:
Mastin wrote:
Okay, let's shoot these all down, one by one.

Then you say:
Mastin wrote:
I do not....Blah Blah Blah

And finally you say:
Mastin wrote:
My actions are always pro-town in nature.


I rest my case.

There is nothing wrong with my style of play. I do not go on with the "Blah Blah Blah"-style stuff you accuse me of.

And the lack of anyone on the Johnny wagon being able to bring an actual summary of the points against him continues.

1: Others have done this--is this an accusation against them as well?

2: And I've already explained that I will not do a summary, but am willing to do a PBPA. Conveniently forgot to mention that, didn't you, VP?

^^Everyone please note Mastin trying to scare you into not voting him

Oh, not really. It's simple. Those who vote for me are scum. They get thwacked by walls of text from me to prove it (making them miserable from having no choice but to respond to it all or die), and IF I am SOMEHOW lynched through all of that, they often will receive SERIOUS attention after that. (There's a risk that people will go "Oh, this is Mastin. Let's ignore the bandwagon on him." But that's poor play, and is not done often.)

Just scroll through Mastin in post 708 and 709 to see all of the complete BS he is accusing people of.

1: I am not doing so; I've proven this.

2: However, I can say the same about you, BS'ing points against me.

-He was fishing for flavor

Trapping scum...

-He is spamming the thread so you do not take time to read his posts

1: I am giving long posts, that if read in detail, would potentially give scumslips.

2: This is a null tell, as I do it in most of my games.

-He repeatedly asserts how pro-town he is

I shot this down already, and you failed to even respond to my counters in your post. Why? Because you know I'm correct and can't counter, of course. They're null tells.

and rather than defending he claims that most scumtells are null against him

1: I HAVE defended. You just didn't QUOTE my defenses!
2: They are null. I do 'em all the time as town.

-He has refused more than once to summarize any points against JR

I asked you if you wanted a PBPA on JR and you--you refused to answer.

-He has misrepped many many people in this thread

I have been stating what I see. Nothing more.

-He's OMGUSing anyone who disagrees with him

Explain how I have agreed with SC, then. And how I've attacked people who agree with me.

If you agree with these points please Unvote, Vote Mastin

Funny, how VP talks of me OMGUS'ing me, and then does it himself.

What happened to your case against MafiaMann?
What happened to you thinking that the case/vote on me was weak?

I can quote your case against Mafia, and quote the fact that you said yourself that you likely weren't going to vote me over a weak case.

---

Have to leave now, sadly, having only responded to VP's case against me. Oh, well. I'll finish 29 and then 30 later.
This was fun enough for a while.

[SerialClergyman]

Serial's Re-read Gems continue:

(Well, you would, except that half of the time, I'm too lazy to check back on my own posts and go by memory.)

[VP Baltar]

Glad to see I'm not the only one who saw that.

[iamausername]

-=Vote Count #19=-

Mastin (7) - Kublai Khan, VP Baltar, roflcopter, MafiaMann, Wickedestjr, Mufasa, Lowell
Kublai Khan (4) - ZazieR, Empking's Alt, ckool5000, Namttam
VP Baltar (2) - Kise, Mastin
Hayker (1) - Faraday
ckool5000 (1) - fallen angel
Achilles (1) - SerialClergyman

Not Voting (5) - Achilles, curiouskarmadog, dvdkid13, Redith, Hayker

11 to lynch.

[Mastin]

I would like to start out this post by stating that the timing of VP's vote on me has sparked a theory of mine. As with the flavor-theory, I am afraid that I cannot say it without claiming, but needless to say, one of my comments in my post there makes me think that VP figured something out about me, and panicked.
Now, with that out of the way...

---

Please do. Your opinion is valued, because, well, you're normally an active player.

You are correct. It is a null tell.
My posts are like a coin.
Reading my posts is like flipping the coin.
If it lands on heads, you see how my posts are pro-town.
If it lands on tails, then you see how my posts are anti-town.

But, no matter where the coin will flip, you're not going to get my alignment from the posts; that is because they're null tells. I'm a hard, nearly impossible, read, in fact. While I recently found a possible supertell of mine, other than that, there's no way for anyone to tell what alignment I am.

If people point out something scummy in my posts, I can not only
-Explain why it isn't,
but also
-Give examples of me doing the "scummy" thing as a pro-town player. (Most of the time. Sometimes, it's an ongoing game, meaning no link, no quote, without mod permission.)

Fishing for flavor,

Setting a trap.

misrepping,

1: Giving my opinions.

2: I've been accused of misrepping before. See 742, the best example of this off the top of my head. The accusations were false, sure, but they were still made.
So IF you accuse me of a misrep, I can prove how the supposed misrep (which is me just calling it as I see it) is a null tell from me.

Really, VP. I gave the links to all of my completed games. Don't tell me you didn't even glance at any of them. I gave them to prove these things as null tells, and opinions long-standing from me.

OMGUSing tons of people,

1: I accused you, and had my vote on you, long before you voted me. I went for a while thinking Khan was town, but Zazie's posts, some of Khan's blunders, and some review made me realize he's not. Lowell blatantly buddied up, and also, defended Khan a great deal from MULTIPLE PEOPLE, me the LEAST of them.
That's not OMGUS.
That's scum hunting.

2: And, again...look at my games. I could've technically been OMGUS'ing And and Kier. Chainsaw defense made me suspect Ace,
Same with Mikek here,

If memory serves, I did it here as well,

And so on.
Consider your point pwned via my meta.

and claiming your actions are always pro-town

I've addressed this, VP. I said, SEVERAL TIMES, that my actions are NULL tells. Sure, that means not scum, but it

also

means NOT TOWN.

Let's give a few examples, shall we?

They were all clustered in one specific area, in fact. VP ignored most of them. Enlarged size, bolded, italicized, and underlined added for emphasis.

most scumtells are null against such a "unique" individual like you,

This is me saying that they're

NULL

tells

. Meaning

NOT SCUM

,

BUT ALSO

NOT TOWN AS

WELL

[/b].

you claim sole responsibility for moving the game out of RVS,

So, what? It might be a pro-town action to do,

but it's a

null

tell[/i]

; I'd do it regardless of alignment.
[/b]

you inflate your importance in moving the discussion along,

I got us discussing. That's, again, a pro-town action (why I listed it as pro-town to do),

But something that I'd do

regardless of alignment

.

Making it a

null

tell[/i][/b]

.

you are scumhunting so very very much.

Explain to me how good scum hunting isn't pro-town.

<<< Mastin Edited In Note: This was

NOT

me stating that I was pro-town, as VP claims. It was me stating that my

scum hunting

was pro-town

, which is an entirely different matter. That's playstyle. >>>

should have to be constantly referencing these things and their actions should speak for themselves.

The thing is, I'm not.
I insist that most of these things are

null

tells[/u]

.
That means

null

--

NOT SCUM,

NOT

TOWN

.

Do you have worries that yours do not?

My actions are always pro-town in nature. They might be seen as anti-town to others, but they've also got the pro-town side of the coin as well.

It's a

null

tell[/u],

though, my posting style. [/b]

I've been insisting my actions are null tells. Not town tells as VP claims.
Can we lynch the lying scum b*content censored*, please? Let's make the Vice President, Baltar, get reelected to the noose.

If you want me to, I'll go digging for me insisting that my actions are null tells in other games as well. I can easily find stating that voting myself is a null tell (For example, I asked ekiM to confirm it here), but for my actions, that might be a bit harder. (Blasted ongoing games...)

are solid scumtells that I am quite sure he does not do all the time.

And I just proved you wrong.

They all are, actually. I just pwned VP's assumption by proving his points false, via meta and my own actions this game.

What makes you fairly sure of that?

Because it is, of course.

Also, voting VP Baltar is pro-town.

Fixed.

I figured as much.

Sucks.

Oh, don't get me wrong--it's because of those reasons that I'm not voting Khan.

Khan's scummy. But I do not think he should be the day one lynch. It'd be almost as bad as lynching a claimed cop, day one. (Same role mechanic in the claim.) He DOES need to die, as caught scum. Just not today.

Today would be much better spent lynching VP Baltar.

My point 4 continues to be relevent to a number of people in the game.

And, well, I disagree with it. I have previously taken the stance of two experienced players familiar with each other going at it being two pro-town players going at each other (ask Zaz. She was one of the two), but I don't think that is the case this game.

I think that players like (but not exclusively) Mastin, VP, KK, Zaz, Lowell and roflcopter are all using preconcieved ideas to further convince themselves that the people they are attacking are scum.

