Mini 1042 - Skillville - GAME OVER!

[Untrod Tripod]

ok finished reading and I think Vollkan/Zach are the scum team

and your evidence and/or reasoning for that is...

[drmyshottyizsik]

It's coming hold tight I have to make my cases, and actually think about what I say

[drmyshottyizsik]

My Case on Zach

vote: Aldusskel

L-1!

No claim. Somebody hammer.

Woo real vote time!

Unvote
Vote: Socrates

Yay! Reasons?

FoS: Socrates

He's obviously looking for a reaction. You should know better, I think the pressure caught up to you.

Yet you voted for me. I'm presuming you didn't like my unvote because you didn't actually explain the vote. (There was a reason for my vote as I've obviously alluded to, I just haven't explained it yet.)

The whole vote now and explain later when someone calls me out on it, gambit only benifits scum, if you have a reason for something say it asap, don't clutter the thread with a page of talking about why you haven't said why, and distract people from the topic at hand.

Did you think I was serious? Did you think a hammer would actually happen?

Did you think a hammer would actually happen when you put him at lynch -1? It's a possibility whether you think it will happen or not.

+1 Scum points.

Please, I invite you to dig yourself into a deeper hole. Arguing with a buddy won't help out.

Whatever...

Ok Zach here, why did you just blow this off? The only reason you would fight back with a "the only reason someone would do that is if they were scum", is if you were scum. I feels like you don't explain your reasons for saying almost because you are the only scum not on that wagon and you know if you were to hammer it you would be right in the spot light.

You were counting on an unvote when you made that vote?

Risky way to get reactions... but you seem genuinely interested in getting reads on people. Leaning town.

Vote: DemonHybrid

Too confident/certain in early reads. Getting a bad vibe from it.

Have you played other games on MS Demon?

Confidence is not a scum tell, it just means he is sticking to his guns and not jumping all over the place like oppertunist scum(aka zach)

uhh no.

Unvote:

5 votes is more than enough for the reason I voted for him. The reason however is not lynch worthy this early in the game.

You had reasons? Reasons that were/are genuinely worth 5 votes...? I think I'd quite like to here this.

I said 5 votes was

more

than enough didn't I?

I'll be more inclined to explain my reasoning when Alduskkel actually posts some more.

Now this is almost fishing and it kind of makes me mad. Town should/would explain his or her case on someone, and then wait for them to respond to the case. Scum should/do vote and wait for a reaction a a phrase that they can then blow out of preportion and throw in peoples faces.

Besides if you read Alduskkel's contribution to the game to this point, you can probably make a good guess to why I'm voting him without me actually explaining.

No No No NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!
Just what is wrong with your mind?

Anyway, Alduskkel's posts thus far have seemed to do nothing but promote RVS.

Yes in a RVS supporting it is a great thing. Scum want the RVS to die quickly so no convo's will really start. And if you are so anti-RVS(which you haven't been in other games) why did you RQS? You just sat there and insult him for trying to do something.


And all that's left on zach if how much he active lurks the rest of the game

[q21]

Mod: I think vollkan should be voting Demon Hybrid. He made that vote in #308.

And I still AM pretty confident of my Zach case, but if you'll notice that I said

screw this... Zach can wait. (Although I would still like him to respond to my points, instead of ignoring them)

That means that while I still have Zach on my scumlist, I have someone that I found worse. Make sense?

It made sense when you actually voted esp, but now that he's been replaces, why is shotty a better vote than someone you have made a rather more substantial case on?

Unvote
Vote:drshotty

Solves policy, and Esp was scummy anyway.

This is horrible. Policy? He's just proved that he doesn't deserve a policy lynch, #327 may not be the most mindblowing post of the game, but it certainly makes arguments for policy lynching him ridiculous. And the second bit... Esp was scummy because he wasn't contributing, then he flaked... which kinda nullifies the not contributing part. All in all, this vote is opportunistic and scummy.

[Zachrulez]

Just checked a previous game with Shotty...

His case is horrible, but I think he's town.

[Zachrulez]

http://www.mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopi ... 3#p2426373

Read Shotty's contribution from that point. The contrast from his play there vs his play here is obvious.

[Skill006]

@q21, he unvoted in his next post.

[drmyshottyizsik]

oh i almost forgot

unvote
vote zach

[DemonHybrid]

What about vollkan?

[DemonHybrid]

Also, Reck?

You never explained your vote on him. Still waiting on that explanation...not any others.

