Mini 873 Plainview Game Over

[archaebob]

@ cruelty - can I assume then that you do not find Muffin at all suspicious?

[peanutman]

@Archaebob

, could your scumlist also be titled : "People who have questionned or accused me of being scummy"?

Foilist never made this argument, so why are you making it for him?

I usually try to give people the benefit of the doubt in the early stages of mafia games. Given that the majority of the players are town, chances are when I pick up on something and I question them, they are probably town. Nonetheless, I do question them to get a read, but I don't feel the need to always be aggressive. Therefore, regarding Foilist, I am trying to understand his logic, and, if his claim is true, I wanted to know what he found scummy about Mordy.

Re : Mordy

Another post that really doesn't sit well with me. This is totally unnecessary.

I hope to God SpyreX is Town, because if he isn't, I'm scared to death.

You might also have a few other people to look into if this is really important to you.

No, you do have to justify every vote you make. Every single vote, when you make it, how you make it, and how long you leave it on. That you think this is beyond reproach totally confuses me.

Finally, regarding the Foilist BW, I don't get a strong scum feeling from him. To be honest, I don't think a scum would act in this way on the first day. This could of course be taken into WIFOM so I'm not claiming him town but I wouldn't advocate a D1 lynch on Foilist just yet. Others have acted scummy as well.

[SpyreX]

Finally, regarding the Foilist BW, I don't get a strong scum feeling from him. To be honest, I don't think a scum would act in this way on the first day. This could of course be taken into WIFOM so I'm not claiming him town but I wouldn't advocate a D1 lynch on Foilist just yet. Others have acted scummy as well.

Lets take a pause.

This isn't a function of WIFOM or playstyles or whatever.

You are saying you don't think scum would make a mistake and then be obstinate about it.

Is this the stance you are taking.

You say "others have acted scummy" without saying who/what/when/where/why.

[MordyS]

You might also have a few other people to look into if this is really important to you.

Interesting, peanutman. Are you of the opinion that people's vote records are not important, and that people shouldn't have good reasons for voting?

[cruelty]

@ cruelty - can I assume then that you do not find Muffin at all suspicious?

You can assume whatever you like.

[archaebob]

@ Peanutman - why do you give the benefit of the doubt only to foilist? you had no problem voting for me on your second post.

@ Cruelty - I'm saying that only because you said foilist's suspicions were entirely worthless. Muffin is his top suspect, so I extrapolated. Is this incorrect, or not? I don't understand why you are hostile to me.

[foilist13]

@Archaebob - Can you please explain your opinions? As you can clearly see my explanation yielded some information that you can look at. Had I just posted a list like yours no one would have said anything, or if they did it would be much more limited.

Now why don't you post a list of

opinions.

I.e. explanations of why you feel the way you do about those players.

For afatchic and peanutman, they didn't give me different vibes, one gave me a town vibe, and the other gave me

no

vibe. That doesn't mean scum, that means I haven't identified any kind of a pattern however limited from afatchic. From Peanut, his posts seem very infrequent, but when he makes them they seem pro-town

a little bit.

That doesn't mean I have anything conclusive, it means its an opinion. Vibes are by definition limited opinions only based on general feeling. I haven't made any strong statements about either of them.

[cruelty]

@ Cruelty - I'm saying that only because you said foilist's suspicions were entirely worthless. Muffin is his top suspect, so I extrapolated. Is this incorrect, or not? I don't understand why you are hostile to me.

Not hostile.


I just don't want to show my entire hand - it's related to my stance on scumlists. If I find someone suspicious to a point whereby I think everyone should look at them, then I'll post.


And no, I wouldn't rule Muffin out because he's at odds with foilist. Like I said, I'm not 100% on foilist for a start, and you can never ignore bussing, or potentially 2 anti-town factions (eg: mafia/sk). That said, I'm not going to speculate about partners/bussing/multiple factions, I only bring them up to show my line of thinking.

[peanutman]

You are saying you don't think scum would make a mistake and then be obstinate about it.

Is this the stance you are taking.

You say "others have acted scummy" without saying who/what/when/where/why.

I'm not saying scum wouldn't make a mistake. I'm simply saying I don't think that's the type of mistake that scum would make. As for others having acted scummy, I've already had a previous post on it, and I'm sure there is plenty of other examples you can find in the 8 pages of posts. I didn't think I needed to justify my comment with a whole recap of the 8 pages.

Interesting, peanutman. Are you of the opinion that people's vote records are not important, and that people shouldn't have good reasons for voting?

I think you misunderstood me. I'm saying that there are a few people who have voted without any explanations (and none to the extent you mentionned - i.e. "how long you leave it on"). One example of this is AB's post 68.

@ Peanutman - why do you give the benefit of the doubt only to foilist? you had no problem voting for me on your second post.

I'm not just giving Foilist the benefit of the doubt, you have it as well. I'm not claiming you're scum, but my vote is on you because I still have my suspicions. If you were to pursue your line of thinking, I shouldn't be voting anyone at all, correct? That is not the intention of me giving the benefit of the doubt. I just won't get tunnelling someone because of one seemingly scummy action and blow it out of proportion.

@Spyrex, what do you make of Mordy's comment (post 166) about being scared to death if you weren't town? I'm relatively new to the site so I'm not sure if I'm supposed to take that as you being a strong player here in MafiaScum, but I for one will not be intimidated.
@Mordy, are you intimidated by Spyrex? If not, why else would you make that comment?

