Mini 1009 ÔÇô Popularity mafia (Game over - Mafia wins)

[drmyshottyizsik]

Idk, and sorry I missed your post in which you answered them.

Vote count

(12 players alive = 7 to lynch before deadline)

(2) Blackberry – Thief, drmyshottyizsik
(2) Thief - eljcko, Blackberry
(2) mothrax - scotmany12, ChannelDelibird
(2) drmyshottyizsik - mothrax, Korts
(1) Iron Man - Simenon

Not voting: Cuethlachtli, Iron Man, tumescence

:arrow: Day 1 – (Deadline is August 10)

[Blackberry]

BB: your inconsistency comes from you admitting that what mothrax said relating to your likely alignment flip would be scummy--that is, if you didn't know YOUR alignment. The two have nothing to do with each other, that is, your knowledge of your own alignment and mothrax's behavior.

Did you read what I've said? I said I would find it as something that indicates that the two people mentioned were

scum together

.

And no, my resentment has no bearing on my vote, that was just meant as a side comment. You acting like you're dispensing superior knowledge about optimal scum and town behavior in every post of yours is just... fucking annoying me no end. I don't mean to insult you, but you insult my intelligence with your attitude, whether you do it intentionally or not.

I don't understand how I insult your intelligence. I think I may have insulted your intelligence by the fact I set up a controversial discussion about random voting and you were the first player to take the easy attack on me for it. But that's another topic.

Being that A) you were the first person to take the bait and go for the easy attack raises ideas you could be mafia, your constant hopping from person to person makes me suspect of you a tad bit. However, you are atleast doing something. If you are mafia, atleast you'll put pressure on people and get them to react.

I could also see you as a town, whose resentment towards my attitude has blurred your read on me. Or as a mafia that sees me as a threat (although I don't really believe that, it does give my ego a boost )... lol.

I'll stick with Thief - and I still don't understand why others are doing the same. He blantedly contradicted himself about whether his suspect was a real suspect or not, and has still not explained it. Don't let him slide by.

[mothrax]

To put the whole criticism of my comment @BB to rest(hopefully) It was meant to say "I don't have any idea what he will flip if and when he does, but if he does flip scum, then it will look bad on me because of my "buddying up" with him." The "some odd chance" was me assuming there are 3-4 scum, which makes it a 25-33% chance that he will... I still don't have a scummy read on him, nor do I really have a townie read on him.

[mothrax]

Also, I am not sure if my vote carries over or not, so just in case: UNVOTE: VOTE: drmyshottyizsik
I still find that slot scummy, and the fact that drwhatshisname(sorry, after our first game you will never have a real name) has yet to present anything new, and just rehashes what others have said is another point against him.

[drmyshottyizsik]

@ Mouthrash- sorry I am quite sick and I am trying to manage 6 games. By tomorrow night I will give a descent iso of everyone.

[Blackberry]

The "some odd chance" was me assuming there are 3-4 scum, which makes it a 25-33% chance that he will...

This sticks out to me as odd.

I still don't have a scummy read on him, nor do I really have a townie read on him

This almost sticks out to me as you trying to make it look like we're partners and we're distancing from eachother. (If you

were

mafia, it'd benefit you to make us look like scum together, because if I get lynched first, it makes you look more clear, or if you got lynched first, it'd make me an easy lynch next time around - buying the rest of your scum team more time).

----- -----

I think what bothers me more is that people are quick to hop on and vote drmyshottyizsik and not doing the same thing to THIEF...

when they have both done simular things. Aka, in other words, I get the feeling that drmyshottyizsik may have atleast one mafia attacking him.

[Korts]

Did you read what I've said? I said I would find it as something that indicates that the two people mentioned were scum together.

I would be

more

suspicious of mothrax if I had been the subject of his comment, not less. That there is the inconsistency in my eyes, your complete ignorance of buddying possibilities.

I will have to review the game, because my list of suspects is getting out of hand. I would, however, appreciate more votes on drmyshottyizsik (fucking annoying handle, man), Thief, mothrax and Blackberry.

In the meanwhile I'd also settle for more people posting.

[scotmany12]

Sorry for not posting. Have fallen behind due to vacation, and I'm not sure if I'll have internet the next few days.

With that said, I'll try to get a little bit caught up. Don't expect me to read the big long wall of texts in depth though.