VP's scum. Khan's very likely scum. Lowell's at third. Rofl's just rofl, and if his lurking is part of his meta, then he can be excused. Zaz is pro-town.

I've gone over the reasoning why multiple times. I believe that we should get rid of VP today.

Why didn't people notice stuff like the fact Achilles posts scummy stuff EVERY POST,

I forget which, but I recall liking one of Achilles's posts.

or FA and MafiaMann's little conversations?

Quite personally, I had noted them as, at best, things that look like a null tell. They do seem a bit scummy from it, but other than those two, I don't see anyone else linked together to form a mafia team in just those two.
I do, however, see a strong VP-Khan-Lowell link. Three's better than two, no?

Untrue - it's listed as a Cerulean Mafia Doctor.

Same thing. Cerulean Doctor, not Emerald Doctor, a sample PM given on the first page.
Cerulean Mafia Doctor, just being more specific about an already-known fact.

Just take a closer look at the sample PM's given on the first page.
It gives the information about what an Emerald Doctor's pm would look like if in the game. It specifically showed Emerald Doctor.
We had a Cerulean (Mafia) Doctor.
You don't need the Mafia phrase in there to get the message that the doctor's a member of the mafia. What's Cerulean going to be for when we have Emerald, a serial killer? Nah; it's mafia.

That is significant because your entire argument is that Emerald specifies town in a larger way than just flavour.

It does.
Emerald-->Town.
Cerulean-->A Mafia Faction/Family. The fact that it says Mafia in their PM's doesn't change the fact that they're not going to remember to change their *Faction Name* *role they want to claim* into Emerald *role they want to claim*.

As soon as you see the word mafia there, you realise you could remove the colours completely and still have a cogent town vs non-town role.

Yet it works vice versa as well:
You can remove the Mafia part, and still deduce that Emerald-->Town,
Cerulean-->Mafia.

If the word 'mafia' wasn't there, someone could claim doctor and it we would not be able to say whether it was a pro-town doc or not

And think about it--

Let's use that Cerulean Roleblocker example again:

Say the PM says "You're a Cerulean Mafia Roleblocker". The person wants to claim.
They INSTANTLY will remove the Mafia part of their PM. And as Cerulean is a specific type of mafia, they'll likely remove that as well.
Leaving just Roleblocker.
"Claim: Roleblocker". Oops, no Emerald, that person's scum.

Where as a pro-town player, who gets a PM, say, saying "You're an Emerald Roleblocker", and they want to claim...

"Claim: Emerald Roleblocker".

This works for Mafia claiming a role they are not.

Say a PM says "You're a Cerulean Mafia Goon." The person wants to claim Miller.
Drop the Mafia, of course. Drop the Cerulean, because it's the type of mafia. Change Goon to Miller, and...

"Claim: Miller." Same mistake. No Emerald.

Does that clarify my thought process?

But since the word mafia is there, it is immediately obvious, colour or not, that the person is either town or anti-town, making the colour merely flavour, and thus KK leaving it out originally much less significant.

Emerald isn't flavor. It's part of the role.
Someone can be a Roleblocker. But if they're not an Emerald Roleblocker, they're scum. Why? Because Emerald is a pro-town player's PM. Leaving out the Emerald part is leaving out a vital part of their claim.

Bolded for emphasis. Presumably mafia would also get a colour with their role, and even if they didn't they could easily tell from the bodies and the vanilla townie PM that a colour was involved.

Doesn't change the fact that they're less likely to remember the "Emerald" phrase in their role PM.

I think this argument is not only a foolish endeavour, it may be scummy in and of itself because it contains a desire to put deep significance on the 'flavour faction' of mafia

1: Unless the mod outlaws it, I encourage using flavor in cases. Scum PM's can differ from town PM's.

2: But, again, Emerald isn't flavor. It's part of the PM; if someone leaves that vital part of their PM out, then they're scum.

I would imagine that the people who care what colour faction a player flips are FAR more likely to be mafia than town, because it's significant to them whether it is one type of faction or another. I think that's a possible scumtell.

Possible scum tell, sure.
In reality, a scum tell? Not so much.

Meh, kinda have.

Eh, not in my opinion. I have VP, Khan, and Lowell pegged as scum, but look at other alternatives as well, like Mafia.

You went through the 30 quotes I posted and found the ones pertaining to you and Rotten/KK only.

I wanted to go through them all, but I was a bit short on time and couldn't get it all.

Yep, that's still a threat.

There's no threat in a fact.
I'm stating what has happened. People (scum) HAVE been nailed for pushing my lynch, and me flipping town. People (any who attack me) get miserable when they attack me due to me responding to their attacks, and counter-attacking, creating huge walls of text.

It's simple, really.
I have fun when attacked.
If I'm not being attacked, I have no fun.
When I am having no fun, I will post shorter posts.
And when I am having loads of fun, I will post wall after wall of text.

Which means that those who attack me end up regretting it later, because they not only have to live through my walls, but they also have to accept that pushing for my mislynch will make them look terrible the next day.

In fact it's just a poor one, because lets face it, we'll cop walls of text anyway

Not as many.

and if someone aims to get you lynched knowing they'll get lynched the next day, a good townie should still push through it and criticize you, whereas scum would be more fearful of their own life.

It's called "point of no return".

A quote from a television show regarding a person shooting himself with another person's gun to frame him:

"Oh, the gun. Leave it, and it looks bad. Take it, and it looks even worse."

Once a person attacks me, and attacks me hard, there's no going back on it. They look bad for continuing. They look worse for stopping. I push for their lynch, even when they stop pushing for mine, so they have no choice but to push my lynch as scum, because if they don't, instead of getting lynched the next day, they get lynched THAT day.

Something of content happened (ie not RVS - KK claims). You react to that and rofl finds you scummy.

My reactions were that of the RVS. I was reacting that way for fun. (I had a lot. )

Rofl made my joking responses into scummy responses--the most scummy interpretation possible. Tunneling on me.

It's not a huge deal. It's annoying, to say the least, and rather anti-town, but rofl's rofl, who is known for this.

It was just about the only thing he could genuinely focus on, and noone else had done much at all, so it's impossible to tell whether he had tunnel vision on you or not.

It took him forever to unvote, and that was due to the fact that he couldn't get anyone to go along with him. Because the scum want me dead, now, though, he's revoted me.

Definitely seems like tunneling to me.

I'm not buying the wagon on Mastin.

That's because it's largely scum-driven.

I take issue with some of what he says and some of his conclusions, but at the end of the day I count about 30,000 words from Mastin and I have trouble with about 5 sentences within them.

I still don't see the issue. My actions here have been null. I do this kind of thing regardless of alignment.

- I agree about fishing for flavour.

Look, when I reveal whether the trap worked or not, I will prove why the assumption that I was flavor-fishing was absolutely false. I've opened a notepad document and saved my thoughts there, just in case I forget later on.

- More evidence please. I think there's been very little misrepresentation.

1: I've stated that these so-called misrepresentations are just me posting my opinion,

2: And even if they weren't, I have a meta to back up doing this as town. VP lost on this point.

---

---

Oh, man, talk about fun!

[curiouskarmadog]

this read is unbearable..

Mastin is spouting too much...I hate the term "wall of text" but I can see this as a pro town move on his part...not finishing the read, I would vote him...but I dont know what has been said the last 5 pages or so...my brain is fucking hurting..

hoping I will catch the last 5 tomorrow.

[Mastin]

If I can go through his last two posts and point out all the misreps and hyperbole in the horrible cases he is pushing, will you vote him?

For every reason you attack me, I can provide two in defense. (Literally. Proving why you are wrong, and then meta of me doing this as town.)

I know I'm coming on a bit strong with this case,

Nonsense. You're pushing for it exactly at the level I'd expect for you to push it. (Hard, like scum would, mind you.)

but it has nothing to do with egos or reputations.

Agreed. It has to do with wanting to catch the scum--you, Khan, and Lowell, amongst others.

I don't even hardly know who Mastin is outside of one ongoing game I was with him in.

That is painfully obvious by your attitude towards my playstyle, VP.

Also, I'm not OMGUSing him.

Uh, yes. You are. You built a very solid case against Mafia, and declared the case against me as weak/insignificant/something like that.
And then, after I go HARD against you and Khan, you vote me. Throw away the Mafia case to vote your attacker.
That's OMGUS.

I criticized him in my first content post of the game.

You criticized my playstyle, and resorted to personal attacks. You weren't calling me scum.

That is when he came with a whole bunch of garbage about how I'm scum.

I had been voting Johnny for a long time, and pointed out a whole bunch of scummy comments from you LONG before those posts, VP.