[drmyshottyizsik]

oh the vote on reck was just saying hey look im here, and I'll make my case on vullcan on monday or tuesday, gone tomorow. Zach's my main suspect

[DemonHybrid]

You don't put your vote on someone just to say "Hey, I'm here".

Vote:drmyshottyizsik

Reason isn't good enough. I feel like Reck was your "fallback" suspicion, and now that you made up a case, you don't need a case against him anymore.

[drmyshottyizsik]

no I always pick a random person to vote for when I join a game, notice how I in no way put him in danger of a mislynch

[DemonHybrid]

no I always pick a random person to vote for when I join a game, notice how I in no way put him in danger of a mislynch

I never said you put in him danger of a mislynch. What does that have to do with anything?

[vollkan]

Unvote
Vote:drshotty

Solves policy, and Esp was scummy anyway.

Bullshit.

Scott+3

I quote from your previous postL

Espeonage- no specific quotes has been active though which is concerning.

I'm assuming you meant to say "inactive".

In any event, you haven't given a single reason for suspecting Esp. Which is very interesting because in that same post you also attack Reck (who alon with Esp you say are your "top 2" suspects) but your reasoning on Reck is at least existent:

Reckamonic 139 sums up the play from this slot. Generic reads, not really any reasons. Not helpful. 142 equally unhelpful.
144 I always find the whole "ask me questions!" strategy to be scummy. It gives an excuse for lack of participation.
162 Ignores Aldus and only responsds to DH who conveniently is voting him. Scummy.

The whole vote now and explain later when someone calls me out on it, gambit only benifits scum, if you have a reason for something say it asap, don't clutter the thread with a page of talking about why you haven't said why, and distract people from the topic at hand.

So you think gambiting is anti-town?

First, that's wrong. Second, you've failed to explain why gambiting is a scumtell. No matter what your personal opinion is of it, that doesn't make it scummy. Even if you think it does only benefit scum (which is ridiculous), it doesn't follow that it is a scumtell (because town do gambit - usually for good reasons)

Ok Zach here, why did you just blow this off? The only reason you would fight back with a "the only reason someone would do that is if they were scum", is if you were scum. I

feels like

you don't explain your reasons for saying almost because you are the only scum not on that wagon and you know if you were to hammer it you would be right in the spot light.

So a major plank of your case against Zach comes from you having an unsubstantiated "feeling" about one his posts. That's bullshit.

Drshotty+2

Now this is almost fishing and it kind of makes me mad. Town should/would explain his or her case on someone, and then wait for them to respond to the case. Scum should/do vote and wait for a reaction a a phrase that they can then blow out of preportion and throw in peoples faces.

How on earth is it 'fishing'?

And while town normally should give their reasoning, gambiting town is a massive exception to that.

oh the vote on reck was just saying hey look im here,

Um...what?

I

feel like

Reck was your "fallback" suspicion

Why?

no I always pick a random person to vote for when I join a game, notice how I in no way put him in danger of a mislynch

Give me meta links to this happening

[drmyshottyizsik]

http://mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.ph ... &start=500
http://mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.ph ... &start=325
http://mafiascum.net/forum/viewtopic.ph ... &start=475
if you want any other meta reads on me I've got like 15 completed games

[Reckamonic]

Don't have much time right now, but horrordude is clearly OMGUSing us without actually voting yet.
He didn't pay as a damn bit of attention until we called out his scummy ass.

DH TODAY, HORROR TOMORROW, Q21 (PROBABLY) D3. GOOD FUCKING GAME.

[q21]

Interesting point, Reck, and on investigation a somewhat valid one. Horror, all your initial attacks on reckamonic were for not explaining their reads - which was fair enough. Since Reckamonic's post explaining many of their reads you still suspect them, why?

[Alduskkel]

Unvote
Vote:drshotty

Solves policy, and Esp was scummy anyway.

So, why was Espeonage scummy? He lurked for out of game reasons. And is shotty even scummy to you?

I really haven't seen much scum hunting from you, Scott (except maybe for iso #8). Also, calling people scummy for lurking (i.e. Espeonage) is pretty hypocritical. Have you seen your posts and # of posts?

Confidence is not a scum tell, it just means he is sticking to his guns and not jumping all over the place like oppertunist scum(aka zach)

And how has Zach been opportunistic?

Now this is almost fishing and it kind of makes me mad.

What do you mean by fishing, exactly?

