Back from my 4th of July Family activities –
Retro wrote:Alternatively, someone who has no votes.
Why, if the vote is arbitrary, would it matter if said vote recipient had a vote already or not? This is the sort of caution embodied by Mafia, not Town.
Retro wrote:Tasky, you are attacking players based on their answers to the question, specially those who has thinks you are a scum. Don't you think this is something?
Aside from the grammatical issues that render this post mainly incomprehensible I ask you – why is attacking players based on answers scummy? Mafia is a game of information and motive.
Chi wrote:
This is a test question, and almost any answer I use here will be used against me. No answer.
As stated above regarding Retro this is a level of caution that I find indicative of scum.
Chi wrote:I would join a pressure wagon, if there is countless evindence that the person is scum. But I won't self-hammer myself, unless I'm a jester (which is considered an unhonorable role, so it's not likely I'd ever be a jester).
The idea behind a pressure wagon is to provide evidence that someone is scummy via response. So your assertion that you’d only join that type of wagon after evidence is provided makes no sense.
What relevance does your self-hammering statement have to the question? Are you stating you are scummy and worthy of a vote? And what about the “unhonorable” nature of a jester role makes it unlikely you would not randomly be assigned the role?
Chi wrote:Unfortunately, I don't have any vaild reasons to vote for any of the wagons right now. But it seems like you are leaning towards Lemon, am I right? (I might be wrong).
So you aren’t going to scum-hunt. Gotcha. Also, your pandering for a direction to place you vote is also noted.
Chi wrote:Wow, there seem to be a relationship between Tasky and AClockworkMelon. Relationships usually means scum, or masons.
I bet scum, but it would be rash for me to vote for one of them right now.
We are over a week real-time into the game. Voting based on something you see as solid evidence would not be rash. You’d rather have a RVS vote hanging on someone (which you admitted your vote on NoPoint is) rather than vote for someone you think is scummy? This is further caution that I feel is unwarranted.
And please elaborate on what “relationship” you think you are seeing between ACM and Tasky.
ACM wrote:I'm going to mimic Minii's vote on Chihuahua and his FOS on Tasky.
VOTE: Chihuahua
Scummy.
ACM wrote:Maybe you're looking for an easy lynch but I don't think you'll find one here.
This post basically acknowledges that you are active lurking. Asserting that you are playing in a scummy fashion isn’t a valid defence against a case.
Furthermore I don’t like that your post with content at 174 only comes after you’ve been called out for active lurking. Reactive play is a scum-tell in my book.
NoPoint wrote:I would do the same seeing as to how fast the Chi wagon seems to be moving despite its flawed evidence.
1. Three votes over 5 real life days hardly qualifies as a fast wagon. Why are you attempting to paint it as such?
2. Please provide support for your assertion that evidence against Chi is flawed. I’ve yet to see anything directed at him that is qualifies as flawed. You yourself point out in 157 that Chi is not approaching the questions from a Town perspective.
NoPoint wrote:This is not how it works Tasky, you haven't even given Chi a chance. The fact that you're trying to take the easy road to get somebody quicklynched really bothers me.
Another post that uses tainted language in an attempt to discredit someone. Chi has hardly been the target of a quicklynch. In fact that heavy defence of his scummy play by multiple players indicates quite the opposite.
Lemon wrote:What I am saying is that kill him through lynch. Perhaps he may lead us astray with his newbiness, but more likely, it intuitively feels more like newb Townie mistakes than anything. Are you going to policy kill him on this basis?
Your inherent assumption that invalidates this entire line of questioning is that Chi is Town. Unless you know for certain that fact your continual efforts to paint his scummy play as “Newb” (which once again IS NOT AN ALIGNMENT) and to paint any attempt to lynch him as a “Policy lynch” are at best Anti-Town.
Lemon wrote:So Mafia can't act incredibly or out of the ordinarily active to trick the town?
Can you substantiate that my activity in this game is “out of the ordinary”? If not you are simply using the “Too Townie” fallacy, which is scummy.
Lemon wrote:I see it as instead of possibly getting rid of a scum, or focusing our suspicions elsewhere, we focus on his newb play.
More unfounded statements.
1. How again is focusing on Chi’s scummy behaviour not scum-hunting?
2. Can you support the inference that I’m focusing solely on Chi? You are attempting to portray my play as Tunneling.
Lemon wrote:But in the best case, we get a scum. I think we should push for the best case.
Yet your posts to the point of
Post 155 consist of defending Chi and doing some awkward attack on me. You aren’t even voting for anyone. If you truly believed what you said you would be making a case and actively voting for someone.
Lemon wrote:Except, the Mafia knows who their enemies are. Hence they probably could have influenced all the L-5 wagons, thus making them less random.
You keep stating that the Mafia “knows who their enemies are” as if it is not inherent game knowledge. Why?
Lemon wrote:And honestly, at the "1> Are you Scum?" question to Chihuahua, stop overplaying it. I would bet that regardless of what answer, you guys would pick it apart. If he said he was townie or no, there would probably be some convoluted method to determine that he's lying and convict him on that basis.
This post is mind-boggling. Are you saying if he has said “No, I’m not scum” he would be attacked for that? You are so tied to your defense of Chi at this point you can’t rationally separate yourself from the argument. You are pre-judging others based on theoretically actions that never happened.
I’m going to flat out ask you (and the expected uproar over “Role-Fishing” be damned) if you have any concrete reason why you know Chi is Town.
Equinox wrote:Further, I'm getting the feeling that the chihuahua0 wagon is scum-driven. He's a ridiculously easy target, and I'm seeing some signs of a policy lynch going on. That doesn't sit well with me.
Scum driven wagon? Hmmm. At the time of this post Chi has exact three votes – myself, ACM, and Young. Which of these players is scum and why?
"I am a leaf on the wind ... watch how I soar!"
Pretty much Geriatric game restricted at this point ... unless there are players I REALLY want to play with.