KK also criticized him.

My suspicions on KK are not related to that at all. He's done many scummy things which have been outlined. (I can outline those myself as well, but that's going to be another PBPA.)

As did Lowell.

Lowell entered the game with extreme buddying (mainly to everyone attacking me) and a HUGE defense of Khan, along with attacking pretty much EVERYONE attacking Khan.

Suddenly we end up on a scum team together.

Because you three are linked like no others. You defend Khan, and attack me, plus Zaz. Khan votes me, yet attacks Zaz. There's that early link pointed out as well, Lowell does an EXTREME defense of you and buddies up heavily.

Yea. You're scum together, alright. I've nailed you on day one; you're going to push with all your might to get me lynched, because you know that if I don't end up lynched, you'll be exposed day one.
And you do not want that.

A theory he claims has a 60% likelyhood of being correct.

Incorrect.

I said 90% of one.
75% of two.
And AT LEAST 60% for all three being scum.

There is a HUGE difference.

VP's conveniently leaving out a large amount of facts again to support his case. What more evidence do you need that he is scum? That PBPA?

That's just being ridiculous,

If it were true, yes. But I specifically said that there was a FAR greater percentage in 1/2 of you being scum, AND said "at least", meaning that the 60% was the MINIMUM.

VP keeps on leaving out things that are inconvenient to him, in order to strengthen his own case and weaken mine.

and to me it looks like scum trying to strong arm the town.

That would be you, not me.
"Voting Mastin is pro-town" comes to mind.

Spamming the thread could be a valid scum tactic

Hmm...
Let's see...
I've several times outlined why long posts are potentially pro-town.

And HUNDREDS of times posted like this in my games.

735 was the start,

It got worse in 742,

I got bullied into shorter posts later,

And it carried on from here,

And this happened at the same time.

I was back to my old habits again, though, even through the fact that my posts were far and few between. They were still long, though.

And the rest are all ongoing.

But you get the pattern.

Long posts are what I am made of, VP.

Heck, I'll be getting a title soon because of it (Unabridged).

So, no.

"Spamming the thread" is NOT a scum tactic.
Want me to try and track down my reasoning throughout my games as to why my long posts can be pro-town?

because who is really going to read all that stuff?

Anyone who wants to play.
Size enlarged for emphasis.

It takes me less than ten minutes to read most of my own posts, half an hour max. They take

HUNDREDS

of times longer to write than they do to read! I am a slow reader, so if I can do it, so can ANY other player, so those using this as a case against me are pushing for an absolute BS case.

There. You can't miss that, people, unless you're truly trying/are scum.

Oh, and, while we're at it. Let's make sure people don't miss the part about VP, Specifically,

VP is leaving out MANY of the facts, conveniently skipping over key details and ignoring my meta altogether.

Do you think on day 3 or 4 you would be able to read Mastin in iso?

Me in iso?
Heck, I can't read myself in Iso.
Just do page-by-page. It's easier, the old fashioned way, so to speak. It works for me. I find it hard to read practically any player in isolation day 3 or 4--they're too many posts and some are long.

Old fashioned way is better.

At best it's anti-town.

It is a coin. It has a pro-town side, and an anti-town side.

There is no "pro-scum" side, or "pro-town" side.

Also, constantly stating you are pro-town is a scumtell in my book.

I think I effectively proved that I was not doing this.

It work on a psychological level to reassure people through its repetition.

Heh. I described this to a player:

You're a claimed *role*. (Role will be referred to as X for ease.)

You say You're X constantly. You're accused of psychologically manipulating others.

You say you're the claimed X.
People will say "claimed? I thought you WERE X! Die scum die!", accusing you of having doubts that you're X, and accuse you of being scum because of it.

There's no way to win.

I mean, don't you find it a bit ridiculous for someone to say that their actions are "always pro-town"?

My actions always are, though, VP.
Yet at the same time, they're always anti-town.
See my coin example again.
They're both pro-town, and anti-town.

But they're not a sign of my alignment. Making it a

NULL

TELL

.

Now, there's not a way I can think of to make that more clear.

Not stating the case against me could be a scum tell.

And I offered you a PBPA to present the Case in the most efficient way.

I asked many times.

And I asked, many times, if you wanted a PBPA. YOU NEVER ANSWERED.

My feeling is that there isn't much of a real case there,

The case itself is very strong, VP. There's just no way to summarize it without making it weaker.

so stating it in bulleted points would show how weak that wagon is.

Summarized cases can be shot down with far greater ease than an actual case.

No scum wants to do that because they still think I'm a viable mislynch.

I have

Several times offered you to do a PBPA against you. You have NOT responded to that.

Misrep and hyperbole evidence will come sometime today when I have time to go over his posts.

And I will counter it shortly after that.

I will also include the completely awful reasoning he has in some of his other points.

Force me to look at my own posts for actual in-thread quotes to counter your selective quoting.

I have seen mastin as town,

Know who suspected me?
One player.
Out of 24 or so players alive.
I got bored.
And was busy in other games.

Not being suspected is boring.

Look at 141, for example. I was bored, there. Nanook was kinda sorta suspicious of me, for mostly OMGUS-like reasons.

and he definitely did not make such bad points in that game.

Go to the mafia wiki.

Type in,

Mastin's Insane Tells

letter for letter.

That's my logic, VP.

I think he is reaching for cases here.

This is how I truly play. That game, you know me from?
It's a joke. A seriously bad joke. I was bored. No suspicion, no motivation.

This game?
My natural playstyle.

As far as the OMGUSing, I encourage you to look at how Mastin flips out as soon as some of the replacements start attacking him.

No, VP.

-My vote had been on Johnny WELL BEFORE YOU REPLACED IN.
And I had been suspicious of him, even giving a case against him. And you only amplified it.

-I was suspicious of Khan through all of his scummy comments,

-And Lowell did some seriously scummy things in his entry to the game.

I had no suspicion on SC, who also attacked me, because he was doing it in a pro-town way, and had no buddying, no defending, no chainsawing.

However, I also mentioned mastin in my first content post.

Know what?
I won't save this for the PBPA and will just do it now.
Let's look at your first content post.

In the meantime, I'd like to say this: Mastin, if you spent less time in your posts jerking off to how great you think you are (cause that is what you are doing 70% of the time) perhaps you would be effective at scumhunting.

A personal attack.

Not an accusation.
Just an attack against me.

As it is, you're just spamming the thread with a lot of useless crap, and what is useful scumhunting is buried somewhere in there.

Another personal attack ("Spamming the thread with useless junk"), no accusation.

I think out of the twelve pages I read, there was at most 5 pages of actual game being played and the rest was Mastin saying, "If the best of every player on the site was put together, that would be me!"

A manipulation of my words. Blatant twisting, actually.
No accusation.

Seriously, get over yourself and actually

learn how to play the game.

More personal attacks against me.
Yet no accusation.

I don't believe you are even keeping what you're saying straight, so just knock it off.

Finally an accusation, this one of me not being consistent. Tells me to "knock it off".

If this is your normal playstyle, then you need to change it because it's really annoying and not as pro-town as you seem to have led yourself to believe.

Personal attack, admits that this might be my natural playstyle, and yet, no accusation.

Sorry if the noobs who think it's cool get offended, but it's true.

A seriously personal attack. No accusation.

Please begin dismantling your shrines post haste. [/venting over so much useless information]

This, I also took as a personal attack. And no accusation.

In other news, I'm not sure why people are ignoring MafiaMann and the giant red scum arrow pointing to his head. Just saying.

Accuses MAFIA, not me.

Unvote Off to work, I'll try and read the rest tonight.

And unvotes me.

That's VP's post's mention of me.

Yes, you mentioned me, VP. A great deal.
You didn't voice any true accusation towards me, but instead, were targeting Mafia.

He has acted scummy, and I probably wouldn't have pursued him if he didn't start bringing such horrible cases against people.

You started attacking me only after it was clear I would not back down. Not vice versa. I attacked you. You asked me to stop. I attacked you for the way you asked me to stop. You pretty much attack me after that, and OMGUS me. There might be more of you saying my style's anti-town and asking me to stop, and more attacks against you, but the pattern remains the same.

It is clear he is thrashing about now that the easy targets of KK and JR have come into a bit of doubt.

If KK and JR were easy targets, they would have had plenty of votes before I suspected them.
I was one of the first to suspect both of them, if you look back.
No, I was not targeting easy targets.
I was targeting those who were extremely scummy, like you and your selective quoting.

If Khan already told us he was a miller, than what is the problem with asking for more flavor?