[scotmany12]

To put the whole criticism of my comment @BB to rest(hopefully) It was meant to say "I don't have any idea what he will flip if and when he does, but if he does flip scum, then it will look bad on me because of my "buddying up" with him." The "some odd chance" was me assuming there are 3-4 scum, which makes it a 25-33% chance that he will... I still don't have a scummy read on him, nor do I really have a townie read on him.

Not buying this at all.

BB: your inconsistency comes from you admitting that what mothrax said relating to your likely alignment flip would be scummy--that is, if you didn't know YOUR alignment. The two have nothing to do with each other, that is, your knowledge of your own alignment and mothrax's behavior.

Did you read what I've said? I said I would find it as something that indicates that the two people mentioned were

scum together

.

And this is bullshit. Its a scummy statement no matter what. "If by some weird chance so and so turns up scum" is a scummy statement because it implies that the player, mothrax in this situation, has knowledge of so and so's alignment, which would be BB. Only person who would have knowledge of alignments would be scum. Town has no reason to say what mothrax said concerning BB.

Also, mothrax seems to be more concerned about not getting lynched rather than hunting scum. His reluctance to vote first, him constantly posting things he has "learned" all look to me like he is only concerned about his wellbeing, rather than the wellbeing of the town.

drmyshottyizsik needs to start contributing. Also, I was never impressed with ecto at all, and I really did not like his vote on iron man, or his vote on cuet. Though cuet's reaction was horrible.

[scotmany12]

EBWOP: mothrax only did the what he has learned thing once, but I still believe him to be more concerned about his own wellbeing rather than that of the towns.

[Thief]

Unvote:

[Simenon]

Limited Access indefinitely (hopefully until tomorrow)

[Thief]

Mothrax being afraid of being seen as defending scum later on is not a towntell. Scum often ask that they not be viewed as "defending" a certain player, as they don't want connections being drawn.

Did anyone ask that they not be viewed as "defending" a certain player?

Not explicitly. Doesn't mean that isn't the underlying motivation.

Someone may have asked why I find Blackberry suspicious. There is plenty of other cases on him right now, and his play before my vote has been discussed (such as his awkward interaction with Morthrax's comment). I'll comment on his most recent move:

There's are cases on me? Please elaborate what case you see agains't me.

I'll go back if I have time, but I do remember some cases on you yes.

He votes me for not being genuine. The fact that he misreps my Iron Man vote as genuine (

when it was in fact not, but merely a reaction test for Ecto who has recent experience with that scumtell

, and for others by quickly changing it).

Ecto's jump is noted. He is in the ongoing game in which scum was lynched D1 for "pretending" not to have seen a second page.

Him not mirroring my

read

and keeping his vote on Iron Man is suspicious.

You said your read. A read means you genuinely think someone is suspcious, yet, you just said I am misrepresenting your Iron Man vote and that it wasn't genuine. You just contradicted yourself.

You're playing semantics. "Read" can also mean (and in this case, did) my read of the situation, not my 100% scum or town read on someone. My read in that case was that I "read" the situation as similar to the one in an ongoing game, and voted accordingly to see what would happen, and Ecto did not react in the way I would expect someone coming from that game to react.

1) What purpose does a town serve in calling a question "weak" - WEAK is the type of adjective Mafia would use in order to discount a person that mafia wants attacked.

Or weak is just a word and you again using semantics in order to paint my play as scummier than it is.

Also scum could potentially gain from pretending not to read a page (as I said a scum was caught this way in another game) by appearing "careless" like a townie. Also I'm not going to answer what town would gain for not pretending because town

wouldn't

pretend, that's my whole point.

Once again, you are describing your reasons for voting Iron Man as if it was a legitimate reason, yet you said you weren't being genuine in voting Iron Man.

It could be a legitimate reason coupled with other cases, yes. In this case it is not. I was just exploring the possible theoretical motivations scum would have to do such a thing, aka responding to your question. You trying to twist my response into your case against me is getting me ready to revote you.

You are contradicting yourself by saying A) You weren't genuinely voting Iron Man and B) Giving reasons for why you genuinely voted Iron Man.

I wasn't genuinely voting Iron Man in that I wasn't going to call for his lynch as scum. I was voting for him to see how it went, and here we are. B) Those were not reasons why I was voting Iron Man, they were an explanation of what IronScum's motivations could be with that move.