Yes in a RVS supporting it is a great thing. Scum want the RVS to die quickly so no convo's will really start. And if you are so anti-RVS(which you haven't been in other games) why did you RQS? You just sat there and insult him for trying to do something.

You're pretty much taking the opposite stance on theory here vs. Zach. He says that scum want the RVS to be prolonged so that real discussion takes longer to get going. Why is he wrong, and why is that scummy?

There are other problems with your case on Zach that have been noted already. I won't go into them.

I noticed in post 340 that you don't address any of vollkan's points except for the meta one. Why? Digging up those links has got to be harder than responding to his other points.

Vote: Scott Brosius

.

[horrordude0215]

Socrates, what will your reads be if Makemuki flips scum because she didn't include everyone in her analysis?

Scott's 315 is scummy obv.

Shotty's 327 is LOL. First of all, your case on Zach is full of fail/misreps. Secondly, where's your case on why vollkan is scum?

And I still AM pretty confident of my Zach case, but if you'll notice that I said

screw this... Zach can wait. (Although I would still like him to respond to my points, instead of ignoring them)

That means that while I still have Zach on my scumlist, I have someone that I found worse. Make sense?

It made sense when you actually voted esp, but now that he's been replaces, why is shotty a better vote than someone you have made a rather more substantial case on?

Because shotty is still incredibly scummy, and added to Esp's scumminess it makes them scummier and Zach for the moment. (Voll explains quite a bit in his 339)

Shotty's 337 is even more LOL. Why would you RV when you replace into a game? That makes no sense to me...

Don't have much time right now, but horrordude is clearly OMGUSing us without actually voting yet.
He didn't pay as a damn bit of attention until we called out his scummy ass.

Nice try but no. I didn't suspect you as much until your post 265, but it doesn't mean that I'm OMGUSing you. In fact, quite the opposite. You're on my suspect list because of the reasons explained in my 274. You did nothing but misrep in your "case" against me, and that's why I found you scummy. It's really not too hard to understand.

Interesting point, Reck, and on investigation a somewhat valid one. Horror, all your initial attacks on reckamonic were for not explaining their reads - which was fair enough. Since Reckamonic's post explaining many of their reads you still suspect them, why?

I explained this above. You can look at his post (265) and my response to it (274) and understand why I'm still suspicious.

So, why was Espeonage scummy? He lurked for out of game reasons.

Actually he lurked because he wasn't "in" to the game. I can understand that as I have done it before in the past, but I personally found him to be scummy for other reasons.

[horrordude0215]

Oh, and Zach, are you going to respond to my post 313?

[q21]

And I still AM pretty confident of my Zach case, but if you'll notice that I said

screw this... Zach can wait. (Although I would still like him to respond to my points, instead of ignoring them)

That means that while I still have Zach on my scumlist, I have someone that I found worse. Make sense?

It made sense when you actually voted esp, but now that he's been replaces, why is shotty a better vote than someone you have made a rather more substantial case on?

Because shotty is still incredibly scummy, and added to Esp's scumminess it makes them scummier and Zach for the moment. (Voll explains quite a bit in his 339)

So, why was Espeonage scummy? He lurked for out of game reasons.

Actually he lurked because he wasn't "in" to the game. I can understand that as I have done it before in the past, but I personally found him to be scummy for other reasons.

Please explain "Esp's scumminess", what other reasons are you talking about?

[horrordude0215]

My ISO 7 is my entire case. To sum it up: He was a lurker and he was buddying up to me, hard. Both things I found scummy, so I voted him for it.

[Zachrulez]

1. Think about it. What sort of reaction will you really get if you're the L-5 vote during RVS? I think almost everyone would just ignore it and pretend like it didn't happen.

It's not what vote you are. Votes that are serious or votes that might be serious are generally going to be responded to.

2. I would be fine with this reply except for you didn't even mention it until 10 posts after your unvote. There was plenty of game-relevant discussion already. There wouldn't be anything wrong with it except for the fact that it was mainly added as an afterthought, so how could it have STARTED game-relevant discussion? And correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't RVS usually a time to joke around and have some fun? How is it that just because Ald made 3 post on page 1, that's trying to prolong it?

People tend to see RVS that way, but if you're joking around and having fun in RVS, you're not moving the game forward. That's what I was trying to do. As for the prolonging RVS, I did see potential for it in that manner of posting yes.

[Zachrulez]

And at this point, I think you've used up your questions regarding this line of discussion. I find it unproductive to keep going back and forth on this RVS issue. If you have any other points against me that you want to bring up, then I'll respond to those as they come up.