Wicked's post here accurately reflects my opinion.
There is no rolefishing when asking for information from an already claimed individual.
Only scum hunting (via laying traps).

Because Mastin was asking for things like 'why you came to Emerald land' and other backstory crap that is not in my town pm.

Like I said, it was a trap for Khan.

He was clearly trying to find out what the flavor in the town pms is so if he had to fakeclaim later he'd be believable.

I have ways to prove this false. Not going to say how, right now, though.

That is rolefishing.

You have admitted that it is very possible I was laying a scum trap.

Which I did.
(Want your own quotes to prove it?)

He disputes this and claims he was trying to set a trap,

My RVS posts are also a trap. Which you also failed, VP.

My posts are filled with traps.

however when Hayker (I believe) asks him if his pm contains any of that kind of information Mastin calls it rolefishing.

I am unclaimed. Asking me is rolefishing.

Khan is not unclaimed, as in, he is claimed.
That's scum hunting.

This is indicative of how he has been trying to have it both ways all game.

Metagaming me in defense has always worked, people using it against me have always failed. I've been accused of trying to have it both ways then, proven town by a lynch-flip.

Really, VP.
Scum tells don't work nearly as well against me, because I am trapping scum with my posts.

I have dealt with this before, Mafia. It takes maybe thirty minutes tops to read my posts. Responding to them, sure, that can take hours if you do it line by line, but individually, not so much. You can respond to the most vital points in a post, and just summarize the rest if you don't want to comment on it.

Yea...Mafia... You aren't linked to VP; that's almost sure. But we have two scum factions; you easily could be a member of the other due to things such as this.

Misrep, Shoddy reasoning, and Contradictions: A 45-point Review on Why Mastin is Scummy

Note how he says "Scummy" and not "Scum". Because he knows that I am likely pro-town, and that I am very doubtfully scum, although I might be scummy.
I'll respond to it shortly. Going to post this before I'm logged out (...again. <_<).

---

---

Let's do a summary, although I hate it.

-It takes FAR LESS TIME THAN YOU THINK to read my posts. You don't HAVE to respond to everything. Skip what I'm quoting; it saves time. Skim if you have to.
-VP has been flat-out ignoring many of my points, conveniently leaving them out. He's selectively quoting my arguments, leaving out the explanations that make it less likely for me to be scum.
-I *am* willing to give a case on Johnny. A full-blown PBPA, for that matter. VP left this fact out.
-I blew VP's points full of holes about my actions this game being scummy, not only by proving that they're false, but also giving links of similar behavior as a pro-town role.

[Kublai Khan]

Oh, fucking hell. I'm so close to throwing in the towel and asking for replacement because of Mastin's posts.

The parsing of every sentence clause was bad, the endless repetition of the same points over and over

within the same post

is worse, but now the super-condescending

LARGE TEXT

he's added is beyond asinine. It feels like his ego is so big he thinks he has to talk louder and slower for the rest of us simpletons to understand his massive genius.

He is literally sucking the fun out of this game and making it a chore.

Look at this:

Once a person attacks me, and attacks me hard, there's no going back on it. They look bad for continuing. They look worse for stopping. I push for their lynch, even when they stop pushing for mine, so they have no choice but to push my lynch as scum, because if they don't, instead of getting lynched the next day, they get lynched THAT day.

The above paragraph doesn't describe scum-hunting.. it describes a strategy of OMGUS. Mastin is doing the following:
A) Admitting that he doesn't really care about alignments, he is all about personal vendettas and trying to get people lynched for the sole 'crime' of suspecting him.
B) Admits that he will make-up scum-tells as part of his "ends justify the means" mentality.
C) Bullying townies by threatening to eat away at their free time by forcing them to either respond to huge amounts of trumped-up charges or else look bad and get lynched.
D) Presenting himself and his playstyle as exclusively pro-town. There is no null version of this type of strategy, so he presents his tactics as working well against scum, but doesn't include the fallout of what happens when a townie attacks him. If the person he is revenge-attacking is town and backs off, then he will continue to push for a town-lynch. If the person he is revenge-attacking is town and doesn't back off, then he will do whatever he can to smear the person to that they get lynched the next day.

Bottom line is that anybody can smear anyone else. But Mastin's game of "I'm going to smear anyone that attacks me and take them down with me" isn't scum-hunting, it's scummy OMGUS. It's unforgivable anti-town behavior.

I'm not normally a policy lynch kinda guy... But what exactly is the point of keeping Mastin around? He's basically insisting that all he wants to do is piss people off so that he can go toe-to-toe with and try to get them lynched by hook or by crook. There's no conceivable way that his strategy would exclusively target scum.

If Mastin isn't scum, then he's a troll.

But since he's gleefully staying within the mod's rules, then we have no choice but to lynch him

[Mastin]

For the purposes of this academic analysis I shall be reviewing post 708 and 709.

Because you seem to insist that my scummy behavior started there. More like my increased aggressiveness against you.

This is merely a small cross section of his posts in this game, and yet there is a huge amount of scummy points and absurd stretches of logic being made here.

The same can be said for any player.

Let's say, I look at a player who makes an average of one scummy comment per paragraph.
If they post one paragraph, that's one scummy comment.
If they post ten paragraphs, that's ten.

The longer a post, the more potentially scummy comments that can be in there theoretically if done correctly. Like your selective quoting of my posts. That makes them look scummy, sure, but then I log on, and post the full thing, thereby, exposing your lies.

First he claims that lowell is buddying with me because he said this:

What's wrong with stating the truth?
Lowell was buddying up to you.

Very happy with VPs first post.

The fact that he was very happy with your first post should prove that it was, in fact, buddying up to you.

His take on the miller situation is well put

He is congratulating you further in the wording here, VP.

(Zazie's pursuit of it looks worse than KKs response to said pursuit)

He attacks Zazie, and by extent, defends Khan.

as is his take on mastin's post-walls of idiocy.

And not only personal attacks me (like you), but ignores my meta of having done this many times (like you).

That. Is. Buddying. Defending. Chainsawing.

All I see here is mild agreement.

And I see huge buddying, chainsaw defending, etc.

What I think is far more likely in this case is that lowell said that mastin makes "post-walls of idiocy" and mastin is OMGUSing becase he took it personally.

No. I haven't taken offense at my playstyle being attacked, like, ever. Because, well, I see how it can be anti-town.
But it is also pro-town.
The coin, VP. The coin.
It really is my playstyle.

I *did* take the "idiocy" part personally, because that is a personal attack. The mod has been very lenient thusfar on those matters, but that doesn't change what it is.

Attacking my playstyle, not offensive. (If done correctly, it *can* be pro-town. However, most of the time, it is a scum tell because they're attacking me in a certain way. Know my RVS comments? Yea, those? Reactions to those can be either pro-town, or pro-scum, and there's a very distinct difference between them. VP, you fall on the scum side.)

As far as I know this is the only real time that lowell even mentions me.

Okay, let's look at Lowell in Isolation, shall we?
Bolded--An attack/defense/buddying.
Underlined--Defense.
Italicized--Buddying.
Strike--Neutral/null tells, which might be ways to prevent taking a stance on someone, most likely, partners.

From the beginning:

8- mastin selfvotes [-, grandstanding]

11- kublai votes mastin, claims MILLER [+, approve of this tactic]

18- mastin claims jester

22- rofl votes mastin [+, needed]

43- newbish post from hayker [-, too newbish]
51- fallen questions rofl for tunnelvision on mastin
52- rofl calls fallen scum w/ mastin
59- rofl well explains why scum-miller claim isn't likely [+]

60- johnny finds voting scummy [?]

85- faraday votes hayker [+]
102- hayker argues over RVS [-, smoke and mirrors]
110s-120s- mafiamann and ckool argue, sort of [--, both look bad, too tame]
142- namttam votes hayker for his obsession with RVS [+, my sentiments exactly]

166- zazie points out KK's vig-slip [-, mediocre]

180s- hayker defends himself
213- fallen posts full playerlist [-, only takes on easy targets for possible scum]

219- johnny votes mastin, calls him a detriment to the town [+]

232- zazie explains why there's probably two scumteams
260s- fallen and mafiamann get into really dumb argument [-, both]
270s- ckool tries to be loved [-]
284- reveillark posts his suspicions [+]

292- rofl wants to lynch mastin, fallen, hayker, maifamann [++, me too!]

307- emp votes fallen
311- achilles enters, posts thoughts [+, town read]

336- emp votes KK [-]

344- wicked enters, votes johnny for not voting [-, ages ago, minor point]

346- ckool votes KK

354- hayker explains absencse [-], votes johnny for having "bad" posts [-, terrible, reeks of "ANYONE BUT ME!!"]