Let's see how you respond to this post. In other news:

[Thief]

Wait what. How can someone misrep your thought process if you haven't made any claims to what your thought process is? I realize Blackberry is scum, but don't be throwing shit at random, just what's sure to stick. And then we can lynch you afterward for throwing shit to see what sticks. And blatant wagonhopping. And then some.

Theorizing Blackberry and I are scum together after what has can not come from a town state of mind. He "realizes" BB is scum, and calls me scum as well? And doesn't say I'm obvbussing, just blatant wagonhopping? I don't think he truly believes I am scum with BB as he claims as he has made no connections or posts to tie us together. This reads as a half-ass attempt to line up lynches.

Vote: Korts

[Iron Man]

Crap, been really busy these last three days. Will definitly get a good analysis in tomarrow.

[Korts]

Thief, you don't understand sarcasm, do you? Me saying "I realize Blackberry is scum" is a clear-cut example.

[Cuetlachtli]

got friends coming in tomorrow. V/LA until Wednesday.

[tumescence]

Will read and post by end of today.

[ChannelDelibird]

Ouch. Prodded. What tumescence said.

[mothrax]

wow, there has not been much content and I have nothing to add... I will try and reread tonight

[scotmany12]

Posting to let people know that I will have limited access until the weekend. Don't expect a lot from me.

[Simenon]

Access back.

It's kind of hilarious how BB keeps repeating this phrase:

A genuine town player

as though using the word "town" as much as possible in a sentence could actually influence anyone's opinion of him (apart from the obvious No True Scotsman argument).
BB has consistently padded his arguments with this kind of drivel. Take this comment from post 123:

* I think the stance that the mafia can not genuinely look for scum the same way town do IS true. You disagree with that? When did I say two people think exactly alike? I find your bolded comment offensive, because you assume incorrect ideas. I am a very open-minded individual and am well aware that no two people play alike, regardless: mafia can not fake the sincere scumhunting that a real townsperson has. I don't see how you could think that stance is wrong.

Bits like "I am a very open-minded individual" accomplish nothing except frame the debate in terms of personal insult. Had the purpose of this comment been to refute Korts' point, he could have done so in one sentence, not five. If you remove the empty rhetoric from the post, you're not left with much.
~
I eagerly await the above promised analysis. I wouldn't mind a lurker wagon if those promises aren't fulfilled.

[Simenon]

content

[mothrax]

V/LA 7/29 to 8/24

I will have access, but not sure how much and only on my phone

[Blackberry]

I would be

more

suspicious of mothrax if I had been the subject of his comment, not less. That there is the inconsistency in my eyes, your complete ignorance of buddying possibilities.

And this is bullshit. Its a scummy statement no matter what. "If by some weird chance so and so turns up scum" is a scummy statement because it implies that the player, mothrax in this situation, has knowledge of so and so's alignment, which would be BB. Only person who would have knowledge of alignments would be scum. Town has no reason to say what mothrax said concerning BB.

I understand what you guys are saying. At the time, to me- in my head- knowing that I am town, it doesn't make sense for a Mafia to say that about an innocent person (it'd make sense for a mafia to say that about another mafia). That was my main thing. And the rest of what he said, I didn't think he'd be a mafia trying to buddy up with me, considering it was A) really early in the game and B) buddying is something I see the "smart, sterotypical, experienced" players do - and mothrax wasn't sounding like that the way he was talking.

You're playing semantics. "Read" can also mean (and in this case, did) my read of the situation, not my 100% scum or town read on someone. My read in that case was that I "read" the situation as similar to the one in an ongoing game, and voted accordingly to see what would happen, and Ecto did not react in the way I would expect someone coming from that game to react.

Last time I was accused of "playing semantics" it was a MAFIA PLAYER trying to defend himself agains't what I saw (I think I see things differently, especially since no one else is voting Thief for my reasonings). This makes me confident in my vote.

1) What purpose does a town serve in calling a question "weak" - WEAK is the type of adjective Mafia would use in order to discount a person that mafia wants attacked.

Or weak is just a word and you again using semantics in order to paint my play as scummier than it is.[/quote]

See above.

Let's see how you respond to this post. In other news:

This seems like a scare tactic, like "back off and change your mind or I'll vote you again."