[MordyS]

Yes, I think SpyreX is a very strong player and I just finished a game with him where he was a very strong Town player. My comment was acknowledging that.

[archaebob]

@ Peanutman - is my "unexplained" vote the only reason you are voting me? wouldn't you agree that i have explained it fully since it was made? it's curious to me that you aren't willing to ascribe my posting habits to my play style, but yet you are willing to fabricate a whole defense out of thin air to proactively offer another player.

I don't buy your vote on me. And that's not OMGUS, believe me.

And I don't buy that you are giving foilist "the benefit of the doubt." I think you are trying to gently show foilist a way out of his hole.

HoS: Peanutman

Afatchic, lexprod, and AGM really need to post soon. Lexprod in particular, who has actually posted nothing so far, and specifically said he would be on tonight.

Muffin, you've also disappeared. I need a response to the case against you, and I need to see some scum-hunting. You are very much not in the clear right now.

[archaebob]

@ foilist - I'll go into detail once I have a read on all the players. more people need to post.

that's all I'm saying about that right now.

[foilist13]

@Archaebob - So you're voting for me because other people haven't posted enough? Somehow my content has lead you to suspect me, and lack of content has lead you to ignore other players.

And you still have not posted a list of opinions by saying more people need to post, yet you asked for the same thing from me. Thats blatant hypocrisy.

You need to get your arguments straight and post them in a clear case, as obviously there are several people who are confused.

[archaebob]

@ foilist -

I asked for you a list because I couldn't tell if you were paying attention to anyone besides muffin. You cannot say the same for me.

I'm voting for you because the things YOU have done are scummy. I'm not ignoring the player's who haven't posted, but I'm also not going to vote them for being inactive over halloween weekend. Pay closer attention foilist, I still don't think you are reading the thread closely. Have you noticed how almost a third of my posts draw attention to the non-posters?

[foilist13]

I think thats irrelevant. The vast majority of your posts are simple questions without content, and most of the time you're just asking other people for content.

Stop being a hypocrite and post your opinions. Amount of content needed to form opinions is irrespective of the situation.

[archaebob]

Foilist, I already said that we're not discussing this. You'll get your list of opinions after lexprod and the rest of them lurkers start to show up.

[SpyreX]

I'm not saying scum wouldn't make a mistake. I'm simply saying I don't think that's the type of mistake that scum would make. As for others having acted scummy, I've already had a previous post on it, and I'm sure there is plenty of other examples you can find in the 8 pages of posts. I didn't think I needed to justify my comment with a whole recap of the 8 pages.

You said that Gamma is buddying up with Mordy.
You voted for Archae for 1.) leading questions 2.) Lack of content (active lurking) 3.) Claiming foilist is ignoring questions 3.) voting without reason.

So, your "others have acted scummy" means Archae (which is in no small part in relation to Foil interaction) and Gamma (who, oddly enough, was your random)?

Thats fair enough. As for "plenty of other examples" - I can and have found them but yours pretty much is that.

@Spyrex, what do you make of Mordy's comment (post 166) about being scared to death if you weren't town? I'm relatively new to the site so I'm not sure if I'm supposed to take that as you being a strong player here in MafiaScum, but I for one will not be intimidated.

MordyS's post I assume is a fist-pump for the last game we were in which happened to be one of my better performances.

And, just because it needs to be last:

I'm not just giving Foilist the benefit of the doubt, you have it as well. I'm not claiming you're scum, but my vote is on you because I still have my suspicions. If you were to pursue your line of thinking, I shouldn't be voting anyone at all, correct? That is not the intention of me giving the benefit of the doubt. I just won't get tunnelling someone because of one seemingly scummy action and blow it out of proportion.

I don't even know what to think about this. Every bit of it reeks scummy.

No way in hell the whole scumteam would jump out though, right? It just doesn't make sense. If I was a vig... yea. You know the drill.

It doesn't make me want to lynch Foil any less though.

[archaebob]

Spyrex, I know it's a LOT of extra effort, but can you please put the names of the people you are quoting into the quote tag? Going back to read the thread later is going to be a bitch if you we have to figure out who's addressing who for each post.

[SpyreX]

Bad habit - if I'm only quoting one person I forget to.

I'll try and keep up on it though.

[archaebob]

@ foilist - what's your opinion of Peanutman? My opinion of him is that he's scum. There, now it's fair. Do you find anything about him suspicious?

[foilist13]

Archaebob, the attention is on you now.

unvote, Vote:Archaebob

until he posts something of relevance, and then depending on his answers.

If we are not discussing this, what exactly have you decided the discussion will be about?

[archaebob]

Archaebob, the attention is on you now.

unvote, Vote:Archaebob until he posts something of relevance, and then depending on his answers.

If we are not discussing this, what exactly have you decided the discussion will be about?

Lol.

@ Spyrex - I'm just curious, why would you prefer to lynch foilist right now than peanut man?

[foilist13]

Mind answering a question for once?

[archaebob]

The discussion is going to be about the players who haven't posted yet. The discussion tomorrow revolve very strongly around them. Then, depending on how things turn out, we're going to lynch either you, peanut, or one of the non-posters, if they manage to dig themselves a deeper grave than you've been enable to so far.

At least, that's what I intend.

[archaebob]

EBWOP: "will" revolve very strong around them.