357- mafiamann votes hayker [+]
363- reveil votes johnny
367- johnny leads w/ 5 votes
377- ckool explains elaborate 'LOL' scumtell [+, clever, actually]
389- fallen votes ckool for coaching
406- fallen misses his mastin [-, dumb]
411- rofl votes hayker

Some thoughts:

I have strong town reads on the following:

rofl- he's right in post 52, 59, and I especially approve of his list in 292. He gets points

for being willing to say mastin's play is scummy as hell.

farady- he had me at hello (post 85). since then everything he's done looks town.
ckool- tries too hard to be loved, but the attacks on him lately seem weak and contrived.

kublai khan- LOVE first post miller claims. ROFL's 59 explains why it's almost certainly true. In a game with three KNOWN killing factions, scum claiming miller is unlikely at best.

The following players are scummy and need death:

mastin and friends- here's what bothers me about mastin's playstyle. Every two posts someone is there to quell any suspicion by saying "oh, he ALWAYS does that." Well, if he always does that, and he's not helping town (he really isn't), I don't know what I'm supposed to think other than scum. I have a nagging feeling that this is part of his plan, and I don't like that he seemed to enter with a lot of allies willing to get his back. I didn't record all the specific instances where everyone said stuff like "oh, well, that's mastin for ya' *eyeroll*" but the fact that they're there at all worries me.

hayker- 102 is terrible and a clear diversion from real issues. His defense in the 180s does nothing for me, and 354 reeks of "please don't kill me!" bandwagonny.
fallen- 213 is an awful post. In it he mindlessly identifies the two easiest (non-him) targets as possible scum, and even there doesn't go out on a limb far enough to make anyone angry. He's playing way too safe, and posts like 406 look like he's trying to stay on the good side of the active posters.
mafiamann- he's involved in two supremely dumb arguemnts: in the 110s-120s with ckool and in the 260s with fallen. Both look tentative.


As a policy I haven't read (nor will I) any of mastin's inane long posts. If anything of import happens in them, I'll rely on others to convey it. I'm torn between voting him or fallen, but for now I'll vote fallen

Lowell shows EXTREME buddying/defense of rofl/Khan AND Johnny in that post.

The kublai thing is a sideshow.

Tries to distract us from Khan...

He doesn't see the case at all... (Not pro-town. Pro-town is to either see the case, agree with it, and vote off of it, or to acknowledge the case is legit, but disagree with it being the lynch, etc.)

The buddying I mentioned here...

After having wanted a FA lynch but backing down, votes Hayker for a "rival bandwagon",
And then,
Later goes to me. The date shows Saturday; I imagine that was earlier today, after you posted your cases, VP.

He has
-Chainsaw Defended Khan and Johnny
-Buddied up to several individuals, including Khan, and you, VP,
-And attacked your/Khan's top suspects in his posts.

Yea...buddying is definitely a legitimate charge against Lowell.

To propose it is buddying is absurd hyperbole.

If a person says,
"Hi, I agree with Alduskkel on matters XX and YY. He voted for the scum, VOTE: ZZ" as a RVS-style post,
Would you consider it buddying?
It's only one post, right?
(Off-topic: I'm mentioning Ald as an example just because I have a habit of doing it unintentionally, and the fact that he noticed it made me start doing it intentionally. )

Yea...one post is enough. That'd be an RVS post, sure. "Just the RVS", riiiiight?
Wrong.

Buddying is a scum tell that applies from any single post in the thread. (Not friendship bias, though. That's different. Friendship bias-->Having played with them before, liked their play, and from then on, thinking of them as a fairly pro-town player. Admittedly, I'm guilty of doing this, but, hey, it's not a scum tell, because it's a subconscious thing. Buddying, conscious and intentional.)

If this is Mastin's definition of buddying,

It is.

he would have to extend it to anyone in the game whoever agreed with anybody else.

I call out buddying when I see it. If someone agrees with another, then I'll point it out as possible buddying, if I notice it.

2) Khan asks Zazie if she is a Lyncher.

That's rolefishing. It's not scum. Hence, it's rolefishing. I don't give a d*censored* about the fact that it's a third party role; why don't you just scream "MASTIN IS A JESTER!" every game while you're at it?
It's rolefishing.

Mastin claims this is rolefishing,

It is.

but how can someone be fishing for an anti-town role?

Because it's anti-scum as well. If someone asks you if you're any role but scum, then it's rolefishing. If someone asks you if you're the M. Godfather, not rolefishing.
Lyncher? Rolefishing.
Jailer? Rolefishing.
Cop? Rolefishing.
Jester? Still rolefishing.
M. Goon? Not rolefishing.

More false accusations.

And as I just showed, this is false.
Anti-town can also mean anti-scum, you know.

An unquoted accusation that makes no sense.

Says the buddy to the person being accused.

Khan claimed miller.

Did not he say what type of miller he was earlier?
Then why the confusion?

Zazie and Mastin (and a third part I think, perhaps Kise) did demand to know if he was a miller or death miller.

Then should you not be making these accusations against them as well, instead of just me?
Tunneling at best, here.

These are facts, so what is the contradiction?

He said: Asked for more information that he had.
I ask:
Didn't you claim to know what type of miller you were?
Because,
Knowing what type of miller he is-->Being able to answer the question. ("What kind of a miller are you?)
More information than what he has-->Not able to answer the question.

---
On a side-note, I'm having so much fun here, you wouldn't believe it. VP, you're a fine foe to duel with.

This has already been pointed out to be utter crap.

1: Personal attack.
2: I've already explained why it IS legit. See my example given earlier, about the Cerulean Roleblocker claiming Roleblocker, and the Cerulean Goon claiming Miller.

Mastin repeatedly comes back to this point, which is really insignificant and it makes complete sense why someone would just say miller.

Because...
IT IS A LEGIT POINT.

Not specifying Emerald, when it is one of the FIRST things listed in the sample PM's, is a SCUM TELL.

Just look how much he harps on this point in 709.

And your problem with that? It's a truly legit point.

Again he is stretching to make something that isn't really scummy look scummy.

The thing is...

IT

IS

SCUMMY.

Emerald is one of the first things it says in any given Town PM. Look to the first post for proof.
A good claim would look something like this:

I am an Emerald *role*. *details of role here*.

The Emerald part is part of the Role, not flavor. It is VITAL that people specify this in their claims, because if they do not, then they are scum.

Khan says Mastin may be implying something about the setup of the game.

Which is rolefishing. How is implying that someone knows something about the setup NOT rolefishing?
People of ANY alignment might know key details about the setup. He was rolefishing.

Mastin claims it is rolefishing.

AND a baseless accusation. You left that part out conveniently, though, didn't you?

These are not really related, but accusing someone of rolefishing makes them sound scummy. Misrep.

Implying that I might know something about the setup IS rolefishing.
And, get this:

Rolefishing

IS

scummy!

It doesn't make them "sound scummy".
It points out how they ARE scummy.

There is no "misrep" here, VP. Just an empty accusation from you.

If it is such a HUGE scumslip, why is he voting for me?

Because,

1: While I think Khan is scum, I do not believe he should be the day one lynch (rofl raised good points about this),
and
2: While I think Khan is scum, I am FAR more certain that you are scum, from all of the scummy things you have done this game.

More exaggeration.

No.
It IS a huge scum tell.
But see above for why Khan does not have my vote.

My feeling is that because I'm attacking him harder than Khan, he feels the need to reciprocate.

The thing is,

I was attacking you

FAR before you started attacking me

; the attacks were

ALSO against your PREDECESSOR

.

Again pointing out how no one should be calling him scummy.

No.

If I give evidence to support that my supposed "scummy activity" is really just a null tell from me, then it's no longer a scum tell, and can be ignored, because it's my natural playstyle, a null tell, and not a scum tell.

This is me stating a

simple metagaming

FACT that can be applied to ANY PLAYER

.

If I give proof that shows, via meta, why my so-called scummy activity is null,

THEN IT IS DARN-RIGHT PROBABLE THAT THE "scummy" ACTIVITY IS ACTUALLY A

NULL TELL

.

Empty threats of long posts,

Empty threats of a long post?!?

VP,

I was asking you if you wanted the accusations against you in a PBPA!

Really.
For someone who accuses me of Misrepping, you sure seem to like doing it a lot yourself.

which no one wants to read.

That's their problem. But I was specifically asking

YOU

if you wanted me to do the PBPA on you and Johnny. Which you had ignored, stating that I refused to summarize the case on Johnny.
When, in truth, I was asking you whether you wanted me to not give the points, or to do a PBPA to best-explain the points, because summaries are easier to shoot down.

VP, you've been
1: Selectively quoting
and
2: Stretching, something you're accusing me of,
In this matter.

If I'm so blatantly scummy, then why can't the general ideas at least be summed up?

Because summaries are easier to shoot down.
------
On another side-note, it should be noted that even as scum, I *never* lie about anything except my alignment. I have NEVER spewed a load of supposed junk that I don't believe. The proof is in my record, if you look at my scum games. (Like my view on pushing policy lynches)
------

I've asked and asked and have seen jacksquat.

And, in turn, I've asked and asked YOU if you want a PBPA,

The most efficient and accurate way of delivering the accusations against you

.

And have seen no answer to the request.

Also, why has no one else accused me of being scum if it's so completely obvious?

You HAVE been accused of being scum. Proof is in the old vote counts. At least five or six (whatever the top of the wagon was), in fact.

This is complete WIFOM.

No.
Asking if Khan knew about the things rofl posted is NOT wifom. It is a serious question, that needs to be answered.
If Khan didn't know, he's more likely to be scum, who didn't think over his fakeclaim well enough.

---

Ah, drat. I have to leave now. But I'm having so much fun!

Ah, well. I'll get to the rest, later.

[Mastin]

Ah, good to be back. It's so much fun, this game.

I left off at point ten.

My play is consistent, if you know what you're looking for.

But I'm even MORE different than an average player...

Translation: It's not my fault if you find me scummy, and I will not answer any accusations against me.

He restates that here:

This is NOT what EITHER of those quotes said.

1: My play is consistent. It means that there might be inconsistencies on sight, but if you know what to look for and know that I'm, well, me, you'll find that my play is consistent.
There is NOTHING in there that even REMOTELY says "I will not answer any accusations against me", nor "It's not my fault if you find me scummy".
It is me saying that I'm only scummy if you don't know where to look.

The two are TOTALLY different.

I was stating, in response to SC's point that every player is different, so scum tells should remain constant,

That by MANY players' admitions, I am even more different than, say, a normal person. Meaning, what many see as scum tells against me aren't scum tells, but rather, null tells, because I'm Me, Mastin, Zwetschenwasser times ten in many (not all, of course. ) ways.

IN NO WAY does that translate to "It's not my fault if you find me scummy", nor "I will not answer any accusations against me".

Again, VP.
You accuse me of misrepping.
It is only fair that I do the same to you.

It was a trap, on a player already claimed.
Those rolefishing me are asking for information from me, when I have not claimed.

This is being hypocritical at best.

1: Yet you, VP, on several occasions have stated that it could have been exactly what I meant it as:
A trap for scum.
Now you claim it's hypocritical at best?!?
Inconsistency.

2: And there's one HUGE difference between me and Khan:

Khan has claimed. I have not.
Anyone asking Khan for role flavor info is scum hunting, via scum traps.

Anyone asking ME for role flavor is rolefishing, asking an unclaimed person about information their role has.

Me simply stating facts.
NOBODY has ever gotten away from an accusation on me without later regretting it.
-They'll face walls of text
-IF they get me lynched, they'll often be lynched the next day
-And other such various regrets.

More empty threats meant to divert attention away from him.

There is no threat in a FACT.
It's true. And always has been. Me, posting walls of text, happens the most often when I am under suspicion. Because it's more fun that way, and increases my odds of winning, regardless of alignment. (If I just hang back, am not suspected, basically, contribute next-to-nothing, and don't get any suspicion because of it...I'm not playing. I'm just moving along. This is detrimental to my town win condition, because I'll let the scum slip by. This is detrimental to a theoretical scum win condition, because I essentially let them massacre my buddies and avoid mislynches.)

And when I AM lynched, and DO flip town, then they will either
1: Ignore my posts. "He was Mastin. Let it drop."
or
2: Use my information. "XX was pushing VERY hard for Mastin's lynch, and he was a mislynch. Mastin was also bringing some solid points against XX. VOTE: XX."
If the latter is the case, then the scum (who pushed for my lynch) are screwed. They bought themselves a day, no more.

It's really that simple.

13) Hypocritically accuses rofl of tunnelling while letting Zazie off the hook as only having "a bit of confirmation bias".

The difference is, rofl isn't presenting a good, solid case on me. He's tunneling, without much of a solid reason. My RVS posts are me having fun, nothing more. Always have been, always will.

Zazie, however, has raised good, solid points against Khan, which I agree with.

The difference is clear.

Zazie has posted far more in this game and hasn't moved her vote at all.

And has, similarly, raised good points.

Rofl has voted for more than Mastin.

1: He voted for one other person, and did so only because he thought a lynch of me wasn't going to happen any time soon,

2: Zaz has also given suspicions on other players as well.

Again, Mastin is lobbing accusations at his detractors while giving those who agree with him a free pass.

There's no accusation in a fact: Rofl is known for tunneling, and he tunneled again this game.

Sure sign of scum trying to go with the flow and not draw unnecessary attention.

The thing is, I've always been this way. Look at the links I've given.

How many people who I have agreed with have I called town?
(Answer: Plenty. Not all, but plenty.)

How many people who I have seriously disagreed with have I called scum?
(Answer: Plenty. Not all, but plenty.)

You can look at any of my town-games for proof of this.

You are also ignoring the fact that I have disagreed with some people (SC, mainly), and called them town.

Again pointing out how his scummy behavior shouldn't apply.

The thing is...

If I have a Meta to support why my scummy actions are null tells...

Then,

in all likelihood, my supposedly scummy actions are truly

NULL tells

.

Can't make it more clear than that.

I point out that his point is bad.

I respond that I was pointing out the possibility of a scumslip, no matter how unlikely, because I am scum hunting, considering all options.

He admits that it is "doubtful".

Doubtful, but still possible. And as it is still a possible scumslip, it's still something which SHOULD be pointed out.

He tries to claim he is being thorough,

Leave no stone unturned.
Leave no potential scumslip unnoticed.
Same thing.

I'm being thorough. I'm looking at all options, and pointing out possibilities, no matter how remote, because it is SCUM HUNTING.

but this is completely illogical.

How is being thorough and pointing out a potential scumslip illogical?

If he was really trying to point out every possibility then he'd still be on about page three with his reading.

I fail to follow.
I am pointing out every possibility that I can think of (sadly, this is generally only two or three in most situations; I'm not going to be a Lelouch and pull 14 at once) in all posts. How would that slow ME down?

What is far more likely here is that he's throwing mud and seeing what sticks, a common scum move.

Mastin's Insane Tells

MafiaWiki it.

It shows some of my logic, VP. This is no different. I am pointing out possibilities, no matter how remote, in an effort to scum hunt. The tells may make very little sense or be a stretch, but this is how I play, because it is scum hunting.

This point is repeated about his other ridiculous scumslip he references here he tries to insinuate that Mufasa using the word "men" in his post is a scumslip:
[cut quote]
You need logic, descretion and a general reading ability. Throwing mud again.

I mentioned a possible scumslip. That is something that no player should NOT do. I was pointing out, no matter how remote the possibility, a possible scumslip. Scum hunting, without eliminating possible suspects.

I gave enough logic in that post to make it worthy of pointing out.
What more than that would I need?

I ask him why he didn't attack mufasa over an obviously scummy action, such as having only two posts. Mastin tries to justify this, while he thinks the "men" thing is a possible sign of scum. How much worse can your logic get?

The number of weak posters, posters who haven't contributed a great deal, speaks for itself.

There are plenty of 'em.
They can't all be scum, now, can they, VP?

The men thing, however, is something ONLY Mufasa had used. And it was something which was a potential scumslip. Hence, I point it out.

So, he is claiming that pointing out irrelevant and illogical things like that above is really scum hunting.

This is NOT an answer to the question,
"How is pointing out potential scumslips NOT scum hunting?"

A scumslip is a mistake, made by scum, which accidentally gives away information that only the scum would have, or is a comment that only scum would make, thereby revealing them as scum.
A potential scumslip is just the potential for the above to be true:
To catch scum.
So, I ask again:
How is it not scum hunting?
I see none of this supposed "irrelevant and illogical" reasoning.

This is my point about his giant walls.

What about them? My great walls of Text are what make me who I am. They symbolize how much fun I am having. The longer the post, the more fun I have had in writing it.
They have nothing to do with alignment.
Nothing to do with this argument.
They're, again, like a coin, VP. Pro-town and Anti-town are the two sides of the coin. But there's no pro-scum side to the coin.

People aren't really reading them for actual content

That's their problem. They can read the whole darn thing in less than half an hour. If they don't have that much time, they can just skim and get it done in five minutes.

Not reading my posts is their own darn fault, and not my problem. It's theirs.

and are letting a lot of garbage pass as actively scumhunting,

1: Perhaps, have you considered, the possibility that, well, I AM actively scum hunting, and that you thinking I am posting "garbage" is not the opinion of others?

2: Personal attack. Calling my posts, essentially, garbage is an attack against me, my style, and what makes me play the game of Mafia.

which it clearly is not when you look closely at it.

Actually, I'd say the opposite is true:
Those who don't look closely don't see the whole thing. I've been accused in previous games of posting almost nothing but fluff in long posts, from someone who was skimming them.

Yet when reading my posts closely, they'd realize that I HAVE been scum hunting.

Quantity =/= Quality

And I agree. Which is why I don't post a great number of one-liners. Instead, I take the time to write a huge post, full of quality, instead of a great number of posts, quantity.

Apart from justifying his rolefishing,

Baiting scum...

he is saying he won't point out whether he belives Khan 'got the answer right' or not and claims it would be anti-town to do so.

Well, duh. Saying if he got the answer right/wrong to a question about flavor would give scum the ability to fakeclaim that way/adjust their claims to make sure it passes.

Why is would it be anti-town you ask? Answer: it's not.

See above. It IS anti-town, because it gives the scum information that they might not have. Which is detrimental to the rest of the town.

I'll fill everyone in on what the real case is, Mastin doesn't have an answer because he was rolefishing.

I have a good case in notepad, typed up to prove how I was not. Again, I won't post it unless I see it fit to reveal the answer to whether Khan got it right or wrong.

There was no rolefishing, and I CAN prove it, with evidence that you can NOT refute. I just, as I said, believe it would be anti-town to give the scum information regarding roles that they might not have.

Furthermore, it became obvious that Khan did not have extra flavor just like the rest of the town, and Mastin does not want to acknowledge this because it would detract from trying to get a mislynch on Khan.

No. It would give scum information that they might not already have, which is anti-town.

Don't you think if Khan had actually gotten it "wrong" Mastin would have been all over it? He has certainly said that he isn't the type to let things he considers scummy to slide.

Who's to say that he didn't get it wrong?
I have been attacking him, as well as you for defending him over that point, have I not?

You're making dangerous assumptions, here, and are rolefishing for the answer.

Being succinct is not a scumtell. More mudslinging.

It's not a scumtell to make a summary.
It's a scumtell to QUOTE a summary, because a summary is NOT the whole argument.

I don't do summaries well. It makes it extremely easy for people to take the weakest part of my argument (the summary) and bash it full of holes. I've seen it happen before. (Ongoing, sadly.)

Yes, it is.

And I have, time and time again, shown how Emerald is NOT flavor.

I asked him what an Emerald does to affect a role and he couldn't answer me.

The thing is,

I

DID

answer you!

I gave DETAILED EXAMPLES of why it was NOT flavor, but was part of the role.

You just ignored that part of my posts, didn't you? Want me to quote it?

Emerald isn't flavor--

If I see people fail to state they're an "Emerald *role*" when they claim, they're scum. Look at the bodies we have--

Emerald Townie.
Emerald Jailkeeper.
Cerulean Doctor.

See the difference?

Emerald reflects role.
If people fail to state they're an "Emerald *role*", then they're scum, who forgot this little detail.

Khan did.
And then, later--AFTER having been called out for it--includes the Emerald part.

And I've even more recently described why it was not flavor further in my recent page 32 posts as well. (Although those were made after you typed this post up.)

The fact that he wants to argue over definitions such as what a role is and what flavor is when he is clearly mistaken shows he is overdefensive scum.

Option B:
I am aggressive town, who knows he is right on the matter.

Claims that because Khan didn't do something the way he would he is scum.

It's common sense:
If you have a role that could have ANY doubt about it,
YOU ASK THE MOD TO CLARIFY.

Cops should ask if they're sane.
Millers should ask what type of miller they are, details of flips, etc.
Lynchers should ask for the details of their win condition,

And so on.
That's Night Zero/Pre-game stuff.
NOT day one stuff.

This is a ridiculous justification for your argument.

The "your case is weak" argument again.

Also, I highly doubt Khan had any question about whether he was a miller or death miller until you guys had an aneurism over it.

Many roles have things that could be interpreted differently.
It's the job of a good player to ask the mod to clarify these issues early-on, as in, during night zero.
Khan had, what, three days to talk to the mod about his role?

He apparently didn't use them.

He clarified because you asked and then you claim he is scummy for clarifying for your benefit.

The thing is, his clarification contradicted with his earlier reasoning.

Also,
This is mostly Zaz's case.
Why no attack against her, but an attack against me?

You coaxed him into asking and then justified your forgone conclusion from that fact.

We asked him about the details of his role, scum hunting, and he failed to answer successfully.

That's entrapment. You know who does that: scum.

Scum aren't the only ones who lay traps.
See: Flavor.

More ridiculous assumptions and bending of facts to fit his viewpoint. Rofl hasn't defended Khan, he says. Orly?

THAT IS NOT WHAT I SAID!

The fact that Khan has only two active defenders (VP, Lowell.

Rofl did so earlier, but

hasn't truly defended Khan

other than for the fact that he claimed at exactly the right time and gave reasoning why the claim doesn't work as scum

) is more proof in my eyes that Khan's scum, and that his defenders are his scumbuddies.

VP is DELIBERATELY leaving out a VERY KEY PART of the Sentence to further his own case.

I said that rofl hadn't truly defended Khan, other than the post about how his claim would not be successful as scum.
Which is true--that's all rofl has done to defend him, reposting that same thing.

YOU, however, along with Lowell, have been actively defending Khan, against ALL attacks.

Ok, I think I've effectively proven my point.

You've proved one thing: You were leaving out a key statement.
Yes, rofl HAS defended Khan.
But not ACTIVELY.
Just that one post's reasoning, rehashed over and over again multiple times, essentially. A small, insignificant defense, which I actually partially agree with (read: We're not lynching him day one, but he needs to die).

YOU, however, are different. You're actively defending all of the case against him. You and Lowell are both Chainsaw Defending Khan a great deal.

*sidenote* looking at rofl in iso I see another incident here where he points out an early incident of Mastin rolefishing

You are forgetting a key fact, though:

Khan had done that

WELL before *I* had

, and yet nobody who brings this up points this out.
Why?
Because they don't want to see Khan as scummy, and want to see me as scummy.

Misrep. I never believed it to be a scumtell.

You agreed that he shouldn't have doubted his miller status. His doubting his miller status was part of the scum tell.
Hence, you agree with the scum tell.

Simple logic, really.

I said he shouldn't have doubted it just because you guys were being stubborn.

Again, you're saying he shouldn't have doubted it. Yet he did, and that doubt is the scum tell, so you should be agreeing with the scum tell in that post, essentially.

Doubt isn't a scumtell.

Oh, yes it is.
Doubt is like caution. It's something which scum show FAR more often than a pro-town player will.

Even if I actually believed this to be a scumtell (and I don't) why would that mean I have to vote him?

If he makes a scum tell, then he's more likely to be scum.
Why note vote for him?

It doesn't. Mastin is just trying to add weight to his argument by implying that I'm contradicting myself.

The thing is, you ARE.
A LOT.
You're showing a good deal of hypocrisy, misrepping me, leaving out key details of my posts...

Another free pass for Zaz, while he attacks other players for tunneling.

The thing is, Zaz brings up good, solid points against Khan.
Those others who are tunneling, not so much.

It's not that hard to see the difference. It's simple, really.

25)He answers every single point I make toward Zazier. What was the reason for this? I don't know.

1: Ignore the "R".

2: You didn't exactly provide a quote, so without the quote, I--myself--cannot answer.

---

Oh, man. This is so much fun.

Let's sum up this part (about half, right?) of VP's post. (If you quote the summary, even after my warnings to not do this, I'm going to steal the words of a Famous EpicMafia user:
Die in a fire.)

He
-Is being hypocritical. Misrepping me when accusing me of misrepping, along with leaving out key details of my posts in order to make his attacks stronger.
-Is defending Khan,
-Not attacking others for using the same reasoning that I am,
-Defending Lowell.

[Wickedestjr]

vote: Mastin

Thanks.

Mastin could be scum. Some of your points do have merit,i.e. his parsing has allowed him make some things appear scummier than they were. However, having been in the game for a short while, you are making yourself guilty of misrepping just as you accused him of doing(see post 749 before you deny it). More over, your appeal to other players dislike of mastin's post style is a incredibly suspicious play. You are using it to further your desire to get him lynched because your case is not as strong as you would like. I would vote for you before I vote for Mastin, however I'm leaving my vote on KK because I believe my logic is solid.

In other words, you think the people voting for Mastin are doing it mostly because his posts are annoying? Possibly, but what's wrong with the points against him that have already been provided?

unvote, vote mastin

. I am mufasa's alt.

No, not really.

But I also don't feel like giving reasons.

Why not? "Because I don't feel like it" is not a good reason. You could be scum just voting Mastin for the heck of it. Why shouldn't we think that?

I don't focus on people unless I find them at least suspicious. I voted for him to apply more pressure to him and get him to talk more because I thought he might be scum. With more information I could get a better reading on him and hopefully find out if he was scum. Vp has been plenty active and is providing lots of information so I switched over to the person I find 100% scum.

If you thought Khan was 100% scum, then why weren't you voting him before?

Last post I promise. That is already four people responding to VP's push on Mastin. Three of which did not post any reasons,(MM kinda did but seemed to imply he was voting for his post style). If anyone is trying to take advantage of sheep it is VP. Encouraging voting

without reasons

encourages play which provides little information, and is definitely not a town move.

How has VP not given reasons? I think you missed post # 746.

@Wickedestjr (725): Why? (second part)

It's because if you were really pro-town, then you would be encouraging discussion, and that exactly isn't the most encouraging statement to make. I sort of find it typical for somebody to think that the arguments against them suck.

@ Wicked:

Are you saying that since he posts so much, then he is likely to say something scummy once in a while?

Not quite - I'm saying that for any player you should balance the amount of dicey stuff they've written with the amount they've written overall. Something like half of Achilles' posts are seriously scummy. I think only a small percentage of what Mastin has written is scummy.

Why not vote for dvd then? He has posted once, and that post was extremely scummy. Is 45 points in two posts not enough?

That is not my logic at all. What I am saying is that since KK asked the mod to answer whether he would flip town or scum and the mod resent his role PM, then the information would be in the PM. However, since he already had the PM then there would have no need to ask the question since he had the answer. Whether he claimed he would turn up town or not is irrelevant to the argument. So no I do not understand where you are coming from.

I also find that incredibly scummy. However, I want to hear what Khan has to say about it.

[Wickedestjr]

It'll take me a few weeks, but soon hopefully, I will comment on Mastin's three big posts.

[Wickedestjr]

Sorry, that's

5

big posts.

[VP Baltar]

Mastin stating that I'm OMGUSing because he was voting for JR is quite a load. Plenty of people were voting for JR, and I've barely mentioned any of them. Once I criticised you over your playstle and then later, after more careful reading, over all your scummy actions, that is when you became convinced I was scum.

re: null tells. You keep repeating this mantra and it seems less true every time you say it. I already pointed out how you are saying this while also saying things like "my actions are always pro-town". I can quote that again if you'd like. It's all a head game. Hell, in your last posts you're trying to say that you misrepping people's positions is a null tell. That is completely ludicrous.

Also, notice how Mastin is trying to softclaim a powerrole above in 782. The scare tactics continue.

re: Khan-VP-Lowell scum team- Again, this is stupid if you're such a meta lover. Newbie 696 I bussed my partner on Day 1 and that was probably the most I have ever defended a scum partner. In Amnesiac (which I don't know if the original threads exist still or not), I bussed CheifSkye4 and she was the first wagon that formed in the game. It ended up falling apart before her lynch, but I would have followed through. In One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest, I bussed Josh Lyman on Day 1 for the lynch as well. You can also look at the ongoing you are in and see where I was on those lynches.

For someone who claims to care about meta so much and has warned everyone about my scum meta, you certainly don't pay very close attention.

A theory he claims has a 60% likelyhood of being correct.

Incorrect.

I said 90% of one.
75% of two.
And AT LEAST 60% for all three being scum.

There is a HUGE difference.

VP's conveniently leaving out a large amount of facts again to support his case. What more evidence do you need that he is scum? That PBPA?

That's just being ridiculous,

If it were true, yes. But I specifically said that there was a FAR greater percentage in 1/2 of you being scum, AND said "at least", meaning that the 60% was the MINIMUM.

VP keeps on leaving out things that are inconvenient to him, in order to strengthen his own case and weaken mine.

This doesn't make sense. I say you said it had a 60% likelihood of being correct. Your reply is that I'm misrepping you because you said it had AT LEAST a 60% chance of being correct? My point above is that your odds disproprtionately high you dolt. That is what is ridiculous about that-that you are claiming to have caught an entire scum team without knowing anyone's alignment and are giving the odds at 60% (or apparently more). I don't care who you are, it's nearly impossible and you definitely are not that good of a player.

It is a coin. It has a pro-town side, and an anti-town side.

There is no "pro-scum" side, or "pro-town" side.

Again he claims he never does anything scummy. Also, this magic coin simultaneously has a pro-town side and has no pro-town side. This is what I am saying when I refer to gibberish.

I mean, don't you find it a bit ridiculous for someone to say that their actions are "always pro-town"? [/quote\
My actions always are, though, VP.
Yet at the same time, they're always anti-town.

Now that I call him on saying his actions are always pro-town, he argues they are always anti-town as well. How much more non-sensical can one get. Let me ask you a question, Mastin: If you're actions are always null as you claim they are, do you believe you are above reproach? Should player ignore everything you say as being simultaneously "pro-town" and "anti-town"? If that is the case, then any scumhunting you are claiming to do is null as well.

re: mastin being interested when suspected--this is horrible play if it is true. It is essentially saying that you want to draw town focus away from actual scumhunting because it's more entertaining for you personally.

Yes, you mentioned me, VP. A great deal.
You didn't voice any true accusation towards me, but instead, were targeting Mafia.

Worth noting is that I skimmed most of your posts because they were horrendously long and void of good content. Upon closer inspection, they show how scummy you really are. And thank you for pointing out that post because it shows exactly where your OMGUSing is coming from. I attacked you over your playstyle and lack of real content (which are not personal attacks btw) and that is the exact moment you got up in arms about it. I didn't feel so strongly about your lynch until I looked closer at your posts, but that's life eh.

You have admitted that it is very possible I was laying a scum trap.

Which I did.
(Want your own quotes to prove it?)

I was one of the first people to call you out for rolefishing, so yes, please back this up with some quotes you plan to misrep. Lemme guess, the quote where I say at best it's entrapment, which came long after I accused you of rolefishing? I also don't think entrapment is a valid town tactic. There is a reason its illegal in the law books.

------

Actually KK makes good points in post 785 and I'm not going to continue to respond to Mastin regurgitating the same crap over and over. KK I hope you don't replace out because I think Mastin is lynchable today and then everyone will be better off. I'm sure his scum partners are even considering lynching him at this point.

We're at 7 votes now, we only need four more. SC and anyone not voting Mastin, I ask you to use reason here. You can't honestly believe that Mastin is being effective at scumhunting or helping the town in any way. This matter is only going to resolve in either him or I being dead. Vote for whoever you think is acting more scummy and let's be done with these giant walls of back and forth that are making this game a drag.

[roflcopter]

vp baltar wins the thread. lynch mastin plox.

(while we're on the subject of random meaningless meta related comments, i was in amnesiac mafia where baltar was scum, and i think he's town here)

[Faraday]

Gah! All these long posts.

I'll get to this tomorrow, this has been a busy weekend.

[roflcopter]

hey faraday, why aren't you voting for mastin?

[VP Baltar]

Better be careful rofl or it will become obvious that we're scumbuddies together!

[curiouskarmadog]

OMG...I cant fucking take it anymore...I have replaced into 20+ games and this was the worst and longest read by leaps and bounds.

vote mastin.

Even after everyone has suggested that his play his anti-town..he continues. Other players post are lost...points are lost...I spent minutes fact checking then rescanning mastin's post to find the orginal bit I was checking....doing that 10-20 times per post I spent an hour...fuck even trying to quote something..more time spent finding what you want, and eliminating the fat. Why bother. This has to be a scum tactic....if not, I will never play in a game with you again...

you know what...I dont think I will either way.

[ZazieR]

Ok, I''ll be starting my update.
Though, when skimming, I saw a lot of long posts >.< So it might take a while before I''m fully done.

[Achilles]

finally caught up. posting thoughts/responses soon.

[ckool5000]

Sorry Mastin, but you and vp are making this game a headache. Plus, to me, vp wins the debate.

unvote
vote: Mastin